Check out Ruger's new rifle...

Status
Not open for further replies.
LoonWulf hit the nail on the head. It's an intro rifle. Someone buys this as their first rifle, enjoys it, buys a Hawkeye later with a little more $$, then a #1 later, etc. Same happens with many manufacturers, Jaguar used to only have two models, Ford didn't used to make compact cars, etc.
 
You say that like it's a bad thing. Can we please stop using "plastic" as a derogatory term describing materials? I'd take a "plastic" stock anyday... it's more durable, more forgiving to weather, and lighter.

Plastic is the proper term. You can have your cheap injection molded plastic stocks. If you don't mind I'll stick with Walnut or if I really need a submersible rifle a good glass one.

I suppose you still use wooden arrows too?

Sometimes I even fletch them with real turkey feathers. I'm such a Neanderthal.


It's not like they went down to the tupperware factory and modified one of the container presses to start pumping out rifle stocks.

The stock used on the Ruger and so many other abominable budget rifles is not made from a form machine but injection molded, you can see the seams and injection points.

Hopefully Ruger won't feel the need to produce a pistol to compete for HiPoints market share.
 
Im just glad there are still some companies making things in america.

Looks like an interesting idea. Looks a lot like an axis with an accutrigger on it.
ruger has sat with the model 77 for a long time, nice to see they arent stuck in a hole developmentally, would be nice to see an american company build something that could rival a tikka out of the box at a similar or lower price.
It will be interesting to see how well the aftermarket likes these rifles.

btw "Ford didn't used to make compact cars, etc." ford made compact cars, they just didnt sell them in america because no one wanted to buy a compact car here.
GM did too. MOPAR was late to the european market, but gm and ford were there a long time making tiny little cars, decent 4cyl gas and turbo diesel engines.... i digress.
 
I like the idea, but that stock is ((ahem)) ugly, to say the least. American to me would mean an attractive high quality wood stock...
 
My point remains, they didn't sell them here because there wasn't a market, later there was. Ruger sees a market and they're going for it.
 
Not really a rifle guy....what other companies have free floating barrels at that price point?

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk
 
The problem is you really can't call anything they have done innovative or original. Does that make it bad? Nope but their marketing program seems to make claims that raise a few questions. The real question is if this will be a rifle like say the vanguard or venture or will this be the 770? I don't have issue with Ruger making these and I think Ruger is smart to enter this market. I hope for their sake that they have everything squared away as this segment is very competitive and anything but a real performer is going to have a tough time gaining market share this late in the game.

As for Gunblast and Mr Quinn. It seems any rifle sent to him shoots half MOA or better with at least one brand/load of ammo. I've heard he has many unfavorable reviews of items not posted but it really does seem that you can count on any review he has to show one ammo well under MOA if not under 1/2 MOA. Maybe all of the firearm manufacturers are simply cherry picking rifles to ship. If we were to only look at his reviews though there isn't a firearm made today that won't shoot 1 MOA.
 
Sometimes I even fletch them with real turkey feathers. I'm such a Neanderthal.

Yeah what I said didn't really come out right. I didn't mean to knock someone for doing this... that's pretty cool. The point I was trying to make was that just because something isn't wood doesn't mean it's crap. Yes, there are better stocks out there, but at this price point it's a decent option. I take care of my gear, but I don't baby it. I feel that a "plastic" stock gives me that. I don't much care if it has seams on it. To each their own.
 
I own the Savage Edge/Axis and this gun looks like its twin! My Savage will shoot 1/2 MOA all day. I upgraded the trigger and this thing is a shooter. It's super light so when you're walking corn fields it doesn't weigh you down.


...
 
I don't get the problem with the stock? It's functional, it has marks of manufacturing, and this is not acceptable on a budget rifle?
 
I agree it would be more desirable with a nice walnut stock, but the current one is fuctional. Im sure if it did have a nice wouls stock, people would find something else to complain about like the price.
 
It's a sad state of affairs when a company can market a cheap plastic-stocked rifle with no sights as an "American Rifle" and not only keep a straight face but expect to sell them en masse. How far we have fallen.
 
I don't think it is that sad these days. Probably expected, but I'd say a Marlin 336 is more of an "American Rifle" than this. You are correct in that respects. At least you can buy a 336 a box of Federal 170 grain blue box RN, and kill 20 deer for the cost of this rifle. I still like this rifle though.

I feel it will push the QC of other companies in the same market of budget bolt guns.

I'd like to hold one, and inspect it in person. Picture can be doctored, and gun writers make money for their words. Another thing is it wouldn't weigh 6.25 or 6.12 lbs. if it had a wood stock.
 
It's a sad state of affairs when a company can market a cheap plastic-stocked rifle with no sights as an "American Rifle" and not only keep a straight face but expect to sell them en masse. How far we have fallen.

Sounds like the idea behind the Model T. A cheaper, plain jane car for the every day man.


Not sure what having no sights has to do with it...CZ makes guns in Europe with no sights and calls them "American". How many $2000+ Weatherby Mark Vs come with sights. How many $3000+ Cooper rifles come with sights?
 
It is funny how this rifle creates such a negative reaction in so many. I don't recall people crying bloody murder about the Stevens 200 or the Marlin XR7 or whatever it is. Maybe if Ruger would have called it the Low Baller Rifle, everything would be peachy.
 
The marketing folks at Ruger aren't stupid. You can bet they did their research and decided there's a market for this rifle.

I can now buy pretty much what I want but this wasn't always true. I remember the days of saving $5.00 a week to finance a gun purchase. I remember saving for months to buy a Remington 1100 12ga. It cost $179.00 and I thought I never would get there. Low cost firearms aren't "low cost" for everyone. Not everyone can afford a new Sako or Cooper.
 
After six months there will be twenty or thirty reviews by actual High Road members. By then, several of us will have at least looked one over in a gun store.
 
Same old ho-hum calibers.
Why not a .260 and a 25-06?

Those same ho-hum calibers are consistent sellers. I'd imagine they're testing the waters with this rifle before they go whole-hog and introduce new calibers. If this gun takes off, I expect more selection in a few months.
 
Lets look at it this way, who would buy one? Who wouldnt? Guys who crave beautiful guns, or something revolutionary will snub this and pretty much every other budget rifle. These folks look at guns more as art then tools, or mayhap artfull tools? The other side to the coin are the folks who see only a tool, solid, usefull, and good enough. Savage managed to tap into both groups to an extent, and another, the guy who wants to stick stuff to his tool......
This gun might also get some luvin from that group :d
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top