Ruger rifles?

[Jar Head]

Hey fellas,
Does any one have a bad opinion of these rifles & if so what is it? My wife wanted a hunting rifle for deer yet something that could handle elk if she ever gets the notion. I sugested a .270 win. as she is very small & this has accounted for countless deer & elk. Other than that I told her she was on her own. I was not trying to be a jerk but I expained to her that I wanted her to pick a rifle that she liked & felt right to her. After some time of research & looking around she picked a Ruger M77 MkII. I have heard a lot of bad things about this rifle but to be honest it's been a really good gun. The trigger is a tad stiff & I had to put a after market recoil pad on it for her, other than that it shoots 1" groups as is. She has been using 130 gr. Speer BTSP for practicing & plinking & will use 150 gr. Partitions this season. I am not crazy for plastic stocks & stainless steel but this rifle is very comfortable & shoulders nicely plus shoots groups that are more than just o.k. for hunting purposes. Am I alone in thinking Ruger is getting a bum rap or did she just get lucky?

 

[FOTIS]

All I can say is the following. A lot of rifles these days are hit or miss when it comes to accuracy...Ruger included.

The only ones I trust are Sakos Tikkas and Savages.

If anyone is looking for one I have a new in Box Tikka 270 WSM for sale at a Ruger price. These guns are smooooooth as heck and very accurate. They will not leave the factory until they shoot 3 shots under an inch at 100 yds. Being a 270 WSM you can easily download it ----say 140 AccuBond at 2800 or a 150 Partition at the same speed to get the 270 Win recoil.

Check it out it! I listed it $50 under regular retail.

 

[FOTIS]

New (test fired at factory) TIKKA T3 LITE in 270 Winchester Short Magnum cal. Very nice black synthetic stock w/ positive checkering. Hammer-forged 24 3/8" blued bbl is mated to slick-cycling SAKO designed steel T3 bolt-action w/ detachable 3-shot magz. Trigger pull is easily adjustable from 2-4 lbs. Scope rings included. Studs. No sights. Only 6 lbs. 3 oz.! Guaranteed from sako to shoot 3 shots under moa at 100 yards. Box/manual/warranty.

$475 shipped to 48.



Please e-mail me. Do not rely on PM's.

 

[Guy Miner]

Jar Head - I've seen, owned and shot some real nice Ruger rifles. Have a particular soft spot in my heart for a good Ruger Number One single shot. Twenty years ago my first "magnum" was a Ruger 77, .300 Win mag. Good all-around hunting rifle.

They have a reputation for having fairly rough bores, but in general I think they're good hunting rifles. I do like Ruger's version of the controlled round feed. Real nice action for a general purpose hunting rifle.

Nope - I've got no beef w/Ruger at all.

Semper Fi, Guy

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

We have so many Ruger 77 mk2's that I dont even know where to start. To say the least, they are a great rifle. My only complaint is that they seem barrel heavy. All of ours have easily shot witin 1" at 100 yards with handloads and a trigger job. I have at least loaded for 7-8 and have not had a problem yet. From .223 to the .338 and almost eveyone between. All were easy shooters from the get go. One in particular was my 25-06. Several .4-.5" groups at 100 yards, and 3-4" at 500 yards. Rugers have always treated my family well, or we just lucked out. Others swear at them, others swear by them. I'm neither. They are accurate, at least from my experiences, but are barrel heavy. I prefera win 70 classic or a rem 700. Shoot just as well, but are better balanced. Also cost $200 more. For the money, Rugers are great in my opinion, cant beat them.

 

[Tom1911]

If I recall correctly, Ruger had serious quality control problems with the barrels it was using on its earliest offerings. In fact, I remember being at a So Cal range about 15 years ago shooting next to a guy who had a Ruger in .280 Rem that he couldn't get to shoot to save his life. He asked me to try. To write that that gun was a POS would be kind. Anyway, he was a poor son-of-a-gun who was plagued with a bad barrel. However, I have heard the Ruger recognized this problem and to its credit took pains to correct it. Now, from what I understand, their rifles are accurate to acceptable standards.

The Model 700 used to set accuracy standards. While it probably still does, from what I understand Savage has given Big Green a run for its money (title). In terms of accuracy, I am not sure that Sako has anything on either of these two.


Good huntin',

Tom

 

[cal sibley]

I think many of the Ruger accuracy problems were due to their not making their own barrels, but I understand that's changed recently and they are now producing their own. For a long time it was a crap shoot. Some were very good, some were awful. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

 

[Black-tailed bandit]

My uncle swears by them, he has about a dozen of them and have has no problem with them. Here is my Ruger opinion, I have a Super blackhawlk, and a 10/22, never a 77, why? because when I bought my 30/06, Bi-mart had a sale on 700's $389 incl Tasco scope, next to it was a Ruger 77 for $425 After a long debate I went with the 700, if the price was the same, both with or without scopes, I'd still be in the store and this was in 2000. I have always been a BIG Remington fan, but would NEVER turn down a Ruger ( I shot my first Deer with a No. 1 in 30/06) if given the chance.

 

[live to shoot]

Jar Head,

I don't think that you got lucky with your M77, My M77 is chambered for the 7mm Rem Mag. I took it out the other day with FACTORY ammo and put 3 shots in a 1'' square. at 100 yards. like you said, my only gripe with ruger is the poor triger on an otherwise fine rifle. I am currently thinking about a Varment M77 in 25-06 with the new 2 stage triger. If any one has shot one I shure would like to know about it.

 

[remingtonman_25_06]

I have not shot the one in 25-06, however I to would love to own one. I have however got to play with 3 different calibers in that rifle. .223, 22-250, and 220 swift. All of them are superbly accurate. WIth good handloads, each will shoot .25" 3 shots at 100 yards. What more can you ask for? The trigger is great, its like a savage accutrigger, w/out the other stupid little thing you pull. Its got a little slack, but once you feel it tighten up, its about 2lb pull. Very nice. I would assume the 25-06 would also be a shooter, my sporter weight rifles in 25-06 have always been pretty accurate, hate to see what it would do with a heavy barrel!!

 

[Greg Nolan]

The Ruger had a barrel problem early off but the big thing was that they were the first manufactor to have litigation triggers that weren't easily adjusted without a gunsmith. A heavy trigger makes accuracy much more difficult. I've just never cared for thier lines but their integral scope mount was revolutionary and like all ruger products, very strong.

 

[catman]

I have had 2 ruger's and sold both after a year. I will never own another one. Could not get them to shoot anything for nothing. Bad luck comes in pairs....I guess

 

[Greyfox]

Jar Head
When Ruger came out with the new MK II stainless/synthetic stocked rifles, I went and traded my blue/wood MK II for a Stainless 280 Rem.That rifle would shoot 1" or less if I did my part.Now I had a rifle that would not change point of impact no matter what time of year I shot it. Because the MK II in 280 rem shot so good I bought one in 243 Win. With that one I could cover 10 shot groups with a Quarter at 100 yards. Then I had to have a 7mm Rem Mag for Elk hunting. My best group at 100 yards was 3/8" for six shots. Then when the 260 rem came out in the Ruger MK II stainless, I bought that for my Deer rifle. With four different bullets I could get three shots into a 5/8" group at 100 yards. Now I have a 7mm08 which will be tested for groups in the future.

All these groups were shot with handloaded ammunition and hunting bullets. Would these rifles shoot as good with factory ammo??? I do not know.

I have owned alot of Ruger M-77 MK II's . Not once did I have any problems with any of them.

The best recoil pad I found is Limbsaver. It adds a little lenght of pull, but if it would work the Wife would love you for it.

Good luck with your MK II. Don't worry!!!

Greyfox

 

[ordy67]

I owned a Ruger 77 in .338 for years, never failed me killed many a deer loaded 210 gr. noslers. Wish I had it back. Am currently looking for a 77 MKII in 458 Lott. NEVER had a problem with rugers!

 

[cdw338]

I have three M77's. One a 7MM mag was good enough take an elk at 425 yards with hand loads. One a 338 mag put the first 5 rounds of 210 federal ammo into 5/8" at 100 yards. Still have some of that ammo and
the 338 still shoots as good a ever. The third M77 is a 280. it has never been fired. I bought it new when they quit making the M77, as I like he tang safety.

Good guns in my opinion.

 

[Ron_T.]

The Ruger Mark II is a fine, accurate rifle. The earlier ones were plagued with poor accuracy due to poor quality barrels, but Ruger has fixed that by making their own barrels now.

As to the .270 caliber... I'd recommend the 130 grain Partition (Sectional Density = .242) due to it's lighter recoil as compared to using the 150 grain Partition (Sectional Density = .279). Since both bullets are Partitions with adequate S.D., either one will penetrate deep enough to get the job done.


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

 

[340boy]

I own 4 rugers. All Mark2's.
A 257 Bob, 338win, 375H&H, and a 416 Rigby.
Curiously enough, the only ones I have had any problems with have been the big guys(375 and 416). The 375 had the rear scope ring (base)machined incorrectly(crooked) and the 416 magazine box was not aligned correctly with the action, thus would not feed ammuntion! Ruger did a good job of repairing both problems, however. My 257 and 338 are very reliable and quite accurate. I would buy another Ruger ,no question. :grin:

 

[Desert Fox]

I only own one Ruger and it's a 9 MM P89 pistol but my hunting buddy own a 308 M77 that outshoot all his custom gun and that's the only Ruger he own.