The Ruger ring system is an absolutely great design for a hunting rifle, returning to zero easily when switching scopes; and losing zero seldom. I don't care if a tapered ring/base design isn't available, as there are plenty of scopes made with more than enough travel to get a person out further than they have any business shooting at big game anyway.
The angled front screw works well; heck I have had a bunch of Rugers that needed no bedding.
Ruger makes the 77/22 to go along with the MK II/Hawkeye as a trainer rifle. A small bolt face model is also readily available, for a 223 companion to one's "big game" rifle.
The Ruger is a great hunting rifle design. Pre 64s are nice, but I'll take a Ruger every day.
Don't think anyone is disputing that Ruger is not a nice rifle, purpose of the thread to point how stupid it is to compare a rifle built in 1948 with current production . I don't see the purpose of the thread other then to diminish 1948 70's and sell a bunch of new Rugers. Oh wait it is a useless gun magazine
