Input Request - Appalachian Mountain Rifle

[BlondeBear63]

I will soon be looking for another rifle. As anyone who has spent anytime hiking mountains full of brush can attest, lugging a typical center-fire rifle can be draining. My current rifles are a Winchester 94 AE (first year), Marlin XT-22TR with a nice walnut stock, and Optima V2 with 3-9x40 scope. My muzzle-loader is more than I want to carry, but gets me in the woods sooner. I love my Winchester (equipped with Hi-Viz sights) for shorter ranges and it isn't going away nor wearing a scope. The XT-22TR, offered in a more powerful cartridge would be about right in size and weight for a bolt action.

Current specifications to meet:
A 16"-20" stainless, parkerized, weather-shield type, or hard coat finish with a bull barrel in a caliber sufficient (greater than .22 by law) for 450 lbs of black bear at 2-300 yards. There is a some flexibility here.
Lightweight and well-balanced with a 2-7x?? scope and a stock that can take a beating.
No excessive recoil or muzzle blast.

My current ideas, each having special benefits:
T/C Encore pistol frame wearing a rifle barrel. Caliber, barrel length, weight, and balance input is very welcome.
AR15 in a popular caliber that will interchange without special mags, etc. No AR10.
While I really like the idea of a 7mm-08 Compact Ruger Gunsite in a full size stock it is WAY too expensive.
Price is important!

Thanks to all who provide input!

 

[ColtPythonElite]

Remington Model 7 in your favorite caliber with a Leupold 2-7 x 33.

 

[critter]

I have a little stainless Ruger compact in .308 that would be a good fit there.

 

[Ash]

For mountain hunting, and I've hiked many miles in the Smokies and other ranges from North Carolina to Georgia to Alabama, I'd eschew the bull barrel.

 

[jmr40]

Ruger Predator in 308.

18" medium heavy barrel threaded for suppressor or flash hider
7 lbs as shown in photo
Under $400




It does this at 200 yards. The 18" barrel is about 100 fps slower than a 24" barrel. With good bullets will take any bear in the lower 48 and deer out to 400-500 yards.

 

[lobo9er]

Ruger American is nice light weight rifle.

 

[StrawHat]

The Savage Lightweight Hunter would get serious consideration for my Appalachian rifle.

http://savagearms.com/firearms/model/11LH

Kevin

 

[double bogey]

No bull barrel, but a Tikka T3 Lite, in the caliber of your choice.

Mine in 25-06 with a scope weighs 7lbs. 1.5 oz.

 

[Gtscotty]

Why do you want a bull barrel in a light, short, walkabout type rifle? There are plenty of lighter profile barreled rifles out there that will meet your shooting needs while being much easier to hike up and down hills.

 

[Elkins45]

There's no shortage of accurate lightweight rifles:

Ruger American
Savage Axis
Tikka T3 lightweight
Remington 7

They are at different price points but all would do the job. Pick a short action cartridge like 308. Forget the bull barrel.

 

[eldon519]

I've been thinking about building an ultralight 6.8 SPC AR for similar uses, but I don't know that it is what I'd want for a 450lb black bear. I've seen 5.56/.223 ARs built below 4lbs with things like polymer receivers and parts. I'd probably aim for more (perceived) durability and stick to metal parts. It can get expensive though.

The Ruger Hawkeye Compact is a great option too, but try to hold one in person. They are really small, almost too small for my liking. I think the stainless laminate .308 is right at 6.0lbs even. They are around $730 online.

 

[Corn-Picker]

For a really lightweight setup I second an AR in 6.8 SPC. The CZ 527 carbine in 7.62x39 is plenty light and short, but 200 yards is pushing it for that round.

For an encore I'd keep it simple and get a 308. If you want to save weight consider a TC contender in 30-30 (the contender weighs less but can't handle a 308). With the super performance ammo the old 30-30 may be a 300 yard rifle.

 

[BlondeBear63]

Thanks everyone for your interest. I have more to add:

First, the bull barrel. It is mostly about length, barrel whip, and repeatability. Am I wrong or over-looking something as it seems sensible to use a fluted stainless bull barrel on an AR style weapon? Or for that matter, a single shot based Encore or even NEF SB2. Doesn't it take as much steel to make a fluted 16" Bull Barrel as it does a 20" tapered sporter?

As for caliber, I have read with interest all the input. The more expensive 30-30 Hornady Leverevolution would be about the same as 7.62x39, and both at their limits by 300 yards. In an AR platform, what of big game performance of the 6.8 SPC, 6.5 Grendel, or .458 SOCOM? There has been much mention of the .308. How well would a 16" bull barrel or 20" sport tapered barrel carry on the Encore frame? What about the muzzle blast from a .308, 7mm-08, or a magnum in a 16" barrel? No suppressors allowed.

I have kludged the ol' Savage 110FNS 30-06 about for the last time. I am pretty much through with bolt actions. Great for many applications, but I have tired of carrying 8+ pounds of scoped battle tank. I haven't completely given up the idea of a compact and lightweight medium range bolt action, but the Ruger American, Savage Axis, etc are not what I seek. And the Marlin Levers are out as well as I don't want to search for ammo.

Once again, thanks to all for your input. I look forward to reading more of them.

 

[md7]

It doesn't have the bull barrel, but a tikka t3 lite would be a great lightweight hunting rifle. The only other experience I have with "light weight" hunting rifles would be with the one I've hunted with the past 17-18 years. A Remington 700 mt rifle in .270 win. It's nice, but I doubt it weighs less than the tikka, and I don't think it's made any longer.

 

[md7]

OP,

I like your sig line, btw. Feel the same way about hunting too. Ethical hunting seems to be dying around my parts. More about volume, less about quality. A lot of folks are a lot less civil about it too.

Hope you find a good rifle, and have a safe (and successful) hunting season.

 

[md7]

Duplicate. Sorry about that.

 

[W.E.G.]

When you say "price is important," please specify your upper price limit.

Also specify whether the optic is to be included in your price cap.

Its a bit confusing when you bring up single-shot break-action rifles in the same notion as you mention major-caliber AR-based guns.
Which is it?
Do you want an off-the-shelf single-shot or an autoloader with a custom flulted barrel?

 

[eldon519]

I'm not sure I understand what your thinking is with the short bull barrel/long sporter weight barrel is. A 16" sporter barrel will already be stiffer than a 22" sporter barrel. For a hiking rifle, I would do anything possible to save the weight, so I don't see why you would want to shed all the weight by going short and then make it heavy again. You don't need a 1/4" 100yd rifle to hunt deer or bear.

I think the Ruger Hawkeye Compact stainless laminate is about perfect for what you are looking for. It is not the same bargain line as the Ruger American rifles. One in .308 fits your original description quite well other than the bull barrel part.

 

[Sug008]

It is going a slightly different direction, but it seems to me that a Henry Big Boy Steel or Steel Carbine would be really good choice for you. I'd go with the .44 Magnum ...

 

[WestKentucky]

My two cents...I have hunted LBL a few times and it is nothing more than a series of steep, deep valleys, so would be similar to mountains for walking purposes go. For the purpose you are looking at I would be looking at a 7-08 or 308 rifle. I personally don't care for the Sb1 or the Rossi singles, but I do own and love my contender. If you were to put a 16 or 18 inch barrel in your caliber of choice on an encore frame you would be in good shape. Light, tight, accurate.

 

[Tirod]

There are some common misconceptions about barrels. First, barrel length has nothing to do with accuracy. That's not at issue here. A good 16" barrel for an intermediate caliber light rifle would be plenty long enough.

Bull barrels are the other misconception. A heavy barrel in and of itself also doesn't have anything to do with accuracy - for hunting. Bull barrels were designed for bench rest shooting longer strings of fire, and the extra mass is intended to absorb more heat without distorting due to inclusions or stresses in the base materials.

Hunting focuses on the critical cold barrel first shot or the less rare second follow up shot. Two or three rounds are not going to heat up a normal profile barrel and cause it to distort. If it did that badly, it's defective. On a 24MOA target - bear - even a 6MOA shot out barrel is going to be "good enough" at 200m. That's still a 12" group on a 24" kill zone.

Nope, bull barrel, even fluted, is just cosmetic for the application, and certainly runs counter to being a light weight mountain country rifle. It's not necessary and will be a source of effort and serious cognitive dissonance after one trip.

The real issue is whether to choose a manual action or self loader. The choices given don't show any consideration about how they will interact with the hunting experience. For the game mentioned on that terrain, it's going to be a more personal choice rather than one scientifically determined to prefer one over the other.

I think the major difference would be this: After the first shot, do you want to break your visual sighting plane to get your head out of the way of the operating bolt, with the resulting delay getting the action back into play, or just keep your eyes on the target ready to squeeze the trigger again within 1/4 the time for a follow up shot?

We are talking bear, albeit not grizzly at close range they can be aggressive. Do you want to track one into a thicket at close range to finish it off knowing that a second shot rapidly applied will have a high priority?

Ok, yes, I'm an AR fan for that. One good shot is supposed to drop them, but hunting for 40 years, I found I preferred the ability for a rapid follow up shot to down game, rather than watch over the scope as they disappeared while cranking away with a bolt handle. I've heard plenty of others doing it and now rejoice when I hear it - a deer might be coming my way.

If you are sure about using a bolt gun, a 16-18" .308 with composite stock and 2-4 power scope would be one choice, or a AR15 in 6.8 with red dot optic another. But frankly, asking us which you would prefer is only going to be a survey of what we like.

There's no way of knowing your capabilities or interests - other than a bull barrel has no place on this application.

 

[StrawHat]

... After the first shot, do you want to break your visual sighting plane to get your head out of the way of the operating bolt,...

Proper manipulation of the bolt will prevent this. Work the action with the stock in your shoulder and your eyes on the sights. The bolt will not hit you.

Kevin

 

[T.R.]

This is my older Remington model 660 with 20 inch barrel. This .308 carbine has put a lot of meat on our dinner table. I took this carbine on this rifle hunt to western South Dakota a few years ago. It was a rough country hunt back in the forest quite aways from the logging road where we parked. I found this carbine perfect for the task.

TR

 

[Tirod]

The way my Rem 700 is set up for my eye relief, the bolt will hit my cheek as I work the action. Your standard is not a "universal" standard.

Same issue with the '64 Saddle Ring Carbine.

It's not like I didn't try them - what I found is that I'm better off not working manual actions and that consideration does exist for others. If it strikes a note for the OP then it's something he's aware of and needs to address. If not, then he's got another reason to consider manual actions.

But by no means are we going to give him a "universal" answer that will solve his issue. If we could do that then the AR15 would be the best hands down choice across the board - just the same as it has been in the military for 45 years.

Or, maybe not, it's America and we do have choices. When an OP asks about to widely diverging examples it means he's really asking about the differences and how they might affect him. It's time to examine how they aren't the same for their very specific reasons. I've been using military self loading actions since I picked up a HK91 - 1976 - ten years before I joined the military and there are significant differences I've experienced over the years.

Most hunters claim they are deadly on the first shot - but I'm in the woods with them, and no, not so much. The are only deadly on the first shot when they are - and a lot of the time, they aren't. I hear them cranking away unloading the magazine as if it were their last stand in Mogadishu and see the deer run by. Plenty are shot later and found to have a slug in them from a popular manual action gun - one that is never a self loader choice.

Your mileage may vary, make an individual decision. Its not about which gun "tribe" you want to be a member of, it's about what works best for that shooter.

 

[Legionnaire]

I like Tirod's logic, but my personal preference is a bolt-action.

ColtPythonElite said, "Remington Model 7 in your favorite caliber with a Leupold 2-7 x 33."

Bingo. Mine's a .308; not stainless, but exactly right for hills and deep woods.