gamestalker
member
At present, I have been working with no less than 5 different Americans in various calibers. They aren't producing terrible accuracy, but not anything to rave about either. Being a long time Ruger fan, I find this rifle to be a major disappointment.
However, three separate aspects have come to my attention, the magazine, stock, and bolt face.
The magazine has is nothing short of cheesy and unreliable. So far, two of the 5 have had the magazine literally fall apart. One broke while simply loading it. The other was accidentally dropped while loading it, and it just broke apart.
The incident that happened while loading it was a clear indication of it's lacking durability, a weak design IMO. I would think a person loading a magazine should be able to do so without having to be ever so careful of it breaking during normal and common use.
The other incident in which it was dropped, was also a clear indication of a weak and cheesy design, especially for a high powered rifle IMO. The mag was on her lap while she was feeding cartridges into it when it slipped off her lap from about 2' off the ground, not concrete, just plain hard dirt. That one pretty much exploded into pieces, it broke the holding tabs molded into the plastic, which allowed everything to come flying apart.
One other noticeable issue is the weak and also dragging spring tension in the mag., which has caused very unreliable feeding in all 5 of these rifles. It usually requires having to smack the mag with the palm of your hand several times, if that even works, and at the risk of breaking it.
As for the stocks, well, they are poorly made and without any aspect of precision workmanship. Every single one of these stocks is clearly and visibly warped at the fore end. All exhibit a twisted appearance. There is simply no consistent points of contact or floating of the barrel. It's so bad and inconsistent, that one can't even determine if the stock is designed to be pressure bedded, or free floating. And when considering solving the issues by either free floating or by pressure bedding it, would be impossible due to the weak and extreme faulty workmanship.
And one other faulty quality is the bolt face. It's not very clean machine work, and exhibits a machine groove that stretches half way across the face the width of the extractor. It runs from the extractor, to the firing pin hole. For a reloader, this creates a problem by having to work with brass that has a .002"-.003" raised spot on the case head. This creates problems when trying to get head space to within acceptable tolerances without having to index the case head to the bolt face flaw. This problem is present on all 5 rifles I'm currently working with.
GS
However, three separate aspects have come to my attention, the magazine, stock, and bolt face.
The magazine has is nothing short of cheesy and unreliable. So far, two of the 5 have had the magazine literally fall apart. One broke while simply loading it. The other was accidentally dropped while loading it, and it just broke apart.
The incident that happened while loading it was a clear indication of it's lacking durability, a weak design IMO. I would think a person loading a magazine should be able to do so without having to be ever so careful of it breaking during normal and common use.
The other incident in which it was dropped, was also a clear indication of a weak and cheesy design, especially for a high powered rifle IMO. The mag was on her lap while she was feeding cartridges into it when it slipped off her lap from about 2' off the ground, not concrete, just plain hard dirt. That one pretty much exploded into pieces, it broke the holding tabs molded into the plastic, which allowed everything to come flying apart.
One other noticeable issue is the weak and also dragging spring tension in the mag., which has caused very unreliable feeding in all 5 of these rifles. It usually requires having to smack the mag with the palm of your hand several times, if that even works, and at the risk of breaking it.
As for the stocks, well, they are poorly made and without any aspect of precision workmanship. Every single one of these stocks is clearly and visibly warped at the fore end. All exhibit a twisted appearance. There is simply no consistent points of contact or floating of the barrel. It's so bad and inconsistent, that one can't even determine if the stock is designed to be pressure bedded, or free floating. And when considering solving the issues by either free floating or by pressure bedding it, would be impossible due to the weak and extreme faulty workmanship.
And one other faulty quality is the bolt face. It's not very clean machine work, and exhibits a machine groove that stretches half way across the face the width of the extractor. It runs from the extractor, to the firing pin hole. For a reloader, this creates a problem by having to work with brass that has a .002"-.003" raised spot on the case head. This creates problems when trying to get head space to within acceptable tolerances without having to index the case head to the bolt face flaw. This problem is present on all 5 rifles I'm currently working with.
GS
. Seriously though I do handload for it and I put a buckmaster 3x9x40 on it. Due to its light weight it kicks like a mule. I look at budget rifles like this. Are there budget rifles that can shoot sub moa groups? Of course. All companies make those for a reason. Cheaply made and low price points for sales volume. I think the budget rifles do have a higher risk of failure but you roll the dice at that price point. I knew for deer it would be fine out of the box. But for pd dogs at 500 yards I spent the money on my 220 swift. Kinda like buying a judge for the wife for protection and buying nickel plated 1911 for me. They both go bang but one looks better!
