Rimfire Central Firearm Forum banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have a 77/22 that won't shoot better than .8" groups with any ammunition. I am looking for a new idea on what I might do. There are many things I have already tried. If you have any suggestions for what I might do to get this thing to shoot I thank you for them. If I have already tried it I will answer your post with "done that"

Right now I can't think of many things that are not "done thats" that's why I'm asking for your help. TNX
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
233 Posts
What range are you shooting at for .8" groups? That ain't bad at 100 yards.
If 50 yards, and if you have already free floated the bbl, put a bit of epoxy under the receiver, and installed a Volquartsen sear and trigger spring, you should be doing better.
Did you try Aguila and Wolf ammos? They work for me!
Next thing to check might be the crown job on the muzzle...
Good luck,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
done that

All groups are 5 shots at 50 yards. The trigger is a Vol. drop in.

The stock is completely glass bedded with an accurglass bedding kit. Besides the bedding I built a aluminum test stock that only contacts the reciever on the two points where the reciever screws are. Same result. Seems its not bedding.

The barrel is a new Lilja model. After having it a while (with not good results) I returned it to Dan Lilja who pronounced it in good working order both before and after. It's kinda hard to argue with a man the status of Dan and say I know more about barrels than he does. So it seems not the barrel crown.

Ammunition: Let's see I've tried all the Aquila, all Lapua, two federal gold medal matches, CCI Green, standard velocity, pistol match and two others, four types of Eley including Ultra, Three Winchesters and a few others, no Wolf yet.

As for the scope I've tried three. Two of them shoot .4 inches or less on my Kimber. Simmons 22 Mag. A Leupold 2x7 Compact RF, and a Leupold 6x18 44mm A/O with mil dot and target knobs.

Keep those suggestions coming please! After you've seen what else I've done you'll know why I need a good idea to do something for this thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
233 Posts
Do the case heads look flat and square? Could be an indicator. Any ballooning might mean a headspacing problem.

(And now that you post what you've done, I gotta say WOW!)
Good Luck!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Bob

Headspace:

I machined a washer from shim stock to go in the bolt split to adjust the headspace. From so tight where the bolt will barely close to loose as possible (over .007 bolt free travel) no difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
You are getting .8 now with the mod's you listed

What did it shoot Factory???

You said the rifle shot the same with only the action held in the aluminum stock. The Ruger 77's I have perfer to be CRANKED down into the stocks. The stocks are not free floated on any of my guns and the up pressure on the barrel is noticable when I remove the actions from the stocks. Both the walnut and synthetic stocks. Seems you should have gotten some change.

What trigger pull do you have at the moment and what was the original trigger pull?

That I have found to be the main problem with my guns.
The Last one, a 77/17, would actually support the weight of the rifle Without tripping the trigger. BAD

A little work one night with a model file and set of sharpening stones fixxed that.

You have put a good bit of work and money in the gun.
I had a Remington like that once. That piece on junk and All the other Remingtons I had are now GONE!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Interesting Questions

Ern asks a few questions of note. I have been paying attention from the day I bought the rifle. The groups from the factory were larger than now so some improvement has occured. The original groups of 5 ran 1 1/8 inches average with the best ammo.

The original factory trigger was not measured. The drop in trigger I'm now using breaks at 2.8 lbs.

I would note that factory barrels are not free floated. However Lilja barrels are a different animal and must be free floated if they are to work as Lilja expects. This causes a possibility of barrel cant. To prevent this in loose fitting recievers (such as this rifle) I cement the barrel into the reciever with red loctite. The barrel is held in a jig to insure it runs straight down the stock and does not point down as the cement dries.

Bob: You ask about case condition. No case disorder is apparent. The only case variance from unfired is the firing pin strike and small and faint ejection scratches about .1 forward of the rim.

Chum I am aware of CPC they set head space by barrel set back. That may need to be done but other things are possible. First I have been given a tip from a friend to make absoultely sure about even lug contact. After that a set back may be in order. CPC also stiffens the bolt by putting a larger sleeve pin to mate the bolt halves. I am able to machine this bolt stiffener and have already done so on this rifle.

On another site someone told me to make sure the scope mounts mated correctly with the reciever. It seems almost impossible for a Ruger mount to cause a problem. However I see light under the bottom of the forward ring mount so I will check this today.

TNX again all
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
rb,
Have you tried to shim the barrel on the foreend of the stock?

I know that the barrel manufacture says don't but it sounds like the action still has some play in it. That bolt may or may not be locking up square with the barrel. If the barrel is not the problem then the play in the action is it. The Bolt shim would have been the next suggestion for correcting the problem. You have done that. Try the barrel shim. Use something simple like thin cardboard to start (Cookie box). Pick ONE ammo. Shoot and measure and change the thickness as you go. A warm barrel in the Rugers I own tend to group better too. And the factory barrels at least shoot better it they are not cleaned. Don't know about the one you have.
Ern
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
rb,
One thing I have done to several Rugers including my own is to take the barrel out and run a couple of bands of knurling around the barrel where it fits in the action with a hand knurling tool.
This expands the metal a few thousands and I just keep at it untill I get a light press into the receiver.
I then use red Loc-Tite and a block of wood to tap the barrel into the receiver and tighten the clamp.
It has done wonders on the ones I have done!!!
JIM
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
jdoyle DONE THAT

That method is fine. I use a automatic center punch to make 2 circles of dimples around the barrel shank to do the same thing. The slightly raised metal makes the barrel center in the reciever if its a loose fit. I also locktite a barrel if it's pulling hard down or left on the stock but prefer to leave barrels that fit in factory condition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Solution Found

This morning a close inspection of the locking lugs seemed to show both making contact. However I decided to cycle the bolt several times to observe the contact pattern. After several bolt travels I noticed normal wear pattern on top but no wear on bottom except a bright shiny line very near the inside edge of the lug. This indicated to me a sharp edge on the reciever lug contact zone.

To cure this I took a honing stone to the inside of the lug. Well the edge must have been really sharp as head spacing immediately lengthened .004" enough to give problems with ignition. I had to adjust head spacing. The first 3 groups I shot after this were .345" .384" and .334" with Midas M.

These results are good if this trend continues. But it has tarnished the name of Ruger in my book at least some. It was too difficult, took too long, and cost too much to achieve the results. A new VBZ cost over $400 it should not take this much effort (my opinion) to get one to shoot.

I am an avid shooter with plenty of experience and some tools for making a rifle shoot. Lord pity the poor beginner who gets one of these things with a similar problem.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,905 Posts
Wow good job

That was some intense smithing you have done to get a relatively cheap gun to shoot compared to a more expensive custom fine tunned out of the box shooter. To bad you didn't find the problem sooner or enjoy putting the puzzle together more. I feel you are being a bit hard on Ruger. Ruger gave you a gun that shot OK out of the box and you turned it into a custom super accurate gun that some only dream of having. It would probably shoot great with the factory barrel now. I have a 77/22 magnum that shoots sub MOA with just a bit of stock fit tunning. It is well known that the 77s sometimes need some fine adjustments but they are still a good frame to work with. I think really down deep inside you are proud of your custom Ruger.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Chum:

I will admit to some frustration near the end. I have done several Rugers mostly 10/22s but more than 10 77/22s. For the most part you could turn a 77 into a shooter (if not that way from the factory) for $150 or less. If you require target accuracy a premium barrel is likely to raise the price $250 or so. I define shooter as a rifle able to average .5 inch or less at 50 yards. I define target accuracy as .35 inch or less same distance. Yes that can be a lot of money for .15 inch. But we are talking averages here not the best group the rifle will ever shoot.

I enjoy most of my projects that's why I will be working on a 10/22 project as soon I'm sure this one is done. I have enjoyed many aspects of this project. Not the least enjoyable thing is I learned a few new things which is the reason to do these projects in the first place.

That said I will stick with my guns about Ruger at this time. Ruger is not a bad company their products fill a need in the marketplace. The Ruger is certainly the easiest upgradable rimfire available. It is still my belief that they are getting harder to tune. I could write a book (and I might) about the reasons I feel this way. The short reason is, lack of detail of construction. You could say that that is all the detail you can buy for the money paid. I would counter by saying this is a new thing from Ruger. The newer 77s are lacking. Maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps I just got the hard ones. But if I'm right I hope this condition will be corrected by Ruger.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top