Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles What's keeping the RAR from replacing the 77?

So if they blue it or add a good hunk of walnut and a more solid magazine??

That's truly an interesting question. If you look at Winchester (XPR), Ruger (American), Savage (Axis/Stevens) and Remington (783), they'll all are budget offerings. All of these offering seems to borrow traits from one another with the Savage Stevens starting the trend. The 'fire seems to like to tinker with the cheaper models (including me) even though we have more expensive (is it better?) stuff to play with.

What makes the question even more interesting is that it seems like all of these budget offerings shoot excellent to a point where they might shoot better than their more expensive siblings.

With that said, I think we are seeing a trend where hunters/shooters want performance above costs and these models will become the new norm for all manufacturers as they are modular and cheap to produce.

America has become a 'disposable' society. And the gunmakers are giving out what's wanted by their public.

I picked up a RAR a while ago and asked myself what it would take to put it in a wood stock with a blind mag.

I don't know what that has to do with fooferall, but that was my first thought.

Who'll be the first, Manners or McMillan, to start making a RAR stock?

I shot both the RAR and hawk eye on subsequent days on the same caliber similar glass and green box ammo... The RAR was more accurate, lighter, easier to load.

I fully expect to see an upgraded version of the American in the near future. I don't have any inside knowledge -- it's just a guess.

It makes perfect sense to me. The American is a solid platform.

I think the next iteration will likely be something akin to the ranch on 308, 338 and...dare I suggest...358win.

Yup. I'm just waiting to see which one is the first to switch manufacturing to China. Once that starts all of them will follow suit quickly.

Isn't the Ruger Precision Rifle an upgraded version of the RAR?

The market is in budget, high end. or black guns. Went to the local Scheels store the other day. They have maybe dozen new rifles in the majors' flagship rifles (maybe three R77s, three W70, handful of R700). All other guns were Tikka, RAR,Axis, etc. They actually have more new Kimbers and Coopers than they do 77s, 70s, and 700s combined. Big cabinet of ARs. Where the market goes, the merchants will follow.

Kaiser Norton

I don't care for them, as a class, myself, but the concept makes sense for a lot of people, for multiple reasons. Might buy one myself one day.

Well...I've never owned a 7#, 16"Bbl, center fire that would shoot like the little ranch does. Even with $10 rings and a cheap Nikon.
I'd suspect a quality set of rings and scope, better brass than remanufactured LC, and some attention to loading and it could really be a half inch gun.
I see the STD 308 for less than 300 bucks in hand.
That's something that Remington and Winchester and browning have yet to pull off successfully.
And certainly something that those makers will need to address if they continue to attempt to battle ruger in the entry level market.
I doubt savage is very happy about it either.

Yup.

The beginning of the "end" was when they sold you something...then charged extra for the warranty.

They were telling us.."It's gonna break".

When the Remington 700 came out it was considered a cheap disposable rifle too because of all of the corners cut in manufacturing. Same thing said about the 870, Savage 110 series, Glocks, post 64 Winchesters, and Mossberg 500's. They all seem to work and have proven to last. I suspect the RAR will too.

Actually the 721/722 Remington were considered the end of civilization as we know it by some. Here's a quote from the the 1958 issue of Gun Digest by then well-known writer Bob Wallack: “The motto at Remington these days…is ‘all for production,’ so their rifles are designed for ease of manufacture and to sell at a certain price. Every part that can possibly be banged out on a punch press is banged out on a punch press, much to the sorrow of any real gun bug. Such methods do not affect the handling qualities or functioning of a rifle, certainly, but neither do they add up to a gun that a guy’d want to own with pride.”

Before the 721/722 was the Savage 23, and a bunch of other "cheap" rifles that often are now considered classics. Just look at the price a "nice" 722 in .257 Roberts or a 721 in .300 H&H brings these days.

American mass manufacturing has always been aimed at providing the average customer a functional product at a good price. In fact that's one of the basic principles of capitalism. And now we're bitching about it.

It all went into the shieter in 1964.......

Probably.

A certain proportion of shooters has always considered guns as tools, with no interest in fine mechanisms, pretty wood, and attractive lines. Function is everything, and low-cost functionality a great virtue. They're not wrong, for their use. Some of us just like something a little nicer. A 77, or its equivalent in other brands is roughly two or three times the price of a RAR. To me, it's worth it. For someone wanting to try out a bunch of different cartridges, or who wants to just shoot, a reliable, accurate rifle for $300 is a wonderful bargain and a good idea. It takes the place for many of the used rifle, with its potential problems, and also possibly the change-a-barrel guns like the Encore.

The question is, will the manufacture of nicer stuff be sustainable for ordinary gunmakers or will it fall to the semi-custom and high-end companies and the Europeans?

Fu ck the magazine. I don't mind hinged floor plates. Don't really care for push feeds, but the RAR isn't bad in that regard.

I have both, and both work. The RAR .308 is a great first 'grownup gun' for my 15yr old, or a decent gun for anyone....for any purpose. My 77 in 7x57 is more desirable and classy, for sure. Bar chick or serority chick: both will get the job done, just depends on which you'd rather leave the lights on for.