Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?

Print Thread

Hop To

Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye? duckster #10384708 09/04/15
Joined: Feb 2001 Posts: 7,980 Eagle River Alaska K kk alaska Campfire Outfitter
kk alaska Campfire Outfitter K Joined: Feb 2001 Posts: 7,980 Eagle River Alaska	Originally Posted by duckster Do the Hawkeyes shoot appreciably better than the RAR? No on the ones I have been around, but the Hawkeye just feels solid and fit and finish are nicer. Of the 2 prefer the Hawkeye. But very nice to have more options on LH rifles! kk alaska Alaska 7 months of winter then 5 months of tourists

GB1

Entire Thread
Title	Posted By	Posted
Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	old_willys	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	TheBlueMountainApe	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	noKnees	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	TheBlueMountainApe	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	shawlerbrook	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	Jim in Idaho	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	Jim in Idaho	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	prairie_goat	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	pointer	09/02/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	prairie_goat	09/02/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	Mule Deer	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	old_willys	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	AMRA	09/02/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	StudDuck	09/02/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	Canazes9	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	shortactionsmoker	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	prairie_goat	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	Mule Deer	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	prairie_goat	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	EdM	09/02/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	Pappy348	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	Pappy348	09/01/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	EZEARL	09/02/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	Pappy348	09/02/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	pointer	09/02/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	Steve Redgwell	09/02/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	Pappy348	09/03/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	DakotaDeer	09/03/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	duckster	09/04/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	kk alaska	09/04/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	Mule Deer	09/04/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	Elkhunter49	09/04/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	Klikitarik	09/04/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	Steve Redgwell	09/04/15
Re: Why couldn't Ruger just build a lighter weight Hawkeye?	Canazes9	09/04/15

Moderated by RickBin

Link Copied to Clipboard

AX24

250 members (338rcm, 10gaugemag, 160user, 12344mag, 1Longbow, 10Glocks, 21 invisible), 1,598 guests, and 976 robots.

Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod

May
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
			1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30	31

Forum Statistics

Forums81

Topics1,193,455

Posts18,507,993

Members74,002

Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023

Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.087s Queries: 17 (0.005s) Memory: 0.8632 MB (Peak: 0.8847 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-05-13 10:51:24 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS