Back in December 08, I bought a 9.3x62 off GB. It has a Douglas barrel on a Ruger MK II receiver. It's not the prettiest thing, but I was planning to just use it, not look at it. Anyway, there was a problem right away because the safety wouldn't lock the bolt down as it should. I think the tip on the little pin was broke off. So I sent just the bolt back to the seller, who is a gunsmith, and he fixed it at no charge. I got it back last week and went to the range today.

Sighting in was no problem. I fired only five rounds, and now it's hitting where I aim at fifty yards. The problem is that it took three trys to get the first round to fire. It took two trys on another round. The other three fired the first try. That makes me nervous.

So, I came home and thought about it. Then I swapped out the firing pin/shroud assembly with another MK II, and drove far enough out of town to fire two shots, which fired with no problem.

Now I notice the indentions in the primers are rather shallow compared to other fired cases I have fired in different rifles.

During all this, I took notice that the indentions in the primers are not centered. Compared to all the other cases I inspected today and tonight, that's unusual. Finally, I just took a look at the bolt face, and darned if the firing pin hole is not centered. I don't think I've ever seen that before. I'm surprised.

Now, I'm not sure what the extent of the problem is. I'm suspecting that it may be difficult to get another bolt out of Ruger, because they may say they need to do the fitting themselves, and since it's a simi-custom rifle now, they probably won't touch it.

I just wanted to see what some of you fellows think about all this while I'm considering my options.

Thanks,
KB

Many military M98 have off center firing pin holes that don't create problems. Excessive off center can cause problems .You might post a photo .
Your comment about light strikes however is more likely to be the cause.That should be investigated.

Kabluey
What brass are you using?
I had trouble with unfired Graf 9.3x62 brass that was undersized and the firing pin was driving the round forward lessening the blow causing "misfires". Once the brass was once fired everything is fine. This may or may not be your trouble. If you are shooting new brass try some in the once fired cases and see if it persists.
I have very few rifles that leave a centered firing pin dent.

Sounds like you need a new firing pin sprung to me, Call Ruger.

Keith

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
I just wanted to see what some of you fellows think about all this while I'm considering my options.

You might not live in the appropriate climate for this suggestion, but those Rugers make mighty fine tomato stakes.

I had a problem with a VZ.24 in 9,3x62 not igniting Winchester WRL primers. It's FP hole location isn't perfect either.

I replaced the FP spring and the problem disappeared.

quote:

Originally posted by onefunzr2:
You might not live in the appropriate climate for this suggestion, but those Rugers make mighty fine tomato stakes.

No offense Dave, but no better words have been spoken by the under informed. Dual square bridge, intregal scope mounts, return to zero, quick release, 3 position safeties, and a tuneable trigger ..

Sounds better than a model 70 to me!

I got your mater stake, RIGHT HERE

quote:

Originally posted by onefunzr2:

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
I just wanted to see what some of you fellows think about all this while I'm considering my options.

You might not live in the appropriate climate for this suggestion, but those Rugers make mighty fine tomato stakes.

You're right Dave, we don't grow many tomatoes here, but those peas with the vines grow well. You have given me a great idea. I'll use my all weather Ruger in the garden all summer to hold the pea vines up, then take it hunting in the fall.

KB

An off center firing pin strike has can be OK within reason. Generally, if the strike is within 1/4 of the diameter of the tip (which is actually quite a lot)it can still work OK while looking awful.
It is possible to bush the bolt and correct this but it is a bit difficult to do correctly and one has to be willing to live with the idea of a repaired bolt. If it was a Savage, you could just throw the bolt head away and get a new one ( some would say you could just throw the whole Savage away but that's another issue). Regards, Bill.

My question would be, Why shouldn't Ruger take a look at it even if the rifle had been altered to hell and back just so the bolt itself hadn't been altered. There doesn't seem to be much logic in the argument that "we won't fix your bolt because you altered your barrel and your stock".

If you send it back to Ruger they will want to replace everything thats not what it left the factory with I know first hand they wouldn't replace a bolt on a mini-30 without wanting to replace the gas block,stock[it had a houge on it]and the barrel it was chambered for another cart.Good Luck

I've had this discussion with Ruger. I suspect they do this upon advice of their attorneys.
KB

KB

Not all attorneys make sense. In fact, I have found that most of them I have dealt with don't make any sense.

It appears that the lesson to be learned concerning defective products from Ruger is that if one purchases a new Ruger product and alters it they should make sure and keep everything they took off of the product so they can replace it if they need to send it back to Ruger.

Everyone has their own perspective. The problem with most attorneys is they have a very skewed perspective. They are either after something, trying to avoid something, or muddying something. Seldom are they after clarity or reasonablness. And they further complicate dealing with them by saying one thing while their aganda is something else entirely. This ain't personal slam or anything like that - I'm just talking about generalities.

Back to the Ruger - I gave up on Ruger factory repairs long time ago, mostly because I don't have a Ruger that stays factory standard very long. So, if it can't be repaired by a gunsmith, then it has to go away.

KB

By email, I contacted the gunsmith who sold me the rifle, and explained the problem. He said he would fix it or otherwise make it right, which is what I figured would happen. So, I'm not too worried about it, but I found it interesting since this is the first time I've seen this problem with a Ruger. Actually, it's the first time I've had this problem at all.

KB

My old bro in law had a Ruger that did not fire as well his would not fire handloads though not all handloads but only the ones he took hunting all of the range ones would fire........
GO FIGURE

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Back in December 08, I bought a 9.3x62 off GB. It has a Douglas barrel on a Ruger MK II receiver. It's not the prettiest thing, but I was planning to just use it, not look at it. Anyway, there was a problem right away because the safety wouldn't lock the bolt down as it should. I think the tip on the little pin was broke off. So I sent just the bolt back to the seller, who is a gunsmith, and he fixed it at no charge. I got it back last week and went to the range today.

Sighting in was no problem. I fired only five rounds, and it's hitting where I aim at fifty yards. The problem is that it took three trys to get the first round to fire. It took two trys on another round. The other three fired the first try. That makes me nervous.

So, I came home and thought about it. Then I swapped out the firing pin/shroud assembly with another MK II, and drove far enough out of town to fire two shots, which fired with no problem.

Now I notice the indentions in the primers are rather shallow compared to other fired cases I have fired in different rifles.

During all this, I took notice that the indentions in the primers are not centered. Compared to all the other cases I inspected today and tonight, that's unusual. Finally, I just took a look at the bolt face, and darned if the firing pin hole is not centered. I don't think I've ever seen that before. I'm surprised.

Now, I'm not sure what the extent of the problem is. I'm suspecting that it may be difficult to get another bolt out of Ruger, because they may say they need to do the fitting themselves, and since it's a simi-custom rifle now, they probably won't touch it.

I just wanted to see what some of you fellows think about all this while I'm considering my options.

Thanks,
KB

Following up. I found a complete bolt assembly on Gun Broker. Took a chance and bought it. Last week it arrived and fits the receiver as though it left the factory that way. Works perfectly and it's all stainless.

I messed around with testing for headspace issues by putting some tape on the head of the brass, and seeing if felt resistance closing the new bolt. No resistance with two layers of tape on new ammo, but good resistance with one layer of tape on cases fired with original bolt.

So, I couldn't resist and took it out the road and fired it twice - no problems noted. The primers look normal - not backed out any - and the indention looks normal depth, but still slightly off-center, but not as much as with the original bolt.

I was wrong about the firing pin hole being off-center on the bolt face. It was an optical illusion caused by the circle on the bolt face, the diameter of the primer pocket, is off-center. This has to mean the bolt is not centered in the receiver. As I said, this condition is not entirely corrected with the new bolt, which the firing pin hole is also centered on the bolt face, but still the strike indention is not exactly centered.

I hope to get to the range soon and sight it in, and in doing so, I'll know if the problem persists. There is the chance that the shoulder of the new ammo is allowing a head space issue, by allowing the cartridge to be pushed forward a little on the first firing. I dunno for sure, but seems to me that the primer would back out a little if that was what is happening.

This is somewhat of a mystery for a non-gunsmith because I dont have a go/no-go gauge. I'm working with two different boxes of Norma ammo. I doubt that the ammo is the problem, but it could be, since this is old ammo. It is also possible that the chamber is a little on the long side, and the new bolt has less head space than the original bolt.

I just want the darn thing to work and be safe.

KB

As a follow up:

I have sighted the rifle in using the new bolt assembly, and yesterday I tested it at 100 yards for accuracy. Only two shots to conserve ammo, but the two hit less than 1 inch apart, about 2 inches high.

The rifle has fired every time, with the firing pin strike very close to center and appears to be proper depth. I think the problem is solved with the new bolt. I think I got lucky.

So, it seems that I have a 9.3x62 Ruger that's ready to go hunting.

KB

Kabluewy:

"Out of center" firing pin strikes are more typically the result of an oversized chamber or an undersized cartridge. Think about it: The undersized cartridge lies in the chamber on its side, sitting on the bottom of the chamber. If the chamber is significantly larger than the cartridge (at least at the head portion) then the primer will be sitting below the centerline of the chamber and the centerline of the firing pin (which should be the same).

Using a once-fired case that is neck or partially sized-only will help solve this problem. The once-fired case is a better fit for the chamber, therefore it is limited in how much below the centerline the primer can be positioned.

I see what you mean. In this case I don't think that is what was happening. I think the original bolt was not centering up when closed. This barrel is a Douglas, and the gunsmith seems to be careful. I don't think he is using a fat reamer.

If the chamber is oversize, then it's likely the off center strike would persist regardless of which bolt I put in there.

I've seen some fired brass from an oversize chamber, and the expansion near the base is evident, and as I remember lop-sided. Seems like accuracy would suffer, with the cartridge not being aligned with the bore.

This rifle seems to be accurate, and the brass shows no signs of ballooning, especially lop-sided.

I'm just glad that it seems to be cured.

KB

Remember, the chamber may be well within spec, but if it is near maximum and the brass is near minimum, then you may experience the problem of an off-center strike.

You don't say what kind of brass you are using, but there always seems to be more compatability issues when the caliber is European like your 9.3 and the brass is American, or vice-versa. Some of this comes from different Euro standards vs. SAAMI standards, and some comes from "rounding" when converting metric measurements to English. This is true of both brass and chambering reamers.

Try this: Fire some new brass with your new bolt and then try shooting it after reloading (using miniumum resizing) with your old bolt. Such an experiment might provide you some insight as to the nature of your problem.

Thanks Stonecreek. I'll remember that for future reference, when I get my reloading bench and outfit set up again.

The ammo I'm using is Norma factory loads.

Now that I'm thinking about it, I certainly hope it's not because of a fat chamber, because for the chamber to be off enough to cause the firing pin strike to be off center as much as it was with the original bolt, the chamber would have to be awful fat.

I remember the fat chamber problem with many Ruger factory chambers years ago. They seem to have tightened up since then. I had a 7x57 Ruger that I actually sent back to Ruger because of the oversize chamber. They said it was within spec and sent it back. If it was in spec, which I doubt, it was way on the side of maximum.

KB

To find out if the firing pin is off center or if the chamber itself is off center, or any other combination of those...take some fired cases and only neck size them. Then fire them and observe the firing pin indentation. I have a custom rifle I built in 6.5x54MS. I bought Norma brass and man is that stuff way undersized. I have a another 6.5x54MS and the Norma brass was undersized for it too. I got the same results you are getting...off center fire pin indentation. After my cases have been once fired I neck size only and the problem went away. Just to give you an idea of how undersize the rear of the cases were I could wrap more then two wraps of Scotch Tape around the web and still chamber them. By the way this is a trick to fire a cartridge that way smaller then the chamber to get it to expand evenly rather then the lop sided you mentioned. Of course multiple firings of neck sizing only will even out the case expansion too. Hope this helps.

Joe

I'm retreving this old discussion because the info herein is still relevant.

Following up, after replacing the bolt, the Ruger rifle I mentioned previousely in this thread - the 9.3x62 - is still firing every time, but the trouble I had with it caused me to be more observant about whether the firing pin strike on the primers is centered or not - on all my rifles. It's not centered on the 9.3x62, but it fires anyway, and it's a lot closer to center than it was with the original bolt.

What I discovered is that the strike is not centered on ANY of my Rugers, but is centered on all my other rifles that I have checked so far, which is most of them. I'm surprised that I haven't noticed this before.

The 9.3x62 with the Douglas barrel tested accurate with my limited test at the range several months ago. But I haven't had great accuracy from any of my other Rugers, and one has a custom barrel, so I'm pretty sure the barrel is good.

This is rather discouraging. I understand what some have said about neck sizing and such, but I don't think that's the problem or solution.

I have tested all the Ruger 77 MKIIs I own except one, and I have tested or looked at the primers of cartridges fired in most, but not all, my other rifles, and for those I have looked at, ALL my Rugers show off-center firing pin strikes, and ALL my other rifles show the strike centered.

I don't know for sure what difference it makes, in accuracy for example, but now that I think about it, except for the 9.3x62, I do know that I have not been thrilled with accuracy from a Ruger - EVER, or at least I can't remember one, and I've thought about it a bit. In comparison, I can think of several other rifles that shot accurately right away, namely two custom Winchesters, several Mausers, and all but one of the CZs I've tried so far.

I'm telling ya'll about this because I want to read other's experiences with this. I have been shooting rifles many years, and frankly I'm surprised with myself that I never really paid much attention as to whether the srike of the firing pin was centered or not. Those days are over. Live an learn, I recon.

KB

You had to buy a new bolt for your new rifle and consider yourself lucky?
I would be rather upset,myself.

I considered it lucky because I didn't have to pay for postage again to send the whole rifle back to the gunsmith, and because I didn't have to deal with Ruger, who I doubt would have been helpful, based on past experience. I consider it very lucky that the bolt worked. I figured the odds were against it. I considered it lucky that the bolt was available on GB in the first place.

Based on the number of posts I have seen on this forum, and others, about the frequency of firing problems with Rugers, I doubt luck has much to do with the initial problem. Looks to me like pure sloppiness in Mfg and tolerances.

I also consider it lucky that the rifle seems to be accurate, considering the pin strike isn't centered, and with the initial problems, and with the lack of accuracy I'm getting with the other Rugers I've tried in the last two years or so. I bought one of those Hawkeyes in 257 Roberts, and when I was in Texas we shot it some more, with handloads this time, and it still shoots chit for accuracy - 6" groups.

So, it could be a lot worse than merely having to come up with a new bolt. I could have a bunch of Rugers to sell. Dang the luck.

KB

Try Federal primers; they are much easier to set off than Wins.

I added up all the $$ I could raise, conservatively, from the sale of most of my Rugers, and the amount is plenty to buy, or have made, one rifle that will be sure to strike whatever primer I use right in the center. And I'll have money left over too.

Or perhaps better yet, take the money and one of my good shooting CZs and go on a real good hunting trip, and still have money left over.

KB

If you want to eliminate the possibility of a bad (or poorly cut) chamber, you only need to make a chamber cast. Heres how:

CERROSAFEavailable from Brownells)

While the makers of Cerrosafe produce several different alloy combinations, the one we are concerned with consists of the following percentages: Bismuth - 42.50, Lead – 37.70, Tin – 11.30, Cadmium – 8.50. Note: Cadmium is very toxic so use good hygiene and avoid breathing the fumes. We all know the harmful effects of inhaling or digesting lead. Cadmium, is even worse. Its compounds are extremely toxic even in low concentrations, and will bioaccumulate in organisms and ecosystems. So use similar but even greater caution when working with Cerrosafe as you would when handling lead.

Notes:
 Melts between 158 and 190 degrees Fahrenheit
 Should be melted in a clean iron ladle without direct flame on the product.
 The chamber being cast should be cleaned thoroughly and a thin coat of oil or graphite applied.
 Reusable

Contraction - expansion factor versus time, after casting, measured in inches per square inch:
 2 minutes -.0004"
 6 minutes -.0007"
 30 minutes -.0009"
 1 hour +-.0000"
 2 hours +.0016"
 5 hours +.0018"
 7 hours +.0019"
 10 hours +.0019"
 24 hours +.0022"
 96 hours +.0025"
 200 hours +.0025"
 500 hours +.0025"

Basic Instructions:
 Plug the bore about one inch ahead of the throat of the firearm using an appropriate size cleaning patch.
 Pour the molten alloy directly into the chamber until full and allow it to cool, it will turn a shiny silver color. As soon as it has cooled enough that it is no longer a liquid (and doesn't present a burn hazard), run a rod into the bore from the muzzle and tap the casting out of the chamber. Take care not to overfill the chamber as the alloy will then run into the locking lug area, making removal extremely difficult. Any recessed areas can be plugged with modeling clay prior to pouring.
 During the first 30 minutes of cooling Cerrosafe shrinks and then begins to expand. At the end of one hour it should be "exactly" chamber size. The Cerrosafe will manage to find its way into some pretty tight places so it is easier to have the rifle stripped to the frame prior to commencing the job. Clean the chamber, lightly oil it (then wipe it out with a patch), plug the barrel at a point that allows the formation of about an inch of rifling to be included in the cast, and cast it.

Cerrosafe's melting point is below the boiling point of water so you can use a plastic funnel with a short length of vinyl tubing to get it into the chamber. The tubing should be just long enough to reach the chamber with the funnel set through the back of the receiver. Heat the Cerrosafe in a skillet ashtray, or other container with a pouring spout, over a heat source set on low. As soon as the cast has set up, push the “plug-patch” along with the casting out of the receiver with a wooden dowel or brass rod.


When making a Cerrosafe cast of a high-wall rifle, the action must be disassembled and, depending on when the cast is measured, a mathematical adjustment (see above chart) may be necessary due to material expansion. Also, when using Cerrosafe to determine case OAL, headspace must be measured separately, which can be somewhat complicated.

One additional excellent use for all of the low-melting-point alloys is to “fixture” small, delicate and/or odd-shaped parts for filing or machining.


If you want to confirm the accuracy of the casting, to determine the expansion across the diameter of the casts, compare the cast to a soft lead slug, which has been driven into the throat and bore. To check length expansion, use the following technique.

The rifle is loaded with a case almost filled with lead, that has been previously fired in that firearm but left unsized and the action is closed. With the butt of the rifle resting on padded carpet and the muzzle pointing up, thick soft lead wire is dropped down the bore. Using a steel rod longer than the bore and slightly smaller than the bore diameter, pound/drive the wire into the unfilled mouth of the case and fully expand it into the chamber and throat by “pounding” on the end of the rod with a hammer. The resulting case and formed end provide a very accurate representation of the chamber, freebore, throat, land and grooves. This technique is discussed in more detail elsewhere. Simple precautions such as spaced areas of tape placed around the rod will eliminate possible rod-damage to the chamber and bore.

Because a “slugged image” of this area made in this way does not shrink or expand over time, this method is cheaper, simpler, easier and more accurate than using Cerrosafe. In addition, a measurement from the rear of the rim to the start of the transition step includes the actual headspace of the rifle and provides the overall length (OAL) of a properly trimmed fire-formed case.


An alternative to using Cerrosafe or the “pounded slug” method is to make a sulphur/graphite cast. To do this, make up a mixture containing a ratio of approximately two-thirds sulphur to one-third powdered graphite. Sulphur requires a much higher melting temperature than Cerrosafe but it has the advantage of neither growing nor shrinking once the cast has set. A chamber cast can be made using just sulphur but these casts tend to be somewhat hard to remove and they tend to be brittle. The addition of graphite in the casting makes it easier to remove once it is hard.

A 4-lb. sack of sulphur can be had cheaply at the garden centre. Clean and degrease the chamber, put a paper plug about 1/2" into the rifling, drop a piece of cotton string into the chamber, do not use synthetics, have a wood dowel longer than the barrel and of smaller but as close as possible to the inside diameter on hand. Place some sulphur in a small pan with a pour spout, using, preferably an electric hot plate, slowly heat the sulphur until it melts, do not let it catch fire, the smoke is poisonous. Stir in the powdered graphite and pour in enough of the liquid mix to just fill the chamber, wait until the cast is completely hard, this will depend on how large the chamber is, which governs the mass that has to cool down. Carefully push on the cast with the dowel while firmly pulling on the string; it should come out easily once it starts to move.


As noted, unlike Cerrosafe, sulphur cast dimensions of the chamber do not change at all over time, so how soon you measure the cast is not important. Sulphur is one of the few elements that do not change dimensions when going from a liquid to a solid state. Casts made with sulphur do not change shape or dimensions even after many years. Molten sulphur can also be used to set machinery anchor bolts in concrete.

The inclusion of graphite allows the casting to release very easily after it cools. The best ratio, is somewhere between 10% and 30% graphite. Use a piece of poly tube through the receiver, pressed firmly against the rear of the chamber to keep from spilling it all over. Stick a funnel in it and pour until you see it in the tube. These castings can be remelted for re-use or they can be kept for future reference.

Hope this helps. Have a great day.

Pretty common problem for factory mass produced rifles. Remember they are put together with only the minimum of touch labor to reduce cost.

The problem is when M77 recievers are made the centerline of the bolt and centerline of the barrel are not necessarly in line with each other. This is not corrected by Ruger when they machine the reciever threads. The more you know about the way Ruger casts their actions and machines them the less impressed you'll be with Ruger quailty or should I say lack of it.

quote:

Originally posted by SWD:
The problem is when M77 recievers are made the centerline of the bolt and centerline of the barrel are not necessarly in line with each other. This is not corrected by Ruger when they machine the reciever threads. The more you know about the way Ruger casts their actions and machines them the less impressed you'll be with Ruger quailty or should I say lack of it.

That's what I've been trying to say. I have come to the realization that on those rifles that are not center striking, the bolt is in fact not aligned with the barrel. Some have said it's sloppy chambers, which I can understand the logic behind that. In this case I'm talking about custom chambers in two instances, and they ain't sloppy, yet the primer strike is still off-center. I've tried the neck sizing thing, and same result.

As a comparison, I don't have this problem with any of my seven CZs. They all strike center of the primer, or so close that I can't tell it's off. On the Rugers, off-center is obvious.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by onefunzr2:
You might not live in the appropriate climate for this suggestion, but those Rugers make mighty fine tomato stakes.

No offense Dave, but no better words have been spoken by the under informed. Dual square bridge, intregal scope mounts, return to zero, quick release, 3 position safeties, and a tuneable trigger ..

Sounds better than a model 70 to me!

I got your mater stake, RIGHT HERE

nice rifle,jeff!