Stupid question of the week: What's the deal with Ruger "Hawkeye" rifles?

I had a friend that loved his (African in .375 H&H Mag), I never saw it jamb or have any issues. It is no longer made (they have .375 Ruger now ) and was at least 10yrs old. It has controlled round feed (CRF) so it is pretty idiot-proof, which is good for a dangerous game rifle. I only fired it a few times but it did well and was reasonably accurate (about MOA if I had to guess), pretty smooth, recoil was well managed, so no real complaints. Personally, I think there is better, but to each-their-own; and there is definitely worse. Oh, and I have no idea what they did to it, probably cheapened it, if anything at all.

1KPerDay -

There was a time when Ruger was buying barrels and the quality of some were not up to snuff. Ruger rifles got a reputation as a result.

But that was a couple decades ago. Not sure when Ruger started making their own barrels, but all the Rugers I have shoot great:

1982 - M77 7mm RM
1984 - M77 .30-06
1989 - .257 Roberts
2002 - .22-250
2003 - .300 WM

I float the barrels and polish the triggers, but I do that to all my rifles.

The Hawkeye has a redesigned stock, matte finish, a steel vs aluminum floorplate, and a better trigger compared to the MK-2. Once you get the trigger adjusted the MK-2's are just fine, and a lot of people prefer the metal finish on the older guns.

Ruger started making their own barrels in the early 90's and have had no more accuracy issues than any of the other major rifle makers since then.

The m77 Hawkeyes are nice rifles. MY father has a 30.06 in Walnut and it is a nice rifle with no plastic on it. It weighs around 8 lbs loaded and has a very nice trigger. For $600 it is a great hunting rifle. He chose it over a Remington 700, the plastic turned him off.

a lot of people prefer the metal finish on the older guns.

Click to expand...

There's metal finish on the new guns?

They went from nice polished blue to GACK!

I still might get a Hawkeye as a hunter.

Can you retrofit an aluminum floorplate? I see zero reason to add weight to the gun with a steel piece that will get sweat on it and rust. Aluminum parts can be superior for a given application (can't think of the last time I heard of a steel airplane, either).

I would rather take a matte blue finish and have the rest be wood and steel and keep the price at $600 (30.06). I like that there is no aluminum or plastic on it and it is one of the reasons I would buy one over a Remington. I doubt the steel plate weighs much more than the aluminum compared to the rest of the rifle (maybe an ounce or 2) but it is much more ding resistant. The 30.06 is a nice light rifle. I keep my father's gun clean so he does not have to worry about it (he missed 2 deer last year because of a filthy 336 so I took over his maintenance).

I guess aluminum and plastic can be good but in a bolt hunting rifle give me wood and steel. That is why I like my M1A so much and why it took me so long to buy an AR.

Someone please show me a new Ruger that is accurate! :banghead:
Of all the rifles we put together for customers here at the range, the Rugers tend to be the least accurate of the bunch.

I would like to get a Hawkeye, say, in .300RCM but.....

We haven't done any Rugers for a while, so I'm hoping we just got a batch of monday mourning rifles. Anyway... the customers love them.

I have never shot a ruger with a heavy barrel but the 30.06 I sighted in for my father with a hunting profile barrel shot great at 100 yards.

I would buy one over a Remington.

Click to expand...

Cerberemington is not even on my consideration list.

it is much more ding resistant

Click to expand...

Ah. That definitely counts for something.

I would rather take a matte blue finish and have the rest be wood and steel and keep the price at $600 (30.06).

Click to expand...

Yes. I think what chaps my hide is that Ruger's recent rifles in the same price range as the Hawkeye (adjusted for inflation, not $600 20 years ago or anything) had gorgeous polished blue.

Ah. That definitely counts for something.

Click to expand...

To me it does. One reason I hated my winchester 1400 with aluminum receiver is that you could just look at the thing and scratch it.

Yes. I think what chaps my hide is that Ruger's recent rifles in the same price range as the Hawkeye (adjusted for inflation, not $600 20 years ago or anything) had gorgeous polished blue.

Click to expand...

They are not the only ones. If you want a nice polished blue finish you will pay for it these days either in cost or in trade offs such as plastic and cast aluminum parts instead of steel.

The closest remington 700 in walnut was $750 had the same matte blued finish and the ruger was just a better built rifle IMO.

Funny how, about 10 years ago everbody threw their wood stocks in the fireplace and would not be caught dead with a blued barrel/action... they rust much too easily...right?....yea right!

Now the industry has come full circle, we get more requests for walnut and blue than stainless and plastic.

But, the quality of blue nowdays is not what it used to be by a long shot.
Manufacturers just don't want to take the time to polish... time = money... money lost.

Manufacturers just don't want to take the time to polish... time = money... money lost.

Click to expand...

Exactly I would rather take the matte blue finish and have all quality steel parts for less money then get a poor polished blue and then have a plastics trigger guard and stamped thin aluminum floor plate for more money.

I guess I'm a bit odd but I don't mind a matte blue on my hunting rifles. Probably due to my love of the M14.

Personally, I don't MIND flat blue. But I'd really like a flat stainless finish and walnut.

Ruger's "target gray" would actually be an ideal hunting finish IMO. I'd pay extra. But they seem to offer it only on target rifles, Super Redhawks and the Mini-14 Ranch Rifle -- which I already have.

I float the barrels and polish the triggers, but I do that to all my rifles.

Click to expand...

Buy a Sako and you won't need to.

the quality of blue nowdays is not what it used to be by a long shot. Manufacturers just don't want to take the time to polish... time = money... money lost.

Click to expand...

Most manufacturers will spend the time, if people are willing to pay for it.

The real problem is that lots of people balk at spending more than $1,000 for a bolt-action rifle; and there is no such thing as a free lunch (oddly, many people are quite happy to pay double that amount for a stamped-out generic AR-15 clone with various unnecessary bells and whistles added on).

Quote:
I float the barrels and polish the triggers, but I do that to all my rifles.
Buy a Sako and you won't need to.

Click to expand...

Or even a much cheaper Tikka.

Correct.

Quote:

Someone please show me a new Ruger that is accurate!
Of all the rifles we put together for customers here at the range, the Rugers tend to be the least accurate of the bunch.


I won't argue that a Ruger will hang with a dedicated target gun, but I own 3, a 280, 308, and 300 WM that will all shoot 3 shots into 1" groups at 100 yards with their prefered ammo. That is plenty good enough for a hunting rifle and I have seen few hunting rifles made by any of the major rifle makers that would better that. My Tikka will and my 35 year old Reminton will, but only by the slightest margins.

I just compared the Hawkeye with the new Winchester Featherweight (not the Deluxe, so the price is back into hunting rifle range).

Hawkeye is no longer on my consideration list.

I can get an American-made M70 from South Carolina instead, and it's REALLY NICE. Better balance, silky-smooth action, just all around a much nicer piece. It's CRF, too, so there's just no downside. Okay, it's $100 more than the Hawkeye, but I'll remember the great feeling of working the bolt a lot longer than the 100 bucks.

The Ruger is solid, but it's ROUGH. It's got a 3-position safety like the Winchester, but the Ruger only locks the bolt down to the last 25 degrees of throw, not all the way down like the Winchester (and every other bolt-locking safety I've ever played with).

What's the point of locking the bolt halfway? If I want a bolt that goes out of battery when the gun's on safe, I can get a Cerberus 700 or something (which you can surmise I won't).

I also compared it with a Mark II that was still around. The polished blue on the previous model was NOT mediocre. It was gorgeous.

The matte blue on the Hawkeye was the rough kind that collects moisture and the salts from perspiration, i.e. you get rust fingerprints really easily on guns with that finish, IME. Not acceptable for real-world use, unless the gun's a good deal cheaper and I just don't care about rust.

Sorry Ruger. I have a bunch of your products, but this rifle is a real disappointment.

I like the Rugers, but now that Winchester is back in the game I agree that it is a better design. I'm still waiting for their production to get cranked up again and see how the new ones actually perform in the field. I could see a Ruger being traded for a Winchester in my future.

Hey fellows,

I'm a Ruger fan, particularly the #1s! But I had the opportunity to shoot the Hawkeye Alaskan at the SHOT Show. The Rifle itself was accurate enough offhand at 100 yards, and the recoil management was phenomenal. I wrote all about it here:

416 Ruger and the Hawkeye Alaskan

I was pretty impressed by that particular rifle. I haven't tried any other ones at the range, though I did handle most of them at the show. Fit and finish were more than acceptable, but that doesn't tell us how accurate they may be.

Best regards,
Albert
The Rasch Outdoor Chronicles
The Range Reviews: Tactical

Believe me, if any Ruger M77 is handled right, it can be very accurate.

Bought a Ruger M77 in .30-06 maybe 1980.

I free floated the barrel by rasping out the barrel channel and using very dense plastic shims under the vertical screw that holds the action to the stock assembly.

This is one very accurate .30-06 bolt action.

Maybe the new Rugers are more accurate, but I would have to be shown that.

I love my .270 Winchester all-weather M77 Hawkeye. LOVE it!

Ruger's Achilles heel has always been the barrel. While I dunno who makes the barrels now (I've heard Wilson, don't hold me to that) but they used to buy their barrels from Green Mountain. GM's bread and butter are black powder, they work great for that but not so much for smokeless. These barrels will actually open up from chamber to muzzle, while you can sometimes get away with this in a BP barrel (soft lead obturates) you'll never get a modern gun to shoot well.

Bill Ruger was never a friend to shooters, just ask the Palma Team members he sullied with his M77 Palma rifles that they couldn't use because they were junk. For the company's sake he finally croaked and they can now move on...

I believe for the most part Ruger makes their own barrels these days.