110 Lightweight Storm 270 for '06 build?

[Chris_in_Idaho]

I have just put my first suppressor in jail (Dead Air Nomad LT) and while I'm waiting for it I want to put together a light, handy host rifle for it. It would be sort of a mountain rifle for up to Elk, and I have sort of a strange nostalgic fondness for 30-06. I'd like to run an 18 inch 30-06 barrel with the can directly threaded for compactness and weight savings. Most accounts I've read of 18 inch 30-06s still manage 2600+ with 180 gainers.

So the simple answer would be to order up a 110 Storm and send the barrel to be cut and threaded... but then I discovered the 110 Lightweight Storm. Holy cow, 1.8 lbs lighter!

The differences that I can spot are: stock lacks accufit cheek piece, receiver is skeletonized, bolt is spiral fluted, and barrel is 2" shorter. I imagine the barrel is also a skinnier profile, but I'm not positive.

The bad: no 30-06. In fact the only long action clambering I see is 270win. This seems odd to me, as most people looking for a 270 probably want a 22 or 24 inch barrel to wring the velocity out of it...

My question is: is it worth it to buy the 110 LW Storm in 270, sell the take off barrel, buy a 30-06 barrel to have threaded at 18" for my super light suppressed rifle? Or should I just start with the standard 110 Storm already in the right caliber?

How much of the weight savings is in the barrel?
In other words, if both Storm and LW Storm had the same barrel installed, how much weight savings could I expect from just the skeletonized receiver and fluted bolt?

Thanks for putting up with my rambling questions!

[Newtosavage]

Don't take this the wrong way, but I'm afraid you're considering a fool's errand here.

I've owned two LWStorms now. Still have one. Rebarreled a long action LWS to '06 in fact (from .270) with a standard sporter weight stainless '06 Savage barrel. Took it elk hunting even.

The greatest weight savings in the LWS is from the barrel. That 20" barrel is pencil-thin and weighs less than 2 lbs. Not sure there is any way to thread one, they are so thin at the muzzle (.560" I think).

As for the round, in a 16" barrel you're better off with a .308. You'd never burn all the powder from an '06 in a 16" barrel, I don't think.

I have a real fondness for those LW Storms now though. Fantastic stock, even though they don't have the adjustable cheek risers. They fit me better than any stock I've ever owned, and that's a lot of stocks.

To answer your final question, the weight savings from the receiver and bolt on the LWS is only about 1.5 oz. total. That's it. The rest is in the barrel, which is about 8-10 oz. lighter than a standard 22" sporter weight barrel.

My advice would be to buy a short action LWS and rebarrel it to a carbon fiber 16" .308 that's already threaded, then run the can on it. You won't get any lighter than that and you'll get better performance in the long run.

In a 22" barrel there is only about 100 fps difference between the .308 and '06 and in a 16" barrel it will be even less. IOW - not enough to matter.

Best of luck.

[Newtosavage]

One more thing. The LWS I have now is a short action, wearing a 20" sporter weight 7mm-08 barrel. It's 6 lbs. 3 oz. bare. I ordered a 20" Proof Research barrel for it in .308 and then sent that barrel back because it was actually too light. I think it was 2 lbs. 2 oz. and the rifle didn't balance well at all with it, which is the reason I pulled the factory LWS barrel in the first place.

BUT, had that been a 16" barrel with a suppressor on the end, I think it would have balanced really well. I just don't use suppressors. So for me the gun didn't have enough barrel weight to hold steady, even at 20" and I decided to send it back.

I think if you went with a 16" CF barrel and a suppressor on a short action LWS, you'd be very happy with that in the mountains.

[Chris_in_Idaho]

That is exactly the kind of insight I was hoping for. Thanks very much for taking the time to reply.

[Newtosavage]

That is exactly the kind of insight I was hoping for. Thanks very much for taking the time to reply.

My pleasure. Let us know how it turns out.

[Chris_in_Idaho]

Let me just make sure I'm boiling this down correctly.

If I'm not going to stick with the LWS barrel, then there's no significant weight savings to using the LWS receiver over the standard 110 Storm receiver?