ORIGINAL: eldeguello

There are more differences than just different safeties. Despite having a Mauser-like extractor, the tang-safety Model 77's are "push feed" in which the extractor does NOT grip the cartridge until the bolt is closed. Consequently, if you "short-stroke" one, you will end up with two cartridges trying to get into the chamber at the same time, which is a real jam that is aslow, PITA to clear. The Mark II's are genuine controlled-round feed rifles. This type of a jam can't happen with one of the Mk II's. However, such considerations are only of real concern in a dangerous-game rifle.

I don't think you can easily retro-fit a Mark II Ruger 3-position trigger & safety (they go together) onto the older tang safety model. However, I personally prefer the a safety that sits on the top of the tang, where it SHOULD BE! There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with the older, tang-safety Model 77's. As a matter of fact, the ones made in the later 1960's and early 1970's seem to have better classic stock lines than some of the later ones, which more often closelyresemble clubs!

ALL Ruger Model 77's have proven to be VERY TOUGH and RELIABLE rifles that do well in horrible environments, like coastal Alaska or extreme cold.

What's the difference between the 3-position safety on the Ruger and the one on the Winchester?
And thanks to all who answered

ORIGINAL: stalkingbear

Eldegullo-while I agree with you on dangerous game rifles,controlled feed rifles are overhyped on regular rifles for deer/elk/etc. I've NEVER seen anybody short stroke a rifle in the field OR on the range. I don't consider push feed to be of any disadvantage on most rifles.