Ruger bolt action rifles - why are they not more popular?

I have owned and liked a few of the older tang safety models. The tang is where the safety is supposed to be on any long gun. Only complaint about my 77s was that the triggers were so-so - not "bad", but not "sweet" either. But they always take a back seat to my all-time favorite rifle - the Ruger #1.

They are a nice copy of a mauser. I just don't think the bang for the buck is very good with them.

I own one Ruger bolt action rifle. It is very, very accurate. It is a varminter model in .243. Shoots lighter bullets superbly. This thread got me thinking why I don't own more... the only things I can think of are looks, price and accuracy reputation.

They are not nearly as sleek as most other guns today. Very utilitarian design and if I ever need an African Caliber it will be a Ruger, but I have never lost an animal due to not having controlled round feed. Completely different requirement in an African Rifle.

The price generally seems to be a little high for what you get. Not always, but generally and much of that is because their wood is NEVER pretty.

Their accuracy reputation seems to be just OK. Which for me is the killer. The only reason I have the one I do is because I knew the seller and got a complete shooting report (with favored loads) ahead of time.

Any GunRag that writes about them says they have 'good hunting accuracy' which is the kiss of death. 1.5-2" groups with factory ammo is wholy unimpressive when every Savage I have shoots MOA or better. Not that they are all that pretty, but accuracy makes up for ugly in my book.

It occurs to me the Howa $200 cheaper argument has tremendous weight. For the price of an unscoped Ruger, you can get said Howa and a Nikon Monarch (Team Primos) scope - a very fine scope in anyone's book.

Ash

rbernie, the last sentence in my post should have indicated what I think of Remington's price/performance ratio. I wasn't comparing a Ruger to a Remington.

WRT the Howa, I picked that because the stock it comes in is exactly the same. This makes the comparison a fair one (it would be dumb to compare the price of a rifle in a well-bedded fancy walnut with one in the cheapest plastic stock for example) and the Howa is a consistently good rifle, in whatever guise it appears. I don't think anyone honest can call the Ruger a better barreled action than the Howa.

Aside: CRF is not all created equal. Try feeding the Ruger in every possible position and see if it's REALLY any better than a PF. Maybe it will be.

Like I said, I'm not calling the Ruger junk. I was just answering the question: "why are they not more popular?"

I love my 22/45 Target. Some think it's butt-ugly and a PITA to clean and reassemble. I suppose that they're right, but the thing is so fun to shoot, so reliable and so accurate for what it is, that the downsides don't bother me. For others, the downsides matter more than the upsides. It's all okay.

Maybe you love your 77. I'm sure not saying you shouldn't. The question was just, "why are they not more popular?"

Depends on the rifle. I would buy a Marlin 60, anyday over a 10/22. Now a 77/22 is a flat out far superior weapon, although at 2-3X's the price. My 77/22 I use to shoot dum-dum suckers out of a 2x4 at 100 yds. My Model 77 .308 is my deer rifle and can hit at 1MOA. I bought both used at $300 and dont regret either purchase. I like their overbuilt designs, but I did pay for a trigger job for both rifles.

i own a KM77VTMKII .308 Winchester comes with laminate stock target grade trigger adjustable
for sear engagement over travel and weight of pull, three position saftey. shot < moa out of the box with my handloads. will put it up against any post 64 winchester model 70 or remingtion 700, 10 series savage, for workmanship, quaility, accuracy and price for what you get .

Price and politics. I buy nearly all American guns even if they cost more than some imports that are comparable.

But I don't buy from any Company that I consider to be anti-civil rights (this rules everything from China neatly). Maybe Ruger is trying to change, maybe they aren't.... Time will tell. They seem to be stumbling in the right direction but are a long way off from any real change.

Won't accept a Picatinny rail - I'm not interested.

(Before somebody posts it, yes I know there is some gizmo, with a Picatinny rail, that will CLAMP onto the Ruger proprietary scope-mounting system. I'm not interested in that either.)

Speaking of the trigger on the M77 rifle, I bought the Rifle Basix sear from MidwayUSA on sale for $30 and installed it according to the directions. What a difference it made. It isn't a match-quality trigger, but it's finally the trigger I was hoping to find. It still has some creep on the initial pull, but it breaks well with no overtravel and I can adjust trigger pull anywhere between 2 and 5 pounds. Stock trigger was 7.5 pounds non-adjustable.

I ordered one of those for my son's gritty 25-06, glad to hear it works. Then all I have to do is float the barrel, and hope it shoots better.

"why are rugers not more popular" because winchester is awsome functional extremely reliable and tough as nails. and rugers are over priced pieces of junk. winchesters are way better for the $$$$$.

Seems the Hawkeye has fixed most of the "issues" but they are more money than a MKII.

I love Ruger

I've wondered why they are not more popular myself.

It might be that Ruger has only been around since 1949, while the other big American manufacturers have been around 150-plus years. Its probably because of an undeserved reputation for so-so accuracy.

I do know that my Ruger M77 with the tang safety in .30-06 has a crisp trigger and shoots MOA with factory 150 gr. Remington Core-Lokts. It points great and feels good in the hands. Personally, I think it has classic looks with fantastic innovations such as a solid integral scope mount. Everyone who has hunted with it and taken game has had pretty much the same comment: "That's a good rifle."

At one time they had a rep for the barrels being a roll of the dice. Some were good,some pretty bad. Not sure what the current bunch has going in this department.
Triggers were always bad (real bad!)
Not like you can get much of a deal on them price wise.

Ruger Bolts.....

Well at least the money I've spent on my Rugers gives my fellow Americans jobs.
I have several Nice Ruger Bolts in lots of different calibers, and I've never gotten a bad one. I like them.
So all you fellows that don't like them, THANKS I'll keep buying the ones you don't.

I want a rifle, not a billboard. Amen, Bro! I ruled out M77's when the Syth stock models had the Ruger logo molded into the stock. If they want me to advertise for them, they can pay me a fee!

Here's my input on Ruger 77's. Good gun for the money. Better than average fit and finish. One of the only American guns you don't rip your fingernail off on a poorly fitted recoil pad. Destock a Ruger 77 and a Rem. 700 side by side. No comparison which one looks cheap. Compare the one piece stainless bolt to the 3 piece light- weight Remington with a brazed on bolt handle. Compare the fact that the Ruger is one of the truest copies of the famed Mauser 98. Flat bottom reciever, true claw, 3 position safety etc.

Here's what I don't like about em'. Accuracy has been average in my experience. The worst factory trigger known to mankind (haven't shot the new LC6 trigger yet). Aluminum floorplate (new Hawkeye is steel). Poorly machined factory scope rings leave horrible ring marks typically and even dented a scope once. The rings should be lapped unless you don't mind torquing your scope and leaving witness marks on em'. I am neutral about the cast reciever as I don't see this as negative since the gun was engineered for it. Where you get into trouble is when a forged piece is replaced with a casting it wasn't designed for IMO.

Over the years I have owned a dozen or more Remmington 700's, 5 Win 70's, a couple of Weatherby Vanguards, a coupe of Browning A-bolts, Savage, Mossberg, some odd and end rifles, and 3 Ruger M77's.

We currently have a stainless M77 in .243 that is a very good shooter. Nice trigger. Not a target trigger, but a good solid 5 lb hunter, and even with factory loads can get around 1 moa. The M77 7mm mag was NOT great. OK trigger, ok accuracy, even with good factory ammo like Federal premium, was never much better than a 2 moa rifle. The 3rd was an absolute dream. Best rifle I ever owned and I regret EVER selling it. Was a old model M77 .270, wood stock, great trigger, and was a 1moa rifle anytime you did your part. I personally love the looks, and feel of their stocks. Further more I love the rimfire versions of the M77 that I have shot over the years as well.

The primary reason that I don't own more is that for the price the Ruger brings I can buy a rifle that is just about as serviceable and have some left over for glass or ammo to play with, something that counts a lot these days while trying to feed the shooting habits of my two sons and myself.

Those kids need jobs! Then they can afford their own Mosins and ammo.

I own Sako's, Winchesters, Remingtons and Ruger bolts.
I absolutely love the mauser designed tang safety M77 in 25-06. Built like a tank and the trigger is great for hunting applications.
I will be buying more.

I have a Ruger M77VT in .243 that is surprisingly accurate, considering Ruger's reputation.

I heard from 3 other varmint hunters that the VT model was a good one, and maybe I shouldn't compare it directly against other Ruger's. ('cause I don't own any ...)

By that I mean, this model has a free-floated heavy barrel, a laminated stock that doesn't warp when it gets wet, a 1-1/2# target trigger, and a gray ceramic coated stainless barrel & action.

The problem is it's heavy for consideration as a general hunting rifle at 11 lbs w/ scope. Not bad if you're hunting from a fixed position, however.

My fun question for the day is, if Ruger got this trigger past their lawyers, why didn't they use it on all their rifles? It's night and day difference between the VT trigger and even the new Hawkeye trigger.

Besides the casting, Mattel trigger, and cheesy billboarding mentioned, I always seem to hear the Ruger was accurate after a gunsmith "fixed" it. My guns shoot as bought or they don't stay bought {period}

When it comes to a good all around hunting rifle, I think the Rugers are hard to beat. They're not expensive in my area if you buy used. I recently picked up a barely used MKII all weather 270 in matte finish. I dropped a Timney trigger in it and it shoots great. It feels good on my shoulder. It is "utilitarian" enough to drag through the swamps I hunt down here in FL and not worry about it.
I group them with the Savage...just plain dependable hunting rifles.

In my part of the world I see more used MKII Rugers for sale than any other particular type or brand. It raises the ?, what were they traded in on?