PDA

View Full Version : Lightweight Stevens 200



Pages : 1 [2]

Dust_Remover
03-19-2011, 04:56 PM
I talked to a guy the other day who was wanting to build a ultra light hunting rifle. A 7 SAUM and he was trying to keep the weight around 7lbs. I asked him if he was using a brake because that would be very painful to shoot! I can see the desire for a ultralight hunting rifle, I would like one, but i'd want one in .243 to keep the abuse down. I'm thinking Savage SA in .243, Shilen #1 @ 18", Manners SL stock. I think that would be a winning 5.5lbs combo, add a 1/2lb for a Leupold ultralight series scope. Good possibility that it would be under 6lbs with scope. I have handled a 700 in 7mag that was a titanium action, 26" pencil thin barrel that was fluted, with a prototype carbon fiber stock that had to be right at, or really close to 5lbs, it was ridiculously light.

To the OP, if you want a great stock that's superlight (27-28ounces) to go with your Stevens that's much better than the flimsy tupperware stock, gimme a call at Manners.

Branden

tammons
03-19-2011, 07:13 PM
A 5# 7mm magnum sounds painful.

Dust_Remover
03-19-2011, 07:52 PM
A 5# 7mm magnum sounds painful.




It did have a brake on it, never fired it so I can't comment on it's effectiveness, but i'm sure that it was still not terribly fun.

Branden

tammons
03-19-2011, 08:39 PM
Probably tolerable with a brake.

Slowpoke Slim
03-20-2011, 06:24 AM
OK, in my opinion, a 5 lb rifle sounds good on paper, but the real question is, will you be able to hit anything with it?

I have a few barrels for my Contender carbine. One of which is a very slender 6x47 (222 Rem mag) barrel that's only 18" long. The whole rifle including scope weighs just over 5 pounds. Sounds great, right? Until you try to hit something with it, either off hand, or from a "normal" field position (my position of preference is kneeling). I can tell you that it's hard, I mean really hard, to hold that little rifle steady enough to make the shot. I have a few other barrels, but that one is the smallest (lightest).

For me, I think the point of diminishing returns is around 6.5 lbs, depending on rifle balance point, and how far away I'm planning on shooting. Any less than that, and there just isn't enough weight to dampen movement and heartbeats. I seem to do better with rifles weighing around 7 pounds and up. Much easier to hold these steady on target, especially "big game" rifles.

Just something I hope you guys have thought about before you go spending a truckload of cash on a 5 to 6 lb (all in) rifle that you can't hit squat with.

bluealtered
03-20-2011, 09:21 AM
There is a reason long range and tacticals are heavy as slim pointed out. My current tactical, (.260) weighs in a little over 11 lbs and some would consider that light.
however the 11 lwh in .260 should be a small enough caliber to work well on a 5.5 lb rifle that when scoped and full mag will be closer to 7 lbs most likely.

To me it's just a matter of, is it worth $700+ to gain that extra 8ozs of weight savings over what i have now. blue

HeavyDuty
03-20-2011, 10:48 AM
Just as a point of reference, I weighed my Stevens 200 just now; it's a SA (in .308) with one of the FDE Tupperware stocks, a DNZ one piece mount and a Nikon Monarch African 1-4. 7 pounds 3.125 ounces.

Getting one of these sub six pounds could be a fun project, but IMO going below that will take a lot of work!

tammons
03-20-2011, 12:24 PM
The difference carrying a 6# rifle and a 7# rifle is nil to me.

If you ditch the dednutz scope mount, and go to a weaver or 2 piece base and 2 OZ rings,
and lop a few inches off your barrel you will be just under 7# for very little $.

A magnum strap is the best piece of carry equipment you can buy IMO.

HeavyDuty
03-20-2011, 12:55 PM
The difference carrying a 6# rifle and a 7# rifle is nil to me.

If you ditch the dednutz scope mount, and go to a weaver or 2 piece base and 2 OZ rings,
and lop a few inches off your barrel you will be just under 7# for very little $.

A magnum strap is the best piece of carry equipment you can buy IMO.


I'm very happy with it as configured; I was only posting my rifle's weight for the OP's reference.

tammons
03-20-2011, 12:57 PM
I was just saying.

Once you get past a certain point the $ goes up exponentially to save a few more OZ.