I have one of these rifles, in .416 Rigby, and have seen from the pictures in the NRA American Rifleman piece that the bedding system has not changed with the latest production .458 Lott.

In August 1990, Saint Finn reviewed the then-new Ruger RSM in American Rifleman:

"Most bolt-action rifles have a recoil lug under or just at the front of the receiver ring, which leaves only a relatively narrow recoil shoulder in the stock between the lug and the magazine well to take the force of the recoil. It is less than an inch thick in the Model 98 Mauser, slightly over an inch thick in the standard Ruger Model 77, and only a little more substantial in the Remington Model 700. Consequently a rifle chambered for a hard-kicking cartridge such as the .375 or .458 Mags. is often fitted with a second recoil lug located on the underside of its barrel, in addition to having the recoil shoulder and web between the magazine and trigger wells of its stock cross-bolted.

" I was therefore somewhat startled when I took the barreled action of the Magnum Ruger out of its stock to find that it bore no recoil lugs whatsoever. Instead there is a boss around the front action screw hole that engages a hole in a long metal plate that is held in the stock with what appears to be the fore-end screw. This recoil plate (as Ruger terms it) has a massive recoil lug attached to its front front end that bears against a recoil shoulder in the fore-end almost 6" ahead of the magazine well. Thus there is considerably more stock material supporting the recoil shoulder than with most other rifles," .... (RIP: By this Finn means most other smaller bore rifles having only integral action recoil lugs without secondary recoil lugs on the barrels.) ... "and the chances of the stock splitting should be much reduced.

"It is also possible that the recoil plate could swivel a little around the boss on the receiver under recoil to bring the recoil lug into perfect alignment with the recoil shoulder. (Not having a recoil lug stuck on the underside of the barrel may further help accuracy.) There is a cross bolt in the stock behind the slanted front action screw, but how necessary it may be seems moot. "

Little has changed since Finn wrote those words, though Ruger did lighten the Magnum Rifle by a pound with a lighter contour barrel, and the barrel (instead of the fore-end) bears a banded sling swivel base now.

Is this a revolutionary Ruger engineered improvement? It allows one recoil lug (on a plate that falls off the rifle when it is taken out of the stock) to do the work that an integral action lug and barrel lug used to do.

Should we grind the lugs off those CZ 550 Magnum rifles, and the Brevex Magnum Mauser rifles too while we are at it (both action and barrel lugs), and fabricate some neither-fish-nor-foul recoil plates for them?

Or should we solder a standard recoil lug onto the barrels of the Ruger Magnum RSM's?

I am so terribly confused and don't know what to make of this!!!

My 458 HE is on a Ruger 77 with the same recoil
plate.The best way to handle big recoil like
a 450 gr bullet at 3000 fps.Those plates are real strong.Mine has the barrel band in end of stock,
which I recommend for any wildcat like mine or bigger.I like the recoil plate so well I picked up a half dozen along with barrel bands from Ruger; and used them on my Enfields, by making
Enfield lug fit plate.One is a 458HE and other will be the 550HE.(It was a 510 HE with 600 gr at
3000 fps).And they have barrel band in stock also.
So if you want a gun with no split stocks,
that recoil plate along with barrel band,is one way to go.And saves bucks on extra recoil lug on barrel and extra stock bolts.Ed.

I found that amusing also. The fact that he was startled by a design that has been around since at least 1984 (my .458 is exactly the same way) makes me wonder if Finn knows anything really about them at all. You don't need a standard recoil lug on either the .458 or the .416 Rigby. I have both and with many hundreds of rounds through the .416 and well over a thousand rounds through the .458, there is absolutely no need for the receiver mounted conventional recoil lug. I steel bedded the action and recoil plate on both rifles and all has been well for many, many years. IMO it is one of the best designs yet.

Some of the hardcore gunnuts have scorned this system, but apparantly it has proved successful as I have not personally seen any split stocks from this system. Like any other rifle I would bet they would perform better when glassed..

I think the Ruger is the best value in a Safari rifle on todays market..The new ones are almost custom....lots of bells and whistles for a mass production gun....

would someone post a photo of this recoil plate?

All the recoil force comes to bear on the "boss" around the front screw hole on the bottom of the receiver. This is one little nubbin that pokes through the rear end of the recoil plate. This recoil plate is a transfer bar with a recoil lug on its front end that engages the stock about 6 inches forward into the fore-end. This "massive" solitary recoil lug is no larger than a standard primary recoil lug on most actions, and smaller than some.

So we have an "old" break-away-breakthrough from the original Ruger M77 pushfeed .458 WinMag that allows one detachable recoil lug to do the work of two, and a slip-fit system that attaches this swiveling recoil lug to the bottom of the action by the boss around one screw hole.

Startlingly amazing.

KMuleinAK,
Look at the tiny pictures on page 74 of the November 2003 issue of American Rifleman , the NRA pub.

RIP - thanks, I received that issue several days ago and had not peeked at it - been "too busy" - KMule

To paraphrase Jeff Cooper on the DA auto, it seems like an ingenious solution to a non-existent problem.

Clearly, though, it's cheaper to mass produce.

Jeff could be right about the problem, but it certainly would not be easier to mass produce as a recoil lug on the action body is simply cast with the body...

I have seen them modified by using a Remington type recoil lug that is ringed onto the barrel ahead of the threads...why I have not clue.

[ 11-04-2003, 08:47: Message edited by: Atkinson ]

Walt Abe did this on rifles he built many years ago. He had a plate with a slot the receiver recoil lug fit in, and the plate extended up into the forend several inches and had a second lug. And Walt placed the cross bolt through a hole in the plate, just aft of the receive lug. Nice system.

So, it is nothing new.

Regardless, it is a good idea to transfer some of the recoil force up front and reduce the pounding on the slight section of wood in front of the magazine well. I have seen more than one rifle with this portion of wood split out.

I think one area that is rarely addressed is the thickness of the wood around the magazine well. This stuff really flexes in a high recoil rifle!!!! I had a original Schuler rifle in hand a couple of years ago, it had interesting integral "panels" on the sides of the stock, from forward of the receiver to aft of the trigger. Result was nearly twice the normal thickness around the magazine well. Looked nice also.

I have been guilty of epoxying carbon fiber cloth in the wood inside the magazine well to increase stiffness. Jury is still out on this one.

You think that front screw at a 45 degree angle has alot to do with it?

BTT

Some have said Ruger voids their warranty if you take the RSM out of the stock.

If this is true, I guess they just want to protect you from being "startled" to find no recoil lug on the barreled action after you lift it free of the wood and the recoil plate.

quote:

All the recoil force comes to bear on the "boss" around the front screw hole on the bottom of the receiver.

All custom gun builders fit an extra recoil lug on Mauser actions to share the load with respect to heavy recoiling calibers - normally from .375 H&H and up and they typically fit 2 crossbolts in addition to keep the wood together. It would be silly to argue with this logic. RIP is quite correct in his assessment.

Warrior

Hello,
The subject of removing the RSM from it's stock was discussed some few days ago and I had reported ,due to conversation with Ruger, that removal would void the warranty. However, some had said that having doused the rifle in water, rainstorm, etc. felt it necessary to remove to clean/eliminate the water from within stock bedding, etc. Upon recontacting Ruger Serv. Dep't and explaining the situation, such removal is NOT a problem, but altering, bedding, etc. will take you off the warranty list!! If you elect to remove the stock suggest you eat a good breakfast and be ready for a tussle for it is on there w/ a great deal of torque.
Whether Ruger's method of dealing with recoil is innovative or not, the system works very well for me and shoot the 458Lott "a lot" and not with light loads either and no problems.
For a factory, non custom rifle, the RSM is about as good as it's going to get. Go have your military surplus Mauser 98 variant given the full treatment, square bridge and all, and for real "shock and awe..." have a barrel made up like the RSM. Not all, but most will fold at that point and then the RSM becomes a real good bargain. Might mention that someone on the classified section has an RSM in 458Lott for some $1100.00 and that is about what you would pay for a custom builder for a barrel like Rugers.

Interesting thread. While recently invalidating my warranty by taking the action out of the stock in order to install a recoil pad, both my gunsmith and I were "startled" to find the recoil transfer plate described above.

I appreciate the opportunity to study the various opinions on its function. My gunsmith, a Teuton of advanced years, did not think much of the arrangement, but I was not so sure. I am now convinced that Ruger is sincerely attempting to manage the recoil of the big bores. Whether this attempt is effective remains subject to debate, althought I find the arrangement kind of reassuring.

My gunsmith, always on the lookout for something to glass bed, glass bedded the recoil lug on the recoil transfer plate into the stock.

not much room for a cross bolt on the front end according to my smith. he said it is a pretty duarable set-up. he his cutting out a bit of wood so that the he can insert and glass a piece of metal for that odd recoil plate to bang into inside the stock. reckon it will work.

I do agree that it seems to make for a very accurate rifle. And it can be made to hold together with proper glass bedding and a hidden crossbolt or pin between the trigger and magazine, and proper relief of the tang. That should make it O.K. for even the .458 Lott.

I have gotten over the "startle" ... finally, but if Ruger redesigned it to have a lug on the action and a lug on the barrel and two crossbolts ... I would not lose any sleep over that either.