Remington 700 vs. Ruger 77

Status
Not open for further replies.
Could you explain this ? I've hunted for years with a Rem 700 (3) and Never had a safety Issue.
Click to expand...

Never been to Kalispell, but where I've hunted in Montana, there wasn't a lot of heavy brush to worry about. :)

Hunting in the California mountains, there is thick brush that will scrape you up, rip your clothes, and open the bolt on a rifle nice and quick. And you have to bushwhack through it.

Bottom line? Remington skimps. Their products these days are often overpriced for what they are. If you want to pay more, and not get a feature that's part of every other rifle, it's your business. But the OP asked for a comparison, and that IS a difference between the rifles, and it matters to some of us.

Doc2005 is right on.
 
Both actions have to be bedded to reach the potential of the barrels.
Click to expand...
+1.

Since Ninja42 specified that he wanted the rifle "to be ready for work out of the box if at all possible", I would go with the Weatherby Vanguard.
 
homers said:

I, for one, love the looks of the ruger M77.
Click to expand...

I sure can't disagree with you there! The Ruger M77s are drop-dead beautiful, especially the bolt and the integral base. :cool:

Doc2005
 
Owned one Remington 700 (30-06). It was a fine rifle but it did not shoot well for me. Sold it.

I now own several Rugers that shoot equally as well or better than the Remington. I like the triggers better and IMO the Ruger is a very handsome rifle.

I don't know what accuracy is expected in most hunting rifles, but 90% of my Ruger rifles are 1"-1 1/2" and that is just fine with me. The other 10% of my rifles are sub MOA varmint guns. For the money I don't think you can beat Ruger.
 
i have a remmy model 7 in 7mm08 and it is a great rifle and i have a ruger m77 mk2 which started it's life as a stutzen, i have cut the forestock down and floated the very slim barrel and it is now a sporter and it is also a great rifle. they both shoot very well. both are a bit fussy with ammunition but both are great game getting tools, my advice would be go with what you like the look of. pay attention to getting the right calibre, consider 7mm08 or .260 rem as well. i run a bushnell banner 3-9 x 50 on one of my rifles and a 3-9 x 40 trophy on my model 7. they are great scopes for the money.

as for the safety catch/ bolt openning issue.... never been a problem for me

interlock
 
Another thing you might want to consider is shooter comfort. Remingtons have a tendency to be brutal guns, with little or no recoil padding stock. There's always aftermarket Limbsaver pads, but this is something to consider because, if you flinch, you're not going to shoot it very well. I have also heard a few rumors that Remington's quality might be declining somewhat, although I've yet to see any specific examples cited.

The Remington 7mm round is not a favorite of mine either. The 7mm takes a "small caliber, high velocity" approach. This can result in overpenetration and not enough kinetic energy transferred to the target. I have heard of .308 rounds completely knocking a deer off its feet, but the 7mm may blow through completely resulting in a long chase. It all depends on what you're planning to hunt. For the most accurate, most effective deer rifle, you might be more happy with a .308 than a 7mm. If you're planning on hunting something truly massive like bull moose, you might go for a 30-06 or a similarly sized cartridge.
 
Ruger has consistantly improved the M77 action, I like the three position safety, the claw extractor, various little stuff. Ruger hit a home run with this action.
Click to expand...

You mean with the 105 year old Mauser design?

Ruger actions are plenty smooth, but I'll stop short of giving them credit for it's creation.

Between the M700 and M77, I choose the 700. I own 3 700's and 2 77's, and it would have been 4 to 1 if Remington had offered the .220 Swift in their 700 VLS 2 years ago. Remingtons just shoot better.

That said, when we went rifle shoppong for my little sister's first big game gun we opted for the M77 over the 700 for one reason; the 26" barrel on the .280-chambered M700 is a much worse tree branch snagger than the 22" M77. If there is something like this that you find preferable about the M77, then go with it.

Also, this Rumor of M700's bolts opening while hiking through the brush is just that. I've never carried anything but an M700 through some of the nastiest scrub oak South-Western Colorado has to offer, and it never happened to me. And I actually like the ability to unload the rifle with the safety engaged.
 
Ninja,

If you are limiting yourself to the 700 or the M77 I would go with the Remington in 30-06. I own / have owned multiple M77s & 700s in various calibers. I have had some problems with the M77s but no problems with any of my 700s.All my Remingtons have consistently shot 1 1/2" or better with selected hunting loads.If you are open to other rifle manufacturers I would suggest you look at the Tikka T3 lite, Browning A-bolt, Weatherby Vanguards or Savage.
 
Last edited:
Best shooting rifle I have ever owned was a Ruger 77 in .270. Was not uncommon to shoot 1/2 - 3/4 MOA with factory ammo in good weather. Best group was a 1/2 inch single hole 3 shot group at 200yards. Now it had been worked on, and had a great trigger, I have also owned a couple of 77s that were not as good, but all have been decent shooters. I have also had very good luck with the Remmington 700. As has already been mentioned they are typically more accurate right outta the box and you really can't go wrong with them either.

I agree that they Ruger is the better looking rifle and I wish that I had never let my old .270 go.

I also had the Vanguard, Savage, and Mossberg and they were decent to good shooters. The old Browning 30-06 I had was an excellent shooter, but costs quite a bit more.
 
The Remington 7mm round is not a favorite of mine either. The 7mm takes a "small caliber, high velocity" approach. This can result in overpenetration and not enough kinetic energy transferred to the target. I have heard of .308 rounds completely knocking a deer off its feet, but the 7mm may blow through completely resulting in a long chase. It all depends on what you're planning to hunt.
Click to expand...
I would say: it all depends upon accurate shot placement and appropriate bullet selection.

Ninja said that his rifle will be either a .308 or a .30-06. How did the 7mm Magnum become an issue? :confused:
 
You mean with the 105 year old Mauser design?

Ruger actions are plenty smooth, but I'll stop short of giving them credit for it's creation
Click to expand...
.

The M98 Mauser is the best (over all) bolt action ever designed. Unfortunately it is too expensive to manufacture for todays' market. In 1948 Remington released the M721, which put an affordable to make, but excellent and safe design into the American market. The M700 is the descendent of the M721.

The Ruger action uses features of the M98, but not many. Bill Ruger wanted a claw extractor, so it has a claw extractor. The M77 Ruger is a new design.
 
horsemany(and shawnee)

Horsemany...First off, if your handle here is true, and you have many horses, I feel for you. My wife has one and the thing is a constant moneypit!
Shawnee...just to clarify, I wasn't implying the bolt came open by itself, what seems to happen is it catches on something and since the remmy doesn't lock like the ruger, it can get pulled open.
OK so to the issue at hand...I didn't realize I was in the minority on this remington bolt coming open deal. I remember it happening to me a few times on an alaska trip a few years back, but not quite as much as on my recent hunt. This hunt it just seemed to happen alot. I am actually a huge remington fan and own more of them than any other rifle. When I'm sitting on stand or traversing more open terrain I never have an issue. After seeing everyone's comments that this is really something other people rarely if ever have happen, I gave it some more thought. The only thing I came up with was although the hunts where this happened alot were in thicker country, they were also "bring everything you need for a week on your back" hunts, so I was wearing my frame pack. Maybe wearing that pack puts my rifle in a position on my shoulder that makes the bolt more likely to catch on things? With a ruger, this would not have mattered. In any event, I was not trying to rail on remington's, just passing on something I had experienced. I really like remington's, since I currently own 2 that shoot in the .4's that are bone stock except a trigger job.
and as far as this...
Also, this Rumor of M700's bolts opening while hiking through the brush is just that.
Click to expand...
well you don't know me so I it is your choice if you want to think I'm the type of person with nothing better to do than make up internet rumors about remington bolts coming open on a wilderness hunt. I guess there is nothing I can do to change your mind over the internet. I have no axe to grind with either company and think they both put out a fantastic hunting grade rifle for less than $600.
 
Last edited:
I would have to lean towards the Ruger.


I have the Varmint profile barrel in 220 Swift, and it is indeed a shooter! I haven't done much load development for it because everything I have loaded will shoot within an inch at 100 yards. I am not a benchrest shooter so that is more than good enough for me.

Love that claw extractor. I wish my Winchester 30-06 (push feed) was a Ruger. Ruger actions function in a very positive manner. By that I mean it controls the cartridge very well.

I like the integral bases and Ruger rings too.
 
Just so that Jbeck123 does not feel so isolated, I will admit that the bolt on my m700 has been pulled open while hunting, and on more than one occasion. It has happened to other people I know as well. If you are carrying a m700 on your shoulder, and a branch of sufficient size or something else catches on the bolt, its gonna flip up the bolt handle, simple physics. This is my only complaint about the m700. Otherwise I love it!

BPL
 
I own and like both. The older Remingtons were more accurate than older Rugers, but with more recent guns it is a wash as far as I can tell. For a variety of reasons I would pick Ruger as the perfect all around rifle at this time.

For out of the box accuracy it is pretty hard to beat the Tikka's at any price. I like them along with my older Remingtons for pure accuracy and light weight. My Rugers may give up a tiny bit of accuracy but I would trust them to work under harsh, dirty conditions over most anything. I also think they are the best looking rifle being made today except for possibly the Winchester Featherweight.

I've hunted with Remingtons for 35 years in some pretty nasty stuff. If you are having problems with the bolt opening it is not the fault of the gun. It's operator error. Get the gun off your shoulder and hold it in 2 hands in the thick stuff and you will not have any problems.
 
Of the 2 you mentioned...get the Remington and don't look back.

If you want a factory action that is THE BEST....look into the Winchester Model 70 Featherweight...these are new rifles but they have went back to the pre-64 controlled feed design.

The Winchester will cost a bit more...but if there is a factory action that stands a chance of being better than a Remington 700...it is the pre-64 Model 70 Winchester.

The only Remington I've ever owned that had problems with the bolt opening was a Remington 788...that action is not even remotely similar the 700.
 
One thing you're seeing these days is the difference between less expensive and more expensive guns shrinking. Modern computer-controlled fabrication machines produce products to much tighter tolerances than older production methods. A gun that was considered very good in the 60's and 70's that you would have paid a premium for then can now be matched by a much cheaper product. A new Ruger will likely outshoot an old Remington, and a new $60 scope may be better than older scopes that cost hundreds of dollars. The bar has been raised, and the real question is how much you're willing to pay for an increasingly shrinking difference.
 
jbech123

Horseman is a nickname given to me by a flirty 9th grade math teacher. The name stuck and someone already had Horseman so I added the Y. I don't currently own horses.

I don't doubt what you say about your bolt opening. I don't mean to call anyone here a liar. I can only say I believe those occurences to be the exception rather than the rule after 20+ years of hunting with 700's. 700 bolts actually have stiffer pressure to lift the bolt than most other bolts I've used or owned(I've owned almost every major mfg). It seems the gun would have to take quite a hit to jar the bolt open. I hunted some of the nastiest terrain I've ever seen growing up in WI. I'm talking 7' tall brush you had to walk 45deg. into to push through and I never had a 700 open up on me.

To those of us challenged to keep the bolt protected on a 700 I'd suggest don't try bowhunting. I haven't had problems with 700's but I have been confused about what position the safety was on a Ruger when the adrenaline kicks in. I've also seen my brother use the middle position for the safety and basically use it as a 2 position safety to keep it simple. I'm not a fan of 3 P.O.S. safeties.
 
The Ruger action uses features of the M98, but not many. Bill Ruger wanted a claw extractor, so it has a claw extractor. The M77 Ruger is a new design.
Click to expand...

The M77 is one of the truest copies of the Mauser design being made today IMO. I consider this the Rugers' best quality. Even the bolt release is a copy.
 
POINTS:

1.
I have an Original M-77 Ruger which seems to be a controlled at first glance but it is not. The originals were a push feed with a claw extractor and a tang mounted thumb safety. You can cycle rounds through the chamber with the safety on. But this only blocks the trigger. NOT A MAUSER but they were pretty smooth.

2.
I have a Ruger M77 MKII as well. In the MKII configuration they made it into a real controlled feed. Somewhat closer to a Mauser EXCEPT, the 3 position safety which appears to be bolt mounted is not. It is actually part of the receiver /trigger assembly. It only locks the firing pin in the 3rd bolt lock position. But you can cycle rounds into and out of the chamber with the firearm on safe. But the safety, not being part of the bolt can get moved in the wrong position.
They are somewhat rough and need a lot of work to make them as smooth as they could be. I have had to polish the feed ramp on numerous stainless MKIIs. Cartridge COL can be a problem with them at times. That is because they are made from cast parts. I am done spending money and then a bunch more time and money to make Rugers feed and shoot like they should.

3. I have 3 Remington M-700s. They are a push feed but very smooth. Their fit and finish is superior. Their safeties leave much to be desired, but they are more positive than some other side mounted safeties.


4. Winchester M-70 CF, Dakota, Kimber, Montana. Basically improved Mausers wth a 3 position saftety mounted on the bolt cocking piece. This safety blocks the firing pin from moving while in the safe or safe /bolt lock positions.

5. CZ, Parker Hale, Charles Daley, Later (1950s) Model Husqvarna's ect: These are basically Mauser actions with a side mounted trigger safety instead of the bolt mounted Mauser safety. Why they took the best hunting rifle in the world and did that is a puzzlement. The side mounted safety may be faster and possibly more quite...
 
Besides, you can get an aftermarket 3-position safety AFAIK.

The question to me is, why, on rifles that Remington is charging a pretty penny for these days, should you have to spend extra money to get a feature that every other rifle includes from the factory (not to mention that Remington warranty service is known for returning everything to "factory condition" including replacing 'smited triggers, etc.)?
Click to expand...

You're exactly right, Armed Bear. What advantage does a two-position safety (one that does not lock the bolt down when on "safe") have over a three position safety? Rhetorical question. Answer: none. What advantage does a three position safety have over the aforementioned two-position safety? Again, rhetorical question. Answer: The bolt stays locked when on "safe". So, as you asked, why pay extra for a feature found standard on most other bolt-action rifles, including even the modestly-priced Savage, which has had a three-position safety since its inception way back in 1958?

The original Remington 700's two-position safety locked when on "safe" and were that way until the lawyers intervened somewhere in the mid-eighties. So now you can unload a 700 while the safety is in the "on" position. That way, you can't shoot somebody while unloading your rifle.:rolleyes:

And, yes, I've had a litigation-minded, two-position safety become unlocked while hunting and I wasn't chopping firewood with it at the time. :cuss:
 
How about do what I do, flip a coin and do the exact opposite of what the coin says :p Hopefully, you are the kind of hunter that worries more about the skill and less about your gun. Both guns are nice IMO, a Vanguard or a Model 70 is nice too. I would seriously consider the new savages for their accu-trigger, and would bet they shoot pretty straight too. Don't rule out the Mossberg 100 ATRs either. Oh, and I would vote .308, it's a swell cartridge. BTW, I hate when you can't open the bolt with the safety on when you want to pull out a round for crossing a fence/etc. Still, not a deciding factor either way for me.
 
Pick yourself up a model 70, you'll come out with a better rifle than either the ruger or the rem.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top