Long Range Hunting Gun Weight

[dragman]

What is the total weight that you like your long range hunting guns to be at?? - this is total weight scope, level, ammo, etc.

 

[Broz]

What is the total weight that you like your long range hunting guns to be at?? - this is total weight scope, level, ammo, etc.

And what would be the maximum range of the said "long range hunting guns" That will make a huge difference.

 

[ICANHITHIMMAN]

And what would be the maximum range of the said "long range hunting guns" That will make a huge difference.

Yes define this

 

[rick523]

Yes define this

+1 what they said.

 

[dragman]

Lets say your figuring on a shot between 800-1200 max distance 1600.

caliber would be your choice. if you vote say 15&up because you shoot a big gun then say thats why

 

[COBrad]

My long range varmint gun weighs 13.5 lbs all up. Not real heavy, but it is a chore for me to pack around in the Eberlestock day pack I use. I like to be able to cover ground when hunting, and most of my hunting is from 9000 to over 12000' elevation.
I like my little 8 lb hunting rifle, but I don't see it as a 1000 yard rifle.
For a big game rifle intended for the ranges you mention, in the terrain I hunt, I am thinking 10 lbs scoped and ready to go.

 

[Greyfox]

My favorite LR hunting rig is set up for shots from 50-1000 yards. I'm predominately a deer, antelope, and coyote hunter. I can stretch it another 100-200 yards effectively for a shot at a coyote if the opportunity arises. I do s combination of mostly stand, but a fair amount of walking and stalking. It weighs in at about 12 pounds. I like a barrel at least .75" at the muzzle and a length of 26". Gives me enough LR weight/stability for my 6.5-284, and is the limit for me to make a steady off hand shot on those rare occasions.

 

[Outlaw6.0]

As far as my LR rigs are concerned, it looks like this:

6.5WSM w/34mm MK4 & Atlas= 15.8lbs <<will go up after I install the new USO.
338RUM w/34mm MK4 & Atlas= 16.7lbs <<16.something anyway
7RSAUM-not finished= Est'd ~ 14lbs


My "carry gun" in 7.82 Patriot is in the 12lb range. I would have to consider myself an ambush hunter, but I've put a few miles on the WSM this year after my Fuzzy Wuzzies.


With the info I had to work with, I voted 15+.

 

[Broz]

Lets say your figuring on a shot between 800-1200 max distance 1600.

caliber would be your choice. if you vote say 15&up because you shoot a big gun then say thats why

Well, there is a miles differenc between a 800 yard shot and a 1200 yard shot and 1600 is another level again.

So, I will think in terms of a 1200 yard shot and say this. I sure would not want a rifle under 12lbs if I wanted my success rate to be good. And for the 1600 yard shots I would want a 16 lb .338.

Jeff

 

[Scot E]

Well, there is a miles differenc between a 800 yard shot and a 1200 yard shot and 1600 is another level again.

So, I will think in terms of a 1200 yard shot and say this. I sure would not want a rifle under 12lbs if I wanted my success rate to be good. And for the 1600 yard shots I would want a 16 lb .338.

Jeff

Jeff (and anyone else with an opinion),

I have been thinking about gun weight in relation to LR shooting quite a bit lately and would love your input on this. I am trying to balance cartridge size and overall weight to come up with an ideal LR deer and antelope gun for backpacking and carry. Not that it matter for this topic but it will most likely be a 6.5, probably the Swede.

I realize there are many reasons that weight helps with a LR shot. I am wondering though if the weight should be commensurate to the recoil of a gun? For instance, let's say you think 12lbs is needed for a 300 Win Mag for distances to 1200 yards. But does a 6XC or 6.5x55 need as much weight to be as accurate at 1200 yards assuming they are equally accurate guns to begin with? Again, I am not talking about bullet drift, subsonic entry, etc that would make a smaller caliber gun less accurate at range but am specifically looking at accuracy that would be derived from the weight of the gun itself. It seems like less weight would be required for less recoiling rifles but I seldom see mention of this by any smiths or shooters. Maybe this is because more weight is always better than less so guys get as much as they can. It has just been something sticking in my mind lately as I try to build a gun heavy enough but not an ounce heavier than I need.

Scot E.

 

[dragman]

For me the magical weight for most calibers is between 12-14lbs and that is for anything from my .243- 300RUM. the only time I need to go heavier than that is if I am going over a big .30 in Cal. If I am going into my .338Lapua or larger I prefer 14-16lb guns. I have never been able to "control" or get the repeatability with guns that are lighter than that.

 

[Broz]

Scott, in all the rifles in different calibers I have built, it has always been the heavier rifles that were the best tack drivers. Even though they all have very effective brakes. You should shoot my 14 lb 6 br with a brake. I get your drift but I feel weight will be of help for accuracy no matter what the recoil. So probably it would be good to look at it this way. What is the distance potential of the caliber with the intended weight of bullet you will use? Then, what would be the accuracy level for that rifle to do what you need it to at that distance, .5 moa, 1 moa? Then decide how thin of a barrel and light weight of a rifle you can get by with. I don't feel it is all in recoil, the human error is multiplied with a lighter rifle. From ability to hold on target, heart beat right down to the smoothness and brake of the trigger, weight is your friend.

Jeff

 

[Scot E]

Scott, in all the rifles in different calibers I have built, it has always been the heavier rifles that were the best tack drivers. Even though they all have very effective brakes. You should shoot my 14 lb 6 br with a brake. I get your drift but I feel weight will be of help for accuracy no matter what the recoil. So probably it would be good to look at it this way. What is the distance potential of the caliber with the intended weight of bullet you will use? Then, what would be the accuracy level for that rifle to do what you need it to at that distance, .5 moa, 1 moa? Then decide how thin of a barrel and light weight of a rifle you can get by with. I don't feel it is all in recoil, the human error is multiplied with a lighter rifle. From ability to hold on target, heart beat right down to the smoothness and brake of the trigger, weight is your friend.

Jeff

A 14lb 6BR huh? Does it even move? I bet that is a tack driver. What bullet do you shoot?

I was just thinking back to LTLR's post this summer about the McMillan EOL Outdoorsman he worked with. I think that is a 8lb gun and he was getting some pretty impressive groups at and beyond 1k and that was with a 300RUM! No doubt they would be better with more weight and obviously he has some serious skill and experience as well. It is interesting though.

This particular gun will likely be a 1/2 mile and under gun and I would like it to hold .5 MOA but even .75-1MOA is doable at that distance. If it is in 6.5x55 I would think a 9.5-10lb gun fully loaded would be more than enough. Just wondering how much less I could get by with.

Thanks for your input.

Scot E.

 

[Broz]

Well I believe I will only talk of what I know on this, and not what I have read. I feel your 9.5 lb rifle would be pretty good to 1000 for hunting and able to hold 1 moa if it was a quality build and fit you well. And even better at your 880 yrd limit. For this rifle I would shave the weight in the scope area, and leave all I could in the barrel.

My 6 br sends 107 SMK's

Jeff