I've never smithed one of these, or even disassembled one for that matter, but have always been attracted to the tang safety and the QD/QC scope mounts. I have 2 questions for the folks who are familiar with smithing these rifles:

First, have you ever seen a 375 H&H, 404 or similar-length cartridge built on one, and what was involved? I've seen references to the limited size of the bolt head but IMO, without ever having examinined one of course, this could be easily solved. What are some of the other problems with length?

Second, what are some of the general or specific objections to this action? I know there's gotta be lots of objections, otherwise they'd be more popular than they appear to be! Not trying to hurt anyone's feelings here or generate any hate & discontent, just asking.

And please, let's leave the push-feed vs controlled-feed question for another thread, the Ruger can easily be altered to controlled-feed so let's assume it has already been done. I'm a lot more interested in things like triggers, availability of 3-position safeties, bottom metal, parts reliability, ease of operation, ergonomics (placement & shape of manually-operated parts), dis- and re-assembly, preferred bedding method(s), relative accuracy potential and anything else you can think of.

Most of my experience has been with Mausers, M70s and 1903 Springfields but I REALLY like the idea of the built-in tang safety and the built-in scope bases. How about some comparisons?
Regards, Joe

yes, it can be done
replace mag box, grind/mill the back fo the mag well

nice actions ... plunger ejector

no 3 position safety replacement that I am aware of

ruger's 3 pos is more like an enfield than a m70 ... attached to action, trigger blocking, then bolt locking .. doesn't interface with the sear so to speak..

it MIGHT be possible to machine in a 3 position dovetail into a tang safety, the logistics woudl be odd

I was assuming that the plunger ejector would be altered to the M70 style as a part of the controlled-feed conversion; I've forgotten which smith used to do this conversion but it's not too difficult for a good metalsmith.

Was hoping for an aftermarket M70 style 3-position that locked the striker, but....I won't use a safety that must be disengaged in order to raise the bolt handle, there are plenty of other, safer ways to ensure the bolt staying in the down position.

Any special procedures needed for increasing the rearward bolt travel?
Regards, Joe

Would it work to cut back the right side of the receiver ala M70 and cut the bolt stop back as well?

Rich

How easy is it to convert a Ruger push feed to control feed?

I ran some searches but didn't come up with any hits.

You would have to remove the plunger, open up the bottom of the bolt face, slot the bolt and receiver and install some kind of ejector, probably do some magazine work.

Who has done it and what else is needed?

Thanks.

quote:

no 3 position safety replacement that I am aware of

I have one made by Ed LaPour on one of my rifles. According to his site he still sells them.

quote:

Originally posted by Idared:

quote:

no 3 position safety replacement that I am aware of

I have one made by Ed LaPour on one of my rifles. According to his site he still sells them.

http://www.edlapourgunsmithing.com/
I've been thinking about installing one on a 77 that I have. What is the appropriate welding method used to repair the tang where the thumb saftey was on an investment cast action???

OOoohh...thanks Malloy805 for the link. I've been wanting a 3 position safety for my MKI Rugers for years...I just removed all the pieces and parts, ground off/rounded off the blessed cobble and filled in the stock gap. I've never depended on safeties anyway, preferring to leave the chamber empty or the bolt lifted. I've seen too many "accidents" with safeties...on when they needed to be off...off when they needed to be on or some other malfunction.

quote:

Originally posted by Idared:

quote:

no 3 position safety replacement that I am aware of

I have one made by Ed LaPour on one of my rifles. According to his site he still sells them.

i believe that is a "did" not "does"...

I too, wanted to convert a M77 tang/push feed to 375 or 404, and I have a 7mm donor rifle. I got to work on it, so to speak, and suddenly realized that the center action/trigger guard screw is directly behind the mag box, so in order to lengthen the mag box, you have to eliminate that screw; no real problem but then your TG is hanging on with the rear screw; no problem with that, but your floorplate is held on by that trigger guard. so it is left not really secure. SO, the tang safety M77s aren't really conducive to lengthening. I gave up on that and bought a MK2 in 25-06, yanked the barrel off it and made a stock pattern for it. out of a tang safety stock, which are beefier and better for a hard kicking rifle. I also took out the inlet for the bolt handle in case you want to weld on a Mauser type. I might. If you are interested on one, let me know, but I digress. The center screw is 1/4 inch back of the mag box; plenty of room for an extended box. Mill a bit from your receiver opening at rear. Move the bolt stop back (easy, alter bolt face and extractor and you have it). Here is a pic on photobucket to show you how it is. http://i914.photobucket.com/al.../dpcd67/DSC00128.jpg I should have laid a .375 round on the mag, but if you had a mag box long enough to fit one, the middle screw could not be there. Wow, hope that helps everyone.

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
I too, wanted to convert a M77 tang/push feed to 375 or 404, and I have a 7mm donor rifle. I got to work on it, so to speak, and suddenly realized that the center action/trigger guard screw is directly behind the mag box, so in order to lengthen the mag box, you have to eliminate that screw; no real problem but then your TG is hanging on with the rear screw; no problem with that, but your floorplate is held on by that trigger guard. so it is left not really secure. SO, the tang safety M77s aren't really conducive to lengthening. I gave up on that and bought a MK2 in 25-06, yanked the barrel off it and made a stock pattern for it. out of a tang safety stock, which are beefier and better for a hard kicking rifle. I also took out the inlet for the bolt handle in case you want to weld on a Mauser type. I might. If you are interested on one, let me know, but I digress. The center screw is 1/4 inch back of the mag box; plenty of room for an extended box. Mill a bit from your receiver opening at rear. Move the bolt stop back (easy, alter bolt face and extractor and you have it). Here is a pic on photobucket to show you how it is. http://i914.photobucket.com/al.../dpcd67/DSC00128.jpg I should have laid a .375 round on the mag, but if you had a mag box long enough to fit one, the middle screw could not be there. Wow, hope that helps everyone.

Wow, it sure helped ME, thanks! I see very few problems with moving the center screw to the rear, in several different ways, but what about that big honkin' piece of what appears to be a part of the trigger, immediately behind the center screw?
Regards, Joe

quote:

i believe that is a "did" not "does"...

That is entirely possible, but I do have one whatever the case.

I think you can add a tang or other safety easier to a different action than you can mess with the M77 TS rifle. I have several of them and the tang safety chews my somewhat oversize hand.
You might try one of the rifles first before you fall in love with them.

You have to accept what the tang model has to offer and not try to change it too much. It's not all that bad to begin with conpared to some morphos that abound.

You could probably do a lot of pieces and parts making of bottom metal, or eliminate the bottom metal, or....yada, yada, yada, but that's just beating a dead horse. I went through all of that before deciding to go down the simpler road...decided to go with the magazine length as is and save a lot of headaches.

There are a lot of large caliber cartridges that will fit within that length...my 375 H&H and 416 Taylor work just fine at 3.25-3.28" through a tang model Ruger.

Going with the MKII makes it a little easier to lengthen the mag but you still have to muck about making "stuff".

Going with the "New Model" that is already set up for long cartridges would be the way to go and you don't have to do much machine work...basically just a barrel swap and maybe some bolt mods.

While you can get quite a bit more pizzazz out of a larger, longer case, 90% of those thinking about it can't handle the amount of recoil generated by large calibers.

My 510 MAKATAK with 600 gr bullets at 2200fs generates almost 100 ftlbs of smack at 11 lbs worth of rifle, about half that with the muzzle brake. Push that to 2400 fs and you're into the cross-eyed, "what the he** happened", "God, I'm hurt", realm.

And all that in a pushfeed I wouldn't carry on ANY hunt where fanged or horned creatures lurk about just waiting for their shot.

The tang model is an excellent platform for a lot of conversions...as is, but without the bong smoke rising around...Hahahahaha

I can't find any way to add cartridges other than widening the mag about 0.050" which will be realitively easy...just split the mag and solder/weld in a little addition and a minor amount of wood work.

I could add twice that amount and get a 4 down mag, but then the rounds would be very close to the cartridge wedging point or I could add a 0.100" extension to the bottom of the mag and to the bottom of the stock, but that would mess up the front receiver screw angle and look funny to boot.

Naw...just add the small extension and call it good. If I can't take down what I'm aiming at with 4-50 cal bullets at ~5000 ftlbs of whackadoo at 50 yds, I probably shouldn't have pulled the trigger in the first place.

I pulled the safey parts off all my tang models early on...just for that same reason SR4759. I learned to handle a gun without my finger on the trigger, no round in the chamber or the bolt lifted...safeties can get you dead by being in the wrong position at the wrong time by the wrong person.

I have an email out to Ed...I sure hope he is still doing them, or some one is doing them, or I can get the measurements and parts list to do my own. Thanks for nice close up, Idared...is the "I dared", or "I, da' red"

Luck

quote:

Thanks for nice close up, Idared...is the "I dared", or "I, da' red"

Actually it is short for "Idaho Redneck" which I was often called when I lived in Idaho years back. I hope to find my way back there again some day.

I'm astounded by the folks who say they wouldn't hunt with a push-feed and who also say they don't use safeties. If you can imagine a scenario where the big bad animal knocks you down and your rifle has to feed upside down, wouldn't you want to be sure that the rifle didn't discharge prematurely, leaving you NEKKID?

Sorry, gotta call BS on this one and plenty of it.
Regards, Joe

I don't get replacing the tang safety with a 3position safety .. the newer, 3 position safety models can be had for about what buying the safety (lapour/wisner) and having it installed costs.

You're probably right Jeffe..lots of MKII's and other very good shooters out there for cheap money. I wouldn't mess around with changing if they're too costly. Kinda like mucking about with a military conversion...I've spent more money doing them that just buying a new/used rifle, but then I've never been able to buy what I wanted across the counter.

ALL mechanical devices screw up...Murphy's Law...I've had 2 Rems fire when the safety was pushed off, finger off the trigger...the infamous Rem faux pas...you can read about it if you want to crawl the net a bit...swapping out that POS Rem trigger solves that one easy enough.

I've had Ruger tang safety's hang up and not slide...Mausers flip the wrong way for me...magazines not seat and fall out..keep your automatic ejectors and safety's...etc, etc, etc...You can't always trust your backup...most of the time they're trying to score something and your DI ain't the one getting hosed...I don't depend on mechanical devices any more than I have too.

You have to do what works for YOU...not the rest of the sheep...the rest IS BS...besides if you want to hump a bear and rassle an eskimo, you probably shouldn't be in Alaska anyway, trying to drink a tub full of barley pop.

Luck

The discussion has morphed somewhat, as usual.

I have absolutely no intention of REPLACING a tang safety with a 3-position M70 style, I'd like to ADD the M70 safety to block the striker when wanted, such as during unloading. The tang safety is used as simply a form of stalking safety during the actual hunt, while the striker-blocking safety is reserved for other occasions. Too complicated, too subject to pilot error? Probably, but that's my preference.

I simply wanted a tang safety and integral scope mount bases and a striker-blocking safety on the same rifle, with a magazine box long enough for a 375 or 404. I've done tang safety conversions before but was attempting to avoid the work, it's a real PITA.

Sounds like the Ruger is a non-starter; if I'm gonna hafta do all that work, I'll just stick with a Mauser or similar.
Regards, Joe

ADDING the safety I get ..

making the mag box is the same work as making one for an enfield .. 10 mins on a sheet metal bender, and a quick tig weld... you get 3.5 just by reshaping the "tongue" on the back of the box. can get the other .15 with some decent milling on the back of the action .. feeding shouldn't be an issue ...

but, seriously, i designed the AccRels just for this purpose ... standard length action, screw in teh barrel, and chamber!

The MKII has more room to work with behind the magazine box, if you were choosing one to lengthen.

Bruce

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by Idared:

quote:

no 3 position safety replacement that I am aware of

I have one made by Ed LaPour on one of my rifles. According to his site he still sells them.

i believe that is a "did" not "does"...

Recieved an e mail from Mr LaPour today stating that he is still making the side swing safeties for the 77, but is currently out of stock. $220.00

Wellllll.....maybe a little more time on the bender...to get the lips bent right...the MKII is basically a square box but the MKI has lips, nips and notches to deal with...add another 5 minutes. Going with a simple square box on the MKII was one step in the right direction, but having lips to bend vs rails to grind makes feeding adjustment a lot easier to achieve...maybe.

But...Jeffe is totally right about one thing...his AR is a much better designed case for the Ruger MKI/MKII receivers for someone who can't do their own work.

There are also the B&M and MDM rounds using the RUM case that would work very well, probably allowing a third cartridge, that could be used with either the 0.500" or 0.510" barrels...and of course, the belted magnum cases are also represented...basically a barrel change only...I already have a belted 416 Taylor using the MKI, 3 down-one up, 400 gr at ~2350fs...500 A-square anyone???(I get a 600 gr bullet going at the same velocity in the 510 Makatak) Another barrel change only proposition and one already recommended by many of the more knowledgeable 'smiths on this forum.

I gave up with the third cartridge idea...no matter which way I jump, it means a whole lot of rebuilding of something...new box, new, wider hinge floor plate, added and removed stock wood...etc.

This being a push feed, I would'nt use it for DG unless forced into it by circumstance...to keep my bacon out of the fire...so the cost for me in getting that third cartridge isn't worth it...I/you could buy a used DG for less money.

I got an email from Ed also...220 smackers is way too much cost for my taste...I'll leave mine sans mechanical device.

Yeah...J.D...threads have a way of getting run over and misaligned...Yes/no/maybe answers would get pretty dull, pretty fast otherwise, but that's where good ideas and additional information come from...others experience and input are what make the internet such a valuable tool for innovators and average guys...there is always someone else who's "been there, done that... and here's the real scoobydoo"...and NOBODY has a lock on it all.

Besides, anyone taking time to answer YOUR question is also adding input to all those that are thinking about doing something similar...and there have been lots of questions concerning large case/large caliber conversion or similar subjects..."What can I do with...." The MKI and one of the larger cal/larger case rounds seems to almost fill your bill...anyway.

Probably not a real good idea right now, to do any major modification on the MKI receiver...there just AIN'T very many parts available for it...I haven't been able to find a LA mag box...ANYWHERE...better stick to the MKII or Hawkeye if you want a Ruger...or a CZ...no diss intented to Ruger lovers...I still have 4 I'm married to...wouldn't sell or trade...well maybe for a CZ.


When I was designing my 510 MAKATAK, I had in mind doing a 20-24" bbl, hunting type rifle using an extra, un-barreled MKI action and the Cast Performance 525 gr slug, and also do a 36" barrel on an extra Savage LA, w/3.6" mag, single shot for 650/800 gr military/target bullets seated to 4-5" COAL, as a long range on shooter for those pesky T-Rats that abound in my area. At least I have the hunter...maybe this year I will do the Savage barrel...sans nut and 1.35" dia, cylinder contour, to match the Savage receiver OD.

The CP 525 gr slugs touch the lands at 3.66" COAL so at 3.26" COAL there is a good 0.400" jump...whether that will affect accuracy within 100M has yet to be confirmed. It will mean more powder to get the pressure up equal, but also probably a little more velocity than software programs indicate. A military 647 gr 50 cal bullet seated to the cannelure is 4.45" and still leaves a bit of a jump. That bullet touches the lands at 4.6".

I wanted all the case capacity I could get in a LA without going to the Gibbs case, or a belted mag case. I ended up with 142gr H20 in my Rigby iteration...which isn't all that bad.

I DID take a close look at the Gibbs case. I designed a blown out, shortened case that would have worked with a slight amount of mag box lip benting, rebating the rims and shortening it to a case capacity of ~155 gr H20, but it required almost 15% more powder just to equal my 510 MAKATAK, the dies cost much more, the brass cost more...etc...I had reached the point of diminishing returns in my case, and I was getting headaches thinking about it.

If I just wanted a hunter I would have gone with the 500 AR or one of the other excellent offerings...they would have fit much better, no mag changes needed for the most part, a LOT cheaper for the brass and dies, a Lot easier to deal with, and given almost the same performance...more than enough for anything walking this earth...

So far the hunting rifle is shootable now...once the dies get here so I can get some rounds loaded and IT QUITS SNOWING. I have some 600 gr Woodleigh PP's coming to try out also. I might stick on a front sight...but my eyes are so bad now I need a scope, so a front sight is just something to hang up in the bush.

My work in R/D'ing my 510 MAKATAK and the MKI receiver fit my purposes and might not do you any good for your needs, J.D., but it might do some good for those looking at it from different perspectives...or not...won't make much difference a hundred years from now, but that's what differences are all about.

Luck

quote:

Originally posted by FOOBAR:
So far the hunting rifle is shootable now...once the dies get here so I can get some rounds loaded and IT QUITS SNOWING. Luck

SNOWING?!?

My yard has looked like a young rain forest for a month, I've been mowing all week and weedeating in between mowings, now I can start over at the beginning again and continue until late October at least. BAH!

I was looking for something with an already-existing tang safety that could accept the H&H/404-length factory loads, for a non-handloader. My own 'fight-stopper' DGR has 6 down + 1 in the chamber and can be reloaded hot so I don't need any more firepower, only more practice(G).

Looks like it's gonna be a PITA problem any way it's approached. Maybe it's CZ time; fabbing a tang safety isn't nearly as difficult as lengthening an action.
Regards, Joe