Ruger Hawkeye Ultra Light

[Bitman]

I'm wanting a nice light, short rifle for deer hunting, in 243.
I've looked at the Ruger Hawkeye Ultra Light with the plastic stock.
Anyone have any experience with this rifle.
My other option is the Kimber Montana in 243, but it's about $500.00 more.
I know, you get what you pay for.
I will be reloading, as I have a 243 Cooper MTV, that I load for. Along with my 204 Cooper MTV.
Anyways, your thoughts or suggestions are appreciated.

[huntsman22]

bit, I have an older mkII, same model, only in 7/08. Great little rifle. Has no trouble ringing a ram sillywet at 600 yds. Skinny little 20 inch barrel and all....... The target grey finish looks good, but the trigger sucked. A rifle basix cured that....... I think you would like it. By the way, I have the kimber montana in 260, too.

[K22]

Bitman,

I have the older Ultralight in 204. While it is a very nice shooting rifle, I would not consider it light weight. On a Postal scales, mine weights 8lbs. 3oz. setup ready to hunt. Another one I have in 223, blued with a walnut stock, weights 7lbs. 9oz. If you're looking for a true lightweight, the Kimber Montana would be a better route to go.
A Mdl. 7 in 17Rem. with a synthetic stock on it I own is heavier than the Ruger Ultralights. I find that the synthetic stocks most manufacturers use are heavier than the walnut stocks. Kevlar stocks seems to be the way to go, but they are expensive which then makes the Kimber Montana rifles start to look like a real bargin.
In my opinion, which really doesn't amount to much, any rifle weighting over 7lbs in a hunting setup is not a light weight rifle.

K22