I have a Ruger M77 in .338 and am seriously ready to tame some recoil and move to a lighter caliber. This rifle is a straight from the factory M77RPKMKII stainless with the synthetic stock.....my plan was to replace the bbl with a .264 mag bbl at about 24" in length 1-8" twist for the Barnes 140grn XLC. I was hopefully planning on a bbl change only - Is this all I need to do? Besides the obvious change of the trigger (stock) and the stock itself (slick sided thumb-nail ripper) to a more reasonable setup. From what I can glean from the manuals a 264 is basically a 338 necked down - so therefore no change in feed mechanisms/bolt face/rails/etc.....correct? I am planning to accomplish this switch soon - My question is mainly - Can I switch BBl's and no more.....Or am I missing something?
Thanks
Eric

Nothing other than switching barrels is required for this caliber conversion. The same is true of a 7mm Remington. I would suggest stretching the barrel to 25 or 26 inches for the .264, although performance is still good with a 24".

Let me caution, however, that unless you particularly like the features of your current rifle (which you seem not to), it is almost always much more cost-effective to sell the unwanted rifle and purchase another in the caliber you want. Unfortunately, choices in the excellent .264 are somewhat limited; the only factory rifle available in that caliber that I'm aware of (outside of some semi-custom rigs) is the Winchester 70.

Here's your chance to improve your rifle in a number of other of other ways, and here's how I'd do it.

You can go .264 Win. Mag. all right, but that cartridge is dying and you may be wise to think of going with the 7mm Remington Magnum.

Order a barrel of the exact-same contour as your current Ruger barrel (from Lilja, Pac Nor, etc.), then take your rifle to a good riflesmith to square the action face, install the new barrel, and rebed all at the same time.

AD

My opinion if fairly close to Allen's however this is where I differ. Rather than picking up a barrel with a similar contour. I would find a smith who has a tracer lathe and let him duplicate the exact contour for you. So the only thing that you need to do is make a decision on the chambering and the barrel maker. And the reason why I say this is because I dont think you're going to be able to order a barrel with the exact same contour.

[ 08-25-2003, 19:51: Message edited by: alvinmack ]

Send your barreled action to Pac Nor, they will duplicate exactly your 338 barrel and install the new barrel.

If you have the funny plastic all weather stock on your MK II, this is a good portion of the recoil problem. This is about the worst stock design that exists. I would replace it.

Nothing wrong with a 264, just lay in a good supply of brass. Sometimes the brass is scare as I think Win only makes one production run a year. Regardless of 7mm Mag or 264, you want a 26 inch barrel.

[ 08-25-2003, 20:56: Message edited by: John Ricks ]

Or just buy a .270 Winchester and be within 100 fps + or - of either the .264 or 7mm Mag without all the fuss and muss...

Kain Tuck, you be making it too easy!!

I know, I know, and I happen to have a 27 inch barreled 270. Nice Mule Deer rifle. Light on the recoil also.

Eric,
let me be the voice of reason...

sell the ruger
get a 270 wsm, on a model 70 feather weight...

let's say you get 400 for the ruger...
the winnie is 569...

if you had pac do the barrel, mount and blue, they'll set you back 400...

in my opinion, you both upgrade your rifle and save at least 250 bucks

jeffe

I would like to say, while I still have my recoil induced headache, the 264 win is no slouch in the recoil department.
It has the worste recoil of any of the rifles that I own including a 300 win mag, and 375 H&H, and 45-70 with stout handloads.

I believe the pain from recoil is due to the increased recoil velocity the cartridge generates. (and the fact that I am shooting a feather weight win M70 with the original steel butt plate)

But if you do not like the 338 recoil unless you add weight or change the stock you will not like the 264 recoil.

The factory ammo should come with a complementary bottle of excedrin or bc powder.

In order to increae barrel life and lower the number of concusions per week, I reduce the loads just a tad.

Try a laminate stock or something else to add weight or get a better recoil pad.

The money spent on the conversion could buy you a nice CZ 6.5x55 or .270 win. And you would have 2 guns instead of one rebarreled gun.

Just my thoughts. Good luck.

David

Good advice everyone......
I did think seriously about just putting this .338 in the corner and buying a nice 7mm-08. But.....there is no fun in that!

I love my cannon but the .338 is a little much for casual shooting practice. For deer I run a 160grn X - beautiful reach out and touch em' round. Elk hunting....it foots the bill nicely too with a 225grn X. But I bought this rifle because it was the lightest on the market at the time.

My goal is to maintain the light weight and move to a caliber that is a little flatter on the trajectory.....hence the .264 (hopefully lighter in recoil too).

If a 24" bbl is a might bit short for this caliber then a 26" is the next option.......is a 1-8" a good twist rate for the longer heavier bullets, i.e. 140grn barnes?

I like strange and different calibers - that part doesn't bother me. I just saw a perfect opportunity to switch calibers without a lot of gunsmithing, building, modifying of the action etc. The "stock" stock is going to adorn the darkest corner of my gun room - along with the factory trigger. I haven't yet decided on the replacement stock yet - bbl contour therefore is open for discussion.

Thanks everyone for the input.....
My heart is set on the .264 Mag - gotta be different ya' know!

You will like the.264 . With the lighter bullets , recoil is very easy , and I feel it does outperform the .270 in the trajectory department . It is sort of a specilaty caliber though , in my book .

I will almost guarantee you the recoil will be in stock design. My 264 with a 26" 1-in-9" recoils less than my 308 with any bullets up to and including 140s. I haven't tried 160s yet -- haven't seen the need. I think the conversion is great. If for some really wierd reason you can't find the abundantly available brass with the proper headstamp, buy 7Mag brass and sent it through the full length size die.

In short, change the stock too and go for it.

I know what you are saying Stonecreek . A .264 will serve well for any of those critters . But dozens of other calibers with longer barrel life will work too .

However, I feel the .264 has few peers for hunting deer , pronghorn and such in open plains country , and that's where it shines. I am not knocking the caliber , I think it is way better than it's detractors would have you believe . My .264 is too accurate for me to consider useing up precious barrel life banging away at jack rabbits or sage rats.

I get 3400 fps (120 gr bullets) out of my 24 inch barrel with RL25 , and that load is mighty flat.........

Good deal....I really appreciate the comments and ideas!

I originally wanted to stay as light as possible - my poor aging bones are telling me to go lighter. In my younger days I loved large recoil and big calibers (still do some) - but now It is time to concentrate on flat and deadly.

I have heard tell of some amazing feats with the .264 mag both on stopping power and on range. To me it is just one more reason to try something new! With my magnum action I was also considering the 257 Weatherby Mag as a contender to the .264. I like the idea of having "standard" shoulders on my cases though and not having to worry and fuss with so much "freebore".

From what I found there is some mighty slim contours of bbls available....at 24" would a "feather weight" style contour have a real problem with bbl whip - weight aside? I am no benchrest shooter by any stretch of the imagination.... as long as I can comfortably place my shots in the kill zone I am happy. 400yd shots are outside of my abilities in normal hunting situations. Here in MY real world...my normal "long" shots would be at 250 to 300 yds tops. I judge this on my scope....holding a 3x9 or a 2x7 scope still on an animal off-hand.....that is as far as I dare reach. That being said..... would a feather weight type bbl "hold" a load on paper at say....1" at 100yds? (assuming of course everything else is perfect). I have heard some say the feather weights are less than 1 MOA at 100yd bbls.....is this true?

If I have heard wrong.....then I will obviously lean toward the lightest bbl I can find. Otherwise I was looking at Pac-Nor's 24" stainless bbl in the contour just bigger than their lightest contour (don't remeber the designation). Fluted also sounds appealing for a little less weight.....decisions.....
Thanks
Eric

Forgot to add to my previous post....

bbl life isn't important to me at this point. I have heard both sides - older steel when the cartridge was introduced - hence shorter life. Modern steel hence longer life. yada - yada.

Anyway the reason why it isn't important to me is simply I won't have enough deer and elk tags in my lifetime to wear a bbl out! Oregon is funny that way - here in Eastern Oregon we average a tag every 4 years. Otherwise it is fling sticks or chase spike only (yeah right!).
The most action this weapon will see is paper - or if I win the lottery - I'll hunt another state!

Oh well - it is only powder, lead and steel...
and don't forget fun! I have to admit though I wouldn't pass up a shot on a good sage rat if it is fat enough!

Thanks
Eric