Hello Folks

After a long wait my Ruger No 3 "project action" is in NZ and will be in my hands soon.

I've had a while to muse on suitable chamberings and was somewhere between 257 Roberts and 25-06. However a further thought has occured, how about 25-303. It was popular here in NZ at one time and is sort of "indigenous" to Aust if not NZ - and this makes it very appealing to me at least.

Most of the loading tables I have are older, and I suspect aimed at the SMLE type conversions.

The case holds 56 to 58 gns of water, which isn't smallfry, being in the same league as the 257 Bob. Is 303 brass strong enough to consider trying to approach 257 Rob velocities in the ruger action ??

Does anyone know if the 25-303 can be gotten to shoot as well as the 257 ??

Cheers - Foster

I have a P14 actioned 303/25 that will duplicate the performance of the 257 Roberts.

In a strong Action like the Ruger, there should be no problem.

Here in the USA when Krags came on the market we took the 30-40 Krag and made a very popular wildcat by necking it down to 25. But the strength of the action limited it to 250 Savage performance. The very similar 303 necked to 25 but in a Ruger #1 should get to 257Roberts .

quote:

The case holds 56 to 58 gns of water, which isn't smallfry, being in the same league as the 257 Bob. Is 303 brass strong enough to consider trying to approach 257 Rob velocities in the ruger action ??

Yes, it is. And I believe .30/40 Krag brass is even stronger - plus there are a number of .25 Krag wildcats around as well as .303 wildcats!

Ye Olde Powley Computer reckons 2800 fps is feasible with 120 gn bullets. QuickLOAD agrees. 4831 class powders were indicated by both. Not proof positive, but a good sign.

The Roberts is not a high pressure round, the same as the .303 (in SAAMI spec). Having nearly the same case capacity, you'll get nearly the same performance.

Thanks for the encouraging dope guys, I'll cast around and see if I can locate a 25-303 reamer in NZ.

I have plenty of H4831 so thats a good omen also.

Cheers - Foster

Is there a ghost of a chance that you might consider making it up as a "switch-barrel" gun?

If so, one of the larger bore barrels on the .303 case might also be very nice to have...something on the order of a .375x2-1/2" Flanged for instance...

I like wildcats that were from the olden days, when a matter of necessity existed with tons of surplus actions available back then.. I'd vote for the 25/303!

and this from a guy who loves the Roberts!
cheers
seafire

Hmmmm - How is it that folks can read other folks thoughts via the internet - AC. I am thinking about a switch barrel - My means are pretty modest and if one was to spend a lot of hard earned dollas on nice wood and good blueing it would make sense to be able to use it alot. Thats why the 25/303 or 257 Bob are on the menu, most everthing huntable in NZ can be taken by a 120 gn projectile. Now if I was to visit our Aussie cousins things might be different !!

The issue is how successful a switch barrel might be on a Ruger No 1/3 action. Certainly a "takedown" isn't an option due to the hanger (or does anyone have ideas how ome might to do away with the hanger ??)

If one was to try a switchbarrel how would the extractor work, it doen't look interchangeable between cartridge base sizes to me, although sticking with the 303 or 7x57 case give heaps of choice anyway as Seafire has noted.

What sort of torque is required to fit the barrel on this action to give good accuracy ?? I want to do an octagonal barrel, are there any implications of this on a switch barrel ?? I also want to use scope blocks rather than a quarter rib.

All ideas appeciated . . . .

Cheers Foster

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tentman:
Hmmmm - How is it that folks can read other folks thoughts via the internet - AC. I am thinking about a switch barrel - My means are pretty modest and if one was to spend a lot of hard earned dollas on nice wood and good blueing it would make sense to be able to use it alot. Thats why the 25/303 or 257 Bob are on the menu, most everthing huntable in NZ can be taken by a 120 gn projectile. Now if I was to visit our Aussie cousins things might be different !!
----------------------------

The issue is how successful a switch barrel might be on a Ruger No 1/3 action.



I think it would be very practical indeed.

True takedown would not be practical so long as you retain the "hanger", as you note, but you don't need to take that hanger off every time to switch the barrel.
-------------------------------


If one was to try a switchbarrel how would the extractor work, it doen't look interchangeable between cartridge base sizes to me, although sticking with the 303 or 7x57 case give heaps of choice anyway as Seafire has noted.



That's why I suggest the .375 x 2.5" Flanged as another option, though of course you could just have a .303 Brit barrel for it, as yet another choice. Anyway, I would make any (all) extra barrels with chambers which use the basic .303 Brit brass. One extractor fits all type of thing...
----------------------------



What sort of torque is required to fit the barrel on this action to give good accuracy ??



There is lots of varying opinion on the subject of how tight a barrel has to be torqued for good accuracy. My experience is that they don't need to be torqued any more than hand tight. I have owned LOTS of both high dollar and inexpensive rifles of both take-down and/or switch-barrel varieties. All shot well if well chambered and well fitted to start with.

That was true, regardless of action type. From Dan'l Fraser Mausers, through Martinis by Greener and Francotte, and lots of other makes & types in between. All were nice rifles that shot well.

Many of them had a set-screw system to assure the barrels wouldn't turn loose (unscrew) in the field. Almost all the set screw ones were of the large-headed-screw type, so they could be unscrewed without tools while in the bush, and the barrel(s) removed or exchanged and the set-screw retightened. As a nice touch, most of those large head screws were knurled completely around the outside edge to improve one's grip on them.

No big trick at all.
------------------------



I want to do an octagonal barrel, are there any implications of this on a switch barrel ?? I also want to use scope blocks rather than a quarter rib.



If the barrels are indexed to the action properly to begin with, and locked in place with a set screw, there is no reason they should not work fine regardless of exterior contour.

With a dimple in the side of the barrel thread or tenon to take the rounded (domed) point of the locking screw (set-screw) , the barrel will come up with the sights in place, just as it should. I know some folks may throw their arms up in horror, but believe me, I have used such rifles in the field for over 30 years with no problems whatsoever. Maybe I'm just lucky, but if so that must be the only part of my life where that applies....
--------------------------

The set screw arrangment AC mentions has been used on many rifles, including the Stevens 44-1/2 target rifles, so I have to believe that will work just fine. The only negative I see is that the lower lip of the receiver (on which the forend indexes) will prevent putting the screw on the bottom of the receiver ring (under the forend) meaning you'll have to leave the set screw's head exposed, either on the top or the sides of the receiver.

OK, it's been years since I opened up a No. 1, but I thought the forend hangar wasn't attached to the barrel, rather it's cantilevered off the receiver. I just checked de Haas's book, and it suggests this is the case as well. How is it actually done? If the barrel free floats, perhaps the barrel could be unscrewed with out removing the hangar.

The mainspring arrangement of the Fraser action shown in de Haas's big book could be adapted to the No. 1, and it would be well clear of the barrel.

ASDF -

You are exactly correct. That's why it's called a "hanger"...it is a structure independent of the barrel from which one hangs the forend wood.

The only time clearance is a problem is where one fits either a pentagonal, hexagonal or octagonal barrel that is big enough in diameter that the flats barely clear the hanger. Then, when one goes to unscrew the barrel, the corners of the barrel flats might hit the hanger....

Can't imagine why one would hang such a big barrel on there though if he already knew it was going to be a switch-barrel or take-down rifle.



You are also quite right about where the set screw must be. Personally, I always prefer the screw to be on one or the other of the action sides of my rifles, about 1/2" to 5/8" back from the forward edge of the action.. If the screw head is made thin so it doesn't jut out a mile, is knurled all the way around, is highly polished on the flat, and is heat blued, I think it rather adds to the look of the rifle rather than detracting from it.

(Sorry about that spelling error. I guess it's a result of having both shooting and flying as hobbies.)

A switch barrel in .303 and .405Win would work rim is near identical and no change to extractor

That would be a nice combo (the .303 and a .405), though possibly nicer for NA than for NZ because of the scarcity of DG in NZ.

If I was going to hunt much on the west side of South Island, I might also think about making my second barrel in .338/.303 - Would sort of approximate the ballistics of the classic .318 Westley Richards, with much better choice of available bullets. And what with the South Island terrain, the less far the game runs after being struck, the better I'd like it...

Anyway, will be a really neat gun, I'm sure, whichever choices you make.

As you sound like maybe you've not passed your middle years, maybe some day you'll find you could even add a 3rd barrel...in something akin to .220 Swift ballistics...such as a .22/.30-30 Ack Imp. I had one of those once on a large Martini and it was a great round for distance varminting. I seem to recall some .22/.303 wildcats as well, and am sure they perform(ed) at least as well. If I was going to do another of the "hot" .22's, I might choose a tad quicker twist than 1 turn-in-14", for bullets clear up to and including 90 grs, but maybe not....

Elwood Epps from Ontario made quite a few High Wall Winchesters in 25/303 and even 22/303 back in the 1940s and 1950s. These were quite successful, they show up for sale in the NE USA every so often, usually in heavy varmint rifle form. Have never heard of his using a takedown High Wall action though.

A switch barrel rifle would be very handy. The 35 Winchester round which has the same rim as the 303 and a slightly longer case would be a useful caliber on larger game. In strong action such as the #1 and +P loads you would approach 35 Whelan ballistics. For larger game the 9.3x74 R would also deserve consideration.

I feel I should clarify something regards switch-barrels. I probably should have included this in my earlier posts.

You CAN have trouble with the hanger on the No. 1, if you want to keep a rear sight or scope blocks on the barrel while screwing the barrel on or off. If the sight or scope (or scope mounts) are far enough back toward the chamber end that they can nterfere with the hanger, they may well do so.

I have always pretty much preferred a receiver sight, which does not get in the way by turning with the barrel (because it doesn't mount on the barrel), so I neglected to make that point earlier.

The front sight is not usually a problem when changing a switch-barrel, as you can place a barrel-vise beween the forend stock and the front sight pretty easily in most cases, and grasp the barrel that way if you need to. Of course you still need to remove the forearm after putting the barrel in the vise, before attempting to unscrew the barrel.

The barrel-vise does not need to be right up against the action...unless one torques their barrels on a heck of a lot tighter than I do.

In fact, when using a set-screw equipped switch-barrel or take-down rig, I don't even torque the barrels tight enough to need a barrel-vise at all.

Of course, if one has a scope or rear sight mounted on the barrel where it might interfere with the hanger, it is not a gargantuan task to remove the scope or sight before removing the barrel and putting another on....just part of the cost of doing business...