Ruger RPR + Shaw barrel

[XTR]

I've got a RPR that I put a shaw barrel on this week. This gun had ejection issues that seem to have plagued some of them. I've filed off the little knotch on the bolt that was catching the ejector spring clip on the left side of the bolt (and later someone has made a vid about that fix) and bent the spring in giving a bit more pressure and it ejects great now.

I had done a couple of sessions with the factory barrel and was looking for better than I was getting though I may need to revisit a little on that.

After reading a lot on the interwebs about the Shaw barrels having tight chambers and being hard chambering I put the barrel on with a .010 aluminum shim to give me a little more chamber length and make it less likely that it will stick loaded rounds. I may eventually try it with out it too.

Took it to the range today testing new lot of Wolf Math Target and some Laupa Center-X

I spent a bit of time getting zeros for 25, 50, 75,and 100 yards. One thing I found was that my Silencerco Warlock does not help this rifle. It opens up pretty badly at longer ranges with the can on.

At 100 yards I was surprised to find that the Wolf shoots quite a bit better than the Lapua in this rifle. I still have to measure groups but right at 1MOA for the wolf vs over 1½ for the Lapua

One other problem with this setup. The Lapua Center X fails to extract about one in every 7 to 10 rounds. Not fail to feed, or an ejection issue, you have to pick the fired case out of the chamber. Didn't happen once with the Wolf.

 

[straightshooter1]

I've got a RPR that I put a shaw barrel on this week. This gun had ejection issues that seem to have plagued some of them. I've filed off the little knotch on the bolt that was catching the ejector spring clip on the left side of the bolt (and later someone has made a vid about that fix) and bent the spring in giving a bit more pressure and it ejects great now.

I had done a couple of sessions with the factory barrel and was looking for better than I was getting though I may need to revisit a little on that.

After reading a lot on the interwebs about the Shaw barrels having tight chambers and being hard chambering I put the barrel on with a .010 aluminum shim to give me a little more chamber length and make it less likely that it will stick loaded rounds. I may eventually try it with out it too.

Took it to the range today testing new lot of Wolf Math Target and some Laupa Center-X

I spent a bit of time getting zeros for 25, 50, 75,and 100 yards. One thing I found was that my Silencerco Warlock does not help this rifle. It opens up pretty badly at longer ranges with the can on.

At 100 yards I was surprised to find that the Wolf shoots quite a bit better than the Lapua in this rifle. I still have to measure groups but right at 1MOA for the wolf vs over 1½ for the Lapua

One other problem with this setup. The Lapua Center X fails to extract about one in every 7 to 10 rounds. Not fail to feed, or an ejection issue, you have to pick the fired case out of the chamber. Didn't happen once with the Wolf.

When I first installed my Shaw barrel, the bolt was substantially harder to close than when the factory barrel was on. I fired a few hundred rounds and was expecting that tightness the become less. It did become "less", but not enough and just didn't like having that much effort to close the bolt. So, I removed the barrel and reinstalled it, but with an aluminum shim that was ~.004. That made all the difference and bolt feel fine and the bullets still get engraved as expected from a match barrel. Extraction was never an problem, except before I had installed the shim, some unfired cartridges would not extract (pretty much per the Shaw warning about "difficulty removing unfired rounds from the chamber") . Fire cases always extracted just fine.

Since you've used a shim that's .010", I have a strong feeling that's what is likely causing your extraction issue. You might want to try half that amount and see how that extraction goes???

In my RPRR, both Wolf Match Extra and Center-X did well and Center-X did the best. What worked the very best in mine was Federal Ultra Match. Unfortunately, the Ultra Match isn't around any longer, and I'm down to half a brick of it. But . . . I do find that RWS R-50 comes pretty close.

 

[XTR]

I'll try that. I shot more today just getting elevations for the scope, and I was shooting a 458SOCOM that I just put together too so even though I shot all afternoon I didn't get a whole lot of data. I almost giggle every time I look at the holes you make with a big bore (I love my 45-70s too)

I did have the trigger for my Lab Radar with me this time and I was able to get some MVs on the 22LR. I went with a 20" barrel after reading that some folks who got the 18" Shaw barrels found they were running closer to super sonic than they wanted. Might have been a good choice. I'm running 1050 to 1065ish with both the Wolf and the Lapua.

Oh, one other thing a figured out today has to do with Ballistic calculators. (garbage in = garbage out moment) My 25 and 50 yard elevation zeros were identical, but the calculator said I should need .3 to .5 mils at 50????..... all the others lines were off as you'd expect if 50 was off that much. Came home and puzzled it for a while and figured that at 25 the bullet had to be rising to the LOS and at 50 it had to be falling and the only thing that makes that work is scope height, so I measured it. I had put in 1.5", it measures closer to 2" Plug that in an WHAM! It all matched up. It's one of those inputs that I've played with in my center fires and it never makes an appreciable difference.

100 yds with Wolf

75 yds Wolf

the dots are 0.75 inch.

Harris bipod and a rear bag.

 

[straightshooter1]

I did have the trigger for my Lab Radar with me this time and I was able to get some MVs on the 22LR. I went with a 20" barrel after reading that some folks who got the 18" Shaw barrels found they were running closer to super sonic than they wanted. Might have been a good choice. I'm running 1050 to 1065ish with both the Wolf and the Lapua.

I have the 18" Shaw barrel on mine and wish I had gone with the 20 incher. My Wolf Match Extra and Center-X both run just a hair over 1100 fps (like around 1103 average).

Oh, one other thing a figured out today has to do with Ballistic calculators. (garbage in = garbage out moment) My 25 and 50 yard elevation zeros were identical, but the calculator said I should need .3 to .5 mils at 50????..... all the others lines were off as you'd expect if 50 was off that much. Came home and puzzled it for a while and figured that at 25 the bullet had to be rising to the LOS and at 50 it had to be falling and the only thing that makes that work is scope height, so I measured it. I had put in 1.5", it measures closer to 2" Plug that in an WHAM! It all matched up. It's one of those inputs that I've played with in my center fires and it never makes an appreciable difference.

. . . funny how that works, huh?

 

[Booner1334]

I also have a Shaw barrel on my RPRR and noticed an approximate 30 fps gain in muzzle velocity with the 20 inch barrel over the factory barrel.
I think the reason for this is that the match chamber in the Shaw barrel jams the bullet into the rifling and it takes more pressure before the bullet begins it's movement. Or to say it another way, the pressure has to build high enough before it can overcome the case crimp plus the rifling engravement on the bullet. Therefor, more velocity, and perhaps a cleaner or a more complete powder burn in the case? I clean my barrel after each range session and I've noticed my patches aren't as dirty with the Shaw barrel verses the factory barrel. The bolt closure does take more effort, but that hasn't caused any problems.

 

[straightshooter1]

I also have a Shaw barrel on my RPRR and noticed an approximate 30 fps gain in muzzle velocity with the 20 inch barrel over the factory barrel.

The difference I've gotten from my 18" Shaw SS barrel and the factory barrel has been 40-47 fps. Though there are usually differences between chronos, I know longer barrels will produce slower MV's, so that in part can explain some of the difference we have.

I think the reason for this is that the match chamber in the Shaw barrel jams the bullet into the rifling and it takes more pressure before the bullet begins it's movement. Or to say it another way, the pressure has to build high enough before it can overcome the case crimp plus the rifling engravement on the bullet. Therefor, more velocity, and perhaps a cleaner or a more complete powder burn in the case? I clean my barrel after each range session and I've noticed my patches aren't as dirty with the Shaw barrel verses the factory barrel. The bolt closure does take more effort, but that hasn't caused any problems.

I believe you're right about the additional pressure a match chamber produces in that way thereby increasing MV's. I don't know about the cleaner powder burn. But I know the SS barrels I have are smoother than the factory ones making for easier cleaning and appears to be less dirty (or it's simply easier to get the crud out with few patches).

 

[Frankr]

I've got a RPR that I put a shaw barrel on this week. This gun had ejection issues that seem to have plagued some of them. I've filed off the little knotch on the bolt that was catching the ejector spring clip on the left side of the bolt (and later someone has made a vid about that fix) and bent the spring in giving a bit more pressure and it ejects great now.

I had done a couple of sessions with the factory barrel and was looking for better than I was getting though I may need to revisit a little on that.

After reading a lot on the interwebs about the Shaw barrels having tight chambers and being hard chambering I put the barrel on with a .010 aluminum shim to give me a little more chamber length and make it less likely that it will stick loaded rounds. I may eventually try it with out it too.

Took it to the range today testing new lot of Wolf Math Target and some Laupa Center-X

I spent a bit of time getting zeros for 25, 50, 75,and 100 yards. One thing I found was that my Silencerco Warlock does not help this rifle. It opens up pretty badly at longer ranges with the can on.

At 100 yards I was surprised to find that the Wolf shoots quite a bit better than the Lapua in this rifle. I still have to measure groups but right at 1MOA for the wolf vs over 1½ for the Lapua

One other problem with this setup. The Lapua Center X fails to extract about one in every 7 to 10 rounds. Not fail to feed, or an ejection issue, you have to pick the fired case out of the chamber. Didn't happen once with the Wolf.

is this the video you’re talking about?

I've got a RPR that I put a shaw barrel on this week. This gun had ejection issues that seem to have plagued some of them. I've filed off the little knotch on the bolt that was catching the ejector spring clip on the left side of the bolt (and later someone has made a vid about that fix) and bent the spring in giving a bit more pressure and it ejects great now.

is this what you did to your bolt?

 

[XTR]

What I found was a little notch that didn't get machined out of the bolt that the ejector spring (the curved one) catches on and holds it away from the bullet

This picture is what it looked like after I filed that away with a jewelers file. (hadn't cleaned it up yet so the filing are still there)

It's the same thing he's talking about in the video. I found that even after removing the burr in the bolt I still had to bend the spring in a little tighter to get reliable ejection. I've seen a picture somewhere of the new spring that Ruger ships out and it's got a slightly different shape that I am going to guess results in the same thing.


Took the pictures with my Teslong borescope

 

[Frankr]

What I found was a little notch that didn't get machined out of the bolt that the ejector spring (the curved one) catches on and holds it away from the bulletView attachment 7401016
View attachment 7401019

This picture is what it looked like after I filed that away with a jewelers file. (hadn't cleaned it up yet so the filing are still there)
View attachment 7401027


It's the same thing he's talking about in the video. I found that even after removing the burr in the bolt I still had to bend the spring in a little tighter to get reliable ejection. I've seen a picture somewhere of the new spring that Ruger ships out and it's got a slightly different shape that I am going to guess results in the same thing.


Took the pictures with my Teslong borescope

Thanks for the photos


I will look after dinner tonight

 

[Frankr]

Here is what I found sorry for the iPhone pics, but’s it’s the best I have. I don’t see much that could be removed. Am I missing something?

 

[XTR]

Yours looks good. Compare the pictures, mine had a pronounced notch on the left side

 

[straightshooter1]

Here is what I found sorry for the iPhone pics, but’s it’s the best I have. I don’t see much that could be removed. Am I missing something?

This looks exactly line mine and this wasn't an issue for my poor ejections:

There was two things I did to get mine to consistently eject. One of them I can see in the following picture is that the ejector needs to be bent down to where it's just touching the edge of the bolt (that edge where you see a narrow white space between the ejector and the bolt in your picture). If you slide a case into the bolt, the extractor and ejector should hold it firm enough so that there's not much wiggle.\

I found it helped to file the extractor on the inside from the point to the junction of the L shape taking nothing off at the tip the more at the L junction so that only the tip of the extractor is making a sharp contact with the cases rim. Again, a case should be held in with very little wiggle.