I got my new m77 mkII in 6.5x55 out to the range today.
Groups all over the place from 1.25" to 2.5".
Tried S&B 131gr sp, Rem 140gr sp and Wolf 139 gr sp.

The groups were walking around like a bad scope. I even changed the scope, same results.

I found that the firing pin strikes are off center of the primers, by almost the width of the pin.

The action screws were so tight that I had to use a large "t" handle driver to break loose. The stock was actually making "popping" noises as the screw came loose.

I just removed the pressure pad and floated the barrel channel.

I gave up on Rugers after the last lemmon. I guess I should have bought the Cz instead.

Any ideas, besides tomato stake?

TIA

Difficult to gauge a rifle on factory ammo. Methinks S&B and Wolf is junk. The box of Rem factory that came with the deal didn't fair well for me either (300 fps less than I could do with handloads).

Pump up the volume.........

and trigger job.

I think Mule Deer has found some junk batches of 6.5mm 140 grain Rem bullets as well by testing on a Juenke machine. You may be snake bit with your ammo choices.

I agree with the Wolf. I have had good results with the S&B 8x57 sp loads, always 1" or so.
I already polished the sear and trigger.

It sucks to have to spend over a $100 just to crank out some loads to test a rifle. I can usually get any sucks to group an inch with at least 2 or 3 factory loads.

IIRC this is about 7 Rugers I've tried and none were worth keeping. If I can't get this one to shoot I'm gonna' beat it with a hammer, bend the barrel 90 degrees and mount it on the wall. That way everyday I'll be reminded to stay away from Ruger.

I think I'll just order a new barrel and reamer Monday and screw it onto one of my 700 long actions. I've got .270 ADL I never shoot.

The front screw is the key screw. The other just needs to be snug. Go too tight and you can have problems. Find the sweet spot with the front screw (I believe 60 psi) and get some good ammo.

Do remember that the 6.5 x 55 has a long throat to be able to handle the extra long bullets the round was designed around.
If this were my rifle I would firelap it, or, at a minimum hand lap the barrel with some JB paste. THEN, I would get some bullets witha long bearing surface and a short Ogive and load them out as far as the magazine would allow. If limited to factory loads I would look toward loads at the heavy end of the spectrum. My guess is that the groups will shrink down a bunch. The 6.5x55 is not a good candidate for a non reloaders rifle. It is more of a tinkerers or rifle looney caliber. Kind of like a V-8 with a solid lifter cam. If you do not enjoy tinkering and tweaking as you go, not a good choice. Do not give up so easily, friend. I sense that rifle happiness is just around the corner for you.

My problem with the situation is that I have seen several "bubba'd" Swedes over the years that would shoot everyting from 100's to 160's pretty well. If I'm going to be limited to just the 160's, then this one's trash.

I think I just don't have any luck with Rugers. I gave the last one away, just to get it out of my sight.

Middle screw is the key.

Though I put very little store in Factory fodder,for weighing inherent attributes...............

My Ruger 6.5X55 needed a new trigger BAD! It also needed a bedding job. Shooting it much before doing this was just burning powder. Check thoes 2 things and put together some handloads with a good 140gr bullet and then see what you think.

I was wondering about that innocent looking little front guard screw. Ruger says just snug on the guard screws but, it looks like the you could tweak the action very nicely by torqueing that little baby.

After staring at the action and looking at the design, I think I'll pillar bed all 3 screws. I've got some high strength aluminum round bar at the shop. I'll bore and knurl some pillars in the morning.

As for the barrel, it feels very smooth for a factory tube. I've got some synthetic patches that will "grab" and shred easily at any sign of roughness.

"Though I put very little store in Factory fodder,for weighing inherent attributes............... "

I don't expect top performance either. A 3" group is kinda' sucky.

Easy to make a .25MOA shoot 3MOA,with an ammo swap and a screwdriver..................

I gave up on Rugers too. I have found the Remington 700 to be the answer to out of the box accuracy.

After my MKII .257 Rob exercise, I to have given seen the light on Rugers, high odds they need coarse and fine level work to get them where you want.

On the other side, my CZ 6.5x55 full stock shoots holes touching with factory Federal 140 speers at 100yds. All I added was the scope.

I guess the good news is, the MKII can be made to shoot better, but what it takes is the question.

BTW - great choice of caliber, highon my list beside my 7x57

I owned one and friends owned two others. All were legitimate 2" guns.

77s are nice-looking guns but, in my experience, they're not shooters.

BTW, I didn't own mine very long and replaced it with a 700 that shoots nice little groups



<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Bought my youngest son a fully stocked Mark II in 308Win several years back and told him not to expect much in the accuracy dept. I do load for it. Three shots cloverleafing are the norm. Also have two older Rugers, 257 Roberts UL and a 7MMRemMag. They are also shooters but have been bedded and had trigger replacements.Rick.

Based on the off center firing pin strikes I would have shipped the rifle back to Ruger with 5 or 6 of the fired cases. It is possible that Ruger could have corrected it. I had a similar problem & Ruger replaced the gun.

Mike Fletcher

I don't think I'd use that ammo as a benchmark for accuracy testing.

There is a good article in the Dec issue of "GUNS" (I think?) that shows the author going through his process of taking a box stock rifle and preparing/tweaking it for use on a hunt. The rifle used in this article was a factory Ruger and the author uses many of the popular techniques to easily get the particular rifle to shoot like a champ. IIRC, one of the accuracy issues he had was the barrel channel pressure point and he used the platic shim trick to test if the rifle shot better free floating.

I have several newer Rugers and all have shot well using standard techniques to ensure the action was not binding and the barrel did not walk as it got warm. The most I've had to do was take a small amount off the mag box to give it minimal free play (prevent binding), remove the barrel pressure point, and seat the action squarely in the stock w/ the screws torqued somewhere in the neighborhood of 30-35 in-lb front, 20-25in-lb rear and center screw just snug. I've done this on wood, laminate and plastic factory stocks and all have shot well.

GVA

Out of the 5 M77s in the safe, only one shot best freefloated. I don't like it that way, but thats what I ended up with. All have been glass bedded, but none pillored. They will all shoot under an inch with at least one load, most with several.

The accuracy of almost any new rifle can be significantly improved with three things: a trigger job, bedding, and a re-worked crown.

Just bought a Ruger Mk II 257 Roberts rifle before our Deer hunting season.
I didn't have time to work up loads, so I loaded up a bunch of cases with 45gr of H-4350 with 100gr Nosler Partitions, and shot a three shot group at 100 yards that measured 9/16", using a 4x scope. The only thing I did to the stock rifle was to install a new trigger. Now, with some time, I'll work on the load with RL-19 as well as H-4350 powders.
I'd say that a 9/16" 3 shot group isn't too shabby for a stock rifle.
Besides, I love the wood stock design on Ruger rifles.

Don

I would certainly try handloads before I did a bunch of tinkering with the rifle. That would be the less work way to approach the problem in my view. That said, you may find a solution to your problems by using the correct brass for your rifle. 6.5 Swede cases can have quite a bit of size variation dpending on their source, something your off-center primer strikes may indicate. Then again, I have always seen primer strikes which aren't centered in a whole variety of guns - I don't think it's a big issue unless you are having ignition problems. I don't know this for a fact as I have never used them, but I understand Lapua brass is sized properly while much American stuff is not.

My Swede chambered rifle, a Winchester, took awhile for me to warm up to. It is finicky both in the length of the ammo it will feed as well as in what shoots accurately. It does shoot more than well enough for any big game use it is suitable for though (as long as 1" groups are acceptable.) I have been able to find this accuracy in new American made brass.

I'll take it off your hand for $100.

I have two Rugers that I purchased that shoot great out of the box. The one is a 300 SAUM that I changed the stock on but it was just to a Ruger wood stock and the other is a 257 Roberts that I have done nothing with. The 300 SAUM will shoot under an inch at 100 yards and the 257 Roberts shoots just over an inch. I reload for all of my rifles so I don't know how they would perform with factory fodder.

You're right. Sometimes this computer and typing all at once slows down the thinking. Do you remember the amount of pressure on the screw? On the one hand 60 psi comes to mind but it could be 40. Been too long

Whatever the front screw that is angled into the receiver is called...I always had to take pressure off this screw and found that every one of the dozen or so Tang safety 77's I owned over a 10-15 year period could be tuned by finding the "sweet spot" of torque. First time I backed that screw off every one of them made a loud popping sound as the tensio was loosened. Some of the guns also needed the float job and some didn't, but Ruger ships their guns hell for tight on the receiver screws....and that would be the very first thing I would look at.
Ron

I must be the luckiest SOB alive... out of nearly 2 dozen MKIIs, I've never seen one that wouldn't do at least MOA... but I've always remedied bedding and trigger outta the gate, no matter the brand.

Out of the box accuracy to me doesn't mean going out and shooting in the .2s with S&B ammo...

Send me that 6.5 and I'll give it a happy home with one of my kids. I'll even pay the shipping.

Whenever I see one of these yahoos that has been thru 6 or 8 Rugers , or more ; and can't get a single one of them to shoot...........I know the guy is pretty much clueless.

Someone always has to be an azz around here.
I call not being able to find a factory load for any rifle to shoot 1.2" groups, BAD!

Cheap S&B is for the 50yd. line with a new setup. Cheap, and decent reload brass, as well.

When the rig in question won't even group 2", that is a problem. One never experienced with any of my Remmies or even Savages.

And btw, "slinger" as to your opinion of my clueless condition,

Human languages cannot express how little your opinion means to me.

IMHO,barely enough tension to retain the mid-fastener,is just right.

Bed the lug,tweak trigger and live large..................

Perhaps you mean in/lbs? PSI in those numbers is very light and ft/lbs would likely be imbedding the screws into the stock. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

It pro'lly was ft.lbs. I had to use the vise and large "T" handle to break the front screw loose.

I already tweaked the trigger to 3.5 lbs. breaks clean.

I made both front and rear pillar inserts yesterday, the epxoy is drying at this time.

Being "clueless" I hope I didn't [bleep] up the pillar installation, It's rocket science ya know.

You're too funny Terry!

Let us know how it shoots.

Just for grins, have you ever had a barrel settle in and start shooting better after the 150 rnd mark?

Maybe that's what it needs?

hope it works out for you ...

Sometimes very true. Funny how many factory barrels shoot very well when fairly well fouled with copper..

I can't comment on either the caliber or the ammo. I would suspect the ammo. However, having said that - I've sworn off Rugers for the rest of my life. I have to admit that I like their physical design but...
I'm tired of buying a new rifle then having to put more money into a new trigger and a decent bedding job. By the time I've paid the extra money, I've got almost as much money into it as if I had bought a Kimber or even a pre-64 Mod. 70. Then, I've still got a Ruger. I'm just tired of the whole mess. Bear in Fairbanks

Terry, I do hope you get this thing figured out. I personally have had very good luck with the Rugers I do or have owned. Most of them still have the stock bedding and trigger.
The most important things I have found are even fore end tip contact and receiver screw tightness. Having said that, my best shooter is a 220 Swift which I did bed and free float. The previous owner had already done it (shabbily, I might add) so I re-did it when Ruger installed a new barrel.
Please keep up updated with your progress. If all else fails, call Ruger, they will make it right.

After reading this comment I decided to check the screws on a new, unfired M77 MKII we recently acquired. I was amazed at how tight they were. Thankfully I'd gone to the gunsmith screwdriver set on the bench and picked the proper tips. I actually used a 1/4" ratchet set to break the torque on the front screw. The middle one was pretty darn snug too considering what I've read about "how" it should be.

Anyone know why the factory does this? I've got a couple of other Ruger's, #1's, 77-22's and 77 Varmit models and don't recall ever running into this.

Right now I'm waiting for warmer weather to try this one.

I have had several Rems that were,"fickle" for a few dozen shots. That said they all were under 2" with trash factory loads during break-in.

Hell, I even took a Handi Rifle/.223 from a friend that wouldn't average 3". I put about 100 rounds of bulk reloads(mixed brass gunshow loads) down the tube before I even touched the scope. That little rifle is now my favorite .223 it puts Win 45gr hp.bulk ammo into 1.1 avg. 10 shot groups.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the Ruger is pro'lly gonna be a write off. While waiting on the pillars to setup I took the action into the machine shop for a look-see. Its tweaked, looks like the combo of torqueing the front screw down on the recoil lug cockeyed and over torque on the front guard screw the action is not square, pulled down in the middle about 0.15 on the right side and 0.12 on the left.

I put a call in to Ruger for the specs on receiver.

Thanks for the tips.

I think I'll go ahead and pickup a Cz American in 6.5x55 this coming weekend. The reason I went with the Ruger in the first place was a slightly lighter feel than the Cz. I can deal with that.

If I can get the Ruger down to 1.5", I'll give it to my business partner's son for his starter deer rifle. He's 21 and never hunted, the low recoil should start him off right. City boy!

Prediction: You will love the CZ and join us CZ fans here at the 'fire singing thier praises. While you are at it, why don't you grab one in .375 or 416R and join us in July for the 24hr campfire Cape Buffalo hunt?

Well, I managed to sneak away for a little range time this morning.

3 shot groups went from, .652" to .676" to .787" a final 5 shot went .992". Obviously spreading with the heat.

The interesting thing, the first 2 shots of each group either touched or didn't exceed .248".

After the tweaking, the first shot was 5.5" low.

The ammo was Federal 140 gr sp.

I'm already a Cz rimfire convert, I gave all my other .22 rifles to grandsons and friends after the 1st one.

This was with the Ruger, I assume? If so, you want to get rid of it?

I just read all of the replies to the original question. I am currently trying to get a Ruger compact in .223 to shoot better than 3" groups. My action screws were terrible tight too. I floated the barrel, fixed the trigger, and ran many patches of JB down the tube to no avail.
I started going through many different boxes of ammo I have and found a true 1" with Winchester 50 gr. ballistic tips. Now will try reloading with Nosler 50 BTs. I agree,
one shouldn't have to do all of this to get MOA results.
I like Ruger, they have been good to me for decades, I just wish they were more consistant. For now I will stick to American made.

The Ruger, yes.

I will get my reloading equipment out of storage after the holidays and try a few loads. This one is throated so deep that every 140gr, or less is going to be .056" or more off the lands. I ordered a box of Hornaday 160gr rn. to try also. Those puppies are long!

I'll get it to shoot, without a barrel change, one way or the other. I had one in '06 that drove me nuts. I finally started cutting a 1/2" at a time from the barrel, it shot good at 19".

Took about 3 weeks, 10 hours in the machine shop and $100's in load components, to get .850" avg. rifle.

Westerner, try an adjustable barrel pressure point.
I did that on a 7mag.
Drill and install a nut in the forearm, use a long hex set screw and start putting pressure on the barrel.

It is more precise than playing with pressure pads.

I've had three or four Rugers and have yet to see one shoot a MOA out of the box.

I will qualify that by saying I've never bought one "in the box," but bougtht them all used. Maybe they shot better new, but I doubt it.

I agree with whoever said, the forend screw tension has been the key. The last one I had was shooting about 1.5" and I loosened the forarm screw 1/4 turn and it started shooting less than an inch. It was amazing.

Rugers are perfectly fine rifles but they're not target grade. At least that's been my experience, but like I said, I've only owned three M 77s....a 22-250, a 30-06, and a 7 x 57.

Make that four. I also own a 77T in PPC, and it's a bughole shooter. But I put another stock on it, which doiesn't have that foreend screw and is aluminum bedded and the barrel is floated all the way back. The stock that was on it was laminated. I can't say it shoots much better than with the laminated stock, because I didn't shoot many rounds with the laminated stock. I like to think it does, though, to justify spending the money on the replacement.

Overall,

I've had very many and all shot very nicely.

Bed,tweak trigger,load and rock on...................

Too many years ago to think about I made a true believer of the local range's emergency gun repair/range master when I watched him struggle to get a NIB 77 to group under 3"s ...and showed him that trick with the front screw. And just prove the point I re tightened it back to where it had been and once again it shot like poop on a stick. Some guns need a totally loose ie "no tension" setting and some need it pretty tight, but there has always for me anyway been a sweet spot on the front angled screw I could generally find in quarter turn increments....then you do all the rest of it with the bedding and trigger.
Interesting idea to pillar bed one though, I believe sumbody said that Brownells now sold pillars for 77's...dunno, ain't got one I need to fool with.
Ron

Amen to that! That is exactly why I have switched to Tikkas and hopefully Sako in the near future. Rather than do all this work on a Remsucks or Ruger why not get a Tikka and go shoot? Great triggers, the barrel is already floated, etc.
When will American manufacturers wake up? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/help.gif" alt="" />

Will happily put my Ti against any of the lot.

Prepare to come in a distant second..............

Every so often I weaken and think about buying a Ruger UL in .257. Then I come across a thread like this and am jerked back to reality. Thanks,guys. You've saved me half a grand. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Picked up a .257 UL MKII and a .260 tang with a Krieger barrel about six months ago. Paid $325 for the pair... both included rings, brass, dies, etc, and both to come in 3/4 MOA or less...

Maybe I got seriously [bleep], have no idea how badly, and should get my money back or sell them off to put a payment down on a Barfetta, uuhhh, I mean Tikka?

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

Full length neutral on the 257 UL and full float on the 260 seemed to work just fine... neither treatment cost me jackschitt.

Mat..,

Back in the days of the original chat room - me and the boys setting around a pot bellied stove - Ruger rifle accuracy was a hot topic of debate. The chat room has changed, but the same debate rages on.

I'm not aware of any other gun maker who has been the topic of so much controversy. It's this controversy that makes me leary
of buying a M77. You got a great deal, would'a done the same thing myself. Even at that, I notice one of your rifles has a custom barrel and it seems it took some playing with the bedding to get them to shoot.
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

The most accurate out of the box rifle I ever owned was a Ruger m77 mkII 25-06 would shoot sub 1/2 MOA all day long. I guess some people just like pipes over good square conrolled round feed actions.????

I hear ya, brother. I've owned 6 Ford trucks, and every one of them has been a worthless POS. I'm sure the next 3 or 4 I buy will be no better.

Seriously, if you don't like Rugers -- or Remingtons or Winchesters or Savages or whatever -- don't buy them. That will leave a few more available for those of us who find them to be quite satisfactory. Moreover, once we get it in our head that we don't like a particular brand, I'm not sure we don't go looking for ways to find fault with that brand. It becomes quite easy to let prejudice cloud our judgment.

As for Rugers, I've owned several and have generally found them to be just as reliable and just as accurate as any of the competiton in the "popular" price range. Some have needed a little more "tweaking" than others, but the same can be said about the Remingtons and Winchesters I've owned. I've never owned a Ruger, a Remington, or a Winchester that I considered to be the perfect rifle, but neither have I owned any of the three that I did not consider to be a good value for what I paid.

Is it that the screws are that tight, or is it the screw locking goo they're putting on them now? The last M77MKII I bought, I had to use a crescent wrench on the shank flats of the screwdriver to get the front screw out. A few weeks later, I had go the same route when I wanted to take the screw out again. That time I knew the screw hadn't been overtightened. After cleaning the stuff off the screws, I don't seem to have nearly the trouble.

Is it that the screws are that tight, or is it the screw locking goo they're putting on them now? The last M77MKII I bought, I had to use a crescent wrench on the shank flats of the screwdriver to get the front screw out. A few weeks later, I had go the same route when I wanted to take the screw out again. That time I knew the screw hadn't been overtightened. After cleaning the stuff off the screws, I don't seem to have nearly the trouble. [/quote]

Hmmm? Could be the goo. I haven't retried these screws since I loosened them the first time. Somebody did say that Ruger torques that front screw to 90 in.#'s. As I recall, the owner's manual says either snug or firm.

The only comments I hold for Ruger follow.

The old man and company are backstabbing SOBs when it came to gun control issues. Whatever it took to keep their mini 14 afloat, the hell with the rest of em. And they'll gladly bow to the 10 round mags voluntarily. Yellow bellied sobs.....

I do a bit of work on rifles here and there. Its the downside to being a top well known national competitor in a small town. They think you can fix everything.

By far the most rifles brought to me for issues are Ruger 77s. Accuracy, broken parts of the trigger guard,bad trigger pulls, bad accuracy. Right now I have an ejector so stuck I've been after it with Kroil for a week and still no dice on driving the retaining pin out....

As for accurate. Yep and nope. Seen some real shooters. Usually right after they crap out and need a bedding job and then you deal with the goofy 45 lug and getting all the pot metal parts to line up right again....

To be fair just had an issue today with a Rem 700 SPS. But the issue was with factory tube it won't shoot better than .75 moa as is with a certain bullet. Of course bedding will solve that I'm sure. And much easier to bed than a 77 IMHO.

Wish the Ruger issues were so easy and less often.... everytime I see a Ruger I get a headache.

To be fair I had one that had a rusted out spot mid barrel in a 7 mag. Sent it in by owners request and think the bill for a new tube was like 15 bucks. Rifle shot very well again after that, even taking a bull elk at over 500yards. They stand behind their product.

Still want at least a #1 in my life though, love those guns, just have not been able to talk myself into dropping money into their coffers...

Jeff

Must not be a S&W fan either?

As opposed to the pot metal or plastic on a Sucks?

The hinge assembly the floorplate attaches to has always been steel. Floorplates are steel or aluminum on any I've seen.

BTW, Ruger hasn't used those "potmetal" trigger guards since about 1989. Welcome to the 21st century.

That front screw also wouldn't be nearly so goofy if you'd bed it for 60 degrees instead of 45. Maybe the pieces would line up better upon reassembly, too??

Mattman
Mostly out of touch with the new issues as I don't own a 77. Sorry I missed the angle. Not perfect. Simply stating those are the ones that come in here and the issues I see. Ruger by far outweighs the others with issues.
Any advice on how to get the ejector out since ya know so much about em? Kroil for a week and 2 punches later give nothing....

Kecatt
Yep S&W is on my list, even though they've come back around???

I only own 2 Ruger 22 pistols for target work as they are the best for the job. A concession and done before the stabbing happened.
I own one Smith after the stabbing, no good options at the time for a 329PD... One has to do a few things they don't like at times. Including the coming #1 at some point.

Jeff

Now that Bill Ruger has passed on maybe their anti-gun stance has changed, just as S&Ws has changed with ownership....

The necessities for making a"Ruger rifle" shoot well. Re-torque the action screws(center screw just touching enough to stay in place), remove pressure pad at front of barrel (float barrel), check barrel channel for undue odd pressure spots, check action inletting for odd pressure spots and neatness ( no stray wood chips making uneven contact on action) , LAP scope rings, stone trigger, and bed the action. I have learned that if a rifle won't shoot well after that, the crown is not correct and re crown. I just have not seen a Ruger rifle not shoot at least respectably after those modifications which I consider basic new rifle preparation.

If I didn't send the rifle back to Ruger to replace the ejector I would heat it up with a soldering iron and let it cool to break it free. No guarantees, but might work. Replace the pin regardless when you get it out.

All opinions and information from me are free and I assume that you will value them for the good intentions that I express by giving them.

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Recipe to make a Sucks shoot sub moa. Take out of box, shoot.

I own Ruger - rem - win and a few other off brands of rifles along with a couple of custom barreled rifles I also do all of my own gunsmithing as well as for A few close freinds of mine, All I can say is since Ruger started making their own barrels A few years ago they have become my favorite rifle . TO EACH HIS OWN........

What anti-gun stance? All Bill Ruger did was to enunciate a position already adopted by SAAMI, a position that was intended to help head off an assault weapons ban. All the major gun manufacturers were in on it, but it was Ruger who took the rap for speaking out. When the assault weapons ban was passed anyway, Ruger took a leading role in its not being renewed.

Moreover, the Ruger family and the Ruger company have surely done as much as anybody, and more than most, to keep the American shooter and hunter supplied with quality firearms at affordable prices. To characterize them as "anti-gun" is as ludicrous as it is stupid.

I was responding to this:



It is not necessarily my view......

Hmmm? Could be the goo. I haven't retried these screws since I loosened them the first time. Somebody did say that Ruger torques that front screw to 90 in.#'s. As I recall, the owner's manual says either snug or firm. [/quote]

I rechecked the screws last night and they're right where I set them for torque/tightness. Doesn't look like there's any "goo effect" on this one.