PDA

View Full Version : The Ruger American Rifle


jakeLC
January 4, 2012, 11:31 AM
Has anyone looked at the new ruger american rifle. according to the website it is 100 percent made in america. available in 4 calibers and all for an msrp of $449. I have to say it may be my next rifle.

Heres a link:
http://ruger.com/products/americanRifle/models.html

UtopiaTexasG19
January 4, 2012, 11:46 AM
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=473783

taylorce1
January 4, 2012, 01:22 PM
Just a sign of the times and what people want these days; Ruger is just trying to capture more of the entry level market and the garage gunsmith. There are a lot of first time buyers who don’t want to mess with trying to figure out the used market, and they will buy these. If they offer them in a youth sized stock I imagine they would be able to sell quite a few to parents looking to buy their kids first hunting rifle.

These rifles appear to have a barrel nut so switch barrels will be in the future. The safety in the trigger shoe isn't needed but everyone wants the much adored Savage Accutrigger, so now Mossberg and Marlin offer one why not the new Ruger. Plus Ruger has always liked to lawyer proof things so they won't adjust lower than 3 lbs.

Unlike Tikka they use two different length actions so that is nice, I still don't like the recoil lug being attached to the stock like the Tikka's and Axis. They hold one more round than the T/C Venture by using a rotary magazine vs. single stack. The will use a standard base and ring set up vs. the Ruger rings which is nice as well.

warbirdlover
January 4, 2012, 04:01 PM
I'll be darned. They DO have a barrel nut setup like Savage. I missed that the first time I looked at the pics. I'm just betting whether well made or not that these will be good shooters.

treg
January 4, 2012, 10:50 PM
Goes back to Bills saying, and I quote loosely, " a quality firearm for a weeks pay", for a LOT of people.

kst8fan
January 5, 2012, 06:00 AM
These new rifles may be cheaper but I would imagine they will be shooters. Ruger has one of the best customer service dept in the business. I may have to look in to one of these.

Mannlicher
January 5, 2012, 12:01 PM
note that the referenced thread about Ruger's new rifle was closed fairly quick. Guess we can't discuss the pros and cons of a new rifle here without straying into personal attacks. Sad.

My take is that Ruger has produced a quality rifle using modern manufacturing methods. A lot of features are included, such as bedding, hammer forged barrel and a nifty rotary magazine.
I will be looking to pick up one soon, in .308.

old roper
January 5, 2012, 12:47 PM
The new Ruger American rifle has the tang safety.

http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/01/03/ruger-american-the-birth-of-an-american-legend/

It's just like the Tikka lite enclosed bolt and if it's shoots as good as the Tikka be a nice light weight rifle.

DPris
January 5, 2012, 02:26 PM
Taylor,
Not QUITE everybody wants the "Savage" trigger. :)

I'll put up with a Glock trigger on Glocks, but not on a rifle.
Worked with the updated Savage Scout, quite probably would'a kept it had it not been for that trigger.
Same with a Marlin .22 here that's otherwise nice, but not staying.

Irrational, probably, but I dislike the squiggly two-trigger feel of the things. :)
Denis

taylorce1
January 5, 2012, 06:57 PM
Taylor,
Not QUITE everybody wants the "Savage" trigger.

I hear you there, I guess I haven't been able to type well enough for my sarcasam to come through. I buy Stevens 200 rifles or older pre-accutrigger rifles when I use them for projects. If I want a better trigger I replace them with a Northand Shooter Supply tuned 3 screw or a Sharp Shooter Supply competition trigger. I don't like the feel of the trigger safety either and don't want it on a rifle, I don't shoot pistols very often and have never fired a Glock.

DPris
January 5, 2012, 07:40 PM
Yep, I like one trigger on my rifles, not two. :)
But, I've been known to be outa step with other aspects of the modern world, so what do I know?
Denis

Cowboy_mo
January 5, 2012, 07:55 PM
To all the folks who love the I wish "more power to you". But to me, they just feel like a creepy trigger and I refuse to own one.

Now that fact plus the fact that I think 30-06 and 270 win deserve and perform much better with a 24" barrel, I won't be looking to purchase one of these:D

PawPaw
January 5, 2012, 08:09 PM
I like the Savage trigger. Have several of them and shoot them well. I admit that it's different from other triggers, most especially the Remington trigger on my 700.

I'll take mine with the Accutrigger, please.

DPris
January 5, 2012, 08:37 PM
Don't forget the pickles & onions! :)
Denis

CPTMurdoc30
January 6, 2012, 06:39 AM
Man a lot of hate for a rifle that hasn't even hit the market yet.

They are an entry level rifle meant for people seeing if they like hunting or shooting. What is wrong with that?

If it gets more people to be gun owners I am all for it. As should everyone else. I can't believe some of the attitude around this rifle and others.

8 years ago I purchased a Remington 700 VLS in 223 I paid $600 + $500 for the scope and $100 for the rings and bases. That is $1200 all together. It took me 3 months to save the money to get the scope. Now that same rifle with nothing different at the same store is $975 + $500 for scope and $100 for rings and bases. That is $1575 for the same rifle a few years later.

Would I buy an entry level rifle. No because I am not an entry level shooter. Would I belittle someone new to the sport for buying this or the savage NO. I would however explain the lack of quality in the cheap remington rifle.

I think this rifle will be of Ruger quality at a price many can afford. Not everyone in the USA makes $250k a year and can afford the best of everything. Some people have to work hard for their money and they supplement their food and cut costs with hunting.

As for the rifle its self I like the looks better than any other out there. I like the design features over the others as well. I think the stock on this rifle out shines any other budget rifle on the market.

taylorce1
January 6, 2012, 09:12 AM
If it gets more people to be gun owners I am all for it. As should everyone else. I can't believe some of the attitude around this rifle and others.


I agree 100% with your thinking. I don't hate anything that gets people out shooting. I'd buy this rifle if the price is right, especially if a .223 bolt face comes out, or if it is cheap enough I want to build my daughter a .250-3000 Savage. I don't want it to cost me as much as a full blown custom and I can do this myself at my bench. Plus I imagine you might see some aftermarket stocks come out for this rifle.

Marquezj16
January 6, 2012, 09:21 AM
I like it. Ruger is expanding it's customer base by offering a rifle that is affordable.
If it gets more people to be gun owners I am all for it. As should everyone else.
Ditto

TX Hunter
January 6, 2012, 11:20 AM
I was initially upset when I saw this, I was thinking it was a replacement for the Ruger M77 Hawkeye. If they make this as just an aditional rifle I will be fine with that.
I will state the reasons, that I do not like it.
1. I dont like the ejection port, I prefer an open top Bolt action Rifle.
2. I really dont like Plunger Ejectors, this being a Push Feed I assume it has one, Im not pertucularly crazy about push feed either.
3. Im one of the shooters, that actually likes a little resistance in a triger, I dont want a wing on my triger either.
4. I am not a fan of plastic stocks, I do like laminate however.
5, I dont like detachable magazines on bolt action rifles, I like the machined feed rails that you have to do away with in order to use a detachable magazine. I think it will lead to failures in the field.
That said, I think this rifle will still function well for the average hunter, and if its just an inexpensive option for those who would otherwise not be able to afford a rifle I am all for it. :)

Orion6
January 6, 2012, 06:26 PM
Man a lot of hate for a rifle that hasn't even hit the market yet.

They are an entry level rifle meant for people seeing if they like hunting or shooting. What is wrong with that?

If it gets more people to be gun owners I am all for it. As should everyone else. I can't believe some of the attitude around this rifle and others.

8 years ago I purchased a Remington 700 VLS in 223 I paid $600 + $500 for the scope and $100 for the rings and bases. That is $1200 all together. It took me 3 months to save the money to get the scope. Now that same rifle with nothing different at the same store is $975 + $500 for scope and $100 for rings and bases. That is $1575 for the same rifle a few years later.

Would I buy an entry level rifle. No because I am not an entry level shooter. Would I belittle someone new to the sport for buying this or the savage NO. I would however explain the lack of quality in the cheap remington rifle.

I think this rifle will be of Ruger quality at a price many can afford. Not everyone in the USA makes $250k a year and can afford the best of everything. Some people have to work hard for their money and they supplement their food and cut costs with hunting.

As for the rifle its self I like the looks better than any other out there. I like the design features over the others as well. I think the stock on this rifle out shines any other budget rifle on the market.

I said pretty much the same thing in the other thread that got locked. Just classic elitism.

Magog
January 6, 2012, 06:32 PM
needs a flash hider and 30 round magazine.

kozak6
January 7, 2012, 02:24 AM
Sure is ugly. But that seems to be the trend for these new entry level rifles.

The styling really reminds me of a Remington 887.

I'm very curious to see how these shoot.

SwampYankee
January 8, 2012, 03:39 PM
I handled the Ruger American Rifle today at a dealer-only trade show. I have to report that I was very disappointed. Lots of plastic, stock is really subpar and it just feels cheap. LOTS of slop as you draw the bolt. I love Ruger but it seems like they let the guy who designed the LCP into the rifle department. Maybe it can shoot, maybe it cannot, but I was not impressed.

warbirdlover
January 10, 2012, 12:01 AM
I was reading all of Ruger's hype on their website. It is supposed to shoot sub MOA with factory ammo. The barrel is free floated and the aluminum bedding blocks keep it that way when torqued to the correct values. I think they need to put this in a wood stock. Like the Tikka T3 Hunter. I think it's too early to judge until somebody throws some lead down the range with it. I was also reading in their owners manual about (if it doesn't group) sending it back after checking a list of things we already know to check.

And they even have Larry Weishuhnn pushing it in a video. Thought he was a TC guy.

Abel
January 10, 2012, 06:28 AM
And they even have Larry Weishuhnn pushing it in a video. Thought he was a TC guy.

Yeah, that surprised me too. Maybe Ruger sent him some new custom painted leather work/hunting gloves?

Cowboy_mo
January 10, 2012, 12:32 PM
After reviewing the posts following my earlier post and looking through the manual for this rifle, I have a few observations.

1. With a few exceptions, this rifle is very close to the T/C Venture.

The exceptions are:
1. The Ruger has an "accutrigger"
2. This rifle has the bedding blocks milled into the stock (this is the 2nd new rifle I have seen with this design. The problem this creates (in my mind) is a lack of aftermarket stocks should the shooter not like the factory stock.
3. This rifle has a tang safety which some like and some don't. On the plus side (for me) this safety allows the bolt to be lifted while in the "safe" position.
4. The scope bases are NOT integral to this rifle.
5. This rifle requires the action to be removed from the stock to adjust the trigger.

Because of these exceptions, I won't be buying one of these rifles, BUT I think they will be excellent entry level rifles. Hey if you've never shot anything else, you will fall in love with the features I cite as exceptions.

As others have mentioned, I am surprised that Larry Wieshund is endorsing them since they are so close to the Venture and he has always been a T/C guy. Just guessing, but Ruger must have offered a bigger paycheck for his endorsement.:)

Wrothgar
January 10, 2012, 12:51 PM
CZs and Tikkas are both relatively inexpensive and VERY good rifles. I'm looking forward to giving this new Ruger rifle a shot.

mdd
January 10, 2012, 01:27 PM
I like the concept of this rifle and several of the features. I have come very close to buying an axis in 22-250 but just couldn't bring myself to it. If ruger expands their caliber selection to include 204, 223, and 22-250 i'll own at least one of them. It would instantly become my new truck gun.
If nothing else we should appreciate an American company trying something new and offering us an affordable alternative. Built by American workers for working Americans ain't a bad thing.

johnwilliamson062
January 10, 2012, 07:45 PM
If they shoot as claimed I may buy a 22-250 in the future.
Venture at budsgunshop is $475. If the MSRP on the American is $400, I imagine they will settle close to three. That is a HUGE price difference.


1. The Ruger has an "accutrigger" -I assume this is positive

2. This rifle has the bedding blocks milled into the stock (this is the 2nd new rifle I have seen with this design. The problem this creates (in my mind) is a lack of aftermarket stocks should the shooter not like the factory stock. -Isn't it pretty common that you have to buy a stock made for the rifle? How many rifles are interchangeable. I guess a few may inlet stocks themselves, but not many. This will push a replacement stock price up, but I don;t see it directly affecting availability beyond squeezing out lower price points. Most people who want stocks at lower price points will probably be fine with the OEM stock.

3. This rifle has a tang safety which some like and some don't. On the plus side (for me) this safety allows the bolt to be lifted while in the "safe" position. -You are right some won't like it. Most hunters I know like the tang safety b/c they are most familiar with mossberg shotguns. Trap shooters, defensive shooters, high power shooters, not so much, but I don't think they are the target audience anyways.

4. The scope bases are NOT integral to this rifle. -Intersting observation and a good point. I would prefer integral, especially weaver, but not a huge deal. It looks to me like the TC are included, but not integral.

5. This rifle requires the action to be removed from the stock to adjust the trigger. -Is this really a significant negative? Do you foresee changing the settings in the field? I just don't see when this will be a problem. Most will set it once and leave it for as long as they own the rifle.

Pathfinder45
January 11, 2012, 02:20 AM
......I think it's ugly, but that's just my opinion. I forget the name of that thing they made out of their 10-22, that weird pistol thing. That was truly worthy of ridicule. What I really like about this current trend towards ugly plastic and/or tacticool is that some folks seem to be trading off their nice old Winchesters they inherited and now I can afford a classic that they traded off.

Tom Matiska
January 11, 2012, 11:59 AM
I'll give it some points for being a good hands on carry rifle.

At 6.25 lbs it will spend more time in the hands and less time on the shoulder. Don't put a Hubble Telescope on it and you have a carry all day rifle.

Looks like the magazine area forward of the trigger is mostly plastic, and better for single hand carry. Large cold metal clips and floorplates at the center of gravity are on my dislike list on a cold December morning.... if you don't want a cold stiff trigger finger you need to wear too much glove or sling it over the shoulder.

... I'd carry it...

SwampYankee
January 11, 2012, 01:16 PM
One of the first things i did was pop out the magazine. It's all plastic and seems very thin. It's not like the robust mag you find on something like a 10/22. And the latch that holds it in place seems very flimsy, prone to snapping. Once again, it looked great in the photos but one I got my hands on it, I was very disappointed.

ScotchMan
January 21, 2012, 04:01 PM
I am someone who only has a .22 rifle and is looking to get into shooting a centerfire rifle. I have shot friends' 30-30s and a .300 Winmag. However I am not convinced I need a really high quality rifle as I do not hunt and don't forsee any "long term defense" scenarios in my future.

That said, I've been looking for an entry level rifle for me for a while. I love the Savage Accutrigger, and that is the biggest reason I don't want an Axis (lack of Accutrigger). I have looked at the Ruger Gunsite extensively, as well as similarly-priced Savages, but I'm just not at the point where I'd rather have a $700-1000 rifle than a new 1911, for example.

I also am not sure if I want to go with a bolt action or AR first (I'm sure I will end up with both eventually).

So, coming from the perspective above, and already being satisfied with Ruger, I am very interested in this rifle. I'm ok if it feels cheap and plastic, if the trigger is similar to the Accutrigger then I find it to be a great value. And if not, I'm only out $350-400, and I can gift it to a friend to get another person into shooting.

It would seem to me that the type of person who frequents rifle forums online is probably not the target market for this rifle, so the comments here aren't unexpected. But for someone like me, it will probably be a success.

orsogato
January 21, 2012, 04:58 PM
I'd go with the Savage for this type of rifle. They have been making em with this system for a while now.

Bamashooter
January 21, 2012, 05:15 PM
How many of you people badmouthing ruger has actually seen or held one of these new rifles?

ScotchMan
January 21, 2012, 05:38 PM
I'd go with the Savage for this type of rifle. They have been making em with this system for a while now.

What is the trigger like? And is there any reason to think it will be better than Ruger's new offering?

orsogato
January 21, 2012, 07:11 PM
Scotchman,

I don't intend to flame Ruger. I own several of their guns. All are good.

This is Rugers first foray into making a rifle using the barrel nut retention system similar to that of the Savage model 110 and its progeny.

Savage has been making this design of rifle for almost 50 years. It's always had a good reputation for value and excellent accuracy. Essentially it is Savage's base design system for its entire line of bolt action centerfire rifles.

Here's a decent article about the Savage:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_12_48/ai_93317493/


My only point was that if I were going for this design type, I'd opt for the Savage.

I'm sure the Ruger will be a good value also. Most of the guns they make are.

SwampYankee
January 21, 2012, 07:18 PM
How many of you people badmouthing ruger has actually seen or held one of these new rifles?

I have.

I played with one at the Camfour dealer show in Norwich, CT a couple weeks ago. The rifle seemed very cheap and sloppily made. For the price, I would pick up a nice FR8 and save my dollars. I don't know if it could shoot but I was quite turned off by it.

Metal god
June 6, 2012, 09:44 PM
Ruger American rifle in 308 review

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Took my new 308 Ruger american rifle to the range the other day .I spent $360 on the rifle and $ 60 on the scope . I have a 3-9x40 mil-dot tasco world class scope on it . Its a good scope for the money and worked well . I know now that I will need more magnification for what this rifle can do . We were shooting on a table with a rest and rear bag . At 100 yards the rifle will and did shoot 1 MOA . Ammo used was federal gold metal match 168 gran .A quarter could cover the group . Thats not bad for a $360 rifle not sure you can ask for any more for that price . The trigger was nice . We shot it with the trigger wieght at what ever it came from the factory at . That being said we did notice that if the barrel started to get hot the accuracy droped off . The first two or three shots were bang on and tight groups . I would shoot 3 rounds check the grouping load 3 more shoot check the group load 3 more shoot . The barrel would get a bit hot and the grouping would start to dorp off a bit . If you let it cool down the first 3 shots would be bang on again . Realy thats all you need , 3 shots . You take the first shot at the deer or what ever and maybe a follow up shot or 2 . Go claim your trophy and put the gun away till next year . LOL bottom line is good gun boarder line great . Not sure you can beat it for the price . Savage sells one for around that price but at that price you do not get the accu-trigger . You have to shell out another hundred bucks for that . The trigger on the ruger is nice and is adjustible from 3 to 5 pounds . Again very good gun at a great price . It comes in 4 cal. 270 , 30-06 , 243 . and 308 Go get ya one .

The gun is very light so it has a bit of recoil . Some say the recoil is about the same as a 12 gauge ,I think thats about right maybe a little more .

The mag was easy to load and worked great .

From carry to cheek ? I did not do any shooting that required me to move the gun from a carry to cheek/shooting position. I did how ever take the last 4 shots of the day standing and holding the rifle free hand . I had a 8" target set up at 100 yards . All 4 shots were on target I guess you can say I shot a 8" group standing .

There is one more important thing I forgot to say . The barrel is completely free floated . Thats good yes and the stock is sturdy enough when holding it but when you set the rifle on the rest on the front part of the stock the barrel will make contact with the sock and is know longer free floating . We just set the rest way up on the stock just under the barrel nut . That seemed to work just fine .

chucknbach
June 12, 2012, 06:49 PM
Ruger is not known for accuracy. 2" at 50yds is what Ruger calls accurate. I will never buy another Ruger. Yes I'm jaded. I bought 2 of them in the past 7 yrs neither one of them could shoot. Both were not the cheapest in their class. I'd hate to see Ruger when they try to save on production costs.

Hopefully I'm wrong and Ruger got it right with this new one but I wouldn't chance it.

tahunua001
June 12, 2012, 07:00 PM
a local store has one in 30-06 for around 350 bucks. I've held it and it looks good, pending a couple dry fire sessions I would be willing to say that I would buy one if I got the chance.

Metal god
September 10, 2012, 11:06 PM
Sounds like you got a couple of lemons . I'm glad to say I did not .

http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/9782/phone004.jpg


Just got back from the range . I was able to reach out a bit today. We had targets set at 100 , 200 , and 300 Yards . At 300 yds I had a sting of 3 1/2 " . Thats just over 1 MOA and im OK with that . Im not the best shooter and I beleave the gun can shoot better then 1 MOA at 300 yds. The gun out shoots me right now . Soon I hope to out shoot the gun .

Some say if I had better glass I would shoot better . Like I said Im using a tasco wold class 3-9x40 and I like it . I would love to put a $500 to $1,000 scope on it and see if I or the gun shoots any better .

Bottom line the gun is worth the money

If you want to read a real review from pepole that have shot the Ruger American and not just read about it .
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=492169