I am not so familiar with the history of Ruger 77 rifles. I understand that some of them are pre-warning and some are post-warning.

Can someone explain what this was all about and what the difference in the rifles is, if any?

At some point in time, I don't know exactly what point in time, Ruger began to roll-stamp a safety warning on their firearms. I believe that they did it to help counter potential litigation related to user error, rather than a material or design flaw. Of course it won't keep them from being sued, but it might help keep them from losing.

Jeff

Yep, it all comes back to reading the fine print.
JL.

They needed to stamp the barrel as thus:

"Warning...this gun may have a crumby trigger pull, it may not feed shells up the magazine, the bolt locking mechanism may not work, it may not be accurate, the stock may warp, the safety may be faulty and our accuracy warranty is 3" at 100 yards."

Guess that was a low blow.......but accurate.

It is interested to discuss the crap shoot that Ruger barrels have been. I had a pair of 77RSIs in 243 that were only a couple of SNs apart. 1 was a good shooter, but the other would shoot at all, even when installed in a standard Ruger stock that allowed the barrel to be totally free floated. I had it rebored to 260 and now it shoots pretty good.

Jeff

[QUOTE]Originally posted by vapodog:
They needed to stamp the barrel as thus:

"Warning...this gun may have a crumby trigger pull, it may not feed shells up the magazine, the bolt locking mechanism may not work, it may not be accurate, the stock may warp, the safety may be faulty and our accuracy warranty is 3" at 100 yards."

Guess that was a low blow.......but accurate.[/QUOTE

Sounds like your off the shelf remchesterby to me