Ruger M77 Hawkeye - QQ Major issues

[Varminterror]

That’s rich! Pot, meet kettle!

Absolutely! The irony on that comment was thick enough to cut with a knife!

 

[Varminterror]

And here Ruger is highly regarded among the list of rifles i put up earlier.

A Ruger doesn’t become a finer rifle, just because it’s imported. The fact Rugers are workaday rifles is common knowledge, easily found online.

That stock fitment issue is obvious to anyone who understands how budget friendly rifles are made - and without question, a Ruger Hawkeye is a budget friendly rifle by design, you just happen to have grossly overpaid for something which hits unwarranted high price in Oz. Tube type rifles like Rem 700’s and Savages won’t show that kind of offset in the same way, because the tang isn’t keyed into the stock the way are Ruger M77’s.

At the end of the day, you overpaid for something you didn’t understand, and started kicking and screaming online like a schoolgirl instead of just taking the proper channels to fix the issue. Maybe you’re stuck with the rifle - which you would have known going in, and such, should have known you assume some risks, and should have done better homework. It sounds like you researched some ball buttering and believed a high price meant high finish, and didn’t look at all at actual comparisons online and didn’t look at actual MSRP’s for the rifles to realize how badly you were overpaying for one model versus another.

“Buyer beware,” and you weren’t. Man up and own your mistake.

God help you if your next vehicle purchase has the major issue of mud on the fenders…

 

[dranrab]

Ruger is the largest manufacturer of guns in the US. They are not perfect, and some do have issues, so you will see some people pop up with issues just due to the sheer number of Rugers sold. But to say "they tend to sell lemons" is not correct at all. I've bought six of them myself in the past 10 years, and know of another four that were purchased by friends, and 0/10 were "lemons".

Ruger tends to sell lemons. I have had to send 3 back. Have had another 3 that wouldn't perform out of the box, and required work and/or replacement parts. Others suffered accuracy issues. I have lived with others yet that were finicky with extraction. Ruger is a damn embarrassment to American arms manufacturing.

 

[Seamaster31]

I am not a fan boy of Ruger (or any other company), but I have a few Ruger M77 rifles and they are really quite good hunting rifles. Certainly there are better target rifle manufacturers, there are companies that sell rifles with a nicer fit and finish, but Ruger has a fine reputation for making solid and reliable hunting rifles. I am sure that they occasionally produce a "lemon", just like every other manufacturer, but not often. Some of the opinions that have been offered here make me shake my head, and doubt the source.

If you do not like Ruger that is fine. You are entitled to an opinion. However, some of this is simply (and literally) unbelievable.

 

[red rick]

I wouldn’t categorize The M77 as a budget rifle . It is more in the class of Tikka , Vanguard and Savage 110 , just not as good IMO . The Ruger American , yes .

 

[BreechFace]

I’ll take a Ruger Hawkeye over a Savage, Vanguard, or Remington 700.

Winchester M70’s are high on my list as well as Tikka, I’ve never owned a Browning but wouldn’t hesitate to try one.

My hang up is that personal preference leads me to CRF, coned breech, three position safety, and the Mauser extractor. So I’m always looking for Win M70’s, Ruger’s, or Kimbers first, not that I don’t/won’t own another type of action because I do, but it is definitely a starting point for me. I’m sure this leaves a lot of good actions out of the equation but I’m good with that.

Never been a Savage fan, no doubt their barrels are good but the always feel extremely cheap to me.

 

[JPSauer]

Maybe you’re stuck with the rifle - which you would have known going in, and such, should have known you assume some risks, and should have done better homework. It sounds like you researched some ball buttering and believed a high price meant high finish, and didn’t look at all at actual comparisons online and didn’t look at actual MSRP’s for the rifles to realize how badly you were overpaying for one model versus another.

“Buyer beware,” and you weren’t. Man up and own your mistake.

God help you if your next vehicle purchase has the major issue of mud on the fenders…

Stuck? Not at all. Buyer beware mught be the policy in the states but not in Australia. See our consumer laws lean heavily on side of the consumer, especially since their federal reform. Without going into the details, i have an option for a full refund if they decide it cant be repaired. So i am not stuck at all.

Our laws apply to vehicle purchaes too

 

[JPSauer]

Ruger tends to sell lemons. I have had to send 3 back. Have had another 3 that wouldn't perform out of the box, and required work and/or replacement parts. Others suffered accuracy issues. I have lived with others yet that were finicky with extraction. Ruger is a damn embarrassment to American arms manufacturing.

Yea seems i got a lemon. Given most votes people have got better examples and comments show this.

 

[Turkeytider]

There`s no such thing ( at least I`ve not heard of any ) as a manufacturing company that`s NEVER produced a product that`s out of specs or otherwise fails to perform to the expectations of a given consumer.

 

[Remington1911]

Ruger is the largest manufacturer of guns in the US. They are not perfect, and some do have issues, so you will see some people pop up with issues just due to the sheer number of Rugers sold. But to say "they tend to sell lemons" is not correct at all. I've bought six of them myself in the past 10 years, and know of another four that were purchased by friends, and 0/10 were "lemons".

Sorry it is correct, you said yourself "some do have issues". Where we will likely differ is how we define "some".

I know full well that the angry customer is quite a bit more vocal over the happy customer....this is human nature. Where ruger fails is when you are looking at all the Ruger "major issues" you see one theme time and time again. The customer service people are not shocked by the issue the owner has. This tells you one thing, it is happening enough for it to be quite common.

The "gun world" is a bit different from other retail worlds, how often do you see the a statement to the basic effect "would not shoot straight so I sent it down the road". In the gun world for some reason if the product does not perform like it should it is just as often sold for a loss and the customer moves on. Ruger knows this. It is quite the pain to send a "gun back". Not quite as easy as doing a return to Walmart, or Amazon. There is some real processes you must do. I can see people saying, cut my losses and sell the thing. Ruger also knows this, and they bank on this.

I shy away from that company because they know the issues, as evident from all the different people on the forums that have had contact with Ruger CS and the stories that the CS Rep was aware of such issues. THAT is a problem, and no sugar coating will make it better.

They build a great many products that are "just good enough", but want people to think it is special, they are not. Same class as High Point. I would love to "be a fly on the wall" in the offices of both Ruger and Hipoint and see the percentage of total product shipped that has come back for repair, I would bet hipoint is a lower percentage over all.

 

[Nature Boy]

I only own one Ruger product, a PC9. I did have a M77 Hawkeye stainless .308 for a very short time but a buddy was looking for a deer rifle for his son so I sold it to him before ever firing a shot. It seemed like a lot of rifle for the $750 I paid for it.

(Ruger is in the) Same class as High Point.

I understand you have some serious hate on for Ruger but this comparison is pure nonsense

 

[Spats McGee]

I've been out for a few days, but read the thread last week and just spent a few minutes catching up. @JPSauer, first, I don't blame you for being a little sore about this. If I'd paid ~$2K for a rifle that I couldn't inspect first, and it showed up with the flaws you mentioned, I'd be a little testy, too.

However, . . . .

....It was simply that if ruger used cast and benefited from the savings they should have spent a little time finishing better.....

If Ruger spent extra time on the finishing, that would have eaten into the benefit of the cost savings earned by casting parts. It's not like their employees work for free.

In the interest of fairness, I'm something of a Ruger fan. I've owned, . . . . umm . . . . maybe 10 (?) Rugers over the years, and they've all been flawless. I'm not saying they're perfect, because I think we all know better. That said, as someone noted, Ruger builds 'workaday' guns, meaning they may not be the prettiest, and they may not be 'gnats-eye' accurate, but they tend to be reliable and reasonably accurate at a price most can afford.

 

[Turkeytider]

een

Sorry it is correct, you said yourself "some do have issues". Where we will likely differ is how we define "some".

I know full well that the angry customer is quite a bit more vocal over the happy customer....this is human nature. Where ruger fails is when you are looking at all the Ruger "major issues" you see one theme time and time again. The customer service people are not shocked by the issue the owner has. This tells you one thing, it is happening enough for it to be quite common.

The "gun world" is a bit different from other retail worlds, how often do you see the a statement to the basic effect "would not shoot straight so I sent it down the road". In the gun world for some reason if the product does not perform like it should it is just as often sold for a loss and the customer moves on. Ruger knows this. It is quite the pain to send a "gun back". Not quite as easy as doing a return to Walmart, or Amazon. There is some real processes you must do. I can see people saying, cut my losses and sell the thing. Ruger also knows this, and they bank on this.

I shy away from that company because they know the issues, as evident from all the different people on the forums that have had contact with Ruger CS and the stories that the CS Rep was aware of such issues. THAT is a problem, and no sugar coating will make it better.

They build a great many products that are "just good enough", but want people to think it is special, they are not. Same class as High Point. I would love to "be a fly on the wall" in the offices of both Ruger and Hipoint and see the percentage of total product shipped that has come back for repair, I would bet hipoint is a lower percentage over all.

I find this to be an interesting post. I have two Savage rifles that I like and enjoy shooting very much. They are both very accurate and, while not perfect ( heavy bolt lift on the bolt of the 110, magazine issues that seem to be doing better ), I`ve not had any functionality issues that I consider major. Having said that, there are known issues with some Savage rifles that have been reported for a long time, so Savage no doubt has known about them for a protracted period. For whatever reasons, they seem unwilling and/or unable to address those. Case in point, extraction and ejection. Extraction failures appear to be the result of an undersized ball bearing in the extractor. It`s an easy fix to replace the ball bearing, but the end customer SHOULD NOT HAVE TO DO IT. Savage simply needs to go to the slightly larger bearing. To my knowledge, they have not ( would love to be wrong about that ! ). Savage`s factory magazines have been complained about for eons. Why Savage doesn`t make it a company goal to produce a more reliable feeding magazine eludes me. All this does is indicate to the buying public that the company doesn`t give a damn about it`s customers. That`s a prescription for failure ( ask the old Remington ).

 

[red rick]

A friend of mine bought a 77/22 . I will say that it was every bit as nice looking as my CZ452 and I think it was just as accurate , but it cost a lot more than the CZ and that was here in Virginia . I would like the 77 in .22 Hornet , but they cost to much for me for what it is and what I want it for . Now if only they would make a American in .22 Hornet , they would have a sale .

 

[Caplock]

I have a Hawkeye in 7mm-08. Everything about my example is great...except the bolt is gritty and rough. I hope it smooths out with use.
Wood is very nice. Accuracy is very good(hunting gun).
I paid 350.00 for mine second hand. Guy who sold it wanted a Magnum of some flavor. I threw a low ball offer and got it.

Good thing you have good laws over there. Get your money back and get AR10 for your hunting rifle. LoL!!! I have no complaints about my mine.

 

[Remington1911]

I only own one Ruger product, a PC9. I did have a M77 Hawkeye stainless .308 for a very short time but a buddy was looking for a deer rifle for his son so I sold it to him before ever firing a shot. It seemed like a lot of rifle for the $750 I paid for it.



I understand you have some serious hate on for Ruger but this comparison is pure nonsense

I don't hide my bias, but look at it with just an eye to numbers. Thinking of the little carbine that hipoint builds. Try to find someone say a bad thing about it, very hard to find anything related to the thing working, worst it usually gets is clunky. The same can be said about their hand guns, they do seem to work, I bet we have all seen the videos on youtube where it takes a bullet to the gun itself to make it fail after doing everything "normal" to it. They are clunky, but it is what it is and the company does not pretend it is something it is not. Flip that over to ruger and they know x,y,z has issues and yet they still charge good money for them.

 

[Remington1911]

een
I find this to be an interesting post. I have two Savage rifles that I like and enjoy shooting very much. They are both very accurate and, while not perfect ( heavy bolt lift on the bolt of the 110, magazine issues that seem to be doing better ), I`ve not had any functionality issues that I consider major. Having said that, there are known issues with some Savage rifles that have been reported for a long time, so Savage no doubt has known about them for a protracted period. For whatever reasons, they seem unwilling and/or unable to address those. Case in point, extraction and ejection. Extraction failures appear to be the result of an undersized ball bearing in the extractor. It`s an easy fix to replace the ball bearing, but the end customer SHOULD NOT HAVE TO DO IT. Savage simply needs to go to the slightly larger bearing. To my knowledge, they have not ( would love to be wrong about that ! ). Savage`s factory magazines have been complained about for eons. Why Savage doesn`t make it a company goal to produce a more reliable feeding magazine eludes me. All this does is indicate to the buying public that the company doesn`t give a damn about it`s customers. That`s a prescription for failure ( ask the old Remington ).

And I agree with this as well, when the issue becomes known it should be addressed. Sometimes the issue is a design issue that did not show up till the rifle went "into the wild". Other times a revision creates the issue. How the company takes care of the issue is what it is all about.

Personally I have only two savage rifles, one was built under a .gov contract for another .gov, ours "lend leased" it to them. The other is a 99 that is quite old. I can't comment on the savage issues, but do know they exist and some people on other forums feel about savage like I feel like Ruger for the same reasons. I don't fault those reasons as like you said the company does not seem to address them in any form.

I might get hit for off topic, but it does tie into how a company should handle an issue like this.

However this is not a gun related company but tools. I really don't want to type much as I think it will get nuked here, so if the video gets stripped for being OT and the rest of the post is allowed to live check out the Milwaukee 2767 issues on YT. I am only going to link the statement from the company and how they "took care" of the issue as that relates to how companies that know about an issue with a product should take care of said product.

 

[Nature Boy]

I don't hide my bias…..

Really? I hadn’t noticed…

….but look at it with just an eye to numbers.

You haven’t offered any numbers for us to put our eyes on, just a lot of anecdotal dot connecting and faulty comparisons.

 

[Turkeytider]

And I agree with this as well, when the issue becomes known it should be addressed. Sometimes the issue is a design issue that did not show up till the rifle went "into the wild". Other times a revision creates the issue. How the company takes care of the issue is what it is all about.

Personally I have only two savage rifles, one was built under a .gov contract for another .gov, ours "lend leased" it to them. The other is a 99 that is quite old. I can't comment on the savage issues, but do know they exist and some people on other forums feel about savage like I feel like Ruger for the same reasons. I don't fault those reasons as like you said the company does not seem to address them in any form.

I might get hit for off topic, but it does tie into how a company should handle an issue like this.

However this is not a gun related company but tools. I really don't want to type much as I think it will get nuked here, so if the video gets stripped for being OT and the rest of the post is allowed to live check out the Milwaukee 2767 issues on YT. I am only going to link the statement from the company and how they "took care" of the issue as that relates to how companies that know about an issue with a product should take care of said product.

It`s really a shame. It`s almost as if some companies don`t recognize the critical nature of good customer service AFTER THE SALE as a key to repeat business. I think listening to your customer and then addressing their issues is a key component of customer service. The American consumer is amazingly forgiving IF their issues and problems are addressed in an effective and timely manner. Most people understand that things will go wrong with devices. It`s how a company responds that makes the difference. Of course, if the same problem happens over and over again, the NATURE of that problem must be dealt with, not just sending the same part as a replacement time and time again.

Want to experience great customer service after the sale? Buy a Caesar Guerrini or Fabarm shotgun and then need customer service. Might be the very best in the industry if my experience and others I`ve read about were any indication.

 

[JeeperCreeper]

It`s really a shame. It`s almost as if some companies don`t recognize the critical nature of good customer service AFTER THE SALE as a key to repeat business. I think listening to your customer and then addressing their issues is a key component of customer service. The American consumer is amazingly forgiving IF their issues and problems are addressed in an effective and timely manner. Most people understand that things will go wrong with devices. It`s how a company responds that makes the difference. Of course, if the same problem happens over and over again, the NATURE of that problem must be dealt with, not just sending the same part as a replacement time and time again.

Good point, doctors that have good bedside manner and apologize for mistakes have significantly less lawsuits against them for malpractice

 

[Remington1911]

Really? I hadn’t noticed…



You haven’t offered any numbers for us to put our eyes on, just a lot of anecdotal dot connecting and faulty comparisons.

Sorry I don't document every ruger thread, I don't document every wow Ruger customer service is so fantastic. I don't document every thread that has a side post about this or that issue.

And we all know they are there, Perhaps I am overly hard on the company in some folks eyes. I spend good money and expect a product that equals the money spent. I am not asking for single six quality out of a wrangler, I do expect them to shoot without key holes on the target, that is a current one on this very fourm.

I am not trying to be cute like some people are, if people are true to themselves they know they have read a thread here and there on ruger quality. After you become aware of it, they seem to happen quite often.

 

[Remington1911]

It`s really a shame. It`s almost as if some companies don`t recognize the critical nature of good customer service AFTER THE SALE as a key to repeat business. I think listening to your customer and then addressing their issues is a key component of customer service. The American consumer is amazingly forgiving IF their issues and problems are addressed in an effective and timely manner. Most people understand that things will go wrong with devices. It`s how a company responds that makes the difference. Of course, if the same problem happens over and over again, the NATURE of that problem must be dealt with, not just sending the same part as a replacement time and time again.

Want to experience great customer service after the sale? Buy a Caesar Guerrini or Fabarm shotgun and then need customer service. Might be the very best in the industry if my experience and others I`ve read about were any indication.

Good point, doctors that have good bedside manner and apologize for mistakes have significantly less lawsuits against them for malpractice

And yet some people want to just let it slide. Allow the same mistakes to happen over and over again and never hold any accountable for the mistakes and errors that just keep happening. This is why I was shocked at the Milwaukee issue and how it was resolved. Fix the customer side, and address the root issue.

Shocked that this thread has lasted this long.

 

[red rick]

I own 5 Ruger’s . Three of them are revolvers and a 10-22 Deluxe and a American Rifle . I am happy with all of them . I also own 4 Remington 870’s bought within 8 years ago . I am also happy with all of them . But there has probably not been a firearms company more bashed in the last 30 years , as Remington and I read all of that before I bought my first one . I didn’t see the problems people were complaining about , so I ended up with 4 . They are not of the beauty of the old Wingmaster , but they were built for people on a budget . I wouldn’t have bought but maybe 1 at a Wingmaster price .

 

[CraigC]

I find a lot of fault in the OP. Some of the finish details are understandable, other issues are not. Ruger has always been the working man's firearm. They have always cut corners on frivolous fit & finish work to save money over their competitors. Funny, S&W has done the same in response, as has Colt, though to a lesser extent. ALL of the issues you point out should've been noticed in the pre-purchase inspection. That said, most of them are to be expected. Some could be easily rectified. None are a big deal.

If you had such an issue with castings, why was this not an issue before you bought the rifle? Seems to me you decided to get mad about that after you bought the rifle. The cast vs forged argument has been debunked so many times, it's barely worth mentioning. If ALL else is equal, forgings are stronger, in one direction. Investment castings are strong in every direction. The strength of Ruger's castings is very, very, very, very well proven, over 70yrs of operation. Ruger operates on cash and has no debt, while a good many of their competitors have gone under. Where are Winchester and Remington today? Greedy Ruger? Get a grip. The strongest revolver in the world uses a frame cast by Ruger out of 17-4ph stainless steel. S&W frames are forged. Guess what? Ruger's terrible cast Redhawk and Super Redhawk are measurably stronger guns. The rhetoric about pistons is pure nonsense and not applicable.

All that said, having bought 80 Ruger guns of every type (but shotguns) and of every vintage going back to the 1950's, I wholeheartedly disagree with the overall assessment of Ruger and the tone of the OP. You made too many assumptions. I don't know how your location affects pricing and I really don't care. Your expectations were unrealistic and your pre-purchase research severely lacking. Now you're just mad at Ruger when you should be mad at yourself.

 

[JPSauer]

I find a lot of fault in the OP. Some of the finish details are understandable, other issues are not. Ruger has always been the working man's firearm. They have always cut corners on frivolous fit & finish work to save money over their competitors. Funny, S&W has done the same in response, as has Colt, though to a lesser extent. ALL of the issues you point out should've been noticed in the pre-purchase inspection. That said, most of them are to be expected. Some could be easily rectified. None are a big deal.

If you had such an issue with castings, why was this not an issue before you bought the rifle? Seems to me you decided to get mad about that after you bought the rifle. The cast vs forged argument has been debunked so many times, it's barely worth mentioning. If ALL else is equal, forgings are stronger, in one direction. Investment castings are strong in every direction. The strength of Ruger's castings is very, very, very, very well proven, over 70yrs of operation. Ruger operates on cash and has no debt, while a good many of their competitors have gone under. Where are Winchester and Remington today? Greedy Ruger? Get a grip. The strongest revolver in the world uses a frame cast by Ruger out of 17-4ph stainless steel. S&W frames are forged. Guess what? Ruger's terrible cast Redhawk and Super Redhawk are measurably stronger guns. The rhetoric about pistons is pure nonsense and not applicable.

All that said, having bought 80 Ruger guns of every type (but shotguns) and of every vintage going back to the 1950's, I wholeheartedly disagree with the overall assessment of Ruger and the tone of the OP. You made too many assumptions. I don't know how your location affects pricing and I really don't care. Your expectations were unrealistic and your pre-purchase research severely lacking. Now you're just mad at Ruger when you should be mad at yourself.

You really didnt read anything past "investment casting"... so you read investment casting isnt as strong as forged steel, have a stroke and type this out....

If you bothered to read, (hopefully you got this far) i expect ruger to put moe effort finishing when using a cheaper, quicker method to make the rifle.

And the stock fit, and burrs etc all good tooo?? Well not for me. And ofcourse you dont care what i spent, coz i spent it not u, ur not meant to care.

A win model 70 featherweight also a mauser style, is same price, and its all forged, finished well etc. So at this price point casing cast one would expect a great finish.

Mad at myself? Haha for what? Wth our consumer laws, im either getting a refund or the gun remade practically. I just put this up to warn others.

P.s. a ruger is not the strongest revolver, you really need to read through this thread, everything you have mentioned has been brought up before.