I bought a Ruger M77 .243Win in the late 1960s. That rifle has taken uncounted numbers of groundhogs, prairie dogs, fox and half a dozen deer and it still will groups under 1" at 100yds, from the bench.
The only Ruger that I have owned that did not group well was a No.1 in 7mmRemMag. That model had some issue with how the forestock was mounted. I did not get to the bottom of that problem and just sold the rifle.

I bought a new Ruger M77 MkII in 2001, .30-06. I've taken game with it, but it's accuracy is terribly inconsistent. I've tried floating the barrel (disaster), then bedding the barrel channel (better), trigger job, copper fouling removal, endless experiments with ALL aspects of handloads and it just won't love me back. Honest to goodness, last week at the range I tried some different loads out. I shot two consecutive five shot groups using identical components, charge weights, seating depths, etc. The first group was 3.5", the second was 7/8 of an inch. These two sets of five were in the middle of several other sets, so it had nothing to do with cold barrel, hot barrel, etc. I took the targets to my gunsmiths and they couldn't figure it out. I had sets stringing vertically, then other sets stringing horizontally, then sets travelling in huge circles, all from the same trip to the range.

For comparison, I also showed them targets from my new CZ550 in 6.5x55, shot at the same time. All were nice 5 shot groups at or under one inch at 100yds, so I KNOW it isn't the nut on the trigger.

This darned Ruger drove me so crazy that I bought a Remington 700 BDL in .30-06 to hunt with; the Ruger is now my science project. I'm gonna find out why the darned thing won't shoot no matter HOW many years I spend at it.

Would I buy another Ruger? Maybe... but I'd sure rather have a CZ550, Winchester Model 70 Classic or a Remington 700 instead.

Just one man's experience with just one Ruger rifle...

just picked up a new m77 stainless in 7mm wsm yesterday--shot a box of winchester power points 150s just to break it in--they were the cheapest--on the last 10 shots cut 3 holes at a hundred yds after lining in and cleaning repeatedly. Today went back to the range--swiched to 160 gr federal accubond--5 out first six shots cut the hole--couldn't believe it--had to adjust the scope less than 1 inch--after that box, had it dialed in perfectly 1 inch high at 100 with 3 shots cuttin each other--never had a rifle shoot this good--I'm just a hunter that likes to shoot as opposed to a shooter that likes to hunt.

I firmly believe that "Urban Legends" can begin simply by someone who cannot shoot, bad mouthing a certain model, brand of rifle or cartridge. I have seen a ton of Ruger rifles in the field and have never heard complaints from real rifleman stating that a Ruger that they own will not group well.

Sorry to disagree with you Steven, but I do not believe that Ruger accuracy is all simply an urban legend. I am quite confident that there are Rugers out there that shoot very well indeed. Mine is simply not one of those. A close friend also has two Rugers; one won't group better than 2 inches, and one seems to be much better, although it is still fairly new and he's had much less chance to work with it. Two of the guides I have hunted with say they've seen many Rugers that deliver less than consistent accuracy and they would not have one.

I've got several other rifles that I've been able to work up handloads that consistently group at just about an inch at 100 yards. Not so my Ruger. I save all of my targets, keep accurate reloading records, and when working up a load I shoot from a benchrest, so I am quite certain that the problem is with the rifle and not my shooting. I'm not sure what you would consider to be a "real" rifleman. I would never try to sell myself as an expert competition marksman, but I certainly shoot enough to be more competent than the average guy at the rifle range, so I am absoloutely confident that I am able to tell an accurate rifle from an inaccurate rifle.

Clearly it would not be reasonable for me to conclude that because my one Ruger rifle has problems, and one of my buddy's two Rugers is not a tack driver, that ALL Rugers are poor shooters. There are far too many other shooters who are fortunate to have Rugers that shoot well for this to be true. However, I can tell you that I've seen and heard many more reports from guys who've got Rugers that are dogs than I have from other manufacturers, and my own experience with my CZ, Winchester and Remington rifles has been that they shoot tight groups under the same conditions that my Ruger throws patterns. I believe that where there is smoke there is fire, and I have seen enough, read enough and heard enough first hand experiences to convince me that you are more likely to get an accurate rifle out of the box if you buy a Remington, CZ, Winchester or Savage than you are a Ruger. My experiences have born this out.

I've had at least a dozen of them in calibers ranging from 7x57 to 338 win mag. Both tang and MKII models and they all were very consistent shooters. They easily outshot Winchesters of any persuasion with no mods although not in Remington.Browning or Sako levels. Trigger pales in comparism to a remington/winchester/sako trigger but if installing a Timney they can be pretty good.

RC Try a different manufacturer when choosing bullets. Some firearms just don't like certain loads. I have a Ruger Blackhawk in 44 mag. I purchased Remington 240 grain bullets that were very very accurate. A local gun shop had a sale on Peter's bullets in 240 grain. My revolver went from tight groups to spraying all over the target. I opened the box of Remington's and I was back to punching holes. Pick the bullet type you need for your hunting situation and try a few assorted boxes of ammo. I think you will find one that you rifle loves.

Good Hunting....

I, in no way, meant to infer that jmfa is not a "real rifleman" simply because he claims to have a Ruger that will not group. My point was, that the evidence against Rugers is anecdotal and until I see some credible study showing that Rugers, on average, exhibit less accuracy then other mass produced rifles, I will have to believe that the negative reports may be based, in part on the fact that before his dying, Bill Ruger had built up a bit of rep of "selling out" to the anti gun crowd. Again, while I hear reports of rifles that will not group, those reports seem to cut across all strata of costs and brand names. In my experience, having had a dealer FFL for over 20 years and trading in firearms, I have seen no evidence that Ruger rifles produce less, in the way of accuracy, then do any of the other mass produced rifles. My opinion is not based on my loyalty to Ruger, or in the fact that I own Ruger rifles. I own and regularly fire many rifles. Only one of these is the Ruger M77 in .243Win, that was purchased new in the late 1960s.

I own a M77 and know several others who do as well. All the Ruger rifles I have been around shoot well. Some may be picky about the type of loads they like but the same can be said about any rifle.




jmfa1957

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?