Rifle size and weight. Going big for accuracy?

[180ls1]

I am looking at building a long range (700 yards max?) hunting setup but need help from those who have been there. How much does a longer, heavier gun help?

If its of any use I recently went from a 4.5lb 39" ATA bow down to a 34" 3.9lb bow (bow only weight). While the bigger bow was more of a pain (western hunter, Idaho, AZ, CA, UT) I'd be damned if I didnt hit the hair I was aiming at. Not so much with the current setup. I am actually going back to a bigger heavier bow because of that.

How much does that play into effect for hunting/shooting? I'd gladly carry an extra lb and 4" of barrel or whatever if it makes a difference when it comes time to kill. My current rifle is a 22" barrel .270 that weighs 7lb 10oz scoped.


I am looking at a x-bolt long range if you are wondering.

Thanks in advance!

 

[packer58]

I’m no expert, but I prefer my long range accuracy rifles right at 10 lbs +/- for stability and run 26” tubes.

 

[180ls1]

I’m no expert, but I prefer my long range accuracy rifles right at 10 lbs +/- for stability and run 26” tubes.

Good to know. Yeah, I was liking the 26" tubes. Do you feel you shoot those substantially better at longer ranges then a lighter setup? I dont want to carry extra weight for the sake of it but I cant imagine extra weight hurting accuracy.

 

[packer58]

Well, bench guns are not light for a reason. Heavier rifles will just settle better than a light rifle for me. Carrying a 10 - 10.5 lb “all in” rifle doesn’t bother me a bit.

 

[djfergus]

10-12lb rifle & scope is a whole lot easier to drive than an 8lb rifle & scope.. Especially when your pulse rate is up and you are excited. 8lb is easier to carry. I guess it all depends on how far you have to walk and/or how good of a shot you are. Maybe 9lb scoped rifle would be a happy medium.

 

[Centralcoastca]

You’re not going to get less accurate with a good heavy barrel. Finding the perfect balance of heavy enough to be accurate and light enough to carry is the sweet spot. A Carbon barrel could be the solution depending on what you’re going for. A light gun can be also be very accurate but If it’s a shoulder busting caliber you might not be able to shoot it accurately. Id figure out what caliber you need and figure out what is a reasonable weight you are comfortable shooting. If it’s a .270 it probably doesn’t matter, but a .300wm it probably does, recoil could be compensated for with a muzzle brake, yet another variable… good luck!

 

[180ls1]

You’re not going to get less accurate with a good heavy barrel. Finding the perfect balance of heavy enough to be accurate and light enough to carry is the sweet spot. A Carbon barrel could be the solution depending on what you’re going for. A light gun can be also be very accurate but If it’s a shoulder busting caliber you might not be able to shoot it accurately. Id figure out what caliber you need and figure out what is a reasonable weight you are comfortable shooting. If it’s a .270 it probably doesn’t matter, but a .300wm it probably does, recoil could be compensated for with a muzzle brake, yet another variable… good luck!

That balance is what I am seeking. Like at what point is there diminishing returns? Surley a 10lb setup will shoot better then my 8ish lb setup. Better yet a 12lb setup however, thats starting to get up there in weight and will a 12lb gun really shoot that much better then 10lb? I doubt it. This is just me speculating.... Seems like at least 9lbs but much more then 10/11 and I am hitting that point of diminishing returns.

I might just rock a 6.5 prc (modern .270?). Its just served me so well over the years but my 20 year old setup needs a refresh. I am sure I'll get some accuracy just from that alone.

10-12lb rifle & scope is a whole lot easier to drive than an 8lb rifle & scope.. Especially when your pulse rate is up and you are excited. 8lb is easier to carry. I guess it all depends on how far you have to walk and/or how good of a shot you are. Maybe 9lb scoped rifle would be a happy medium.

Thats what I am thinking. 9-10lbs in a newer/better setup is probably going to be the ticket.

Honestly, I am not a good shot (not many will admit that) but I have a 400+lb squat so I am ok adding weight if it will help.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

We are all unique, have difference recoil tolerances, and have different preferences.

Most of my rifles weight 7-8 pounds and my heaviest weighs 9. Zero issues shooting them accurately, including my 8 pound 300 WM, and well beyond your stated distance.

To me the only benefit of additional weight is it is easier to stay on target after the shot. Others will feel additional weight has significantly more benefits. It’s all good as we’re all different.

I would recommend borrowing some rifles in different cartridges and get an idea on your recoil tolerance.

 

[Centralcoastca]

We are all unique, have difference recoil tolerances, and have different preferences.

Most of my rifles weight 7-8 pounds and my heaviest weighs 9. Zero issues shooting them accurately, including my 8 pound 300 WM, and well beyond your stated distance.

To me the only benefit of additional weight is it is easier to stay on target after the shot. Others will feel additional weight has significantly more benefits. It’s all good as we’re all different.

I would recommend borrowing some rifles in different cartridges and get an idea on your recoil tolerance.

Exactly, it all depends on what you like. I actually have no idea what my tikka m965 weighs. It’s a .280 rmef gun with a med. heavy barrel so it’s not light, but I like it and it’s killed everything I’ve shot at it cleanly. It feels right and over the years I’ve become very confident with it so it’s usually my go to rifle for just about everything. I have other good rifles ( I also have no idea what they weigh) , but that one is just the right one. I think finding the rifle that shoots right for you is far more important than finding the lightest rifle.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

Exactly, it all depends on what you like. I actually have no idea what my tikka m965 weighs. It’s a .280 rmef gun with a med. heavy barrel so it’s not light, but I like it and it’s killed everything I’ve shot at it cleanly. It feels right and over the years I’ve become very confident with it so it’s usually my go to rifle for just about everything. I have other good rifles ( I also have no idea what they weigh) , but that one is just the right one. I think finding the rifle that shoots right for you is far more important than finding the lightest rifle.

Concur.

Find what works for you and run with it.

 

[Zappaman]

700 yards on larger game is major step up in a lot of ways.

My 25" hunting gun (260ai) is closer to 7 1/2 lbs. scoped and loaded. But this is a "mountain rifle" (which I carry many miles in a day on my typical elk hunts), that's my max gun weight I'll consider for that type of hunting (out to maybe 450). 10 lbs gets heavy fast when you carry it all day- for 7 days! Didn't matter as much when I was 30, but now in my 50s I like a lightweight (accurate as hell) gun off shooting sticks. So I reload my own and shoot them over a chrony so I KNOW exactly (ballistics wise) what I'm shooting out that far.

But if I was going for the sniper stand (hunting blind) rifle for 600+ yards... I'd consider more weight (to keep the kick down) and a larger caliber (to keep the energy up way out there) on larger animals. And yes, need barrel length for velocity for your average calibers.

My 7MM RM at about 8 1/2 scoped is my "long range" gun, with a 26" barreled Weatherby Vanguard and lightweight Weaver SuperSlam. I'd take a "poke" at an elk out to 600 with a 160g Partition or Berger on a still day. Longer than that, and I'd be carrying a 300 WM and looking for a good rest for that VERY LONG shot (hunting).

I'd also need to "dial" accurately at that range and so the scope price doubles (or triples) and the firearm needs to be "tweaked" with lots of range time before I'd take an elk (or deer) past 600 these days. It's a whole new level of "PITA" with a new scope (about $1200) and lots more time-- so I'll pass. BUT many here do it- just have to have the gear AND the ability to use it... while feeling good about it all from the get go.

I wouldn't take a mature elk shot past 600 though- in any gun I'd hunt elk with. I did it once at about 600 (No range finders back then- walked it off); elk dropped on the spot, but I never felt comfortable with that hold-over shot made 20 years ago when my body and eyes were better too. I've also shot two deer out close to 800 with the 7mm RM (and I've missed 20 times at that range), but those days (living on ranches, killing coyotes out at that range, often) are over and I'd probably not try much past 600 today.

IF I wanted to though... I'd have to again have a WAY better scope and be mentally ready, well practiced, KNOW the load, and prep a while to feel good about doing it. I've never missed and elk, and I don't intend to (after 15 or so killed the last 30 years... I'll take my luck here!).

So I'll keep shots in (my) range and work on closing the gap Vs. shooting that far. I actually LIKE the stalk and getting in close AND... that is easier with a lighter weight rifle in my hunting I do on the mountain Vs. the stand. But over 600 yards or so, the price, time, and risk of injuring an animal goes up and you'll have to buy once and cry once (maybe twice... learning mistakes along the way).

 

[chicoredneck]

For me, between 10 and 11 lbs is where a rifle with good stock geometry becomes much easier to shoot steady off a rest. Less than 10lbs it becomes difficult for me to get a gun really rock steady for a shot.

 

[BRTreedogs]

Depends on the caliber.
I have light and have had heavy.
But 8.5-10 is the zone.

 

[Super tag]

I agree with a lot of what has been said already, I have put together quite a few nice rifles, the sweet spot seems to fall in the 8.5 to10 lb. range, there are some light weight rifles, but by the time you add the needed optics for the longer ranges it’s pretty hard to sneak in under that range. I’d spend as much as you can on the optics, most rifles are capable if you develop the right load and practice shooting. The optics will really help you succeed at longer ranges.

 

[BBarnett13]

I have a 9lb scoped & loaded 300WM that is a dream to shoot. It does have a muzzle brake but recoil is very mild for a magnum. Also, for being a back country / mountain rifle I went with a Hart 24" fluted Douglas #3 sporter profile barrel. There is a minimal difference in velocity/energy between a 24" barrel vs a 26" barrel. Plus, if you plan on putting a brake on, it's only going to add length. Like chicoredneck stated above, stock ergonomics and a good bed job plays a big role in accuracy. My 300WM is furnished with a McMillan A3 Sporter Edge stock that fits me like a tailored suit.

 

[Wrench]

Barrel length vs accuracy is the inverse of what most think, longer introduces more potential accuracy loss. The trade off is the increase in velocity. If a 20" gun and a 28" gun made the same numbers.....could you sell the 28?

If you hunt open stuff the extra length isn't awful, if you hunt tight stuff.....it sucks.

Fwiw, I have done everything you are looking to do with the 270 in a 22" tube.

A lot of internet chatter makes people believe something magical happens in the last .031" of bullet diameter.

Whatever you choose, grab 500 rounds and go pound rocks from various positions and field improvised rests.....that is the single biggest component in being a successful rifleman....it's not nearly as much the tools as it is the skill. Skill comes from practice which instills confidence.

Most of all, understand that there are days or setups that you have no business squeezing the trigger....that's a lesson only experience can provide.

 

[huntnful]

I agree with a lot of what has been said already, I have put together quite a few nice rifles, the sweet spot seems to fall in the 8.5 to10 lb. range, there are some light weight rifles, but by the time you add the needed optics for the longer ranges it’s pretty hard to sneak in under that range. I’d spend as much as you can on the optics, most rifles are capable if you develop the right load and practice shooting. The optics will really help you succeed at longer ranges.

I agree with this fully. 8.5-10lbs. Get a rifle around 7lbs base weight, and throw on a 30oz scope and rings. Don't go light on the scope, go light on the rifle IMO

 

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

That balance is what I am seeking. Like at what point is there diminishing returns? Surley a 10lb setup will shoot better then my 8ish lb setup. Better yet a 12lb setup however, thats starting to get up there in weight and will a 12lb gun really shoot that much better then 10lb? I doubt it. This is just me speculating.... Seems like at least 9lbs but much more then 10/11 and I am hitting that point of diminishing returns.

I might just rock a 6.5 prc (modern .270?). Its just served me so well over the years but my 20 year old setup needs a refresh. I am sure I'll get some accuracy just from that alone.



Thats what I am thinking. 9-10lbs in a newer/better setup is probably going to be the ticket.

Honestly, I am not a good shot (not many will admit that) but I have a 400+lb squat so I am ok adding weight if it will help.

It's refreshing to see guys like you admit you're still developing your shooting skills, I hope you spend a few years really learning what long range shooting is all about before you start hunting at 700 yards.

My long range elk rifle (30 nosler w/ 24" barrel) weighs just over 10 lbs with a March FX 4.5-28 and bipod, it wears a muzzle brake which is a must for tracking your shots.
Any heavier and it becomes to clunky for hunting if you're an active hiker, also I find heavy rifles are much more difficult to shoot accurately from any position that doesn't include prone from a bipod.

For out to 700 yards and mixed timber hunting like you're doing, I like an 18-20" barrel wearing a suppressor chambered in any of the wsms.
It's amazing how much easier it is to accurately shoot a lighter weight supressed magnum.
Longer barrels are not more accurate, and are uncescessary inside of 800 yards in most hunting scenarios shooting magnums

 

[huntnful]

It's refreshing to see guys like you admit you're still developing your shooting skills, I hope you spend a few years really learning what long range shooting is all about before you start hunting at 700 yards.

My long range elk rifle (30 nosler w/ 24" barrel) weighs just over 10 lbs with a March FX 4.5-28 and bipod, it wears a muzzle brake which is a must for tracking your shots.
Any heavier and it becomes to clunky for hunting if you're an active hiker, also I find heavy rifles are much more difficult to shoot accurately from any position that doesn't include prone from a bipod.

For out to 700 yards and mixed timber hunting like you're doing, I like an 18-20" barrel wearing a suppressor chambered in any of the wsms.
It's amazing how much easier it is to accurately shoot a lighter weight supressed magnum.
Longer barrels are not more accurate, and are uncescessary inside of 800 yards in most hunting scenarios shooting magnums

What do you think of that new March FX 4.5-28? How does it compare to whatever previous scope you had?

 

[180ls1]

It's refreshing to see guys like you admit you're still developing your shooting skills, I hope you spend a few years really learning what long range shooting is all about before you start hunting at 700 yards.

My long range elk rifle (30 nosler w/ 24" barrel) weighs just over 10 lbs with a March FX 4.5-28 and bipod, it wears a muzzle brake which is a must for tracking your shots.
Any heavier and it becomes to clunky for hunting if you're an active hiker, also I find heavy rifles are much more difficult to shoot accurately from any position that doesn't include prone from a bipod.

For out to 700 yards and mixed timber hunting like you're doing, I like an 18-20" barrel wearing a suppressor chambered in any of the wsms.
It's amazing how much easier it is to accurately shoot a lighter weight supressed magnum.
Longer barrels are not more accurate, and are uncescessary inside of 800 yards in most hunting scenarios shooting magnums

I can't/wont run suppressed while I live in CA but thanks for the suggestion. I really wish I could. Thanks for all the tips. I definitely won't be shooting 700 yards but I would like that capacity in a setup if that makes sense. To date, my furthest kill is a touch over 400 (most are 100-200) but I know I'll stretch that out some.