Ruger's website

Certainly not most beautiful though...

I guess it is a good rifle, but this is the ugliest of Ruger's current crop I think. And that recoil pad angle...

Lets start out by saying I like Ruger rifles I own 10 plus.

But these best of the best in gun rags just like car rags are normally brought by advertising dollars.

The more the company spends with the rag the better the ratings are IMHO.

I don't trust rating by gun writers it has to do a lot with the amount of goodies they get from the company involved.

I had six prunes, coffee and one egg for breakfast. The dried fruit portion of the meal will give me an opportunity to act appropriately... considering my opinion of the merit of this award.

quote:

The dried fruit portion of the meal will give me an opportunity to act appropriately.

You can also use some pages from the magazine to help you with your endeavor. One of the best uses for that magazine.

quote:

Originally posted by Labman:

quote:

The dried fruit portion of the meal will give me an opportunity to act appropriately.

You can also use some pages from the magazine to help you with your endeavor. One of the best uses for that magazine.

The glossy pages are a little slick for that--but yea I agree!

Ed

I kinda like my guide gun in .375 Ruger. I have not noticed that I experience any discernible peristaltic action when using the rifle.

I had the opportunity to shoot one the other day and it was a great rifle, I do admit that I really like my 375 and 416 Alaskans but I don't believe I am biased about their performance/quality. And like Mike I also did not experience any discernible peristaltic action when using the rifle.

I must say it's nice, even after eight or so years, I still learn new things on AR.

Never ceases to amaze me. The RSM was a very fine rifle. Finest Ruger ever built in my opinion. Now this one-- wins an award. It's butt ugly and chambered mostly in cartridges that will be discontinued in less than 10 years. Only a gun writer would pick such a gun for an award! Just goes to show the lack of depth in the writing profession these days I guess?

Hey, fat chicks need love too! I wonder how good of a hunting tool this is for a short barreled, 3006, brush or heavy timber rifle for anything walking in north america?

Which only goes to prove that the writers are Field and Stream are completely effing clueless!

"Field and Stream" magazine lost ANY relevance it might have once had to the REAL world of hunting and shooting several decades ago.
It's almost reached the level of being something of a contrarian indicator. Nothing against Ruger, but A quality firearms manufacturer might prefer that they NOT be singled out by such a publication.

quote:

Originally posted by buckeyeshooter:
It's butt ugly . . .

I thought that was true of all bolt action rifles . . .

Had to google it; and wow-that is one ugly gun!

quote:

Ruger offers the rifle as a tool for those of us who actually carry and use rifles on a daily basis in harsh conditions. It may fall short in what some folks call "aesthetics", but it makes up for it in rugged practicality.
I have talked with a number of Alaskan hunters and guides who love them. Proving again the old axiom that Beauty is as beauty does

If you lost the muzzle brake, ditched the pimped out stock colors for a straight brown or black laminated stock, and have a 1" recoil pad that followed the contour of the stock it would look okay.

The picture in Field & Stream has a scope with large objective lens - that looks like it is mounted touching the barrel. Maybe not a big deal, but I wouldn't think recoil would be good for scope longevity in that arrangement.

I understand it is a rugged and dependable tool for use in harsh environments. However, I believe it falls way short of the description Field and Stream gives it:

"Here is a dangerous/heavy-game rifle with everything done right."

I can accept adjectives like very good, excellent, and even best in its class . I think "best of the best " is an insult to their reader's intelligence.

quote:

Originally posted by Grenadier:

I think "best of the best " is an insult to their reader's intelligence.

Why would an intelligent reader be looking at F&S ?

quote:

Ruger offers the rifle as a tool for those of us who actually carry and use rifles on a daily basis in harsh conditions. It may fall short in what some folks call "aesthetics", but it makes up for it in rugged practicality. I have talked with a number of Alaskan hunters and guides who love them. Proving again the old axiom that Beauty is as beauty does

Yes

From the picture with the laminated stock I like it

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:

quote:

Ruger offers the rifle as a tool for those of us who actually carry and use rifles on a daily basis in harsh conditions. It may fall short in what some folks call "aesthetics", but it makes up for it in rugged practicality.
I have talked with a number of Alaskan hunters and guides who love them. Proving again the old axiom that Beauty is as beauty does

Looks like a very versatile camp gun in 375 Ruger calibre. The muzzle break and weight should be stored away and the thread-guard installed. Then the stock can be adjusted for whoever needs to use it. It looks very practical and I could see it as an excellent elk rifle.

Stock options might improve the rifle, which would have complemented their discontinued Alaskan 20" 375Ruger and 416Ruger. In any case, Ruger has two great heavy calibres and they need to market them in a variety of practical or more esthetical configurations. The African looks pretty good.

Couple of thoughts on the Guide Gun:

I wonder if a company like Ruger will ever want to adopt the 500 AccRel Nyati? A "500 Ruger" will fit in their Hawkeye action and blow most of the competition out of the water ballistically.

I like what Ruger has been doing for common-priced heavy calibre rifles, though the price tag on this Guide gun is a little steep, I think.

Make a carbon fiber stock and hacksaw off the muz brake threads and you have something.

I laughed when I saw it. Please just build more of the EXCELLENT African models without the muzzle break in 375 ruger, 416 ruger and 9.3x62

I, personally don't care for the stock, its bulky and ill fitting and no excuse for that..but a cabnet rasp, some shaping, some wood removal, especially around the grip, and a new recoil pad would make it an nice using gun. the Ruger African stock pattern would have been would have been excellent....

Glad I have one of the old boat paddle stocked mod 77 stainless Rugers in a 338 Win. It's ugly, but it points and handles well, sucks up recoil, and is very accurate. It's flat and fits a saddle scabbard well Ruger did there homework on this one..

Not a fan of SS and plastic stocks, but I do live in Idaho and the weather can be severe.

Without a doubt, that has to be the ugliest gun this side of a Blaser.

It is too bad but I just checked and I don't have room for another rifle!

465H&H

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by buckeyeshooter:
It's butt ugly . . .

I thought that was true of all bolt action rifles . . .

Hahahaha! Well, they are homely at least. My guess is you prefer the 2 barrel type? My self I like the ones with a lever on them.

Remember that it is a hunting tool, not an art object. It won't do a thing for your gun cabinet but it will do wonders for you trophy wall. I have pretty guns that I don't use in bad weather. I'll use this thing in any weather. Put tape over the muzzle and go to it.

Only a tool? but a tool must feel good in the hands and Ruger left two extra un-needed pounds of wood on the stock...and a recoil pad that changed the pitch and missed the bottom line of the stock, but thats fixable if one is so inclined.

I wonder how many that have commented on this thread have actually shot one. I have a Ruger African and a Guide Gun, both in .375 Ruger. There is no comparison, the Guide Gun is far more comfortable to shoot.

Mike:
Make yourself happy and sell me the old model cheap! I won't have to eat so many prunes.

My Hawkeye African in 375 Ruger is easy shooting and accurate (four shots 0.67" c-c)stoked with RL 15 and a 270 TSX at 2664 fps MV.

I've found it to be more comfortable to shoot than my previous 375 H&H Ruger Safari Magnum which was quite a bit heavier.

quote:

Originally posted by Ammoloader:
My Hawkeye African in 375 Ruger is easy shooting and accurate (four shots 0.67" c-c)stoked with RL 15 and a 270 TSX at 2664 fps MV.

I've found it to be more comfortable to shoot than my previous 375 H&H Ruger Safari Magnum which was quite a bit heavier.

So you can only imagine how sweet the Guide Gun is to shoot.

Mike, How about bringing that guide gun down to the range and let me try it out? I might be able to shoot and drink coffee at the same time.....

No way, you might knock me in the head after you shoot it to try and leave with it.

On this week's episode of Trijicon's World of Sports Afield the Ruger Guide Gun is featured prominently. It looks right at home in the pouring rain, wading through rivers and being dragged through the mud in Alaska. Fifer even gives it a bath in the river, shakes it off, reloads it and keeps right on going. A working man's rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
On this week's episode of Trijicon's World of Sports Afield the Ruger Guide Gun is featured prominently. It looks right at home in the pouring rain, wading through rivers and being dragged through the mud in Alaska. Fifer even gives it a bath in the river, shakes it off, reloads it and keeps right on going. A working man's rifle.

Yep, I noticed that too.

I don't mind the stock, but the muzzle brake is what turns me away. I detest shooting next to someone at the range who is using one. The last was a 30-378 and I swore it was my last!

Hunter Jines,

First it was the admission of Ford trucks, now the Ruger Guide Gun!

Seems like there was an admission of a Blaser or two in there as well?

Must all of my heros fall?

I'm thinking an intervention is necessary!

Ugly . . . like drank too much and woke up with a Ruger Guide Gun ugly.

Compared to the offerings of the last 4-5 years, this is a step in the wrong direction.

Looks like it was designed by a congressional sub-committee.