Ruger 77 pgt aics bottom metal and mags

rosseickhoff

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2011
Messages
346
Location
Grass Range Mt
Has anyone used one of the pgt aics bottom metals with a 300 win mag or equivalent magnum. Looking at aics mags with a 3.65 coal I'm assuming I would need to remove metal from the mag box and feeding ramp. Probably .25 to .3 for the mag to clear properly. Has anybody done this. Already restocked with a boyd laminate, trigger job and muzzle break. Rifle now shoots sub moa still working on loads. Going to shoot some coal of 3.65 next chance to see if it will tighten groups without the .28 jump to the rifling. Has anybody done this before?
 
I just shot 3 sets of 3 still doing ladders in load development with 3.65 coal shooting hornady 208 elr behind h1000. Maxed out velosity at 2900 in a 24" barrel. Accuracy was hard to tell a difference still about 3/4 moa. Shot it at 700 yards and a 5 1/4 group. 100 yard group was still 3/4 inch. Not sure if it would be worth the money and work or not to extend the mag well. Sure would look cool with a ten shot mag and possibly increase rigity with a 1 piece bottom metal. Any input on the project?
 
I have a M77 tang safety that has a short mag box.

I emailed CDI and they said they would be doing the Hawkeyes and MkIIs first and then the M77 hopefully this summer. We shall see.

Try them. I did not ask for dimensions, probably should have. They also stated they would do inletting for free with the purchase. Her's their website

CDiPrecision Gunworks
 
Yeh I have to load right at 3.335" just so it feeds reliably.

I think you would have to take too much off the feed ramp.

I am loading the Barnes LRX as they like the jump and happy so far.
 
I'm loading the 208s at 3.43 I believe. Take up all of the mag. I thought I could shrink the groups a little more bye going to 3.65 but results were mixed. Shot great at distance but 100 was still about 3/4 moa. That was off bipeds without a back rest so maybe the 1/4 inch I'd like to improve is just me.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top