Has anyone tried to reduce the weigh of the accustock rifles? I know the stock is designed to be super rigid, but the aluminum block also adds a good bit of weight.
The reason I ask is because the 110 Storm would be great for me if it were a bit lighter. As a left handed shooter I’m pleased that Savage offers it in a LH model, but I would like for it to be about 8-12 oz lighter.
Right handed shooters have the 110 Lightweight Storm as well as the 110 Ultralite which are significantly lighter. Rumor is, that the Ultralite may be available to lefties in early 2022, which is cool, but I’m not sure I need a carbon fiber barrel or want a rifle quite that light. Also, I don’t know that I want to pay the price that the Ultralite costs. Even if they come out with a LWT Storm in left hand I don’t know if I’d be interested as it doesn’t have the accu-fit stock, just the adjustable length of pull.
What I’d really like is to figure out a way to make 110 Storm weigh less. Can the aluminum bedding block be pulled from the stock? If so, will it make the stock super flimsy if removed? If it can be separated from the stock but is I’ll advised to have it permanently removed, has anyone pulled it out and made any strategically placed cuts or drilled out holes to reduce material weight? Can it be put back into the stock after the weight is reduced, or are such cuts/holes put into the block better to be done while it it os still attached to the stock.
Any other thoughts in reducing the weight, aside from fluting the bolt or barrel?
Thanks for any insight you may have on this!
Switch to Savage synthetic bottom parts like they use on all their lightweight models. Saves about 5 oz. Butchering on an Accustock won’t help you lose much weight. A lighter barrel profile will save weight. For example, the 20” LW sporter profile barrel used on the LW Storm is about 6 oz lighter than the Storm 110 sporter barrel.
Originally Posted by jpdown
Pretty much. A carbon fiber barrel might save weight also.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
Thanks for the replies.
Are the bottom parts pretty interchangeable and easy to swap out?
I hear you on the barrel profile, unfortunately the LWT Storm doesn’t have a barrel in the caliber I’d want, 30-06.
Step 1: Remove action screws and lift barreled Action from from stock.
Step 2: Replace barrel with Carbon Fiber/Ultra Light profile replacement(as mentioned).
Step 3: Replace any metal part able to be, polymer replacements(as mentioned).
Sorry man..., just no free lunch on the weight. But the Accustock is not the main source. Weight difference between Accustock & Standard stock is maybe 4 - 5oz.
Got it. Thank you for the info.
Maybe I’ll just get the Ultralite. Hopefully it will be available in the left handed model soon.
Question...You often laying down some walking miles hunting? Just wondering because I no longer hunt. And I actually welcome weight on my bolt rifle.
Yes, as I go on a hunt once a year out West, often hiking numerous miles each day in the mountains. I’m not looking for something really lightweight as I do want some weight to help absorb recoil, especially with a 30-06. But I also think that 7 lbs 7.5 oz. is a little too heavy to be hauling around. Ideally, I’d want a rifle between 6 lbs 10 oz and 7 lbs.
Loaded magazine with scope and sling?
No, bare rifle weight.
8.794 Bergara B14 Hunter 7mm-08 with mag, four 140 soft tips and a Zeiss 30mm HD5 4-16 x 44 and Warne Mountain Tech rail and rings. I'm sure some have accomplished your goal with a Savage, but it isn't easy. IMHO.
Yikes..... 6lb 10oz? I don’t think many would consider that “some weight to absorb recoil”. I would consider that, really, really, exceptionally lightweight! A SHOULDER THUMPER, in my mind. Not gonna happen on any kind of budget for sure.
Just as a bare rifle it isn't that hard to hit under 7 LBS. You can take a model 110 without accustock and cut a smidge off the barrel. The 110 Hunter is a 7.25 lb gun so you don't have far to go. otherwise at 5.6 lbs the lightweight storm is fine, and my favorite is an ultralite. The ultralite is just a fantastic shooting gun. I have a Savage Lightweight hunter (5.7 lbs) in .270 and a Kimber Classic Select (6 lbs) in a .280ai that are both about a MOA, a Kimber Adirondak 7mm-08 that is 4.7 LBS that is about 1 1/4 MOA and all of them are adequate for hunting... But, i have a Savage ultralite in 28 nosler that is just over a Half MOA with about a hundred rounds through it and a Savage ultralite 300 WSM with about 200 rounds through it that shoots more under 3/8 than it does over and i don't remember the last time it was over a half.
Of all of my lightweight hunting rifles, those ultralites are by far the best shooters.
Last edited by want2ride; 07-24-2021 at 04:26 PM. Reason: mis type
Yeah that’s what I’ve heard. I don’t think I’ve ever heard a bad thing said about the Utlralites, That will probably end up being the route I go if Savage comes through and makes it in left hand.
Of the two Ultralites you have, which one do you grab more often when heading out for a hunt, the 280AI or 300 WSM? Does the 24 inch barrel on the 300 seem unwieldy in the field? Do you think the 280AI needs 24 inches to maximize its potential?
Sorry, i was typing too fast yesterday and mis typed (and edited the post). I have a 28 Nosler in the ultralite, not 280ai, and i didn't get it until after deer season last fall. I did take a white tail with the 300 WSM last fall. I have a feeling that by fall, the 28 Nosler is going to be the one that is my main elk rifle. I only go elk hunting every other year so i haven't taken either hunting out west yet. Last time i went the Kimber 280ai was my main rifle, and the massive amounts of snow made it almost impossible to get around, so i was skunked that year in Montana and i failed to get a deer that year here in Minnesota. I haven't had a 22 inch barrel in a 280ai, so i can't say how badly it will hinder performance, but i couldn't imagine that it would be that bad.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks