Rifle Weight

[SwedishGuy]

This might be slightly off topic but I hope a different view might contribute in some way.

The weight of my wife is about 50 kg (100 pounds?) and she is 162 cm of height (5'4"?) and she does NOT like recoil. She really dislikes the deer that are around our farm since they eat everything. Apple seedling - gone, salads - gone, berries - gone.... You get the picture.

As I see it this thread is really about the optimal hunting rifle. I know I'm opening a can of worms here but please...

So she wants a light gun, a powerful gun, something that will kill animals dead, that she can carry and doesn't kick. Did I say she doesn't like recoil? Well, it seems that a .223 is a pretty nice gun. A bolt acton with a 3-12 X scope and a normal recoil pad seems to do the trick for her. Of course she isn't legally allowed to shoot wild boar or moose with it but it kills most things and it's really nifty to shoot.

What I'm really discussing here is that maybe by going down to a different round we can get all we want from a rifle? Sure, there are times when you need a 9,3x62 round but you don't have to bring it for deer hunting? Thus one might be able to have good accuracy, kill power, light weight and minimal recoil in one gun?

 

[cdb1]

To me the optimal super low recoil deer rifle would be a 22-250 with a 1:7 barrel twist rate. Then shoot the heaviest for caliber bullet that’s suitable for deer.

 

[1948CJ2A]

There are many women, kids and people with medical issues who would argue .260 Remington recoil is not minimal. My 26 year old daughter who is not small is thinking about suppressing her .243, she hates the recoil. Shotguns don’t bother her in the least but she is standing when shooting them. With a rifle she is sitting or kneeling and that makes recoil feel much harder than when standing.

After three shoulder operations I’m getting more and more recoil adverse which is one the main reason I went from shooting a .270 mostly to shooting a fairly hefty weight 6.5x55.

I have a muzzle brake on my 8mm Rem Mag. Its the only rifle I own that has a brake. I honestly don't think it helps all that much... minimal in my opinion. What I tend to notice more is reduced loads. Lighter bullet weights and lighter charges have more of an effect, again in my experience. But hey, different strokes for different folks.

 

[1948CJ2A]

To me the optimal super low recoil deer rifle would be a 22-250 with a 1:7 barrel twist rate. Then shoot the heaviest for caliber bullet that’s suitable for deer.

I am not a fan of 22 caliber for whitetail deer. It is too small in my opinion. The optimal low recoil deer rifle in my safe is my good old 250 Savage. It's the parent cartridge to the 22-250 and you can shoot it all day without recoil issues. The 25 caliber bullets in 100-115 gr are great and yield much better BC than the 224 stuff.

 

[cdb1]

I am not a fan of 22 caliber for whitetail deer. It is too small in my opinion. The optimal low recoil deer rifle in my safe is my good old 250 Savage. It's the parent cartridge to the 22-250 and you can shoot it all day without recoil issues. The 25 caliber bullets in 100-115 gr are great and yield much better BC than the 224 stuff.

I felt the same way for years but changed my view recently.

 

[BWS]

I have built and experimented with "mercury"....as well as other fluids,in factory recoil reducers and machined cylinders made in our shop.I won't say they're a waste of time,which is the general consensus in shotgun circles but.....they don't work significantly better than a "dead weight" on rifles.

I did leave a few ideas on the table but,these are WAY past typical commercial offerings.It's a cost vs benefit ratio.Dead weights are simple and as cheap as dirt.Any machined item,which typical mercury tubes barely represent,add cost or effort to build.

 

[Newtosavage]

I am not a fan of 22 caliber for whitetail deer. It is too small in my opinion. The optimal low recoil deer rifle in my safe is my good old 250 Savage. It's the parent cartridge to the 22-250 and you can shoot it all day without recoil issues. The 25 caliber bullets in 100-115 gr are great and yield much better BC than the 224 stuff.

I would say the same except that new bullet technologies are making these lighter calibers much more effective than in the past. Not that I'm up on all the latest technology, but I can see how it would warrant a look before passing judgement.

 

[Gtscotty]

I feel the same way. I don't own or shoot any hunting rifle with a brake on it but for some it's a "necessary" evil. I'm trying to go the way of @Gtscotty by putting together a suppressed and relatively light hunting rifle but I'm not there yet.

I finally picked up my new 12.7oz TI suppressor on Saturday and tried it out on my Kimber and an AR Sunday. I've got to say, the 10 or so ounce difference between this can and my Saker makes a world of difference on the end of my Montana. The whole package still weighs around or a bit under 7 lbs, but It's easy to carry, not terribly off balance, and settles down quickly offhand with the extra weight on the barrel. I was hesitant about making the leap and having my barrel chopped down and re-threaded, but now I'm planning on having it cut to 20" and threaded 1/2x28 as soon as I can get around to it.

Kind of on the subject of the OP, while I like carrying around light and ultralight rifles, they are definitely more challenging to shoot well from unsupported positions. My main interest now in very light hunting rifles revolves around the fact that they will most certainly have a suppressor mounted when I'm out chasing game. A 5.5 lb rifle + 14 oz of scope/mount + 13 oz of suppressor comes in at around 7.2 lbs, a nice hunting weight for someone who covers a lot of ground. On the other hand, if you start out with one of the many rifles that are 7.5 lbs plain, by the time you get it all dressed up, you are looking at over 9 lbs, chunkier than I prefer.

 

[1948CJ2A]

I felt the same way for years but changed my view recently.

I would say the same except that new bullet technologies are making these lighter calibers much more effective than in the past. Not that I'm up on all the latest technology, but I can see how it would warrant a look before passing judgement.

These are my observations on what has caused the 22 caliber influx into deer-sized game usage. The market became flooded over the past decade with 223 and 5.56 NATO because of the AR-15 craze. With all that available ammo, the firearms manufacturers saw an opportunity to capitalize. Bullet manufacturers also seized the opportunity to improve their offerings all to justify 22 caliber ammo for a broader range of usage.

When I was a youngster and perusing all the hunting and rifle magazines, the 223 was never present. Occasionally I would hear of a lady or kid using a 22-250 on deer-sized game but it was infrequent. My point here is the envelope wasn't pushed because (1) there were better options available AND (2) not many folks if any were hunting with AR-type rifles. I would say that only the latter part of the previous statement has changed. I am not an AR hater. I own multiple ARs and like them for what they are. I don't deer hunt with them but if I did, I would use my AR-10 chambered in 308 before reaching for my AR-15s.

Today just like long ago, there are better options for deer-sized game. I am not here to argue that a 223 or 22-250, or any other 22 caliber centerfire cartridge isn't capable of killing a deer. Again, I'm just stating my opinion backed with some facts to indicate what I believe has caused this shift. A larger bullet with an adequate charge behind it will yield better BC, penetrate deeper, and yield a bigger hole which is more likely to provide rapid or controlled expansion (depending on the bullet selection by the hunter and relative to the application) and destroy vital organs for a clean(er) game harvesting process.

 

[cdb1]

When I’m deer hunting I don’t use a .223. I have killed a deer with a .223 when coyote hunting. I was fervently against shooting deer with a .223 for years. I came to the conclusion though that they work just fine if the right bullet is used.

 

[1948CJ2A]

When I’m deer hunting I don’t use a .223. I have killed a deer with a .223 when coyote hunting. I was fervently against shooting deer with a .223 for years. I came to the conclusion though that they work just fine if the right bullet is used.

I forgot to mention one critical component in my previous post. Out where I hunt, the wind tends to be a constant factor. The smaller the projectile, the more it is effected by wind. Yet another reason I don't use 22 caliber for hunting deer-sized game.

 

[cdb1]

I forgot to mention one critical component in my previous post. Out where I hunt, the wind tends to be a constant factor. The smaller the projectile, the more it is effected by wind. Yet another reason I don't use 22 caliber for hunting deer-sized game.

Definitely a legitimate reason. And not just for deer. I occasionally hunt coyote with my AR .223 but usually use a .243 due to wind drift.. I still believe a .223 is fine for the distances most deer are shot at. There are always exceptions though.

 

[SwedishGuy]

While I in principle, given the (approxemately) same energy, preferr a heavy and slow bullet over a light and fast bullet the latter are kind of aweing. A small bullet travelling at 900 m/s (3000 fps) with a double bonded construction kills most things dead. Thus a smaller calibre gun could do the work needed.

About the shotgun and the bullet gun mentioned earlier. I (who do not like recoil) have the same feeling. I imagine that the shotgun has a longer recoil, timewise, while the bullet gun has a really short (time) kick that is sharp. Like the difference between being pushed and bein hit. But that is just my take on the matter.

In the end, we are all different. My buddy hunts with a 30-06 that I am actually afraid of. Light with no dampening, while I preferr my .308 with a supressor. Sorry, this was maybe a bit OT, just my 2 cents.

 

[Newtosavage]

I finally picked up my new 12.7oz TI suppressor on Saturday and tried it out on my Kimber and an AR Sunday. I've got to say, the 10 or so ounce difference between this can and my Saker makes a world of difference on the end of my Montana. The whole package still weighs around or a bit under 7 lbs, but It's easy to carry, not terribly off balance, and settles down quickly offhand with the extra weight on the barrel. I was hesitant about making the leap and having my barrel chopped down and re-threaded, but now I'm planning on having it cut to 20" and threaded 1/2x28 as soon as I can get around to it.

Kind of on the subject of the OP, while I like carrying around light and ultralight rifles, they are definitely more challenging to shoot well from unsupported positions. My main interest now in very light hunting rifles revolves around the fact that they will most certainly have a suppressor mounted when I'm out chasing game. A 5.5 lb rifle + 14 oz of scope/mount + 13 oz of suppressor comes in at around 7.2 lbs, a nice hunting weight for someone who covers a lot of ground. On the other hand, if you start out with one of the many rifles that are 7.5 lbs plain, by the time you get it all dressed up, you are looking at over 9 lbs, chunkier than I prefer.

This approach makes a lot of sense to me.

 

[Picher]

Many years ago, I made a lead block that fit in the blind magazine on my .30-06 Savage. The top was gouged out to make a loading ramp. It worked quite well for shooting at the range, but the action had to be removed from the stock to remove the block for hunting. The removal/reassembly may have caused a minor POI deviation, but I never noticed it, since the barrel was free-floated and the action glass-bedded.

 

[marksman13]

I hunt with a SCAR-17, a M1A Scout, an AR-15 in 6.8 SPC, an AR-15 in 458 SOCOM and AR-15s in 5.56. All of them carry suppressors. What is this lightweight y'all speak of?

 

[LoonWulf]

Amusingly enough my .458 socom weighted, less than my .250AI.

 

[Gtscotty]

I hunt with a SCAR-17, a M1A Scout, an AR-15 in 6.8 SPC, an AR-15 in 458 SOCOM and AR-15s in 5.56. All of them carry suppressors. What is this lightweight y'all speak of?

How do those feel after multiple back to back 8 - 12 mile days hiking at 8k feet and above? I can attest that my Kimber feels great, my heavier crossbow... less great.

Light rifles are nice for mountain hunting, for sea level, flat land or stand hunting, rifle weight certainly isn't as big of a deal. Hell, I know guys that will haul their 15 lb PRS rifles out onto the plains for antelope "hunts", not too many of them dragging those boat anchors into the mountains after other game though.

 

[chicharrones]

I hunt with a SCAR-17, a M1A Scout, an AR-15 in 6.8 SPC, an AR-15 in 458 SOCOM and AR-15s in 5.56. All of them carry suppressors. What is this lightweight y'all speak of?

You wrestle dinosaurs, so a few extra pounds are the least of your worries.

 

[marksman13]

Amusingly enough my .458 socom weighted, less than my .250AI.

I can believe that. My 458 SOCOM comes in at a svelte 10lbs, 11oz with the Silencerco Hybrid and a full mag.

 

[marksman13]

How do those feel after multiple back to back 8 - 12 mile days hiking at 8k feet and above? I can attest that my Kimber feels great, my heavier crossbow... less great.

Light rifles are nice for mountain hunting, for sea level, flat land or stand hunting, rifle weight certainly isn't as big of a deal. Hell, I know guys that will haul their 15 lb PRS rifles out onto the plains for antelope "hunts", not too many of them dragging those boat anchors into the mountains after other game though.

No clue, but I can tell you what they feel like after several hours of slogging around in muddy bean fields in 90 degree temps with a 90% humidity and mosquitoes trying to carry me away. Hell, I'm half convinced this SCAR-17 kept me from being airlifted back to the queen mother of mosquitoes on a couple ocassions.

 

[LoonWulf]

I can believe that. My 458 SOCOM comes in at a svelte 10lbs, 11oz with the Silencerco Hybrid and a full mag.

I think mine weighed about 9lbs loaded, heavy enough that to dampen recoil anyway.

 

[marksman13]

I think mine weighed about 9lbs loaded, heavy enough that to dampen recoil anyway.

I've been shooting mine more with subs than anything and between running subs and the suppressor, the recoil is not bad at all. I do remember the recoil being more noticeable on my first 458 SOCOM sans suppressor.