Ruger 77 Compact .260 Rem

[pitweiler]

Lately I've been mulling over the idea of rebarreling my .243 M77 Ultralight (20 in bbl) to .338 Fed, .260 Rem or 7-08. I just don't see much point in owning a .243 when I have a .223, .30/30 and .30-06. The slightly larger .260 and 7-08 are more versatile than the 243. Anyways, I have an opportunity to jump on a M77 (I like Ruger, leave me alone, lol.) Laminate Compact stainless in .260 Rem, NIB. I'm thinking of moving on it and then putting my .243 up for sale. The .260 has a 16.5in bbl so it'll suffer some velocity loss, but nothing worth noting inside 300 yards. Would you move on it? (I don't care about factory ammo availability.)

[chas0218]

11 hours ago, pitweiler said:

 (I like Ruger, leave me alone, lol.) 

haha that's funny. Honestly what it's going to cost to re barrel you could buy another rifle. I have seen some re chambered guns and that would be one thing but to re barrel you're looking at a good chunk of change. Nothing wrong with Ruger at least it isn't a Savage, I like the Ruger M77's they are nice shooting guns. Personally if the new ruger is a good price I would end up buying that vs re barreling your current gun.

[bugsNbows]

Agree with above. My wife shoots a laminated Ruger Compact in 7mm-08. It's a nice little rifle and suits her fine. That said, it is only ok accuracy-wise. I'd not buy another if I had the chance. 

[pitweiler]

Why wouldn't you buy another one?

[bugsNbows]

IMO, the bbl is too short. It is handy though and the boss loves it! LOL

[pitweiler]

I like short barrel guns. My .243 has a 20 inch barrel and that is pretty handy in the woods. I've always liked the Ruger compacts, but I always worried that I'd be losing a lot of velocity from the short barrel. From what I'm reading it looks like the .260 loses ~175 fps in the 16.5 bbl compared to a 24 bbl. I thought about making my own compact in .338 or .358 with an 18 inch tube. Just saw this .260 and thought it might be nice.

[Pygmy]

Talk to buckmaster 7600....He likes stubby barrels.....Concerns about velocity loss are not a big deal unless you are shooting at long range , say 300 yards...Also, efficient  chamberings  like those based on the .308 Win case suffer relatively less velocty loss than overbore cartridges like the 25-06, 7mm Rem mag and all the weatherby mags, which tend to turn into  loud, ineffficient fire breathers with barrels less than 24 inches or so..

[pitweiler]

I can't decide if I want to move on the .260, rebarrel to .260 or .338 Fed, or just stick with .243. I have more interest in hunting the northern zone than southern zone and that means I have more opportunities to run across a blackie. I know .243 kills plenty of black bear, but I've been face to face with them as a kid and I just can't imagine poking one with a 6mm. 

Once I get back into a house next month I was planning on working up a load with 85gr TSX, trying to hit 2850 fps from the 20in tube. I've read how the TSX bullets perform a lot bigger than they are.

If the .260 had a 20 inch tube I wouldn't even have posted this. I also found a 16.5 inch 77 in .300 RCM. That could be interesting. 

Edited October 14, 2017 by pitweiler

[Buckmaster7600]

First I'll say I won't own a new Ruger 77 I hate the new safeties. A 260 with a 16" tube wouldn't be my first choice my personal rule is nothing under 30cal with shorter than a 20" barrel and as many on here know I love short barrels.

My suggestion trade the 243 in and find a good used Remington pump.

My suggestion within your options is have the 243 rebored to 358 Winchester and have the barrel cut down to 16". 338 federal suffers from bullet selection.

STAY AWAY FROM THE RCM, brass is getting impossible to find, my 338 RCM is a killer but I rarely shoot it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pitweiler]

Seems like more .338 bullets are available than .358 bullets. Most everyone makes a 210 gr .338 and the federal seems to work with a 210. Why do you say the .338 suffers from bullet selection?

[Buckmaster7600]

Most 338 bullets are designed to expand at higher velocities than you will ever see in a 338 federal especially with a short tube


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pitweiler]

That makes sense.  

[Buckmaster7600]

I don't know how you intend to hunt or what shots you are willing to take and those are essential pieces to the puzzle.

 

Me personally my cartridge selection is based on 2 critical components. I want a bullet that will give me an entry and an exit at any shot angle. I want to have the ability to shoot 200yds.

 

Now the 200yd part is easy just about any rifle cartridge will kill a deer at 200yds the other one is the roughy. My favorite deer cartridge on he planet is a 7mm-08 but it won't go end to end of a deer. What I have found that works the best for me as a tracker and still hunter in the big woods is 225gn Barnes tsx at 2450-2700fps out of a 358, 35whelen, 35 rem mag. My ADK buck last year weighed 228 dressed and I had a bullet go corner to corner entered butt cheek exited from shoulder with excellent expansion it just doesn't get any better than that.

 

All that being said if you will be sitting and only willing to take broadside or quartering to shots about any cartridge will work.

 

Here's an article you might enjoy. https://www.bigwoodsbucks.com/gallery/articles/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/174/how-to-pick-the-perfect-tracking-rifle

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pitweiler]

I want something I can walk with and sit with. Something that will be capable of touching 300 yards if needed to and not carry like a boat anchor when I'm walking. My '06 is long and heavy. My .243 is short and light. I want something that is short and light with no more recoil than an '06, give or take a little. 

I think the parameters you listed above are good. 

[Buckmaster7600]

I want something I can walk with and sit with. Something that will be capable of touching 300 yards if needed to and not carry like a boat anchor when I'm walking. My '06 is long and heavy. My .243 is short and light. I want something that is short and light with no more recoil than an '06, give or take a little. 
I think the parameters you listed above are good. 

I suggest a 308 with an 18-20" barrel in the action and rifle you prefer. I am a big fan of pumps because I want a fast follow up shot and it's what I'm comfortable with. Balance is more important than overall weight but I like to be under 8lbs loaded. here is my rifle that fits your bill to a T 35 whelen "started as an 06" 18" barrel tikka t3 2-7 leupold. 6.6lbs loaded shoots 1" groups at 100yds.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pitweiler]

That's a nice rifle. If you're recommending a .308, wouldn't a .260 be fine as well? Even from a 16.5 inch tube a 120gr bullet will reach 2750 fps and a 140gr bullet will make 2550-2600. Could you make the argument that a .243 with the right load can handle everything?

Edited October 15, 2017 by pitweiler

[airedale]

On 10/12/2017 at 10:34 PM, pitweiler said:

(I like Ruger, leave me alone, lol.)

I like Ruger 77s myself especially the older tang safety models, the old tang safety Ultra Light is a fine handling easy carry rifle.  I think both Ruger rifles you mention would work well at moderate ranges in the woods. I have zero experience with the 260 Rem but I do believe it to be a top notch medium game cartridge. As for the 243 I have owned several and also one 6 mm Remington which is pretty much the same. I killed more woodchucks and crows than anything with those rifles but did take a half dozen or so Deer and can tell you none went very far especially when I went to the 95 gr Nosler Partitions. I did take one with a 105 gr Speer and while it pretty much dropped where it stood I did not like the fact that the bullet shed the jacket.

So to be honest I do not think a Deer would notice too much the difference from being shot by the 16.5 inch barreled 260 Remington or your current 20 inch 243 Winchester as long as you are firing well made bullets at moderate ranges, they both are time proven cartridges that are able to do the job. 

10 hours ago, pitweiler said:

Something that will be capable of touching 300 yards if needed to and not carry like a boat anchor when I'm walking.

Now when you start talking a possible 300 yard shot personally I leave the short barreled rifles home and carry a more all around firearm.  I know under the right condition even a handgun can make a long shot but I try to match my firearm to be best suited to the cover and all the possible range tasks at hand I may be faced with.

Light bolt action sporters with 22 inch barrels weighing under 7 pounds handle pretty darn good and chambered in something like 280 Remington or 270 Winchester they will easily make long shots with good ammo and a confident and competent shooter pulling the trigger.

Al

 

Edited October 15, 2017 by airedale

[pitweiler]

3 minutes ago, airedale said:

Light bolt action sporters with 22 inch barrels weighing under 7 pounds handle pretty darn good and chambered in something like 280 Remington or 270 Winchester they will easily make long shots with good ammo and a confident and competent shooter pulling the trigger.

Al

 

When I bought my .243 I considered a .280. The 20in size of the .243 is perfect. Which Speer bullet did you use? Was it a Grand Slam? I don't see a 105gr in their line up anymore. I've heard other folks reference that bullet. 

[airedale]

3 minutes ago, pitweiler said:

When I bought my .243 I considered a .280. The 20in size of the .243 is perfect. Which Speer bullet did you use? Was it a Grand Slam? I don't see a 105gr in their line up anymore. I've heard other folks reference that bullet. 

It was the "hot core" Speer 105 gr spitzer which is probably not even being produced today, I am an old goat and loaded those bullets back in the late 60s early 70s.

Al

[pitweiler]

I think they still make the Hot Cor but it's a 100gr now. 

[TACC]

When I bought my .243 I considered a .280. The 20in size of the .243 is perfect. Which Speer bullet did you use? Was it a Grand Slam? I don't see a 105gr in their line up anymore. I've heard other folks reference that bullet. 

I have an older, don't even know if it is still produced, 280 Rem in a model 700 BDL mountain rifle, with a Nikon 2-7 on it. Very light, flat shooting, tack driver. I would say my favorite non 30 cal all around gun.

Sent from my SM-G900T3 using Tapatalk

[Rattler]

3 hours ago, pitweiler said:

 Could you make the argument that a .243 with the right load can handle everything?

I you use a Barnes TSX in 85 grain or better, the .243 will do most of what the .260 Rem will.  I think it could handle everything you could ever hunt in NY quite well.  I'd keep the .243 and use Barnes bullets and go with a new .338 Federal rifle, considering the other rifles you mentioned you already own.

Why .338 rather than .308?  The .308 is best with a 150 grain bullet in it, whereas the .338 Federal uses much heavier bullets.

[thphtm]

.260 rem. ,7mm-08 and 6.5x 55 all pretty much the same , with a 120 gr. or 140 grain all will kill a deer at 300 yards.Another thing to think about If you reload your own ammo Is to get your .243  re chambered to a .243 ackley improved which will hold 10% more powder and should be enough with a 90 gr. bullet at 300yds. 

[Buckmaster7600]

That's a nice rifle. If you're recommending a .308, wouldn't a .260 be fine as well? Even from a 16.5 inch tube a 120gr bullet will reach 2750 fps and a 140gr bullet will make 2550-2600. Could you make the argument that a .243 with the right load can handle everything?

Sure it would be "fine," but it would not be my choice and if you're buying a rifle for this purpose why settle on "fine." With modern ammo there isn't a bad choice.

As someone who lives to hunt big woods and stays awake at night thinking about guns and load data and the perfect rifle combination I feel it's hard to beat a 18" barreled 308 when all things are considered. If it wasn't for my penetration criteria it's what I would hunt with a lot more.

Yes with the right hand load you could certainly get by with a 243, but getting by doesn't seem like what you are after.

From someone who has cabinets full of short barreled rifles I think you're off by over 100fps on your guesstimated velocities. Now it's impossible to tell because all barrels are different but I think you would be closer to 2650-2600 with a 120gn bullet. Now if you had 18.5" I think 2750 would be reasonable but those 2 inches are your biggest velocity drops. For instance I have a 16" 270 that I can't to get over 2700fps with a 130 gn bullet.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pitweiler]

Those are some good points. Maybe after this season I'll send it off for a new barrel. I think I'm going to stick with 20 inches if I do. The biggest issue with all of this will be having a stock made. I doubt the barrel profile will match the OEM profile and I can't find a good place that makes 77 stocks to match the slightly shorter barrel.