ORIGINAL: VAhuntr
To me this is not good evidence that a Ruger is not accurate. Being a guide does not make one an expert on Ruger accuracy or lack thereof. There are too many variables in such a broad statement as that: What was the level of accuracy of the shooter? How well had the gun/s been taken care of? What was the consistency of the ammunition being used?
Gentlemen, please let me say first that I will NOT go on record as saying that ALL Rugers are inacurate. I will go on record as saying that MY Ruger has shown itself to be inaccurate, and a close friend has one that is not as bad as mine but still not very good. I will go on record as saying that I've read many posts from guys who have had trouble with new Ruger rifles, M77 MkIIs, No.1s, and Mini 14s. I am well aware of the gossip capabilities of internet postings, and being an ex-engineer who now runs a manuacturing facility building scientific instruments, I trust data that I see with my own eyes more than I trust second hand stories. I have heard many guys tell me that their rifle shoots one hole groups, then watched them shoot maybe a couple of sub-m.o.a. groups amd lots of 2" and 3" groups when it comes to show time. I also am aware that it is not wise to base conclusions on a limited amount of data, which I freely admit to having. I have done extensive work with my own Ruger .30-06 to no avail; if anyone is interested in a long, boring litany of everything I have tried, you can read what I've posted on the Ruger Forum; here's a link:
http://www.rugerforum.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/001590.html
I can only base my opinions of Ruger accuracy on the following:
1. Very limited personal experience of one M77 MkII .30-06 that won't love me back despite trying every trick in the book, plus a Mini 14 which groups 4-6" at 100 yards with open sights and my "made in 1957" nearsighted eyes
2. A buddy who has one tang safety M77 7mm mag that shoots indifferently despite many experiments in handloading (maybe the barrel is worn? 7mm mag loads can erode the throat are quicker than milder calibers) and a new stainles M77 MkII in .30-06 that so far seems respectable
3. Many internet postings from those who disdain Rugers, but admittedly offer little in the way of supporting data
4. The disdain of two of the three guides on a hunt I was on 3 years ago. Now, the two guides with no use for Rugers were rather young, in their twenties, and have no doubt seen as many guys who can't shoot as they've seen Rugers that won't shoot, but these kids grew up with guns and see more than the average guy does so I was inclined to respect their opinions. I must add, as I did not previously, that the third guide was a tough old fellow over 70 years old who DOES like Rugers. It was he who gave me many important tips to try, all of which help with my other rifles, but none of which did diddly squat on my Ruger (groan!)
Having said all of this, I must also reinforce that I have read many, many internet posts from guys who have Rugers that will cloverleaf with the right load. I just don't happen to be one of them. Would I ever buy another Ruger M77? Of course I would! As much as I whine and moan about mine, I have taken game with it, and I will submit to you that a rifle that can keep its shots in a 6" circle at 100 yards will fill your freezer if the rifleman is up to it. Also, I am aware that things such as "lemons" exist. Being a guy who makes his living manufacturing high tech instruments where precision is much sought after, I tend to be somewhat anal retentive about rifle accuracy. I have been told that I obsess too much about certain things. This is a useful quality for a guy who makes DNA Sequencers, spectrophotometers, blood analyzers and such grand toys as that, perhaps a less useful characteristic in a guy who just likes to kill at least some of the meat he puts on his family's table. I am well aware that hunting rifles differ from target rifles, and perhaps I am expecting too much! Still, my Winchester Model 70, Remington 700BDL and CZ550 meet my accuracy expectations with careful handloads, so I don't feel bad about being picky. (Just remember, if you or your family members ever need a blood test, chances are it will be done on a machine made by a company that hires nit picky guys like me.
My biggest complaint with my own rifle is that it has destroyed any confidence I had at taking shots much past 100 yards, based upon missing two hogs with it (250 yards and 200 yards) as well as by throwing inconsistent groups at the range. Missing the first hog was definitely me; I held too high, based on mis-estimating the range. The second miss was a pure mistery because the hog was broadside, still, and I was shooting from a rest. When I stalked one to about 100 yards, waited until my heartrate settled before squeezing off, I had the pleasure of seeing my hog topple over... and roll 100 yards down a steep hill. He HAD been standing conveniently close to a dirt road when I shot him.
I am now spending time regaining my shooting confidence with my Remington. It behaves very predictably, and while it lacks the Mauser claw extractor and 3 position safety of the Ruger, this baby does group beautifully for me.
Like I said, I don't mean to imply that EVERY Ruger is a poor shooter, but I will say that I have seen enough for myself and read enough second hand information to be suspicious that there is some variability in Ruger accuracy that may be more pronounced than that from other manufacturers. Perhaps I need to buy a few more Rugers to collect more data; wonder if my wife would buy that argument?