I recently bought a Ruger M77R in 7x57 1971. The rifle has had little use and shows only handling marks. The bore looks like new. I made up some handloads of 140 gr Partition bullets w/42.0 gr IMR4064 CCI250 primers in Grafs brass that I fully prepped. I set the OAL at 3.065. It does not pattern well by my standards. Most annoying is that there does not seem to be a pattern other than loose horizintal stringing. I shot it at 100yds from a Harris bipod and sand bag prone. I fired it from a cold bore two rounds and then a long wait and then two more rounds. The spread is about 3 1/4" all right of the established point of impact. Last year I tried other loads from the rifle and had similar results. I called Ruger in NH today and they said that their standard of acceptable accuracy for this rifle in 7x57 is 1 1/2" groups at 50 yards. They suggested using Federal 140 gr softpoints or Winchester 145 gr softpoints. They will not discuss accuracy if you use handloads. I know I am spoiled by my .222 and 6BR, but even for hunting, I hoped for better. If you play with the stock bedding at all, Ruger will not warranty it. The barrel has side play in the forend and seems to settle in different places when squeezed by hand. My plan is to get the ammo that they suggested, shoot 10 rounds of each from 50 yards and 10 each at 100 yards and evaluate it from there. If it falls within Rugers acceptable accuracy (1 1/2" @ 50 yards) then I am on my own. At that point does one free float the barrel or glass bed a pad where the barrel contacts the forend? I like the rifle otherwise and love the caliber. Any ideas welcome. Thanks, Peter.

I would first figure out why there is side play, if the barrel is moving while your handling it, just imagine how much it is moving when shooting.
I've been playing with an older m77 in 7mmRem. that has never shot worth a nickle, so it may be a long road ahead getting your rifle to shoot good.
I free floated the barrel and it did nothing for accuracy. I had a gunsmith recrown the barrel and this helped a bunch. I may end up putting a small hump back on the tip of the stock like the original had to see if it helps. I've been fiddling with this for a good while.
Good luck with yours.
JR

Back in those days, Ruger sub'd out the barrel manufacturing to another barrel maker. Quality was suspect and many rifles left the factory with substandard barrels. Yours may unfortunately fall into this area.

Best advice is to asssure all screws for the action and scope are properly tightened, the barrel is free in the channel, the recoil lug is properly bedded and the action isn't binding in the stock. After that, try various brands of bullets and powder combinations to find the best accuracy.

If you do decide to takle the bedding, then do some temp work...stuff that can be easily reversed if it doewn't work out without any modifications to the rifle.

An "up bed" at the forend tip of plastic tape won't last real long, but it will proove if it's worth working in that direction. Two cardboard shims under the action (so long as the recoil lug is still engaged) won't last long, but will proove is free floating is worth a try. Once you see what temp. fix seems to offer hope, can then consider doing a real job of it.

As I remeber the early 7X57's, there were some "stinker" barrels. Few were bad bores...the ones i remeber being written about had oversized chamber throats.

On the off chance yours is one of those guns, the only "trick" i've found that usually improves accuracy in wide throated rifles is to use a bullet with a very long BEARNING AREA. Not length...the long sharp points of a spitzer give it length, but not bearing area. The old 175 blunt nosed slugs are shorter than the spitzers, but have more bearing area. have some ideas about why this seems to help in oversized throats, but no proof...do know it's worth a try.
------
Addition:

Another overlooked bit. If the root of the bolt handle contacts the stock accuracy seems to go to pot right away...over tightening the action scews, which tends to "sink" the action into the stock (and usually unevenly) seems to be the cause of most of bolt-handle-hitting-wood proablems I've run across, so it may just be that bolt-handle-to-wood contact is a sign of acrushed bedding rather than a symptom by itself.

Peter, I also have a 77 that acted the same way, nothing really worked,I used Brownell's acuraglas and beded the first two inches of the barrel, but left the recoil lug alone, it improved ,120 gr.sierra with 43 gr of 4320 half in at a 100 . I used 160 gr sierra on moose. I now use 154 gr. Hornady on deer, this spring my nephew used 175 gr. federal round nose on bear,first factory rounds I 've used in it in 30 years really worked well on black bear.

before you do anything to that rifle i suggest sending it back to ruger. they may just replace the old barrel. if that rifle truely has one of those bad barrels ruger may just make good on it. they wont commit to it over a phone but this would not be the first time i've heard them replaceing the barrel if they did. all you have to loose is some shipping cost.i would contact ruger and try to be very nice when talking with them, ask for names and when calling back ask for those people. it's worth a try.

How does the bore look? The crown? If those look good try experimenting with some different powders and seating depths. Most manuals recommend a particular powder, the Nosler Manual recommends H414 with the 140 grn as having the best accuracy.

I'm going to throw a clinker in here. Back when I was in Alaska in the mid 70's I bought a brand new Ruger 77 in 7 by 57. Put a nice Leupold 2 by 7 scope on it and put the bore sighter on it prior to taking it to the range.

It shot dandy 12 inch groups about 13 inches high and a foot to the left even though a bore site said it was right on. At the time I had a gunsmith shop running and I tried everything I could including glassbedding, free floating and more.

I finally sent it back to Ruger and lo an behold they said the chamber was bored crooked to the bore. Sent me a check for the cost of the gun plus the work I'd done to it. I ended up buying a new Ruger 06 that was a perfect shooter.

Moral of the story is when Ruger was outsourcing it's barrels there were some stinkers that can only be cured two ways, by rebarreling or by trading it in on something else. My understanding was the 7 by 57's produced during that period seemed to suffer the worse.

I'm not casting any dispersions on Ruger, Their fine guns and I especially like the tang safety ones the best, but just keep in mind that your cure may be a barrel instead of any mechanical fixes. The new 06 77 I bought killed a Dahl Ram at just over 600 yards. It was the longest game shot I've made in 45 years of hunting.

Thanks for all the replies! When I called Ruger the woman was very nice, although I did not write down her name. I have ordered the two cartridges that they recommended and will try and see what kind of groups I get. I will save the targets. If it performs as I expect, I will send it up to Ruger. I had very good luck with Remington in similar situations. Like someone said the only thing I have to lose is the shipping. The bore on the rifle looks perfect as far as I can tell with my eyes. It is pretty tough to evaluate the chamber and neck areas, but there are no obvious issues there. The bolt does not hit and the action is properly tightened and I even read their proceedure in the owners manual. I do not like the way the barrel nests in the foreend. The lateral movement and the surface where the bottom of the barrel sits does not look like it would promote consistency. I will be patient and methodical and try the warranty proceedure with Ruger. I agree with Jim H that being polite and kind can go along way. Thanks again for all your help. The bullets are coming from Midway and will be almost a week until they arrive. I will kep you guys posted as to how things work out. Thanks, Peter.

I'm wondering if there's a pressure pad in the tip of the forend that's flat or humped in the middle. That would explain the side to side play in the barrel. Look for marks where the barrel is touching the forend and see if it's resting in two different places. Try filing the pad where the barrel wants to rest so the barrel can return to the same point after firing. A bit of a groove might do it.

Try pushing the barrel the same way before each shot. I would try both left and right and see which side gives the best groups. File a groove on the best side.

Bye
Jack

The forend surface is just like Jack described it. In addition I tried to check the throat area. I used my Stoney Point OAL gauge and two bullets that I have, 139 gr Hornady SP FB
140 gr Nosler Partition #16325. Bad news by my standards. The gauge point is at 2.574 (ogive) for the Hornady bullet and 2.628 for the Nosler. That puts the OAL at about 3.150 and 3.165. The bullet would not stay in the case set that way. That is about .100" distance off the rifling. I have never had a rifle work well with this situation. Maybe it is throated for 175gr bullets? 175's don't give the trajectory performance that I was hoping for. Plus I think they are a bit overkill for Whitetail deer in this area. I have dreamt of a bullet exchange agreement with members so that we don't have to buy a box of 100 only to find out they don't work well in my rifle. Then what do you do with them? I'll put a posting in the Reloading section anyone interested? Honor system even trades!? Thanks guys, Peter.

I have this exact same gun but made in 74. I used to shoot Remington 160 grains through it with acceptable accuracy. Those went out of production and I tried various 140 grain shells. The gun hates those. I was shooting shotgun patterns at 100 yards. Switched to Federal 175 grain and am shooting sub 1" at 100 yards.

Like you I am less than thrilled by the ballistics of the 175 grain... IIRC it is down 22.5" at 300 yards

I received the two factory loads that Ruger wants me to try. These are Federal Power-Shok 140 gr and Winchester Super-X 145 gr Power Point. I usually use a Harris bipod and a sandbag for the rear and shoot prone from the earth. I hope to go some time this week to test it out. I am less than optomistic, but that is a hurdle that I have to go through. Ruger sure has given themselves a big out with their accuracy standard of 1 1/2" at 50 yards. Lets see how it pans out. Thanks, Peter.

Worst case could be that you might have to rebarrel. I'd talk to Ruger first if that is the case. I really liked the old tang safety Rugers. Thought some of the class dissapeared when they went to the Mark II design.

Worst case could be that you might have to rebarrel. I'd talk to Ruger first if that is the case. I really liked the old tang safety Rugers. Thought some of the class dissapeared when they went to the Mark II design.

The 140 Grain Federals where one of the ones I tried that did so dismally. For me.. the Federal silver box 175 grain softpoints are all that I have found that shoot well thus far.

I have seen an M77 7x57 rechambered/barreled into a .280 Rem with decent results.

I have not had good luck with the Federal rifle ammo either. I am just going through the motions of what Ruger wants. If the rifle needs a new barrel, it will only happen if Ruger puts one on for free. It certainly is not shot out in fact I would bet it has been shot very little. I'll keep you guys posted. Thanks again, Peter.

in my opinion you need to throw more powder at it, just the same the 7X57 rugers from that era had throats about a mile long, and yes their subcontracted barrels stunk. if you got a M77 from that era that was a tackdriver you had something, the majority weren't real accurate(accurate enough for what was needed, just not for shooting itty bitty groups). my experience has been that when you have verticle variation you need a bit more powder, however, you should use your own judgement.

Dan, funny you should mention that. The Hornady rep I spoke with said the same thing. I think as the bullet gets heavier (longer) it is harder to stabilize. If it does'nt rain, I will test the Win & Fed ammo today. If the warranty thing does'nt work out with Ruger, I think bedding the forend and using the Hornady 154 gr Spire point flat base bullets set as close to the rifling as they will reach with a fairly fast load will be my best chance. The Hornady 154 gr bullets have about the longest bearing surface of any without going to a 160 or 175 gr. Thanks, Peter.

Long throats on the 7x57, typically. You'll just have to hunt through some factory ammo it likes, or start handloading.

it is interesting to think about how things tie together in terms of pressure, velocity and accuracy. the thing to remember with a factory bbl is that they may occasionally be a bit oversized in terms of bore diameter, but they will never be under. and bearing that in mind, pressure is what gives us consistant performance in terms of velocity and usaully accuracy. modern powders don't always work well with the old school reloading mindset. for insance, i love the ramshot powders and they are some of the most modern powders on the market AND the one thing that i've noticed with them is that their groups always improve as the load gets closer to max. like i say, i love ramshots stuff, my buddy louie has no use for it but he's got a different approach, he doesn't like to push maximum with any of his rifles, even his 7mm rem mag. so he's better off with the older technology powders.
the best thing that you could do is buy a chronograph, you can get a good quality basic model for about $100.00 ... when you get to the velocity that the manual states then you are where you need to be. my 25/06 is 100fps slow compared to the nosler manual and i have a mauser that i rebarreled to 280 with an adams and benett bbl from midway that is over 200fps slow. the 25/06 shoots well enough that i don't worry about it, but the 280 shoots best a few grains over published maximums.

something that comes to mind after looking at the load you've listed is the cci 250 primer. i use a lot of cci 250's and really like them, but for that load you really don't need them. in fact that may be you problem, i doubt it, but i have read more than once that magnum primers aren't as accurate as standard primers. that is something to consider... as i sit and think about that i have to question that thought, i think it would give more horizontal variation or else just put shots everywhere. the verticle stringing tells me you need a bit more powder. i'd bump it a grain and see how it does, then mabey go 1/2 grain increments from there. she'll shoot, just be patient.

I spoke with Coy at Speer yesterday. He was extremely helpful. He also suggested that I use standard primers such as CCI200's or other similar brand. He thought that the energy of the magnum primer could actually bump the bullet out of the neck prior to the ignition of the powder. I think this goes back to a neck tension type issue. In their manual their test rifle was a Ruger M77 and one of his coworkers has one that needed to have the bullets crimped at the cannelure to get it to shoot well. He said that the rifle will shoot sub one inch groups with their 130-145 gr bullets. Coy felt that IMR4350 or H4350 works very well, as does IMR4064 and RE-19. He also stressed that I should check the concentricity of the bullet in the cartridge case.
I also spoke with Ruger who encouraged me to send the rifle back to them. This is my first step and when it returns I will try some of these tricks as necessary. I will keep you posted. Peter.

Although there may have been problems with Ruger barrels etc., it really sounds like you've pinpointed a beddng problem. Hopefully Ruger will work it out for you. If not, you still have some options as far as diy bedding 'fixes'.

I had to give at least another try! I followed Coy's advice and switched to standard primers, loading 42gr IMR4064, CCI 200 primers, and Hornady 154gr bullets set to an oal of 3.074. Way long, but this leaves them about .025 off the rifling. I rolled the loaded cartridges and there was no appreciable bullet wobble. The necks were a bit tight in my new New Diension dies. The necks measure about .3182 loaded and the neck on the fired case measures about .324. SAMI max is .321. The result was....not much if any different than before. The neck and chamber may be a bit loose, but is that causing the poor accuracy?
A local gun shop has a M77 MKII in 6.5x55, and I can test their rifles and then decide if I want to buy. Being frustrated with the 7x57, I took this one to the range the same day and fired some handloads of 45.2gr of H4350 with CCI200 primers and Hornady 140gr bullets. This rifle shot groups that patterned a little different than the 7x57, but were only a little better. The price on this used rifle is quite high, so it will probably go back to the retailer. It has a Leupold 3-9x scope.
While I have both rifles together I got the bright idea to study their bedding (again). I had not had the MKII out of the stock yet, so I took it apart first. The action screws were all appropriately tight and I bet it has never been apart. I began studying the design and contact areas where the action sits on the stock. I noticed that the front angular screw seems to be intended to pull the action rearward and down into the stock to provide a good tight purchase between the recoil lug and wood and the flat bearing surface to the wood. Seems logical to me. I think I would tighten this screw first, at least pretty snug. The contact at this location was quite good on both rifles. No issues there. Toward the rear things are not quite as pristine. The two rifles I have discussed are different toward the rear due to the different triggers and safety systems. They are quite similar though. On the M77 7x57, the not so good things are that the action has raised square bumps right and left about 3/4+" forward of the bolt cut out. The stock inletting is flat. These bumps have forced quite an impression in the wood. The bad part is that on the right, there is significant contact at this point. On the left, this bump is barely catching the wood. There seems to have been motion at this location as there is black staining in the wood. There is also light contact at the action shoulders right and left of the tang, but at least this is symetrical. The contact at the tang screw looks quite good. On the M77 MKII 6.5x55, a similar condition exists only the stock has been roughed out differently and cut more generously. Again though, there is a one sided contact point below and inside from the bolt release. The other contact areas seem quite good. On both rifles there are contact points on the action bedding that are not the same right to left providing the possibility of torsional stress on the action in the middle and toward the rear. The barrel to stock contact at the forend is the same on both rifles where there is a small pad providing a bit of upward pressure at the tip of the foreend. I then wanted to look at the bores again. I had studied the 7x57 bore quite a bit as stated earlier. I looked at the 6.5x55 bore as best I can with a flashlight. The rifling at the muzzle looks like brand new. The crown looks very good and there is no evidence that I can see of problems. I studied the residue from firing the rifle. It looks good. I tried to look in from the chamber. This is difficult, but there are no obvious horrors. I held the two rifles side by side and compared the muzzle ends and the bores. The 6.5x55 looks much more impressive than the 7x57. The rifling on the two rifles is significantly different. The 6.5x55 has fairly wide lands whereas the 7x57 has very narrow lands and quite wide grooves. There was evidence of copper jacket transfer in the grooves on the 7x57 and not on the 6.5x55. What does all this mean? I don't have a clue! Could be a combination of bedding and barrel. I think I should stick with plan A which was to return the 7x57 to Ruger to have them look at it. I would not be surprised if they rebarrel it. I can buy time and hang onto the 6.5x55 until the 7x57 returns. At least it is an option. :confused: Peter.

Have you tried putting some paper or cardboard from a match book under the foreend? Sometimes that is all it takes and is cheap. If that works glue a pieceofwood the exact thickness ti the channel.

BC Hunter, The forend has a pad in the wood that provides up pressure. At one point I folded up paper and put it in the channel around the barrel to take up any lateral movement. It did not seem to make any difference. I wish it were that easy. Thanks for the suggestion, Peter.

I (finally) sent the rifle to Ruger. They called today and reported that they want to replace the barrel. The replacement will not have any sights because they no longer produce that caliber with sights. I use a scope, so I don't need the sights although they were very nice. I told them it was OK. It will be about 4 weeks. I am quite pleased. I will keep you guys posted. Thanks again for everyone's help. Peter.

glad to hear they are taking care of you on that. by any chance did they offer you choice of caliber since they where re-barreling? just curious, not that you want anything differant, but i thought maybe ruger tried to go out of their way to please ya.

Jim, I did not ask. I had thought of asking that question, but I figured that on a rifle made in 1971 I should not push my luck. I was also busy at work when I called the lady at Ruger back. I had been dreaming of 6.5x55:), but 7x57 is darn good by me!;) It will probably be about 4 - 6 weeks before I get it and have good weather to try it at the range. Thanks again, Peter.

Pintopete,

I have used JB Compound on a patch wrapped around a brush to mend new/old bore problems.

HG

Peter, I have the exact same rifle as your's and it is a shooter. As mentioned by many, Ruger did not produce their own barrels at that time and you got what you got screwed into the receiver as far as barrels were concerned. Some good, some bad, and some just terrible. Most of that original run of 7X57s shot terrible. Some people back then advertised accuracy jobs on Ruger M77s with a guarantee of 1" or less at 100 yds and there was always a disclaimer in the ad saying "except for 7X57 caliber". Some out there might remember the ads and who did them. The original run were all long throated. You might see if Ruger would return the original barrel to you with the rebarreled rifle.

You might see if Ruger would return the original barrel to you with the rebarreled rifle.
while it would make a dandy tomatoe stake i would bet the farm and everything else that Ruger wants no part of that barrel gettting back out into the public.

So today the UPS man again pulled up in front of the house. My kids ran to the door and yelled out "don't bring anymore packages for our Daddy". The UPS man grinned. There was a long distinctively shaped box. I excitedly opened it to find the M77 7x57 inside. The rifle looked quite nice. I dug through and found the packing slip that reads "refinished/reblued; barrel replaced; repair, safety function check, proof test, and range test firing have been completed". I then looked closely at the rifle. It has infact been re-blued and the barrel replaced. The new barrel measures 22" long. I am not sure what the old one was. It is a typical Ruger sporter weight (light). No sights as agreed. I continued to study it and the action also looks like new due to the re-blue. The bore shows evidence of the test firing. Nice job. Outstanding service. Hopefully it will shoot well. I bought some RE-19 and I still have some IMR4064 along with some H4831SC. I have 120 V-Max, 139 Hornady SPFB, 140 Partition, 150 Rem Cor Lokt, 154 Hornady SPFB, and 175 Rem Cor Lokt. Does anyone out there have a pet load for me to try? Thanks for everyones interest. I will give you a range report when the weather improves. Peter. :)

All this sounds like my #1 in 7x57. It is an early 80's model and has a very long throat. It is a beautiful rifle but is so darn finicky that I don't trust it. I have often thought of sending it back to Ruger to have it rebarreled.

i have an 80s model 77 in 7X57. Mine has shot well with several loads but it's favorite is a max load of Win 760 (from the Hornady manual) and a Nosler 140 grain solid base bullet.

Hello

I have a late build, last year if I remember correctly, M77 tang safety 7x57. I was looking for a roberts, but have 3 7mm's so plenty of reloading stuff, and love the bc of 7mm bullets. This is a very lightweight gun, and I prefer the tang safety being used to it from my 25-06 midweight barrel tack driver.

I took a sierra 120 soft point bullet, loosely installed it in a new case and closed the chamber. The oal touching the lands is 3.125" so I suspect it has a long throat.

I plan on loading some rounds w/ 140 gn ballistic tips for their long body, with 4350 and 4064 and firing a few out back, but I am afraid it too may need rebarreling.

Pete, I would appreciate Ruger contact information, and any recent information on how it is working out.

Thanks
Allen

I briefly owned a Ruger M-77 in 7 X 57 m/m and I also could not get it to group very well with any load or weight of bullet. I was told that the throat of the chamber was a bit too long and the bullet had to make a big jump before engaging the rifling. I also noticed the bore would become filled with copper deposits & fouling after just a few rounds. I sent it back to Ruger and they replaced the barrel but it still fouled excessively and was not accurate. This is the only Ruger M-77 I ever had trouble with.

Thanks

I also see a lot of copper fouling at the end of the barrel in mine, and the gun looks to be shot very little in the field as it is in 99% new condition.

It looks like nosler 140's can be seated to fill most of the neck at .010" off the rifling, so maybe mine has a shorter throat barrel.

I am going to try 140 BT and partitions with imr 4350 and 4064 as they seem to give the most velocity/ case capacity, and I have several pounds of it, LOL.

Any additional loads/ OAL greatly appreciated.

Allen

i would also consider using the barnes tsx, it is rather long for weight since it is lead free. i've gotten good accuracy with them in other calibers and i know that they kill like lightning. you might also want to try the new nosler e-tip, it is similar to the tsx and in the 7mm i think that it is a 150gr bullet.

Thanks

I also see a lot of copper fouling at the end of the barrel in mine, and the gun looks to be shot very little in the field as it is in 99% new condition.

It looks like nosler 140's can be seated to fill most of the neck at .010" off the rifling, so maybe mine has a shorter throat barrel.

I am going to try 140 BT and partitions with imr 4350 and 4064 as they seem to give the most velocity/ case capacity, and I have several pounds of it, LOL.

Any additional loads/ OAL greatly appreciated.

Allen

Allen,

You might consider "Fire Lapping" your Ruger. This sometimes helps, and it smooths out rough areas of the bore. It's worth a try if nothing else works.

Two things to mention here. One is that the older M77 had an aftermarket barrel that would respond well to lapping / firelapping, etc. The Wilson production grade barrels used tended to be a bit rough. The other is more simple. The front takedown bolt on M77's is at a 45 degree angle, and you will notice in the stock that there is a relief in the bedding ahead of the takedown bolt hole. Tightening the front screw tends to stress the action, and doesn't do the groups any good. I would try shimming that area first to make sure the action flat just ahead of the takedown hole is supported, and give it a try. The 7x57 is a great caliber, and one of my favorites, but it sometimes can be more tempermental than some other calibers. That goes back to the SAMMI specs, and the use of bullets that vary so much in length. Some chambers favor the long 175 RN, and can be picky with the shorter bullets. Good luck with your rifle!

Thanks

I ended up spending several 15 minute cycles of "copper fouling" remover trying to dissolve the copper, removing small amounts every cycle. Finally resorting to lapping the bore w/ JB, which I had to do to the m77 25-06 after bedding it.

I did loosen all action bolts, tightened the angled lug bolt first, but we will see how she shoots in a few days. I think the 140 ballistic tips are long enough to seat out .010 off the rifling and have plenty of neck support. Only bad thing is, I opened a box of 280's I am loaning to my son in law ( rem 700 classic) and the 7x57 isn't much shorter... but the little ruger is a much smaller profile and lighter gun. The desire to die with more toys has me with 3 7mm hunting rifles, which one to use is the question...lol

Good thing my son will use the 7mm mag, sil 280 rem, and my little 7x57 ( if it shoots decent)....

Thanks again

Allen

Here's wishing you good luck in resolving the issues you are having with your Ruger M-77 in 7 X57 m/m. Please keep us informed on it's function/accuracy after you deal with the issues. I'll try to think of thing you might try to help you improve the accuracy. One other thing: make certain (I am sure you have) the stock screws are secure. Remember the middle action screw should be just tighten slightly so it won't bind the action. <Good Luck, Allen>

When I got my Hawkeye the screw under the magazine floorplate was so tight even the gunsmith could barely get it off. No telling how that would have hindered its accuracy, but it grouped 1 MOA right out of the box. I always double check torque on screws before I fire a new rifle; good thing.

I don't have a clue why the torque specs are so high on the screw just in front of the trigger guard! I have run into the same thing trying to remove one the first time. It certainly doesn't help accuracy since the function of that screw is only to hold the guard in place, and there is no bedding area supported by it. You will probably find all current Ruger MKII's torqued that way though.

I don't have a clue why the torque specs are so high on the screw just in front of the trigger guard! I have run into the same thing trying to remove one the first time. It certainly doesn't help accuracy since the function of that screw is only to hold the guard in place, and there is no bedding area supported by it. You will probably find all current Ruger MKII's torqued that way though.

As a general rule, the middle screw should be just tight. The front & Rear should be tighter.

+1 on the guard screws being tight with the middle screw just snugged.

When I got my Hawkeye the screw under the magazine floorplate was so tight even the gunsmith could barely get it off. No telling how that would have hindered its accuracy, but it grouped 1 MOA right out of the box. I always double check torque on screws before I fire a new rifle; good thing.
I just bought a new Ruger 77 in 257 Roberts. My experience with Rugers has not been good. In the past, I've had 2 #1's. One in 243 Win and one in 7X57. I've also had a 243 model 77 and a 77 in 280. IN my opinion, it requires way too much Tweeking to get a ruger to shoot well.
This new 257 shot 2" groups out of the box. When I tried to get the floorplate screws loose, it took my smith and a bench vice to break them.
The "new" ruger trigger is as bad as the old one and not too easy to modify. After getting the rifle back, I took it out and got groups of 1 1/2" at best and still some closer to 2". I also had to free float the barrel because the barrel was wedged into the stock. Way too tight!
That's it for me, I got rid of the rifle.
I bought my Rugers because I always thought they were good looking rifles but they are not known for hair splitting accuracy, at least with the fellows I know.
I would never own a Ruger again. I've just had too many lousy experiences with them. I hope the rifle works well for you. I really do.
It is so nice to buy a Tikka, install the bolt, mount a scope and get tack driving accuracy. That is the way it should be.
I know there are many savage fans on this forum that have also had good luck.
But for me, "Life is too short to buy another Ruger"

My experiences match yours quite closely but I beat you to it......I quit buying Rugers in 1981 after miserable experiences with a M77 in 7X57mm and a #1 in 6mm Remington. Enough's enough.

I just bought a new Ruger 77 in 257 Roberts. My experience with Rugers has not been good. In the past, I've had 2 #1's. One in 243 Win and one in 7X57. I've also had a 243 model 77 and a 77 in 280. IN my opinion, it requires way too much Tweeking to get a ruger to shoot well.
This new 257 shot 2" groups out of the box. When I tried to get the floorplate screws loose, it took my smith and a bench vice to break them.
The "new" ruger trigger is as bad as the old one and not too easy to modify. After getting the rifle back, I took it out and got groups of 1 1/2" at best and still some closer to 2". I also had to free float the barrel because the barrel was wedged into the stock. Way too tight!
That's it for me, I got rid of the rifle.
I bought my Rugers because I always thought they were good looking rifles but they are not known for hair splitting accuracy, at least with the fellows I know.
I would never own a Ruger again. I've just had too many lousy experiences with them. I hope the rifle works well for you. I really do.
It is so nice to buy a Tikka, install the bolt, mount a scope and get tack driving accuracy. That is the way it should be.
I know there are many savage fans on this forum that have also had good luck.
But for me, "Life is too short to buy another Ruger"

If you glassbed your Ruger and change the trigger to an adjustable one; I think you'll be fine. You're correct inthat it does take some work to get a Ruger to shoot like a target rifle. I receive fine accuracy from my Ruger MKII Model 77 in .270 after I changed the trigger and glassbedded the barreled action. I get, on average, about .50" to .75" groups @ 100 yards for 5-shots using 130 grain SPT bullets.

I just bought a new Ruger 77 in 257 Roberts. My experience with Rugers has not been good. In the past, I've had 2 #1's. One in 243 Win and one in 7X57. I've also had a 243 model 77 and a 77 in 280. IN my opinion, it requires way too much Tweeking to get a ruger to shoot well.
This new 257 shot 2" groups out of the box. When I tried to get the floorplate screws loose, it took my smith and a bench vice to break them.
The "new" ruger trigger is as bad as the old one and not too easy to modify. After getting the rifle back, I took it out and got groups of 1 1/2" at best and still some closer to 2". I also had to free float the barrel because the barrel was wedged into the stock. Way too tight!
That's it for me, I got rid of the rifle.
I bought my Rugers because I always thought they were good looking rifles but they are not known for hair splitting accuracy, at least with the fellows I know.
I would never own a Ruger again. I've just had too many lousy experiences with them. I hope the rifle works well for you. I really do.
It is so nice to buy a Tikka, install the bolt, mount a scope and get tack driving accuracy. That is the way it should be.
I know there are many savage fans on this forum that have also had good luck.
But for me, "Life is too short to buy another Ruger"

My Hawkeye shot 1" groups at 100yds right out of the box. My old M77 Mark II in .280 Rem would group just as well. It was made in 1991. Ive always heard that either you get a so-so or a tack driver with Rugers. They've always been good to me and I will continue to stand behind them until that changes.

I've had Rugers that shot well after tuning them and (spending more money on them) to get them to shoot right. To me, that ought to be included in the price of the rifle.
I like the looks of the Ruger, but I think there are many others that are much more accurate.
I'm kinda impatient, and I buy way to many rifles, but I can tell you the ones that will shoot straight right out of the box. I get rid of the ones that don"t.
I wish that Ruger would go to a Tikka trigger assembly, change the way the barreled action is secured through the stock, and do a better job of bedding the barrel. That would go a long way to please their customers, even if the price was nother $75-$100 higher.
I think I have given up on them for good this time.
Thanks anyway.
Good Luck

I have heard about the Rugers that aren't accurate for years but I have yet to have one. After 10 Rugers the worst one I ever had was semi bull barrel 25-06 that had very interesting life before I got it and it still shot 1.5". My 300 Win is an old stainless all weather that shoots about anything at .75 and stuff it likes around .5". I even have have an old 77R here in 7x57 that will print 1" groups. My new Hawkeye 308 shot its first group into .75". I have never replaced a stock, trigger, or did any bedding work on any of them. I've heard about them but haven't owned or had first hand experience with one yet. I hope I never do.

Try 175 grain loads. I had a #1 that hated anything lighter. The 7x57 is an old military cartridge that was based on a heavier bullet, not 140. Its because of the twist rate in the barrel. 7x57 kicks butt. I'd love to have an old tang model with open sights. That was one of the best ones ruger made.

Remember that the Ruger bolt action receivers are castings, and sometimes exhibit some twist as you noted in the bedding. The area behind the recoil shoulder needs consistant contact as does the machined area in the rear tang, but other areas between the screws shouldn't be bearing hard. As I mentioned before, the area just ahead of the front screw needs support too. Think about what happens when you tighten that screw if there is no support right ahead of it? The differences in the rifling you noted are the differences between the barrels they were buying, and the ones they are hammer forging. The 6.6x55 you looked at probably had a hammer forged barrel.

The "new" ruger trigger is as bad as the old one and not too easy to modify.

I love the new trigger. Mine breaks cleanly at 6lbs with very little creep.

pintopete - I read all 4 pages of this thread and I still don't know how your refrubished rifle shoots ...... ya gotta tell us!

Flash I was thinking the same thing!

Two years a go I purchase a new Ruger 300 win mag, stainless, laminated stock, at the range the best I could doo was 3 to 4 " groups at 100 yds.....I glass bed the action and the first one and half inch of the barrel and now all others component being the same it grup less than one inch.

Sorry if Pete chimes in, but we shared information and he sold it several months ago. The good news is mine has a much shorter throat than Pete's did, my 140 Nosler partition loads with .020" off the rifling gives me a little over 3" coal ( sorry, the vault with the ammo's room is under construction).

I gave her one load, 48.5 gns imr 4350, as I only have 2 suitable powders for the Noslers, and had no time to play with it. If it didn't shoot well, the Rem classic in 280 or my 35 whelen would have been packed for deer opener.

At my backyard range I stated sighting in my son's BIL's 1968 ruger m77 in 6mm rem, and after 3 sighters got it spot on at 100 yds. I got 2 to touch, then let him shoot it for a 3 shot 1 1/4" group. Good for deer.

Took me another 3 shots to get the 7x57 1/2" high at 100, then 3 rapid shots for a 1" group, 2 touching.

One thing a friend taught me, which I didn't do, is if you are serious in doing workup loads, bring your best rifle that is a medium kicker and shoot it first. If either you, the rest, the sun or the wind is bad , your 'GOOD" rifle will show a bad group, which means to come back another day for workup sessions, maybe break out the 10-22 or pistols and make it a fun day.

BTW, I took the 7x57's scope ( leupold 3-9 mk2-rings attached) off a bad shooting ruger 77 in 7mm mag a friend gave my son. It shoots 2+ groups at 100 yds ( factory ammo), which is what my 25-06 did before I bed it 25 years ago. So it seems that scope was ok.... now the 7mag will be a winter project for my son to learn on.

Hope this helps someone,

Allen

I promised an update on my re-barreled 7x57. After receiving the rifle back from Ruger with a new barrel I used some recommended handloads. These were with Hornady 139 & 154, Remington 150, and Nosler 140 gr Partition bullets with IMR4064 and RE-19 powders. I varied loads, seating depths etc. The throat on the new barrel was shorter than the old barrel by about .020 - .040" depending on the bullet. A step in the right direction. The accuracy was better than before and within Ruger's liberal standards but I was not happy with somewhat erratic 3"+ groups. I discussed all the details of what I tried with Allen and I pretty much scoured every option. Some of the things I have forgotten by now. The only other thing in hind sight that I could have changed is to use a sand bag or rest further back on the fore end instead of a bi-pod at the swivel. Outside of that I was out of ideas and thoroughly frustrated. It should not be that hard to get consistent 3" groups. Thanks for everyones help and suggestions, Peter.

Yup - get that front rest as far rearward as you can and get the weight of the rifle off the forend (where the sling swivel attachment for the bipod is). Practice breathing/squeezing/sight picture control and see if that doesn't help.

If you have some Varget powder, might try that. Also, don't overlook the 160 gr .284 bullets - found them to be exceptional in a Brazilian Mod 1908 7x57. 'Course, this was an original military barrel with the longer throat and fast twist.

One quick check on most Rugers is well worth doing. Try to move the barrel side to side in the barrel channel, and listen closely. If you hear a squeak you may have a minor problem that different loads won't fix. When the stock is machined, they go up one side of the barrel channel, and down the other with a slightly undersized cutter since any cutter wouldn't be the right size for the entire channel anyway, and the undersized one allows for resharpening. Sometimess that leaves a bit of a high spot in the middle of the channel near the forend tip. During shooting, the barrel will try to move from one side of this "bump" to the other, and that sure does nothing for group size. My Ultra Light .308 was shooting from 1 3/4" to something over 2" groups at 100 yards. I relieved the bump with about two light file strokes, and have since shot three shot groups under 3/4" at 100 yards with a couple of different loads so far. I don't think it gets much better than that for such a skinny barrel.

I had the exact same "problem" on the Boyd's Thumbhole Laminate I bought for my Fireball. There was a small ridge that ran down the center of the barrel channel. I simply sanded it down as soon as I saw it. I haven't experienced any inaccuracy due to a shifting point of impact on the stock. The barrel is not in contact with any place on the stock.

I agree with Kdub- lose the bipod. Use sandbags- and you may need to experiment on where you put them. Sometimes moving the sandbag back, closer to the action, can give a distinct improvement in accuracy off the bench. Use a rear sandbag, too. unscrew the front sling swivel when you shoot off the bench- it'll screw right back in again. The idea when bench shooting is to get the rifle to recoil exactly the same every time. The front sling swivel can catch on the sandbags during the recoil cycle- and if it catches only sometimes, it'll play H*** with your group size.
Bench shooting is a skill in itself.
I like H414, 4350 (anyone's) or Reloder 19 in the 7x57 with 140 grain bullets.

i too had a Ruger 77 in 7X57mm from the same time period that also could barely hold 3" at 100 yards. I suspected at the time that as Ruger was highly successful, they started turning out some garbage and allowed their reputation to carry them. Never did try to accurize the Ruger. Sold it instead.

I also sold everything. Rifle, dies, brass and bullets. In the interim I had acquired a Marlin 336SC in 35 Rem that shoots less than 2" groups with factory Hornady LeverEvolution ammo. Now I can spend my time enjoying shooting and hunting instead of chasing accuracy from a rifle that should have been easy. Thanks to everyone again. If nothing else this series of postings provides for a lot of info for someone with similar circumstances. Take care, Peter.

Hey - I just heard Marlin started outsourcing their barrels! :eek: Sorry- couldn't resist a little rib. Thanks for documenting the whole story Pete -it made an interesting read and I appreciate your not writing in derrogatory\inflamed manner when it had to be frustrating. Gotta laugh a little - you went from one of the most highly debated rifles to about the safest, most agreed upon, firearm ever made. Buddy if YOU couldn't get that one to shoot who could blame ya. Hope you enjoy the Marlin and expect a satsified sigh of relief next trip to the range.