graveyard zombie

I was at a local gun show Sunday and stumbled across a Ruger 77/50 muzzleloader. I have been looking at various brands of muzzleloaders and owners comments for some time now but I did not know Ruger even made a muzzleloader. I usually see something at the gun show that I like and then have time to research it but Sunday was not the case. I really liked the looks and the workmanship of the Ruger and I felt it was too good of a deal to turn down so I bought it. The guy told me Ruger has discontinued making muzzleloaders due to poor sales and stiff competition so he was afraid to get stuck with it. It is new in the box, has a black composite stock, stainless steel, came with Ruger rings and he threw it a 209 conversion kit because he said it wouldn't fit anything else he had for sale. I got it all for $225.00 and since I've been looking at a lot of muzzleloaders I thought I couldn't go wrong with the Ruger name and this price.

I've only found two reviews of the Ruger 77/50 on the internet. One is by Randy Wakeman who didn't like it at all and the other is by Randy Smith who just loved it. My rifle is set with the #11 primer but I do have the 209 kit to change it should I feel the need to do so. One of the dislikes that Wakeman had was what he felt was a lot of blowback to the underside of the scope. However, the bolt on my gun seems to block the upper side and throw everything out to the right. Is this some type of change or will it still blowback from the top? I would greatly appreciate anyone in this forum who owns a Ruger to give me their likes or dislikes.

dbowling

I had a 77/50 for 6 yrs., killed a bunch of deer with it, very accurate with Hornady xtp 240 gr. w/green sabot. The only problem with the gun is with the #11 nipple they will mis-fire sometimes, if you put the 209 kit on it problem solved. Very nice gun, light, points good and above all accurate. Nothing wrong with these guns except for the #11 nipple. Good deal if gun ws new in the box,209 kit is 40.00 and gun runs around 300 or so. Enjoy it great gun, Dean---P.S- Im trying to get mine back from the guy I traded it to.

herman

I think the ruger is one of the best on the market as far as shooting goes.The triger comes anywhere from 6 to 8 lb pull,but after getting that fixed you have a nice muzzleloader.The one I have,I haven't shot it in a couple of years because I have so many others.It would shoot about any size bullet I wanted to shoot in it.
Mine has the bolt that covers the nipple and I got very little blow -by.It is blue with walnut stock and I paid a lot more for it than you did for the stainless.It is very easy to clean also.
Didn't know that ruger had quit making them though.

graveyard zombie

Thanks for the opinions dbowling & herman. I haven't confirmed them being discontinued by Ruger, yet. Their website shows serial numbers from 1997 through 2004. The last sequence they show is 730-16784 and mine starts with 730-17*** so it may have been one of the last ones made if the seller is correct about them being discontinued. But Ruger said they sometimes makes their serial numbers out of sequence so I'm getting them to give me the history of this gun. The one bad review I found by Randy Wakeman said he "wasn't sorry to see them go" but his article didn't have a date on it so I don't know when he wrote it.

The guy who had this rifle had two others but both were wood stocks / blue, one called an officers model (curved buttstock) and the other straight buttstock. They were cheaper than the one I bought but I was interested more in hunting durability than looks. That officers model looked like a mini-14 only with a fat barrel. I'm waiting for the show to come back in early March and if he has that officers model left, I may just have to take it home with me. I've found a couple of older websites and you are right, they did sell for a lot of money. I've also found a couple of other forums from the 1997 - 2001 era that addressed misfires. Some went to a musket nipple to solve that as they said no 209 conversion was available for the 77/50. However, we know that is not the case now cause I got one with my rifle. The instruction manual was printed in 1997 when the first model came out and one of the diagrams show a gap at the top so you can see the cap showing for safety purposes. However, on my model as well as yours, Herman, I guess that may be a change they made due to early complaints and testing. I guess if I go to that shotgun primer I'll find out about any blowback since I hear they are quite powerful. I only own sidelocks with #11 nipples so this is my first in-line as well as 209 primer. I really do appreciate your opinions

BDHUNTR

I never owned or shot one, but I used to converse with two hunters on another forum who owned Ruger 77/50 muzzleloaders and both of them loved their rifles. When I bought my first inline, I came down to either the Remington 700 MLS or the Ruger 77/50. I bought the Remington, as it was a return to the dealer and I got it basically brand-new for 40% off.

I have heard pros and cons about both the Remington and the Ruger muzzleloaders, but one complaint I have never heard about either one is in the accuracy department. I bet once you find the right powder/bullet combo, it will shoot very accurate. Good luck with it.

Brian

graveyard zombie

Thanks Brian. I also looked at the Remington, too. A dealer three tables away had a used Knight (early Wolverine) and a Remington. The Knight was in poor condition and the Remington was used, too; but it was in very good condition. The main difference I saw between the Remington and the Ruger was that the Remington's bolt went forward to strike the cap while the Ruger's bolt locks in place and an internal striker hits the cap. This Remington was black composite / blued and had a #11 nipple while the Ruger was black composite / stainless, had a #11 nipple, scope rings and a 209 conversion kit with it. The used Remington was $200.00 (after some dickering) while I was able to get the Ruger (new in the box, unfired) for $225.00 (again after some dickering). So I paid $25 more for a new gun in stainless with rings & 209 conversion. I guess I couldn't go wrong with either of them but I believe the Ruger was definitely the better deal after listening to various opinions of them.

herman

If I get time this summer I am going to have to take my ruger out of the safe and shoot it some.Like I said I haven't used it a several years because I have other muzzle loaders mainly been shooting two savages which I have now.My encore I only took it to the range this past summer to check it out in case I wanted to use it some in hunting season,3 shots each time all inside a 1 inch circle.So I cleaned it and put it back in the safe,and played with the 2 savages the rest of the year.
Thinking back on the ruger ,I took 7 deer in a row,all head shots from 20 to 70 yds using a nosler 185 gr bullet and 100 grs of pyro.Shot a cooperheads head clean off at 20 yds ,looked like I had taken a knife and cut it off.This is just an example how mine shot for me after I got the trigger pull down.Would I sell it NO WAY.I hope you enjoy yours as much as I have mine.

top_prop

Sorry to resurect an old thread, but this one came up high in the search results and doesn't really offer a great solution: Badger Ridge's Ruger 77/50 sealed breech 209 converstion: www.badgerridgeind.com

a1smokepole

Hunter makes that kit for the Ruger geat kit.

Gm54-120

Yeah and Top Prop is Badger Ridge or an employee. He has popped up on several forums just to advertise his website.