Unlicensed Dremel
Moderator
Ahhh, thank you - tis true; just an assertion; not proved. But it is asserted by most, with a purported reasoning or theory behind it.
Ultimate build: Which chambering for a SHORT action: .260 AI or 6.5-284
- Thread starter Unlicensed Dremel
- Start date
There are a ton of guys building light rifles out there. I'm sure you can find a reputable smith who can answre your questions near you. If I had to have a truly light rifle and money was no object I'd be talking to Melvin Forbes of New Ultra Light Arms, he is pretty much the guy who pioneered light weight hunting rifles. Another option for a light hunting rifle would be Wayne York of Oregunsmithing LLC.
As far as to a custom action as light as the Remington TI, why not use the Proof Research H6 action if you go with them for your build. Then there are a ton of guys out there who will skeletonize a regular M700 action and get it down to the weight of a TI. If you scrap having to have BDL bottom metal and go with a blind magazine you'll cut weight there. Or you can buy a lightweight PT&G aluminum BDL bottom metal.
I changed a factory Winchester M70 Featherweight .30-06 into a 7lbs 1oz rifle just by putting it in a McMillan Hunters Edge compact with a blind magazine, Talley LWT mounts, and a Leupold VX-III 2.5-8X36. I'm right around 7.5lbs with a sling and 5 rounds in the magazine.
As far as to a custom action as light as the Remington TI, why not use the Proof Research H6 action if you go with them for your build. Then there are a ton of guys out there who will skeletonize a regular M700 action and get it down to the weight of a TI. If you scrap having to have BDL bottom metal and go with a blind magazine you'll cut weight there. Or you can buy a lightweight PT&G aluminum BDL bottom metal.
I changed a factory Winchester M70 Featherweight .30-06 into a 7lbs 1oz rifle just by putting it in a McMillan Hunters Edge compact with a blind magazine, Talley LWT mounts, and a Leupold VX-III 2.5-8X36. I'm right around 7.5lbs with a sling and 5 rounds in the magazine.
Last edited:
Unlicensed Dremel
Moderator
Very well; excellent info, espec. on the actions equally weight of a Ti. Thanks very much.
Unlicensed Dremel
Moderator
Hey, also, can anyone tell me, why is this set of sections on this site collectively known as "The Hide"? Does this refer to a hunting blind / sniper's blind, or hide of an animal, or both, or other? Thanks.
A Pierce Ti action is 18.5 ounces ($1400). McMillan Hunters Edge stock is 22 ounces ($700). A 26" gain twist Bartlein, #2 contour profiled and fluted, chambered and crowned is 46 ounces ($800 installed). Trigger, mag follower and spring, action bolts and a lug is 7 ounces ($300).
Weight: 93.5 ounces (5.84 pounds)
Price: $3200 if you drop the barreled action in the stock and do your own trigger install. About $3600 OTD by a reputable smith. Realize there is $500 or so of gunsmith labor in the $800 for the barrel.
I have shot one Wayne York's rifle, and it was very impressive. A local smith here was building the Kifaru's for years out of the shop owned by a friend of mine. All of the Lightweight Hunters I have shot that were built with Kreigers or Bartleins were excellent shooters, all under 1 MOA.
Weight: 93.5 ounces (5.84 pounds)
Price: $3200 if you drop the barreled action in the stock and do your own trigger install. About $3600 OTD by a reputable smith. Realize there is $500 or so of gunsmith labor in the $800 for the barrel.
I have shot one Wayne York's rifle, and it was very impressive. A local smith here was building the Kifaru's for years out of the shop owned by a friend of mine. All of the Lightweight Hunters I have shot that were built with Kreigers or Bartleins were excellent shooters, all under 1 MOA.
Unlicensed Dremel
Moderator
taylor, look at this auction:
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=397906472
that rifle is 6 lbs, 2 oz. with a 26" bbl.
I'm confident I can be well under 7 lbs with just one more inch of bbl, esp. when that marginal extra inch is the tiny "sleeve" bbl under the fiber wrap (since the fatter "end part" is a given or "fixed cost" if you will).
And I think that that is true with OR without a Ti action (that one there IS built on a Rem Ti action).
And that looks like a long action. So if I build in essence the same thing as that one except in .260 in a short action, it may come in under six lbs even with a 27" bbl. It should *easily* be under 6.5 lbs.
That one there is "getting warm" to what I'm after.
That particular rifle has Christensen wrapping. If they're telling the truth about 40 rounds through, then it's a VERY good buy.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=397906472
that rifle is 6 lbs, 2 oz. with a 26" bbl.
I'm confident I can be well under 7 lbs with just one more inch of bbl, esp. when that marginal extra inch is the tiny "sleeve" bbl under the fiber wrap (since the fatter "end part" is a given or "fixed cost" if you will).
And I think that that is true with OR without a Ti action (that one there IS built on a Rem Ti action).
And that looks like a long action. So if I build in essence the same thing as that one except in .260 in a short action, it may come in under six lbs even with a 27" bbl. It should *easily* be under 6.5 lbs.
That one there is "getting warm" to what I'm after.
That particular rifle has Christensen wrapping. If they're telling the truth about 40 rounds through, then it's a VERY good buy.
I have no doubt you can get under 7lbs, but you're going to have to be very cognizant of your component choices to do it. The reason I said a 26" barrel is because Proof Research didn't list a 6.5 barrel that long. According to their barrel contour list they don't start a 27" barrel until you get to a 7mm and 28" in the .30 calibers.
Plus I don't feel you gain anything by using a carbon fiber wrapped barrel. There are amazing quality barrels out there known for their accuracy that you can have custom contoured, threaded, chambered and installed for less money than the Proof Research barrel. They'll probably shoot just as well as a CF wrapped barrel, if not better in some cases.
Plus I don't feel you gain anything by using a carbon fiber wrapped barrel. There are amazing quality barrels out there known for their accuracy that you can have custom contoured, threaded, chambered and installed for less money than the Proof Research barrel. They'll probably shoot just as well as a CF wrapped barrel, if not better in some cases.
Unlicensed Dremel
Moderator
Thanks guys - I will definitely take that under advisement.
However, look at that auction rifle one more time please:
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=397906472
You're telling me that someone else could build a rifle with the SAME 6 lbs and 2 oz weight, and the SAME 26" bbl length, but without carbon fiber wrap, and have equal accuracy? Really? The barrel would have to be "sub-#1 contour" - it would look like a noodle that was in your Pho soup stretched out straight.....
Last edited:
Unlicensed Dremel said:
Kimber builds a Montana 84M short action with a 22" barrel that weighs 5lbs 6oz, and a 5lbs 10oz in a long action with 24" barrel. So if a commercial rifle is that close to your goal weight, then "YES" a custom builder can do the same without a carbon fiber barrel. Plus I don't get the need for a long barrel that you seem to have, with a .260 your going to probably only loose about 100 fps going from a 27" down to a 22".
I agree with taylorce1, 27" will not gain you anything real on target. The price you are going to pay for that extra 3-5" in $ and yes, accuracy is not worth the slight velocity increase. For $1000, I can get 200 polymer tipped rebated base lathe turned bullets that will have more velocity at 600 yards from a 22" barrel than the Nosler LRs will have from a 27" given the same MV.
Read this: http://www.weatherby.com/company/pressroom/pressrelease/item/view/44744
and take a gander: http://www.weatherby.com/product/rifles/markv/ultralight
I own a Weatherby ULW in .338-06 (5.75 pounds) that printed the first group at under 0.4" with factory ammo. Now, 10 years later and lot of game animals harvested, it still prints under 0.5" with my 3 loads. I have shot three different .308 based lightweights that were under 5 pounds, and a few ounces over 6 pounds with optic. They were all 1MOA or better, which is more than enough for 450 yards on game and 600 yards in matches, which is your stated quest. That Weatherby, in 7mm-08 or .270 will do everything you want so I would use that as a base comparison. Heck, you could buy the .308 version and a .260 Bartlein barrel and be at about $2500 after selling the take-off.
My .260 sports a 21" barrel, and I shot my Pronghorn at 680 yards in 2013, just for reference.
Unlicensed Dremel
Moderator
MarkCO, Thank you. But the barrel length here is a given; not in question. It will be 27".
The QUESTION here, now, at this point in the thread is: If I build a rifle with a 27", non-fluted bbl, under 6.5 lbs bare, will it have the same accuracy potential in real field conditions, as that rifle in that link, particularly from the 2nd and 3rd shot, as the bbl is warming?
It doesn't seem to me like the answer would be yes, but some knowledgeable people seem to think that the answer is yes. Your anecdotal evidence from a 26" bbled Mk V (it is 26, right?) also supports this. My accuracy goal is indeed 0.5 MOA (but not the 1 MOA you mention; that's double). However, if yours is 26" and that accurate, and sub-6.0, there's no reason I suppose that I cannot go 27" and have same accuracy and still be sub-6.5 easily. If the accuracy goals are there.
I have a Mk V ULW, but I lopped the bbl from 24 to 22.25, as I wanted it to be both a woods rifle and a semi-long-range rifle. (It's not a magnum, so it came with 24 instead of 26)
Let me ask you, please.... How many shots are your 0.5 MOA groups? At what distances are they shot? What's the ambient temp typically? How long did you let your bbl cool between shots? Were you disregarding or not disregarding flyers? Was this consistently or just the best groups? Did you do any special work to the rifle beyond factory? Bedding job or anything? At what range were the one half and one MOA groups shot? 100? Thanks.
But in any event, y'all really have me re-thinking this. I'd love to save the money by not getting CF if the goals can be met. Love to be able to build it for $3K instead of $5K obviously. Due to developments here, I have reduced (or increased?) the max weight requirement from 7.0 to 6.5 lbs bare, regardless of bbl type. I think that's well doable.
The QUESTION here, now, at this point in the thread is: If I build a rifle with a 27", non-fluted bbl, under 6.5 lbs bare, will it have the same accuracy potential in real field conditions, as that rifle in that link, particularly from the 2nd and 3rd shot, as the bbl is warming?
It doesn't seem to me like the answer would be yes, but some knowledgeable people seem to think that the answer is yes. Your anecdotal evidence from a 26" bbled Mk V (it is 26, right?) also supports this. My accuracy goal is indeed 0.5 MOA (but not the 1 MOA you mention; that's double). However, if yours is 26" and that accurate, and sub-6.0, there's no reason I suppose that I cannot go 27" and have same accuracy and still be sub-6.5 easily. If the accuracy goals are there.
I have a Mk V ULW, but I lopped the bbl from 24 to 22.25, as I wanted it to be both a woods rifle and a semi-long-range rifle. (It's not a magnum, so it came with 24 instead of 26)
Let me ask you, please.... How many shots are your 0.5 MOA groups? At what distances are they shot? What's the ambient temp typically? How long did you let your bbl cool between shots? Were you disregarding or not disregarding flyers? Was this consistently or just the best groups? Did you do any special work to the rifle beyond factory? Bedding job or anything? At what range were the one half and one MOA groups shot? 100? Thanks.
But in any event, y'all really have me re-thinking this. I'd love to save the money by not getting CF if the goals can be met. Love to be able to build it for $3K instead of $5K obviously. Due to developments here, I have reduced (or increased?) the max weight requirement from 7.0 to 6.5 lbs bare, regardless of bbl type. I think that's well doable.
Last edited:
Based on your current bullet selection with a tangential ogive, it may not be particularly relevant.
But I'm completing my son's long-range .260- which is actually chambered in ".260 Match"- which has an additional .042 of freebore to allow getting more of the VLD out of the case without jamming it into the rifling.
I think it's a bit of overkill for your application, but it's not uncommon for those so inclined to have reamers made specifically for a particular bullet and seating length. It will be a long time, if ever, before I'd be able to outshoot a rifle that didn't have a custom-cut chamber so I don't worry about such things
But I'm completing my son's long-range .260- which is actually chambered in ".260 Match"- which has an additional .042 of freebore to allow getting more of the VLD out of the case without jamming it into the rifling.
I think it's a bit of overkill for your application, but it's not uncommon for those so inclined to have reamers made specifically for a particular bullet and seating length. It will be a long time, if ever, before I'd be able to outshoot a rifle that didn't have a custom-cut chamber so I don't worry about such things
I use 5 shot groups shot in a steady cadence. I would say that the time between rounds is about 20 seconds at 100 yards, maybe 25 seconds at 300 yards. I don't believe in discounting "flyers". The 338-06 has a 24" barrel and is bone stock. I have shot it at 5000' and 8000' elevation and from 5F to 70F over the chrono.
Unlicensed Dremel
Moderator
OK, thanks again. I've got some thinking / researching to do.... I may just stick with the current setup of two rifles to cover these two uses, rather than trying to replace with "just one" for both uses, in light of barrel burn and initial cost. Although part of me says that a Nosler M48 Patriot in .26 Nosler or 6.5-.284 for $1,600 would be a heck of a rifle and meet the criteria to combine both into one rifle - though at the expense of being a barrel-burner. LOT cheaper than the full custom I was considering, though it wouldn't have the stock I wanted.