Hello all, I'm just curious what you guys think of the Ruger M77 MarkII in 300wsm. I'm thinking of getting one. I've been looking at the Tikka's, and the Savages as well, but I seem to come back to the Ruger's. Any good or bad experiences would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mountain_man:
Hello all, I'm just curious what you guys think of the Ruger M77 MarkII in 300wsm. I'm thinking of getting one. I've been looking at the Tikka's, and the Savages as well, but I seem to come back to the Ruger's. Any good or bad experiences would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

---

Get the Ruger and don't look back. Excellent rifle and calibre for anything in North America.

Mtn, I've played around with all the WSM's available in CRF (M70, Kimber 8400, Ruger 77)... the Ruger has, without doubt, the best designed magazine, follower, feed ramp, etc., to handle the short/fat WSM's. I currently own an M70 cause that's what I like. But it wasn't designed from the ground up to handle the WSM cartridge like the Ruger. Because Ruger uses investment casting it's a bit easier for them to modify their basic action to handle the fatties. They did a good job as it hold three down with room to spare (they went to a wider magazine rather than a narrow one like Kimber) and feeds very well. The down side is it ony has a 22" barrel which will cause you to lose around 75-100 fps... at least that's what I lost in my first M70 when I cut it from 24 to 22". Also, the MKII trigger will need work to get to 3lbs and that'll require some scratch.

If you're happy with the Ruger I'd say go for it... I particularly think they did a good re-design on their synthetic stock if you're thinking stainless... course if you go stainless I'd reccomend taking it to a smith for a good bead blast.

BA

Brad, what was your opinion on the kimber?

XP, I had a Kimber 8400 MT last fall... it wouldn't feed. The store took it back. With a full magazine, trying to chamber a round it would hang up on the feed ramp... you'd have to "stand on it" to make it chamber... forget it! I personally believe the feed ramp is too steep on the Kimber and the magazine too narrow. Apparently, if the ramp and rails are carefully polished it'll feed good enough. The same store later got a 270 WSM that fed much better. However, when something requires that much perfection to function you can count me out.

I agree with Cobra and Brad, I actually prefer the 22" bbl and think that judicious loading of 200 gr. bullets over RE-25 in the .300 WSM might well give you results that you would be most happy with. I can't think of any B.C. hunting that I have seen in the past 40 years that the Ruger-WSM combo would not be suited for. I happen to be a .338 nut, but, a .308-200 gr. Nosler or Trophy B. at 2850 fps. is pretty skookum medicine, IMHO.

I like Ruger guns, have owned many of them and still have a few, you can't do much better for a hunting rifle at almost any price.

Barrel blow ups aside , I doubt that any Ruger or any other rifle would feed a WSM case as flawlessly as a Tikka T3 with its vertical stack magazine.

Maybe a moly-chrome T3 is the answer??

You need to try the Ruger...

Ditto, MLG! I own a Ruger M77/II and a Tikka Master (Whitetail) deluxe. I bought the Ruger earlier than the Tikka, but I have no doubt: my next rifle will not be a Ruger, but much more likely a Tikka, even if I must admit that they dealt with those blow-up problems poorly. Just my humble opinion. - Lorenzo

Sorry for my mistake; I wrote "earlier" instead of "previously" - Lorenzo

Why not just get a 30'06? The 22" bbl seriously hinders the potential of this cartridge. I'm absolutely flabbergasted that Ruger decided to go with a 22" bbl. Now granted, the WSMs do achieve their velocity faster than a longer, less-efficient case, and therefore can do it in a shorter barrel, but you're still losing any advantage it has over a 30'06.

The M77 Mark II is well liked, but I think I'd prefer a 24" .300 Win. Mag. to the 22" .300 WSM. A friend who has the .300 WSM was saying the same thing.

Go with the Ruger.

whats wrong with the winchester 70's?

quote:

Originally posted by Kyle:
Go with the Ruger.

Complete agreement. Just spend an additional 90 $ for one of those nice Timneys. I got one in the mail yesterday. They are just that little bit better than a professional trigger job.

Well, there's good and bad to your proposition. On the plus side, you will have a 300 WSM. On the down side it will be a Ruger. Personally, I went for the Kimber. A better handling and more graceful factory rifle I have not yet seen. Great trigger, and good accuracy. I haven't done any serious load development yet, but so far the rifle shoots between .75" and 1" with several bullets and H380 just doing barrel break-in. (I did have a Ruger 7 mag that shot consistently in the .4's after glass bedding in a Brown Precision stock and extensive load development)