Ruger 458 Lott.... Is it soup yet????

17 January 2003, 09:58

Hi Guys:

I still have not seen the new Ruger 458 Lott for sale in any stores in PA yet.

Did Ruger put this puppy in production or what? Patience is not one of my virtues. LOL

Jim P.

17 January 2003, 11:37

Mikelravy

Ruger has a reputation of announcing products ahead of making them available. My advice to anybody would be to shoot someone elses before buying. I don't think I'm a sissy, but those things kick.

17 January 2003, 11:45

500grains

The Ruger 416 is a bit light and the recoil pad not quite up to snuff in my opinion. I hope that the 458 lott is heavier with a better pad.

18 January 2003, 05:14

PAHunter

Hi Guys:

Yeah, I guess we will just have to wait and see about the weight and the recoil pad on the new rifle.

I have a 458 Win Mag Old Style Ruger, push feed, tang safety, barrel band inside forearm, in excellent condition, anybody interested in buying?

Jim P

20 January 2003, 08:29

RIP

The Ruger No.1 in .458 Lott (stainless & laminate stock) has hit the shelf in Kentucky. It arrived a few days ago at a big dealer's store. I couldn't resist. I wonder if I have the only one in Kentucky? Surely the bolt action will follow soon. [Big Grin]

Will the .458 Lott M77 Magnum have the same bizarre recoil plate on the barrel and no primary action recoil lug as the other Ruger M77 Magnums? Probably so.

The old fat barrel Ruger .416 Rigby was too heavy, at 10.75 lbs?

Now the slim barreled ones are too light at about 9.5 lbs?

There is just no way to please everybody!

Viva la difference.

The .416 Rigby CZ with the slimmest barrel of all is about 9 lbs., +/- a few ounces depending on it's highly variable wood.

The CZ 550 Magnum in .458 Lott (converted from .458 WinMag) might still need a new safety and a new stock to please most.

One will get a lot of value for the bucks with the CZ, however, and end up with two recoil lugs and a properly glass bedded stock after the work is done. One can also chop of the 25" barrel, change the front sight and add the barrel band swivel base. The express rear sight is integral to the barrel.

If only Ruger would get rid of the "recoil plate" and put a standard barrel mounted secondary recoil lug on the barrel, and an action recoil lug on the M77 Magnum, like the standard Mark II M77 actions ...

Then the Ruger would be something indeed, with it's classic express stock, three position safety, integral quarter rib barrel with express sight imbedded there, barrel band swivel base and front sight.

Warts and all, I still want one too.

20 January 2003, 18:40

ALF

/

21 January 2003, 02:33

Hobie

quote:
Originally posted by ALF:
Ron:

There is something about the Ruger M77 that I do not get and that is it's inherent ability to kick the enamel of your teeth:

... the thing was a shear horror to try and shoot of a bench.

Then I fell in love with the M77RSI and got a hold of one in 30-06 and the same thing, it plainly just kicked itself out of my life.

Alf,

I've shot rifles by the major makers (Remington, Winchester, and Ruger) chambered for common cartridges (.30-06, 7mm Rem Mag and .338 Rem Mag). I find that the felt recoil is less in the Ruger than the others. I submit that this is a function of our relative builds. I am 5" 8ï¿½" and otherwise average in all other applicable dimensions. Whether you are bigger (likely I think) or smaller, I can see how this could easily affect how the stock works with you. Of course this applies to everyone else as well. When possible, I'd suggest shooting a candidate rifle BEFORE purchase.

21 January 2003, 03:01

jeffeosso

quote:
Originally posted by DaggaRon:
The Ruger No.1 in .458 Lott (stainless & lamina
The CZ 550 Magnum in .458 Lott (converted from .458 WinMag) might still need a new safety and a new stock to please most.

Hmm, I wonder who that would please, bunchs?? [Big Grin]

Morning RAB, hope you have a great day!!

I tried to let Mike have me turn his 602 458 into a lott, but it was the LIGHTEST 458 I've ever handled. The stock reminded me of a "Scant stock" 1903a3. That barrel is going on a mexican mauser of mine.

I hope ruger brings it out in a 24" heavy tube, like a pacnor #6 or a shilen/douglas #5... and they do keep it slightly nose heavy. I would rather winchester bring it out, but they don't do quarterribs or nice sights.

jeffe

21 January 2003, 15:55

PAHunter

Hi DAGGARON: That sounds lika a nice score on a Ruger #1.... Let me know what load you are working on for the Lott.

As far as recoil goes, my 458 win mag in my older M77 isn't that bad. And that's with that hard rubber pad on the end no recoil pad per say.

I found my 416 Rem Mag & Rem 300 Ultra Mag, felt recoil was worse than the Ruger. That was before I had them braked. Now they are both pussy cats.

The 458 Lott we shall have to see....

22 January 2003, 04:30

RIP

Alf,
Must be just the traditional Ruger butt pad of hard rubber. I think the rifles are otherwise well designed for recoil handling. The Ruger stock is unbeatably classic.

Jeffe,
Hopefully the Ruger 77 Magnum will be about 0.750" at the muzzle. The No.1 is still 0.810" at the muzzle, in the stainless .458 Lott.

PAHunter,
My .458 Lott load is set in stone:
F215 primer.
Reloder 15 powder: 84.0 grains with solids, 85.0 grains with softs, of 500 grains, any make of bullet or brass should be O.K. This shoots to the same POI of the Hornady factory solid load, and they are around 2240 fps from a 25" CZ barrel.

I expect the 24" Ruger to do about the same: 2175-2250 fps with the Hornady factory stuff, softs and solids. Their 500 grain factory soft loads shoot about 50 fps slower than their 500 grain factory solid loads, and their velocities are closer to 2200 fps than the advertized 2300 fps.