Shooters Forum banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi Guys,
I am thinking about getting a Ruger compact rifle in .260 Rem. I want something short and handy. A truck gun. Does anybody have any ideas about this combo? Also what power should I try? The barrel on this thing is pretty short. I want to use the 95 gr. V-Max Hornady for varmints and a 140 gr. for bigger stuff. All help would be appreciated.

Jack K.
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
5,220 Posts
For some reason, the 16.5" barrel on the compact  Ruger bolt guns seem terribly short to me.  I haven't shot one or shot the 260 Remington cartridge, but seems like it's getting close to diminishing returns.  I'm not sure what the full length of the rifle is, but the No. 1A and RSI's should be close to the same length with longer barrels.  You have the choice of 243, 270, 7mm Mauser or 30-06 with those.  The No. 1's are single shots, so you'd have to feel comfortable with that, but I think they are great rifles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
I purchased a Ruger compact in 260 last year to use for deer hunting.I have not killed a deer with it yet,but I have killed a few coyotes with it.My best load in this rifle so far is a 140 grain partition bullet loaded with 45 grains of reloader #19 powder.This rifle amazed me how well it shoots despite it's short tube.I am getting groups of about .75 inch with this load.The Hornady 129 grain sp bullet loaded with 46.5 grains of reloader 19 also shoots well too.Groups are slightly over an inch.I have experimented with 100 grain bullets too,but so far have not found an accurate load.The Ruger compact is a neat little rifle.I am thinking about getting another one in 223 later this year.
 

·
The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
Joined
·
36,236 Posts
I'd think that the rifle would be so much more efficient with a larger bore.  Either .358 Win or .35 Rem would get my interest.

Better yet, .44 Mag would be the cat's meow, and generate reasonable ballistics in a 16" barrel, I would guess.  Now THAT combination would be one heck of a truck gun.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
556 Posts
1) It's a very neat gun in that caliber.  The 308 family seems to do well with short barrels.  All the military stuff has short barrels.  They killed elephants (were they drunk?) with the weaker 6.5x54 MS out of a 17.5" barrel.  If it groups halfway decently, you have an argument for it being the "perfect" do-all deer rifle.

2) Alyeska is right about the #1A, or shorter yet RSI.  For the same overall rifle length, you get no compromises on barrel length (22" 1A) and any cal they make -- but, only one shot.  I guess this is the old way to do what the Compact does.

3) MikeG: Ruger does make a short .44 77 bolt gun and it's neat.

-Charlie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
872 Posts
Two things i think you should consider.  The first is that 16 in is mighty short.  Short, light guns are real hard to shoot, and there is a definate point of deminishing return.  My model 7;  18" is about as short as i want to go, and i don;t feel comfortable taking over a 150 yard shot with it.  Why model 7s are made with 20 inchers now, i expect.

Second, if memory serves,  am thinking that the 260 uses fairly slow powders.  Slow powders and real short barrels might not be that great of deal, as lots will get burned outside the muzzle.  Check that one out, because i am not real sure.  

As far as the caliber, i am a big fan of a 6.5mm/ 260.  they are one of those cartridges mild of voice, easy of recoil, modest of velocity, accurate, reasonably flat shooting, and hit harder than they should.  A man just has to like that.

you might want to handle a 18 or a 20 incher, and see if you thought they were handy enough.

Good hunting,

Steve
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
5,220 Posts
Jack,
Sharp1 has one and likes it.  That would be a good sign, especially if you've had your hands on one.  No opinion speaks as loudly as experience.  I sure didn't mean to try to disuade you, but it sure sounded like I did.  Apologies to both you and Sharp1.  It does sound like a handy little "ranch" rifle.  Let us know what you decide.
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
I'm in full agreement with Steve (whitehunter53). In my opinion the trend to excessively short barrels is getting a bit carried away. I purchased a Marlin 444P with its 18.5" barrel after concluding the handiness would be much greater than my old 22" 1895. After shooting and succesfully hunting with it I've come to the conclusion that it really isn't that much more handy and the increased muzzle blast compared to handloaded .45-70's in a 22" barrel is significant.

I sincerely doubt I will ever purchase another rifle with less than 20" of barrel length when a bottle neck or big bore cartridge is chosen. Alyeska's suggestion of a 7x57mm No.1RSI is a very hard one to disagree with for most any big game hunting in the lower 48.



<!--EDIT|Bill Lester|Mar. 02 2002,14:24-->
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
5,220 Posts
Hey Bill,
I know it seems like I really push that cartridge and gun combination, I don't want to sound like a worn out record, but I'll let you guys know where I coming from.  All of my hunting is done here in Alaska.  I try to get in on a Sheep hunt, a moose or caribou hunt, and a goat or deer hunt every year.  I have a karma situation with the big coastal brownies, hopefully if I leave them alone, they'll leave me alone.  I pack a large bore handgun or shotgun working in the backcountry though.  For years I used nothing but the mags.  300 and 338 Win Mags.  Then I came across this little rifle.  It's handling characterstics were like warm sunshine, I had to have that rifle.  Mind you, I had no complaints with the way the 300 or 338 performed on game, but those rifles are long and heavy.  The first game that was taken with the little Ruger was a large dall ram.  Just like he had been struck by lightning.  No it wasn't a 400 yd shot, I'm much more a believer in getting within 200-250 yards, the wind currents in the mountains and glaciers here can do 10 different things in 400 yards, its one thing to shoot across a beanfield with a nice rest, its totally different scrambling around on scree or talus slopes and try to get an accurate shot in the high mountains.  Anyway, I've used that little Ruger on Caribou, Sheep, Goat and Sitka Blacktailed deer and I cannot tell any difference in killing power from that rifle and the 300.  Dead is Dead right?  I've had one animal to run aways, that was a spooked caribou, I prefer to take my time and sneak up on the animal undisturbed and unaware.  I've yet to use it for moose, or on hunts in big bear country, I carry the No. 1 in 338 for that.  A 284 pill is just a tad small to start throwing at animals of that size for my tastes.  I have almost said that this rifle kills all out of proportion for its size, but remember, Karamojo Bell killed elephants with a 7x57 Mauser.  I would recommend this cartridge/rifle combo for anyone hunting anything up to elk size game.  It is very handy, well balanced and efficient killer.  It's compact, light (but not featherweight), easy to hold steady and comes up like a fine english made sxs double barrel shotgun.  It's like an extension of my arms.  If hunt solely out of a tree-stand, you probably don't care, but if you are a still-hunter, stalker, stump-sitter, need a "ranch" rifle, this is as close to perfect as it gets as far as I'm concerned.  My rifle is accurate, moreso than I am, I'm afraid and I've done nothing to it.  It's got a really nice trigger and shot factory ammo around MOA right out of the box.  I'm not a tinkerer or gun crank as Mike G (that was a warning/compliment he gave me, I think) has said, I haven't come down with that affliction - yet.  If someone has that bent, well, I'm sure they could cook some real accuracy out of this little rifle.  If for some reason I didn't have this rifle tomorrow, I would go and buy the exact same thing again.  If I went on a hunt in the lower 48 for anything deer up to elk, yep I'd be carrying this rifle.  Elk, I'd probably carry the No. 1S in 338.  There are elk up here by the way, but its a hunt by drawing permit, not many get 'em.  Someday, just like with our bison.  I guess what it all boils down to is what fits you and what you are comfortable with.  The 300 I had, I had to crank my head around and dig my face into the stock to line up the scope.  When the little Ruger hits my shoulder it's automatic.  If you aren't comfortable with a single shot rifle, don't let me talk you into it.  If you are though and have that confidence, it sure is a treat.  Hopefully I haven't rambled too long.  Just wanted to explain myself and say Hi.
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
Alyeska,

No reason to explain yourself. Hopefully every shooter has that one particular firearm with which he has a special synergy. It is an almost magical bond that is hard to describe to those who haven't experienced it.

Your choice of cartridge as well needs no elaboration beyond it has been very effective against all manner of game for over a century. I am very seriously considering the 7x57 in a No. 1A as my all-around rifle. It's moderate ballistics by today's standards provide a near perfect balance between trajectory, retained velocity at range, penetration, expansion, muzzle blast, and recoil. It is an excellent and elegant choice for just about any hunting situation short of the great bears.
 

·
The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
Joined
·
36,236 Posts
I saw a Win M708 Featherweight in 7x57 in a gunshop a couple of years ago, used but in excellent shape.  Still occasionally kick myself for passing on that one...
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
5,220 Posts
The Ruger No. 1 and 7x57, that combination....well, it's pure grace and lightning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
123 Posts
Jack,

I would agree with alyaske about the No. 1 in 7x57, although mine is in a 1A.  I, or my elder son, has 3 1As at this time.  7x57, 30-06 & 338-06.  They are handy as can be.  I have used the 7x57 for deer, elk and coyote.  (Some guns seem to attract coyotes and that one has killed about a dozen during deer season.)  

I have two loads that work very well:
   140 gr Nosler partition, ** grs 4320, CCI 200 w/ bullet seated just short of lands.  (2980 fps chronographed)
    160 Speer GS, ** grs 4350, CCI 200 w/ bullet also seated out just short of lands.  (2580 fps)
Both shoot well in my rifle.

The 140 is almost the same trajectory as a hot 257 Roberts and will kill deer very well.  That killed my longer coyote at over 400 yds.  ( Damned good shot with "no" luck but a good rest.)

Not a "bear" gun, but it is a dandy and work better than it should because it is so easy to shoot.

Yes, I'm prejudice as I can be, but with experience.

dclark

Loads shown in this posting exceed data presented by both Nosler and Speer. Charge weights have been deleted for the safety of all Shooter's Forum members.



<!--EDIT|Bill Lester|Mar. 05 2002,19:13-->
 

·
Beartooth Regular
Joined
·
5,220 Posts
I agree with you d.  My little Ruger shoots, and I'm not that great of a shot.  Somehow though, that little rifle helps me shoot little bitty groups and hits exactly where it's pointed.  If I never recommend another thing, I'll always recommend the No. 1 RSI in 7x57.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
My disappointment with the little Ruger Compact is based on its very short buttstock more than its business end. The 12" length of pull was designed for women, youths or the vertically challenged but Ruger failed to point this detail out in their literature. You COULD swap its short stock with the Ruger M-77 Ultralight stock if you really wanted the short barrel and still have a conventional 13 1/2" LOP. But then why not simply use the Ultralight with 18 1/2" barrel? As far as the 260 caliber, I sold a Rem Model 7 Youth in this caliber to a 10 year old boy last fall who used it on his very first moose hunt. His grandfather backed him up with a .30-06 but the boy downed an 850 pound bull with a single lung shot at approximately 150 yards; no 06 required.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,132 Posts
Better yet, .44 Mag would be the cat's meow, and generate reasonable ballistics in a 16" barrel, I would guess.  Now THAT combination would be one heck of a truck gun.
You are in luck Mike, the 77/44 is already in the bag, and weighs less. :)

The Ruger Compacts are light and handy, although the short tube on the 7-08 produces all sorts of blast. Just guessing, but I doubt that would improve much with a .260, if you can find one. The compacts are also pretty short, as my 5'4" daughter thinks it's perfect for LOP. But if that's not an issue, it's a very nice rifle to haul around.

As a truck rifle, I'd be inclined to adopt a compact American.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,959 Posts
A friend of mine bought a Ruger Compact in 243. When we were at deer camp, he asked me to zero it for him- and I soon found out why. That rifle was the barkingest, kickingest 243 you can imagine. Even with good earmuffs on, the muzzle blast from that rifle hurt. Recoil was substantial.
The Ruger Compact is very handy and very light. If you want a 'carry a lot,shoot a little' rifle, it would fit the bill fine.
I can't imagine a less suitable varmint rifle, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,287 Posts
A friend of mine bought a Ruger Compact in 243. When we were at deer camp, he asked me to zero it for him- and I soon found out why. That rifle was the barkingest, kickingest 243 you can imagine. Even with good earmuffs on, the muzzle blast from that rifle hurt. Recoil was substantial.
The Ruger Compact is very handy and very light. If you want a 'carry a lot,shoot a little' rifle, it would fit the bill fine.
I can't imagine a less suitable varmint rifle, though.
LOL, a friend asked me to zero his wife's youth sized 243 in, and with a 18 inch barrel. The recoil I don't remember being that bad, but the muzzle blast :eek: was down right awful. What are friends for, huh ?
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top