End Game Big Game Rifle

With regards to the .270Win and his wishes to have a gun for longer shots I told him that a custom would be the way to go because he could have it built with heavier bullets in mind. Anyone have any experience shooting heavier bullets with a .270Win?
Click to expand...

Never owned or built a .270, but no reason it wouldn't be capable of shooting heavies.
Potential "downside", is that bullet selection/availability in .277 is very limited. Nosler, Berger, Sierra all make heavy hunting bullets, but zero target bullets (Sierra does make the MK in lighter weights). Since it seems the application is strictly hunting, probably not a consideration.

The .270's "replacement" as it were, the short/fat .284 Winchester- will do anything the .270 is capable of, with an infinitely larger selection of 7mm boolits. Though it was designed with a short action in mind, running it in the long action would absolutely eliminate any issues seating out the heaviest of VLD's and still be within mag length constraints.

Keep in mind that the greater the demand for accuracy, the higher the cost as would be expected. Sako Finnlight II is less than half the cost of the Proof Research Summit mentioned above- but the accuracy "guaranteed" is double...

Good luck, always fun spending someone else's money :)
 
Art Eatman said:
If his billfold is really fat, have him do a search for Peter Hofer, the Austrian gun maker. :)
Click to expand...
I may have mislead the conversion when I said "big $$$$". He CAN afford anything he wants but he is definitely not interested in top-end Euro rifles or high-end walnut furniture.

Just an American bolt-gun lightweight or semi-lightweight that will shoot accurately enough for cross-canyons.

I was looking at .270 bullet selection and I think it's pretty good these days. Berger and Nosler have relatively high-BC hunting bullets available. I just wonder if it's a trick to get them to shoot out of a 24" 1:10" barrel.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
Wyosmith said:
If he wants to buy a factory rifle and not have one built as a fully custom job, I doubt you can get better then this.

http://www.winchesterguns.com/produ...-Current-Products/model-70-featherweight.html

No action is more reliable, at any price. Most of them shoot under MOA right out of the box and if you got one that didn't (not likely) you can re-barrel it and still be into the gun for less then some of the others mentioned above. They sell the barrel on e-bay in "like new condition" and you can get about $100 of your barrel job back.

I make rifles to earn my living. Mostly flintlocks, but I have made a LOT of custom bolt actions too. I reject the idea that "it's too nice to hunt with" because 300 years of history are proof that's not true. And you can refinish and re-checker a wood stock and make it as good as new. Add to this the fact that plastic stocks and laminate stocks cost a bunch when you buy them new, but do not hold value well at all unlike a nice wood stock.
But if plastic is the order of the say, you can look at one of these.
http://www.winchesterguns.com/produ...ent-Products/model-70-extreme-weather-ss.html
Click to expand...

I am with you on the walnut stocks. It's what I prefer, by far. I love, LOVE a walnut/stainless combo.

I like the Winchester Extreme Weather SS a lot and I have always been a M70 lover but I just imagined a semi-custom like a MRC would have a much better chance of being a nail-driver. They aren't even that much more expensive, either.

The Forbes 24B that someone posted is a real option. I tipped him off about that one.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
The Montana will not be a lightweight rifle, in my experience MRC is a little heavier than advertised.
Click to expand...

MRC is coming out with a X3 rifle that is supposed to be lighter so they say, I believe they might be already making those.
 
The thing most people complain about is bullet selection for the .270, but they fail to realize there are just as many choices in hunting bullets to choose from as most other calibers. If you want to target shoot you should pick a different caliber. If you're hunting you'll have all the bullet choices you could ever want.

FiveInADime said:
I like the Winchester Extreme Weather SS a lot and I have always been a M70 lover but I just imagined a semi-custom like a MRC would have a much better chance of being a nail-driver. They aren't even that much more expensive, either.
Click to expand...

I have a M70 EW in .270 Win and it shoots lights out! I can usually shoot about 1/2" at 100 and hold under 3" at 300 yards. They've supposedly slimmed down the stock as I hated the one that was on mine, I found a used McMillan for $450 and sold my takeoff for $200. I bought the rifle used for $850 so I don't feel I've done to bad on it. The rifle with 3.5-10X40 Leupold VX3 CDS, Talley LWT mounts, Mountain sling, and six 130 grain cartridges weighs 7lbs 13oz. It isnt as lightweight as my .30-06, but it isnt too heavy to carry all day and it's much easier to shoot than my 06.
 
He hunts in the big mountains and wilderness areas in the Southwest so long shots are probable.
Click to expand...


Since the goal, is ultimate performance/accuracy with heavy VLDs, it's worth considering custom.
Best performance possible is with a non-SAAMI chamber throated for a specific bullet; being able to seat the bullet further out (which you might not be able to do with the heaviest bullets in a SAAMI chamber) increases your case capacity AND obtainable velocities.

Well explained by Berger, here:

http://www.bergerbullets.com/effect...coal-and-cartridge-base-to-ogive-cbto-part-1/

Custom really wouldn't break the bank and could be done for the cost of many of the suggestions above, but if his application requires several different bullets it may or may not be advantageous.
 
Last edited:
A little-used 700 Ti in, say, .30-'06 could be an above-average choice. Mine is in 7mm08, and fully dressed, ready to hunt, is 6.5 pounds. Great recoil pad; doesn't hurt at the benchrest. A surprisingly decent trigger.
 
If I was looking to spend big money for a high country backpack hunting set up it would be a Kimber Mountian Assent in .308win. The rifle weighs 4lbs 13oz not including a scope and loaded. The .308 would be good enough for me for a light weight hunting rifle. Top it off with a nice Swarvoski scope and I'd be a happy camper. However at $2040.00 MSRP without the Swarvoski and probably another $1,200 with it I'll never be able to get one haha. A Christensen would be nice but I have had a few gunsmiths tell me they are not what they are cracked up to be. I've talked to other guys who own them and they said they won't shoot 2MOA and they have sent them back time and time again in order to get sub MOA accuracy out of them. Montana Rifles and Best of the West rifles are nice too. I guess it just comes down to what a guy can afford or what he really wants.

My go to hunting rifle is a Browning X-Bolt Stainless Stalker in .375 H&H with a Leupold VX-1 3-9 and I have had zero issues with it. It's nice to shoot with recoil feeling like a light weight. 30-06 to me and it's accurate. Fairly light weight too at just shy of under 7.5lbs with the scope. I don't see any replacements for it anytime soon.
 
I like the new Kimber Montana rifles for a light SS rifle. The last longer range deer I got was taken with my Kimber 270 WSM.

I suggest he find a Kimber Montana 270 Win. and then he will have a rifle now.

Waiting for a custom can take longer. Also two rifles are back ups to each other.

https://www.kimberamerica.com/montana
 
Last edited:
It's the 'End Game' comment that has me wondering....?

Leupold glass is excellent, range estimation and adjustments are usually in imperial instead of metric, they have lifetime warranty they stand behind.

Consider mounts & rings as a priority I stead of an afterthought.
A full length mount will stiffen a long action.
I often redrill & tap mount screw holes for -8 screws, and epoxy bed the mount to the receiver.
This makes for a super solid, nearly bang proof mount for rough handling.
(See Marine Corps M40 or Army M24)

Steel rail mounts expand & contract with temprature at the same rate as the receiver, while aluminum does not.

A good set of lapped/aligned rings, 4 cap screws per cap will spread torque load out over the screws and provide built in redundancy in the event a screw loosens up.

For subsistence living hunting (off grid) you might want to look into a spare firing pin, springs, screws and other small parts.
I would install blocks epoxied into the stock for bipod & sling, since subsistence living rifles take some pretty good knocks along the way.

The choice of rifle is up to you.
.270 is a good choice up to really large or dangerous game, with light bullets it's fast & accurate, with heavier bullets it will take everything common up to elk or moose very well.
 
JeepHammer said:
It's the 'End Game' comment that has me wondering....?

Leupold glass is excellent, range estimation and adjustments are usually in imperial instead of metric, they have lifetime warranty they stand behind.

Consider mounts & rings as a priority I stead of an afterthought.
A full length mount will stiffen a long action.
I often redrill & tap mount screw holes for -8 screws, and epoxy bed the mount to the receiver.
This makes for a super solid, nearly bang proof mount for rough handling.
(See Marine Corps M40 or Army M24)

Steel rail mounts expand & contract with temprature at the same rate as the receiver, while aluminum does not.

A good set of lapped/aligned rings, 4 cap screws per cap will spread torque load out over the screws and provide built in redundancy in the event a screw loosens up.

For subsistence living hunting (off grid) you might want to look into a spare firing pin, springs, screws and other small parts.
I would install blocks epoxied into the stock for bipod & sling, since subsistence living rifles take some pretty good knocks along the way.

The choice of rifle is up to you.
.270 is a good choice up to really large or dangerous game, with light bullets it's fast & accurate, with heavier bullets it will take everything common up to elk or moose very well.
Click to expand...
End-Game as in: The last one he'll ever buy. The ONLY gun he'll need.

I, personally, like Warne steel weaver-style bases and Burris Signature rings. Maybe not bomb-proof but they are convenient and have a great deal of flexibility. I am not and have never been a fan of how a 1-piece base blocks the port. If you have a proper, stiff action (like a M70, Mauser, etc.) I don't really see the need for the stiffening properties off a 1-piece. I do like the idea of upgrading the mounting screws. I HAVE had those fail I'm the past and it's a PITA.

I have that setup on a M70 in 7mmRemMag and it's never been an issue. Took a dive down a steep mountainside covered in crumbling-degrading granite two years ago deer hunting and the gun landed right on the scope damaging the turret-knob and putting a scrape on my barrel, as well. Took a couple shots at a white rock at 400 yards and it was dead on. Good job Vortex Viper HS-T and good job Warne and Burris on the mounts.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
It's up to you, I just didn't know what the 'End Game' comment meant.
Ounces equal pounds, pounds equal pain when you have to pack it around up & down mountians.

I know the trend is toward naked barrels, but I usually recommend iron sight mounts, with sights at least stored in the stock or under the butt plate.
Rifles do get banged around, optics do fail, redundant sights keep you in the hunt.
If it's hunting 30 minutes from home, no big deal. If it's an expensive hunting trip and three days to get in or out, that sucks.

My rifle case has an extra firing pin, spring & cocking piece for the bolt (bolt being lapped to fit the receiver/barrel, not field replaceable). It seems extreme, but it's in response to broken firing pin or spring that spoiled a hunt.

The screws that come with common, off the shelf mounts don't have very good thread engagement, and are often 'Soft'. I don't care to use them opting for threading the holes myself for sharp, clean, straight threads in the hole, and better quality screws with good engagement of the hole threads.
I've seen WAY too man boogered up threads and broken screws, this was the most simple way I've found to prevent that issue. (Simple Is Good! Especially when it strengthens the assembly)

It depends on cheek weld/optical center line how much metal you can put on top the receiver.
You don't get to adjust your cheek bone or eyeball orbit center, so cheek weld sets the height of the optic centerline.
I don't want to hunt around for optical centerline when the cheek bone hits the stock.
Natural alignment means jacking that optic centerline up & down until it naturally aligns with the eyeball.

I use a 1" (or 30mm) aluminum bar stock with a 1/8" hole drilled lengthwise in the rings, and watch the customer shoulder the rifle.
If he has to hunt to see through that little hole, the stack up is wrong.
When you get the right height stack of mounts & rings, he will see stright through as soon as cheek hits stock, no head bobbing or weaving.
Once that rifle fits, he'll LOVE shooting it!

My job is to make everything precisely correct, from function to fit...
Take what you need/want for your application.
 
I also like Cooper for a push feed.
Click to expand...

I don't own one so I could be wrong, but it's my understanding that a Cooper isn't a push feed like an "ordinary" push feed (Remington 700 style). It has a claw extractor, albeit smaller than a Mauser style extractor, and the cartridge rim pops up underneath it before fully chambering. It's sort of a "semi" controlled round feed design.
 
Controlled round push feed is probably what you are talking about, and I can see where it would be a good thing on a 'Scout' rifle.

Controlled round means the bolt captures the round before it's fully released from the magazine and controls entry into the chamber, the round can't cock sideways or escape the bolt/chamber if the rifle is cocked sideways or he barrel pointing up/down when the bolt is cycled.

The most famous controlled round push feed is probably the Mauser 98 action, simply because there were so many made, and so common on the surplus market.
I have zero issues with controlled round push feed, a darn good idea even if it does make the bolt more complicated and requires a slightly longer bolt stroke.
 
oldscot3 said:
I don't own one so I could be wrong, but it's my understanding that a Cooper isn't a push feed like an "ordinary" push feed (Remington 700 style). It has a claw extractor, albeit smaller than a Mauser style extractor, and the cartridge rim pops up underneath it before fully chambering. It's sort of a "semi" controlled round feed design.
Click to expand...

That's why I like it over a 2-lug normal push-feed like a R700 or a post-64 M70.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
Push vs. CRF is an age old and overhyped discussion and would be about on the bottom of a list of "reliability" parameters for me. Both work reliably on a well-tuned rifle.

Things like crappy ejectors, poorly designed safeties, bolt handles popping loose....that's the important "stuff"....
 
tobnpr said:
Things like crappy ejectors, poorly designed safeties, bolt handles popping loose....that's the important "stuff"....
Click to expand...

Which action do I have to worry about these things with, lol?

Cooper's bolt looks like a great design to me but I have no first hand experience.




Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top