Author Topic: Ruger accuracy ? (Read 4732 times)

Country Boy · « **on:** June 17, 2008, 06:47:57 AM »

Why are Rugers considered less accurate than a Remington or others ? I was thinking of a .350 mag

bilmac · « **Reply #1 on:** June 17, 2008, 10:17:51 AM »

Can't tell you why for sure but of the Rugers and Rems I've owned that is the case. I even had a 77-22 that didn't shoot until I freefloated the bbl. Rugers are pretty but I've sworn them off.

flintlock · « **Reply #2 on:** June 17, 2008, 10:23:40 AM »

I've got a Ruger M-77 .243 and brother has one in .270, I have a friend that has one in .308, with the 3 position safety, all shoot just fine...

victorcharlie · « **Reply #3 on:** June 17, 2008, 12:52:12 PM »

The ones I have are fine!

rbergum95 · « **Reply #4 on:** June 17, 2008, 02:44:31 PM »

my rugers all shoot at least as well as any remington i have owned, in some cases much better than remington. maybe that explains why i have 4 rugers in the safe and no remingtons.

Val · « **Reply #5 on:** June 18, 2008, 03:46:17 AM »

Considered less accurate by whom? I've got one that shoots .75 MOA consistantly and I haven't even played with the seating depth.

daddyof4 · « **Reply #6 on:** June 18, 2008, 04:29:03 AM »

My favorite rifle of all time is my M77 in 338 win mag. I floated the barrell and it will put 3 215 sierra's into .5 to .75 at 100 meters.

jlchucker · « **Reply #7 on:** June 18, 2008, 07:05:05 AM »

I've never owned a Ruger rifle. That's not because I have anything against them. I've simply never owned one. For the most part, though, the ones that I have seen others shoot a club ranges seem to shoot every bit as good as other brands. Those who have encountered problems with Ruger accuracy, though, all seem to say that they can't seem to ever really fix them. I wonder. Every brand can have its lemons, as well as its bright spots.

AtlLaw · « **Reply #8 on:** June 18, 2008, 08:02:27 AM »

I dunno why they are considered less accurate, but that is an opinion you often hear stated. I've worked with 2; a friend's #1 in .270 and my own 77 MKII in .257 Roberts. I was pleased with the accuracy of the #1 right off when working up loads. The M-77 is another story. I couldn't do any better then an occasional 1.5 inch group but that hasn't prevented it from killing a few deer over the years. Of course I never took the time to bed the recoil lug and other such tweaking like I do on all my rifles, but I'll start from scratch the next time she comes up in the hunting rotation.

warrior1 · « **Reply #9 on:** June 18, 2008, 11:58:15 AM »

i am totally satisified with the accuracy my ruger rifles and handguns exhibit. dan

slabsides · « **Reply #10 on:** July 15, 2008, 05:45:13 AM »

I now own two Ruger rifles, and 8 of their handguns. All of these, plus about forty or fifty more that I've handled and shot in the long years
of a very long life, have been acceptable to outstanding, sometimes needing a bit of adjustment on the triggers, depending on the model. I have a .222 Victorian that is a hundred-yard bumblebee gun. I've got .22 target pistols that outshoot S&W's, Brownings and Colts that I have owned, mostly due to superior barrels. I never expect MOA performance from plinking models like the 10-22 or the .44 Carbine, but they can punch a squirrel or a deer's ticket at woods ranges every time. My 77-7mm Mauser tang model is always right about MOA; with favorite loads it does much better. A pal has a 77V in .25-06 that can cancel postage stamps at 200 meters and is MOCoyote out to 500 yards.
I like my old Remingtons (pre-slump models all) but Rugers don't have to hang down their heads in any company, in my experience. Their dicey rep was acquired by a few bad barrels outsourced for the centerfire line in the 70's. Ruger has made good on any legit complaints about
these, as I understand it. Some people just look for an excuse to dump on a whole organization for a few mistakes made. I like to judge a gun
by how it shoots, not by its Internet reputation, or the advertising hype that surrounds it.

stanimals2 · « **Reply #11 on:** July 27, 2008, 12:00:31 PM »

I own Ruger rifles in 22, 22 mag, 222, 243, 30/06, and 300 raum and am very satisfied with all of them or I wouldnt have bought more. I own one remmy a 788 in 223 and yes it is a tack driver that shoots better than my 77vt in 243 but the differance is this, I took the 788 and changed the stock,bedded the action, floated the barrel, stoned the trigger and reloaded hundreds of differant load combos to get it to shoot groups that are sub 1/2 at 100 yards. All I have done to the ruger is take it out of the box, try a few old stand by handloads and it shoots consistant 1/2 moa. So I guess I dont see it, I,m sure remmy owners ill disagree though.

Stan

billy · « **Reply #12 on:** July 27, 2008, 02:06:38 PM »

I have owned ruger m77 in 3006,280,270 and a hawkeye in 7mm-08 ,all have been great hunting rifles and shoot minute of deer. Should still all of them but i get trade crazy sometimes.

Tom W. · « **Reply #13 on:** July 27, 2008, 04:38:52 PM »

You've heard a lie from somewhere.....

jcn59 · « **Reply #14 on:** July 27, 2008, 05:47:24 PM »

Any $500 Tikka t3 would out shoot my two early m77s, one recent one, an early #1, a 96-44, and a 77-22. The worst two of the lot shot 2-4" at 100 yards depending on the phase of the moon. I did have a recent SS 77 in .280 Rem that was a sub minute rifle. Gawd, I wish I kept that. I really like the 77s, the metal, the stocks, the "made in USA", the way they look, but they must never scrap a barrel no matter how bad it is. That's why owner reports on accuracy vary so much. None of my worst Rugers responded to the usual accuracy-enhancing tricks.

Ruger doesn't just have the "usual" number of "bad shooting rifles". Read a Tikka or Savage forum & see how little complaining about accuracy is there compared to the Ruger forum.
Tikkas come with a sub inch guarantee and you can usually buy a new one on sale somewhere for $379. and up.

I have a number of Ruger handguns and a shotgun that I am quite happy with so don't think I'm your usual Ruger basher.

George Foster · « **Reply #15 on:** July 28, 2008, 12:36:38 AM »

I own two Ruger 77 Mark II's, one in 243 and the other in 6mm Rem. I can state with their light contour barrels and 3-9x scopes that I have shot 1/2" or less five shot groups with both rifles and more than once with each rifle. This is of course with handloads that each rifle likes. The best group has come with the 6mm which was 3/8" with a 75HP load. I believe the Rugers are as accurate as any other brand rifle as long as you do your part.

SingleShotShorty · « **Reply #16 on:** July 29, 2008, 01:05:49 PM »

I think that it is all a bad rumor I have approx 15 Ruger rifles and they all shoot under 1" at 100

Mr. Joe · « **Reply #17 on:** July 30, 2008, 05:14:50 PM »

My rugers shoot right along with my remingtons...no better, no worse...they all of their favorite loads. I do like the ruger action, stock, and scope mounting system more however

deltecs · « **Reply #18 on:** July 30, 2008, 06:22:15 PM »

Quote from: Mr. Joe on July 30, 2008, 05:14:50 PM

My rugers shoot right along with my remingtons...no better, no worse...they all of their favorite loads. I do like the ruger action, stock, and scope mounting system more however

I agree. Rugers just have the distiction to be less costly than the Winchesters, Remingtons and other firearms manufacturers when they brought out the 77 Mark I. Dealers did not get the same high mark up selling these as they did with other rifles and so related poor accuracy and soft barrels, none of which was true. Gun writers got into the same numbing mind set and wrote disparagingly of Rugers. I believe it is a case of sour grapes that a relatively cheap, good looking, good handling, great functunality rifle shot as well as their pet rifles costing hundreds or thousands of dollars more, so had to belittle these fine attributes. Accuracy out of the box seems to be the primary concern and easiest to spread. No confidence in a rifles accuracy and there is every chance to prove it by not squeezing the trigger just right and hurried shooting. Sell it, it doesn't shoot as well as my Kimber. Go buy a Kimber out of the box in the same caliber and you'll have to find a load it likes as well, just like Rugers. I'll bet out of every 100 Kimber, that less than 5 will shoot minute of angle with a hunters first chosen load, factory or hand loaded. A Ruger will do that.

Norseman · « **Reply #19 on:** August 26, 2008, 05:22:57 AM »

My Ruger M-77 MK II All weather 30-06 can keep a consistant group of 1 inch at 100 yards to .75 inch. The key is to let the barrel cool between shots with the bolt open (5 min between 3 shot groups), then after the 3 shot group I let the gun cool down for 10 minutes and adjust for impact. This is a hunting rifle, not a target rifle. You will shoot an animal with a cool barrel remember? The groups mentioned above are excellent for ANY production hunting rifle. I am very pleased with the rifle! When I bought it though, I had to "can" the old paddle style plastic stock and I got one from Bell and Carlson. No biggie. It's a great rifle!

Ahab · « **Reply #20 on:** August 26, 2008, 12:09:37 PM »

I've a 7mmMag safety on tang and a relatively new Mk77 lightweight 7-08 all-weather that quite easily produce .75groups or better with developed handloads. Had a Remy .243 that sucked and the last new Savage 112 .204 I bought last year had to be sent back to the factory because the bore was oversize. Yes, the new barrel shoots a lot better but...the Encore .204 I have shoots a lot better. Have Wby's and Howas that all shoot great. Notice some of these don't have sterling reputations. I believe all the makers are producing better guns than in the past but a lemon can still find it's way to the consumer now and then.

j104wd · « **Reply #21 on:** August 26, 2008, 01:09:52 PM »

Ive been happy with all the bolt action rugers I have owned just as accurate as the savages and remingtons I have. The mini 14 I had was a waste of money horrible accuracy maybe that is where some of it comes from. My current stock sks will out shoot the mini 14 I used to own.

AtlLaw · « **Reply #22 on:** August 26, 2008, 01:44:29 PM »

I own one Ruger HP rifle; a MkII in .257 Roberts. Like the rifle, love the caliber, but it isn't one of my most accurate rifles. I've said this before but I worked and worked with it and the best I can do is about 1.5 inch. But then I've never gotten around to working on it like I do most (all) of my bolt guns.

I just read an article in Rifle or RifleShooter about the common twist rate for .257 barrels being a little slow for bullets over 100 gr.. Since I was shooting 115 gr. Nosler Partitions this may be a consideration. Anyway, it gives me an excuse to load up some of the 100 gr. bullets I've got next time the Ruger comes up in the rifle rotation.

Graybeard · « **Reply #23 on:** August 27, 2008, 07:54:15 AM »

I've owned several Ruger centerfire rifles so far I've never yet had one accurate enough to keep. I bought a Number 1B in 6MM Remington cuz it's a round I've long wanted and it's hard to find anyone still chambering it. I couldn't even keep the bullets on an 8.5x11 target at 100 yards no matter what factory or reloaded ammo I tried. I gave up in disgust and traded it back to the dealer who sold it to me.

I realize some folks seem to have good luck finding Ruger guns that shoot accurately for them I just don't seem to have such luck all I can find are junk.

jcn59 · « **Reply #24 on:** August 27, 2008, 08:31:23 AM »

Me too, with just one exception over the years........but they sure are nice looking, esp. the #1. Otherwise only about one of the nine or ten I've owned could be counted on to shoot 1 1/4" at 100 yards, & most were a lot worse. If you want a better chance of getting an honest-to-God M.O.A. rifle, buy a Remington 700 or if you can tolerate an import in your safe, get a Tikka.

I'm not "condemning" all Rugers, just the rifles I've owned.

I think the Ruger revolvers are a different story. I've had a bunch & they generally shoot as well or better than anything else. Plus they are stronger and less expensive than anything else in that price range. Never had a bad one. Own a couple fantastic ones!

Tallwalker · « **Reply #25 on:** August 27, 2008, 02:33:20 PM »

For a nujmber of years Ruger was buying their M77 barrels from an outside source, and sometimes the quality left something to be desired. The very early ones had Douglas barrels (flat bolts) as did the No.1's for some time after that. Beginning at least at the onset of the MKII line, Ruger started hammer forging all their own MKII barrels. Once a brief learning curve was past the quality of those barrels was, and is very good, and very consistant. I would put them with any other production barrel out there. The nice thing about a hammer forged barrel is that when the contour is turned they tend to get smaller at the muzzle if anything as opposed to a button rifled barrel that tends to open at the muzzle as the contour is turned smaller there. The horror stories that you hear about hammer forged barrels have more to do with how good the finish is on the reamed hole before the barrel is hammered. Flaking, short life, etc. that one hears about is the result of surface inperfections getting hammered right into the rifling. If you think about where the forces are placed during their manufacture, it makes perfect sense. At any rate, the OP asked about the .350 mags, and to the best of my knowledge all of those shot very well!

jeep08ham · « **Reply #26 on:** October 04, 2008, 05:59:11 PM »

Golly I am amazed that some people are so anti Ruger. At last count, myself, son in law, my boys, grandkids, we total over 30 Ruger rifles. Since I usually do the scope mounts and reload for all of them, we have not gotten a single bad one in the lot. All will shoot under 1 1/4" at a hundred yards. All loads are usually towards the upper limits. One item I have found to be a cause of in-accurate Rugers is the method some people tighten the bolts. Most people overtighten the angle bolt and induce stress into the barrel and forearm. The poorest shooter I had new was a Mini 14 but with reloads it is shooting .75" 5 shot groups. Have shot over 325 coyotes with this combo and even used it on prarie dogs. Some of these rifles go back to the early 70's. The little womans #1 in 223 has over 4000 rounds thru the barrel and the accuracy is just starting to fade a bit. It started out shooting 1/2" groups all day and now I am up to 5/8" groups. I know it can not be me as I am getting up in years a long way. Ha! The wife still collects lots of dogs with it and once in a while she will get a coyote out to around 275 yards. Guess if anyone wants to donate me a Ruger, I would take it.

saltydog · « **Reply #27 on:** October 06, 2008, 02:48:12 PM »

IMO the higher cost of the bolt action rifles and the accuracy issues associated with the mini 14's and 30's have given the pinhead crowd a license to T off on Ruger - and how better but to complain about accuracy of the rifles which can not be verified independently. The new Ruger Corp - pst Bill's Senior and Jr. appears to be trying to give the customer value for their dollar and the customer service has been great when I have had to use it.

WyoStillhunter · « **Reply #28 on:** October 07, 2008, 02:19:13 AM »

I have bought six Rem. 700s beginning with a '06 about the second year they were made. Only the BDL Synthetic in .223 that I bought from Wal-Mart about five years ago has been disappointing. The others all shoot better than I can after having the triggers set to 3 lbs. I have gotten sub-MOA groups from all of them but the truth is they commonly group around 1.25" with a variety of ammo. Never owned another brand of bolt gun until last year.

September of 2007 I bought a new Ruger Hawkeye in .257 Roberts (my only Ruger rifle), put together some "book" loads, and went hunting. I killed an antelope and two Whitetails with as many shots. So it works.

I put it away after the season with less than 100 rounds through it. Groups were around 1.5" for three shots. I was hoping for better out of that classic cartridge. I thought I would sell it but haven't yet. It sits in the box as I hunt with a new-to-me M700 Classic 6.5X55 (one antelope so far).

After hunting season I want to put a scope back on the Hawkeye and do some thoughtful load development to see if it will shoot a little better. I love the cartridge and the way the rifle handles. We'll see.

bilmac · « **Reply #29 on:** October 07, 2008, 05:19:53 AM »

Yes Wyo I kind of think a lot of the fierce loyalty to Rugers comes from their good looks and some really nice chamberings. That is the reason I bought the ones I did. One of the old timers OConner or one of his contemporaries said "the only interesting rifles are accurate rifles". Holds true with me and the Rugers aren't with me anymore.