looking on info on the ruger compacts..

never owned a ruger before. the action n the stainless laminated stock was kinda rough due to the bolt rubbing against the reciever. tried 4 diiferant types. 308win,7mm-08rem,243win,and 260rem. both seemed the same.
was looking at one in 260rem but with the 16" barrel on it would it affect accuracy and maybe heat up due to the small light barrel?

Quilly, These Ruger' s are great rifles. I haven' t had any dealing with the Compacts though.The full size M-77' s are good shooting rifles.Triggers are generally a little heavy.I wouldn' t worry about the short barrel and heating up. Remember it' s a BA not a full auto.You' re not going to put hundreds of rounds a minute through it.Ruger along with other companies test these guns.If the 16" bbl wasn' t suited to that cartridge I' m sure they would have changed the bbl length. You' ve dealted with enough different guns to know they all shoot different. I think you would be satisfied with a Ruger.
Ruger Redhawk

Quilly, Last months Rifle or Handloader magazine had an article on them and they gave them very good reviews. I trust their opinion over that of other magazines. i have handled them and they point and balance extremely well and they appear to be well built and are extremely popular. The drawback I see is the short barrel and they mention that in the article it creates a bit of muzzle blast.. But for shooting a couple of times a year its no big deal IMHO.

Keep an eye on the length of pull. The stock on my son' s 223 compact is too short for me to shoot comfortably. Like all Rugers, the action is not the smoothest and the trigger pull is heavy but they are good rifles.

I resisted buying Rugers for years because I hated the feel of the action.
I finally bought one because the price was so good.
Now it is one of my favorite rifles, very accurate after I free floated the barrel. The action works fine with consistent performance.

The short barrel on the compact will decrease your velocity but it will not heat up any more than a longer barrel would.

I went to a local dealer and looked at them. I also looked at the model seven Remington. The Ruger would not be my first choice. The Remington had better fit and finish. I have the Ruger M77 and it is a good shooting rifle but as far as the compacts go I would have to buy the Remington.

The short barrel will reduce velocity, improve the muzzle blast!!, BOOOOM!!!, but will NOT reduce accuracy nor heat up any faster than a longer tube!!

I bought a new ruger compact in the 7mm-08 last year and I love it. It' s a great little shooter. I bought in the same as you are looking at, laminate stock and SS bbl. I think you' d like it.

They just seem so small to me. A 16 1/2" barrel is going to produce some underwhelming velocities.

To me the Ruger M77 is a " compromise" rifle. It doesn' t shoot as good as a Remington, Savage, Tikka, Sako, Steyr, or Browning and it' s not as nice of an action as a CZ 550 or Winchester M70. The fit and finish are better than average and they look pretty nice. The triggers are heavy and they have to be modified by a gunsmith or replaced to improve (they are not adjustable). I suppose I would just say they are an all around " average" rifle - nothing special.

The three I bought were horribly inaccurate and Ruger wouldn' t do anything about it either. I' ve shot many of them and some were OK, but most were about 1.5" + groupers. Plenty good enough for hunting, but my .45-70 and .444 Marlin shoot that good

Quilly the ruger compact is a good rifle for women/children but that is what it was designed for . Its a bit small for the average sized shooter . The short barrel won' t effect the accuracy and you wouldn' t shoot it fast enough to ever heat it up .One of the kids that shots here has one in 7mm/08 and its a good little gun but to small for me to shoot comfortable .