Just wondering what anyone thinks of the following advise which is posted on the official Alaska division of wildlife conservation web site:

An Introduction to Big Game
Hunting in Alaska
by Dave Kelleyhouse, ADF&G

I am a proponent of using one rifle and one cartridge loading for most big game hunting in Alaska. Over time the combination will become as familiar as a good friend and you will come to use it instinctively and with confidence. Personally, I like a dependable Mauser- type action chambered in .300 Winchester Magnum. I shoot premium quality 180 grain spirepoint bullets for everything from Sitka black-tailed deer to Alaska Peninsula brown bears. The 30-06 with 165 grain bullets would define my personal low end of calibers and the .338 magnum with 225 grain bullets the upper end for an all around Alaskan big game caliber and load.

The web also contains the following in a separate section on selecting firearms:

If you presently own a rifle chambered for the .270 Winchester, 7mm-08, .308 Winchester or .30-06 and can place all of your shots in an 8-inch circle out to 200 yards from a sitting or kneeling position you can be a successful Alaskan hunter. To be as effective as possible these cartridges should be loaded with premium quality bullets such as the Nosler Partition®. If hit in the heart-lung area with a 180 grain Nosler Partition® fired from a .30-06, the bullet will pass completely through a mature bull moose, interior grizzly, or black bear.

Big magnums not needed
Because of the presence of brown and grizzly bears, many hunters have been convinced that a .300, .338, .375, or .416 magnum is needed for personal protection and to take large Alaskan game. This is simply not true. The recoil and noise of these large cartridges is unpleasant at best and plainly painful to many shooters. It is very difficult to concentrate on shot placement when your brain and body remembers the unpleasant recoil and noise which occurs when you pull the trigger on one of the big magnums.

It looks like my tried and true 30-06 may be enough.

If everything goes right, the 30-06 is fine for hunting just about everything in Alaska. The problems occur when you go after the big bears along the coast in the real thick and nasty alder & willow jungles, only to bump into one that takes exception to it, just a few feet away. Or when you are on a mountainside and the only legal dall ram you've seen the last 10 days is laying in the most protected place on the planet, with the wind swirling and your only shot is approaching 400 yards.

The '06 may still handle those situations, but there are much better chamberings available. With all due respect to Mr. Kelleyhouse, I don't know of any of our ADF&G folks that pack 30-06's for bear protection when they are doing their work in remote places. I also don't know of any guides that carry a 30-06 for backing up clients.

I don't think you'll run across too many people that live and hunt up here that will say the 30-06 is inappropriate. But dollars to doughnuts, the next thing out of their mouth will be something along the lines of "but I would prefer....". The '06 is fine for just about everything, given everything goes right. But if you are paying upwards of $10,000 for a bear or sheep hunt, or are using the only two weeks of vacation you have left for the year on the hunt, I would really rather have something that shoots a little flatter for that sheep, or has the authority at close range to put the brown bear down quick.

Never having hunted in Alaska, guess my thoughts really don't count for much. That said, my personal choice for one-gun, one-chambering, would have to go to the .338 Win Mag with a 225 - 250 gr premium bullet.

Have shot a 30-06 since Hector was a pup, and still have a pre-war M70 in the vault. Think the world of it - but, against the BIG brownies, would have to defer to the .338 WM.

Take the hunt away from the big brown bear areas, maybe exclude the curly horned sheep, and the 30-06 is a fine all around rifle for anywhere in the U.S. It's just those two (and maybe include mountain goats) really are better served by another cartridge, in my opinion. Moose, caribou, deer, and wolves, the '06 is fine. I would even suspect so on Elk, Musk Ox, and Bison, should you be lucky enough to get drawn.

I do believe a 338 or 375 H&H would be better for moose, though the '06 will do the job. I believe a 300 or 270 would be better for caribou, but an '06 will do the job. Mostly, I guess, the '06 in Alaska is pretty much like it is throughout the lower 48, it's a jack of all trades. There are other cartridges better suited, and I would definitely want something different on a coastal brown bear hunt, but the '06 would probably do for everything else. Might not be the best choice, though.

Very happy with my '06 - it's my "when something absolutely, positively, needs to be dead" rifle for hunting in Texas, and I've killed plenty of deer, pigs, and varmits.... BUT.... I'd take my .338 for Alaska.

Actually, I don't find the muzzle blast to be significantly different with the .338 (more powder, but larger bore size); and recoil is a modest step up from the .30-06.

With the 200 grain plastic-tipped bullets, the .338 shoots plenty flat, certainly no worse than the .30-06.

Anyway, to each his own.....

As the original post suggests the 30-06 is marginally adequate. I agree that a medium bore is prefered (have been debating between a .338 and 35 Whelen with a 35 Whelen on order).

What about the idea of a single rifle and load (specific bullet weight, etc.) for all Alaskan hunting?

In looking forward to going, I plan to have the 30-06 as the "second" utility rifle with a medium bore as primary. My take on the article is that he is recommending a single set up (his being 300 Win mag.) for hunting - deer through the big bears.

I also notice he advocates a mauser action - leaves out my Remingtons. Is this a personal bias or is there wide agreement to use only mauser type actions in Alaska? I have had only good experiences with my Remingtons.

Looking real hard at a 338/06 converson. Had a Ballenger custom that I let go in a moment of stupidty (one of many). May not have the range of the 338, but will still perty much hold its own. Another thing is brass, have bunches of /06 brass sitting in boxs that I've collected over the years.
Alyeska and others whats your thoughts on the 338/06 for use in alaska?

Gun Runner

Paulinus -

The Mauser type action is most probably in consideration of the controlled round feed - the elimination of a possible "short stroke" jamming the action.

Having never been in a life threatening situation while hunting, don't know how much this comes into play...............but, it IS a consideration when trying to eliminate any possible mishap when confronted at close quarters with a p.o.'ed grizzly or brownie.

Hmmm, good questions. My opinions are only those of myself, hacked out of my own personal experiences and those of my friends that I've witnessed on our hunting trips. So, take this post with a grain of salt.

Personally, my favorite hunting of all here in Alaska is Dall Sheep. So, whatever one load rifle combo I chose, it would have to excel at that. The other end of the spectrum is working on brownies at shoestring distances, whether they are unaware or completely ticked off.

I don't think there is one rifle that will handle everything quite as good as two rifles or even three will here in Alaska. But there are a few that come pretty close.

I would definitely choose a medium bore of some sort. I've used 338 Win Mags for a long time and guess I'm kind of biased towards those. I personally would not feel overly comfortable in brown bear territory with anything less than an 8mm. The Dall Sheep hunting distances would dictate something like an 8mm Rem Mag for the minimum choice of one rifle to do it all. The 338 Win Mag, 338 RUM, 340 Wby, etc.. and so on are probably right in the wheelhouse of flat shooting and having the bone breaking penetrating power with manageable recoil for one rifle. After you get into the 358 Norma, 375 H&H, rifles that are manageable recoil wise are usually a bit long and heavy to be toting up a shale covered mountain ridge for sheep or greasy fern covered cliff after goats.

Even with the 1/3" caliber guns, it's not as comforting when in big bear territory as carrying something 40 caliber or better. Lord knows if I were getting a rifle just for brown bear hunting, it would be chambered for the biggest, meanest, most ferocious cartridge I could find.

I think the 338/06 is a fine cartridge. The only problem I would have with it is I don't think I, personally, would be confident enough in it for the longish shots that seem to happen in sheep country.

For the cartridge, I would want something in the 8mm to 35 caliber size. I would want a bullet of premium construction of pretty close to .275 or better sectional density (for the bears). And, I would want it moving along around 2,700 fps or better. Not too many cartridges can do that. The magnum 338's can (as can Remington's 8mm Mag). The reason for the caliber size is area of displacement for the big bears. The reason for the sectional density is penetration for the big bears. The reason for the velocity requirements is for the flatter trajectory for caribou, sheep, and goats. The mid range .338 premium bullets from about 225-250 grains fits the bill fine. Especially bullets like the FailSafe, Nosler Partition, North Fork, and others.

My choice for the action would be some type of Controlled Round Feed. Mauser, M70, CZ, Browning FN Safari Grade, or whatever else is out there. And, I would want it worked over to ensure that it feeds properly. I'm not much of a Remington fan, I've had a terrible experience with their custom shop's customer service and doubt that I will ever buy another Remington rifle again. But they aren't CRF actions anyway, so it's a mute point. I wouldn't choose a Weatherby based on the CRF issue, even though Weatherby's have been used worldwide with amazing results. It's my hide I'm working on protecting, not somebody else's and not for magazine publication. I've had Weatherby rifles in the past and they have all proved to be very accurate and didn't give me any problems. They will produce a "smokestack" jam if you short stroke them, though, as will the revered Sako.

I want a low to medium power scope, something like a Leupold 1.5-5x, 1.75-6x, or even the 2.5-8x. In years past, I've found the European scopes to be too heavy and bulky, but earlier this year have picked up a Zeiss Conquest that is destined for my 300 H&H whenever it gets back from the stockmaker. The A series Swarovski's and Zeiss Conquest line of scopes seem to be bright and rugged enough for hunting here, and are also lightweight like their American cousins. I also want open sights on the rifle that actually work right and are set. Because of that, I like quick detach scope mounts. I've personally used Leupold, Warne, and Talley's and haven't had a bit of problems with any of the three.

Take the mountain game out of the equation, and you won't likely need such a flat shooting rifle. Take the coastal brown bear out of the equation and use a .30 cal rifle (or even a 7mm) and be happy.

It's tough for one rifle to do it all. I don't use one rifle for everything now. I've got a .40 and .50 cal rifle for the really big brownies. I've got a 7mm for deer and mountain game where bears aren't part of the plan. I've got a 300 where the mountain grizzlies may be included. But, I always pick up the .338 Win Mag when thinking about trying for sheep or deer in an area where there may the big brownies.

Like I said, these are my opinions and may not amount to much, but it's what I'm comfortable with.

alyeska338:

Thanks for the thoughtful replies. My hunting has been in the lower 48, mostly whitetail and mule deer, with some fox and coyotes in the mix.

A couple of other issues raised by the first article. How important is the stainless steel recommendation - it is sometimes hard to find the action-trigger, caliber, fit, and finish/stock recommended (i.e., quality (smooth/reliable) mauser action & trigger, 338 Win, comfortable stock fit (LOP, etc.), with a stainless action/synthetic stock.

It is interesting you mention SAKO. I looked at one today in 338 Win. push feed, 60 degree bolt lift, walnut/blue, good trigger, and fit well. The only areas where it met the recommended criteria was caliber, fit, and trigger.

How would you priorize the recommendations?

The only stainless steel guns I own now are handguns. I just don't like stainless/synthetic rifles. I don't like the way the look or feel. Having said that, they do make good sense. However, blued/walnut guns are fine as long as they are cared for properly. The wood stocks need to be sealed, especially in the action and barrel channels. None of my blued rifles have rust on them. They need a good exterior wax or oil rust preventative treatment before taking them out on 2 or 3 weeks stints in remote locations, but it doesn't take any longer to do that than it does to treat stainless rifles. Stainless rifles will still corrode and rust, so some manner of rust prevention must be applied. Doesn't take any longer to do a blued rifle than a stainless one.

I haven't had any weather-related problems with my rifles not shooting to pre-hunt zero, or the wood expanding and contracting so bad that accuracy falls off.

I've owned some of my rifles for a long time and have hunted with them from snowstorms on mountainsides, to frog-strangling rainstorms on the islands in the Prince William Sound, have never had a bit of problems from them and they still look like new except for a few "character" dings in the stocks and a little blue wear on the bolt handle, lever, or muzzle.

Just make sure you wipe it down good at night while you are in camp, maybe add a little oil to the exterior surfaces. I use electricians tape to cover the muzzle when hunting in inclimate weather.

We had a very experienced resident and guide that was mauled pretty badly up here this spring when he jammed his Sako up tight. He was going into the alders after a wounded brownie in Southeast Alaska with his Sako chambered in 416 Remington. He got off his first shot, but short-stroked the rifle and jammed it. The first shot was mortal for the bear, but it still had enough steam to work the guide over pretty good before expiring. I think I posted the story around here somewhere, but can't remember exactly where.

I would not go after dangerous game, no matter what the rifle was chambered for -- alone without backup without a CRF bolt action. I would use a double, but can't afford one. It just doesn't make any sense to not have that positive, mechanical feeding and extraction system when facing an animal like the brown bear. Sako's are great rifles, and have a grand reputation here in Alaska. If it fails, well, it's probably operator error. However when slam banging the bolt when faced with a charging bear, it can be pretty easy to get a little too hurried and short stroke the bolt. With a CRF rifle, if you shortstroke the bolt, you won't have a live round in the chamber, but you can cycle the action and will. A shortstroke jam in a push feed is the devil to clear to and get the rifle operational again in a hurried manner. The rifle, in effect, becomes a very expensive club.

But... bears always get the glory. A lot of hunters never face down a bear or the closest they get is 100 yards or so when they shoot it. The probability of actually coming across an enraged bear at close range is very small. It does happen at least a couple of times a year up here, though.

Again, these are just my opinions. Just my experiences and those that I've witnessed.

Paulinus,
Are you intending to move to Alaska and hunt, or are you coming up for a hunt? If you are coming up for a hunt, where are going, and what are the animals you will be after?

Like I said before, asking one rifle to handle everything, from sheep and goats to moose and caribou to coastal brown bears is a pretty tall order. AND, you won't find all those animals on the same hunt in the same game management units.

Using a .300 Win Mag who am I to say that a .35 Whelen or .308 is more than adequate? However, I do not think that one bullet fits all. I am of the camp that heavier bullets are a better bet than a lighter bullet with 'perfect' accuracy. 180 gr. spirepoint bullets do a fine job at a long distance for most animals. Moose don't seem to care much for them but an accurate shot will drop even the largest moose. However, you can use a heavier bullet, accept a little less velocity and see those moose and bear drop. In my area we don't have many real long shots.. Further north we often see some long shots for caribou (I usually go far north and then I have less of a long shot and I can fill the freezer in a couple of hours). Sheep are the ornery ones and you won't get many shots under 150 yards. One day I may fill a ticket but for now my sheep hunting has been done with my eyes(less work). It all shows to go you that one caliber may work well but don't settle on one bullet or charge.

Any thoughts on the .300 Remington short action ultra mag?

Thanks!

Any thoughts on the .300 Remington short action ultra mag?

Thanks!
Just as effective as a 300 Win Mag. Might have a hard time buying ammo away from Anchorage or Fairbanks. Always pick a premium bullet.

I've killed many moose and a few caribou. Never hunted bears, they leave me alone, I live them alone.

My first caribou and my first moose were both killed with a Model 37 Winchester .410 with slugs.

Since then I have used either a .308 Norma mag, or a .350 Rem mag. Mostly the Norma. Had one .338. Didn't like the rifle ( Browning BAR). The caliber was fine, just didn't like the packaging.

However, I have been bitten by the Big-Bore bug. Last year, I started with a .458 Win mag. What a kick!! (pun intended) Now I have found the 45/70. A Marlin 1895 with the 22" barrel. With 525 gr Bear Tooth Bullets, this thing is my ultimate weapon. Moose season starts in 1 1/2 weeks. I have to work opening day, but my vacation starts the 3rd. Can't wait to try this one out on a nice bull.

I still have a safe full of guns. but this one is a keeper. About the most fun I have is watching other people react to these two at the range. Shoot the 458 for about twenty rounds, then bring out the small stuff, the 45/70. Finish up the 44 loaded with full house 300 grain loads.

Start by passing out earplugs for those who don't have them. It's surprising how many people take kids to the range without ear protection.


Just rambling, but if I had to pick one rifle, it would be either the .338 Win mag, or the .375 H&H mag. Any of the other nedium bore magnums would probably be just as good, but those would be my choices.

Always remember, most advice is worth what you pay for it.

Paulinas, I suppose with all due respect that the 30-06 could be used in 90% of most big game hunting situations throughout the world. It was used a bunch back in the 40's, 50's and very early 60's for just about all types of hunting on the North American continent.

Many a big bear has been takin with the 30-06 and 220 grain Winchester Silver Tip ammo. Many a hunter owned but one or two big game rifles back then also. Today things seem to be a little more towards the half dozen or so rifles for most hunters, which is dandy to my way of thinking.

However, I must agree with the post of Alyeska in that guides don't carry or guide clients anymore using a 30-06, at least I never saw any in my short stay in that state in the early 70's. The .338 magnum was the gun of choice for the most part and serious guides used the .375 H&H. A bear in the flats at a 100 yards is far less of a problem than one in the thickets at 25 feet. You best have something that will indeed shut the door hard on on such a bear!

After reading the replies and an off-forum exchange of email with alyeska338, I began looking for a .338 Win. chambered rifle with control feed. While partial to Remington and CZ products, neither currently produce anything in .338 Win. (and Remington is a push feed). Wincherster since the introduction of the short mags. has reduced its offerings in .338 Win., but Ruger still has it chambered in its M77 Mk II.

I have a Ruger on order with a synthetic stock and iron sights. I will leave the iron sights when I scope the rifle. I wanted to go with the laminate stock, but I have been told that Ruger is discontiuing offering iron sights and the laminate stock w/ iron sights is no longer available (BTW it is still in the catalog).

Update: The Ruger arrived with the older style synthetic stock, so it went back. Since the dealer could not find a .338 with iron sights, I am now the happy owner of a Ruger M77 Mk II in .338 Win. with a laminate stock. The laminate stock is a bit heavier than the synthetic and should help with recoil management.

Thanks for the replies/responses.

Well, you can't go wrong with that combination - Dave gave you some good advice.

If you plan on the iron sights for scope damage possibility or close brush hunting, be sure to get the quick detach scope rings. Think they are made for the Ruger integral mount.

Good hunting!!

I have hunted Kodiak a few times now, and slipped up on a bear while hunting deer. I was glad I had the .375 H&H with me. The only draw back is the weight. At 11 lbs it's a bit heavy for long hikes. Shooting deer with it at under 100 yds did make me take my Win. 92 in .45 Colt this year. I left it in the boat when I went on shore though!

You need my nine-pound .458 Win Mag! :eek:

If don't get the bear, the recoil will probably make you wish the bear had put you out of your misery, LOL...

The controlled Round Feed is a mute issue. I can tell you from personal experience that when encountering a pissed off bear...it is the first round that counts...there won't be time for a second one. I have used push feeds with great success and also CRF. I prefer to concentrate on how accurate I am with it, how well suited it is to what I am hunting, and just how functional it is. I am a gunsmith and gun dealer. I get many odd comments on my lack of having an arsenal. I have only a very few guns and each is dedicated to it's own type of hunting. I have killed everything in North America with a .308 Win...the same one that I have had since I was 9yrs old. I concur with everyone else about the 338...Alaska wise it is probably the best all around choice, but if I had an '06 and was just going up for a one time hunt, and was not rich...I would probably not buy another gun. I have a 45-70 that I used for years, and when I was a packer, I carried a 460 Weatherby Mag Custom...2 different worlds. One I am shooting something that is probably not too awefully pissed, the other I am saving my life and the life of a customer from something that is h*** bent on death and destruction. Just remember to never shoot a bear that is down hill from you...a 105 howitzer is not going to stop him from getting you if he is coming up a hill. Those are my opinions. But an oldtimer once told me that "opinions are like a**holes...everyone has one, and most of them stink."

I have to agree with Alyska338, There isn't much that could be an all round rifle for a place like Alaska! The 338 Win mag is close, but the 340 Wby Mag, in a CRF actioned rifle is just about as close as one might get! The 340 WBY cartridge is pleanty flat shooting for the sheep, and is, at least , adiquate for close Brownies, If you're lucky!

I have hunted Alaska every year since 1982, and the area where we have done most of the hunting has a large population of Brownies in September. The Mulchantna basin, south west of Illiamna west of the Katmai ntl park, is loaded with borwnies migrateing back into the hills for den up after spending the summer runs with people takeing pictures of them. These bears are agressive as ****,and are not intimadated by your presence at all, when they see your camp. What they want, they take, with you standing in camp. We also hunt around the base of the mountains along the border of Danaley(spl) Park past the end of the trapper Creek road, on the back side. These bears are used to people as well, and will walk right up to you if you are not careful. For this reason,it is easy to stumble onto them in the alders. I have always hunted Alaska with one of my 375 H&H rifles. Since I hunt Africa, and the 338 of any kind is not legal for Dangerous game, and the 375 H&H is, I do a lot of shooting with a 375 H&H rifle. Given a good rest, I can hit a sheep, or caribou at 300 yds every shot, so I don't need anything flatter shooting.

The 375 H&H or a 9.3X74R double rifle is always my light rifle in Africa, with a 500/450 Westley Richards double for the real thick skinned stuff. With this background, the 375 H&H seems small to me, and is no draw back at all, on long shots. The 375 H&H 300 gr Nosler Partition actually damages less meat than a 100 gr 243, or a 180 gr 300 wby mag. bullet.

If you look at the record, most hunters who are scratched, in Alaska, by Bears, that had already been shot, but not stopped, were shooting some sort of .30 cal rifle.

Any thing "CAN" kill a Brownie, as big as a Volkswaggen, "IF" everything goes right, and you hit the vitals. However, the thing that kills large animals is bullet placement first, and formost, but if that placement is off just a mite, then bullet size, and weight is what counts. The velocity nutts are barking up the wrong tree here. What you need is a bullet that will penetrate deep to get into the vitals, and break large bones.

This is just a long winded post to say what RUARK said 70 years ago, "USE ENOUGH GUN" . All my opinion, and worth exactly what you paid for it, to anyone but me, and bears I meet! :D

Can't argue with your thought process - if ever having the chance to hunt in the Alaska wilds or the African plains, I'd want the biggest bore that could be handled with a degree of expertise. My present limit seems to be the 45-70 with fairly stiff, but not absolute, loadings.

Think anything less than .400 bore would be left at home.

Alyeska,
I do beleive you and I went to the same school!!
I have many rifles to choose from but I am going to sell all but two. My 7 RM and my 338 WM, which is a custom built on one of the first LH S/S Win Mod 70's out. It was a 300 WM but didn't shoot well so I put a 338 Lija bbl on it, and converted an old Winchester 'light weight' syn stock to LH. We were experminting with different finishs on the metal so we nickeled this one!! A S/S with a nickel finsh, I'll bet there arn't many of those out there. I shoots MOA- with most loads. The Hi-Tech brake make the recoil of this 7 lb'r very plesant. :cool:
The 7 is my 'up country' rifle. (I have a 300 WBy Custom that I may keep instead of the 7)????????????????
I am a firm beliver in a one load of all. In the 338 I have not compleatly settled on a load yet, still working up loads.
Keep uo the good work. ;)

Scoutsniper - I've never been to Ak, and probably never will get there unfortunately. Nevertheless your advice to not shoot at a bear that's downhill is interesting to me and something I'd like to hear more about. Is this a sure reaction with a wounded bear. and I wonder why? What about one that's uphill? I don't mean to sound stupid or disrespectful, just interested in hearing more from you or anyone else. Thanks

338 - I think one reason the F&W depts. encourage lesser calibers is because they don't want to discourage hunters who can't afford another riflle besides their deer rifle. I know this is the case with Maine F&W in their publication about moose hunting. They make millions on moose drawing entries, and don't want anyone left out of that! My 2 cents>

Scoutsniper - I've never been to Ak, and probably never will get there unfortunately. Nevertheless your advice to not shoot at a bear that's downhill is interesting to me and something I'd like to hear more about. Is this a sure reaction with a wounded bear. and I wonder why? What about one that's uphill? I don't mean to sound stupid or disrespectful, just interested in hearing more from you or anyone else. Thanks

338 - I think one reason the F&W depts. encourage lesser calibers is because they don't want to discourage hunters who can't afford another riflle besides their deer rifle. I know this is the case with Maine F&W in their publication about moose hunting. They make millions on moose drawing entries, and don't want anyone left out of that! My 2 cents>

It is something that I heard from a guide after many years of hunting bear on my own...and after I started paying attention, I found that it was pretty much a sure thing. His explanation was pretty logical to me. They have short front legs and long back ones, which makes them a little awkward going down hill.....DON'T BE CONFUSED....They CAN go DOWN HILL FAST...they just don't seem to like it. They go up a hill much faster and in better control. Everytime that I have jumped one in hill country, if I was up hill I got charged...if I was down hill they ran over the top and disappeared. I am sure that there is someone out there that has a story that is contradictory, but it is just what I was told and what I have noticed over the years. Hope that helps your curiosity. I hope you do get an opportunity to go up sometime...it is worth every penny.

Thanks alot Scoutsniper. The comments and threads I read in this section on "Alaskan Hunting" are by far the most informative and interesting to me. I hope to get there someday, as I'm sure I'd enjoy it immensely.

alyeska338:

Thanks for the thoughtful replies. My hunting has been in the lower 48, mostly whitetail and mule deer, with some fox and coyotes in the mix.

A couple of other issues raised by the first article. How important is the stainless steel recommendation - it is sometimes hard to find the action-trigger, caliber, fit, and finish/stock recommended (i.e., quality (smooth/reliable) mauser action & trigger, 338 Win, comfortable stock fit (LOP, etc.), with a stainless action/synthetic stock.

It is interesting you mention SAKO. I looked at one today in 338 Win. push feed, 60 degree bolt lift, walnut/blue, good trigger, and fit well. The only areas where it met the recommended criteria was caliber, fit, and trigger.

How would you priorize the recommendations?

I can build you a gun on a modified Pre-64 Winchester Action in Stainless, right or left hand, in just about any caliber you choose, synthetic stock to your length of pull on various different designs like the weatherby style stock for about $1500 just depends on options.

My first pick would be a new, fresh out of the box NIKE tennis shoes :eek:

All your hunting pardner needs a 22, to shot you in the Nike!!! :rolleyes:

Haven't hunted Alaska and I LOVE my '06, but... A Brown Bear? I think I would want something bigger. They say Fred Bear killed a polar bear with a bow, but I bet there was guy next to him holding a .375