Now The Fun Begins - 30-06 Ruger M77 Mark II

[Howard1955]

I just bought a 30-06 Ruger M77 Mark II on Gunbroker.

The seller provided the serial number of the gun, and I called Ruger to ask about it.

The lady at Ruger said “The rifle was a stainless gun when we shipped it out”. (Or something very close to that statement.)

The reason I called to ask her? The pictures showed a black, boat-paddle M77.

I looked more closely at the pictures. It looks to me like someone had fun with a rattle-can of black spray paint.

So - now the fun begins. I get to disassemble it, and then strip the paint off of all the parts of this rifle.

At least, I think it’s paint.




















,’,!

Read More

 

[PaulB47]

It's a Ruger. It's never going to look pretty, no matter what you do to it.

 

[oldcorpgunny]

It may be epoxy, if it's paint. Soak it in lacquer thinner for a day or so (without the stock!!)

 

[TTSX]

My opinion, I enjoy the rattle can look. I like how it scratches/burns off. Have a beater AK with a rattle can on top of rattle can job.

 

[arrowshooter]

If the seller was D4 Guns, they should have at least been able to mention it was painted since they are in the business. Good winter project though if we ever get winter.

 

[Howard1955]

I picked up the rifle today, and it does appear to be spray paint. I can scratch it off with my thumbnail, at the edges of the scrapes.

 

[arakboss]

I hope you got a good deal on it.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

If its regular old spray paint....it will come off with most gun solvents like Hoppe's #9 etc.
Neat rifle nevertheless...be nice to see a picture once the "clothes" come the "painted lady"...
Andy

 

[Howard1955]

I stripped several layers of spray paint off of the slide of an XD pistol a few years back, using Powder Blast. It worked great, and didn’t affect the factory finish at all.

Do any of you know how it would work on this stainless barrel? It does contain acetone.

 

[Howard1955]

I tried some Powder Blast on the bottom edge of the stock, and didn’t see any problem. So I went after the stainless.

This solvent is amazing. Here’s what the rifle looks like after about 30 minutes of scrubbing.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Hey...Look there is a rifle hidden under all that paint...Very nice..!
Andy

 

[gmerkt]

It's a Ruger. It's never going to look pretty, no matter what you do to it.

Ordinarily, I would agree as Ruger has a reputation for more workman-like finishes. However, I have a Ruger Mark II RL in .223, blue with wood stock. It's one of my nicer looking rifles with a deep blue. Only the bolt is stainless. It dates to 1991 and I bought it new. I was too cheap to buy a new scope, so it sports an ancient Weaver KV 2-7 scope on it. The RL was their lightest version of the MK II.

 

[Pete F]

The grip panels on the stock should be wood inserts. I am not sure how to remove the paint, but it looks much nicer with the wood accents. I have one in 7.62x39. I really like mine even with the paddle stock.

I do like the stainless better than the black paint. Nice job.

 

[orygun]

Ordinarily, I would agree as Ruger has a reputation for more workman-like finishes. However, I have a Ruger Mark II RL in .223, blue with wood stock. It's one of my nicer looking rifles with a deep blue. Only the bolt is stainless. It dates to 1991 and I bought it new. I was too cheap to buy a new scope, so it sports an ancient Weaver KV 2-7 scope on it. The RL was their lightest version of the MK II.

View attachment 756718

I bought a 77MKII in 30-06 about the same time as your .223. Nice gloss blue and good looking walnut stock. IT was a fantastic shooter, too.

The grip panels on the stock should be wood inserts. I am not sure how to remove the paint, but it looks much nicer with the wood accents. I have one in 7.62x39. I really like mine even with the paddle stock.

I do like the stainless better than the black paint. Nice job.

Not all of the grip inserts are wood or contrasting colors. Many on the standard hunting rifles are black. However, in this instance anything is possible. Those sling loops are supposed to be stainless, too.
Nice job on the cleaning. These boatpaddles have some collector interest, but I thought the finish was way too flashy. I bought an identical rifle brand new and put the boatpaddle on the above mentioned 77MKII, blasted the finish and then added a Hogue stock. (I absolutely hate the look and non removable sling loops of the boatpaddle) Kinda didn't stop there and added a Timney trigger and a trip to Velzey for an Ackley Improving. We're having a lovers quarrel right now and I've been distracted by a couple of Winchesters, but this is a fantastic rifle.

 

[Howard1955]

Ordinarily, I would agree as Ruger has a reputation for more workman-like finishes. However, I have a Ruger Mark II RL in .223, blue with wood stock. It's one of my nicer looking rifles with a deep blue. Only the bolt is stainless. It dates to 1991 and I bought it new. I was too cheap to buy a new scope, so it sports an ancient Weaver KV 2-7 scope on it. The RL was their lightest version of the MK II.

View attachment 756718

That’s a good-looking rifle.

 

[Howard1955]

I bought a 77MKII in 30-06 about the same time as your .223. Nice gloss blue and good looking walnut stock. IT was a fantastic shooter, too.


Not all of the grip inserts are wood or contrasting colors. Many on the standard hunting rifles are black. However, in this instance anything is possible. Those sling loops are supposed to be stainless, too.
Nice job on the cleaning. These boatpaddles have some collector interest, but I thought the finish was way too flashy. I bought an identical rifle brand new and put the boatpaddle on the above mentioned 77MKII, blasted the finish and then added a Hogue stock. (I absolutely hate the look and non removable sling loops of the boatpaddle) Kinda didn't stop there and added a Timney trigger and a trip to Velzey for an Ackley Improving. We're having a lovers quarrel right now and I've been distracted by a couple of Winchesters, but this is a fantastic rifle.
View attachment 756735

That does look good.

I was surprised to find out that people were collecting these rifles. My interest in them is purely utilitarian. If I can, I aim to pick up a 77/22 this coming year.

 

[TNThomas]

Yup, great solid rifle and action right there!

 

[Howard1955]

I’m planning to disassemble it as soon as I can, but have never taken one of these apart.

Do any of you have advice or tips to share? I’m hoping I can get the thing put back together without breaking something or having leftover parts.

 

[gmerkt]

I was surprised to find out that people were collecting these rifles. My interest in them is purely utilitarian. If I can, I aim to pick up a 77/22 this coming year.

I didn't know they were either. The one I have was for shooting, but I've kept it so long and it hasn't been out much so it's still nice. The reason I bought the lightest weight version was I thought I might be packing it somewhere. But I never have. And it doesn't make a very good range gun because the slim, tapered barrel heats up in no time so you have to let it cool off frequently. Then there was my friend in Everson, he had a farm and some cattle. When they were calving, he'd have trouble with coyotes. So he'd call me up on the phone, all worried, asking me to come with "a rifle." Of course he was miles and miles distant from me. Even when I did come to the supposed rescue, the coyotes were long gone.

The 77/22, I've got one of those also but I'm not a Ruger collector. I didn't even know they existed until a few years ago. A friend of mine had a couple, needed some emergency cash, so I bought his wood stocked version. According to the serial number, it was made in 1984 which was the first year they were offered. It isn't a cherry example as it has seen a little use but it's nice. I bought a spare mag for it, I don't trust having only one of those little plastic rotary mags on hand.



I do not have a Ruger 10/22. Nor any other semi-auto .22's. I did have a Remington Nylon 66 but I got rid of it before I-1639 took effect. I didn't want it to be a problem for my estate. I haven't felt that way about other semi-autos, though. I've got some other .22 rifles, which I consider to be the all-around most utilitarian firearm a household can have on hand. If nothing else.

 

[gmerkt]

I bought a 77MKII in 30-06 about the same time as your .223. Nice gloss blue and good looking walnut stock. IT was a fantastic shooter, too.

My 77 MK II in .223 is a nice shooter. One of its favorite loads is with IMR 4320. The rifle has the 1-12 twist rifling so I've never fired any bullet over 55 gr. I did discover that it hates 55 gr. FMJ with military ogive. Which I guess is not an unusual thing with a 5.56 profile bullet in a .223 rifling leade.

I've owned a couple of other Ruger 77's. One in .257 Roberts which was a tack driver. The other in 7mm Mauser and it drove me crazy trying to find a load that it liked. After who knows how many load and bullet combinations, I finally discovered that it kinda liked 139 gr. But it was too finicky for me and I found a new home for it. In reflection, maybe I should've looked into how the barrel fit the stock. I had a Winchester Model 70 LW carbine in .308 that drove me crazy with a wandering zero; I finally discovered that the barrel channel wasn't made right and pushed on the barrel in an odd location. Heat would move that barrel all over the place. After I corrected that clearance, the rifle shot well.