I see the 98 actions used for custom rifles but aimost never Ruger 77 actions. Why?

i duno - i've done a few using 77actions and they all worked out well

I would tend to agree with Duane. The tang safety early models do have a good resale value, and that would get you fairly close to a rough OM 70 for a custom build. I just bought one recently with a boogered-up stock and a 3-9X Leupold scope for less than $800.

Based on what I have read, there is a mental component at play.
The 77 is a fine 'working rifle'. I believe Phil will agree w/ this assessment.
As a 'working rifle' few want to spend the time and money to use it as a base for a custom. Hell, I have not.
Some smiths do not want to mess w/ one.
Isn't the 77 action 'investment cast', instead of forged ?
I own multiple Ruger rifles and have no complaints. I seem to be one of the few able to get my (3) #1s to shoot ( to my anal accuracy requirements). The 77 I bought on ARBAY was easy to find a load that worked.
Mental, snob appeal, mindset And attitude all go into the mix.
Hell, I am guilty of it too!

The bespoke rifle trade is to a great degree built on recapturing the nostalgia of yesteryear. Yesteryear being the 1890's through about 1964.

The Ruger M77 has the same features as, say, a Granite Mountain action, or a Winchester OM70, but it doesn't have the historic link to the guns of yesteryear.

It is a great design that uses modern manufacturing to make a pretty solid rifle, but it doesn't stir any emotion in most folks. If Ruark had used one, I wager that it would be a different story.

Yes, the receiver is investment cast. A fact that has no actual meaning with regard to quality. Though it seems to mean something to some folks. It isn't like Ruger's have a reputation for being weak, and prone to blowing up, quite the contrary.

Jeremy

It was pointed out to me many years ago that the M77's vertical sided receiver was designed for mass production and did not lend itself to the really tight wood to metal fit expected in a custom rifle. Never stocked one so I can't say for sure that is true.

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe (CG&R):

quote:

Originally posted by loiblb:
I see the 98 actions used for custom rifles but aimost never Ruger 77 actions. Why?

My opinion only! I've done a couple, needed so damn much work to make the action presentable, came to conclusion they aren't too bad as a factory off the shelf...that's the niche they belong and should stay

On the user side of the spectrum, this is the same conclusion I came to. Rough, would need a lot of work to make the grade for a custom, investment cast, not forged, perfectly functional though. In my experience Ruger barrels are the same way, rough but perfectly functional.

JPK

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe (CG&R):

quote:

Originally posted by Glen71:
It was pointed out to me many years ago that the M77's vertical sided receiver was designed for mass production and did not lend itself to the really tight wood to metal fit expected in a custom rifle. Never stocked one so I can't say for sure that is true.

You're right...the very last one I fooled with..well...the receiver was a paralleogram. I had to rermove an alarming amount of metal from the L side to end with a minimal taper for inletting

Duane, I don't understand as every Ruger in my camp will easily drop into any Ruger stock. There must be some problem with your insletting

last one i cheated on and used a bedding block

the statement about Duane's inletting; that was funny Phil...

I think, for most of us, that resale value has to be considered. Build on a Mauser 98, or an OM 70.
Those two are investments.

About anything else, build what YOU want. It would seem unlikely that anyone else will want to help you recoup your $$$.

If Ruger sold the 77 with no polishing done, it might save a lot of work in trying to make one look decent. I have always kind of liked the Ruger products; including the 77. If one's idea of a custom rifle is just a rifle with an aftermarket barrel and stock, the 77 is just fine. For an all-out custom rifle, it's not quite so fine.
Having said that, I saw one that Ralf Martini had worked over and restocked which I thought looked pretty nice so they can work out pretty well. Regards, Bill.

My dislikes for the Ruger actions have always been esthetic in nature. While the stock has a generally overall pleasing shape the execution with all the flats is very unappealing to me. Also I find the trigger guard and release to be downright ugli. Most of my displeasure has been centered around the bolt handle and saftey. This all presents a problem inasmuch as there is very little aftermarket upgrades produced for the action probably simply due to it's low demand as an action for customization. I tried to modify an RSM in 458WinMag by replacing the bolt handle with a straight one and then filling the attendent opening in the stock with an Ebony insert. But could not figure anything to do with the tiny safety lever or the triggerguard that was within my skill level. It shot good though and the person I sold it to tok it to Africa and took an Elephant with it so it worked fine.

A ready made 'custom' quality Ruger M77 is the Express model. I have a couple of them and they are very well made, accurate and the function is flawless.

They come in upscale walnut and look great.

From a mechanical engineering standpoint, that front angled screw is a really bad idea - if not bedding perfectly it will generate torque on the action.

The patent on this "great" idea has long since expired, but the fact no one has copied it says a lot.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Leeper:
If Ruger sold the 77 with no polishing done, it might save a lot of work in trying to make one look decent. I have always kind of liked the Ruger products; including the 77. If one's idea of a custom rifle is just a rifle with an aftermarket barrel and stock, the 77 is just fine. For an all-out custom rifle, it's not quite so fine.
Having said that, I saw one that Ralf Martini had worked over and restocked which I thought looked pretty nice so they can work out pretty well. Regards, Bill.

I've used one in this manner and have been very happy with. Krieger barrel, McMillan stock and a Timney trigger. It's a solid, accurate, reliable, ugly, function over form hunting rifle that gets used probably more than any other in my safe during hunting season.

I didn't have it built for looks or re-sale nor do I have much invested in it.

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Leeper:
If Ruger sold the 77 with no polishing done, it might save a lot of work in trying to make one look decent. I have always kind of liked the Ruger products; including the 77. If one's idea of a custom rifle is just a rifle with an aftermarket barrel and stock, the 77 is just fine. For an all-out custom rifle, it's not quite so fine.
Having said that, I saw one that Ralf Martini had worked over and restocked which I thought looked pretty nice so they can work out pretty well. Regards, Bill.

I've used one in this manner and have been very happy with. Krieger barrel, McMillan stock and a Timney trigger. It's a solid, accurate, reliable, ugly, function over form hunting rifle that gets used probably more than any other in my safe during hunting season.

I didn't have it built for looks or re-sale nor do I have much invested in it.

I don't recall who has this as his signature line: Life is too short to hunt with an ugly rifle!

But I like it.

BTW, I do hunt with a SA LH Ruger M 77 sometimes, at one of my clubs, which has sika deer and salt marsh with inseam deep black ooze in places and not uncommon standing (brackish) rain or flood water, where I wouldn't take one of my nicer rifles. I think their lines are pretty attractive. Fore arm is too long, but the stock is fairly lean. I am not plastic and stainless tolerant.

JPK

I've got a few pretty ones in the safe too.

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
I've got a few pretty ones in the safe too.

I'm sure. Once upon a time I used to leave the pretty ones at home, but I try not to do that anymore; they were made to hunt. Even at the club with the salt marsh and the ooze, I will bring a nice rifle as well as the Ruger, and use the pretty one if I'm not going to be in the muck.

For inspiration, take a look in Custom Rifles in the Weibe Six Shooter thread. That beauty survived a wet and messy hunt...

JPK

I hear ya and pretty much do the same. I've been hunting a soybean field a lot over the last 5 years and that Ruger is a .264WM which is perfect for that application.

John Farner aka: toomanytools put it together for me some years back. Some rifles are pretty to look at and some are just tools. My Ruger falls in the later category. That said perfect function has a beauty all of it's own.

My Ruger has the best seat in my gun safe.If you pay a ton for a rifle and it screws you somehow then I would think that not only will you not want to use it but not look at it as well.It is nice to take something you know works very well and try to improve on it functionally and look wise.I would like to customize a Ruger-stock and all-I would not touch the integral barrel.

I used the Ruger 77 MK II action for several projects, and was always happy with the results. These actions solved several feeding problems.

Right now I have custom rifles in 6.5 Grendel, 308, 9.3x338 and 458 each using a stainless MK II action. The Grendel started as a 6mm PPC rifle, so it feeds the 6.5 Grendel perfectly. Timney didn't make a trigger for that action so I used another brand to upgrade. I have another in 9.3x62 on a blued MK II action. The 9.3x338 wears a fiberglass stock.

The 308 and the 458 have Hogue stocks, and yes the Hogue holds up to the 458 recoil - it was a take-off from either a 375 Ruger or a 416 Ruger, can't remember which. My opinion of Hogue stocks has elevated over time and use. There is something to be said for a drop-in stock that feels good and works. There is no easier solution to something that can be made into complexity. I have a new factory laminate stock for the 308 and all it needs is bedding in, but the Hogue works so well that I haven't gotten around to converting.

The 458 started life as a 300 WM, and it took no modifications for it to feed the 458 cartridge perfectly. I improved it with a stock factory magazine from Ruger made for their 416. The Grendel wears a factory sporter laminate stock with checkering.

These Ruger projects have saved me a lot of money, time and aggravation and the end results are real shooters. I've also had a lot of people here to turn up their nose at the thought of my projects, but no one has said anything negative among those who have actually seen them.

Basically, I migrated to the Ruger action simply because I got tired or waiting on gunsmiths, and tired of the expense of other choices. The length of time from idea to shooting is greatly reduced by using a Ruger action as a donor, and the probability of a serious flaw to ruin the whole thing is greatly reduced.

I also used a CZ 550 action for one project and it was also hassle free, insofar as the action itself.

KB

I believe there is an old Russian saying that says something like "Better is the enemy of good enough"

They must have had Rugers in mind when they came up with that one.

Perhaps it was "good enough is the enemy of better".

Good enough could mean a lot. It could mean it gets the job done, and also brings the necessary degree of satisfaction, from several perspectives.

If a guy is going to fret over things like the flat sides, the bolt handle, the safety or trigger, and other details, and is willing to fork out lots of money, and insists on fine walnut, and doesn't mind waiting on gunsmiths, he is probably better off to avoid the Ruger action.

If a guy wants a shooter that is the least hassle, feeding issues resolved before proceeding, drop in stock options with minor bedding, quality replacement trigger for little money, stainless steel, and other features, the Ruger action is better than good enough.

Just because someone spends five times the money, or a lot more, doesn't make it "better".

KB

quote:

Just because someone spends five times the money, or a lot more, doesn't make it "better".

True, when the measure is putting x bullet in y place reliably, but the chances of it being a hell of a lot nicer are very high!

JPK