View Full Version : Does anyone have a Ruger M77?
May 9, 2005, 05:20 PM
I am pretty familiar with the differences between the model 700 and model 70 rifles, but where does the Ruger M77 fit into all of this?
What type of action (feeding) etc...?
It seems that most folks argue for either the Model 700 or the Model 70 (and maybe rightfully so). Any feelings on the Ruger?
May 9, 2005, 09:03 PM
I argue for the Rem Model 7 and the Ruger M77.
Both sweet rifles in my opinion.
But then again I like nice rifles. ;)
May 9, 2005, 09:16 PM
I have never been a remington fan, I had one once and could not make is shoot worth a cr*p. I own several winchester 70's and about a dozen M77's. I like the three position safety. Both are on the M77 MkII and M70. I like being able to open the bolt with the gun on safe.
Both shoot very nice and are built among the best. I like the Ruger because you can put a Timney trigger in them(with a little fitting filing) and get a fabulous trigger pull. Also the Rugers come with their own scope mounts with a integral base. Saving about 40-60 bucks.
May 9, 2005, 11:28 PM
Thank you for the information. I have always been a fan of Ruger firearms and for some reason have never really considered a rifle made by Ruger. I think that is about to change.
Now I just have to decide which caliber to buy...tough decisions...and probably a whole new thread. :)
Actually, I think I am going to buy one in .30-06... :cool:
May 9, 2005, 11:44 PM
They don't have the history and mystique of a Model 70, they don't have "3 rings of steel" like a 700, and they aren't as inherantly accurate as a Savage or A-bolt.
That being said, they are built twice as stout as any of the above, they posess most of the best traits among the above, and will shoot within' a gnat's ass of any of them. Very good rifles, bang for the buck or otherwise. Ive never seen one that wouldn't shoot 1-1.25", as well Ive never seen one break in any form or fashion (ok thats a lie, but putting a 270 shell in a 7mm Mag is asking for it, and then it was only a magazine floor that needed replacing).
My only complaint is the sythetic stock on them sucks for recoil control. Anything without a belt is ok, but once you get up to the 7mm and 300 mags, and especially the 338 (bad bad memory there), a good aftermarket synthetic stock is a good investment.
May 10, 2005, 12:50 AM
May 10, 2005, 01:31 AM
I have the M77 in 338 caliber and its one of the best rifles i own...shoots really smooth and really accurate..you wouldnt be making a mistake in purchasing one...and they have a Mauser action...probably the second best bolt system around...(second to the new sako's) IMO..how that helps some..
May 10, 2005, 04:41 AM
It's my dad's M77 [270 Win.], but I've shot it about as much as he has. It shoots excelent, and has never had any problems with it whatsoever. Of course it's quite well cared for, the first year he got a deer with it was 1982 and the rifle looks like it just came out of the box. He's taken many a deer with it over the years, including one that was ranked in the top ten in the state the year he shot it. IMHO you would do well with a Ruger M77, it's just as good as the Remington.
May 10, 2005, 08:01 AM
You're probably aware that the "M77" and the "M77 MkII" are two different animals. The older M77 was a push feed, plunger ejector, used a tang-mounted safety, and had iffy barrel quality - some excelent, and some decidedly not. The current M77 MkII is controlled round feed, standing ejector, really excellent barrels, and among the worst safety ergonomics in rifledom. In a nutshell.
May 10, 2005, 08:56 AM
I have owned two M77s, a .30-06 and .220 Swift. The Swift would stand with ANY sporter rifle within the limits of its caliber (.22 centerfires can't hang with the big boys in wind).
The stock of the Ruger M77 helps to make it a very accurate gun in the field. I would take a rifle with a well fitting stock and a good trigger and a so-so barrel over one with a great barrel and mediocre stock and trigger.
As far as the vaunted three position safety, I hate it, I hate it, I hate it, in all three of its positions.
The Savage 110 has a top tang safety, and like the Winchester, the bolt can be cycled with the safety on, as explained here:
The Savage three-position tang safety when pulled all the way back locks both trigger and bolt. In the middle position the trigger remains locked but the bolt can be operated for loading or unloading. All the way forward is the "fire" position.
My brother went out and bought a spare M-77 with a tang safety when he heard they were changing them.
May 10, 2005, 01:19 PM
In the mid-70s, I traded into a Model 77S in .257 Roberts, mostly as a favor to a gun show pal who really wanted a revolver I had. I wasn't too eager, either. This was one of the early limited run .257s, before Ruger took up the caliber as a regular production number. I'd class it as a heavy sporter barrel - - Not quite a varmint barrel, but pretty heavy. The rifle came with a Marlin 3-9x scope in Weaver rings, as did about 30 rounds of factory ammo.
I was stunned by the tiny groups I got with Winchester 100 gr Silvertips, and things just got better with handloads. I later installed an old steel tube Weaver Widefield 3-9 scope in a Redfield mount and rings. I still have this rifle. It accounted for first deer for both of my sons, my daughter-in-law, an ex-neighbor, and at least one of my son's friends. Elder Son calls it our "Mini-Sendero," and it continues to be a mainstay in my gun safe.
With a perceived need for a heavier rifle, I acquired a 77R in .30'06, and it has served long and well. Not as accurate as my .257, it is a solid, dependable rifle that has not failed to perform over the years.
Influenced by my success with the above two Rugers, my hunting buddy Doug bought two of his own. Both were the model 77RL light weight versions, one in .30'06 and one in .257 Roberts. His .257 was a vast disappointment. We could NEVER get it to shoot under three inches at 100 yards. He sent it to Ruger, and they pronounced it "within specifications." He decided to sluff it, but his elder daughter said she wanted to keep it. I lost track of it after that - -I believe she had it rebarreled.
The other lightweight rifle, the .30'06, went just the other way. It was amazingly accurate - -More so than my standard weight '06. When Doug said he wanted to sell it off to get money for another rifle project, I just couldn't let it go, "outside the family." I had a few extra bucks from an off duty job, and I got the rifle, complete with a Redfield Tracker 3-9 scope.
After some extensive chest surgery in 1999, I sold off my good old Mark X Mauser .338 Winmag, thinking I'd never be able to handle vigorous recoil again. Well, call it good fortune, or Grace, or whatever, I recovered pretty well, and later began looking for another big bore rifle. Unable to locate a .35 Whelen or .375 to suit me, I blundered into a deal on a 77RS in .338 Winmag. Big mistake. I've no idea of the dynamics of the stock design or dimensions, or how they interact with my own physique, but this rifle just flat HURTS to shoot with factory ammo. I let my dies go with the Mauser, and haven't begun handloading for it again. Probably won't.
I subsequently dealt into two nice Remington 700s - One a .375 H&H and the other a .35 Whelen. I'll likely let the Ruger.338 go, and maybe one of the '06s, but the .257 will be with me until I pass it on to a son.
No extra charge for my meander down memory lane. I kinda enjoyed it. :p
May 10, 2005, 03:03 PM
I can attest firmly to the fact that my M77 Mark II Stainless/Synthetic in .300WinMag kicks like a horse! :eek:
May 10, 2005, 09:18 PM
HAve a M77 MK II in 223 that is a piece of art as far as fit and finish. Accuracy is not quite up to my HB savage Mod 10FP but it's a whole lot sweeter to carry!
May 10, 2005, 11:07 PM
It seems that the only 'complaint' that some people have is that the 77 is not quite as acurate as the 70 or 700 and that it kicks a bit more due to the stock. But in terms of a field rifle, it seems to be a fine choice. Thanks for the input.
May 10, 2005, 11:40 PM
Hey, if it's a magnum, it's supposed tokick like a horse! That's why people get magnums, is it not? :D
Seriously, re the Ruger MkII: I have one, a Target .243. Love it. Mechanically, it is a Mauser knock-off. Bill Ruger got this one RIGHT, IMHO. Haven't even gotten started developing a load for it, and it is accurate with the first thing I threw together for last fall's deer hunt. I'm sure it'll be more so when I get a load properly worked up for it. The Target is a heavy gun, and the .243 is a light cartridge. Recoil?? Hah!
The metal is finished with a matte-silver coating which takes a little getting used to. That said, it doesn't look bad, per se, just different.
May 11, 2005, 07:18 AM
I'd have to dispute your conclusions.
Based upon my experience, observations, and reading, I'd have to say the current Ruger, the M77 MkII, is more accurate than most out-of-the-box M70 rifles, primarily due to some really remarkable barrels. (My M77 MkII was certainly more accurate than my current M70.) They are so smooth that even after 50 to 100 shots it takes three patches to clean them - one dirty, one gray, and the third clean. Writer John Barsness has commented that Ruger barrels are finer than some custom-made efforts - just as if they had been hand-lapped.
It's the older Ruger, the M77, which had iffy accuracy, primarily due to Ruger outsourcing barrels at that time and and accepting some pretty rough specimens. They now make their own barrels.
On other rifles, I have no opinion. I don't own the M700 or read about them. I read occasionally about the Savage, just enough to know people believe they are the most accurate factory rifles - not quite pretty enough for my closet, though. (Yes, I'm that shallow.)
I no longer own a M77 MkII, but it's not due to its lack of accuracy. I don't find them as smooth as some higher priced brands, so I've pretty much given up the lower end of the market, even while recognizing them as remarkable values.
May 12, 2005, 05:38 PM
I think I more or less agree with the majority of comments being proffered. I guess I have more Ruger rifles than any other as a matter of chance. The last one I bought was a rough old M77 with the tang safety. It looked like it had been dropped out of an airplane, but shoots (300 Win Mag) great, and I don't have to worry about it getting banged up on a field trip. I would rate any ruger I have owned at least as high as any other brand on most accounts, and used they tend to be real bargains - provided you don't get one with a lousy barrel. The only one I would rate higher as far as bang for the buck is the CZ 550 (if you can find them). I have several rifles with the three position safety that everyone seems to love (Rugers and Winchesters). To me they can be kind of confusing, but I guess that's not a major point.
May 12, 2005, 11:51 PM
Have owned and enjoyed many a Ruger rifle. I dont currently have a 77 but will again. The ones in my family are all great shooters, reliable and well used. I currently have a No. 1 B in 7mm STW. As you can tell we here like Rugers. My little brother has a 77 in .243, wich I believe to be the ugliest straight shootin gun in the world. I cant abide that plastic stock. Its just well ...ugly. Other than that I love em. A side note , my other little brother, the less gunwise one, was testing a 77 in 7mm mag. last year. He calls me from the range and says he cant get it to group and will I come help him. So off I go .45 in holster(cant go to the range without takin a little pistol practice). Anyway, I didnt know you could make 7mm Rem. mag cases out of 7mm Wby. cases. Apparently he didnt know there was more than one 7mag on the planet. Now that had ta do somethin pressure wise. didnt it? Just a funny aside. E :o
May 13, 2005, 08:33 AM
i have the absolute best 77 ever produced. the red recoil pad, tang safety RSI mannlicher stocked 308 w/ a KOWA 4X32 german post recticle.
May 14, 2005, 08:49 PM
Regarding bolt-action centerfires, I currently own a Browning A-Bolt in .22 Hornet, a Savage 116 Safari in .338 Mag., two Ruger Model 77s w/o open sights (.257 Roberts and 30-06 Springfield) and two Ruger Model 77 Mk IIs with open sights ( a 7X64 Brenneke and an International Model in .308). Strangely, given my age (pretty old :) ) and appreciation for fine firearms, I've never owned a Model 70...I have owned a couple of Rem. 700s as well as a Model 788 in the past. lLike others have opined, I too much prefer the older 77s two position tang safety over the Mk II's "improved", lawyer motivated system. What I don't like is Remington's method of appeasing their attorneys by allowing the rifle to be unloaded while on "safe" at the cost of not having the bolt locked while in this configuration. IMO, a person can safely unload a rifle in the fire mode by obeying standard safety precautions... I have had good service from my Rugers, both in terms of accuracy and reliability, and , aesthetically , I think they're the best looking rifles out there! LONG LIVE PRETTY WALNUT AND BLUE STEEL !!!
May 14, 2005, 10:11 PM
I have a M77RL in .270 and I love it. There are no problems with accuracy and at a little over 6 1/2 lbs it is easy to carry all day. At just over 40" long it handles the thick stuff as well as.....without too much trouble.(I almost said like an old lever gun but don't have asbestos underwear :D ). The rifle kicks alittle more due to its light weight, the stock has nothing to do with it. I shot a friend' s M77 in 7mm mag and it did not bother me much at all, and I'm not a very large guy.
May 15, 2005, 11:08 AM
A favorite topic of mine!
Please tell about your experience with your M77 (M77R??) in .257. Full weight or LW? Type optics and mounts? Accuracy with factory and handloads. Please see Post #11 in this thread for background to these questions. I think they're the best looking rifles out there! LONG LIVE PRETTY WALNUT AND BLUE STEEL !!! I fully agree. When I got my pet .30'06, decades ago, I was 'way off into handgun hunting and just wanted one all around centerfire rifle. I figured, What better multipurpose rifle than an aught-six? At the time, it seemed the Roy Weatherby/Holywood style stocks with Monte Carlo cheekplieces were ALL the rage. I wanted classic looks and didn't want to pay the premium for a pre-64 Model 70. I have never regretted my choice of the M77, wishing only that I'd held out for a 77RS model, with the iron sights, as well.
Thanks very much.
May 16, 2005, 01:30 AM
Johnny Guest I have not reloaded for my Ruger Roberts. I bought it new in 1975. It has the "sporter" grade barrel in 22" length and it has always had an older (steel tubed) Weaver "MicroTrac" V7 (2X7) scope mounted in Ruger rings. I like Rem. "Core-Lok" bullets for my whitetail hunting and this rifle using 117 gr. loads has proven to be a quick and reliable killer. My records show over the years that this rifle stays just under 2" (100 yds.;3 shot groups ) with the aforementioned loads. To my liking , it definetly prefers heavier bullets to lighter ones ( I have a battery of other rifles I use for varmints !). Like you, I prefer having irons on all of my big game rifles as auxillary sights ( and, in the case of my lever action rifles, with the sole exeption of a Sav. 99 in .358 Win., all of them are mounted with peep sights ). I am serious enough about the matter to have, a few years ago , taken both of my 77s w/o irons to the Williams Gunsight Company in Davidson ,Mi. with the idea of having them install sets of their irons on the rifles. I backed out of project at the last minute due to the estimated cost of almost $100.00 per rifle! I ,accordingly, decided to put a little more trust in my old Weavers ( the other 77 that I have w/o irons is an aught six with a Weaver K4 MicroTrac ) ,even if they are lonesome without the company of their metallic buddies!...One Model 77 that has always intrigued me and one that I see at the shows every so often is an iron-sighted speciman chambered in .358 Win. Too pricey for me though: they have been fetching upwards of $900.00 or so. Do you have any experience with Ruger bolt-actions in either .350 Rem. Mag. or 35 Whelen?
May 17, 2005, 12:22 AM
I've owned 3 older M-77's with tang safeties. The 338 was a good shooter, and not unpleasant to shoot with a decelerator pad.
I don't recall groups shot with the 30-06, but it was not bad or I would not have kept it as long as I did.
Sold the two above guns.
The 308 flat bolt has shot military ball ammo into around 1 1/2" @ 100 yards with a 4x scope. Good enough for me. Haven't shot any commercial or handloads in it yet. I bought it mostly so I could shoot cheap ammo. Been very happy with it. I can go out and plink a couple boxes of rounds off at ridiculess ranges for next to nothing, and not worry about the brass or reloading.
I like the large Mauser extractor, classic style stock without the monte-carlo, real checkering (as opposed to the impressed checkering some others have had) and the tang safety. I also like the integral scope bases. Wish it had a solid ejector, but I've never had any trouble with the plunger type so far. They seem to work OK in M-1 Garands and M-14's.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.