Lessons learned

[Hunt]

I sold off my Tiikka and Weatherby in 270 Win over a year ago with plans to buy the Barret Fieldcraft down the road. At the time it was still in production and I had a source for $1,800.00, decided to wait on buying. Today, its out of production and $2400 starting bid on GB. It reminds me of the times I looked at CZ75s when first imported for $299.00 and brand new Browning HP for around $650.00. Should have bought a truckload of them all. Anyway, what do you guys think would be a good lightweight substitute for Fieldcraft?

[grovey]

Tikka's the schit in my book. I've had 5, and have shot groups of 1/4" or better with handloads @ 100 with all. All about what ya like/want though. Good luck.

[sigstroker]

Christensen? Cooper maybe?

It's weird, the local store has both of those, Kimbers too, but it's a rural blue collar town. I can't imagine anyone here would buy a Christensen .338 Lapua, but this store has one, and ammo for it too.

[1859sharps]

I sold off my Tiikka and Weatherby in 270 Win over a year ago with plans to buy the Barret Fieldcraft down the road. At the time it was still in production and I had a source for $1,800.00, decided to wait on buying. Today, its out of production and $2400 starting bid on GB. It reminds me of the times I looked at CZ75s when first imported for $299.00 and brand new Browning HP for around $650.00. Should have bought a truckload of them all. Anyway, what do you guys think would be a good lightweight substitute for Fieldcraft?

As I understand how the Fieldcraft came to be, it was yet another failed attempt to mass produce the New Ultra Light Arms rifles. That effort failed, Barret bought up the remains of that effort and released the FieldCraft. If they ended production, doesn't look like it worked for them either.

My two cents.... IF you really want something like the Fieldcraft rifle, get the real deal. Go to the source and buy the real thing https://newultralightarms.com/ get the real deal. would seem there is a reason NULA is still around and the mass production clone efforts aren't.

I would buy before Melvin passes on and someone with a more bean counter mentality takes over.

[splithoof]

As I understand how the Fieldcraft came to be, it was yet another failed attempt to mass produce the New Ultra Light Arms rifles. That effort failed, Barret bought up the remains of that effort and released the FieldCraft. If they ended production, doesn't look like it worked for them either.

My two cents.... IF you really want something like the Fieldcraft rifle, get the real deal. Go to the source and buy the real thing https://newultralightarms.com/ get the real deal. would seem there is a reason NULA is still around and the mass production clone efforts aren't.

I would buy before Melvin passes on and someone with a more bean counter mentality takes over.

[Catch]

The fieldcraft is sub 6 lbs? Kimber might be closest option.
I've not tried one though they sound like an easy carry.

[Divernhunter]

Tikka T-3 Lite is my choice with a leupold 3.5X10X40 Duplex reticle Non-AO scope

[devster55]

The new savage 110 ultralight is really nice and has a proof barrel.

[pennstater]

Nothing wrong with the Sako 85 Classic. Quality, craftmanship, reliable and damn accurate.

[1859sharps]

Bottom line is that, if you want true quality and craftsmanship, you must pay for it.

This is a very valid point. When you look at Savage, Kimber, Tikka and such for "light" rifles, you are NOT looking at a rifle built ground up from raw materials to finished product to be a light rifle.

IF one actually wants a true light rifle, go to the actual manufactures of light rifles such as NULA. It will cost more, but you will get the real deal. If it costs more than you have on hand now, save a little longer, be patient.

One last piece of advice...before you spend on a true light rifle, see if you can shoot someone else's first. One of the lessons learned with Scout Rifles, which are "heavy" by comparison, is sub 7 pound rifles are not for everyone. The idea of light rifles and the experience of shooting one do not always match up.

[mtenenhaus]

these look like suitable and readily available commercial options:

https://www.springfield-armory.com/model-2020-series-rifles/model-2020-waypoint-rifles/

they come in a variety of calibers, the .308 for example runs around 6.5 lbs with carbon fiber barrel, the 6.5 Cr a few oz more.

that Sako sure is pretty though, albeit in lovely wood as opposed to polymer

[diver160651]

Lessons learned

This is a very valid point. When you look at Savage, Kimber, Tikka and such for "light" rifles, you are NOT looking at a rifle built ground up from raw materials to finished product to be a light rifle.



IF one actually wants a true light rifle, go to the actual manufactures of light rifles such as NULA. It will cost more, but you will get the real deal. If it costs more than you have on hand now, save a little longer, be patient.



One last piece of advice...before you spend on a true light rifle, see if you can shoot someone else's first. One of the lessons learned with Scout Rifles, which are "heavy" by comparison, is sub 7 pound rifles are not for everyone. The idea of light rifles and the experience of shooting one do not always match up.

I can't agree more. I


As an example, I have a tikka mag with a pencil fluted barrel and no brake. Bare (before rings and a scope) it comes in 5.9lbs. It's just not fun to shoot and spends most of its time in my Wyoming house. I had a Kimber that bare came in about 4.8 or 1lbs lighter, but with a brake, a slightly smaller caliber and was easier to shoot, but still, a beast, except the gun didn't shoot all that well (for me at least).


Just a couple of pounds in the right place can make all the difference. For the last few years my magnum running a 28oz carbon stock, carbon bolt knob, Ti-Action rail, CF barrel. So the base is light, but I choose the thicker, longer 24" (vs 22") m24 sized carbon barrel that adds a few ounces, a brake, a 3.4oz full-length rail, and a full feature FFP illuminated scope at 26oz (very light for a scope of this type) vs a lighter duplex for my long-range hunting. This builds a complete field-ready gun in the 9lbs range that really feels light even against a Tikka, but is a pleasure to shoot. Yes, I could have given up the scope, 3oz rail, and brake a shorter barrel and saved a pound. but the rifle would be much harder to shoot and not as capable for my style of hunting.



The point is in field trim it still packs light for a magnum, but it is easy to shoot and see the impact on the animal. It is a better solution at least for my hunting than just looking a min weight and the features I'd give up to save a pound.

[splithoof]

these look like suitable and readily available commercial options:

https://www.springfield-armory.com/model-2020-series-rifles/model-2020-waypoint-rifles/

they come in a variety of calibers, the .308 for example runs around 6.5 lbs with carbon fiber barrel, the 6.5 Cr a few oz more.

that Sako sure is pretty though, albeit in lovely wood as opposed to polymer

[bigbossman]

I have a Tikka T3 Lite in 30-06, and I had a Kimber Montana in 25-06. Neither is particularly unpleasant to shoot..... the Kimber weighed 6.5 lbs ready to hunt with a Leupold 3-9x 40mm scope, and the Tikka weighs 7.3 pounds similarly configured.

I sold the Kimber, because it shot for crap... I could never get it to group very well, and I tried all kinds of powder, bullet, and charge combinations. The Tikka shoots very well, and load development was minimal with excellent results. Pretty much did a ladder with one bullet and one powder, and was done.

[LynnJr]

I can't agree more. I


As an example, I have a tikka mag with a pencil fluted barrel and no brake. Bare (before rings and a scope) it comes in 5.9lbs. It's just not fun to shoot and spends most of its time in my Wyoming house. I had a Kimber that bare came in about 4.8 or 1lbs lighter, but with a brake, a slightly smaller caliber and was easier to shoot, but still, a beast, except the gun didn't shoot all that well (for me at least).


Just a couple of pounds in the right place can make all the difference. For the last few years my magnum running a 28oz carbon stock, carbon bolt knob, Ti-Action rail, CF barrel. So the base is light, but I choose the thicker, longer 24" (vs 22") m24 sized carbon barrel that adds a few ounces, a brake, a 3.4oz full-length rail, and a full feature FFP illuminated scope at 26oz (very light for a scope of this type) vs a lighter duplex for my long-range hunting. This builds a complete field-ready gun in the 9lbs range that really feels light even against a Tikka, but is a pleasure to shoot. Yes, I could have given up the scope, 3oz rail, and brake a shorter barrel and saved a pound. but the rifle would be much harder to shoot and not as capable for my style of hunting.



The point is in field trim it still packs light for a magnum, but it is easy to shoot and see the impact on the animal. It is a better solution at least for my hunting than just looking a min weight and the features I'd give up to save a pound.

This is what I have been preaching forever.
What good is a 6 pound rifle if you can't shoot it enough to like it and get comfortable with it?
I would rather hunt with a Calguns heavy rifle that is accurate than a I hike 15 miles on every hunt rifle that makes me flinch.