Bobby, I checked out your web page. Well done. You've got some good shooters in your stable. Keep developing your web page.

Jim

I've been reading a lot of Ruger bashing lately and really wondering what's going on. Now if it were Remington, I could understand (just kidding, I like the 700).
I have, over the last 3 years, bought or traded for the following:
1) 77 in 30/06 old model
2) 77MKII ss/lam .308 (new)
3) 77RL MKII ultra light in .308
4) 77MKII ss/lam .270 (new)
5) 77 in 7X57 old model
6) 77RL MKII ultra light in 257R
7) 77MKII .243 (new)
Of the above guns I still have 1,2,6&7.
I bought the 30/06 first, because it was a good used deal. What a deal indeed, it shoots like a bench rifle. I must have gotten lucky, cause some of the old models don't shoot that well. The 7X57 was a good example of that, it wouldn't hit a barn. Then I bought the two .308s the same day. When I got home, my shooting pal saw the stainless one and just had to have it, so I sold it and kept the ultra light. The UL shot ok, maybe an 1-1/2" or slightly better if I had a good day. Killed two nice bucks with it. Then the other day, my pal was lamenting that he wished he'd bought the UL .308 instead, so I traded him, the stainless .308 remained unfired. I straighted up the bedding, floated the barrel and glassed it, broke the barrel in and here is the first group of a serious try. The worst group was 1" exactly.

Then came the .243, I bought new because it had the most beautiful wood Ruger ever put on a 77. When I shot it I liked it even more. Fist four shots into one hole at 100 yards, a first for me and a new Ruger. Then 3 shots at 200 yards in an 1 1/2", which for me is good too. I then bought a stainless .270, and when I shot it my neighbor was with me. He was so impressed by the way it shot, that after a couple of weeks he broke me down and bought it. After that I ran onto a 77RL ultra light at a gun show in .257R, I'd always wanted one, so I bought it and it shoots super.
So you might say with the exception of the 7X57, which was used and I didn't really mess with it as much as I should have, I've been getting some really good Ruger 77s. These guns fit me and are fun to shoot when they shoot like the do. My newest .308 stainless, is boringly accurate off the bench. It will produce 1" or less groups all day long with nearly any reasonable load, and that's with a cheapo Swift 6X scope!!
If you've gotten Ruger 77s lately I think you'll find the barrels to be top notch, my latest one is easy as all get out to clean, and glass smooth. I really do think Ruger is making some fine barrels now.
If you want to see some more, go to my website at
MY WEBPAGE and see what I've been up to.
Give Ruger another chance if you've had bad luck. I did when Remington came out with the CDL and got a really good rifle, trouble is so does one of my shooting pals, he traded me out of it!

Bobby,

I think Ruger has an excellent design and product in the M77, #1 and other models for the price. It's just that I am a M70 and Kimber guy.

I do have some Rugers however.

Hey Bobby, I've only owned 2 Ruger centerfire rifles. One grouped 3"@100yds so it was traded for another. That one would only do 4"@100yds After the resale of both rifles I was out about $400. That was eough for me, If you've had good luck with them, that's great. I still think they're good solid rifles, the one's I buy just don't shoot.

Terry

Bobby: I see some posts also in this regard and it goes without need of repeating here (but I will anyway!) that Rugers bolt action Rifles are not as accurate over the long haul as Remington bolt actions - for sure. Having stated the obvious here I will continue with these observations. I do not consider it bashing to relay ones experiences with a particular Rifle or with a bunch of Rifles of a particular brand. I have seen the most outlandish and outrageous and unblieveable "bashing" though committed against the Remington 700's! I consider the nimrods that espouse this type of mean spirited and untrue tripe as simply contaries or immature attention seekers. I have a whole bunch of Remingtons and they ALL shoot very well indeed! And they were easy to make shoot well! Ruger bashing though, seen now and then, is now where near as prevalent as Remington bashing.

The last two Rugers I have bought new were a Ruger 77/17V in caliber 17 HMR and a Ruger 77VT in caliber 204 Ruger. I am very pleased with the accuracy of these two Rifles and they look nice to me also. The 17 HMR Ruger 77/17V is simply the most accurate rimfire Rifle I have ever owned and believe me I have owned a ton of these! No, I am not kidding, I have literally owned a ton of them!

I have other Rugers now and have owned many in the past. Like I said accuracy is more consistently and easily obtained with a comparable Remington Rifle in a comparable caliber. That is my opinion and it is a modest edge for the Remingtons and I do not shun the Rugers over this slight edge to the Remington.

My opinion of the Ruger #1's over the decades has remained the same for a long time now. They are beautiful and pleasing Rifles that are VERY easy to resell if a person is not happy with one. Anymore when I buy a Ruger #1 if I invest in a good scope and good loading components and it does not shoot up to my needs rather quickly - I sell it! I take the $75.00 hit and move on quickly to another #1 or a different Model or brand. I do not waste time anymore trying to accurize the #1 it either shoots and looks good or its down the road.

Take this bit of advice Silverfox for what it is worth (remembering it cost you - NOTHING!). NEVER SELL AN ACCURATE RIFLE to anyone - buddy or not! Keep the accurate Rifles no matter what the hardship on you!

Hold into the wind

VarmintGuy

VarmintGuy, you make some good points. I guess the truth is that all rifle makers, make a clinker now and then. I have had some really nice Remmy's over the years. I have to admit, I don't prefer them now, but I won't deny their fine reputation. I like the M70 Classic, and own them also. Ruger's, at least some, are very finicky about shooting well, but I've found that most can be brought around to shooting with some work, but that goes for any brand also. Although I am wishy washy on the Abolt, it's hard to bash their accuracy. They look and feel cheap to me, but again they sure do shoot. To me there's something more than accuracy to a keeper bolt rifle. Ruger, Remington and Winchester look and feel like quality rifles. Some have features I like and others don't, but they are quality. Browning and Savage just don't do it for me, and Savage probably makes the best factory barrels, (along with some of the new Rugers). They just aren't classic looking, and feeling. I've read all the horror stories about Browning and Remington breaking down a lot, and how they're a gunsmith's dream. But, I've never known anyone who had a Remington or Browning fail, and that takes in a lot of ground. I know guys who absolutely abuse their Brownings and they look like fence posts, and yet they shoot well.
I guess it's all in what you like. I have just heard all the Ruger bashing and it's not the case with me. Over many, many years, I've owned a backload of rifles, more than I like to admit. Of all of them, I keep the Rugers and Winchesters. Once in a while, I'll buy a Remington, but never seem to keep them. I do have a 504, that may be a keeper though. I wouldn't fault anyone who likes a Remington, Savage, Browning, or even a Sako, if that's what turns your crank, go for it. Just to be fair, I had a Savage 110 in .270, took a lot of deer with it, shot super, and I gave it to my son so he would have a good shooting rifle, so I'm at least objective about it.

The few Rugers I have delt w/ were like the common ones seen at the local Wal-Mart. They were ok rifles but, they kicked harder than other rifles in the same cals. I am pretty sure it was the stock config. None of them were as accurate as your average Model 700 but, that was a small sample.

Some people have good luck w/ the Ruger rifles but, the ones I tried left a bad taste in my mouth so, I will not be purchasing one in the future.

I believe all rifle manuf. make very accurate rifles. Some just make them alittle more consistently than others. I don't like to gamble when buying a rifle.

Good Luck!

Reloader

I think Ruger has a good design. It's their quality control that sucks.

My experience with them is their 77's are mediocre rifles, at least in accuracy. Their heavy barrel Varmit rifles were excellent. I gave my son my .308 Varmit rifle and still cry myself to sleep every night thinking about it. It was smooth as glass and virtually a one hole shooter.

At least he will give it a good home.

I own a couple of the M77's and am quite happy with them. The .338 needed some tuning as it wasn't a shooter out of the box. The .257 Roberts hasn't been touched! Not even the trigger!

I have a Mini, a 10/22 and 10/22 Mag as well. I don't compare these with hunting rifles as they are for goofing with but they've been fine as well.

The Rugers I've had were all dogs in the accuracy department. Maybe they've improved since I bought the last one seven years ago, but they'll never get a chance to prove it to me, I'm done with them. If they have improved then good on them, they'll have a chance to make their reputation with a new generation. They blew their chance with me by making crappy shooting rifles.

It is interesting to see the "love 'em/hate 'em" comparison of Ruger rifles on this thread and on others that I have read on other boards. I am a "tang safety" Ruger fan and have had great luck with them. I currently have 5 Rugers that I bought used,(4 tang safety 77's and 1 Number 1) and all are real shooters. That being said, it took a little tinkering and some ammo trying to get two of them on track.
All of them will shoot under an inch, with my 270 & 7mm-08, plus my 7 RemMag #1 pushing 1/2". Why some of them are tack drivers for some people and other people can't get them to shoot I don't know. I am still looking for a few more to add to my modest collection and you can usually buy the old tang safety models quite cheap. Yes, I have and shoot many other rifles (Remington, Sako,etc.) but for the dollar, I just feel that you can't beat the used Rugers.

My next few will be for my sons who are slowly developing their own collections, thanks to Dad. I felt that I should get them at least the "basics" to get started hunting.(You know, a .22, 20 gauge, 12 gauge, 243/6mm, and a mid-range big game gun like a 270, 30-06, 7 RemMag, etc.. So now all I lack are the 243/6mm rifles for them as one has A Ruger 7 RemMag and the other has a Ruger 270. And before someone asks, I am not interested in any Adoptions!!!!

I wouldn't own a Ruger, rifle, pistol or otherwise. One substandard POS Ruger product coupled with their rotten customer service soured me forever. I'd rather throw rocks than use a Ruger.

ZM

I totally agree with boltman. Mine were junk and I won't waste anymore of my money to see if they've improved. There are too many decent brands out there.

Mine are the older tang safety models too. My POS Rugers have been better than the two Remingtons I've tried! The Remington is a cheap POS with an expensive name attached! I spent more trying to fix the little things on the Rem than any other as I kept hearing how great they were. WRONG! The best thing about Remingtons are the green cardboard boxes they come in! I'll be shopping for used,tang safetied Rugers myself.

If I buy another common brand, new, at this point it will be a Winchester and/or a Kimber. I'd even try a Ruger MkII before a Rem.

All of the beefs with Ruger seem to stem from accuracy problems. If you have one that shoots ok, and many do, you have a rugged rifle with rock solid scope mounts. They don't tend to be temperamental about weather and seem to suffer fewer feeding and extraction problems that most other mass produced rifles. All in all I think they are worth considering.

I love mine! All shoot under 1" right from the box. I have never bought any rifle that shoots as bad as some say? Good shoot'n!

I have several Ruger Mark IIs, a Ruger 1B and a 10-22. All of mine function & shoot well. Quality wise I rate them much higer than my Winchester M70 classics. And WAY better than my latest Remington M700.

Although generalities are dangerous, I'll have to say, I've had far more trouble from Remington's than Rugers, and I've owned about the same number of both. Remington's safety design leaves me wondering why the changed it, but that's another story. I have to admit, to get ANY Ruger or Remington to shoot under 1 MOA, you will have to do some work. There are the "one of a thousand", like my brand new M77 .243 that can do it from the factory, but the majority have to have the bedding tweaked, the barrel floated and some trigger work. That's the state of affairs, if you just buy a rifle and shoot factory ammo in it, you can't expect to it to shoot like a Cooper or some other semi-custom rifle that has already had all the accuracy work done for you. Just as there's the "one of a thousand", there are many more, from all makers, that won't shoot no matter how much effort you put into them. These dogs are traders, they'll hunt, but not well. If I'm going to buy a rifle and try to get it to shoot, my money goes for a Ruger. It's the best chance. I don't care much for Brownings or Savages, but they shoot like crazy. I don't think the latest Remmy's are too awful bad, but not as good a chance for a shooter as a new Ruger. CZ is a top brand, but heavy for my liking, and they also shoot very well. Winchester is a great rifle and I like 'em a lot, but again, on average, I've had more shooters from Ruger, as you can see from my website.

As always, your mileage may vary.

I don't know maybe i have been lucky with my ruger.I have a ruger m77 mk2 in a 300 WIN MAG and it is a realy good gun i bought it new 3 years ago.I was realy disapointed on the fist day on the range couldn't get it to sight in.I had made a big mistake i thought a tasco world class would hold me over till i could get a nikon and not have to pinch pennys.It didn't actualy i broke 3 and a simmons 44 mag before i went and bought a nikon 3x9x40 then it began to shine i average about a 1" group with most but i just loaded up some loads for my big game hunting.I Live in alaska now. so i loaded up some partions with reloader 22.The worst group was with 73.5 grains and it was the size of a quater then i found what it liked 74.5 3 shots that touched seen better form other rifles but no in a 300 win maybe just luck.but my dad had a number one 30-06 and Icould put 5 shots in to the size of a dime and that was with factory now my dad couldn't hit a damn 5 gallon bucket no joke.he sold it.most accurate rifle i ever shot. but they kick like hell for there caliber.sorry this is so long.m61fan

As a rule I think the light barrel profiles of the Ruger rifles causes half the problems. If it's compared to a M70 featherweight or light 700, they're all more finicky. If you read through the replies, the people shooting varmint barrels, etc. mostly report great accuracy. Light barrels are just more load and bedding conscious than medium wt. barrels as on a std 700. The other problem is the trigger. They're easy to fix, but impossible to shoot well without some work. I like the Rugers and the CZ's as a hunting and using rifle.

Bobby,

I have never owned a factory Remington 700 that wouldn't shoot under an inch w/ a "pet load," guess I must be lucky.

Good Luck!

Reloader

Reloader, I believe you, but I wish you could have shot the Rem LSS .270 I had last year. The guys at the gun range all shot it and couldn't get it to shoot well at all. I bedded it, several different ways, and it had so tight a chamber, that even new brass was a tight fit, (but not too tight). Everything pointed to a real shooter, but the best it would do was 3" at 100 yards, usually worse, no matter who was behind the trigger. I really like the mountain rifle size and feel, but this particular one was a dog. The only thing we can guess was the bore dimension was off, because everything else seemed fine. Everyone has different experiences, and I know Rem makes some nice guns. I just traded off a Rem CDL in .270 that shot really, well. I've just had a run of good luck with Ruger, and I know it. Somebody on this or one of the other forums said, never get rid of a rifle that really shoots, because they're hard to find, so true.

Bobby,

They all make duds now and again. Seems like some Manuf. make alot more than others. The Rugers I played around w/ were not that great of shooters but, If one of them had been, you would probably still see that baby in the safe. Ruger seems to have a good design, if their accuracy was as common as their competitors I would probably own a couple.

It's the accuracy that really gets me on a rifle. Some folks go for looks, I like performance. Kind of like my beat-up ole' winchester pump 12ga, it certainly doesn't look like much but, it doesn't jam and it will handle ducks and geese just like the new Browning Golds and Benelli SBEs.

Good Luck!

Reloader

I think the M77's greatest shortcoming is their hammer forged (see cheap to manufacture) barrels, replace that with a quality button rifled barrel and youve got a great base for building a fine weapon.

My score:
(5) Rems = (4) shooters, (3) of which are easy, (1) dud

(4) Rugers = (2 tang)shooters, (2) MkII drove me nuts

I am a model 70 man myself.
BUT ! I do have 2 Rugers. 1 Is a 77 MK2 ultra light in .257R, It put 100 grain tripple shock barnes out at 3140 Fps and puts them into a bout .75 With a stiff charge of H-414.But I chaged the trigger and free floated it. The other is a standard 77MK 2 in .280. I traded the only Remington I had for it. It showes real promise. I think of Rugers as good reliable rifles. If they had a better trigger I would probably buy lots more. Also I wish the mounting system had an adjustment for windage. All scopes perform better if the cros hairs are centerd...tj3006

In the safe are 2 700's(.270's), 2 mkII 77's(22-250 and 257 bob), and 1 M70 fwt(22-250). Only the 1st 700(over 30 years old) would beat either of the two 77's. Did take glassing and much work then to beat the 77's out of the box 3/4" groups, now it wears a Pac-Nor barrel and runs with the most accurate M77 I've got. However, the Heavy Barrel Savage .223 beats them all!

Someone mentioned hammer forged barrels. As far as I know, Savage is the only manufacturer that button rifles their barrels, all the others are hammer forged. I guess they're all inaccurate. Did you know that Sako hammer forges the barrels on all their rifles? They shoot pretty well.
The issues I think that cause Ruger so much problems are:
1) misunderstanding of the Ruger bedding. Rugers must have the front action screw tightened before the others and it must be tight to pull the action rearward. It's not so critical on a Winchester, which is bedded nearly the same, but without the angled front screw.
2) Because of this unusual bedding, coupled with poor factory fit of some stocks (like any factory rifle), the problem is magnified.
3) The need for some trigger work from the get go. Which may or may not be a problem with other manufacturers rifles, it just depends on the individual gun.
4) I also think that some people have a preconcieved dislike for Ruger and don't give them a chance. Which is fine by me, but you can't blame the company for it. I've said before and I'll say again, I've had far more trouble with Remington than Ruger in the accuracy department. BUT, I believe Remington makes a good rifle, just luck of the draw. I don't care what anyone says, in the last four or five years, looking at rifles from Ruger and Remington on the racks at many, many gun shops, Ruger has far and away the best cosmetic quality of the two. I've never seen such poor fitting of actions to stocks as Remington has put out in the recent past. I will follow that with I do definitely see a marked improvement in the last several months in Remington. I'd buy a Remington and have in the last year. I have a .270 CDL, which is a good shooter. I also have a 504 which is a good shooter. I also have some really, really fine shooting Rugers as well.
I have to wonder how many accuracy gripes are from scope problems, I've been fooled several times until I investigated something other than the rifle in question. I also wonder how many people are capable of shooting small groups. I'm not being a snob, and I'm no benchrest shooter, I know I wouldn't be able to shoot a 1/2" group with a 300 Win Mag.
There's so much that goes into a good shooting rifle, and so many variables, including the quality of the rifle, that it's hard to say that any one manufacturer is head and shoulders above the rest.
I prefaced my other post about how good my Rugers shoot, by saying "I've been on a lucky streak".

Love the #1's....hate the 77's.

The only accurate (IMO) Ruger rifle that I've ever owned (and I've owned more than a few) is a #1 in 218 Bee. I still own it. Not counting the 10/22, it's the only Ruger rifle I own. Unless I come across one really cheap I won't be rushing out to buy another.

Make mine a Ruger 77 International in 308, thank you very much.