I need some additional input on a Rugger77 SS/Laminate 338WM for converting to either a 458WM or a Scovill/Atkinson style 375H&H(similar to "458's" rifle).
I've just about settled on using the Ruger and have found a suitable candidate, but have a few questions I need answered before I commit:

1). Is it true that the current stainless Ruger has a problem w/ excessive galling?

2). (W/ a crossbolt added in front of the magazine box and bedding) Will the factory laminated stock hold up to 458WM recoil?

3). If converted to 375H&H (like "458's" Scovill/Atkinson conversion), which 375HH magazine box is/was used (the Ruger RSM box?)?

I've had limited time to search the archives and would appreciate any input pro or con to my project.

Thanks. Gary

While I can't adress most of those questions I can adress one.

Will the factory laminated stock hold up?

The laminated stocks will probably hold up to being used as AXE handles.

A more important questions is will your shoulder and collar bone hold up?

AllanD

I rebarreled an older Ruger 77 to 458 Win Mag and have not had a problem with the orginal walnut stock. I did glass in the recoil lug and bottom of the action. Somewhat of a pain in the arse process. Be sure that the rear action screw does not touch the stock or you will be asking for a split stock. The laminated stock should give you no trouble. I have ordered a laminated stock from Richard's Microfit for my 458 primarily for the higher strength of the laminate to resist splitting.

quote:

Originally posted by GaryVA:
I need some additional input on a Rugger77 SS/Laminate 338WM for converting to either a 458WM or a Scovill/Atkinson style 375H&H(similar to "458's" rifle).
I've just about settled on using the Ruger and have found a suitable candidate, but have a few questions I need answered before I commit:

1). Is it true that the current stainless Ruger has a problem w/ excessive galling?

2). (W/ a crossbolt added in front of the magazine box and bedding) Will the factory laminated stock hold up to 458WM recoil?

3). If converted to 375H&H (like "458's" Scovill/Atkinson conversion), which 375HH magazine box is/was used (the Ruger RSM box?)?

I've had limited time to search the archives and would appreciate any input pro or con to my project.

Thanks. Gary

1. Galling is not a problem with stainless Ruger 77 Mark II rifles. It might be with a stainless Mini-14, and I have seen that happen, put a little Break Free CLP and a slam shut of the action, and that one has functioned fine since. The chrome-moly Mini-14 might do the same until broken in. Don't worry about it in a bolt action.

2. No. You must crossbolt fore and aft of the magazine box, pillar bed, and use a barrel recoil lug with crossbolt there too. I would even put an axial grip bolt/rod in too, epoxied and hidden. The cheap laminate is not as strong as good walnut. Birch veneers and glue? Come on! They are pretty though.

3. I believe they fabricated their own box to fit the specific way the action was opened up for .375 H&H. Custom work.

I have broken two factory laminate stocks on my 77 MKII shooting very mild 338 Win Mag loads. The second stock was then glas bedded and received a crossbolt. Since then, it has not broken again.
I agree with RIP that the Ruger laminate stock needs some extra work in order to stand up to the 458.

I built 2 416 taylors on mkII stainless actions both trun out fine. But I used the syt stock.

thanks all for the input!

AllanD - I think this rifle would weigh approx. 8 1/2 pounds. I'll have no problem w/ the recoil, but I'm concerned the laminate stock will. I do want a mid-wt SS/Lam 458.

Old Elk - I like the fit and feel of the factory laminate. I was hoping if I added at least one crossbolt behind the recoil lug (just like my RSM), a good bedding job and relieve the area around the tang..the stock would hold up. I was hoping I didn't have to add a ton of weight to make it work.

RIP - 1. I've lost count how many times I've been told the Ruger suffers from excessive galling (just in the last week). I could not verify any of it but I did note that most who told me this were against the Ruger.
2. I've never seen a forward barrel recoil lug (second lug) that had an extra crossbolt run behind or thru it in the forend. It doesn't seem there would be enough room in the barrel channel of the forestock for this third crossbolt. I must be reading your reply wrong. Can you give me more details on your second lug for the Ruger?
3. I'll need to find the write-up on the Scovill/Atkinson 338 to 375 conversion. I thought for sure that they only used factory inventory parts (magazine box and follower). I thought it was the magnum box and follower (RSM) but was unsure. I'm almost positive they didn't open up the action at all. I thought they only moved the bolt stop and ejector back a bit and removed a small amount of wood from the rear of the magazine cut out to fit the longer box. I think "458" owns this rifle now. Maybe he can shed some light on this.

JV - I would think any of them could fail if not bedded properly, this was my concern. I hope Ruger at least replaced the two that broke.

p dog - I've been going back and forth on this rifle between the 416Taylor and the 458WM. I've wanted the 458 but the Taylor is a close second. Do you see the need in adding a second recoil lug on the barrel? Will the Taylor work well w/ a 20 - 22" barrel?

Thanks!!

I put a 25 in barrel on mine. I do not have a 2nd recoil lug but I glassed bedded it and added weight.

With out the weight and glass bedding it weighted 8lbs 6 oz It nows weighs 10lb on the head loaded with sling. Others here sy they like heir 22in barrels.

I found Hammer's post on his SS/Lam 458 Lott (WOW!!) conversion. Maybe he'll give more details on how Atkinson reinforced/bedded his stock.

Phil Shoemaker, do you have the Scovill/Atkinson Ruger? I thought I read a positive post you authored on this rifle but cannot find it. What are your thoughts on going the 458WM route instead?

Gary

GaryVA,
You are right about using the Ruger factory .375 H&H box and follower. Rifle #211, Jan.-Feb.2004. They just opened the magazine well to the rear and moved bolt stop and ejector back, as you say. That is pretty slick.

I would go to all the reinforcing extremes on the laminate stock, for a .458 Lott. The barrel lug crossbolt can be just a piece of all-thread or cut off steel bolt of 1/4"to 3/8" diameter buried in epoxy, or hidden, in the forend. It doesn't have to be a through-and-through visible.

Thanks RIP,

Did you read the post I dug up on Hammer's 458? Wow!! It looks like his rifle has a very trim barrel band w/ a recoil lug on the bottom (I like that). I may be wrong, but it seems that if the rear of this lug was mated square against a small pc. of flat metal inletted and bedded inside the barrel channel (like you are suggesting), would provide for a good deal of strength w/out adding too much weight. Maybe then a good crossbolt directly behind the main recoil lug, pillar the action screws, devcon titanium bedding/marine-tex skim from tang to the forward lug, then relieve around the rear portion of the tang. This may be more than enough to support the recoil of a 458WM and keep the weight down (I hope).

My top goal was ending up w/ a 458WM, but I was prepaired to drop down to a 416Taylor (to reduce the recoil a bit) if needed, or if that was still too much for the factory stock I would drop down to the 375Taylor or H&H. The good thing about it is I have quite a few options and would be well served by any of them.

Thanks again for you input/insight, it has been very helpful. Gary

GaryVA,
Yep, checked out Hammers thread. Nice. Bill Atkinson did Scovill's too, eh? He must know what he is doing (understatement).

I have an 8 pound .458 Lott made from a Mark X barreled action that started as a .458 WinMag. It is in a Brown precision fiberglass stock, and I have a barrel lug and a gob of epoxy around a hidden crossbolt there too.

I would sure trade mine for a Ruger conversion by Atkinson.

Please forgive my bad on the magazine box. Sumtimes I get confused. May have sumthing to do with 8 pound .458 Lotts.