After sleeping on this, I decided I should apologize... so to all the paperweights out there... I'm truly sorry.
right weight for big 338
- Thread starter 86alaskan
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
dxlbaile
Well-Known Member
So, something to consider for you.. I had a 33 nosler built by Dallas @Lane precision Rifles. Defiance, bartlein, Mcmillian A3, Jewell, brake.. Gun is only 7.25 lbs without optics and just around 9 with.. Gun shoots the 250 gr Elite hunter at 2850 and has knocked down some elk and Barbary out to 800.. It isn't a donkey to pack around and the kick is very manageable with the brake. I can throw it in the pack and take it anyplace I need to go.. 8-12 miles a day in the 'ole' Backpack hasn't hurt me a bit. Just thought you might like another option with some great knockdown and less weight. From Bear to Moose to whatever it will do the job.. Frankly no need to pack 12 pound guns around.. They are great for the range but not practical for packing.. IMO.. Have a look at his website it might spark your interest
86alaskan
Well-Known Member
so far, I'm 36oz with a stock, 4oz bdl, 4.5lbs barrel, approx 2lbs action, 3oz rings, 3oz trigger. throw on a 24oz zeiss V6 3-18 and we're right in the hunt around 10.5-11lbs. I have a silencerco hybrid in jail now, so I'll start with a brake but mostly suppress the rifle. I've noticed with my other rigs that the brake works better than the can, but the can is still pretty good at recoil reduction.
ATH
Well-Known Member
My Edge comes in around 13lbs iirc, ready to hunt. 30" Sendero contour barrel, McMillan A3 Sporter, Stiller Predator action, Burris XTR 5-25 scope. I'm sure you can go lighter but good luck shooting a group and being able to keep your hand on the barrel. You ca also go shorter and give up FPS.
Perhaps when I get older or lazier my idea of a pack rifle will change. This one packed 8 miles into wilderness to take an elk and came out with the first quarter.
I made a compromise on the brake to reduce concussion but still...within 15 rounds shooting in a thin shirt this rifle bruised my shoulder. Take a few pounds off and even with the best brake these rifles are not pussycats.
Perhaps when I get older or lazier my idea of a pack rifle will change. This one packed 8 miles into wilderness to take an elk and came out with the first quarter.
I made a compromise on the brake to reduce concussion but still...within 15 rounds shooting in a thin shirt this rifle bruised my shoulder. Take a few pounds off and even with the best brake these rifles are not pussycats.
troutwest66
Member
I have a factory Remington 700 Sendero in .338 Rum. Leupold VX3 CDS 4.5x14 scope. I don't know the weight but I shoot the Barnes TTSX 225 @ 3100 fps and yes you know you're behind some power but I have sat and shot a box or more from the bench and it wasn't bad.
Sambarhunter
Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2013
- Messages
- 7
Hi I have a Fierce rifle in 338Rum with brake it has a Z8 2-16x50 shoots better than 1/2 inch and weighs complete 8.2pounds and it is very pleasant to shoot with the brake on. Without brake it's a monster.
86alaskan
Well-Known Member
Z8 is a swarovski, and they are very light, especially the mid range powered ones. My Z5 5-25 only weighed a touch over 20oz with larue qd rings
Yeah,
I didn't know they were now making Z8s.
My 3.5-18x Z5 weighs about 16oz. Which is why I purchased 2 of them for backpack hunting rifles. So far they've held up to recoil on some fairly light rifles. Which is more damaging to scopes than when mounted on 14lb rifles.
I didn't know they were now making Z8s.
My 3.5-18x Z5 weighs about 16oz. Which is why I purchased 2 of them for backpack hunting rifles. So far they've held up to recoil on some fairly light rifles. Which is more damaging to scopes than when mounted on 14lb rifles.
bigngreen
Well-Known Member
I've seen so many light scopes junk out when on light weight braked rifles is why most end up with a NF. Part of the reason I work to make a rifle light is so I can afford the weight of a rock solid optic.
memtb
Well-Known Member
Not trying to be a "smart^§, so a serious question. Is a lightweight "braked" rifle harder on scopes, than is a lightweight rifle with no brake? I know that air rifles are "death" to conventional scopes. Similar issue?
86alaskan
Well-Known Member
a lightweight with no brake subjects the scope to a higher acceleration than one with a brake. that acceleration on firing is what really puts the force on the internals. so any way of lessening that force saves the scope.
As far as air rifles, I believe that the ones that kill scopes are the spring piston ones. that's because the force isn't backward, it's the forward recoil of the spring that messes with the scopes. It's a weird recoil impulse.
As far as air rifles, I believe that the ones that kill scopes are the spring piston ones. that's because the force isn't backward, it's the forward recoil of the spring that messes with the scopes. It's a weird recoil impulse.
I hear ya! That's why earlier I posted so far - so good. I've got 4 seasons on one Swaro Z5 and 2 seasons on the other. Not a lot of shots fired, but so far they've survived. One on the muzzle braked 338 Rogue, and one on the muzzle braked 30/375 SI. Both pretty light rifles. A harsh scope testing environment.
86...
Not trying to be a know-it-all, but muzzle-braked rifles are way more apt to eat scopes for lunch than the same rifles without muzzle brakes.
I learned that first hand. Twice!!!
