Winter is upon us here in S Central Alaska, and most likely the range visits will be few, due to short days and snow.

So, a winter experiment with Ruger customer service is in order, regarding an inaccurate rifle.

The rifle is a Ruger 77 MKII 7mm08 stainless. I picked this one because it's new and not been modified, so that eliminates a whole bunch of conversation with CS.

I usually just get rid of Rugers that won't group well, or consider the action as a donor for a project. But lately I've been thinking - What's wrong with that? Why shouldn't I expect Rugers to be accurate?

It's no problem for me to find a Ruger 77 MKII that won't shoot accurately. I can just pick one of several from my stash. I do have two with factory barrels that are accurate, just for the record, and the accuracy was obtained when I switched from the factory stock to a Hogue drop-in stock.

Anyway, I called Ruger customer service, and asked what they could do to help me with a rifle that is not accurate. We went through the expected conversation about whether I had shot handloads through it or not. Naturally I said that I shoot only factory loads, to avoid that trap.

We discussed whether the rifle has been modified or not, and I informed her that I put the rifle in a Hogue stock so the barrel is free-floated. No other modifications to the rifle.

She said that the factory stock puts pressure on the barrel at the forend tip to keep the barrel from moving. So, by free-floating, that is the problem. Also, she insisted that I needed to go to a "gun dealer" and have the front guard screw torked to 95 pounds, and firmly hand tighten the other two screws. Again, this is all to keep the barrel from moving.

I had a brief discussion about what she meant about "moving". I asked if she meant the barrel moved in relation to the receiver, or just walked about, with the receiver in tow, or independently, but that conversation went nowhere.

I agreed to put the rifle back in the factory stock, and tork the front guard screw as instructed, then call her back with the results of range testing.

Anyway, the point is that I plan to follow along with whatever direction Ruger Customer service leads me, and report the results here.

Hopefully this will be interesting. Predictable? Maybe. I'm expecting an exercise in frustration, but open to a surprise. I figure what have I got to loose, since the rifle isn't accurate now, and my options are the normal - get rid of it or re-barrel it.

KB

I hope that was 95 inch-pounds and not foot-pounds on the front screw. Big difference.

This is only the beginning. Actually, I don't remember inch-pounds or foot-pounds, but it doesn't matter. Honestly, I'm going to tighten the damn screw, by hand, and shoot the phucking rifle. I consider the tork wrench absolute BS, in part because such a thing is not available to the average Ruger owner, and isn't commonly used with other makes of hunting rifles. I also consider the barrel "moving" as BS too, but I'm playing along to see what becomes of it. Should be interesting.

I have a 30 year bone to pick with Ruger, and seems like a good winter project. Maybe due to age of the issues, it could now be considered a boner.

KB

Interesting experiment and a good winter project.

Please keep us posted......

KB, you really need to have the screw torqued to 95 inch pounds. If you don't you really have no valid complaint and your experiment is over with. I doubt it will help but you still need to follow thier advice or your experiment is flawed.

I went through this years ago with a .270 RSI. Mine wouldn't do any better than 4" at 100yds. After several calls the answer I got from Ruger was that was within factory specifications

Needless to say I no longer own that rifle. I use to hate Ruger M77's with a passion for that exact reason. Funny thing is, now the most accurate rifle in my safe is a custom M77 MKII and it's chambered in a .264WM of all things. A cartridge that has a reputation for being very finicky.

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
KB, you really need to have the screw torqued to 95 inch pounds. If you don't you really have no valid complaint and your experiment is over with.

you still need to follow thier advice or your experiment is flawed.

I went though this years ago with a .270 RSI. Mine wouldn't do any better than 4" at 100yds. After several calls the answer I got from Ruger was that was within factory specifications

Terry

OK. I consider that good advice. I'll see what I can do to make the 95 inch pounds happen. That's the kind of feed back I'm looking for. Keeps me straight.

Looks like maybe we have something in common, after all.

Regards,
KB

Sears sells an inexpensive inch pounds torque wrench. If you don't want to spend the cash on something you'll only use once in your life, stop by a transmission shop and see if they won't torque it for you. It's a common tool for them.

Terry

Kalbuewy what is a inaccurate rifle to you. Bad Rugers must flock to you and if you hate them so much why to you keep buying them.

Personally I belive I have around a dozen Ruger rifles in the house. The worse bolt was a 338 win mag a 2 inch gun after bedding and finding the right load it is now a 1.25 inch gun plenty good enough for elk to 400 yards or so. I don't plan on shooting p dogs with it. In contrast to that one my freinds 338 wm MKII stainless we brought green box remingtons to shoot up and get brass after seveal sub .75 inch groups with that ammo I just said why reload for this one

The worst shooting bolt I ever owned was 700adl 300 win mag it wouldn't keep a mag full on a 8 inch paper plate. After bedding free floating the barrel it is now a .75 inch gun.

I think you most likelyshould just sell all your rugers stop buying any more and save yourself lots of stress.

I've gotta ask the obvious question, if you have so many inaccurate rugers and the others take something extra to make them work, why the hell do you own/buy so many?? Is it just you have the same experience with all other brands of factory rifle and therefore it doesn't matter?

Red

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
Kalbuewy what is a inaccurate rifle to you. Bad Rugers must flock to you and if you hate them so much why to you keep buying them.

I think you most likely should just sell all your rugers stop buying any more and save yourself lots of stress.

A couple of peeves have gotten on a rip lately. Must be the short days, and too much computer time. One is internet BS, and another is inaccurate Ruger rifles. It seems that such rifles do flock to me, and it is beginning to piss me off. At least I can say, from first hand experience, there are some Ruger rifles that are accurate. But far more often than not, the Rugers I test are poor in the accuracy dept.

When I say test, I mean that I fire them in the original stocks, and lately I've been putting the barreled action in Hogue stocks, to free-float the barrels, and shoot them that way. The two I have that are accurate, only disclosed their accuracy when relieved of the factory stock, and allowed to float in the Hogue stock. I fire a combo of handloads and factory loads, not the same group of course.

I have Rugers with a custom barrel, and they have been very accurate. BTW, the front guard screw is hand tightened.

It's not too much stress. Lately, I buy them, test, and figure out if its a keeper, donor or goner. It's just that folks like you say things contrary to my experience, and it annoys me. It can't be just me. Usually, I take two or more rifles, not all Rugers, sometimes 4 or 5, to the range at the same time. That way, the barrel is cooling on one, and meanwhile I can shoot another. On any given day, some ammo/rifles are accurate and others are not, so sorting out inaccuracy is no big deal. Besides, inaccurate rifles will also be inaccurate tomorrow, or next week, even with load changes, and scope changes, and stock changes, etc. Likewise for accurate rifles - they usually are accurate with a variety of loads, and a varity of scopes, and different correctly installed stocks.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Dago Red:
I've gotta ask the obvious question, if you have so many inaccurate rugers and the others take something extra to make them work, why the hell do you own/buy so many?? Is it just you have the same experience with all other brands of factory rifle and therefore it doesn't matter?

Red

I have three CZ 550s, with factory barrels, and all were reasonably accurate right out of the box. None were piss poor. I'm not counting the CZs with custom barrels. I have had them glass bedded, along with some other tweaking, and in each case they showed improvment from the bedding. I know that's a limited test comparison, but that's what I have. Anyway, my experience with Rugers hasn't been so good. Improving the bedding, and free-floating has not had such a high ratio successful result, as compared to the CZs. And the out-of-the-box tests with Rugers has been just ridiculous.

I have tested a few CZ'z that I no longer own, and several belonging to friends, and none were in the inaccurate class. The latest was a used 270, Minnesota model, which had been bedded by an amateur. It easily shot 1" groups, and I traded it to my hunting buddy for a piss poor 257 Roberts Hawkeye that I am embarrassed to have given him previously. In my book, if a guy gives a buddy a rifle, it should be an accurate rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
Kalbuewy what is a inaccurate rifle to you?

Not that it makes any difference to your experiment, but just what are your expections on accuracy? X.xx" group of Y shots at ZZZ yds. Just curious. I've never owned a Ruger but it is my impression that the barrels on the older ones could be rough but the newer ones are pretty good.

What I was wondering was why you kept buying them if they usually need work to get shooting and some never shoot well? (and what kind of accuracy are you looking for? I'm not a great shot so rifles unless messed up will outshoot me). My 375 H&H mod 70 shot great out of the box. other than the stock fitting me wrong and recoil therefor sucking.

Red

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
Kalbuewy what is a inaccurate rifle to you?

I'll answer it this way. If I can't get a rifle to shoot an inch group or better, at 100 yards, with some load and hopefully more than one, then it doesn't hold my interest for long. I don't necesarily consider that accurate or not accurate. It's just that I have rifles that will easily do that, and I have no need for lesser rifles.

Now, the so-called inaccurate Rugers I'm talking about shoot 3" to 5" groups, at best.

For comparison, one of the Rugers I have with a factory barrel, Timney trigger, Hogue full aluminum insert Stock, in 300 WM, has shot no more than 1 1/2" groups with everything I've put through it so far. Of the 6 or 7 loads, factory and handloads, some were less than an inch. I consider it an accurate rifle, especially for having a factory barrel.

I haven't tested the other one enough to declare it accurate, a 30-06, but it was accurate with what I've shot in it so far - two loads as I remember. That's a pretty good clue.

When I say "groups", generally I'm talking about 100 yds, three shots, warm barrel. Sometimes it's four shots, and rarely five shots. I always consider first shot, clean/cold barrel into the mix. However, at this moment, I can't think of a rifle that I have, and consider accurate, that puts the first shot - cold barrel - in a significantly different place than the shots that follow in the warm barrel.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Dago Red:
What I was wondering was why you kept buying them if they usually need work to get shooting and some never shoot well? (and what kind of accuracy are you looking for? Red

I can buy them cheaply, and usually get most if not all my money back on resale, unless I go and have custom stuff done to them, such as Timney trigger. It's fun testing them, and always hope for a treasure. I have never had a factory rifle of any brand that didn't need some work (IMO).

I answered the accuracy I'm looking for question above.

Lately, the trick has become sorting out the ones with potential, before putting more money into them. As explained, that has been a much easier task with the CZ, as compared to the Rugers. I'm not sure I could get the extra money I've put into the CZs, back on resale, but I don't plan on selling them either. Reselling Rugers, that have gunsmith money into them, is a losing deal practically every time. In fact, it's a good way to get a good deal on buying a Ruger. It's pennies on the dollar, especialy if it has a quality custom barrel.

KB

I agree 3" and larger is not good. 2" I would probably be fine with since I don't shoot that great. I have a sporter springfield in 30-06 that I bought for my wife, she didn't like (had a brake on it, I agree it was loud bastard). It shot, for me, and honest 100yd 1/2 3 shot group, factor barrel with an installed brake!!!

I have since had the brake removed and recrowned, not shot it again yet but am hoping it is still such a doll. I'm gonna have to buy my wife another gun she doesn't want (any gun will do for her as far as not liking )

Red

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Winter is upon us here in S Central Alaska, and most likely the range visits will be few, due to short days and snow.

So, a winter experiment with Ruger customer service is in order, regarding an inaccurate rifle.

The rifle is a Ruger 77 MKII 7mm08 stainless. I picked this one because it's new and not been modified, so that eliminates a whole bunch of conversation with CS.

I usually just get rid of Rugers that won't group well, or consider the action as a donor for a project. But lately I've been thinking - What's wrong with that? Why shouldn't I expect Rugers to be accurate?

It's no problem for me to find a Ruger 77 MKII that won't shoot accurately. I can just pick one of several from my stash. I do have two with factory barrels that are accurate, just for the record, and the accuracy was obtained when I switched from the factory stock to a Hogue drop-in stock.

Anyway, I called Ruger customer service, and asked what they could do to help me with a rifle that is not accurate. We went through the expected conversation about whether I had shot handloads through it or not. Naturally I said that I shoot only factory loads, to avoid that trap.

We discussed whether the rifle has been modified or not, and I informed her that I put the rifle in a Hogue stock so the barrel is free-floated. No other modifications to the rifle.

She said that the factory stock puts pressure on the barrel at the forend tip to keep the barrel from moving. So, by free-floating, that is the problem. Also, she insisted that I needed to go to a "gun dealer" and have the front guard screw torked to 95 pounds, and firmly hand tighten the other two screws. Again, this is all to keep the barrel from moving.

I had a brief discussion about what she meant about "moving". I asked if she meant the barrel moved in relation to the receiver, or just walked about, with the receiver in tow, or independently, but that conversation went nowhere.

I agreed to put the rifle back in the factory stock, and tork the front guard screw as instructed, then call her back with the results of range testing.

Anyway, the point is that I plan to follow along with whatever direction Ruger Customer service leads me, and report the results here.

Hopefully this will be interesting. Predictable? Maybe. I'm expecting an exercise in frustration, but open to a surprise. I figure what have I got to loose, since the rifle isn't accurate now, and my options are the normal - get rid of it or re-barrel it.

KB

The lack of light is getting to you??
or you do HAVE A SCREW LOOSE!!!
Could not resist!! have a good one
How did the 376 or 375 ?? turn out.

Probably both.

Also, I'm looking for someone to phuck with. It sorta works like lubricant on the screws. Keeps them from getting stuck half-way in or half-way out. That could get pretty bad, if you know what I mean.

I had to stop and think a minute about the 375/376 thing. As I remember, I bought a barrel from you. Damn nice barrel too. PacNor 12" twist, 3 groove - beautiful bore. After pondering it for a while, I sold the barrel, because I'm leaning more towards the 9.3mm. A guy can stand just so much redundency. As I recall, I heard from the guy who bought the barrel from me, and he said he was very pleased with it installed on his action.

Besides, the reason I got the 375 barrel was for a bush whacking rifle, for situations where I might encounter a bear like the one that made the track shown in your post. After thinking about it, I already had a SS .458 barrel that I wanted to use, so I used the magnum action I had for the 458 WM. BTW, it's a Ruger 77 MKII action which had a 338WM factory barrel that was poor accuracy. The 458 is very accurate, and easy for load development. I'm much more comfortable with it, for its intended purpose, stopping a brown bear, than any 375 I could build.

KB

Sounds like you may have talked to the same service rep I did when my RSM wouldn't feed.
Her solutions were:
I was using aftermarket magazine.
The recoil pad I added caused the problem.
The forend tip I added caused the problem.
To fix the problem they would have to install new stock. No, they would not let me send just barreled action in without putting a stock on it, and charging me, before it was returned.
The one comment she made when I asked who makes a replacement magazine for the RSM her reply was, and I am trying to quote this accurately, "Aftermarket magazines are made for EVERY (my caps added) firearm that Ruger manufactures."
Best of luck!

That's why I picked one fresh out-of-the-box. Any alterations is merely an issue for extended and fruitless disscusion, and ultimately excuses for no results.

I have a 77MKII stainless in 308 with a laminate factory stock. I bought it used off Gunbroker, for what I thought was a good deal. It was advertised truthfully. I failed to ask about accuracy. It's been glass bedded by someone who knew what he was doing - just a little in front of the receiver, and around the reciol lug area, and a little in the tang. The rest of the barrel is free-floated. The barrel has been re-crowned. It has a Timney trigger.

I can see what happened. A guy bought a new Ruger 308, and it wasn't accurate. So he put some effort and money into it, thinking perhaps it could be improved. He wasted his money. I bought the rifle for about the price one would expect for a used Ruger 77, regardless of the gunsmith work. It still isn't accurate. I've tried 8 or 10 different loads, factory and handloads. Fortunately for me, the action and stock is worth what I have into it, and I have little doubt that it could be turned into a great hunting rifle with a quality new barrel.

So, this is the kind of rifle that a conversation with Ruger about would probably be useless, because it has been modified.

Once upon a time, I had a 308 Ruger stainless that would shoot about 1 & 1/2" groups, all day, with a variety of ammo. A friend who had good tools, and was a BR shooter, agreed to tweek it. He grumbled later, but finished the job anyway. It helped that I paid him $200. He pulled the barrel. Squared the face of the receiver. Lapped the lugs (that's the part he grumbled about, talking something about galling and such) He checked the bolt face, but said it was OK. He cut the rifling section off, and recut the rifling completely, which set the barrel back significantly. Reinstalled, he writing was on the bottom of the barrel, under the stock line. He re-cut the chamber using a Palma reamer, which has a short throat. Then we re-bedded the barreled action. I had previously installed a Timney trigger.

The improvment was noticable. The rifle would easily shoot inch groups, and liked Rem factory ammo, 180gr bullets. I later needed some quick money, so I sold the rifle for $400. I wish I had not done that, and found an alternative.

You may be thinking - all that trouble and $200 for 1/2"??? Hey, I'm just reporting what happened. I might or might not do it again. But the difference for me is (then and now) the dividing line in deciding to keep a rifle or not. Sometimes it comes down to a choice of keep shopping, or tweek the one ya got.

So there are two examples of the results of tweeking a Ruger. The one that showed improvment shot pretty good to start with. I wouldn't put any money into a Ruger barrel that didn't do OK out of the box. The solution to that is replace the barrel, or get rid of the rifle.

Or, in the case of this thread, with the 7mm08, get Ruger to "fix" it.

KB

I have to go with Kabluewy on this. Ruger is a big name in the business. They should make a rifle that shoots as good as the competition. I like the looks of a Ruger. I like the SS actions, controlled feed, and the safety but I had one of the tang safety model 77's that I never could get to shoot as well as my Remington or Mauser actioned rifles and I lost some trust. Kabluey, Work them over good. Post all the results word for word, Follow all of their instructions to the letter. It can't hurt and maybe the power of your posting the results here may help them to get customer service up to where it is actually customer service. Not just lip service. DW

I borrowed this link from another post on AR, under medium bore rifles. http://www.gunsamerica.com/blo...racy-out-of-the-box/

This is the basis of my post. Notice that they have no test of Ruger, and all the rifles tested are out-of-the-box. This is exactly on point with my dissatisfaction with Rugers. There is no excuse for it. Nowadays, there are other options, which produce the results we only dreamed about a few years ago, or paid dearly for.

Do you own Ruger stock? Now that is the question. http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/RGR

KB

I recently bought a used RSI in 243,and feared the worst,but was pleasantly surprised to find it would do 3 shot 1" groups with the first box of remington ammoI bought for it.Subsequent handloads have all been about the same ,this with the original 4x tasco,and a 2x7 cabelas scope,which was noted to be quite blurry.
My next purchase will be either a leupold 2x7 ,or a zeiss of similar proportion.

The early Ruger 77s were excellent out of the box. I continue to buy Rugers because they fit me perfectly. They come up fast and right for me. I only use the tang safety models for hunting. I just traded into a 77v 1970 serial number in 22-250. I didn't care that it was a 22-250 because I figured it to be shot out anyway. So I grabbed an old box of winchester factory 55 gr and it shoots 5 into .75" at 100 yds. Too bad, now I have to keep it a 22-250. It has an after market trigger that is worth what I paid for the rifle. Probably fitted in '70, it has a stub coming down into the trigger guard and a shoe-like trigger fastened over it that isn't a shoe you could put on anything else. I've never seen one. It is about 3/4-1 lb. I have a Ruger 77rs in .243 which would (last time I tried 20 years ago) put three into 3/8" at 100 yds. 85 gr Sierra HPBT. Rugers were accurate up until about the MKII came out. Too Bad.

Parker-Hale the now defunct British volume "gun house" would guarantee that ALL their rifles out of the box would shoot less than 3" at 100 yards with Norma factory ammunition.

Not great, that's true, but at least it set a minimum standard at which you could get satisfaction.

BRNO supplied ALL their rifles, out of the box, with a test target. So again you knew what you were getting.

Sometimes when we do things different here in "Yurrup" we do them right!

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
I went through this years ago with a .270 RSI. Mine wouldn't do any better than 4" at 100yds. After several calls the answer I got from Ruger was that was within factory specifications

Needless to say I no longer own that rifle.

Terry

My experience exactly.....and that was the very last Ruger rifle to ever cross my doorway....and I'm a non forgetter as that was a rifle stamped with the American 200th anniversary!

I'd been down that road with Savage and Weatherby previous to that (for reasons other than accuracy) so when Ruger proved to be worthless as "tits on a boar" it didn't take more than three guns and they was out.....yes....I went through shit with Ruger for three guns.....Neverfuckingagain!

Don't get me started on Savage and Weatherby.

What's going to take to correct this?....when a Representative from the company contacts me and makes an honest effort to make it right! Until then.....I get to kick their asses on the internet like I just did.

I made it to the range today, and took two rifles. One was the Ruger 7mm08, with the factory stock back on it, and the other was an old push feed M70 in 30-06 that I got a good deal on.

The M70 was one of those with the blind magazine, but I had some bottom metal, so I ordered a Hogue stock for it, and some Leupold two-piece Weaver style bases. Then just assembled the parts myself. Apparantly it shoots pretty good for the first time out to the range. I just shot some old handloads left over from testing in another rifle. This is the first 30 cal rifle I've got that has shot those Woodlieghs anywhere close to decent.

Anyway, the two targets make a pretty good comparison.

Here's the groups from the 7mm08 Ruger. They are five shot groups. Factory Fed 140gr TSX, Factory Rem 140 gr, and some 154 gr Hornadys.







Here's the gtoups from the 30-06 Winchester:

Your 7-08 Ruger shots about as good as my Carcano did with open sights. I can see why you may be a little erked. roger

How about that Winchester?

I bought the damn thing thinking of it as a donor action, and as often happens that makes it a shooter. I can't figure why that works that way.

It is a pleasure though to get a rifle and not have much into it, and it shoots ok. I figure with a little load development, I can get regular inch groups out of it. At this range session, I was just shooting ammo that I had, various loads from previous test in other 30-06s.

KB

Sometimes you go where life takes you. I bought a Ruger 77 ultra light a few years ago because it was a good price. I was curious how it would shoot so I bought a $50 3x9 Burris and put it on it. It zeroed fine and shot at 1". I already had a favorite deer rifle, but one afternoon, mid-season, mid-week, mid afternoon, somebody wanted me to show them around a farm we were going to hunt the next day. I took the ultra light because it was light, I wasn't seriously hunting, and we were going to be walking. I shot a very nice buck through the heart on the run at 200 yds. So, okay, maybe I like this rifle. Next year same thing, 200 yds running. Third year same thing. So now this is my main deer gun. I wish I had put a better sciope on it in the first place, but I'm not going to touch a screw on this thing.

My Ruger 7mm08 is off to customer service, as soon as I can get it boxed up and in the mail. They offered to pay for the shipping.

KB

I have experienced a lot of fussy Rugers. I tend to agree Ruger on how tight the front action screw needs be. I worked with a difficult Ruger in 257 Roberts for 10 years 3 pages of different loads.

Rebedded it 3 times. Finally saw it had a bent barrel Ruger rebarreled it, no charge.

I converted 2 RH Rimstocks to LH in Rugers and could not get them to shoot till I duplicated, the front bedding pad up pressure. Every time the rifle quit shooting well. The front action screw had loosened?

Bought a new LH Ruger Hawkeye in 7-08 shot OK till I messed with it. Front action screw was crazy tight, as has been every Ruger that came from factory. The front action screw had a detent hole drilled in it?

Lots of wood Ruger stocks break, right behind front action screw, and In my opinion need to be bedded. Or held tight so action will not move in stock. My 7-08 stock squeaked and was poorly bedded looked to be rushed to get it in production.

I have had good reasults by bedding action mortise and leaving front pressure point alone, but our dry SC AK weather will change forend up pressure. So I bed the forend tip to seal wood after wood stabalizes to our climate.

Just shot the 7-08 yeaterday and it shot a 3 shot group under .48" from worst around 2.5". Oh and the Ruger does not feed all that well!!!

From the looks of your targets, Lothar Walther must be Ruger's barrel supplier!

LOL!