I've got a Ruger #1B .270 Winchester that seems to have lost its mind. I've had it for six or seven years and it has consistently been my 3/4 MOA or better beanfield rifle. For the last month or two I can't get a good group out of it.

So far I've tried barrel cleaning, different scopes, different loads, checked forearm tension, different shooting positions, shooting on multiple days, etc. I feel like I have considered a lot of variables yet when I shoot it will put four shots into say 1.75" at 100 yards with pairs touching or very close to it.

There has to be a specific problem here but I don't know what it is. For a while I really thought it was just me but shooting has been good with my Ruger Ultralight .30-06, my .30-30, my 375 H&H and my M1A, a pretty broad range of rifles, often shot at the same range session as the .270.

Anyone know what my problem might be other than a rifle that is possessed by evil spirits?

copper fouling?

Powder gone bad?

Neither of these. Something is moving. That is why a previously good rifle shoots two separate groups.

OAL of loaded rounds can do this. Seat ~.050 deeper if hand loads...

Ok,so what's moving? The OP says the forearm is tight,changed out scopes,ect? Only thing not touched is the barrel and the rib.
Do you have a #1?

I have to say that I does seem like something moving to me but I sure can't understand what given what I've checked and the butt stock feel tight and free of play.

Fraser,

Walnut stocks can change over time.

The first thing I'd try is tightening the through-bolt that holds the buttstock in place. A slight loose buttstock will do weird things to accuracy.

Another possibility is the forend wood has changed enough that the tip of the barrel channel doesn't fit the barrel as well anymore. It's an easy fix: Epoxy-bed the very end of the barrel channel. An inch will do it, and 5-minute epoxy works fine. That keeps the forend from hopping aroudn slightly on the barrel with each shot.

I epoxy bedded the tip of the barrel channel years ago (I read you article on the subject) but I will check the through bolt in the butt stock tonight.

Chuck

I had this happen a number of years ago with a scope. The rifle would fire two distinct groups. I eventually found the ocular lense was the culprit.

I tried the through bolt and got about 1/8 of a turn out of it. I don't know if that could do it but I will try shooting again.

+10

It's a Ruger. You're supposed to patttern the damn things, not shoot for groups.

+1

Aint that the truth ?!

Gee, and I have a No. 1 .25-06 with a light 24" barrel (special run from Lipsey's) that shoots most powder/bullet combinations into 1" or less--and 75-grain Hornady V-Maxes into 1/2" or so.

Might guess I was lucky--but have owned a bunch of Rugers (especially since they started making their own barrels) that do similar work.

Since the original post stated that several scopes had been tried, that probably isn't the problem, but you never know.

And the number 1 answer is.....

For me it was a slight misalignment of the rings....scope moved to two different positions....lapped rings and problem resolved.

M D - I also have had a couple of # 1s in 270 Win. I had no problems getting -1" groups with 130 & 140 bullets.

At the time I still had a supply of surplus 4831. 3100 fps or so w/130s and 3000 or so w/140s.

Go Figure!!

I've had a pile of Rugers that shot well under MOA, even some of the maligned tang-safety 77's. In fact my first 77 was a .30-06 purchased in 1983 that shot under 3/4" at 100 yards with the right handloads, and under 2" at 300. That was also long before I really learned to load accurate ammo--and with a 4x scope.

Have had a few suck Rugers, but have owned far more accurate ones, including 77's of all generations and a bunch of No. 1's. One of the No. 1's was an early .300 Winchester with a Douglas barrel, which regularly put 5 rounds into an inch, but
a .300 Weatherby 1B was just about as accurate.

The Mark II/Hawkeyes have been at least as accurate. If you doubt my word, ask Karnis about the 6.5x55 77 Mark II he bought from me.

We've had more of the "suck Rugers" in my family. Had being the operative word.

Bad luck sucks!

M D - I'm sure you've had many more Rugers than I have. I haven't encountered one that wasn't accurate.

My first was a tang safety, 243 W. It shot varmint wt bullets and 100 grainers both very well. I have a long time friend that STILL has it. He has killed LOTS of coyotes and deer with it.

The only problem I've ever encountered with a Ruger was a 77 in 7 RM. Don't know if it was accurate or not. Another friend bought it brand new. We loaded and chrono'd it and after swapping ALL components, that 7 RM would not beat 270 W velocity. He got rid of it.

Other than that I have had no problems with Ruger. I have had a Mk II 22 pistol for many yrs. It's not going anywhere. I also have a SS Laminate stock 10-22 that has a home as long as I live.

I DID have a tang safety 77 in 338 WM that kicked SO HARD it was no fun to shoot. It would shoot accurately. 225 gr bullets into 1" or less. It just HURT to shoot it.

Yeah but I've had good luck with Marlin lever actions and I like them better anyway. I did have an extraordinarily good shooting 3 screw Blackhawk and Mark II target many moons ago but their rifles have generally just sucked for us. My youngest brother still owns a 77 MKII that is thoroughly uninspiring but won't sell it because it was a gift from his FIL. Other than that, no more Rugers in the family and no danger of any new ones entering.

Yep, Rugers don't shoot for Schitt...



P

Any chance you are canting the No.1 more than your other rifles?

And maybe in a way that is not very repeatable? This will make your groups look big and if you happen to hold the rifle just right a couple times you'll get pairs.

What type of target? Grids make it easier to have a repeatable cant, even if its not level with the horizon. I've noticed that benches that are not level can also make some people hold their rifle unlevel especially if there's no good reference in the distance.

I have used bubble levels on some rifles, but not my hunting rigs. My range bag has a small bubble level in it, the type that you put on string. I put that on my elevation cap if I'm ever in doubt. You'd be suprised how far off you can be sometimes.

That doesn't prove much. I've killed about a hundred deer with a smoothbore 12 gauge Ithaca model 37 that shot 5 MOA on a good day with it's favorite slugs. Come to think of it that old Ithaca was more accurate than some of the "suck Ruger" rifles I've owned. A couple of 10-22's, a .44 mag. autoloading carbine and a 96/44 in particular come quicly to mind.

Speaking of Marlins, I've had a lot of vertical groups due to powder position in the case.

I have owned several Ruger M77s. Tang safety models as well as Mk IIs and have been "lucky" with all of them. They were not benchrest rifles but all would shoot MOA or better with selected loads. I still own a .223 and a .308 that will shoot great. Not a gun writer, but just had to say....

It needs to go to a Gun Shrink.It has dual personalities.

Honestly, I've owned four or five Rugers over the years since 1977. My first was the Shilen barreled Tang Safety in 220 Swift. What an idiot I was to have sold it.

My last Ruger was an All Weather in 280 Remington bought in 2003. I still have it and always will. I have killed a truck load of W.T's with that rifle, as well as both of my daughters.

What the hell did you kill both of your daughters for ? Are you posting this nonsense from prison ?

you killed both of your daughters with a 280???








teasin ya...read your sentence out loud lol

Has anyone ever had a bolt handle come off a Ruger? An extractor fall out on the follower and make you say WTF? Have the trigger go BOOM,when it should be a click...?

I'm waiting...

And I have photos of targets shot from my Ruger stable....and plenty of dead game ..from around the world.

I've never personally had a bolt handle come off any brand of rifle nor an extractor fall out on the follower. I have chucked Ruger barrels in my lathe and watched them wobble like a drunken sailor though. I've also sent receivers/frames {rifle and revolver} back to Ruger because they were so warped from being dropped from the mould too soon that there was no way to straighten them out by machining. YMMV depending on your luck of the draw "brand carma" of course.

Possibily with a little warpage these would have gone into one hole..Oh well...

Just goes to show even a blind pig finds an acorn once in awhile.

Well hell the nuts keep falling my way...chit..I thought I was special,like my mama said..

.

jstevens, Sorry, I didn't see your response within my quote until just now.

Believe me, more powder would have been too much. I/we were loading by the 'Hagel' method. Any more powder would have caused hard bolt lift or blown primers.

Today our charges would give many here 'THE VAPORS'.

Thanks, seriously.

O.k., Both of my daughters & I have killed a truck load of W.T.'s with my Ruger 280.

Iz'at gooder?

Maybe the quarter rib is touching the reciever. Most shoot their best if they have a hairs width of clearance there. Hope it helps.

Thanks, Tom

All of my Rugers have shot decent- under 1.5" for the most part. I have never had one that could break an inch though. I suspect that very few factory hunting rifles really will break an inch. I have seen a lot of rifle "reviews" in various gun rags and other than a few varmint calibers or heavy barrels rifles, I can't remember seeing any that shot more than one factory load under an inch. I'll bet the average 5 shot group size for FACTORY hunting rifles with FACTORY ammo is closer to 2" .

I have had and still have a few rifles that I have found a particular factory load that shoots significantly better than anything else I have tried. I get a lot of friends and neighbors that have me sight in their rifles for them every year. I have them buy 3-4 boxes of ammo (different stuff) and see what shoots the best.

Last year I sighted in three Rem 700 30-06, a 700 in 25-06, 243, two 7mm Rem Mags, 7 WSM, 700 in 308, A 300 Winnie, couple of 270s (Ruger and Mod 70).

I didn't shoot a single group under an inch with any of them. A couple were close and a couple were 4" groups.

Never had a Ruger shoot a group bigger than 2" so I feel they are pretty consistent- just not target guns.

The last time I suffered the frustration of double grouping, a good friend of mine pointed out that I would shoot two or three shots, and then I had to adjust the sandbags to be back on target. I was skeptical, but then we used his rest, a metal capstan honest-to-goodness benchrest rest, together with a leather "rabbit ear" bag for the buttstock. With his setup, the rifle would recoil and slide back, but I could always return it to the same position by just pushing it forward until the reticle zeroed on the target.

Sometimes it's the simplest things that can drive you nuts!

+1

I had some frustrating dealings with lightweight rifles and found that a consistent bench setup/rifle nesting from shot to shot helped out a bunch.

I have a owned several M77 tang safety and No1's over the years. The worst No.1, a 270 1B would only shot 1" to 1.5" consistantly. My wife's 1B is consistantly under 1MOA. Her rifle and others have been worked on, but were under all 2" before and consistantly in the same place. I did find that changes in temp and humidity over time would move the POI with No.1's. Spring time or summer zero may not be in the same place as fall. The stock bolt may loosen because of these variations.

It is also helpful to varnish the INSIDE of the fore-end to reduce moisture changes in this area. This seems to be a common problem, lots of new rifles have no finish on the interior fore-end barrel channel. If it isn't covered by bedding it needs to be sealed.

M77 tang's, old 30-06 loaner was under 1.5" and very stable, converted it to 9.3x62 (re-bored) still 1.5" and occationally better with handloads, utterly consistant and reliable. Only one M77 over the years that was a genuine POS, a tang safety "Ultra-light" with a pencil thin 20" bbl in 270, didn't shoot consistant patterns let alone groups. I would have felt guilty selling it to someone and eventually converted the action into a long range rifle: 4.5 contour Lilja bbl, glue lam stock, lapped Ruger rings, good gunsmithing work, consistant 1/2 MOA with handloads.

I started out with a M77 tang and absolutely hate safeties on the bolt, ie, Win 70 Ruger Hawkeye. I will put up with CZ's ass backward safety on my varmint rifles since I rarely use the safety and if I do it's not a "quick shoot" situation.

My two Ruger M77's (both tang safety models built in '81, one in .243 Win and one in .270 Win) are not altogether very accurate rifles and do not group reliably at all... they pretty much spray randomly, but within reason. But they are completely accurate enough for normal hunting conditions (nothing long range obviously). They have BOTH cleanly taken big game out to 400+ yds. Both are in original factory walnut stocks and neither are bedded or floated or have ANY aftermarket work done to them. Now having said that, they are also both TANKS, in other words VERY robustly made, NEVER a malfunction (after the trigger recall in the mid 80's anyway) and they are both killing machines. They have been dragged around in scabbards, jeeps, trucks and backpacks for 30 years and both are as reliable today as they were brand new. They are beat up old hunting guns, plain and simple. I grew up hunting with these two rifles, now my son is doing the same. They have killed literally hundreds of big game animals from hogs, deer and sheep to cougar and elk. I would not trade them for ANY amount of money due to the memories. They are like family friends. Every time I look a them I think of hunts past, friends made, memories to last a lifetime and freezers full of meat. I've been planning on retiring them for years now, but they always seem to get thrown in the truck when its time to go hunting. In fact I might go so far to say that ole' Ruger M77 tang safety .243 might be my favorite hunting rifle I've ever owned. Lord knows its earned it.

My example proves as much as yours.
That is to say, not much for either of us.

P

My rifle "double grouped" two loads this past weekend that were too hot.

Obviously the load was not near a sweet spot. Both 4-shot groups, two touching bullet holes 1.5 inches to the left of 2 more nearly touching bullet holes. This out of a rifle that has put 5 shots into 0.6 inches with other loads, and puts nearly any 5 shot Accubond or Ballistic Tip group into an inch. The groups sizes don't matter--I was just mentioning a baseline as I believe the rifle was double grouping.

Could just be your rifle doesn't like the powder and bullet combination. Or if you're using factory ammo, you could try something else.

As far as Ruger goes, #1s are cool, even if I don't have one.

I nearly fell off my chair laffin'.

Sometimes I swear this double grouping business is the barrel not butting up square to the receiver,or the threads misaligned.....and the silly thing bangs around very minutely,back..............and forth.....and back.....with each shot.

Things just not being squared up properly.

Did someone already say this?

Maybe--but if we go back to the original post, the rifle shot very well for years before it started double-grouping--which is why I suggested something's changed with the wood.

Weird, a #1 that doesn't shoot...not exactly a news flash! HAHA

I am with JB. Even though the forestock was glassed in the past, it can still shift and need to be redone. If there is a general loss of accuracy, rather than double groups, I would have a look at the throat. The barrel may be going or gone. All of this assumes that the scopes are all just fine.

Bob, the kind of group shifts that are caused by thread allignment and lug seating issues are those that go from .5 to .6, maybe .7

Traveling across different san jose asian escorts can throw your schedule san jose asian escort When adding hours to your day by traveling west san jose escorts you may need to take more insulin san jose escort When losing hours traveling east

Huhh....OK Rick thanks.Did not know that...

Well, I have seen a LOT worse results from "lug-seating issues."

Hard to tell about thread alignment too. Some factory barrels are barely held on by the first thread. That will also result in more than .1" in groups.

My bet is still on the wood shifting on this particular rifle.

It's happened to me twice. Both times very accurate rifles started shooting two groups. Both times it was the same problem. The wood behind the recoil lug cracked, the tang set back and cracked the stock. In one case the stock cracked all the way back into the pistol grip.

Both rifles were restocked (improperly) military rifles. One a Springfield, one a Mex Mauser. Willing to bet the problem is a lame inletting job. This thread got side tracked onto the the troubles of Ruger products. Well, I agree with those who no longer buy Rugers, but pull the barrelled action and check the the bedding.
Good chance the problem lies there.

O

Hard to "pull the barreled action" when it's a No. 1.

Why is it hard to pull the barreled action on a No. 1? Just curious. Probably been said, but wood compression over the years, due to many factors, can happen to single shots as well as bolt actions.

It isn't too tough to take the forend and buttstock off a No. 1, though it does involve more work than removing the action screws on a bolt rifle.

My objection was more to word usage than the actual task. On a bolt action we remove the screws, then actually pull the barreled action out of the stock. With a No. 1, we pull the buttstock off the rear of the action, and the forend off the barrel.

Got you. I missed the subtle humor, but it may be an East/West thing. I usually pull the buttstock off the barreled action of my Ruger but lift the barreled action out of the stock on my Winchester 70. Hopefully I don't have to do either much.
I'm always looking for an answer that I haven't run into before to questions like the OP put up.

Shooter error! Lol

This has happened to me three times. First time drove me crazy. I even sold a beautiful and likely accurate rifle, after floating, action bedding, and full bedding. Then I discovered loose rings when I went to put the scope on another rifle. Second time didn't take so long to find the problem, as I am usually a fairly quick study. The other time was on a Mini-14 with one of those "dastardly" B-square mounts. I could never keep it tight enough that the bolt didn't shake it loose after several shots and the wandering zero would return. Solution=Ranch Rifle. Best wishes, jack

Well, my #1H in 405 Winchester tosses 300 grain X bullets downrange at 2450 fps into a decent group. Ain't a tack drivin' bench rest rifle, but it's accurate enough for a 12 pound sledge hammer. BTW, box stock in every aspect except the scope.

Those .405 No. 1's usually shoot. The one I had for a while would put about any bullet and load into 1-1/2" or less. It shot the Barnes really well, but did around 1/2" to 3/4" with the 400-grain Woodleigh!

Been happy with mine. Hope to poke a hole in some flesh this year. Betting it will kill moose right fine.

bullet seating depth, move in/out .010 at a time and see which it likes best

Scope parallax and where your putting your eye ball

Well, ok. But no matter if you 'pull' it, 'remove' it, 'miracle' or 'transmogrify' the barrelled action off; the problem's in the bedding or the union of wood to metal... most probably.

I had a #1 go south ( or north, if you prefer) because the fore end cracked. I deduced that to be a bedding or union or fitting of wood to metal problem.

So, unless the distressed poster bent the barrel, horrified the the crown or mounted his scope (or rifle telescope) with silly putty, the problem must lie somewhere within the stockal area.

O

OUTCAST,

It seems that even though you and I might differ in our terms about taking stocks off barreled actions, we're in complee agreement that something has gone sour in the bedding. (Of course, a bunch of other opinions have been posted on this thread, mostly by people who apparently never read the original post. But that's real common on the Campfire.)

But since Fraser has never come back to this thread since very early on, we'll never know if our guess was right!

Shoot him a PM.

I haven't bailed out on this thread just too busy with work and coaching track and field to further test the issues. I have however been reading here, learning and thinking. When I get back at it I will be focusing on bedding and getting back here with results.

Life does interfere with rifle shooting a lot of the time!

Yeah, I'm not feeling too hard done by though. Bear baiting for the spring hunt has been taking up a lot of time and it has been going really well with the hunt set to start in 8 days. It does cut into shooting time though.

MD..,

Legend has it that some one, years ago, wrote an article on "Accurizing the #1". Maybe as far back as the 80s. I searched for that article for years, never found it, and no longer remember in which mag it was supposed to have appeared.

As I remember, it involved somehow free floating the forend, maybe glass bedding the portion where fore end meets hanger, and perhaps glass bedding the contact points of the butt stock.

So, if some jaded gunwriter in search of material had a mediocre #1 and the time and where with all to play with the bedding, he might have the basis for an article and could even become a hero to frustrated #1 owners.

Just a thought.

O

I agree with Pharmseller.......Blackheart, it's gracious of you to decide what everyone in your family will and won't shoot.....What a guy.....

I have "Ruger Number 1, Bedding the fore-end to improve accuracy and zero retention" by Frank de Haas, Rifle Magazine, May-June 1977.

If you want a copy, send me a PM.

DF

Dir..,

Stands to reason de Haas wrote the article. Thanks for the info. However, my days of 'Ruger Rastling' are over. One shot great out of the box, one took $700 in custom stocking to shoot one hole groups, the other was always fair at best and with a factory installed cracked fore end, I just traded it off.

I've kept a 30 Carbine Blackhawk; which defies all attempts to reload for it ( the second one) even after having it rechambered, as my eternal project gun.

Once I solve it's reloading problem (s), I'll write an article and become independantly rich.

O

Offhand, I can also remember articles about accurizing No. 1's from Jon Sundra and Ross Seyfried.

I've written a number of articles involving getting No. 1's to shoot. The easist technqiue I've found is to buy one of the rifles made in the last 20 years or so, since Ruger started making their own barrels--or one of the very early No. 1's with Douglas barrels.

I've owned at least a dozen No. 1's made since 1994, and would guess that at least half have shot very well out of the box. The only accurizing technique I've used on the ones that didn't shoot was epoxy-bedding the tip of the forend to stabilize it, and making sure the rear of the forend wasn't pressing hard against the front of the action.

I got my information from a Sundra article back in the mid to late '70s. One trick was to use an o-ring around the forearm screw or to use a small piece of inner tube to create forend pressure, but those were only short term treatments. Changes in humidity would likely cause a change in the forearm pressure.

The long term fix was to glass bed the three contact points and then sand just enough wood from the rear of forearm to give clearance.

MD,

My less than humble opinion ( ) is, the the Ruger No.1 is the most beautiful, gracefull production rifle ever produced by anyone. This from a guy who isnt really a Ruger fan. Sadly, the No. 1 has the rep of not being very accurate.

The first I ever owned escaped the factory with an exceptional piece of walnut and will put 5 handloads into around an inch. I have never touched a screw on it nor will I ever. It is an early rifle in 6mm and prolly has a Douglas barrel.

It would be great if someone could 'crack the code' that turned them all into good shooters.

O

If you are not succeeding with changing this and that on the rifle- I would suggest you give the reloading dies a thorough cleaning and reset them. Also weigh the components to make sure of the bullet weights and such. Best I can do.-Mike

I had this happen to me. it ended up being a bad batch of primers.

Yep..............I actually replaced wood stocks on some #1's with synthetic stocks for that very reason.

Since most of the potential issues have been discussed, I'd also look at the fore end contact against the receiver.........on #1's I've always made sure that there is no contact pressure there at all as that can also cause problems.

MM