Author Topic: Are Ruger's really that bad? (Read 1866 times)

muz125 · « **on:** January 10, 2006, 02:53:26 AM »

Guys,

I am strongly considering buying a new Ruger M77 in .243. I really really like how the gun looks.

Nothing from Winny or Remington compares for looks in the price range of the ruger.

But...I hear so many horror stories about Ruger. Are these just gripes or are they true? Please give experiences.

Greg

cma g21 · « **Reply #1 on:** January 10, 2006, 03:37:52 AM »

I only had one, a 7x57. I could not get it to shoot good groups (most were more like patterns). I finally gave it to my cousin, who finally had it rechambered to 280 Rem. Then it shot good groups. BTW, this was the Mark I

There are three others that belong to family members. All are Mark II's, and all shoot well.

Grizzly_A · « **Reply #2 on:** January 10, 2006, 06:04:48 AM »

Grrrrr..just lost the post I just completed!

I'll sum it up, I second you on the looks of the Ruger, I love the stainless and laminate.

The M77 MkII rifles that my family and I own are good rifles. We have guns that fall into popular deer/elk cartridges and they have served us well. Some shoot better after having some trigger work or a bedding job done, but most of us just shoot them stock with handloads for better groups.
We're not benchrest or competition shooters, we're hunters and these are our hunting rifles, but we have several that shoot MOA or better.
The one exception is the 22hornet my brother-in-law has. It's shoots pretty crappy...more like a shotgun.

akpls · « **Reply #3 on:** January 10, 2006, 06:25:10 AM »

I have 3 Mark II's (.204 Ruger, a .338WM, 7x57) and a custom (.450 Marlin) built on a Mark II action. All shoot well and are reliable. The .204 and the .338 both needed trigger jobs to make them more to my liking. I bought the 7x57 used and the trigger was probably worked over by the previous owner. I have heard some claim that they can't get their 77's to shoot accurately, but that hasn't been my experience. With the right load they shoot just as good or better than any other brands I own. Even the so-called "long throated" 7x57.

JDK · « **Reply #4 on:** January 10, 2006, 06:45:00 AM »

I have been around 6 or so MKII's in the past 2 years (I own 1). All of them have been accurate, 1.25 inches or less off a bench at 100 yards, while a pair of 270s that my buddy purchased are outstanding. My own 7x57 shoots every factory load I can find to 1.1 inches or less off the bench as a stock rifle.

I dearly love the feel and how the old tang safety models fit me. Unfortunately, they will not be getting any more of my time (and $$) when the newer MKIIs appear to be significantly more consistent.

Paul Barnard · « **Reply #5 on:** January 10, 2006, 07:34:55 AM »

All Ruger 77's I own or have owned were accurate enough for their intended application. Some were very accuarate. Others are just adequate. I have never regretted a M-77 purchase.

3DTESTIFY · « **Reply #6 on:** January 10, 2006, 09:52:59 AM »

I agree with you about Rugers appearance, clean style & good fit/finish. the Ruger's hunting rifle features are what I like, I.E. the one piece bolt/handle, controlled round feed, strong integral rings base & the classic hinged floorplate & recessed latch. I own a Model 77RL ultra light in .257 Roberts with the 20" light contour barrel & it's unloaded weight is 7 lb. with a Leupold M8 4x scaope & Montana sling. The handling & carry characteristics are ideal for the field.
Yes, the near 6 lb. factory trigger pull was sweetened up by a gunsmith to a crisp, clean 3-1/2 lb. hunting pull for less than half the cost of an aftermarket adjustable trigger. I don't need an adjustable trigger on my hunting rifle.
The horror stories usually involve the trigger or rifle accuracy. In my opinion, the trigger is workable & hunting accuracy in good, even better with reloads. These were designed to be hunters & after owning the other two rifles mentioned(I like them), the Ruger M77 MKII is my new favorite hunting rifle. So purchase the Ruger with confidence.

kudzu · « **Reply #7 on:** January 10, 2006, 10:20:04 AM »

Have a ruger 270win in the old tang saftey, a 77-17- 77 6mm, 77 308, and 77 270wsm.
the old 270 has always shot 1'' groups with what ever I ran thru er.
the 77-17 will shoot 20 shot groups into a quarter at 100 yrds.
the 308 is about an inch at 100
the 6mm will put everything intoa susan B at 200 yrds.
the270 wsm will shoot hole for hole time and time again at 100.
All are walnut/blued except for the 270wsm, it's stainless with lam.
I agree Don't be SCARRRED.
Good luck, DM

Paul Barnard · « **Reply #8 on:** January 10, 2006, 10:55:58 AM »

3D, I have that same 257 Roberts. I love it. It is the perfect hunting rifle. Most groups with handloads come in 1.5 inches. Definitely minute of deer accuracy.

Barstooler · « **Reply #9 on:** January 10, 2006, 12:14:54 PM »

I own two Ruger Mod 77 Mk IIs (one in 25-06 and one in 30-06). They both shoot very well.

However, if I was going to buy an new Ruger in 6mm caliber, I would go for the 6mm Rem over the 243 Win.

I own a 243 Win in Mod 70, and have never particularily liked reloading it or the constant requirement to trim brass. I have friends with 6mm Remingtons and they seem to have fewer problems and deliver slightly better performance. I see that Ruger carries the 77 Mk II in both calibers.

Barstooler

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #10 on:** January 10, 2006, 01:53:49 PM »

Quote from: muz125

Guys,

I am strongly considering buying a new Ruger M77 in .243. I really really like how the gun looks.

Nothing from Winny or Remington compares for looks in the price range of the ruger.

But...I hear so many horror stories about Ruger. Are these just gripes or are they true? Please give experiences.

Greg

What kind of horror stories are you hearing? Not accurate? Horrible trigger? Something else?

A number of years ago Ruger got a reputation for inconsistent barrel quality. They were not making their own barrels at the time and apparently did not have adequate QC procedures in place to weed out the bad ones. But Iike I said, that is history Ruger has been making their own barrels for some time now.

A lot of folks think Ruger triggers could be better and in many cases they could be, although that is true of many manufacturers rifles. The last two new Rugers Ive purchased had triggers that were good to very good. If you get one that isnt quite what you want, the good news is that Ruger triggers are very easy to work on and replacements are readily available if you choose to go that route.

I have yet to shoot a Ruger that isnt accurate. I have 4, my hunting buddy has 1 and my brother has 2. The least accurate Ruger I own, a synthetic stocked .300 Win Mag, shoots 1 groups at 100 yards. The .22-250 has put 4 shots into 0.5 @ 200 yards, the .257 Roberts has put 4 into 0.95 @ 200 yards and the 7mm Mag has done 3 shots into less than 2 at 300 yards. When working up loads for the 160g North Fork the 7mm Mag shot a 3-shot 100-yard group that measured 0.266 center-to-center less than one bullet diameter. I wont be sending any of my Rugers back due to lack of accuracy.

All of my rifles get the barrel floated if it doesnt come that way from the factory. My 7mm Mag, which I purchased in 1981, had a problem stringing shots until I did this. Now it gets done before they go to the range. Floating the barrel on a Ruger is a 10-minute job that requires a screwdriver, sandpaper, a Magic Marker to loop the sandpaper around, and some polyurethane to reseal the wood. Floated the barrel on my latest acquisition, a Remington BDL, a couple weeks ago, the night before I first got to shoot it.

I rework all the triggers on my firearms regardless of manufacturer so the trigger doesnt concern me. FWIW, though, the Remington I just acquired needs its trigger worked on, too. The older M77 triggers are adjustable, the M77 MKII triggers are not.

The Ruger M77 MKII advantages include the Mauser-type Controlled Round Feed, fixed ejector blade, single piece bolt, three-position safety and integral scope bases. Plus the Ruger comes with scope rings, so when you compare against most other brands you need to calculate the additional cost of rings and bases for the others. You like the looks of the Rugers and I agree with that, too.

My buddy and I both bought used .357 Blackhawk revolvers that had to be sent back to Ruger for repair his for an upgrade and mine to replace the cylinder basepin. Neither of us were charged anything and Ruger paid the return shipping in both cases. Ruger service gets high marks from me.

Horror stories? Check out some of the complaints about Remington quality and service, or how some bolt handles have come off in normal use. The point is that every manufacturer lets a lemon out the door on occasion. My brother-in-law bought a Mercedes and it spent most of its first year and a half in the dealers shop with a list of problems a mile long. (It was so bad Mercedes finally took it back.)

On the other hand, there are a large number of very satisfied Ruger owners out there. If you like the looks and the price is right, there is absolutely no reason I can think of not to get one. Chances are veryhigh that you will have a rifle that will provide a lifetime of troublefree service

Zachary · « **Reply #11 on:** January 10, 2006, 01:53:55 PM »

I own over 22 bolt action rifle from over 5 or 6 different manfuctureres. However, I don't own a single Ruger.

I really don't have anything against Ruger BOAs. I've just never warmed up to them.

Zachary

Slamfire · « **Reply #12 on:** January 10, 2006, 07:47:07 PM »

I think the blued, walnut stocked Rugers are at least as handsome as most custom rifle I've seen.
I shoot a lot of milsurps, and I can't understand the trigger complaints. I've an Arisaka that I wish I could get two fingers on the trigger, but with a little concentration it shoots great.
I've financed a couple of huntin' trips by reworkin' beater rifles picked up at gunshows, tuned and prettied up.
The only rifle that ever defeated ALL my efforts was a Mauser 96 fresh from an arsnal rebuild.
Go figure!

CEJ1895 · « **Reply #13 on:** January 11, 2006, 02:58:17 AM »

muz125 - I'd also like to hear of some of these horror stories about Rugers. I've used them for over 25 years and NEVER had a bad one, never had to send one for service unlike the Remingtons and Winchesters I used to own. I never had to have a trigger pull lightened on one until the lawyers got into the picture with thier liability law suits. Buy one and I know that you'll enjoy it. CEJ....

High Brass · « **Reply #14 on:** January 12, 2006, 06:36:49 AM »

I have a stain/lam. 77 mkII in 280 and love it. Sub MOA when I do my part with my handloads and it carries and balances right for me. I love the three pos. safety, floor plate release location, integral scope rings, and just the looks of it. I love it so much that I'm thinking about getting an identical one in 223 for coyotes, groundhogs, crows, census people, revenuers, tax collectors, Al Queda, and just plain fun shooting.

Buckeye · « **Reply #15 on:** January 14, 2006, 12:50:14 PM »

I've owned several M-77 's over the years,Some shot better than others ,but all were accurate
Wonderful rifles...

poncaguy · « **Reply #16 on:** January 14, 2006, 01:15:58 PM »

I have a tang safety 22-250 and a new 260, both very accurate rifles.Hard to find better looking rifles for the money.......

Warthog · « **Reply #17 on:** January 14, 2006, 01:41:49 PM »

I haved owned 6 Rugers and have had no complaints except the triggers. Even that issue is easily corrected. If you like it and it fits you, go for it.

As a sidebar, I own or have owned Winnies, Marlins, Weatherbys, Remingtons, Savages, Tikkas, H&R/NEFs, Stoegers, Berettas, Ithacas, Taurus, Brownings, plus others and the only real problems I've ever had came in a green box.

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #18 on:** January 14, 2006, 04:00:35 PM »

Was at the range this afternoon shooting my 'new' Remington .308. Put 6 of 9 shots into one ragged hole measuring 0.610" high by 0.155" wide, center-to-center at 100 yards

Was using the 4.5-14x scope on my Ruger .257 Roberts as a spotting scope and decided to poke a couple holes in the target with it, too. Put 3 of 3 shots into 0.232", center-to-center. Adjusted the scope and chose a new target for the 4th shot, but based on where it landed and the adjustments made, it would have just made the hole a bit bigger.

Crappy Rugers!

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #19 on:** January 18, 2006, 05:24:35 PM »

Here's the 3-shot group from my Ruger M77 .257 Roberts, last Saturday. 100 yards, 0.232".

CEJ1895 · « **Reply #20 on:** January 19, 2006, 02:07:14 AM »

Coyote Hunter - Now THAT'S what I'm talkin about! :-D That rifle is definately a keeper! CEJ...

jro45 · « **Reply #21 on:** January 19, 2006, 03:02:27 AM »

The only Ruger rifle I own is the mini 14. I call it my fun gun. I mean its a nice rifle. most of my rifles are Remington.

lilabner · « **Reply #22 on:** January 19, 2006, 09:14:12 AM »

I've only owned one. Bought a used 25-06 with the tang safety and a 24 inch barrel. The trigger had probably been smithed - very crisp and light. It will shoot consistent half inch extreme spread groups at 100 yards with my handloads and kills deer like a bolt of lightning. Only thing I don't like about it is the hinged floorplate doesn't fit snugly and tends to rattle a bit. It is easily the prettiest rifle I own. If beauty is your thing by all means buy Ruger. Where accuracy is concerned, it should be in the good to very good range. Today's rifles are by and large more accurate than the ones they sold in the misty past.

gunnut69 · « **Reply #23 on:** January 21, 2006, 07:32:38 AM »

I am a little late but found the thread and it piqued my interest. I looked back over the rifles I've worked on over the last few years and the problems I found. The most aggregious were Remington. Things like a chamber with a ring(new from factory) and a 581 that had a bad bore, also from the factory. Also several the were severely misalligned. Those they fixed, the grooved chamber was fixed also. The 581 they claimed wasn;t their fault..I also had a brand new M700 that had no ejector spring and had not been crowned. They would have fixed it but required I send it to them. the shipping was more than an ejector spring(crowned it myself). Rugers had a lot of trigger problems but they all responded(except 1) to a trigger job. A bunch of NEF's with bad chambers(roungh) that I polished out easily, and a couple of old rugers that I adjusted the trigger on. I adjusted some remington triggers but had more that passed thru the shop and had to be set to a higher pull weight to be safe and one remington that wouldn't stay cocked because of the WD40 in the trigger mechanism. Also had a few problems with Remingtons fingernail clipping of an extractor(one was my daughters 280). As to Winchesters they have their share of problems..the hot glue bedding material usually fails and I've fixed several. The trigger can easily be altered to make the safety impossible to use(I bought one of those) but that's a user problem. Worst problem with a winchester was the bedding material. In the Remington the worst problems related to QC failures and in the rugers most problems were in the QC field and usually with new models.. I saw a bunch of 77/22Hornets when they were introduced. The barrels were pathetic.. Some had loose spots so big the cleaning rod would jerk in your hands while pushing it thru the bore.. Also I find the rugers seemed better before Bill Ruger passed. The amazing ones were the savages..few mechanical problems. Trigger jobs, a stripped scope mount hole (owner related???) and minor adjustments .. damage. Overall the savages were the best with Winchesters coming in next. I'm semi retured so don't see many now and have heard of problems with winchester QC too but Remington has provided more than their share of problems,.,.

SuperstitionCoues · « **Reply #24 on:** January 22, 2006, 04:52:03 AM »

No - especially in light of what has happened to Winchester.

Cobra7 · « **Reply #25 on:** January 22, 2006, 05:27:26 PM »

I have owned two Rugers M-77's. One was a M-77 target rifle. Both guns were in .308. I shot the first Coyote in our county at 350 yards between the eyes with that target rifle. It was the best shot I have ever made. I wish I had kept that gun!!! Sean

Muskie Hunter · « **Reply #26 on:** January 23, 2006, 12:07:25 AM »

I replied to this thread but it got lost in transmission but here it is again.I just bought a Ruger77 MKII in 338 win.mag.I took it from the box,mounted my 3x9x Conquest scope on it,measured the trigger pull at just a notch under 5 pounds and fired 5 shots for part of my barrel break-in procedeure using factory Remington 250 gr. Core-Loct PSP's and cleaning between each shot fired.My 5 shot group at 100 yard was 1.348".Is this good out of the box hunting accuracy?You bet it is.Will this rifle shoot much better then that?You bet it will.Am I pleased with the fit and finish of the Ruger rifle?I sure am.Did it break my wallet?Nope.

deerman12 · « **Reply #27 on:** January 23, 2006, 08:11:59 AM »

I have a ruger .204 ultralight with a thin 20 inch barrel. It will routinely shoot 1/2 to 1 inch groups. I depends on how steady I am that day. Great little walking varmit rifle.