Weight of savage actions

[colt56]

I am building mountain rifle and want it on a savage. Does anyone know how much the savage actions weigh including the trigger?

[Savage6x284]

I can't help with the action weights but will tell you that my lightweight Savage 116 came in at 7#2oz scoped.
Specifically a 116 action with a Tubbs 100% Ti FP and the 5/8" Stockade BH.
24" #2 contour Rock nutless with 6mm bore.
McMillan Hunter's EDGE stock with 1/2" pad, Rem 700 aluminum TG, blind mag, and two swivel studs.
S&K rings holding a Leupold VX-3 2.5-8x36 scope.
No lightening cuts or flutes anywhere.
My goal was 7# and it could make that weight with a set of Talley LW's and a Leupold VX-2 Ultralight scope.
I like the S&K's and the VX-3 too much to make the change but this build points out just how light you can make a LA Savage while still sporting a full length 24" tube.
There is just no way that any Savage 110 based rifle can compete with my ULA Model 20 or my 6#1.7oz Kimber but 7# with a full length barrel is pretty darn good.

Good luck and I'd like to see the rifle when you get it built.
There are scads of heavy barrel Savages out there with 2-3# stocks and 2#+ scopes in ringmounts which push a full pound themselves but very few lightweight builds. We need more lightweights!

[colt56]

Basically I was interested in seeing if a savage SA could be built to a weight that was similar to the kimber Montana or mtn ascent. It seems like it's unlikely based on your assessment.

[sharpshooter]

Have you looked at the Lightweight Hunter?

[jpdown]

The Savage LWH action is only about 1.5 oz lighter than a Savage standard action. Most of the weight savings come from stock, 20" FW barrel and plastic bottom parts.

[foxx]

The LWH looks good. :)

[Mach2]

People whine about them but the plastic stocks are very light. Mine are 2006 or earlier models. I like mine.
A 3006 barrel weighs less than a 270 barrel because more metal is removed to create the bore channel.
Watch your scope weight. A straight tube weighs less than a large bell objective.
Aluminum two piece mounts weigh less than one piece.
Short rings weigh less than tall rings.

[Savage6x284]

People whine about them but the plastic stocks are very light. Mine are 2006 or earlier models. I like mine.
A 3006 barrel weighs less than a 270 barrel because more metal is removed to create the bore channel.
Watch your scope weight. A straight tube weighs less than a large bell objective.
Aluminum two piece mounts weigh less than one piece.
Short rings weigh less than tall rings.

Mach2 makes all good points. If you can stomach the factory IM stock it is pretty light.
Leupold scopes are consistently the lightest scopes in their class. I don't know how they do it but they do.
The old model Leupold Ultralights just aren't great scopes but when they were redesigned and made part of the VX-2 line a couple years ago they became much much better.
Talley Light Weight rings are the lightest quality mounts around and they're strong too. A bit homely IMO. The S&K mounts are fantastic in every way but they are like 2oz heavier than the TLW's.
The rifle I described earlier is an uncut long action receiver sporting a full 24" of tube with only a 6mm bore through it and it wears steel rings/mounts holding a light but not ultralight scope. IOW, the components were not what could be chosen if ultimate light weight was your main criteria.

My Kimber of Oregon 84 is a full pound lighter than my Savage but it sports an action which barely fits the diminutive 6x47 (.222RM necked) has a 22" tube, TLW's holding a VX-2 Ultralight, and a 19.3oz stock.

My Savage compromised nothing and still comes in at just over 7#. Flutes on a #2 contour saves very little weight and saves it all in front of the forward action screw. Exactly the wrong place I want it. Lightening cuts on the receiver also saves very little weight and it looks like heck IMO.
My advice is to skip flutes and action cuts and put the money saved towards a high quality lightweight stock like a McM EDGE.

Finally, to me, the Savage LWH is light done wrong on many levels.

[colt56]

Thanks for the comments, I hope to build the mtn gun in a 280 AI so I save recoil and still get the performance I want. I agree that the stock is the best place to save weight. I looked at the manners light stocks and their lightest was 24 ounces. Which stock weighs 19.3 ounces? I like that weight. I was also planning on saving weight on a light contour barrel, optics, mounts and rings. I was curious if any of the savage actions weighed less than the others. This gun has to be an all around hunting gun as I only want one hunting rifle, that always me to have more varmint and bench guns. If anyone has a suggestion on calibers I am open, however I want light recoil and still bull elk knockdown. I have looked at plenty of ballistic charts and recoil charts and I am leaning towards the 280 AI but understand there are plenty of people who know more than me. Thanks guys

[Savage6x284]

Thanks for the comments, I hope to build the mtn gun in a 280 AI so I save recoil and still get the performance I want. I agree that the stock is the best place to save weight. I looked at the manners light stocks and their lightest was 24 ounces. Which stock weighs 19.3 ounces? I like that weight. I was also planning on saving weight on a light contour barrel, optics, mounts and rings. I was curious if any of the savage actions weighed less than the others. This gun has to be an all around hunting gun as I only want one hunting rifle, that always me to have more varmint and bench guns. If anyone has a suggestion on calibers I am open, however I want light recoil and still bull elk knockdown. I have looked at plenty of ballistic charts and recoil charts and I am leaning towards the 280 AI but understand there are plenty of people who know more than me. Thanks guys

The 19.3oz stock on my Kimber of Oregon is a MPI. This stock is not a blind mag stock so add an ounce or so if you go with a blind mag. The stock I chose for my Savage lightweight is the McM Hunter's EDGE which are advertised around 23-24oz. Mine came in at 21-22oz.

My recommendations are for a 24" #2 contour barrel, a McM Hunter's EDGE, Talley Lightweights, and a Leupold VX-2 Ultralight scope. With the bigger bore you'll save a bit of weight.

.280AI, properly loaded is every bit as fast as factory loaded 7mm RM. This is due to the SAAMI MAP of the .280AI being 65K psi versus 61K psi for the 7RM. It really is a wonderful cartridge.

[colt56]

Thanks for the information, looks like I am on the right path.

[Mach2]

Thanks for the information, looks like I am on the right path.

An 18" barrel weighs less than a 20" barrel. Some hunters do carry shorter barrels for easier hiking into remote areas. In my neck of the woods a mile is as far as I ever hike. maybe one day I'll move out West where it takes me all day to hike in.

[Savage6x284]

An 18" barrel weighs less than a 20" barrel. Some hunters do carry shorter barrels for easier hiking into remote areas. In my neck of the woods a mile is as far as I ever hike. maybe one day I'll move out West where it takes me all day to hike in.

And likely blows the balance of the rifle. Not to mention the ballistics compromise and the increased report and blast inherent with short barrels.
With a lightweight rifle balance is of the utmost importance and a #2 contour should IMO be a full 24" to shift a bit of weight forward putting the balance point just forward of the front action screw. This is assuming a lightweight stock in the 21-24oz range.
I feel a 24" tube is where you want to be when the cartridge is a full length 65K psi cartridge like the .280AI.

[Mach2]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECKsFicSbrw


And likely blows the balance of the rifle. Not to mention the ballistics compromise and the increased report and blast inherent with short barrels.
With a lightweight rifle balance is of the utmost importance and a #2 contour should IMO be a full 24" to shift a bit of weight forward putting the balance point just forward of the front action screw. This is assuming a lightweight stock in the 21-24oz range.
I feel a 24" tube is where you want to be when the cartridge is a full length 65K psi cartridge like the .280AI.

The Sav Lightweight Hunter 6.5 Creedmoor utilizes a 20" barrel. A 24" barrel hardly would qualify as an easy to carry Mountain Rifle.

[Savage6x284]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECKsFicSbrw



The Sav Lightweight Hunter 6.5 Creedmoor utilizes a 20" barrel. A 24" barrel hardly would qualify as an easy to carry Mountain Rifle.

###

[Savage6x284]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECKsFicSbrw



The Sav Lightweight Hunter 6.5 Creedmoor utilizes a 20" barrel. A 24" barrel hardly would qualify as an easy to carry Mountain Rifle.

Wanna bet? Most of my hunting rifles are lighter than the Savage LWH and only one has a 22" barrel. My ULA Model 20 6mm Rem is lighter and sports 24" of tube. My LA Savage 116 custom goes 7# 3oz scoped and has a 24" tube. The LA Savage LWH is advertised at 6# bare. My Kimber of Oregon has a 22" and weighs 6# 1.7oz scoped.
Unlike the Savage LWH all of my rifles balance perfectly just forward of the front action screw and not one of mine has a single piece of plastic anywhere on them. Pick up a LWH and tell me where it balances?
None of mine have flutes or lightening cuts anywhere which I find to be a trap for woods junk and which creates avenues for the ingress of water, snow, etc.
None of mine make any ballistics compromises either.
The Savage LWH is an example, for me and many other LW rifle aficionados, of light done wrong.

Get a Forbes rifle or better yet a NULA and you'll know what light done right is all about.

[colt56]

The biggest stress I have had is how the balance will come out. I started into this project once before and got nervous about the balance. What #2 contour are you mentioning?

[Mach2]

The biggest stress I have had is how the balance will come out. I started into this project once before and got nervous about the balance. What #2 contour are you mentioning?

If balance is a key concern then why build a mountain rifle? A mountain rifle is a tradeoff rifle where weight is shed by any manner possible in order to end up with a rifle you can carry for two days. Balance tends to not be so important after you've been hiking 4 hours into the back country.
If all you are going to do is walk 300 yards to a tree stand you don't need a mountain rifle at all.

[Mach2]

Wanna bet? Most of my hunting rifles are lighter than the Savage LWH and only one has a 22" barrel. My ULA Model 20 6mm Rem is lighter and sports 24" of tube. My LA Savage 116 custom goes 7# 3oz scoped and has a 24" tube. The LA Savage LWH is advertised at 6# bare. My Kimber of Oregon has a 22" and weighs 6# 1.7oz scoped.

The Savage LWH Creedmoor weighs 5.5 lbs.
You can go to the Savage custom shop and they will build you a rifle superior to the Kimber.

[jpdown]

The Savage 11/111 LWH's are plenty light and have good balance. The 20" LWH barrel weights around 2 lbs. I have a Savage 11 LWH in 260. I replaced the 20" barrel with a 22" factory sporter barrel in 260. Increased barrel weight by 5 oz (2 lbs, 5 oz). Picked up a Sportsman Guide 23" Savage pre-fit SS #2 contour barrel in 280 AI (sold out) that only weighed 2 lbs. Put it on a Savage 111 LWH. Both rifles are plenty accurate with hand loads for hunting (0.5-0.75"@100 yd). My next project is to switch out the 22" 260 barrel and try a 22" factory sporter barrel in 7mm08. Seems to be a wider selection of good 7mm bullets (120, 140, 150, 154 and 160gr) to play with for both rifles when compared to the various 6.5mm caliber hunting rifles I've played with in the past. Based on my attempts over the past 10 years, buying a Savage LWH is cheaper, easier and faster than trying to build a Savage LW rifle from scratch if a light, compact, easy handling rifle is your objective. My Savage LWH's also cost less than a Kimber and are more accurate than the Remington Model 7's in 260 and 308 that I sold and replaced with the Savage LWH.