Why so light?

[roosiebull]

My brother has 1 rifle, a browning bar my dad gave him for high-school graduation in 1994. It must weigh 11# scoped and loaded. Anytime I hand him my rifle (7.5#) a tear rolls down his cheek.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

I had a BAR safari grade in .338wm, and I truly miss that rifle, didn’t really have a need for the horsepower, and it was too pretty, but the weight was ok with me for that rifle in particular, for an unbraked .338, it was pleasant to shoot, I got more sore shooting my .270 tikka, I think the combo of weight and gas operated, it was a fun rifle to shoot… it pushed pretty hard of course, but didn’t have much sting… I shot it side by side with my little tikka often, and the big boomer was easier on my shoulder, and I don’t think factory tikka stocks fit me well

 

[amassi]

I had a BAR safari grade in .338wm, and I truly miss that rifle, didn’t really have a need for the horsepower, and it was too pretty, but the weight was ok with me for that rifle in particular, for an unbraked .338, it was pleasant to shoot, I got more sore shooting my .270 tikka, I think the combo of weight and gas operated, it was a fun rifle to shoot… it pushed pretty hard of course, but didn’t have much sting… I shot it side by side with my little tikka often, and the big boomer was easier on my shoulder, and I don’t think factory tikka stocks fit me well

These are 7 mags, we all have 1. Mines a Safari ii 25th anniversary with a 3-9 leupolds. Recoil is not an issue whatsoever like you said due to the weight and gas system. Shoots 5 corelokts into about 1.25.
I don't miss carrying it though

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[Macintosh]

I don't know if I would call it trolling but 90% of the time these threads are not the person asking a question. Its them making a statement in the form of a question.

I think you're probably right on the money. And yeah, if that's the case I'd call it a troll.

And if not, who's to say I'm not an ultra-athlete already and it takes shedding 3 ounces to increase my hunting performance?

Reality is I'm a middle-aged FORMER athlete who now drives a desk 5 days a week and makes creaking noises when I stand up from my divot in the couch. I'm fully aware I'd have more actual gains running a few extra miles a week or eating fewer pork tacos (not happening). Still, if I lose even 20 lb, let alone 40, I'd be so skinny I'd be invisible. That's not the point. This is FUN. I LIKE guns, and I enjoy putting thought into them and then using them as designed. If I lost my job tomorrow I could sell all my guns except one 1 rifle and 1 shotgun and still do 100% of the hunting I do today without skipping a beat. And, for the hunting I do most, that gun would likely wind up on the lighter-ish end of the scale becasue it just works better for me most of the time.

 

[eoperator]

I’m always struggling to gain a little weight, that doesn’t work for me, even the off season it’s hard to gain weight and all fall I’m in a calorie deficit, and keestering a heavy rifle isn’t an ideal means of gaining weight

I can remember saying the same before turning 40, not the same for me today.

 

[highcountrymuley]

hunting in the mountains with a daypack on your back and a rifle on your shoulder all day... you should be able to figure out why shedding a couple pounds on rifle weight is advantageous. i have a Ruger American .30 06 with plastic stock that fits the bill. When a buddy helped with my packout he said "ohh i like that!" as he strapped on my rifle as i loaded up quarters.

 

[robby denning]

good thread question OP

To me, 2 lbs is a lot on a gun. 3 is way lots

I like lite as the gun handles better, and if you still-hunt much, you have to keep the gun in your hands to be effective and that's especially where weight matters.

My old Sako weighed over 10lbs and it was hard on the shoulder, but especially the hands when still-hunting.

I bought lighter rifles over the years and the trade off is worth it for the way I hunt. running 7.5lbs scoped now and the only thing I don't like is not as steady for long shots and there is more recoil.

 

[t_carlson]

Isn’t a persons health and ability to carry an extra 2-3lbs weight more important?

I’ve seen that mentality posted again and again online.

In practice, it doesn’t really work that way. You’ll just have to take my word for it until you find out yourself. Guys that go deep — and I’m not talking about deep on the internet — don’t carry any heavier rifle than necessary.

 

[grfox92]

I used to be totally confused by the obsession with light weight rifles also. I am not a guy who skimps and suffers comfort in my pack for anything. But, this year I packed out my first elk for quite a distance and I wanted to throw my 9 pound rifle off a cliff half way through that pack out. Switching hands carrying in the sling, over my shoulder. Eventually it became a burden no matter how I carried it.

If I had tagged out I would have left the rifle somewhere, but I still had a tag so I had to carry it. .

I usually have a Kifaru gun bearer but lost the bottom half antelope hunting in early october and never replaced it. That really mitigates the suck of carrying a rifle of any weight.

Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

 

[grfox92]

I’ve seen that mentality posted again and again online.

In practice, it doesn’t really work that way. You’ll just have to take my word for it until you find out yourself. Guys that go deep — and I’m not talking about deep on the internet — don’t carry any heavier rifle than necessary.

This ny thought process for my pack, a couple extra pounds is no big deal, I'm in good shape and train to hunt.

But carrying a 10lb club around all day is very different. It's just not the same. You need to experience it I guess.

Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

 

[Matt Cashell]

I like lighter rifles because I am just not that tough.

I am always looking to carry less weight.

I spend way more time carrying the thing than shooting it.



It’s really a balance though, I will carry an extra few ounces here and there for feature or convenience…

 

[Coopsdaddy]

It’s not a bravado thing. It seems people put so much emphasis on rifle weight that they convince themselves that lbs matter. If they didn’t know the weight to begin with, they would be bothered.

Than apply that to all your gear and have fun lugging your 100 lb pack.
Will wait for you at the top.

 

[derekvieira]

I removed 3.5 pounds from my kit last year just taking the time to think critically about every single item I carry. Do I really need so many ibuprofen’s, do I need a 90 oz water bladder when most of the time I am carrying 40 oz, do I need extra game bags, do in need a headlamp with 4 AA batteries when I can carry a rechargeable, do I need a range finder if I am hunting in timber, do I need a bino harness if weather will be fine, etc.

My take is that I can always increase my performance and lose weight and I am doing those items. I skipped breakfast for a month before last season to lose a couple of extra pounds.

The rifle is the heaviest item you will carry while hunting so any weight that you can save from it is huge imo.

I know hunting in the mountains is going to be hard no matter my physical preparation so I am trying to give myself every advantage I can since they all add up and are easy to get but not always cheap.

 

[woods89]

I carry a 9.5-10 lb rifle in the mountains. No issues, but I'm in my early 30s, maybe time will change my attitude. At some point I plan to suppress it, so it'll be even heavier.

It's true that one carries their rifle much more than they shoot it, but your whole season rides on those few seconds when you use it. For me there is a real difference in the shootability of a 10 lb rifle and a 7 lb rifle.

 

[prm]

Why? Because I have a choice, and my experiences have informed me. The experience of carrying a heavy rifle (Savage 10FP 26” bull barrel, 10+lbs), and a light rifle (Kimber Montana, 6lb), up and around the CO rockies has demonstrated to me the benefits of a light rifle. When I’m hunting, my rifle is in my hands. Based on my personal experience, lighter is better for me. If I were hiking to a vantage point and sitting waiting for a shot that is likely quite far, I might choose differently.

 

[Mule3006Elk]

Rifles stated to be 7 lbs, it this with rail, rings, scope, the whole package?

My rifle is 12 lbs: gun, loaded mag, rail, rings, scope, bipod, sling.

 

[Mule3006Elk]

All good. Quick research. LW rifles range 5-6.5 lbs. So I would save 1-2.5 lbs off my setup.

 

[BarCO]

I understand your reasoning and I appreciate your comment. But when you have 70lbs on your back over 20+ miles, does a few extra pounds matter?

I keep my rifle in my hands much of the time. I can’t shoot well with it strapped to a pack.

 

[Team4LongGun]

There seems to be a lot of guys out there with a lot of disposable income to spend money on things that don't really have a great bang for their buck.

And this is the beauty of freedom! To each his own.

I don’t weight my rifle or gear, but have spent money for upgrades that also saved weight in my pack. Win win.

 

[Flyjunky]

When I’m hunting, my rifle is in my hands. Based on my personal experience, lighter is better for me. If I were hiking to a vantage point and sitting waiting for a shot that is likely quite far, I might choose differently.

This is the answer to rifle weight right here!

It all depends on how you hunt and the type of shot you are likely to encounter. People are touting physics in this thread, ie lighter = go farther, but those physics also apply to a rifle. The heavier a rifle the more accurate you’ll shoot it, with maybe the exception of guys who are still hunting…tired arms make for shaky shots.

I don’t mind a heavier rifle, actually prefer 9.5-10lbs, but that is also caliber dependent.