Author Topic: Ruger M77 vs. Winchester M70 synth./stainless in 30-06 (Read 1645 times)

dawgvet · « **on:** September 25, 2005, 11:53:50 AM »

My dad is looking for a deer/elk rifle in 30-06 and wants a synth/stainless and has come down to Ruger vs. Winchester. I went with him to look at guns and he wasn't a fan of the Tikka (looks and country of origin, I think), or the Savage (felt too cheap). I've read a good bit about both and have my own older M70 blued/wood 270. I'm interested primarily in any known flaws of each, especially the Ruger. I know some dislike its trigger, but any other problems and good remedies? How bad are their triggers on average? Easy to fix? Dad seems to be leaning to the Ruger right now. Any input/advice appreciated.

Lawdog · « **Reply #1 on:** September 25, 2005, 12:19:33 PM »

Quote from: dawgvet

My dad is looking for a deer/elk rifle in 30-06 and wants a synth/stainless and has come down to Ruger vs. Winchester. I went with him to look at guns and he wasn't a fan of the Tikka (looks and country of origin, I think), or the Savage (felt too cheap). I've read a good bit about both and have my own older M70 blued/wood 270. I'm interested primarily in any known flaws of each, especially the Ruger. I know some dislike its trigger, but any other problems and good remedies? How bad are their triggers on average? Easy to fix? Dad seems to be leaning to the Ruger right now. Any input/advice appreciated.

This is one of those that is near a toss up. Ruger's "lawyer" trigger can be the pits(some seem to be better than others) but are easily replaced with a Timney adjustable one that will increase the value of the Ruger. But then it seems that Ruger's Customer service department is better than Winchester's. Seeing that I dont care for stainless/synthetic rifles Id say whatever your Father wants. Lawdog

hunting1 · « **Reply #2 on:** September 25, 2005, 05:25:30 PM »

I have a Ruger MK II Weathor warrior and it is a great gun. They are a little heavier than some I think, but all of my Rugers are accurate. The trigger is a little hard, but not bad to me anyways. good luck!

High Brass · « **Reply #3 on:** September 26, 2005, 01:57:50 AM »

I have a Ruger M77 mark II stain/lam. and love it. The trigger is a bit heavy but liveable for me and has no creep. Very accurate and it balances great for me. Mine is chambered in 280 Remington.

Dave in WV · « **Reply #4 on:** September 26, 2005, 03:57:07 AM »

I have one of each. I say go with the Ruger but with a laminate stock even though the Ruger factory synthetic stock is ok. A trigger job and mount the scope and you're good to go. The M70 is finished better and has a better trigger but for the money the Ruger wins IMO.

while99 · « **Reply #5 on:** September 26, 2005, 06:12:21 AM »

I've got a Model 70 stainless synthetic in .30/06 and I would not trade it for a Ruger. I adjusted the trigger to 3 lbs. and it shoots well. I have Weaver Grand Slam mounts on it attached with Torx screws. I usually have a 4x matte-finished Leupold on it. It seems to like 190 grain Hornady boat-tail spire points and 200 grain Nosler partitions.

Bart Solo · « **Reply #6 on:** September 26, 2005, 08:14:48 AM »

Quote from: while99

I've got a Model 70 stainless synthetic in .30/06 and I would not trade it for a Ruger. I adjusted the trigger to 3 lbs. and it shoots well. I have Weaver Grand Slam mounts on it attached with Torx screws. I usually have a 4x matte-finished Leupold on it. It seems to like 190 grain Hornady boat-tail spire points and 200 grain Nosler partitions.

I think Winchesters run a couple of hundred more than Rugers. Is the rifle worth the premium?

bgoldhunter · « **Reply #7 on:** September 28, 2005, 04:36:08 AM »

I also have both, and if you keep a close watch, a Winchester can be had for about the same money. I would much rather have the Winchester, myself.

gunnut69 · « **Reply #8 on:** September 28, 2005, 05:33:29 AM »

I would go with the M70. The Ruger will likely as not need the trigger replaced(not cheap) and the safety on the M70 is totally positive. It locks the striker itself. I love the Ruger cast in place bases but their safety, while an improvement perhaps is not the answer. I hate buying a rifle knowing I will likely have to replace parts to get to where I want it to go.. On the bedit side the winchesters have had some QC problems as have the Ruger but the ruger Service people are excellant. Still my last contact with winchester service(2002) was positive if a bit strange. Seems the SuperGrade I bought didn't have 'SuperGrade' engraved on the floorplate. They lost the part when I returned it to them(delivery confirmation!) but couldn't just send me a floorplate..they come only as a unit with the bottom metal(picture frame style).-so they sent the whole floor plate,, Of course the floorplate still wasn't engraved!!

Omaha-BeenGlockin · « **Reply #9 on:** September 28, 2005, 06:33:52 AM »

Its not 1964 anymore---even with the cost of the Timney---the Ruger is BY FAR the better rifle.

Winchesters these days are just sorry excues for a decent rifle---have owned 3---one was a very expensive Super Grade---even with adjusting the triggers to a reasonable poundadge(if that's a word??)----accuracy was very poor with ALL of them.

While the worst Ruger I've ever seen still had 1.5in groups.

The Ruger of today is simply the better rifle----built by a better company---that stands behind their products.

Good luck getting that Winchester fixed.

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #10 on:** September 28, 2005, 07:03:28 AM »

Take my advice with a grain of salt as I am an admitted and unashamed Ruger fan. No Winchesters in the safe at all, never have been.

Regarding Ruger triggers, some are better than others but all are easily improved by yourself or a gunsmith. The .300 Win Mag I got last Christmas had a very acceptable trigger, although I polished it up with a Dremel and a Cratex wheel anyway as I do with all my firearms. Havent replaced any of the triggers in my Rugers, just touched them up.

On the plus side, the Ruger scope mounting system is unequalled for strength IMHO. A mule, two logs and two broken ribs made me a believer. One can argue the relative merits of Rugers cast receiver or one-piece bolt, but its difficult to argue with accuracy. Every Ruger I own is a shooter and a keeper. None shoot more than 1 at 100 yards given good loads, and my .22-250 VT has put 4 shots into 0.5 at 200 yards.

With a synthetic stock you may not find it necessary to float the barrel, but every one of my Rugers is floated, as has been every centerfire rifle that has been in my safe its just something I do to prevent shot stringing.

Then there is the matter of looks, which is highly subjective. Personally, I much prefer the Rugers square-ish receiver, but to each their own.

My suggestion is if your Dad likes the Ruger, get it.

poncaguy · « **Reply #11 on:** September 28, 2005, 07:18:26 AM »

I have the "cheap" Winchester Super Shadow 270 WSM and a Ruger 77 260 Rem. Both very good rifles, either one will do.............

kudzu · « **Reply #12 on:** October 01, 2005, 10:40:00 AM »

Have several ruger 77's. 270, 308, 6mm, 17hmr, 270wsm. they are ALL shooters. the triggers are a little harder than most, but have no creep. I have never beem a win. man, so my vote goes RUGER. An ALL WEATHER Stainless/Syn. would be very hard to beat. I can get the 77's here locally for between 500 and 520 out hte door depending on wether it's walnut/lam/syn/blue/stainless. Good Luck DM