In debates on 77/22 vs CZ accuracy a remark that usually comes up is;
Quote;
"the ruger uses a rotating bolt that can wear with time and need shimming."

So how much of a problem,in reality, is the two piece bolt for wear,headspace and accuracy?

Regards,
DBT

I've shot the BeJeezus outta 77/22 lr's and Hornet/K-Hornet's. My favorite 77/22 K-Hornet has multi thousands of rounds through it and still shoots knots.

Had a pard shim his 77/22 K-Hornet as an accuracy experiment,but he could discern no improvement,as it already shot lights out.

My perception is that their is a Ruger bias and somebody figured that was a good place to boot the 77/22 in the nuts.

I dig the 77/22 muchly......................

I bought a used 77/22 stainless that must have been used as a tomato stake, manure shovel, and dust collection experiment. The rotary magazine spring was so weak it would only push up the first two or three rounds. I doubt it had ever been cleaned.
You guessed it, 50 yard groups (5 shots) with all the holes touching with nearly any high vel ammo.
Women love me, squirrels fear me.

I, on the other hand, bought one that just would not group.
Until...................................................................................
I shimmed the bolt head. It took .012" to bring everything into place. Shot great after that, extremely great, so great my brother has had it in North Carolina for 3 years now.

That sounds like as good an excuse as any to go out and buy a new rifle.

No better form of consolation than that <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

My take is that you'd have to shoot a 77/22 many, many thousands of rounds for the bolt to need shimming. The older Remington 500 series rifles have a two piece bolt, and some of them do need shimming now, but it's not a big deal to do the shimming. I have a 77/22 Magnum that shoots great, like well under 1/2" at 50 yards for five shots. I personally like the Ruger 77/22 series better than the CZ, but that's just a personal thing as the CZ's will shoot very well after a trigger job. I have a CZ in 17HMR that is also very accurately after I did the trigger fix. The Ruger magazines do need adjusting to get best performance from them, which is easy to do. Just disassemble them and wind the spring as tightly as you can with your fingers when reassembling them, and you'll never have any feeding problems as long as they are kept clean.
I like the hefty feel of the 77/22 series as they are much like my deer rifle in weight and balance.
Don

Thanks for the response,I just thought I'd add these little gems;

Quote;
"Great little rifles,good squirrel guns-but not in the accuracy class of the CZ's.

The Ruger 77/22 be it a great gun is not a benchrest gun. Sorry"
-----------------------------------------------------------

I don't know,shouldn't the K77VT at least,perform reasonably well in the rimfire bench matches? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

I own one of the fence post versions of this rifle. I have shimmed the bolt, bedded the action ect. It still shoots like sh**. I used to be a Ruger fan, I own three other centerfires a 308,270, and 300Win mag all of which I have had to modify alot. And lots of their handguns..this 77/22 is a piece of junk, poor design and they know it. I am debating whether to send it off to be rechambered to k-hornet or selling it. Problem is I would feel bad for the sucker that bought it. I will be buying another mfg's products in the future. Ruger's in my experience are sub standard in the accuracy dept. lousy triggers requiring replacement or gunsmithing and limited aftermarket stocks alot of strikes against them, few in their favor.

If it is S/S,I'm interested in the POS,should you sell.................

I have known and know a few. All shoot very well. My only complaint is the lack of left handed configurations. There isn't any.

Chuck

Mine had about 800 lbs of foreend pressure. Scraped that out and it shot good. Now it`s a 17 Ack Hornet and even more fun.

Aloha, Mark

HELP! I've at least learned something today. My 77/22 is one that doesn't do well. My kid's Chipmunk (even with its crappy trigger) will out shoot it everytime. Did all the ammo brands and bedding tricks and no improvements at all. It does well for 3 to 5 rounds and then throws a couple of flyers. Gave up and purchased an Anschutz. Thumb tack holes at 50 yds and less than 1 moa at 100 yds are no problem now. As to the bolt shim.... As I am away from my rifles right now, could someone provide a brief explanation as to the what, where, and how's? Would really like to bring that unit around if possible. Thanks, 1Minute

My 77-22 Mag is in the class of rifles I have that I'll never sell; it's that accurate. I did do several things to "improve" it though, like doing a trigger job that gave it a one pound pull, free floating the barrel, glass bedding the stock, and lapping the barrel. I use the high end Remington Premiers and Winchester Supremes for ammo to get the good accuracy. Mine is going PD hunting this summer.
You'll never hear me complain about my 77-22. I'm looking for one in 22 Rimfire now.
Don

My experiences with my 77/22 WMR rival that of DMB ... the only thing I've changed was the trigger spring ... It's mucho fun to shoot the tacks off you buddies target with it. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I also want one in lr now too! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Here's a bit of rundown on the procedure.

Poor design as meaning just the two piece bolt ?
Or do you mean the receiver as well?

I own a VBZ (LR) and a VHZ (Hornet). Talk about two vastly different experiences!

The VBZ as is, out of the box -- sloppy trigger and all, oushoots any 22LR I have ever tried, including my 'Volquartsened' 22/10 LR.

The VHZ was K'ed on purchase w/o even trying to make it shoot. (The legions who have and failed are warning enough.) It now performs like a benchrest rifle w/o any rebedding at all but with a DaytonTraystor trigger.

Why the diference? They are different systems for one thing. The original VHZ barrel screws into the receiver in standard fashion and it has a very sloppy chamber. (The K-ing process carves off a thread or two to tighten things up.) The VBZ has a tension screw that holds the barrel in place.

Most of my Rugers need a little tweaking to make them really accurate but after that ... none better for the price.

1B

I've had a stainless boat paddle 77/22LR for about 12 years now, bought it used from a friend. I've done a trigger job uncluding an over travel adjustment screw and it shoots pretty well. Wears an Elite 3000 3-9X in Burris rings, Ruger rings are junk....It's a tough rifle, has fallen off the quad a couple times and been dropped in a creek once, no problem. Never could figure out how to get the bolt apart or I probably would shim it just to see what happens, and because I can't own anything without tearing it apart:-). I'd buy another stainless one in 17HMR or 22Mag if I came across one for the right price.

They look strong enough!? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Yeah,..they may be strong but the bores aren't even machined, not even reamed after casting. Just polished a bit. They are neither round, true nor straight. I took one set and milled .010 off of the ring side and the top side where they mate together and rebored them.Not really difficult but not worth it when you can get the Burris's which are windage adjustable also. My Ruger 77/22 receiver ring mounting area is machined quite crooked so the windage adjustment was necessary. If you did the above and bored them while mounted on the receiver you'd have a straight set of rings for that receiver only.