Bullets Stringing

January 19, 2010 05:50

I have a Ruger 77/22 in 22hornet. It started stringing shots after the fourth or fifth round. Once I let it cool down it shoots four or five bullseyes and then starts stringing the shots again about an inch apart in a 45 degree angle from center of target. I tried to pass a dollar bill between the forearm and the barrel and it won't even start. Could my problem be from stock pressure? If so, what type of glass bedding/pillering, etc. should I be looking to get done? Thanks for your input in advance.

0

tsr1965

January 19, 2010 06:59

Thats it exactly...Pillar Bedding, free float the barrel, and a trigger job. I have done several Ruger 77/22's, including the 22 Hornets. They all responded the same...tack drivers.

Best

EDIT 1

Mr. Crea,

You obviously have the Ruger mixed up with thr Remington 700. I have done several 77/22's, and 77MK II's, all with positive results. Part of the problem being that Ruger cuts or molds the barrel channel to tight to the barrel, and they have NO bedding system, other than the screws thru the stock to support the action. The prevalent stringing is proof that the system is poorly engineered. This is what creates the inconsistancy which you describe.

To bad you butched the Weatherby MK V. That is usually the case of an unknowing novice with little or no experience. In order for a rifle to shoot, it has to first have the parts capable, and secondly they have to be assembled correctly. The first move in assembling is to create a stabalized launching pad...one that does not move around, and one that is stress free. That means in a wooden stock that had bottom metal, pillars need to be installed. Wood compresses, and distorts...steel, brass or aluminum pillars do not, when installed and bedded properly. The stock should provide merely a handle to hold the weapon, not support it. The action screws need to be properly torqued also, which with just wood, it is impossible to maintain that desired setting.

Stick around, and you will learn a lot.

Also, for what it is worth, 90% or more of the Remingtons do better when properly bedded, and free floated with that pressure point removed.

Best

EDIT 2

Mr. Crea,

The reason is because they have their bean counters running everything now...sales, purchasing, marketing, and lastly engineering. They have people at the wheel that know nothing about the products they make. The above described work, can be done for less than $200.00, by someone who knows what they are doing, and who is efficient at doing it.

I wouldn't include Weatherby in the list of good shooters. They charge a lot extra for a hand picked MOA gun. In today's world the MOA claim is loosing ground. For the sake of argument, most Savages are better shooter's than the Weatherby's. Weatherby is another with the bean counter's at the wheel.

Best

0

stevecrea

January 19, 2010 09:33

As tsr1965 correctly indicates, the stringing after the barrel warms up is characteristic of rifles that do not have free-floated barrels. I am not a Ruger 77 expert, but to my knowledge, these are not designed to be free-floated. Instead, they have upward pressure on the barrel created by a block designed into the barrel channel an inch or two back from the front of the forend of the stock.

Now, the question for you is, can you make it shoot better by going through all of the free-floating, pillars, and action bedding as tsr1965 suggests. Perhaps, but I do not believe that it is a forgone conclusion. I had an experience trying to accomplish a similar objective with a Weatherby Mark V Deluxe in .240 Weatherby. This rifle would "only" shoot about 1 MOA or so with factory loads, which was not good enough for me using it to shoot rockchucks at long range. I proceeded to free-float the pencil barrel, and accuracy immediately deteriorated to about 1.5 MOA or so. I had to rebarrel it with a heavier Shilen custom barrel, and bed the action, and this got it down to about .6 MOA.

There are other posters who are more knowledgeable about this, and have probably done it with Ruger M77s. I believe that part of the problem is the pencil barrels, which are probably just fine until they heat up some.

But, this raises another issue: After you do all this work to your $700 or $800 Ruger, it will now be a $1000 or $1200 Ruger, to get it to shoot perhaps as well as a $600 Tikka or a $600 or $700 CZ do right out of the box without the tinkering and trips to the gunsmith!! What is Ruger's marketing genius doing here? Can someone explain it to me?

I would like to buy American, and I otherwise like a lot about the Rugers, but, as Col. Townsend Whelan is quoted as saying, "Only accurate rifles are interesting."

I do know that some of the Rugers will shoot. But, I am concerned about their inconsistency.

0

stevecrea

January 19, 2010 13:05

tsr1965:

You make a number of excellent points, and I have no doubt that you know how to make them shoot.

However, why does Ruger put this product out that needs so much work? I have yet to see the rationale in buying a rifle for $600 or $700, and perhaps much more, and then having to spend at least $300 to $500 at the gunsmith to make it shoot as well as an out of the box Tikka or CZ. Can you help me understand this?

I hear many complain about the price of some rifles such as Weatherby, Cooper, and others, but by the time you buy the Ruger or the Remington, do a trigger job on them, recrown the muzzle, float the barrel, and bed the action, your Ruger or Remington now costs as much as the more expensive rifle. And, it costs much more than the CZ or Tikka, which may outshoot it anyway.

0

beantownshootah

January 19, 2010 14:15

quote:Originally posted by stevecrea
tsr1965:

However, why does Ruger put this product out that needs so much work? I have yet to see the rationale in buying a rifle for $600 or $700, and perhaps much more, and then having to spend at least $300 to $500 at the gunsmith to make it shoot as well as an out of the box Tikka or CZ. Can you help me understand this?

Oh. . .that's easy.

Price is about supply and demand, and demand in rifles is NOT purely a function of their accuracy.

There are lots of shooters who never try to push the limits of accuracy of their guns. They'll run maybe 1-2 boxes of ammo a year hunting, using only factory ammo they buy at the local Biggie-Mart, never notice the difference between a 1.5 and a 0.75 MOA gun, or care.

There are people who will simply "buy American" either assuming (often incorrectly) that its usually better, or simply not caring whether it really is or isn't.

And there is such a thing as coasting on your reputation.

Go ask 20 Americans what's a "Ruger" and I bet you'll get at least a few who tell you that Ruger makes guns.

Go ask 20 American about "Tikka", and I bet a few of them will tell you "Geshundeit"!

0

5mmgunguy

January 19, 2010 14:40

tsr has given you the formula for success, I had to do the same thing to my Ruger 77/22hornet when I converted it to a 19 Calhoon...it now shoots like a house on fire. 1/2 inch groups at 100 yards and almost 3400 fps mv.

0

stevecrea

January 20, 2010 03:19

Beantownshootah:

Yes, your points are all well taken.

However, I see a similarity between what has happened to GM (Government and UAW Motors)and Chrysisler on the one hand, and Remington and Ruger on the other. Yes, I know that gun sales have exploded the last few years, you do not have to remind me of that. But, if Remington and Ruger do not wake up to the fact that several competitors are eating their lunch, and if many, such as you continue to deny that accuracy and workmanship is important, woe be to them. Well, you are not denying it, but you are rationalizing poor accuracy and inconsistency because apparently you believe that many do not notice or care. And, you may very well be right.

I have been very tempted by the Rugers and Remingtons. But, the stories about mediocre and inconsistent accuracy and workmanship give me pause.

0

tsr1965

January 20, 2010 03:54

quote:Originally posted by stevecrea
Beantownshootah:

Yes, your points are all well taken.

However, I see a similarity between what has happened to GM (Government and UAW Motors)and Chrysisler on the one hand, and Remington and Ruger on the other. Yes, I know that gun sales have exploded the last few years, you do not have to remind me of that. But, if Remington and Ruger do not wake up to the fact that several competitors are eating their lunch, and if many, such as you continue to deny that accuracy and workmanship is important, woe be to them. Well, you are not denying it, but you are rationalizing poor accuracy and inconsistency because apparently you believe that many do not notice or care. And, you may very well be right.

I have been very tempted by the Rugers and Remingtons. But, the stories about mediocre and inconsistent accuracy and workmanship give me pause.

Mr. Crea,

Beany did not ever say that accuracy and worksmanship were not important. Also it is not us who does not care...it is the people at the wheel of those like Ruger, Remington, and GM. They don't give a poop, about quality, or the cost of quality, or the consequences of having a lack of the forgoing. All they give a damn about is how to line their pockets, and how to mak their millions of dollar salaries and bonuses, and hold the rest of the employee's hostage. We experienced the same type thing here at the plant where I work...only we had a Corperate CEO change midship, who is a people person, and has integrity, and morals to give the customers what they want...the rest will take care of itself. All the other scam artists, group president, and several VP's and managers...well we have chased them out of here.

It is the fabled mythical accuracy of the Remington 700 that has people buying it, proclaiming it to be the most accurate rifle ever built...well it was then, but is not now...but people buy it thinking the new is just as good as the old...much like the southern produced Winchester Model 70's, vs. the pre-64. The new 08 Model 70's have tighter tolerences, and are all CNC...blah, blah, blah...the tolerences are all stack ups, and look good on paper...no new 08 or newer Model 70 will ever stand up to a pre-64...no way no how. But people still still flock to the fabled Model 70...which by the way...the new ones are a real POS compared to the pre-64's.

Do you see the light now Mr. Crea, if not e-mail, and I will write you a book.

Best

EDIT 1

Hi JustC,

I first of all want to wish you and yours a Happy New Year.

I have handled a couple dozen of the FN produced Winchester 70's...most all the standard grade FW's. I sure hope that their machining is better than their fit and finish. I have seen CNC eqipment capable of HOLDING 1/2 millionth of an inch, and one in the dental office capable of Angstroms. That is all well and good, untill the corperate bean counters get involved. Is like the bean counters to advertise one thing and do another too...state of the art to what tolerences? Have you seen prints or a tolerence listing or any QC statements?

I do agree though, that it doesn't take an aweful lot, usually, to turn a Remington 700 into a splendid shooter. In fact, most rifles are capable of MOA when all the factory engineered flub ups are fixed. Just like the Ruger...it takes a little massaging, but it is usually there.

Best

0

JustC

January 20, 2010 06:35

quote:Originally posted by tsr1965

Originally posted by stevecrea
Beantownshootah:

no new 08 or newer Model 70 will ever stand up to a pre-64...no way no how. But people still still flock to the fabled Model 70...which by the way...the new ones are a real POS compared to the pre-64's.

with all due respect tsr1965, I have not handled a newer FN produced version, but with their state of the art facility and CNC manufacturing, I would bet money they will be every bit as accurate if not more-so than a pre64. The machining tolerances are simply better than the old equipment. However, the new price tag indicates this since they have never been more expensive than they currently are under the FN program.

Remington has had some issues, (according to folks around the net[:X]) with quality control, but I havn't had any rem700 in my hands that I couldn't make shoot under MOA with some tinkering and a handload. The widespread issues I hear about have yet to present themselves to me, and I have absolutely no problem buying a NIB rem700 right now.

Ruger 77's use an angled integral recoil lug as part of their casting the action. That makes for an interesting torque setting when tightening the rifle in the stock. Rearward pressure must be applied when tightening the front action screw, then the rear screw must be snugged, then fully tighten the front screw, then fully tighten the rear screw. NOW, THE IMPORTANT POINT, only tighten the middle screw (right in front of the trigger guard under the bottom metal) enough to hold it in place. Too much on this screw creates a "bridge pressure" on the middle of the action which will actually flex it, thus throwing off the harmonics and negatively affecting accuracy.

also, for some years maybe 15yrs ago and back, Ruger outsourced it's barrels to a less than adequate company, and the problems with the 77's were barrel issues. Now, they have 2 of their own hammer forging machines, and for the past 15+/- yrs, their barrels have been much better. I have one in 30-06 that I took from the box, bolted into a Boyds laminated stock (no bedding etc) and after properly torquing it, the damn thing shoots 1/2moa with a certain factory ammo and with several handloads. needless to say I was influenced to change my opinion of the ruger rifles that I had previously avoided. I have no fear of them now and would buy another if the price was right.

0

wtroper

January 20, 2010 07:14

I have had experience with a number of M77s over the years. I like them. However, I have owned relative few that would beat MOA "out of the box." One of the exceptions was a 25-06 that I should have kept that would do close to 1/2 MOA. However, by playing with the torquing of the screws and using various handloads, I have been able to get most of them close to MOA. The others generally improved when the bbl was free floated.

My most recent experience was the an ultralight M77 in 257 Roberts. It required free floating the bbl. With factory ammo it went from about 2" groups to less than 1". While I like M77s, I expect to have to "work" on them to make them acceptable to me.

0

stevecrea

January 20, 2010 07:27

I would tend to agree that fiddling and playing with torqueing and what not would tend to help some of these rifles. However, here is what gives me pause: This fiddling and playing indicates to me that something is just not right. If I have to hold my mouth just right and tap my left foot to a certain cadence while I shoot at a rockchuck 400 yards away, that does not give me much confidence.

I have had two Ruger Number 1s, and I cannot tell you how many people told me that after they...............................then, it would shoot 1/2 inch groups. I do not want to go to the trouble to .................................and pay a gunsmith $hundreds, and then, wonder, when you are making the shot of a lifetime, if you are holding your mouth and tapping your left foot just right.

This all may be fine for someone who loves to tinker, and punch paper. It is not so fine for someone who is actually going after game.

Further, I do not want to have to wonder if the temperature or humidity or something else has made something change since the last time I sighted the rifle in. Again, if you are on a 10 day hunt of a lifetime, and the monster trophy steps out at 400 yards, or you are making that 400 yard shot on a monster rockchuck, are you going to ask your gunsmith what the torque is on the action bolts? Forget it!! Let's get real. You paper punchers live a different life. And, do not get me wrong. I am not criticizing any of you. But live game hunting is a different ball game. I do not want to have to play and fiddle with the rifle to get the job done, period!

My Weatherbys, Brownings, CZ, Anschutz, Sakos, and Tikka, do not have to be "played with" or "diddled" to get them to shoot as they need to, to hit the game that they were designed to go after.

0

Bullets Stringing

Comments

Recent Activity