Sniper Country Duty Roster collective wisdom


Rifle - Ruger M77:


Gentlemen,

I never hear anyone mention the Ruger 77. I handled a heavy varmint version in 308. The bolt cycled smooth and the rifle felt good to me. How far off from a Remington 700 is it?

Thanks,
Chris
Chris <cs141@nwonline.net>
Northern, Ohio USA - Friday, December 18, 1998 at 02:09:18 (EST) 


Chris, if you took a Ruger and redesigned the action a bit. Used a little better safety totally redid the politically correct trigger. Rebarrelled it installed some new bedding lugs. And bedded the stock and replaced it. Perhaps installing a Remington trigger group would be a good answer and maybe a remington action you might have a pretty fair gun.
B.Rogers <brogers@elkhart.com>
USA - Friday, December 18, 1998 at 14:33:17 (EST) 

About the Ruger: I happen to like my M-77VLE in .308. It shoots .75 MOA all day long. The VLE's have the new two-stage trigger, which I like because it is similar to my NM AR-15.

In the last course I attended, there was 4 '77s. One VLE, two VTs (one 223, one 308), and one old 77 (not Mark II). All shot sub-MOA, even with the crappy ammo provided.

Bruce
Bruce Braxton <braxton1@aol.com>
College Park, GA USA - Friday, December 18, 1998 at 17:21:28 (EST) 


Hey now guys, I thought this was a tactical site, so what is up with all this Ruger talk!!! Hehe. Our ballistician said for a Ruger to shoot, ya don't clean it. Their bores are so damn oversized the fouling actually helps the accuracy. And I agree with whoever said if you replaced the barreled action with a Remington and burned that skeleton fiberglass stock, god I hate those, you'd end up with a halfway decent shooter. They are fine if you want consistent 2-3" groups @100 yds, but I wouldn't count on em after that.
Jeremy O'Neal <mrpink@rapidnet.com>
USA - Saturday, December 19, 1998 at 02:02:56 (EST) 
What I was wondering is this since I am on a budget: I have a Ruger (gasp!) M77 MKII in .300 WM. If I have been able to make this gun shoot .5 MOA bone stock with tailored loads, should I invest in a more "tactical" rifle, or shoot what I got? With all the trigger time I see on this roster, I can't think of a better place to ask.

I'm a competitive handgunner making the switch to long range rifle, so bear with me here. Also, if anyone has a handgun related question, please e-mail me and I woul be happy to help you out!

Powder dry,
Ralph
R. Horn <m1911@earthlink.net>
Houston, Texas, USA - Monday, January 25, 1999 at 02:12:49 (ZULU) 


Ralph, I am LE but not tactical. In answer to your question, depends..
It depends on what you want and since your job does not depend on it you can choose. 1/2 MOA is about normal for a good factory rifle and good scope. But it don't mean it is good for sniper work especialy if its field work or even Benchrest work. It depends on what you want it to do for you. I've seen factory .308 Savages that will shoot a real good score at 200 and bad at 600 (IMO the stock on it). But if all you are going to shoot is 200 max it is good enough. IMO the M77 is a good rifle for its purposes and it sounds like it shoots well for you, maybe its all you need.

bill <billmohr@borg.com>
Central, Ny, USA - Monday, January 25, 1999 at 04:02:36 (ZULU) 


Hey Ralph (with the Ruuu, Ruug, Ruuuggee),

If "It" shoots that good, and does so consistently to your maximum extreme range of engagement you may be content. In a nutshell, shoot the heck out of it, get good, and be happy with the rifle and just work to improve your skills.

peteR
peteR <pngreiff@aol.com>
Big City, bY-gAwD, USA - Monday, January 25, 1999 at 16:37:53 (ZULU) 


I was wondering if anybody had an opinion about the Ruger M77 7mm Mag. I own one, and have recently become interested in long distance shooting and I wondered if this would be a good choice of a weapon. I am looking to shoot 800-1000 meters max...for now. Any info or opinions are welcome. Thanks
Sean
Oregon City, OR, USA - Friday, February 05, 1999 at 19:52:33 (ZULU) 
Sean - That's an ambitious goal for starting out.

I have a friend that has a Ruger 77. It couldn't do much better than 2 or 3 inches at 100 yards, so he sent it back. Ruger returned it and said it looked OK to them, their specs are 1.5" at 50 yards or something like that. He mic'ed the bore and found out it widened from breach to muzzle.

The Ruger 77s don't have a great reputation for accuracy from what I've heard, even with a lot of help from a competent gunsmith. An occasional specimen will shoot well, but in general they don't keep up. All I can suggest is to take yours to the range and see what it can do.
Grasshopper <wd6cmu@netcom.com>
Richmond, CA, USA - Friday, February 05, 1999 at 21:19:13 (ZULU)  


Sean,

I have a heavy barrel Ruger 77V in .308 caliber that I use as a back-up weapon for my Remington PSS. I shoot it occasionaly to stay in touch with the trigger pull, but I have to say, that it is not "sniper grade" by any definition. The best group that I have been able to get out of it is 1.25 inches at 100 yards. I consider this piss poor for a sniper weapon. My PSS will shoot .5 all day long. I have heard horror stories about the accuracy of Rugers. Try yours and see how it does. When you get tired of trying to shoot straight with it, get a Remington.

Randy Stoddard <onesht1kil@yahoo.com>
PC, Oklahoma, USA - Saturday, February 06, 1999 at 10:04:42 (ZULU) 


A Post to The Ruger Bashers: Two of my friends and myself own Ruger M77MKIIVT's, two in .308 and one in .220 Swift. All three rifles are capable of shooting 10 round groups at 0.5 MOA with the "right" loads, from the bench or bipod, when we marksmen do our part. Maybe we have the only Rugers in captivity that shoot well, but I doubt it. And, to the caliber sensitive folk, please remember or be advised, that the marksmanship portion of the 1995 NATO sniper match was won by the Bayerische Staat Polizei, (Bavarian State Police) using German manufactured Sauer rifles in 7mm Magnum. Remember, it's not the weapon, but rather the man behind it that makes the real difference.
Mike O'Brien <bopm@aol.com>
Evansville, WY, USA - Sunday, February 07, 1999 at 03:40:23 (ZULU) 
I have a Ruger M77 MK II stainless varminter, Mag-na-ported, frozen, 36X Leupold. I'm damned lucked to get 1 - 1.5" at 100 yds. My bragging group is .363 center to center at 100 yds.

Larry
Larry <skporter@arn.net>
Boonies of the Panhandle, Texas, USA - Sunday, February 07, 1999 at 04:42:57 (ZULU) 


Ruger Enthusiasts:

I agree whole heartedly that it is the man behind the weapon who ultimately makes the 0.5 moa or less shot look easy, but you have to reduce the variables of the weapon itself for it to make this shot everytime it counts, and one of the biggest variables is the manufacturing tolerances held on the barrel. Every manufacturer has to hold their internal barrel tolerances within SAAMI specifications, the closer to minimum, the better. As a barrelmaker, I have seen many different barrels from many different manufacturers and I will say that Ruger holds the loosest and most inconsistent specs on their internal barrel tolerances that I have seen from any major arms manufacturer. My brother in law owns a Ruger M77 in 30-06, swears by it, kills his deer every year, one shot. But that is a 10" kill zone. I have a Remington 700 300 Win Mag in an H-S Precision vertical grip stock, H-S precision barrel made by yours truly. We built a 300 yd range, benches at 1,2, and 300 yds, and he shoots his Ruger on a regular basis, had never shot mine before. When we zero at 100 yds, both using 165 grain Sierra Gamekings, his spread is 1.75" with the Ruger. He uses the H-S gun and shoots a 5 shot spread inside his Ruger's, about .65" or so. Now you tell me the difference between a good or bad barrel. Well he told me. He said and I agree that a Ruger is fine if you are hunting deer, but to put a group on paper, a Ruger barrel isn't the one of choice. 200 yds definitely told the story, both guns are zeroed at 200 yds, the Ruger would not hold any group as the good barrel held its own. This is my latest experience with the Ruger M77, don't trust it, won't own one.
Our ballistician told me one time that the only way a Ruger barrel will shoot is if you never clean the barrel, also said they made a great crowbar, and I agree.

thanks
JR <mrpink@rapidnet.com>
rapid city, sd, USA - Sunday, February 07, 1999 at 04:49:48 (ZULU) 


JR: I'm not a barrel maker nor am I knowledgeable of Ruger's manufacturing tolerances so can't dispute your comments. However, I would like to point out that MKIIVT's are heavy barreled weapons whereas the ones described by you and Larry are light weight barrels. Could the heavy barreled Rugers have closer manufacturing tolerances or could barrel whip in the light barrels be the major factor in the reduced accuracy you describe? As to the dirty barrel joke, mine shoots like crap when dirty and I don't plan on using it as a crow bar as long as it shoots 0.5 MOA.
Mike O'Brien <bopm@aol.com>
Evansville, WY, USA - Sunday, February 07, 1999 at 05:42:39 (ZULU) 
By the way, At first I thought that I was pulling the shots, and that
I was the problem, but I was handed a Rugar M77, 6mmPPC,
that my partner had, and this weapon has always fired perfect
0.3-0.4 MOA patterns. I shot two 0.3 perfect triangles at 100 mtr.
so it was not me jerking the shots off on the 700.

Thor <Charlie01M@aol.com>
Conyers, Georgia, USA - Sunday, February 07, 1999 at 06:40:49 (ZULU) 


JR,
you are the man, I REPEAT, YOU THE MAN!
Guys, heres a barrel maker for a MAJOR PLAYER in the field giving very poignant views on a Ruuu...., Ruug..... Ruuuuggghhhh.... They are fine hunting rifles, with some innovative features, but Tactical Rifles they are not. I was made privy to OEM test fire range specs for Ruuuu.., a few years back, NOT ACCEPTABLE for headshots, otay for deer.

Mr. O'BOPM-DUDE, no flame meant SIR!
Ruuhh, They do not even compare to a Sauer rifle does a Pacer compare to a Mercedes?
Does a 77/.22 OEM trigger compare to an Anshutz or Walther?
Is that .5 MOA at 100 yards or 500, factory or handloads, three shot groups, five shot groups, ten shot groups? I concur with "end-user" aspect, but has any major agency adopted the Ruuugg..... for tactical use?

peteR <PNGREIFF@AOL.COM>
bIG cITY, bY-gAWD, USA - Sunday, February 07, 1999 at 15:20:45 (ZULU) 


With regards my Ruger M77 Mk II .308 varmint; no it isn't a heavy barrel in that it isn't an inch at the muzzle but it is in the sense that it is a 'varmint' and larger than their 'standard' skinny barrel.

I was disatisfied with the groups I was getting and called Ruger. Their 'requirements' were that it shoot under 1.5" @ 100 yds. I told them that was a 'pattern,' not a group. They said that if I was dis-satisfied to return it. It went out the next day. I got it back shortly, they had replaced the bolt which solved the extraction problem I had but had not mentioned. They informed me the 'tech' had gotten a 1" group. When I asked what range, they said, 'Ours...' I finally weaseled out of them that it was Federal match ammo at 50 YARDS! I was so dumbfounded that I forgot to ask but I am sure it was a 3 shot group.

I still like Rugers, why I don't know, maybe because I have so many, BUT I now have an AR10-(T)and am working on it.

Ruger is a Chevrolet... It is a good functional hunting rifle that most folks can afford. I guess if you want a 'Sniper,' (read Cadilac), it will cost a little more.
Larry <skporter@arn.net>
Boonies of the Panhandle, Texas, USA - Sunday, February 07, 1999 at 15:33:28 (ZULU) 


I haved owned more guns than I will ever admit, among them a few Ruger long guns in 220 swift. Would it be the gun I pick up to shoot for money? Nope. Would it be the gun I pick up to shoot paper at 500 meters? Nope. Is it just about the only gun I use on 'yotes and other varmit types out to 500 meters or so? Seems to be.

To compare a $449 box stock Ruger 77 to any high precision rifle [HS Precision] for example, well, just ain't fair to either gun. An operator that bets his life, and the life of his mates, on the ability to take one shot and make one shot needs the highest quality he can afford. As a *field* gun though, I assure you that if you are familiar with the gun you are shooting, and have pushed the several thousand rounds through it you should, the difference between a .5 moa and a 1 moa gun at 3 or 4 football fields is lost on 'yotes and the like. Dead is dead.

I have no reason to believe that what has been posted here regarding the Ruger barrel tolerance is anything but true. I am not in that profession, so I will not argue about it. What I do know, and what I see all the time, is people going to the field with guns that they don't need, because they cannot shoot. I always recall in debates like this what my grandfather said over and over and over again to us boys growing up "the gun can't hunt for you". As a kid I was so damned envious of the custom carrying hunters as I would listen to them chat about rifles. Most of them, I learned later, sat with unfilled tags. My old 06 was in the truck somewhere, the meat was home hanging in a tree.

With that said, would I prefer a precision rifle over a scarred up Ruger 77? Absolutely. Do the varmits care? Well, they don't seem to care much about that inch or two:)

Bruce <Bruce@mannlawfirm.com>
USA - Sunday, February 07, 1999 at 15:46:15 (ZULU) 


My .02 on Rugers, I liked mine, but I couldn't get it to group good, and sold it. What I've noticed in the shooting mags is that Ruger's usually shoot a particular load much better than others, while others did rather poorly. Where my Rem 700 shoots everything well with little difference between loads. Not sure what that means, it's just a newbie's observation/experience. I wouldn't trade my custom 10/22 for anything though ;-)

Tim <timbaird_73@yahoo.com>
Fairfield, IA, USA - Monday, February 08, 1999 at 13:16:46 (ZULU) 


Okay All you RUGER Bashers: I guess my friends and I have the only Rugers in captivity that are capable of 0.5
MOA 10 shot groups @ 100 yards. Our rifles are particular about their diet and the groups will open a bit without the right load for each particular rifle. After reviewing all the anti-Ruger responses, my friends and I feel truly blessed that our paltry little $500 rifles shoot as well as many of the higher dollar weapons and we thank GOD that we didn't have to contend with 8 pound trigger pulls.
Mike O'Brien <bopm@aol.com>
Evansville, WY, USA - Tuesday, February 09, 1999 at 04:45:46 (ZULU) 
On the argument/discussion about Rugers...got one and all I had to do to make it a fine distance rifle was put a Douglas XX barrel and a Timney trigger AND put Burris Signature Pos-align rings on it !! Oh, also replaced the stock but that was my choice and am working on a new stock. Getting a MKIIVT stock and will fit it to an old M77.

Will <willadams@mindspring.com>
Sunny, Deep South, USA - Tuesday, February 09, 1999 at 04:48:27 (ZULU) 


I am looking at a Ruger No#1 heavy barrel in .223. Has anyone had any experience with this rifle for varmit-paper punching?

Tony <abasanese@goisd.k12.mi.us>
MI, USA - Wednesday, February 10, 1999 at 00:26:32 (ZULU) 


Us Ruger bashers have the right to be bashers. I had a Ruger M77 in a 220 Swift which held a unbelievably poor group of 3 to 3.5 inches at 100 yards. No matter what I did - rebedded it, different powder bullet combination. Nothing seemed to work. I got rid of that "rifle" faster than I would have an old sway back mule. Oh it did have a kill credit to it. One woodchuck at about 85 yards. There is one for the books - huh fella?

al
Al Ostapowicz (Fly-Boy) <aaostapowicz@nls.net>
Back on your butts again in an obnoxious state of , Ohio, USA - Wednesday, February 10, 1999 at 03:35:22 (ZULU) 


To all you Ruger lovers I ask this question. Will the gun hold 1/2 minute groups to the same point of aim point of impact every day, not just an occassional group?. Here is the problems: Poor Quality control of Barrels, flexabl actions and lack of bedding/surface. Your factory Rugers will not be consistent. I know I have had several that would shoot good groups on occassions but none that would hold zero. Now I am not Gouch but I have shot hundreds of thousands rounds down range. (Its easy when you don't pay for it). Bottom line is get the most gun for the money that will do the job and that is getting harder with Remington being more interested in the race car these days. I might be custom from here on out, but Winchester has sure improved as late.

The UnDude Mike
Mike M. <DMMDNLN@AOL.COM>
Calif., USA - Wednesday, February 10, 1999 at 05:10:36 (ZULU) 


Ruger Rifles- You know the old 77 was pretty hard to beat as a hunting rifle. I had a couple of .220 swift's that would shoot good but the barrel life was real short. The trigger and works was not too bad. I had a little trouble with some that had had their magazine well altered by improper assembly and overtightening. Don't kick them too much. They haven't had any more problems than winchester over the years when built by scabs. The current ones (Win)are quite good. But the bowing to Politically correct triggers has been a disaster for Ruger. Just thoughts is all. Ruger should stick to revolvers methinks these days or get down and redesign and get gooder barrels.
B.Rogers <brogers@elkhart.com>
USA - Wednesday, February 10, 1999 at 14:04:58 (ZULU) 
To Tony, who asked bout the Ruger No.1 V in .223:
As usual the Ruger bashers have come out of the woodwork in force, but it is important for you to understand that the basis for most of the disparaging remarks is political in nature. Unfortunately Bill Ruger took a position on pistol magazines that has had unfortunate results for all of us. If you don't agree with his position use your economic power; don't buy his products. This does not affect the quality of his firearms. The No.1 of which you speak is a fine firearm; I have "more than one" of these and wish I had some more. Not all shoot to the same standard, but all are aesthetically pleasing and none are hopeless. They require special techniques for accuracy improvement and should be modified only by people familiar with these techniques. My one experience with a No.1 Varminter was positive; it would shoot cheap Chinese 5.56 ammo consistently into 1.25" @ 100 yards. The loads that Depity Dave and I use would bring the group size down to .75". Consistently. Out of the box, no gunsmithing. I have a twenty-two year old M77V chambered in .22-250 that is a consistent sub-MOA performer, again with no gunsmithing.

As with the Savage dispute earlier, I really don't care what others opinions are concerning these rifles; it is the results that count.

The owner of Master Class Stocks in Bellwood, PA has told me the real reason that you see very few Ruger actioned competition rifles has nothing to do with the quality of the action. They are as strong, or stronger than their competition, and flex about the same, maybe less due to the nature of the investment castings from which they are made. In case anyone thinks that system is unacceptable, consult a metallurgist, he will tell you the only thing stronger than an investment casting is a drop forging, and this is only true if the drop forging is properly heat treated. Investment castings are inherently stress-free, even machined parts have a tough time in that regard. The real reason for avoiding them is two-fold, the receiver is so hard that machining it is very difficult, and bedding them, due to the angled action screw, is very difficult. Most of the garbage you read about them is just that, garbage.

Let us be honest here, if you don't like the products don't buy them, but do not say they are not a quality product; that is simply not true. I defy anyone to show me a stronger, safer action than theirs, both in handguns and rifles. The only competition they have in handguns is Freedom Arms. Price one of those recently?

If you find the No.1 attractive, buy it and enjoy. There are few actions that are equally as pleasing to look at and function as smoothly. It may take a little time at the reloading bench to find the ideal load, but then again it may shoot straight from the box.
Fred Fischer <frederick_c_fischer>
People's Rep. of, MD, USA - Wednesday, February 10, 1999 at 15:55:11 (ZULU) 


Rugers actions to hard to machine? If that was the case they would break when firing. They flex much more than a Remington by the very design. Lets face it the Ruger is a great Deer Rifle but if you think so much of it bring it on. I will take a box stock Remington or Savage with a trigger job any day for serious work. Now if you guys are happy with your Rugers so be it but please don't posion the minds of the unexpecting with your fantasies of a great Ruger Target rifle. Ruger was designed to be a great gun for the average hunter!

Now some of you will be mad, but show me the groups and I don't mean 3 shots at 100 yards, after the bore has been fouled.

Mike
Mike M. <DMMDNLN@AOL.COM>
Calif, USA - Wednesday, February 10, 1999 at 16:20:51 (ZULU) 


Sorry Mike, but you are simply wrong. Frank DeHaas, who is now deceased, was an acknowledged authority on bolt actions. He did some actual testing to determine which actions flexed the most. Surprise, the Remington flexes more than the Model 70 action. I guess that's why the really serious guys sleeve them, and yes, they sleeve 40X actions also. Ruger is essentially a Mauser knock-off, as is the Springfield '03, and the Model 70, and its flex characteristics are similar. The alloy Ruger uses for their receivers is very hard, ask any gunsmith, but also quite tough; this is the reason they are so strong. This is a good action; hard to rework and bed, but good none the less. Smooth in operation as well. In case most of us haven't noticed, the gunsmithing world is also full of inertia; most stick to Remingtons. Ever wonder why? Could it be the reasonable cost, round receiver profile that is easy to work with, non-integral recoil lug that is easily changed, non-controlled feed which allows easy extactor mods? The reason custom smiths love Mauser style actions for custom rifles is all the metal work that needs to be done to get what the customer wants, ie: billable hours.

I would be interested in anyone out there producing published testing data that shows the Ruger action flexs to the point that it inhibits accuracy.
Fred
People's Rep. of, MD, USA - Wednesday, February 10, 1999 at 18:07:23 (ZULU) 


By the way, Mike, Ruger was the vendor of the Palma rifles used in the last Palma match held here in the states. Guess those guys don't know what they are doing; no one told them their rifles were not competitive or suitable for target shooting at 800, 900, and 1000 yards.
Fred
People's Rep. of , MD, USA - Wednesday, February 10, 1999 at 18:12:41 (ZULU) 
Fred, my man
I don't think Bill Rugers personal politics are the issue, nor the strength of the actions. I love the #1 action both aesthetically and durability wise. But they either shoot or don't shoot as most serious shooters are aware.
Anybody ever sucessfully used a Mini-14/30 for Hipower matches? The main issue that I believe the "Bashers" would like to see corrected is sub-standard barrels and improved triggers, in fact with flagrant honesty, all Factory riflemakers need to address this issue.

peteR
peteR <PNGREIFF@AOL.COM>
bIG-bIG-cITY, bY-gAwD, USA - Wednesday, February 10, 1999 at 18:38:17 (ZULU) 


Fred:

Do you know how many of those Ruger Palma rifles were used in the Palma Match? A lot of hype and free advertising went down on that rifle. The barrels were beyond belief. I borescoped one and nearly got sick!

If my old memery serves me properly, only two Ruger rifles were used in the Palma match. These rifles had nice stocks, actions with conventional bedding screws, great sights, good triggers, but the barrels were strictly third rate. I'm pretty sure one of the Ruger rifles used in the match had the original barrel. The other rifle may have been fitted with a new stainless barrel after being received by the Palma team.

This forced many of the team members to use their course rifles in the Palma. Not a very good situation, really.

Not trying to burst your bubbles........just history as I recall it.

Ruger makes great utility rifles. The real shining star is the little 10-22. With a decent barrel they will give the finest Anschutz a real run.

Bill Wylde <k9wxr@rr1.net>
WARM - SE, IL, USA - Wednesday, February 10, 1999 at 19:50:04 (ZULU) 


Rugers ain't so bad but something has to be carrying the best reputation I guess. I wish they would loose that stock that looks like somebody milled about 3/4 of it away. And those packing crate lumber wood stocks. Yuk! The laminate's and custom stocks would help them and their prestige! I wonder just how much the so called "flex" has to do with accuracy anyway? Long as it flexes the same. There must be some flex in a fiberglass stock? Fit shoots good shoot it!

B.Rogers <brogers@elkhart.com>
USA - Wednesday, February 10, 1999 at 20:58:39 (ZULU) 


Guys: I was aware that some of the men shooting the match chose NOT to use the Ruger Palma rifle, I was not aware that the barrels were substandard. In my opinion they never should have left the factory with less than the best available, even if that meant someone else's tube. A match of that importance deserves the finest this country is capable of. I did get to handle a Ruger Palma rifle at a SHOT Show, must have been '91 because it was before the match. Not having a borescope handy at the time, I could only comment on the visible aspects, and it appeared well 'smithed.

My point is that there seems to be a propensity to knock these rifles, not based on fact, but on perceptions that are not necessarily true. Yes, I have seen these rifles with bad triggers, but I've seen Remingtons and Winchesters with terrible triggers as well. I own and have shot Rugers that do as well out of the box as anyone else's products. I've read of Remington PSS models that were in the author's words, "unacceptable". I recently had to return a Winchester Model 70 Super Express .375 H&H because the barrel was not square on the receiver. Why is it that we tacitly "accept" this sort of thing by the Big 2, send them off for repair, replacement, whatever, yet if a Ruger is similar in its problems, it is declared junk. Perhaps some of us do not recall when Win and Rem were producing, by today's standards, junk. For those of you that do not recall, do the words "post '64" mean anything? At that time, pressed checkering, lousy wood, and lousy finish work was the norm.

Unfortunately, product liability has severely affected the quality of any of the manufacturers triggers now installed on their products. You want reasonable pull weight, go see a 'smith, any problems after that, don't call the manufacturer, you'll need a lawyer. At the just completed SHOT Show, Harold Rolls and I inspected a really nice Winchester Low Wall chambered in .22 LR. It was a little beauty, with a trigger I would estimate at about 10 pounds, but of course it was tough to estimate since it felt like it was stuffed with sand. No manufacturer's products are immune, all I am saying here is to give these rifles the same respect we give other manufacturers. I seem to recall there was a spirited defense of Savage by several men last year on this forum, many felt they offer a lot for the money. I personally believe Ruger offers at least as much value, and controlled feed besides.

Fred
People's Rep. of , MD, USA - Wednesday, February 10, 1999 at 21:05:52 (ZULU) 


Fred; I once received a Remington mountain rifle with the same serial on the bolt and receiver that would not go in the rifle! I would have like to have seen them test that one. I have seen many (many)Post 64
Winchesters that would fire if you put them on half safe and then pulled the trigger and then put the safety forward to fire they would go off. I've seen Savages that had no safety at all right out of the box. I've adjusted many (many) Remington triggers that were quite sorry but all but one were quite safe and good after adjustment and subsequent testing and all would go 2lbs crisp/nobacklash and clean.
Most Model 77 Rugers were better than most Savages in the trigger department and would stay that way. The new Mark whatever trigger is really not nice or safe in my book of hard knocks. I've seen them wear till they fell when you closed the bolt. Ouch! The new Winchester is truly the Rifleman's rifle or at least the ones I've seen have been. Anyone else please comment on that last line cause I would like to know if you've had bad experiences with late vintage Winchesters?
B.rogers <brogers@elkhart.com>
USA - Wednesday, February 10, 1999 at 21:59:47 (ZULU) 
Re: Ruger Palma barrels

American Rifleman had an article about the rifles. The Palma barrels were made by Green Mountain- whoever they are. Hard to believe isn't it? As of a several years ago Wilson made all of Ruger's barrels. Don't know that is the case now or not. This is a different Wilson than the one that makes quality handgun barrels.

Fred,
Stuart Otteson wrote the action rigidity article for "Rifle" magazine. He was an engineer and authored "The Bolt Action". Frank de Haas (correct spelling) was a gunsmith and the author of "Bolt Action Rifles" and wrote gunsmithing articles for American Rifleman. Mark de Haas, Frank's son, won the Leech Cup (1000 yds, iron sights) at Camp Perry in 1966, and was a sniper in Vietnam.

You are correct about the Remington being the weaker of the two actions in the vertical plane. I also posted this to the forum quite a while ago.

Re: Bill Ruger

I remember back in the '70s when the mini-14 came out. Bill said that he would ONLY sell it to military and law enforcement. The tone of his interview was to the effect that: "citizens have no business with military type rifles". Sales failed to materialize and he soon had to eat his words. That statement still sticks in my craw after 25 plus years. I don't think he is a real good friend of shooters.

That's all for now.
Ron N.

Ron N. <rcn8@accnorwalk.com>
USA - Thursday, February 11, 1999 at 01:24:28 (ZULU) 


I'm sorry Fred for being wrong, but I have shot Palma and have not seen a Ruger on the line yet! Fred Ruger is a hunting Rifle not a target rifle so get over it. Controlled feed is great for hunting dangerous game but not needed for Sniper use. Fred you bring your Ruger to the line and prove it will shoot with the big boys talk is cheap. I shoot my Remingtons every week. I dont care what another writer says I only care about results and Rugers don't hang with the big dogs. Target shooters pay alot for the rifles and anything better is used, shoot some High Power Matches and find out for your self. I never said Ruger had a bad trigger it is fine as is. Savage has a bad trigger. Rugger has a piece of junk for a BBL. that is the major problem with them besides bedding is a pain and hard to hold the bedding because of the angle and surface area.
Mike M. <DMMDNLN@AOL.COM>
Calif, USA - Thursday, February 11, 1999 at 01:26:07 (ZULU) 
Topic of Rugers raises It's Ugly head again. On my previous post about the 220 Swift I had, I will have to admit that it was probably one of the first production M77. This rifle was purchased in 1980-81. My memory leaves me occasionally. Hopefully quality production has improved over the past 17 years. That is why I advocate getting a custom produced rifle. You may pay a little more, but you know exactly what you have and a competent gunsmith will stand behind his work, especially when it comes to Match graded work. Wasn't it some guy named Gump that said, Life is like opening a Ruger M77 Rifle box, you never know whats inside - or something like that.

Al Ostapowicz <aaostapowicz@nls.net>
Sittin' Here happy as a clam in the Merry of State of , Ohi-er, USA - Thursday, February 11, 1999 at 01:37:11 (ZULU) 


I may be mistakenly classed amoung the 'Ruger Bashers.' I have more Rugers than can be counted on my hands and feet.

I discussed the Ruger 'Palma' rifles with a couple of Palma and Hipower shooters, one of which assists in the running of the matches. I also talked to a couple of the people at the Whittington Center about the Rugers. The barrels were made by Green Mountain. The only place I have heard of them otherwise is for muzzle loading rifles. I was told the barrels were so shoddy that they would 'shoot out' while trying to break them in. Consequently, they weren't used in most cases. Add to the problem that they were delivered too late for load developement and breakin.

I have also been told by a barrel manufacturer in Raton, and others, that until recently, Ruger did NOT make their own barrels. I believe they ahve started doing so now. That MAY improve quality.

I've gotta lot of Rugers and I love'em, but they ain't target rifles...
Larry <skporter@arn.net>
Boonies of the Panhandle, Texas, USA - Thursday, February 11, 1999 at 02:52:01 (ZULU) 


Pablito,

I my self have many Ruger guns and they all shoot well except for a couple of them. The 10/22 is a tack driver the Mini 14 & 30 are a joke 3 inches a 100 if I am lucky and I also have a MK 77/22 mag with the heavy barrel it is a very accurate gun for a .22 mag and will shoot sub 1 MOA at 100 yards but is very ammo sensitive any bullet weight change in grains will affect point of impact by as much as 8" inches at 100 yards verticle and horizontal not good. I just picked up a M 77 MK II in .270 and will see how is shoots against my Remington 700 ADL Synthetic in 30-06 the Remington with the medium barrel will put 150 grain bullets in sub 1 MOA all day long every day at 100 yards. I tested my Remington with 3 shot groups 5 times in a row for an average. Overall the triggers on the Rugers are good except the mini 14 & 30 are junk. I am looking forward to getting a model 70 varmit in .223 in the near future to keep the coyote population down in my hunting area. I hope the quality controll on my new Ruger .270 is up to snuff and if it does not shoot as well as my Remingtom I will be selling it.
LEE <ke4lbh@uswest.net>
Woodbury, MN, USA - Thursday, February 11, 1999 at 04:43:00 (ZULU) 


Ruger´s: I had the chance to play with one extensively during a Ruger,Leupold,PMC,MTM sponsored event in Malta Montana in 91´, was a varmint mod. in .22-250 and I shot over 2500 rounds through it without giving it any attention. we even cooled the barrels in an ice chest between p dog town´s. never shot it on paper, but on the p dogs it was good out to and little beyond 300 meters shooting from a montero with the rifle rested on a piece of radiator hose over the rolled down window. So I think it would make a sniper rifle as well.If I had my choice though I would stick with a 700 or better.

"Ende"
Torsten <lasercon@dialup.globe.de>
Germany - Thursday, February 11, 1999 at 08:50:34 (ZULU) 


Couple things! Bill Rugers attitude is questionable. For one thing he is a machinist and inventor. He could just as easily be building sewing machines as guns. He is not a rifleman or handgunner either and thus he tries to be Politically correct having not been in the folds of Hunters/Shooters/Snipers whatever. He relied on the opinions of others in a lot of rifle designs to my thinking at least.

B.rogers <brogers@elkhart.com>
USA - Thursday, February 11, 1999 at 17:12:50 (ZULU) 


Rugers: Man, you folks sure know how to beat a topic to death! ;-)

I have very small experience with them and have not been real impressed with their bolt guns for accuracy. But like every brand on the market, EVERY single one, their performance seems to be pretty subjective and individualistic. I hope to end the topic with this: Like others, Ruger rifles have the potential to shoot well. But by their design (Bedding, barrels, blah blah blah) they have been less accepted in the precision shooting community than other rifles. A "why fight the bedding when brand X is already squared away" mentality exists. Does this make a Ruger owner stupid? No, and I think that is where this subject has gained its Legs. Everyone seems a little defensive on both sides of the topic.

For CONSISTENT precision shooting and sniping, the ruger isn't top choice. So what? As a civilian you can still use one effectively for your purposes.

You can only afford ONE rifle in your life? It has to do it all? Then don't buy the Ruger. You have options aplenty.

The reason we don't talk about Ruger possitively here is because the above topics (precision shooting...) rule #1 on this site. If this were Hunting Country, Ruger might be bandied about a lot in a positive light. It works for fine that endeavor and the ranges involved. If you have one that meets your standard, what ever that may be, rejoice. If you hate them, try not to bust on those that like them. They may not have the same experience as you or even share the same need/standard.

I think it can be obviously stated with out too much argument that no police or military force, upon doing serious homework, would make an M77 in any configuration a first choice for their duty rifle. There are other alternatives that are ODDs-on a better capitol risk. Is this bashing? I do not think so. It still has it's place.

But don't get me on the Mini-14 or you WILL see some bashing! ;-)
Scott <xring@voicenet.com>
USA - Thursday, February 11, 1999 at 18:01:03 (ZULU) 


I have a Ruger M77 Varmint in .223 with a Simmons 4-12. With 50 gr Speer TNTs and 26.0 Gr Varget it will shoot .5 @ 100 yds all day long. I had no need to touch the adjustments on the Palma trigger nor to glass bed. BUT; I would buy a Remington (for serious work) in .308 and have it tweaked. I've owned lots of Remington 700s and wish I had one now, but not to replace my "squirrel-bunny-coyote gun".
BTW; We're all singin' the same song, just readin' off different music.
Hold Hard and Stay Free!
Semper Fi!
Spud
Dennis <usmcspud@aol.com>
merced, ca, USA - Friday, February 12, 1999 at 08:24:37 (ZULU) 
Dave, sorry to burst your bubble, but the "barrel maker in Raton" is NOT K&P. It was Bo Clerke, long time veteran of long range accuracy. The man who helps run the matches is 'Ed Hager of "Ed's Shooters Supply." I had a list of firearms the Whittington Center has for sale and it listed about 20 Ruger 'Palms.' Please don't get me wrong, I LOVE Rugers and have a large quantity of them, but target rifles, generally speaking, THEY AIN'T.
Larry <skporter@arn.net>
Boonies of the Panhandle, Texas, USA - Friday, February 12, 1999 at 02:34:03 (ZULU) 
On ruger accuracy - Mine will shoot reliable, consistent 5 shot 0.75" groups at 100 yards with a Leupold 3-9x Vari-X II. Its basically stock except for a bed and free float job and a 2.5 lb trigger from a benchrest gunsmith. .270 Win, 130 gr. Ballistic tips, 57 gr. Reloder 19, clocked at 3050 fps. It might be able to do better, but I can't hold better with that scope and have problems doping wind.

Aufwiedersehn
Karl
Karl <dahm0030@tc.umn.edu>
Cold, By-Gawd, MN, USA - Thursday, February 18, 1999 at 00:30:18 (ZULU) 


Back to Hot Tips & Cold Shots