On the one hand, rifles are getting lighter and lighter. There’s a bunch of factory rifles in the six-pound class, and a couple, like Kimber’s Mountain Ascent and short-action Adirondack, tip the scales at five pounds or less. On the other hand, rifles are also getting heavier, with “tactical” and “long-range” versions at twice that weight and more. For instance, have you ever seen a light .338 Lapua? Would you want to? It’s an old discussion, but with a new wave of both ultra-lightweights and ultra-heavyweights, the question remains worth asking: Is there an ideal rife weight?
Only you can answer how much weight you want to carry. It depends on your age, physical condition, and physical size. Regardless of strength, a heavy, long-barreled rife is more unwieldy for five-footer than for a six-footer. However, it also depends on what you’re doing.
Kenny Jarrett’s concept of the “beanfield rife” made him famous. It was a long-barreled, heavy rife, intended primarily for the stand hunting millions of whitetail hunters do, with the intent to provide accuracy and reach across, well, soybean fields. Some did, but some customers loved Kenny’s accuracy but hated the weight, and in time, his rifles got lighter.
Of course, there’s hunting and then there’s hunting. You can probably get a heavy rife to almost any deer stand. You can carry one in a vehicle, and you can carry one in a saddle scabbard—provided you don’t plan to get too far from your horse. It’s a different story on a backpack sheep hunt or almost any spot-and-stalk Western hunt. You definitely want a rife with enough capability to get the job done, whatever that job is, but you don’t want to pack so much rife that you wear yourself out.
The first thing to realize is that heavy rifles are not that accurate than light rifles, although they are more stable. We’ll talk more about barrels in a bit, but it is almost impossible to have a light rife with a heavy barrel, and a heavy rife will almost certainly have a fair amount of weight in the barrel. Heavy barrels are not that accurate than pencil-thin tubes. They are, however, generally less finicky because they don’t vibrate as much. They are not as subject to the vagaries of bedding, often more tolerant of the range of loads they will shoot well, and of course, they heat up slowly and therefore will generally sustain a longer shot string without the bullets starting to “walk.”
While these things may be critical to a sniper or varmint hunter, none of them makes much difference to a big game hunter. A good barrel is a good barrel, regardless of weight. A thin barrel is unlikely to hold a five-shot group, but it will certainly hold a two- or three-shot group, and that’s generally all you need. So, from a hunter’s standpoint, there is no real reason to carry a heavy rife just for the sake of accuracy.
Stability, however, also applies to the shooter. It is a longstanding article of faith that it’s easier to shoot a heavier rife, especially when you’re tired, out of breath and under pressure. I have always accepted this as gospel, but in discussing this story, editor Scott Rupp told me he wasn’t so sure about that. Tis gave me pause because while Scott never toots his own horn, he is one of the finest rifle shots in the industry, and as a former member of the Army shooting team, he has the credentials.
Maybe if you’re a good shooter rifle weight doesn’t play a big role. Experience and practice count, but exactly how you shoot also makes a difference. If you consistently shoot from a steady rest—whether over a daypack, of a bipod or from the rail of a treestand — it probably doesn’t matter. For me, however, when an unsupported shot is all that’s available, I find a heavier rife settles in better and quicker and wobbles less than an ultra-lightweight.
Light rifles certainly kick more. Felt recoil depends somewhat on stock fit and design, and it’s certainly mitigated by a good recoil pad. However, recoil is a classic example of Newton’s Third Law of Motion regarding “equal and opposite reaction,” and without weight to slow this reaction, a lighter rife produces more recoil than a heavier rife firing the same cartridge. A six-pound .30-06 kicks a whole lot more than an eight-pound .30-06, and I don’t care who you are: a six-pound .300 magnum isn’t fun.
The simplest way to mitigate recoil is to add gun weight. As mentioned, gun weight may also add stability, but, again, you have to carry the weight. The second easiest way is to step down in power, which I discussed last issue.
It really doesn’t matter how portable a rife is if you’re afraid to shoot it. So, if you must have it light and demand the power, then a muzzle brake is a sound option. I don’t care for them simply because of the noise, but they work. Hunting partners and guides hate them, but they can attenuate recoil by as much as 40 percent.
A partial solution is the removable brake so common today. Use the brake to practice on the range, where everybody is wearing hearing protection, and replace it with a thread protector when you go afield. Just remember to check zero again after removing the brake. It’s a matter of barrel harmonics; some rifles shift zero a bit with the brake removed, others do not. However, don’t leave it to chance.
Gun weight comprises primarily three elements: action, stock, and barrel. The action is a large chunk of metal, and there isn’t much to be done to reduce its weight. Blind magazines—which I really don’t like because they collect gunk and are harder to clear in case of a misfeed—are lighter than floorplate designs. Alloy floorplates are lighter than steel.
Short actions are lighter than standard (.30-06) or magnum-length actions. Moreover, of course, titanium is lighter than steel. However, if weight reduction is a major issue, then you probably want to start with a short action and blind magazine. The Winchester Short Magnums, Remington Short Action Ultra Mags and Ruger Compact Magnums are all about this. They offer performance close to traditional belted magnums but can be housed in shorter, lighter actions. (Of course, they’re going to kick!)
Stock material and design are probably more important than the action in determining final weight. Synthetics are not necessarily lighter than wood. A trim wooden stock can be very light. A synthetic stock of solid construction will be heavier than a synthetic stock that’s foam-filled and can be heavier than wood. Laminated stocks are generally the heaviest though probably the strongest.