Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Ruger 77/357

At the range yesterday the old fellow next to me had one that caught my interest.
I had never seen one before but it sure seemed like a neat little package. Checking his targets (at 200 believe it or not) with my spotting scope it was surprisingly accurate too.
From talking to him I learned that they're out of production but from looking at Gun Broker it appears there's still a few around if you want to pony up $800-$900.
I don't plan to rush out and buy one but it sure seems like it would make for a nice little truck/woods bumming rig.

Any body have one?

I picked up one in 44 Mag and it's been a hoot to shoot. Topped with a Redfield Revolution 2-7x Accu-range scope, it will make a great brush gun....

Had a 77/357. Topped it off with NECG Ruger Peep sight and a fiber optic from blade. Mostly shot .38 special cast lead loads for fun. Pretty handy set up. Ended up giving it to the oldest daughter during one of my purges. The 77/44's look like they would be fun as well...

I have an old JM Marlin 1894 with a Williams peep and FO front blade chambered in 44Mag.....it's pretty sweet but a bolt action chambered in a revolver cartrige sounds like it would be just as handy.
Especially one built with the durability Ruger is known for.

A 77/357 or 77/44 for $650 or less is a good price. Last MSRP was $1000

Nope. I've got 2 of them. Great guns. bought the first one for my son's first dee rifle. He killed a little spike buck last year (Pics on kids at the campfire section). Shot it at 40 yards with 125 gr JSP. Left a quarter sized exit hole. Had to have me one. Just need to mount my scope and go for it.

Maybe 8 or 10 years ago when I picked mine up. I "think" it was new when I picked it up. It came with box, etc. Seem to recall having approx $700 to $750 in it with the NECG aperture and FO front blade.

The price was always the negative to me.I looked into them a few years back but decided I would much rather add a little more money and buy a Montana which would be in a better hunting caliber,lighter ,and as or more accurate.

They are a blast. A lot of fun to send 38's through. Kids love it as well. Handy if you want to do the matching revolver to rifle thing as well.

When Ruger made the cancellation announcement, they said they were "temporarily dropping" that line.

I figured they would somehow adapt the American line to handle the 357, 44, and possibly more. But, nope, no word.

Closest they came is the 450 Bushmaster. No thanks

While I agree that they cost about twice what I'd pay for one compering them to a center fire Kimber is apples to oranges.
The only thing those two rifles have in common is the fact that they're both rifles.
I can see where they'd be tons of fun to shoot and quite useful in several hunting scenarios.
I know the old boy at the range was sure proud of his...

I wouldn't give mine up for 2 Montanas. Its a boatload of fun to shoot and will make a great deer rifle for most places I hunt. Keep your shots to 100 yards or less and it will do the job. Might even got to 150, but that would be stretching it a bit. Great way to punch paper and will use it on coyotes soon.

I guess I can't see how it is in any way better than a Montana,unless you just want to shoot a 357.

Please point to where I said it was "better" than a Montana....

Not you Sir.I was responding to the post above mine that said he wouldn't trade 2 Kimbers for his Ruger. I don't know why it linked my post to yours and I didn't mean it in a challenging way.When I was looking at them,I was looking for a light weight deer rifle for my daughter and I just saw it too expensive compared to the Kimber,which looked like a better deer rifle to me.

I don't have a Ruger but I gots a Browning Low Wall in .357. I've killed three pronghorns with it. The longest shot was just over 250 yards at a doe that had been gut shot by another hunter. I used a 180 gr SSP and a heavy load of H110. She turned just as I fired and the bullet caught her just above the "elbow" on the front shoulder and did a lot of damage. She flopped out of sight into the creek bed. I reloaded with a 215gr gas check and ran up to the creek bank. She was trying to climb out the other side and I shot her thru the neck. The big lead bullet broke her neck and just hammered her into the ground.

One other doe was about 150-160 yards walking broad side. A 158gr XTP hit her right behind the shoulder - bang - flop.

I currently have stainless/synthetic Ruger 77/357 and 77/44 rifles. The 77/357 is quite accurate, producing 2" groups or less at 100 yards. I have a NECG Ghost Ring peep rear sight and a large ivory bead front sight on it, and also have a 4x scope mounted in the rings that I can switch for the peep if I wish.

The 77/357 feeds both .357's and .38 Specials just fine, and is a hoot to shoot with the Specials. They both shoot to the same POI in my rifle up to 50 yards. It's a fun plinker. A friend's 10-year old son killed his first deer with it and it worked splendidly.

The 77/44 is the second one I have owned. The first was wildly inaccurate with all the ammo I tried in it, throwing its shots into about 9 MOA.

When they announced the discontinuance of the 77/xx series, and after reading positive reviews of the newer production 77/44's, I bought one. All I can say is that it does shoot better than my first one...it is good for about 7MOA. It is completely useless as a hunting rifle beyond 50 yards and is shaky at that range.

It is going back to Ruger to see if they can do anything for it. I just got a new Number 1 single shot in .44 Magnum and I hope it does better than the 77/44.

That's a shame about the 77/44's.....My Marlin 44 with a Williams peep and fiber optic front blade shoots Winchester white box into 1" at 50yrds.
I shoot my meat deer from my deck with it.

The 77/357 I posted about was shooting 2"-3" groups at 200. Pretty accurate for a handgun cartridge as far as I'm concerned.

I shot a 77/44 with an integral supressor the other day. Talk about fun. I started checking prices after that.

If I could find either at a reasonable price, It would be a lot of fun.

2"-3" at 200 yards out of either would be very good in my opinion.

That's what I thought when I sneaked a peek at his target with my spotting scope.

Course he had a good scope and had obviously spent some time working up a load but still........