Long Range Rifles/Optics for Backpacking hunts

[Timber338]

In the interest of full disclosure, I do have 3 "sporter weight" rifles (all classic Sakos). They wieigh 10.0, 10.4 and 10.6 pounds but... I didn't take any of them backpacking.

Out of curiosity, how much do the rifles weigh that you do take backpacking?

I've got a light 338-300 wsm that weighs in a bit under 7.5 lbs scoped that I have shot a lot of elk with. Great to carry but shot distance is limited to medium range on elk.

 

[Engineering101]

The 300 RUM I took on the bear hunt weighs 11.5 pounds. The 338 RUM I had to haul out of the bottom of Devil's Canyon is 12.8 pounds. I have a 14.2 pound no taper barrel target rifle that weighs 14.2 pounds. I would not take it hunting - not because it is too heavy but because it is not well balanced.

My nephew tends to favor 30 inch heavy barrels. He has both a 260 Rem and a 338 Edge setup like that. I think he is nuts for carrying such heavy unbalanced rifles. He doesn't give it a second thought (you can do that when you are twenty something). If I recall, he has made several head shots on animals past 500 yards. He also took 2 antelope with 1 shot from the 338. He waited until they lined up and let the 300 grain Berger fly. He found them both tipped over a few feet apart.

 

[Timber338]

Phorwath and Engineering101, it sure is cool to hear from other guys that hunt hard. I've been backpack hunting for a little over 15 years now, so nowhere near as long as either of you, but every bit as hard. Glad both of you have shared your knowledge and advice here... sound like you both have taken two different approaches to the style of rifle you pack.

When I first set out to build my 338 RUM, I had about the 10 pound range is my goal. With the two scopes I've narrowed it down to there's about a 14 ounce swing in weight. The lighter scope would make the rifle handle a bit better and the heavier scope I think would perform better at long range. I'll have to think on it some more.

 

[Wyodog]

I think this is an interesting topic and I often consider rifle weight vs backpacking weight. For me I typically chose either 12.4 lb rifle when I know are long range shot possibilities. I carry different rifle that weighs 9.25 lbs if I think I may need to make quick free hand shot. Both rifles shoot sub moa at 1000 yards but I tend to shoot the heavier rifle better and with more confidence, in field situations. If I have the rifle on the pack I don't mind caring the heavier rifle for several days in the field. But I promise you I notice its gone when I'm packing my second load of elk meat.

If I'm fairly certain that ill be shooting 500 yards or less I'm packing the lighter rifle otherwise I choose the heavier gun.

I like to think that a rifle that weighs between 10.5 and 11 lbs would be a good all around weight for a backpacking rifle, that can reach out to 1000+ yards, but I don't have one so that is purely speculation.

 

[Timber338]

I like to think that a rifle that weighs between 10.5 and 11 lbs would be a good all around weight for a backpacking rifle, that can reach out to 1000+ yards, but I don't have one so that is purely speculation.

Along the lines of what Engineering 101 brought up about his 14+ lb rifle being unbalanced, I think a rifle needs to be put together with similarly matched components. I have my ATACR mounted on my 338 RUM right now just because I have not decided on a scope to hunt with, and it's top heavy. If you're just shooting at the bench it's really not a big deal, but the balance makes it a bit awkward in the field to carry.

So I think it's kind of silly to build a relatively light 338 RUM and then mount a 38 ounce scope with big 34mm rings. I really don't think I want to spend the $$ for a Swarovski no matter how much they are the lightest option with arguably some of the best optics out there .... but something close really might just be the VX6 3-18x50. With Talley rings that would bring my rifle right to about 9.5 lbs which would really be nice to carry but still capable to long range. Probably not the best choice for ELR shots, but that's not my intention for the rifle.

 

[Wyodog]

Timber338,

I agree with you that balanced rifle is nicer to carry and to shoot as well. I like my rifles a little bit bbl heavy but not so much that they are awkward to carry. My most recent build was a 26" sendero contoured benchmark bbl with 8 heavy flutes. it carries pretty good and shoots even better. This is my coyote rifle and I am considering a sister rifle in a new caliber backpack hunting. If I want to come in 10.5 to 11 pounds I would need a different contour or maybe a 24 inch bbl even.

 

[.284]

Here's my 2c. I used the swarovski 3-18 brx for years and it worked well but I didn't like having to crank it to 18 power for the hold over marks to line up. It's a bit too much to spot your shots when your not shooting too far. Plus they are spaced .5 mil apart so while yes it does work you are still holding off a little. I switched to a nightforce compact though I was a little apprehensive about only 10x on the top end. I should of switched years ago, 10x is plenty and I've used it out confidently on targets out to 1000 yards or so.

For me having the ability for a long poke is great but if I have just spent 2 days packing in and a few searching around for a ram I'm gonna get as close as possible and I've never had to shoot over 550 for a ram. If the winds were good I would be very confident to stretch out to the limit of my round for bullet expansion and in no way feel limited by 10x power and love the ability to dial right where I need to rather than possibly hold in between the hash marks on the swarovski.

My sheep rifle is built off a rem titanium and its 9lb 1 oz all up with a brake, bipod, rail, picatiny rings, level etc. Bare rifle is 5lb 15oz.

 

[bruce_ventura]

.284,

As you probably know, that scope gives you other options. Setting the Z5 3.5-18x44 magnification to 16.2X changes the reticle from .5 mil to 2 IPHY spacing. Reducing it to 9X changes the reticle spacing to 1 mil.

 

[Pdvdh]

My backpacking rifles don't have bipods. I want to have enough scope power to determine curl length from a good distance with my riflescope, should I get separated from my spotting scope. It's happend to me over the past 35yrs. Sometimes on purpose. Somtimes by happenstance. I want good quality glass so I can fully use the highest power on my riflescope. 10x maximum isn't even a consideration. And I don't limit myself to 500yds. So I want the additional scope power for refining my aim point out to yardages of 1000yds.

Farthest ram I ever shot was killed by luck, Davy Crockett style, before the days of lazer range finders. I don't really know how far he was, but my 280 RCBS Improved was sighted in at about 325-350yds and I aimed over the back of the ram what looked to be about 12 feet. This was about 25yrs ago. The 150gr Nosler Ballistic Tip hit the ram's front leg bone, and then entered his heart. I was estimating around 850yds, but that's all it was - a visual estimate. And that scope was a Leupold 2.5-8x VXIII. It was dumb luck, other than I'd already been pushing longer distances and had a good idea of the approximate bullet drops out to 600yds. Without a range finder, 600-700yds is a lot more difficult to master than with a laser rangefinder.

The farthest ram I've killed since the arrival of the long range hunting tools in the way of LRFs, ballistic programs, high BC bullets, more accurate guns and ammo, etc., was 730yds. No way to approach any closer than that. We waited 24hrs and 730yds was as good as it was going to get. In comparison to the ram killed 25yrs earlier, there was no luck involved at all with this shot.

So although I killed a ram a long ways off with an 8 power scope, I would never handicap myself today with a lower power scope for shots out past ~600yds. Especially with the availability of the 5X and 6X power magnification scopes available today.

 

[.284]

.284,

As you probably know, that scope gives you other options. Setting the Z5 3.5-18x44 magnification to 16.2X changes the reticle from .5 mil to 2 IPHY spacing. Reducing it to 9X changes the reticle spacing to 1 mil.

Yes sir but then you would be holding between 1 mil marks which I think leaves a bit of precision on the table.

 

[.284]

Phorwath, I think you have answered your own question if you consider 10x to be a hinderence. I don't think a light scope exists which allows high magnification and an accurate, dependable means of aiming at distance as I have searched for the same thing you are.

If you haven't already, perhaps try turning your scope to 10x for some 1000yard practice. For me it was not nearly the handicap I expected.

 

[Engineering101]

I can't resist but to kick in my 2 cents worth regards scope power.

I have come to believe that the old saying aim small to hit small is a truism. My two RUMs are equipped with 4.5X to 30X Bushnells. You can jump shoot OK on 4.5X and see bullet holes in white paper at 600 yards on 30X. Plus they double as a spotting scope. They are relatively compact (13.5") and light (21 oz) scopes too and can be had for $700. I shot a deer with open sights at 375 yards when I was 11 years old. So yeah, it can be done. But as phorwath said, there was some dumb luck involved in that one. And as he pointed out when he finally had the long range gear there was no guess work or luck involved any more. That is what it is all about - taking the guess work out of the equation. A 30X scope versus a 10X scope allows 3 times the precision and I'm not willing to give that up especially considering it only weighs 21 ounces. Check out the review on LRH.

 

[Pdvdh]

Phorwath, I think you have answered your own question if you consider 10x to be a hinderence. I don't think a light scope exists which allows high magnification and an accurate, dependable means of aiming at distance as I have searched for the same thing you are.

Do use strictly use the graduations on your cross hair for holdovers? Or do you also adjust an elevation turret for come-ups? Perhaps that's the difference in our use of scopes. I turn the elevation turret to establish the POA, whenever possible.

I can get out as far as I'll likely ever need to turning turrets with the Swar Z5 3.5-18x44mm scope, which has a manufacturer's weight spec of 15.9 oz.

10x doesn't let me see what I'd like to be seeing at 1000yds. Although I agree it's possible to engage a large game animal at 1000yds with a 10x power scope, I don't have to pack much extra weight to carry a 3-18x. The first 45 yrs of hunting I hunted with 2.5-8x and 3.5-10x power range scopes. So I used them for many years when maximum practical ranges were limited to ~600 yds, because range estimates to the game were just a visual guess, rather than nailed down to within 2 yds with a laser rangefinder.

I've taken some moose a long ways out there with 2.5-8 and 3.5-10 power scopes. But the lethal area on a moose is 2-3 times larger than deer, sheep, and black bear. The refinement in aiming point isn't as critical.

 

[.284]

I never had any of the Swarovski BT 3-18's. Mine were all brx as that was all that was out at the time. I much prefer to dial as it's more accurrate and having used nsx scopes in the past I thought I'd stick with them as we all know the turrets are repeatable and durable plus I love the zero stop.

I run a nsx 3.5-15 on my 7 mag for non mountain which gives more magnification and the opportunity for more precise shot placement but the rifle is heavier and the scope is 11oz more as well so I haven't bothered to lug it up into hills yet.

Happy hunting