Ruger M77 tang safety .270 - questions *UPDATE*

Found a well used Ruger tang safety 270 "featherweight?" in a Gander mtn used rifle rack for S210 maybe 4 years ago. Played around with it, bedding it and etc., tried different reloads at range and around 1 1/2" was maybe best 100 yd group I shot with it. I don't hunt, just shoot paper....so had a cheapo heavy barrel put on it in 7x57. Its now one of my more accurate rifles.

If you do want to do something with the trigger, suggest you install a Rifle Basix "trigger sear, cost around $45. This is not a complete trigger assembly, it's just the trigger. But with a little tuning, so to speak, you will be surprised at the difference in trigger pull with the Rifle Basix.
 
Tim - I have it free-floated to where a dollar bill will slide down.

I live in Georgia, and it's very humid here.

Back in the 80's and 90's it was common practice to bed a barrel 2" in front of the recoil lug for sporter weight barrels. Is this still good practice? Or should it free float to the action?

I wonder how much of a difference a different/better trigger would make? Is there any sort of standard? I.e. is it expected that a rifle go from printing 1.5" 3 shot groups at 100 to printing 1" 3 shot groups at 100?
 
The old old way was a dollar bill clearence, I've found this is not enough on a walnut stock. 1- barrel harmonics (sp) can move that much and 2- plain ole movement of wood , moisture.

I like a bill folded in thirds, or a postal mailing envelope single thickness. Some like more some like less, it's all pref.

I'm not sure which is "best" on bedding. I don't do any barrel at all.

A trigger that is crisp and not overly heavy makes a big diff.

Also a little more scope power never hurts, when doing load work.


These are just what I like, not everyone agrees...
 
Originally Posted By: GCI just remembered a quote from that era, "Ruger M77's have the best $12.00 barrel that can be had." IIRC the first M77 rifles had Douglas barrels and shot really well. Then Ruger began to outsource to cheaper barrels while they began producing their own barrels in house. M77's went through a bad spell with inconsistent accuracy reports being common. That's when that quote came about. Eventually Ruger got it figured out and now seem to produce as good a factory barrel as anyone else.

I've heard these same things over the years.
 
I have an M77 mkII in .270. It's the stainless model with the boat paddle stock. I think it's a mid '90s model. Shoots factory Winchester 130 grain Power Points at about 1 1/2". I know a trigger job would go a long ways, as the trigger is very heavy. They really were never marketed as a precision rifle. They were sold as a quality hunting rifle that would always go bang and never fail.
 
Now days there are lots of rifles that will go bang and never fail. They also have a brand new price that is cheaper than a used wood stocked ruger. But you are correct, it is a deer rifle and 1 1/4 at 100 yards is good enough to kill deer at 400. With all of the accuracy that is out there today we tend to forget that a true 1 inch rifle used to be really special.

On opening day of deer season there is always at least three people in my pasture waiting on me or my father in law to get home a shoot their rifles. Despite the tv shows, those of us that can shoot small groups with a good rifle are still very much the minority.
I have seen people tickled pink over 2 inch groupsot of nice old rifles that you could see the copper in.
 
Last edited:
NB,
I also had a MKII stainless boat paddle stocked Ruger. Mine was a .308 and it was an excellent rifle. My rifle shot 165 gr. Sierra boat tails into sub-MOA groups and knocked the snot out of deer. I regret trading it off. For awhile the boat paddle stock caught a lot of flak for being ugly, ect. Then guys realized how dang tough and stable they are and an appreciation for the boat paddle grew. I wish I had mine back, I made some good shots with that rifle and it killed a lot of deer for me.
 
Originally Posted By: GCNB,
I also had a MKII stainless boat paddle stocked Ruger. Mine was a .308 and it was an excellent rifle. My rifle shot 165 gr. Sierra boat tails into sub-MOA groups and knocked the snot out of deer. I regret trading it off. For awhile the boat paddle stock caught a lot of flak for being ugly, ect. Then guys realized how dang tough and stable they are and an appreciation for the boat paddle grew. I wish I had mine back, I made some good shots with that rifle and it killed a lot of deer for me.

I bought mine a few years back from my step dad. I probably overpaid a little at $550, but I wanted it so bad. It barely had a box of shells through it though. I fell in love with the boat paddles when I was a kid and shot a .22 model at the State Fair. I've got se hand loads that a buddy did for me that get me under an inch at 100 yards, and that is plenty good for what I ask of it.
 
Did you use a rear bag? That group looks like you were breathing a little. That group could be bedding, breathing, or velocity deviation from various brass mixture and that magnum primer.
 
I was using a front and rear bag - caldwell. Not as solid as a front rest for bench shooting, but I use it all the time with my other rifles.

Rifle is bedded with Brownell's acraglass done at least 20 years ago. The primers are old, FED 215, but they shoot well in my .243 rem 600 with w760.

I just wanted to hunt with the rifle for nostalgia this season. I don't have the time to completely figure it out. Plus, it's a little much for our southern whitetails whereas my .243 with Barnes tsx is about perfect.

I bet the barrel doesn't have 75 rounds down it, and I have had this rifle for about 32 years. I am going to put it in the back of the safe for now, and concentrate on my BLR in .243 and my Rem 600 in .243.

Wouldn't mind having one of the new Ruger American Predators in 6.5 creedmor for deer.

BTW, I am sure I made mistakes, but I did exhale on each shot squeezing the trigger as slow and smooth as I can. There was at least 5 to 10 minutes or more between shots to ensure barrel wasn't hot.
 
I recommend you use a larger dot for your target (1"). I only use the one you used when I am shooting high power scopes (18 to 24 power on the high end), because it is a tiny dot. I would bet that the reticle is floating around the target because the dot is completely hidden.

Eric
cool.gif
 
Last edited:
After getting my Browning BLR .243 squared away for deer season I thought I'd give the Ruger one more try.

Loaded 53 grains of IMR 4350 this morning, rem 9 1/2 primers, Hornady 130gr SST seated at 3.360". It shot a 2.723" 3 shot group at 100. Terrible.

Then I loaded 56 grains of IMR 4831. Rem 9 1/2 primer, Hornday 130gr SST, with a COAL of 3.360". Shot a 3 shot group at 100 that measured 3.223". TERRIBLE!

Then I loaded 56 grains of IMR 4831 again, same bullet and primer. Loaded 5 rounds but seated them this time to 3.335" COAL.

Winner! The first 3 shots measured 0.598" center to center. Adding shots 4 and 5 the group measured 0.848" center to center.

Now, I just have to do it again to make sure it wasn't just luck.



and the rifle

 
Back
Top