30-06 Alaskan rifle choices

Status
Not open for further replies.

michnorris

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
4
So I've lurked through the searches of old posts and can't find this advice.:banghead:

Im looking for a synthetic stock, stainless steel, 30-06 for a upcoming Alaska trip which may be a permanent relocation.:what: I can't seem to find anyone who makes this with iron sights. I will most likely put on a low power scope but need the backup of good ole irons.

So far I've been looking at the Ruger m77 hawkeye, the weatherby http://www.weatherby.com/product/rifles/vanguard_2/series_2_stainless, Savage 110, Winchester 70 I really like the weatherby.

I like the ruger's mauser like action and I'm kinda leary of the remington's after hearing some recent quality issues. My father said he didn't like Savages because they used to make some real crap rifles.

I hand load and will most likely be loading up a 220 or greater bullet for super sized dinners and smaller for apetizers.

I hunt for meat not trophies. Currently I have a 308 mossberg 100 atr(which I would not reccomend to anyone), more 22s than you can shake a stick at, 45acp 1911, m9, 357 revolver, 870 12gauge, 1100 12 gauge, and a couple others...

Ideas?
 
The M77 is a classic around here. Cheap and it doesn't matter if it gets beat up. There seem to be a perpetual flow of used ones on the local boards.

The CZ 550 would be my choice, though. Very nice iron sights and a bulletproof Mauser action.
 
thanks cosmoline, I had not looked at the cz. your right the 550 kevlar carbine looks right up my alley, but not in stainless. I'm concerned it's gonna rust out if I don't go stainless.
 
I don't know what your price range is, but if you had some wiggle room, you would have more options if you could buy a blued rifle and have someone put on the protective coat of your preference. For stainless, you have enough options though. For stainless, I'd go with a Winchester Model 70. For blue, I'd buy one of any number of rifles and have a protective finish applied. You could throw a rock into a warehouse of bolt guns and whatever you hit would probably be okay. These are my only points and, aside from this, I will defer to the Alaskans.
 
You want stainless. By the time you figure in the cost to coat a blue gun stainless is cheaper, and still a better choice. If you already owned a gun and wanted to upgrade for a better finish you might come out.

I'd look hard for an older pre-FN made SS Winchester Classic. I have 2, a sporter and a FW. I trust the old style trigger better, but the new production Winchester 70 EW would be my #2nd choice if I could afford $1,000 for the rifle. The Ruger would be my only other option. Ruger is 3rd for a couple of reasons. They are 4+1 capacity vs Winchesters 5+1. In bear country the extra round might help. The Rugers are just as tough and dependable, but are a little rough. They don't feed as slick, but not bad.

You can purchase iron sights and have them installed on either for about the same cost as a budget scope so I wouldn't worry about finding a gun with factory irons. Most are crap anyway and if you want quality, aftermarket irons are a better choice anyway.

The FW

http://s1129.beta.photobucket.com/u...sort=3&o=7&_suid=1351023305201087198553840682

The sporter

http://s1129.beta.photobucket.com/u...ort=3&o=77&_suid=1351023305201087198553840682
 
I'm a fool for Winchester Model 70s, and the latest ones are supposedly the best they ever made.

Having said that, though, I don't like their new triggers. I have had an enclosed trigger freeze up on me while elk hunting in the Rockies, and from now on, I use the old Model 70 with the original open trigger for serious hunting. And that goes double for hunting in Alaska.
 
You want stainless. By the time you figure in the cost to coat a blue gun stainless is cheaper, and still a better choice. If you already owned a gun and wanted to upgrade for a better finish you might come out.

Is it cheaper? Is it a better choice? You may be right on the budget-minded end of things but when you suggest a $1k rifle for the stainless barrel I wonder. I could buy any number of used rifles and have a protective finish put on for well under $1k. But maybe you're right. I like your suggestion on having sights installed though.
 
Stainless doesn't really mean stainless -- stainless can rust. And critical parts, like the springs and other out-of-sight parts, are made of ordinary carbon steel. They can rust all unseen unless you detail strip the rifle after each outing.

At the same time, a coat of Johnson's Paste Wax will protect most of the gun. Rub a thin layer on the metal parts and put it in the barrel and receiver channels and under the butt plate, too, to keep the stock from absorbing water.
 
I could buy any number of used rifles and have a protective finish put on for well under $1k.

A used SS Winchester will be $500-$600. A new SS Ruger about the same. If I already owned a blue gun having it coated would be an option I'd consider, but buying a new gun in blue for $700-$800 and then paying to have it coated will get you back pretty close to $1,000. Might as well buy the $1,000 stainless gun. Buying a used blue gun for $400-$500 and having it coated will end up costing more than a new SS Ruger or used SS Winchester.

Others can disagree, but I'd have nothing but a quality CRF rifle with a synthetic stock for Alaska's harsh environment. I could live with blue, especially if it were coated. The blue will show wear and surface rust, but will not fail without warning. SS is just easier to keep clean. You couldn't give me wood. No matter what you do, you will never completely protect it and a wood stock can go from perfect to useless in seconds with no advance warning.

The CRF requirement limits your options. Winchester or Ruger are my top picks, but Kimber is an option as well as one of the Interarms Mausers in a synthetic stock.

This is another option I'd consider from my safe in 338-06.

http://s1129.beta.photobucket.com/u...g.html?&_suid=1351028241166035244863526851117

It is an Interarms in a Brown Precision stock with the metal coated. I'd still rather have one of my SS Winchesters in 30-06 for a variety of reasons. Easier to find ammo being a major reason.
 
Go for the Weatherby. Its stainless just like you want and the new Series 2 all have a sub-moa guarantee for quality ammunition (and well made hand loads).

I think a synthetic stainless rifle would be perfect for a wet environment like Alaska and the Weatherby would be a great option.
 
What kind of protective finishes are there?

Blued steel. Seriously, quality bluing is very good at slowing corrosion. My most abused blued CZ 542 has had spots of rust but still works fine. It gives the thing character.

There are so many other considerations that factor in, as well. Where are you going to be? What will you be doing? Are you planning a hunt? I'd say don't wed yourself to anything now. If you're planning a move you can get something once you've relocated and seen what you'll need. I wasted a lot of money on heavy impractical firearms when I moved out in the sticks. I ended up doing nearly all of my shooting with the .22 and an old Mosin.
 
I've had only two guns rust on me - both were stainless. What I learned is that you can't use "normal" stainless steel in guns. It's not strong enough. So they use high carbon stainless steel which will rust easier than your typical stainless steel knife. Anyway, I wouldn't hesitate to go with blued steel.
 
I really liked being able to disassemble the bolt on my Win 70 when I was up there. I was amazed how dirty it got on the river for 14 days. The same can be done with the Ruger if you have a small nail or pin. Remington bolts can also be taken apart fairly easy. For the price of adding iron sights on a rifle you can buy a second scope and keep it with you in your pack. I like iron though, so I understand your needs. If you want to shoot heavy bullets, you might look at the .338-06; it handles the heavy bullets better than the 06, is simple to make brass for and gives you all the advantages of an un-belted cartridge.

Good luck and have fun; it is simply wonderful up there.
 
Most folks think 220's for a heavy bullet in a 30-06, but load 200NP's in it instead! I much prefer them over 220's as an "all around" bullet/load for the 30-06.

200NP's are plenty big medicine for brown bears too...

DM
 
Have you given thought to a sporterized Mauser 98 in 8x57? Loves the 200 grainers and keeps up with 30-06 right out to long range. Little bit bigger entry hole, little less recoil. Tough Mauser action. Available cheaper than some options.
 
I really like mine. I believe this is similar to what you're wanting:
IMG_3755_zps4f37bddb.gif
Unfortunately it's no longer a currently available rifle.
I'd do as has been suggested above -buy the stainless rifle of your choice and get sights put on it.
 
ECVMatt, I like that. I was not aware anyone was still making such rifles with sights. My only complaint would be the weight (and price!:eek:)
A 25'' barrel is also longer than some people might like, but it's certainly a ready made, good to go option for someone who wants a rifle such as that.
 
ECVMatt, I like that. I was not aware anyone was still making such rifles with sights. My only complaint would be the weight (and price!:eek:)
A 25'' barrel is also longer than some people might like, but it's certainly a ready made, good to go option for someone who wants a rifle such as that.
If you're interested in new rifles with iron sights, you might check out the CZ 550 Kevlar Carbine, 550 Lux, and even the Zastava M70. However, none are stainless.

Edit to add: All rifles use CRF if that is a consideration.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top