Lightweight Rifle for recoil sensitive folks

[Katfishcharlie]

If you're considering the 6.5 Grendel MFB99, perhaps you should look at the 6.5 Creedmoor. You can also get the Creedmoor in the Howa Alpine Mountain Rifle which might be exactly the gun you're looking for. The 7mm-08 would also be a great cartridge, although the recoil will be slightly more. You can find heavier bullet weights in factory ammo for the Creedmoor, plus get a little better performance.

 

[jimss]

I grew up with a 270 Remington. I was a tint kid and didn't break the 100 lb barrier until after my senior year in college. It really didn't kick that hard and didn't have that much trouble carrying it around. My new rifle of choice that has similar kick to my 270 is a 300 WSM Sako Finnlight. It's recoil is similar to the 270 but is a fairly large chunk lighter in weight. I've shot everything from antelope to elk to mtn goats with it. I don't even notice the kick when shooting game! If you want a super light rifle possibly take a look at Sako Finnlights. The quality workmanship that goes into Sako is definitely worth a little more expense! If you don't want to spend that kind of $ possibly look at Tika.

 

[mtmander]

get a muzzle brake on the rifle you select

 

[Gunner46]

I understand where you coming from. For a decade I hunted with a Rem 600 in a .308. Kicked like my 7RM and was just as loud too ! But I will say, she's a handy little rifle for close work, deadly as well.

Now, to get to your conundrum, I'll suggest a Ruger American in a 7mm/08. Topped out with slim scope you'll still be under/right at 7#. Hand load some 120BT's, or buy some reduced load commercial stuff and you're Golden out to your 300yd objective. If that is still too much recoil, add $50 and install an AirTech recoil pad. They really are a wonder in recoil reduction.

 

[Katfishcharlie]

Some other things to consider: What one person says doesn't kick too bad, or kicks just like ________ is not going to be the same for you. Everyone perceives recoil differently. You really need to consider what your recoil threshold is and also what your preference for recoil is. For example, you might be able to comfortably shoot a gun with 20 lbs of felt recoil, but are more comfortable, or confident with something around 15 lbs of felt recoil. The British did a study just prior to WWII and found that most men hit their threshold for accurate fire at 15 lbs. of recoil or less. In my personal experience, that holds true.

Be honest with yourself. There are a lot of macho men out there that swear up and down that their 500 Super Thumper doesn't bother them at all and slays elk like the hammer of Thor. But in reality, they miss a lot, and wound a lot of game. But their ego just won't let them believe that they can't handle the recoil. Some will even swear that its better to make a bad shot with that giant cartridge than with a lesser cartridge. Well my friends, a bad shot is a bad shot regardless of cartridge used. Wounded game is still wounded game. If you know the gun weight and load info you are interested in, you can plug the numbers into a recoil calculator and get an idea of what kind of recoil you'll be looking at. Here is what I use: http://www.jbmballistics.com/cgi-bin/jbmrecoil-5.1.cgi Chuck Hawks also puts out a great recoil table. http://www.chuckhawks.com/recoil_table.htm

Also, don't discount muzzle blast. Shorter barrels and higher velocity rounds will produce more blast. Some people find muzzle blast just too distracting and it affects their accuracy. You have to figure out your tolerance level for yourself. A muzzle brake will tame recoil but the muzzle blast is downright harmful to your hearing. Using a brake absolutely requires hearing protection if you want to hear well into your old age. And while we should use hearing protection every time we shoot, most hunters don't, or they don't have time to put it on when they have to make a quick shot.

Stock design and fit also plays into the recoil equation. I have seen shooters shoot one gun and flinch terribly but shoot the same cartridge in a different gun with a different stock and shoot that gun just fine.

Finally, some people will tell you that you can train a flinch away. In my experience that is false. While you should shoot often and work on your skills, more times than not once a flinch is developed, it is there to stay. At least with that firearm. Once you lose confidence in that firearm, the flinch will persist and you will be better off selling that gun.

 

[sbhooper]

Here is my take-like it or not. There is no free lunch in rifle performance. If you want great performance, you will deal with a bit of recoil. If you don't like muzzle blast, then you have a double whammy. A .243 is a kitten compared to lots of cf rifles. If you cannot handle that with whatever load, then you have a problem that no rifle is going to solve. If you add a muzzle brake, your ear drums will go away, unless you wear hearing protection even during hunting.

If the muzzle blast is too much on a short rifle, then suck it up and get a longer barrel. I don't know why you think that you have to have such a light rifle, but that is your decision. Like I said, there is no free lunch.

I would say that your best chance at mitigating your inherent problem, would be to buy a Ruger American in .243 with a 22-inch barrel, put on a medium-weight scope and get it up around 7.5-8 pounds. If you can't carry that, then park your car close to your blind and have someone else carry it for you.

Good grief! I know a little freshman girl that just shot a deer with her grandfather's '06. She shot a number of rounds through it on my range. Now that I have made you feel better, have you ever considered bow hunting?

 

[mtmuley]

SB pretty much summed it up. No free lunch here. I don't get the "lightweight" craze. Rifle and scope at 7 to 7.5 pounds is lightweight. And won't beat you do death. mtmuley

 

[mfb99]

Definitely no free lunch, physics gets you every time.

Food for thought on a 7 lb rifle (total w scope and sling) vs a 8.5 lb rifle (with scope and sling). The difference is 1.5 lbs. If I hike that 8.5 lb rifle up a 1,500 foot elevation gain, that will take ~ 2250 foot/lbs. Put another way, hiking up that hill with a heavier rifle is like doing an extra 22.5 squats with a 100 lb barbell.......

For me weight is important in all of my gear. If fact, with my hunting style, my physical shape and age it is maybe the most important thing. Going light, means being able to go farther from the road, it allows going higher up a mountain or deeper into a canyon. Going light is being able to safely go solo because you can take all your emergency gear to survive a cold night out including a 1 lb sleeping bag that is the size of a water bottle. Going light means having your legs just that tiny bit less rubbery to keep you from tripping down a slope while in the middle of no where. Going light means being able to hunt that extra day.

As I look at hunting remote areas a satisfying challenge, finding a lightweight 300 yard deer rifle with low recoil/blast is the same. I believe it is possible and I am looking forward to solving the riddle!

Cheers,

Mark

 

[mtmuley]

It's not a riddle. Lots of cartridges will kill deer to 300 yards. Heavy or light. No cure for being sensitive. Sorry if I am harsh, but rifles make noise and generate recoil. Has to be dealt with. Pick one and build it. mtmuley

 

[JLS]

What good does it do to go so light on a rifle that you can't shoot it? Light weight is awesome until it renders something ineffective. Good luck on your quest.

 

[Hunting Wife]

Definitely no free lunch, physics gets you every time.

Food for thought on a 7 lb rifle (total w scope and sling) vs a 8.5 lb rifle (with scope and sling). The difference is 1.5 lbs. If I hike that 8.5 lb rifle up a 1,500 foot elevation gain, that will take ~ 2250 foot/lbs. Put another way, hiking up that hill with a heavier rifle is like doing an extra 22.5 squats with a 100 lb barbell.......

For me weight is important in all of my gear. If fact, with my hunting style, my physical shape and age it is maybe the most important thing. Going light, means being able to go farther from the road, it allows going higher up a mountain or deeper into a canyon. Going light is being able to safely go solo because you can take all your emergency gear to survive a cold night out including a 1 lb sleeping bag that is the size of a water bottle. Going light means having your legs just that tiny bit less rubbery to keep you from tripping down a slope while in the middle of no where. Going light means being able to hunt that extra day.

As I look at hunting remote areas a satisfying challenge, finding a lightweight 300 yard deer rifle with low recoil/blast is the same. I believe it is possible and I am looking forward to solving the riddle!

Cheers,

Mark

How many squats would it be to carry 7 lbs of useless steel up that hill? Is it better to carry 7 lbs of rifle that you can't shoot well, or 8 lbs of rifle that you are effective with? If you are carrying the weight, rule number one is that it better be useful.

I get where you're coming from. I went the lightweight route years ago. The standard rifles were too long and front heavy for me, and I like to put on miles so I wanted something that was more comfortable to carry for days. Settled on a Ruger ultra light in .270. With everything on it, it's right around 7 lbs. Its got a little more snap in the recoil than the heavier rifles, but I'm happy with the trade off because I'm deadly with it and that was the whole point. If I couldn't shoot it well, you can bet I would be toting something heavier if that's what it took for me to be effective.

 

[mfb99]

Being an engineer by profession, we strive to meet our customers requirement.

In this case the customer is me.....

The customer has said, low recoil/blast, ideal weight 7lbs with scope and sling, 300 yard max range deer caliber, moderate price.

The engineering firm (me) has said it is possible and will deliver......yippee!

This engineer has already done this once with a deep woods deer rifle. The rifle ended up being a Ruger Ranch Rifle in 300 BLK. The rifle with a red dot scope & sling comes in under 7 lbs, it meets the range requirements of 150 yds with deer load, is bolt action, and as the customer has made very clear of his requirement, it has low recoil/blast.

That success is why this customer has again chosen the same engineer. Being a wise engineer he would never tell his customer to suck it up and accept more recoil/blast, he would never say he must accept more weight. If he did this, the engineer would be out of a job.....

Instead, the engineer would diligently go about solving the riddle.

The customer has confidence that with the new rifles coming out in 2017 all the requirements will fall into place.

I am very much looking forward to getting that rifle.

Cheers,

Mark

 

[mtmuley]

Good luck. mtmuley

 

[1_pointer]

Being an engineer by profession, we strive to meet our customers requirement.

In this case the customer is me.....

The customer has said, low recoil/blast, ideal weight 7lbs with scope and sling, 300 yard max range deer caliber, moderate price.

The engineering firm (me) has said it is possible and will deliver......yippee!

This engineer has already done this once with a deep woods deer rifle. The rifle ended up being a Ruger Ranch Rifle in 300 BLK. The rifle with a red dot scope & sling comes in under 7 lbs, it meets the range requirements of 150 yds with deer load, is bolt action, and as the customer has made very clear of his requirement, it has low recoil/blast.

That success is why this customer has again chosen the same engineer. Being a wise engineer he would never tell his customer to suck it up and accept more recoil/blast, he would never say he must accept more weight. If he did this, the engineer would be out of a job.....

Instead, the engineer would diligently go about solving the riddle.

The customer has confidence that with the new rifles coming out in 2017 all the requirements will fall into place.

I am very much looking forward to getting that rifle.

Cheers,

Mark

IMO, the engineering firm would be well ahead to invest in reloading equipment. It makes a bunch of the other criteria to be met more easily and in the long run cheaper...

 

[JLS]

If the Grendel turns out to be a dead end, then I will settle for maybe a bit heavier rifle in I think 7mm-08 with a 22" barrel. I would download a bit to lower recoil/blast. Because the 7mm-08 has more energy at lower velocity than the .243, I feel more comfortable with developing a lead free load for my needs.

Here is reality. If you are using monolithic bullets, you need velocity to make them expand reliably. You need powder to make velocity, which in turn increases felt recoil and muzzle blast. I've downloaded mono bullets to the lower end of the velocity spectrum and can tell that yes, you need speed to make them work. I recovered one that was shot at about 2100 fps muzzle velocity, and I absolutely would NOT go ANY lower. In fact, I wouldn't be overly comfortable shooting them at that velocity for a 200 yard gun.

Here is another reality, not everything is a mathematical equation. I teach people to shoot in the professional world. Reaction to muzzle blast is not a sensitivity, it is a mind set. First off, were you wearing ear PLUGS or ear MUFFS? There is a big difference, and the suggestion was already made to use both. That's a good one, and advice that you should follow. Second, have you taught yourself how to concentrate on the shot execution, or are you worried more about the pending explosion in your face? Muzzle blast is a mental issue to work through. I've shot 5.56 rifles that had an 8" barrel. The muzzle blast is tremendous, but it doesn't hurt you. It just screws with your mind unless you can tune it out and focus on your trigger press.

If it were me, I'd test drive a few rifles before I bought one, but it's your money. Regardless of rifle weight, a 20" barrel is a 20" barrel and will produce the same amount of muzzle blast. You need to find out how long (or short) of a tube you can tolerate and go from there. In terms of chambering, a 6.5 Grendel will be no more magical than a .243 when it comes to terminal performance and felt recoil. You are looking at max 2800 fps with a 100 grain bullet in the Grendel (more like 2600ish). I don't know if that qualifies as flat shooting to your engineering firm or not.

This isn't a riddle, it's a cost-benefit analysis. Put a fixed 6x scope on whatever you buy and go learn to shoot it well.