Mountain rifle combination - Request for opinions

[IvW]

Oops! Almost forgot about the minimum caliber for Kudu which with the current legislation would be 270 or 7mm!

This will exclude some excellent caliber's, the Kudu would not know the difference by the way, but it is the law. So all the 6.5 mm cartridges would be illegal.

(c) .270 or 7mm rifle for the hunting of-
(i) furred game larger than springbuck, up to and including eland, but excluding dangerous
game or giraffe; and

Have a look at below thread:

https://www.africahunting.com/threads/sa-east-cape-kudu-min-legal-caliber.8947/#post-364130

The whole document can be viewed here:

https://www.environment.gov.za/site...tices/nemba_huntingindustry_g32798gen1614.pdf

As for the 7mm RM vs 7x64mm, the Rem mag burns a lot more powder, has more recoil and is not ideal or needed for the smaller species up to Kudu. The 7 x 64mm is a very efficient cartridge and more than capable to do what you need.

Ammo will also be cheaper here in SA.

 

[ChrisG]

7 x 64 Brenneke will give much more versatility and game taking ability than a 27o win.

338 too much gun for most "mountain hunting" in South Africa, although a great caliber.

I think you may be on the wrong forum.... You see, the phrase "too much gun" isn't in most of our vocabularies. In fact there are those who don't believe in it and prefer instead to use .416s to hunt woodchucks and whitetail deer. ... It's like the word "Overkill", for most of us... its a myth. There's just something about burning a mass of powder that weighs more than most bullets and bullets that weigh more than an ingot of silver, and cost about the same. You never know when that 'chuck is gonna charge and you'll have to stop him before he tears into your foot and shins with all the ferocity of a pent up 15 pound rodent.

 

[Nyati]

I won´t claim it´s the best choice, but this is what I use.

Remington 700 Mountain Rifle in .243 Win with a 2-10x42 Leupold scope.

 

[IvW]

I think you may be on the wrong forum.... You see, the phrase "too much gun" isn't in most of our vocabularies. In fact there are those who don't believe in it and prefer instead to use .416s to hunt woodchucks and whitetail deer. ... It's like the word "Overkill", for most of us... its a myth. There's just something about burning a mass of powder that weighs more than most bullets and bullets that weigh more than an ingot of silver, and cost about the same. You never know when that 'chuck is gonna charge and you'll have to stop him before he tears into your foot and shins with all the ferocity of a pent up 15 pound rodent.

Well unfortunately we in SA cannot always afford to shoot large calibers as much as we like. I myself love my big bores, 500 Jeff, 375 H&H(x2), 9.3x74R(x2), 338 Lapua Mag.

Just got back from the gun shop yesterday. I wanted to buy a packet of 20 rounds for a .222 Rem as we will be going on a meat hunt on thursday and my daugther would like to try for a common duiker, well they wanted to charge me US$46!! for 20 Norma Oryx 55 grn.

I don't want to know what they charge for 338 Win!

She will be using the 7x57 instead as I will not be able to re-load for the .222 Rem before we go.

As long as you can handle the caliber you shoot and it is what you want or like, I wholeheartedly agree that you would not be over gunned with a 338 Win, if that is what you want. Is it ideal for the OP and calibers he has mentioned? Is it ideal for the species he intends to hunt? Do you need it to hunt the mentioned species? Most certainly not.

In the end he will get what he personally prefers, we always do.

 

[ChrisG]

Well unfortunately we in SA cannot always afford to shoot large calibers as much as we like. I myself love my big bores, 500 Jeff, 375 H&H(x2), 9.3x74R(x2), 338 Lapua Mag.

Just got back from the gun shop yesterday. I wanted to buy a packet of 20 rounds for a .222 Rem as we will be going on a meat hunt on thursday and my daugther would like to try for a common duiker, well they wanted to charge me US$46!! for 20 Norma Oryx 55 grn.

I don't want to know what they charge for 338 Win!

She will be using the 7x57 instead as I will not be able to re-load for the .222 Rem before we go.

As long as you can handle the caliber you shoot and it is what you want or like, I wholeheartedly agree that you would not be over gunned with a 338 Win, if that is what you want. Is it ideal for the OP and calibers he has mentioned? Is it ideal for the species he intends to hunt? Do you need it to hunt the mentioned species? Most certainly not.

In the end he will get what he personally prefers, we always do.

Oh I was just busting on you. lol. I often feel like I shoot a small bore on this forum because the biggest rifle I own is a .416.... I whole heartedly agree that there is no need to over gun yourself. But it is a lot of fun!

 

[V.Veritas]

I will start by admitting I do not have much experience in high mountains hunting, so I'll post the question I'm always asking myself when it comes to mountain hunting: "What would be more efficient for me: to shave 1-2lb off my equipment or 2-4lb off my belly?"

After all, when we talk about "weight" we talk about the required energy/exertion to move a certain mass up and down the mountain (conservation of energy). From my personal experience, I can shoot a solid (heavier) rifle more accurate than a ligher one - in the same caliber.

When it will be my turn to hunt the EC (praying for 2019) I'll use one of the rifles I already have (7 Rem Mag, 30-06 or even one of the 300 WM) and divide my time equally between the shooting range and the gym.

 

[sheephunterab]

Carrying dead weight is much different than a couple pounds around your middle. I'm not sure I can explain the physics but there are people 100 pounds overweight that can walk a fair distance. I doubt they could pack that much. A rifle is the most awkward weight you will ever pack and lightweight rifles really are important. I'm not sure the EC Mountains are the best example of mountain hunting as basically you drive a lot of places and are typically day hunting with a light pack if any pack at all so sure the average guy can get away with a heavier rifle. Heck, you can get a tracker to pack it if it gets to be too much but for those of us that live out of a backpack for 10+ days at a time covering maybe 100 miles in that time, I'll guarantee you'll notice a few ounces on a rifle let along a few pounds. It comes down to compromises and there are a few compromises I'll make for weight on a rifle...optics being one but if I can save in other areas and still have an accurate rifle, you bet I will.

 

[stug]

I'm with sheephunterab, I had a 9.5lb 7mm rem mag, then made up a 6.5lb 7SAUM. There was a huge difference in carrying. Arms didn't get tired, didn't have to swap arms all the time.
I wouldn't even have noticed losing 3lb in weight.
Mind you the 9.5lb 7mm mag was way easier to shoot. I've now got a 7.75lb 7mm rem mag. About right for carryability and ease of shooting.

 

[Dr Ray]

My first choice as it has been on my Mtn hunts is a 270, either in standard caliber or wsm. I ve taken dall sheep, mtn goat, big horn sheep, tahr and chamois with my old 270. lightweight. I ve since sold it as I shot the barrel life out of it and have replaced it with a 270 wsm. Your 30-06 with todays modern ammo will be just fine. My advise is to sight in at least 3 inches high at 100.

Completely agree with you.
I prefer the standard 270 with a good 130 gn bullet.
3 inches high at 100 yards is what I suggest also.

 

[Dr Ray]

@curtism1234
Thanks for the input.

I guess I could have been clearer about the scope. I prefer smaller lens diameter, even a 36 I think would work for me. It will be daylight hunting, so I would want as small as possible with a max of -10x42. I like Leupold, so not an issue there.
I understand the needs for large scopes, but I believe that is not the correct tool for this job.
I also don't think I need illuminated reticle for the same reason as above.

//Gus

I would suggest 3-8 x 40 leupold scope

Long eye relief, life time warranty, and light.
On my 270 I have a Swarovski 3.5-18x44 but I hunt in flat country with it. It's a Sako hunter 85 with a lightened trigger.

 

[vancewalker007]

For an off-the-shelf rifle I don't think you can beat a Kimber Montana when you start talking about cost+weight. They have a wide range of caliber choices. If you are looking for a standard hunting range type rifle any of the standard calibers like 270, 30-06, 308, 7mm08 etc should do. I'm not familiar with what is typically available in the RSA.

Pick a light weight mount like a Talley one piece ring/base setup and a Leupold VX-3i 4.5-14x40mm (30mm) Side Focus.

That's a smidge over 6lbs for the rifle, scope, and scope mounts with a short action (308Win) or 9 more ounces for 270/3006. If you go with less magnification you can save a little weight. A 2.5x10 saves about 4 ounces.

In the US this setup would be around $1700 , 1100 rifle, 600 scope.

I have owned a Kimber Montana for about 10 years. It started life as a 270 WSM and is now a 300 WSM. I bought it back when Kimber was only offering the Montana in the 3 WSM Calibers. The stock and the action being currently built are the same as the one I have. I have carried that little rifle all over the Western US and even to the Limpopo once. Its always delight to slip that light rifle onto my shoulder. Good luck in your rifle quest, its always a fun ride with a great reward at the end.

 

[Michael Dean]

There are just so many variable factors that change from shooter to shooter that it's impossible to chose a correct cartridge for another person. Some of us can carry the extra weight without being impacted on a hunt while others shoot better with a heavier stock. The key is to review the factors in your control and make the decisions that best fit your personal style and characteristics. My personal choice is a 270WSM in a McMillian featherweight stock with a Leupold 2-10 scope.

 

[Milehighshooter]

The whole "lose weight" instead of a lightweight gun is pure dribble. You carry your body weight, evenly spread, all day every day no matter what. Gear is NOT the same. Especially a rifle which is only carried on one side awkwardly. Ounces = pounds. For those who say a few ounces make no difference, go pick up some heavy fishing weights and tell me you can not feel a few ounces. Put 1 in one hand and 3 in the other. Losing 10lbs off your gut doesn't mean you can't also lose 10oz off your gun. The combo just means you can hunt that much harder

Back to the topic, I have 3 ultralight. 2 are 30-06, one is 308 (still being built). I think a stout loaded 06 is about the reasonable limit of a true light rifle in regards to killing power vs weight vs recoil. With modern bullets, you'll have zero issue with say a 150gr Barnes TTSX vs a 180 gr standard bullet. I run 130 gr TSX in the 1 06 UL I've hunted with and would feel confident shooting our Elk with it, so Kudu on down would be the same. At 400m, I'd probably prefer the 150 TTSX. Or a 130 TTSX from a plain 270 Win.

Scope wise, I'd be looking at the Leupold 3-9x33 ultralight, if I remember right that is like 8oz. If the max range was a bit less, I'd strongly consider a Leupold fixed 6x, very light weight, a little better light transmission, and very rugged.

A Tikka T3 will make the rifle selection easy, no screwing around with modifications like custom stocks and metal fluting. Buy and go hunt.

If I didn't have the endless options I do here in the USA, I'd buy a T3 270, load it with 130 gr Barnes or Hornady GMX, or possibly 140 gr Accubonds, and go hunting. If you want the extra weight, a 150 gr Nosler Partition. Top it with the Leupold 3-9x33 and start going hard up those hills!

 

[vancewalker007]

The whole "lose weight" instead of a lightweight gun is pure dribble. You carry your body weight, evenly spread, all day every day no matter what. Gear is NOT the same. Especially a rifle which is only carried on one side awkwardly. Ounces = pounds. For those who say a few ounces make no difference, go pick up some heavy fishing weights and tell me you can not feel a few ounces. Put 1 in one hand and 3 in the other. Losing 10lbs off your gut doesn't mean you can't also lose 10oz off your gun. The combo just means you can hunt that much harder

Back to the topic, I have 3 ultralight. 2 are 30-06, one is 308 (still being built). I think a stout loaded 06 is about the reasonable limit of a true light rifle in regards to killing power vs weight vs recoil. With modern bullets, you'll have zero issue with say a 150gr Barnes TTSX vs a 180 gr standard bullet. I run 130 gr TSX in the 1 06 UL I've hunted with and would feel confident shooting our Elk with it, so Kudu on down would be the same. At 400m, I'd probably prefer the 150 TTSX. Or a 130 TTSX from a plain 270 Win.

Scope wise, I'd be looking at the Leupold 3-9x33 ultralight, if I remember right that is like 8oz. If the max range was a bit less, I'd strongly consider a Leupold fixed 6x, very light weight, a little better light transmission, and very rugged.

A Tikka T3 will make the rifle selection easy, no screwing around with modifications like custom stocks and metal fluting. Buy and go hunt.

If I didn't have the endless options I do here in the USA, I'd buy a T3 270, load it with 130 gr Barnes or Hornady GMX, or possibly 140 gr Accubonds, and go hunting. If you want the extra weight, a 150 gr Nosler Partition. Top it with the Leupold 3-9x33 and start going hard up those hills!

Those guys at Leupold keep things a changing and it appears they have ditched the old 3x9x33 and now have a 2.5-8x36mm in the VX-3 line, and its only 11 ounces, so that saves you 3/4 to a pound compared to some larger scale scopes and about 1/4 lb on the VX-5 2-10s and VX-6 2-12s. A 2.5-8 should be plenty on most African shots.

I like the Sako rifles, I have loaded for a Tikka T3 in 300 WSM and I own a Sako A7, which is very similar to the Tikka. The only issue I had was getting hand loaded bullets on the lands and still fit in the Box Mag. If you just shoot factory stuff this isn't be a problem. Sako factory barrels are really really good. The basic A7 weighs 6 lbs 6 ounces so plus the scope that's around 7 lbs 2 ounces, not a Melvin Forbes weight rifle, but still pretty light.

 

[Gemsbok Gangsta]

The Tikkas are a joy to carry. I have the T3 hunter in 06 and 270WSM. They just carry and shoulder well. But my new 6.5 creedmoor built on a model 70 06 platform is a real shooter!!!

 

[sheephunterab]

4lbs 13oz

 

[geoff rath]

Dunno much about long range hunting, but there's a bloke in New Zealand who has over 8,000 head to his name, shot at ranges up to the 1100 yard mark. If you can get onto his website (he has books out too) have a good look. His name is Nathan Foster; sounds like a decent bloke with strong opinions, and a sense of humor....

 

[raimanparoni]

Last year I hunt mountain reedbock with my Tikka Sporter 30-06. It weights 5.5 kg with scope. after 6 hours of walking hills up and down I shot a nice animal, but after that I decide to buy lighter gun for.

I bought a Tikka T3 Stainless Lite in 30-06 cal and Its a great gun for its price
It shoots sub MoA groups/3 shoots /100m with all ammos I have tested.

I bought a 30-06 because its cheap to reload and practice, nice to shoot, and you can find ammos everywhere in the world.

My opinion is that best caliber for long distance shooting is that you can practising the most. You can buy 50 ammo of 30-06 against 5 of 338 Lapua Magnum.

In Finnish winterwar we have a worlds best sniper Simo Häyhä who has over 500 hits. The longest hits he shoots with open sights was 800m.

Later a interwiewer asked what is his secret that he shoots so well
Practicing he said

good advice for all of us

 

[geoff rath]

A bit more from this old bloke.... I was challenged to build (have built really) a medium/long range hunting/mountain rifle, so this is what's happening, based on what I had on hand:
Weatherby Vanguard short Magnum (300WSM) action, "worked" trigger , 2.5 lbs crisp; laminated stock; Nightforce 2.5-10X32 scope. The only new bit is a Kiwi-made carbon-fiber wrapped Hardy barrel. All up weight around 7.5 lbs. I'll run high BC top quality bullets 165 - 180 grains in 300WSM. MV about 3100.
Critiques, please?
Oh, yeah; I'll be shooting it a LOT....

 

[Art Lambart II]

Without knowing more about your hunting style or method I will have to make some assumptions. First of all I assume you are not carrying a heavy pack on this hunt so you are just concerned about the rifle, the gear in your pockets and a small pack for water and snacks. If that is the case you probably don't need a new rifle you need a new sling. IMHO the sling in the attached link is the best sling for a hunting rifle on the market. My family members and I have used this sling for year including last year safari and I can confidently say this is the best sling I have ever used.

http://www.specialtyoutdoorproducts.com/

This sling is currently sold on Amazon for $35 and that's a lot cheaper than a new rifle and scope.

Being able to distribute your rifles weight across both shoulders and have both hands free to climb a mountain makes all the difference in the world.