I bought a Ruger 77/22 at a local pawn shop that does an active business in firearms. It clearly has a factory barrel marked .22lr.





When I tried to shoot it, a round would not come close to chambering. A .22 long would go in further than a .22LR, and a .22 blank would fit in all of the way. Blackening the sides of the case would not reveal the problem.

Shown below is how far a .22lr round fits into the muzzle of this rifle.



This is how far a .22lr round fits into a different .22lr rifle.



It sure seems like this is a .17 diameter bore. Which is what my calipers roughly confirm.

Muzzle machining is not great, but does not indicate any modifications.


Neither does the breech--so it is not like someone put a liner in the barrel.


Is there any more reasonable explanation than this is simply a 17 HMR-2 barrel that was mismarked .22lr at the factory?

It certainly gives indication of being a 17 caliber, have you tried chambering a 17 HMR?

I suspect a phone call to Ruger would get you a new barrel installed at no cost to you.

That is a rough looking finish job on the muzzle.

drover

A 17 HMR does not fit at all--the shoulder will not enter the chamber. I do not have any Mach 2 cartridges.

I will call Ruger next week and am curious to see what they have to say.

Does anyone know if this gun was ever chambered in 17 HMR Mach 2?

My question. HOW DID THAT GET OUT OF THE FACTORY? With a muzzle looking like that? Maybe spirited out of the factory and to the black market? I just can't figure it getting out like that. If you look at those guns all day on the job that muzzle has to jump out and say pull me. I do think they would rebarrel that for you. Be Well, Rustyzipper.

Stuff happens, a buddy of mine had a Smith 57 (.41 Mag) marked M29 (.44 Mag), I had a M18 (.22lr barrel and cylinder) marked M48, and another buddy bought a Colt Combat Commander marked .45 ACP on the slide (and it had a .45 barrel) but the breechface was milled for 9mm/.38 Super.

People work in those plants, and people screw up sometimes. Yours is the first Ruger I've ever seen with a mismarked barrel, but it happens. People ain't perfect.

Edit. I just remembered that the M77R .30/06 I bought had a belted mag extractor on it The hook was too short to be 100% reliable extracting '06 cases. I sent the bolt back and got a new extractor. SO, Ruger DOES screw up now and then. People do that.

Ruger made the 77/17 or 77/22, not sure of the correct designation, in 17HM2 for a couple of years. I remember when CDNN was closing them out back in 2007 for around $400. I had one for awhile and, maybe just a little, regret letting it get away.

If it was mine, I'd call Rody's and ask Bill or Henry what they think. 603-863-3356. For me, Bill and Henry are the bottom line when it comes to Ruger long guns, 'cause they know more about Rugers than anyone else who I've met.

I looks like a factory screw up.

The receiver is marked 77/22, and the barrel is threaded (not v-block), it those are useful puzzle pieces re the era of the gun.

Call Rody's if you want a good answer.

Call Ruger if any answer will do.

Utah: I would surmise that "someone" re-worked" that 22 L.R. by apparently reaming the old barrel and installing an insert? I have a BUNCH of Ruger Model 77's in MANY calibers and never seen a muzzle munched up like that?
Maybe I am miss-seeing something but whoever sold that Rifle to that shop should have alerted them that it had been changed from a 22 L.R. to a 17 Mach2
Maybe if you get a 17 Mach2 round (I have many thousands of them and can send you one if you don't want to buy a box) and insert it and put on all your safety gear and holding it in your left hand only point it downrange and touch one off.
Strange and maybe a refund is in order (if you don't want a "bubba'ed" Ruger 77)?
Best of luck to you (and turn your face away when you touch it off.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

It just doesn't look like there is a liner--especially when you look at the breech.

It does look like a liner when you look at the muzzle....to me.

Maybe mislabeled and not even chambered.

Ordered a Number One back in The Day,chambered in 6PPC...but it arrived stamped 22PPC,despite an obvious .243" bore. Store returned it,but I prolly shoulda' retained it as a Novelty,for giggles.

Number One's suck anyhow,so i shrugged it off and away.

Hint....................

That's kinda what I'm thinking.

I have a Ruger 10/22 barrel that had a liner installed and chambered for 17HM2. The liner in that barrel runs the entire length of the barrel and is obvious at both the muzzle and breech.

relined.

Relined to .17 m2,With a good gunsmith,it's not supposed to look re-lined, altho the caliber should be re-stamped.

It's a Ruger.

It's a Ruger

The muzzle picture sure looks like a liner has been installed .....

Utah708, how much you sell it to me for, I pay the shipping to the state of Misery? Be Well, Rustyzipper.

Don’t know what you paid for it but I would either take it back to the pawn shop and get your money back or send it into Ruger . If it has been rebored then Ruger may charge you for a new barrel.

77/22 has been altered to threaded bbl attach.
Doubt Ruger would accept a modified receiver.

All the mods..... line for 17m2 and thread fit......and not restamp chambering ?

Might be a half arsed rig.

Might shoot great and somebody just flubbed cosmetics.
The muzzle didnt look very good liner wise.

If the receiver mod done right and to a standard, could maybe just rebarrel to .22 lr,. Be back in biz

Dunno who sells bbls w that mod.

Utah708.

Will a 22LR catridge fit in the chamber?

From the pictures you posted, I think I know what that rifle may be..

Pretty easy on the liner, all I know of are chrome molly put some cold blue on it and see what happens.

Nope. That is where all this stuff started.

You and me both.

Once upon a time, Gander Mountain would convert a .22 to Mach 2 using a liner for about $150. The local store would send them back to the home planet for the conversion. Toyed with the idea myself for a bit.

Ammo can be found online for $8.00 or so. Give it a whirl and see what happens.

It is clearly has a barrel liner

Since I am the guy who has held the gun in really good light, with a magnifying glass, you need to trust me that it does not have a liner. I understand how you might come to that conclusion based on the photo I posted of the muzzle, but it is misleading. The serial number dates it to 2013, and I believe they had shifted to threaded barrels rather than V-block by then. I think it is a stock gun with an incorrectly bored barrel. The shaft of a drill bit of 0.155" will fit in the muzzle, while one that is 0.162" does not.

I bought a box of 17M2 ammo, and it chambers just fine.

I called Ruger customer service and they have sent me a return authorization.

Stay tuned.

My opinion: Yes, a liner poorly installed and crowned.
Rough cut lathe work hides the liner crevice at the breech. Very poor crown at muzzle.
I strive to do almost imperceptible liner crevices in the few I’ve done.
However the Redman 17 liners are accurate in my experience if properly installed.

Utah708: Okay..... but I still contend I have a BUNCH of Ruger in a BUNCH of calibers and not a single one of them has a muzzle crown anywhere near what your Rifle has!
With your contention then the previous owner of the Ruger 77/22 bought it and used it as a 22 L.R. when in actuality it is MOST LIKELY a 17 Mach2 and said previous owner (owners!) which also includes the shop owner "knowingly over-looked the miss-chambering and miss-barrel size? Something does not fit here?
I do so hope the Ruger folks will make your Rifle "come back" to you to your saitisfaction.
Keep us informed.
I am sticking with "bubba" doing/did a barrel re-lining til I see written proof (from Ruger!) that it was miss-chambered, miss-marked as to caliber and miss-barrel reamed and miss-barrel rifled into a 17 Mach2.
The fact the barrel is "screwed" into the receiver is clue number one for me - you may wish to disregard this fact but "someone" has bubba'd this once nifty Rifle.
In other words you are pinning your hopes on the scenario where "bubba" took the miss-made 22 L.R. barrel off without sending it back to Ruger and then "worked on it" (threaded the receiver and the miss-marked miss-made barrel of a gun he bought as a 22 L.R. and in actuality was/is a 17 Mach2) and then for some reason sold said bubba'd, miss-marked Rifle to someone, who may have been the gunshop in question and they then "innocently" sold it to you - lot of ongoing if's and but's and lapses of responsibility here!
To many in fact.
Again best of luck to you!
I hope the folks at Ruger disregard the obvious and for some reason makes the altered Rifle "regular" for you.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

If I read this correctly (and I apologize if I have not) it seems to me you are saying that because the barrel is threaded to the receiver then it must have been worked on. His rifle was mfr as a threaded barrel to receiver gun from the factory. Now in regards to whether it was refined or miss marked from the factory is yet to be determined. I do side with others that I have never seen a Ruger barrel crown look that bad and I have seen more than a few. In the end I hope we get the answers and Ruger takes care of this rifle for the original poster.

Varmintguy--

I appreciate that your interest in this rifle motivated such a lengthy reply. Jim is right about the threaded barrel. According to Brownells, Ruger switched to threads 11/13/2009 and my rifle was built in 2013.

Rifle is on its way to Ruger so time will tell.

Ruger will probably put a new barrel on it and send it back to you.

Then they should try to hunt down whoever made it and let it escape.

If the rifle was assembled in 2013, that would have been several years after Ruger stopped chambering anything in 17HM2.

IF it turns out that the barrel has been altered after purchase I could see Ruger charging to rebarrel it. If Bill Ruger was still around I doubt there would be a charge. That being said, if it was altered, obviously it’s not Ruger’s fault. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. My advise to the original poster is to be fully honest and up front if Ruger were to ask any questions. You never know when they might throw you a bone for being up front. I really hope this ends up going well for all involved.

My bet is that the barrel has been relined. Hope it works out for you

My bet is they say it wasn’t their doing and they can’t release it back to him in current state, making him pony up money for a rebarrel. I could be wrong.

They can't keep it, they don't own it. They will either deal, or return.....

been there, done that......

If Ruger doesn't rebarrel it, It seems to me that he should be able to keep it as long as it gets the 22LR x'd out and 17HMR2 put in its place. If not, does this mean that anytime you have a gunsmith do anything to a firearm, they never have to send it back?

they can't keep it, if they don't own it. They can rebarrel, replace, rebuild. But if you opt out of having them do one of the above, they HAVE to return it. It is Rugers policy to not have an overpressured, or any firearm that may be dangerous, returned. They will first try to get you to take an option other than sending it back, which involves YOU paying. Stand firm enough and they will replace or return it. But in the mean time, they will string you out for months hoping you cave in, and agree to pay what they ask......

If it is a factory error, Ruger should fix if free of charge.

If it isn't a factory error, Ruger will probably offer to put it back into "factory specs", but for a fee.

Ruger is known for replacing "tuned" triggers with factory units and charging the owner for the parts and labor. They do return the parts that they replace, but the owner has to go to the effort of reinstalling his "tuned" trigger and has to pay the fee for a factory specs trigger that will just go into a drawer and be forgotten. I have been told that even a minor change to a factory specs trigger, like cutting a coil off a spring, will require the entire trigger assembly to be replaced.

That is why I suggested that the OP should call Rody's, to get their recommendation before sending it back to Ruger.

I fully agree with your reasoning which is purely common sense. I bet they don’t offer it up that way, at least In the beginning.

Had a couple guns replaced by Ruger. They will send you a letter stating why the gun needs to be replaced. You have to sign off on the replacement, or sign off that you want the gun back understanding that Ruger is no longer responsible for the gun. Return the signed letter get a new gun or your old one back.

Thing is, they won't send that letter for a long time, a month or two between comms, until they exhaust all other possibilities. First, they will say it's unsafe and you must buy a new one at cost. But 'cost' is not much less than retail. If you don't fall for that, they'll say you can pay for actuall repair cost. Which both times that option was offered, repair and return shipping was more than their supposed 'cost'. And if you are insistent enuff, by telling them to return your rifle and you're not signing nothing but the form for a new one, they eventually will relent....

I've never had any trouble with Ruger, but I've only sent two (2) rifles back to them.

OTOH, Smith & Wesson fought me for months over a custom 624 that I had sent in to be engraved and was subsequently stolen out of UPS on the return. I had specifically directed S&W to insure it for the full cost of the revolver, the custom work, and the engraving. They didn't insure it and after several months finally agreed to replace it with a 629 Classic, but fought me over the engraving that I had just paid for. They finally engraved the 629, but the battle with them left a bad taste in my mouth and I haven't purchased a new S&W product since then.

Smith did me a real good one. Several years back they had a promotion going on new revolvers. Within x amount of time after purchase they would do a factory cleaning and inspection. It was a 686 that frankly got the crap pounded out if it. Well I got home one day to find a blue plastic box on my back porch. With a shipping label on it and the box was open. Fortunately must of just popped open when delivery monkey dropped it.

How nice lets ship a revolver in a factory box untaped and not require signature. Got better. Open up the box. No grips on the gun no screws in the sideplate. Took nearly a month of screw around before they admitted that they somehow made a mistake. Sent me a label to send it back,took them about a month to put some screws in the side plate and grips on it. Shipped back in a plain cardboard box over the factory case and signature required.

Smith did me something similar. I had a new M24-3 .44 Special that spit lead badly. New gun, spitting lead like a Thompson SMG. I sent it back to them to fix. They sent it back, and UPS left it on my porch, unsigned-for. And it wasn't fixed, it came back worse, AND the cylinder would turn backwards if you tried to DA it slowly. I traded it off for a nice autoloader. It wasn't the first N-frame that gave me fits, but it was the last one.

Now I send all of my handgun work to Ahlman's in Morristown, MN. The pistolsmiths at Ahlman's are at least as good as those who work directly for S&W in Springfield, MA,and do better work, do it for less $$, and turn their work around much more quickly. Plus, the do a good job packing, shipping, and insuring anything that you send to them.

www.ahlmans.com

Very interesting and curious thread....looking forward to hearing about what Ruger does with this and hope it all works out for you in the end, Utah.

So what did Ruger say?

No word back, yet.

I called them out of curiosity to see if I could learn anything. Customer service said that it is in the book for a new barrel, but they could not give me an estimate of how long that would take.

Well I recently bought a 10/22 and they messed up the drill/tap on the action. Rail pointed one way, barrel pointed another. They put on a new action, sent to FFL (new serial number) and reimbursed me the transfer fee. Two weeks to get the gun back, three weeks between sending in the gun and getting the check. They said don't send in the magazine so I didn't. It came back with a new magazine.

I emailed Ruger last week about a set of Factory Hogue grips on my Redhawk. These were the original grips. Taking them off or putting them on I must have stretched too far and they cracked slightly. Still worked but no longer fit tightly.

They sent me new grips free. All within 1 week.

Had a couple other issues through the years. Each was taken care of promptly and free. I’ve had good experiences with their customer service.

The crown is an easy fix. I am surprised no one suggested either fixing this barrel or trying to sell for a little profit and buy another. I am no fan of the 10/22 or anything 17 but; they both have a following. And anything that smacks of unique example of a common gun is usually gold. A reline wold not be a collectable, but it might be worth $100 premium. Reline was not established. I did see some one offer to buy it. I think he was serious. I would sure hate to be the guy who found out Ruger did some experimental run and one unfinished example slipped out. Imagine that!

Nothing wrong with sending it back to Ruger. I hope they tell the OP what happened. It will make interesting reading.

Looking forward to finding out about this mystery. Hope it works out to your satisfaction.

Any update from Ruger?

Nothing since I called them and they said they were putting a new barrel on it.

After all this I would call again and ask someone at Ruger just what was the finding on this barrel. Curious minds really want to know!
Otherwise you’ll wind up with a nice new barrel but never know what the story is on this barrel.

Update?????????