Hunting Rifle: Ruger 77 MkII or Remington 7400 ??

[theautobahn]

So... my current hunting (whitetails, generally in the woods, but one of these days I'll do a moose hunt and/or bear) rifle is a Remington 7400 carbine with a synthetic stock in .30-06. My LGS has a used Ruger 77 MkII Stainless in .30-06 with an aftermarket Hogue Overmold Stock. I believe that I could break even (sell my Remington for what I would pay for the Ruger). My Remington is finicky about ammo and isn't nearly as accurate as I'd like.

My question is: Should I keep my Remmy or buy the Ruger (and my wife will kindly explain that owning both is not currently an option).

 

[RCArms.com]

I use an older Ruger 77 MkII stainless with the original Ruger synthetic stock. Excellent rifle that has never failed me. 30.06 is an excellent choice for any North American game.

If I recall correctly, there was a change in vendor that Ruger used for barrels that occurred during the Houge stock change-over. I've heard of issues from some customers with these later rifles. I'd have no issue buying another earlier rifle, but would likely hold off on a later on until doing some additional research.

Don

 

[H2oPumper]

Since it's a used rifle already and a local gun shop, see if you can make an arrangement to take it out to the range an run a box of ammo through it to see how it is for you. Predominately Rugers are decent, but every manufacturer sends a bum into the wild. My concern is the stock, you want to make sure it wasn't put on the rifle to try to correct an accuracy issue. Hunts are too short and expensive to have your main hunting tool be a concern.

 

[theautobahn]

I'm not sure on whether it's an older or newer gun. The stock is definitely aftermarket, not factory.

Let me throw this out there... it's a consignment listed at $375 (with a Tasco scope). I'll make an offer, but even at $375, I think it's a smoking deal. I would take the Nikon off my Remington and put it on the Ruger (maybe put the Tasco on a .22 or jut keep it for a spare).

 

[H2oPumper]

I had a 270 Hawkeye all-weather that would group 2.5" at it's best. My LGS offered me 450 on a trade for anything. I did get another Hawkeye, but in a 280; it cost me about 90 to do the deal. This one is MOA, so I'm more than satisfied with it. I could have done some work on the 270 as far as bedding, pillars and/or stock, but the cost probably would have been more, and there still was no guarantee that it would work. One more note, I did sent the 270 back to Ruger and their customer service was great, but their accuracy tolerance standards are not. Last I heard was 2" at 50 yards.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

If I could come out even, I would definately prefer the Ruger over the 7400. I have a Ruger bolt and love it.

 

[tahoe2]

Rem 7400

mine is currently stocked with a camo synthetic and is a .280 Rem it has many kills under it's belt, although only a couple by me. It shoots 1-1/16" with 150 grn core-lokt handloads and 1-7/8" with Remington factory 150grn core-lokt loads (both @ 100 yds).
Which isn't too bad for an autoloader. I took two Pronghorns last Oct with 130 grn Sierra handloads that printed about in the middle of those two(1-1/2"). As for the Ruger 77, those are great rifles in my experience, and it would possibly be lighter to carry in the field. You need to take up hand loading to ring out the true potential of that 7400.

 

[Manny]

I would do that deal in a hearbeat. You'd be stepping up immensly IMHO.

 

[hardluk1]

Knowing that the semiauto remingtons are not known to be very accurate I would think if the ruger looks to be maintained will it should shoot as atleast as well or better, that should be a worse case too . You know with the controled feed of the ruger bolt haveing a jame is very unlikely too. That 375 dollar price does sound pretty good as is. I have one from 77 mk II ss from 1993 and it is a good one.

For you guys that cover lots of ground while hunting try a Boonie Packer Safari Sling. The sling that allows you to carry in front of you, hands free and still have your rifle to just lift and fire. I have used on for about 17 to 19 years I think.

 

[theautobahn]

I bought the Ruger. I was hoping to talk the guy down but he knew what it was worth. I'll shoot it and if it doesn't shoot well, I'll sell it, otherwise I'll sell my Remington. I was thinking about it a while ago anyway, so I have three people I know will be interested.

 

[45crittergitter]

Ruger.

 

[sgtstryker]

Will you let us know if the Ruger shot more accurately than the Remington? My 7400 shoots very good. Bought it in 1986, in .308. I've had two Ruger stainless rifles, the black synthetic stock ones. One in .270 and the other was .243. I was very disappointed in how they shot. Wonder why all those buddies of yours want the Remington?

 

[R.W.Dale]

ive owned a few 7400's and ruger 77's in various calibers.

I have yet to see or own a 7400 that's not twice as inaccurate as the worst ruger I've owned.

My current go to gun is a skeleton stocked 77mkII in 30-06 that shoots groups like it's a full blown target rifle

 

[Mauser lover]

Well?

Hows it shoot?

 

[sgtstryker]

I wasn't bashing Ruger's. I still have a couple. Oh yeah, is "twice as inaccurate" the same as half as accurate ?

 

[hardluk1]

I have an older SS ruger that is a great rifle. I am more of a fan of the remington pump ,not so the semi-autos. They atleast use to be a free floated barrel and more accurate and no worry of it not cyleing. But any of your choices will do the job. Just try a different bullet type or ammo if the ruger does not shot up to snuff,

 

[theautobahn]

I'll get back to you all when I have a chance to really play with it, but with the cheapy scope that it came with and with the cheapy Remington ammo I was running in the Remington (to get it to cycle reliably), the Ruger is much more accurate; to put it in RW Dale's terms... I would say the Ruger is half as inaccurate.