The Hawkeye Alaskan in 375 Ruger is back! Mine does not recoil enough to need the brake or the barrel band but at least its back!

I've been looking for both a .375 and a .416 Ruger... with polished blue finish... and a walnut stock... and no brake. You'd think that'd be simple to find, but it isn't.

I never owned a 375.I might just get one in the near future-a Ruger or a mod.70.

I am also glad to see it back. And I agree as to the recoil / brake. I prefer the non-braked on the 375 & 416 Ruger Alaskan versions. But, some like the brakes. At least it is removable.

quote:

Originally posted by Live Oak:
The Hawkeye Alaskan in 375 Ruger is back! Mine does not recoil enough to need the brake or the barrel band but at least its back!

I have one with 23 inch barrel and no brake in the SS Hawkeye Alaskan sub model.

My SS Hawkeye Alaskan .375 Ruger of 2007 came with 20" barrel.
Same as the .416 Ruger of same vintage,
both with Hogue stock.
Prefer the original 23" black and walnut.
I would prefer the 23" barrel on any of them.

.458 Winchester Magnum Perfection
In maxima potentia parvum spatium.
Id venit et vicit omnis.

I fail to understand the no brake clan..It comes on and off, has a thread protector! Wonderful for long drawn out sessions at the bench working up loads, POI does not change in my guns (Ruger Africans)….Maybe machismo is out of control!

Ray,

I don't like brakes because I don't like the noise. I'm already half deaf.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
I fail to understand the no brake clan...

Some of us don’t consider .375s and .416s powerful enough to require a brake.

Then again, I only have two bolt rifles with brakes (.416 and .460 Weatherby) and I didn’t have a choice on that. None of my bigger stuff (.470+) has a brake.

When you stop and consider how a brake works and what it does, I don't want it acting on my rifle! To me, it just raises the cost of the rifle. Take it off and miss place it. Thread protector comes loose or off in the field! No thanks!

Brakes increase blast bad thing on Safari where you are hunting with a group. In addition, the damn thing even with thread protected is just plain ugly on a otherwise beautiful Pre64 looking rifle.

Still better looking then hunting with a Blaser.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
I fail to understand the no brake clan..It comes on and off, has a thread protector! Wonderful for long drawn out sessions at the bench working up loads, POI does not change in my guns (Ruger Africans)….Maybe machismo is out of control!

Is that usual, Ray, for muzzle brakes not to change POI?

My cousin has a Savage 458WM with a muzzle brake that can apparently be turned on and off - he says the POI shifts significantly.

Sambarman,
Ruger furnishes a weight to compensate for that, but Ive tossed them as they were not needed on my guns...

Im hearing a lot of lame excuses on here what not to like about the brake, when the only legitimate excuse is you just don't like the damn thing..

The brake has gotten awful popular among the shut in in Alaska and Canada these days..and I understand the dislike as I was anti brake for a number of years, but bursitis was the result of big bore recoil, and to some extent my eyesight Im told....Today the brake is much appreciated on the bench while filing in a set of iron sights, sighting in a scoped rifle, and working up loads...As to the thread protector coming off, that is an overworked imagination or a weak hand, if it comes loose put it on tighter, same for the brake itself, both screw on the same thread!! use a dab of locktite or nail polish..

POI does not change with any of my braked rifles if it did I wouldn't keep it..

NOise of a brake??? shooting an unbraked gun has the same problem, don't ever believe otherwise.

But all this is just good conversation, and it boils down to choice, some like them and others do not. Ive made my case you make yours!

Back on the original subjet, that we got off on regarding brakes..

One of my favorite guns is an older Ruger Hawkeye mk-2, a blue 23 inch barrel, wood stocked and weighs in as 7.25 lbs naked..With a scope it goes 8.50 or a tad less, depending on the scope...It is a 375 Ruger and that was my nostalgic worry as Im definatly old school, but after playing with this caliber, Im sold on it and my old H&H is wasting away in my gun cabinet..This Ruger is stocked properly and recoil is in fact rather mild..I better add my Ruger is not braked!!

Ive since learned that my .375 Ruger is a model 77RS 07 07129 and was manufactured only in 2008 according to Ruger..Why? don't know unless it was too light, to me its the best Ruger Ive owned todate...

I would say Ray's experiences with brakes are an exception. I have tested numerous rifle with and without brakes and have yet to find one that shot what I would consider even close to the same POI!
And I even tried the cute little Ruger heavy thread protector ! Which added another variable.

When Ruger came out with the muzzle brake on the wood stock 375 & 416 Africans I assumed it was simply the cheapest way to stop stocks from splitting. Because they did nothing different to the stocks.

Much of the increased noise related to brakes is directed everywhere but straight back at the shooter. Don't find a Barrett 82CQ offensive when pulling the trigger. Very different experience from an adjacent line position.

So it's not difficult to understand why guides (and horses) might object to a brake.

I hunt alone, and must wear electronic muffs. Can't afford to lose another 8th nerve cell. Don't need to go prone in sand, either. I'd break something in my neck if I tried. Muzzle brakes have become a non-issue. I'd use one on a .308 or '06. Maybe even a .243. Why not?

If that makes me a wuss, fine. Am an insensitive wuss, then.

I'm with Phil on this one, every single rifle I have ever shot, did shoot into a different point of impact with the brake installed and then removed. I have only messed with a dozen or so but every single one of them had the same MO.

You change the barrel harmonics so dramatically it would be an anomaly not to see this change

My Ruger is a #1 Tropical in .458 Win Mag, and with Mag-na-porting. It does help with felt recoil -- they claim 15%, and I can believe that from experience. And I don't notice any increase in muzzle blast. Perhaps the neighbors do!

So being about Ray's age, I'm with him on this, but I've never used a screw on-off one. I understand how that could affect the barrel's harmonics.

Bob
www.bigbores.ca

Im amazed as to the post on the changing of the POI, can be so different than mine. but I base my post on two maybe three rifles Ive owned,all 338s btw, all Rugers Africans. I have one I just bought on AR a month ago, I'll test it with and without..see what happens and if I can work up a load that works both ways, that's what I did with the others.

I have an old M77 30-06 that I had re-bored to 9.3x62, result very light barrel on a very light rifle, under 8 pounds ready to go. Muzzle break was a great addition, especially from the bench! Significantly changed the POI, like over 8 inches at 100 yards! However, I can now practice a great deal more with this rifle and as a result my groups have really improved and I consider it an excellent idea in this case.

Im amazed as to the posts on the changing of the POI, can be so different than mine. Ive heard this before but I base my post on three rifles Ive owned, 2 Ruger Africans and one boat paddle Ruger, all in 338 caliber..One shot 3 higher and an inch right, the other two shot also shot 3 or 4 high to center.I find this more than acceptable..had they shot that horizontal three or four inches I would not find that acceptable...All with one specific load whatever that was...all with 250 gr. Nosler partitions and RL-15, 17 and 19..best I recall without looking in the log book.

Did anyone try working up a load to specifically shoot both braked and non braked loads together, I approached this as I would loading solids and softs in a double rifle..

Maybe I got lucky, I have a .338 I just bought on AR a couple of months ago, I'll test it with and without. I sighted it in with the brake, but have not tried it without, so guess I better do that to be sure.

Im still shooting my light 7,5 lb. .375 Ruger and its about my limit, and I don't like sighting it in off the bench, using a stand up rest solved that problem..May be a canidate for a brake in a few more years..

I sure don't like the look of a brake, and the fact it adds inches to the barrel, but it is what it is, As many of you age, especially those that shoot the big stuff will be taking another look at these nasty tubes, when the hands knarl up and the neck and shoulder ache and father time does its dirty work..and the last thing you want to give up is hunting, shooting and roping, your already deaf because they didn't have ear protection back in the day, then get on AR and scold the believers!!

I won't have a muzzle blaster on any of my rifles.. The recoil reduction would be nice the but the blast is just too painful! If a guy next to me at the range has a brake, I leave or at least go back to my truck till he is done.. and I will not hunt with anyone carrying a braked gun.

All that being said, I use a 416 Ruger Alaskan with the Hogue overmolded stock - the early model before the barrel band. To me that stock absorbs all the vibration and makes shooting it very pleasant.. Its not even bad at on the bench..

Very accurate with 350 Barnes TSX and banded solids and the 20" barrel swings like a dream..

I have been around braked 5.56 to braked 50 Cal Browning and that British early Tank buster (I forgot the name of the Cartridge). It is larger than 50 Browning.

The 50 cal I remember a distinct thundering shockwave down in my chest. The 5.56 physically hurt my ear drums. I had to get an extra set of hearing protection (muffs) over my plugs.

Call me wuss if you need to.

No need for brakes. The blast from them is worse than the recoil. If you can't shoot the rifle without a brake, you can't shoot the rifle!

Do none of you nay sayers have ear protection? and no I don't shoot any big bore rifle without ear protection unless hunting in which case I do not use the brake..Im only suggesting the use of a brake on the target range for sighting in (be sure and work up loads that work for both with and without the brake I guess) It sure is nice for working up loads, sighting in, fileing in iron sights etc...but to each his own, whatever works for you...I learned many years ago that a big bore med. bore and small bore rifles will ruin your hearing as some of you will soon find out as you age....

As to the brake with and without matching POI, it appears that its a real good idea to know that by testing each gun,before you hunt, and you have the option to try and work up loads that will work, if not I suggest you sight in the gun with what you intend to shoot with, the brake or without..Id hunt without the brake if my gun wouldn't shoot both to the same or very close to the same POI...Its a good option to have IMO..

Does "back" mean these will be in stock again?

Regarding brakes, the Ruger brake is the only brake I've ever shot that doesn't seem to significantly increase noise / muzzle blast around the shooter. I have two Rugers with brakes, a .375 and .30-06, and both don't appear to me to be louder, although that is hard to measure. Other brakes to me are obnoxious, even with muffs and plugs, and I can feel the blast in my sinuses, which is probably not good. I don't experience any of this with Ruger's brake design.

When will a Ruger see the “accuracy” light and build an accurate rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by df06:
When will a Ruger see the “accuracy” light and build an accurate rifle.

Hmmmmm. What is your accuracy standard?

I currently own exactly 90 Ruger rifles, and have owned others. None of them are benchrest competition rifles. They are all hunting rifles, and their accuracy for that purpose are quite adequate. My wife and I have taken around 125 Pronghorns over the past 25 years with these Rugers, besides Deer, Elk, Moose, and a lot of African animals. I have taken about (7) Antelope over 300 yards each with no problems. This is not extreme range for good shooters, but that is about all the accuracy I require on such a small game animal.

I do not own any of the original Mark Is made with the outsourced barrels that people seem to complain about, so I cannot comment on that model. Post Mark I barrels are made in-house by Ruger and are hammer forged. Mine are all Mark IIs, Hawkeyes, RSMs, Expresses, Africans, Alaskans, No. 1s, etc.

What has been your own personal experience with Rugers?

My 375 Ruger is minute of turkey head.

Are they doing a left hand version??

I have two 30-06s, one 7x57, one 375, one 250 savage and one 338, all of which shoot an inch or under! Anybody wanting to challange that is welcome to come by get a cup of coffee or a beer and try them out. I have a 75 yard range at the house and it only a mile to a couple of hundred thousand acres of BLM..

quote:

Originally posted by Heym SR20:
Are they doing a left hand version??

Ruger makes left handed rifles, and in 375 Ruger caliber, they make it in the African and the Guide Gun, but I don't believe they make it in the Alaskan.

p.s. I've been to Scotland once in my life for the 4th ITF Taekwon-Do World Championships in Glascow. Beautiful country. Hope to return again some day to see more of your amazing country.

Hello,
I picked up a Ruger Hawkeye FTW a few years ago, in 30-06, and it was the first rifle I have owned with a brake. It did not need a brake being heavy with its laminate stock, and also in 30-06, but it was a great deal at the time. I found out two things about this particular rifle and the brake.
The point of impact did not seem to shift much with/without the brake installed. It is so far a bit more accurate without the brake.
However, using my regular ear muffs is not enough to keep my ears from ringing after shooting it with the brake. I added ear plugs under the muffs, and while better, it is still really loud.
In this rifle I gladly accept a little more recoil traded against all the extra blast.
Thanks,
Rich

Shoulders heal quickly
Hearing damage is permanent

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
Shoulders heal quickly
Hearing damage is permanent

Amen!

+1

quote:

Originally posted by jlabreck7316:

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
I fail to understand the no brake clan...

Some of us don’t consider .375s and .416s powerful enough to require a brake.

Then again, I only have two bolt rifles with brakes (.416 and .460 Weatherby) and I didn’t have a choice on that. None of my bigger stuff (.470+) has a brake.

Or the 500 Jeffery, maybe the 600 Overkill ....

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Sambarman,
Ruger furnishes a weight to compensate for that, but Ive tossed them as they were not needed on my guns...

Im hearing a lot of lame excuses on here what not to like about the brake, when the only legitimate excuse is you just don't like the damn thing..

The brake has gotten awful popular among the shut in in Alaska and Canada these days..and I understand the dislike as I was anti brake for a number of years, but bursitis was the result of big bore recoil, and to some extent my eyesight Im told....Today the brake is much appreciated on the bench while filing in a set of iron sights, sighting in a scoped rifle, and working up loads...As to the thread protector coming off, that is an overworked imagination or a weak hand, if it comes loose put it on tighter, same for the brake itself, both screw on the same thread!! use a dab of locktite or nail polish..

POI does not change with any of my braked rifles if it did I wouldn't keep it..

NOise of a brake??? shooting an unbraked gun has the same problem, don't ever believe otherwise.

But all this is just good conversation, and it boils down to choice, some like them and others do not. Ive made my case you make yours!

Thanks for that answer, way back then, Ray. Obviously I don't go back over my posts for answers as often as I should.

Anyway, it's great to hear you can still use these things. Last time I fired a .458 from a rest I thought for a moment I'd detached a retina.

But really, instead of dropping your wisdom in snippets here, it's time you started hammering out a book for posterity. As said, I'd be happy to fix spelling mistakes and grammatical errors, while trying not to ruin your style.

As far as Ruger accuracy goes, I have had seven Ruger rifles. All have shot sub MOA with handloads. Ruger makes good products in my opinion.

AMEN !