By cheesey stocks I refer mostly to the plastikey stocks that come on most of these rifles. Some are well thought out, some are not. Most have "flex" that causes the stock to touch the barrel if the forearm is pressed against a tree or something. This could lead to a POI shift due to the plastic stock interfering with barrel harmonics. This is the main reason why I prefer wood stocks for rifles in the $550-900 price range.
As for the Savage accustock I have messed with them and they seem really good. They still have the plastic feel but the aluminum chassis helps to ensure the barrel stays free floated. The thing to note is that not all savage rifles with the accustock adjustment system have the aluminum block in the stock and forend. For example, the regular Savage storm has the aluminum accustock block and a 24" barrel for 6.5cm and weighs 7.5 lb. The lightweight storm has the cheesy accustock and only a 20" barrel in 65cm and weighs 5.6 lb. Both of these rifles are in the $750 price range. The Tikka T3X super light has a less cheesy stock (still a little cheesy) a 24" barrel and weighs 6.4-6.7 lb depending on caliber. ($700-900). I bought the wood stock Tikka because I knew that if I had to add material to the plastic stock to stiffen the forend it would defeat the purpose of me having bought a lightweight rifle. (maybey someone who owns one could weigh in on how much the super light stock flexes).
Back to the lightweight storm. If you say get a lightweight storm (5.6lb) and have to change the stock you may spend $500-$600 on a carbon stock making the total cost of the gun around $1300. At this price you still have a 20" barrel which is kind of a handicap for 65cm. Especially if you are going to shoot factory loaded copper ammo, you really need the barrel length. Copper bullets don't have as high of a BC as traditional bullets so they slow down/lose energy more quickly. They need to hit the animals at a higher speed than traditional bullets to expand reliably so that really limits the range. Having a high enough muzzle velocity is very important for good kills at long range with copper bullets.
As far as factory copper ammo I would suggest Barnes LRX 127g bullets and Hornady GMX 120g bullets.
Once you start reloading you should be able to get close to 2900fps with either of these bullets out of a 24" barrel. The LRX will be above 2000fps all the way to 500yds at sea level and 625yds at 8000ft (rocky mountains)
Lightweight hunting rifles and shooting accurate
is not an even slope of weight vs accuracy. My brother has a 10lb 30-06 that shoots a whooping 6MOA at 100yds with factory ammo and consistently shoots 2.5" with handloads. The only accurate shot that counts is the FIRST shot. Also, just because a rifle is lightweight doesn't mean it can't be easy to shoot accurately. And just because one rifle is lighter than another doesn't mean that it will be better in the woods or on the mountains than another. The ergonomics of the stock and how the scope is set up and how good the eyebox of the scope is have more to do with making something easy to shoot than a lb or 2. The seekins havok are a good example of a very well designed stock in a light rifle. Also how a rifle points/comes up to your face for those quicker closer shots has mostly to do with how balanced the rifle is, how well the scope is set up and the eyebox of the scope than the weight. Also I suspect the chances of missing a shot at a close animal because the rifle is to heavy or not set up right to throw up and shoot are much higher than messing up a long range shot because a rifle is too light. Bottom line you can't just base the listed weight of a rifle online to justify whether you will be able to shoot/carry it well or not. There is no replacement for holding the rifle even if you don't buy it where you get the chance to hold it.
Thanks ... all of this seems to triangulate in on Havak PH2, which will give me 1, a light (though not ultra light) rifle with a stock that will help with practical, in-the-field accuracy, 2, a 24" barrel, 3, components (like trigger and barrel) that will be at least somewhat better than anything in a cheaper factory rifle, 4, essentially better quality control/peace of mind... as in, in might not actually be more accurate than a cheaper Savage (if I get a good one) but will be less likely to have some sort of issue that would require tinkering/gunsmith work to correct, which I definitely want to avoid, 5, seems to be loved by those who have one (from what I've seen so far) and 6, looks like it costs a little less (or at least not much more) than a Sako, Bergara (Premier), or Browning.
Good to know on the copper bullets. I have some knowledge about copper bullets and terminal ballistics and I can see how a higher velocity would be needed to ensure good terminal performance downrange than for say a high quality bonded SP. I will say that my '06 loves the 165 gr. copper solids used in the Federal Premium factory ammo, which is to say that is shoots them okay ... and that is the only factory load that it seems to shoot well. I was going to try some 180 gr. Core Lokts since my interpretation is that it likes long bullets. But in the end, my '06 is a beautiful rifle (an old, lightly used Howa with a beautiful wood stock) that I got for a very low price. But it's heavy (heavy enough to make unsupported shots very difficult, at least for me) and so far I haven't gotten it to shoot very well. I'm sure I could improve that to some degree with handloading, some gunsmith work, etc., but as mentioned I want to downsize on rifle weight and caliber and I'm pretty sure something like the PH2 will shoot better than the Howa would even with the tinkering. So, I think the '06 can become the second string rifle I give to my father or whoever is hunting with me.
On the manbun, I definitely don't want a "sniper" rifle and don't want to do hunting like I'm sniping something. I respect other points of views, but for me currently I think
most types of hunting should require getting somewhat close to the game, and I don't have the skill to shoot anything smaller than a barn at 800 yards anyway. The last big game shot that I made with a metallic cartridge rifle was a small deer at 290-300 yards, off of crooked wobbly post ... that was pretty good for me. The idea is that I can stretch that out to maybe 400 yards with better hardware and a lot of good practice. After that my sense of fair play for the game starts to play a role in terms of whether I'd even want to take the shot. That said, I'd love to be able to shoot accurately at long ranges some day - I just don't think it will ever be part of my hunting unless that is just how it goes with the particular type of game or something.
