Just picked up a 1999 Ruger M77 MKII at a steal of a price. All of the blued metal looks 100% but there are some nicks, dings, and gouges in the otherwise nicely grained stock. It wasn't shot much but it was hunted for several seasons.

Now that you have the gist of what I'm working with I need some help selecting some after market rings. I don't have many ruger rifles but the ones I do own I bought new. This one being used the slotted screws in the top of the rings are quite buggered. I am thinking I want some aftermarket rings that are either HEX or TORX.

Let me know what rings you would use on your M77 MKII and why you like them better than the competitors and/or the factory Ruger rings.

Thanks

Leupold..period
lighter,cleaner....

Hex or Torx from Brownells. Why buy new rings when screws will do?

The newer TORX screws eliminate all problems with the Ruger rings.

Until Talley comes out with Ruger rings I've never had any others that were better than the stockers.

Is there a problem with the Ruger factory rings?

JEff

Weight is the only issue and it ain't a big one. No others are as strong nor come hooked to the rifle when you get it.

Rifle's got it with the Leupolds. Use the lows if you can; the highs are, well, very much so. Burris lows work well and are more moderately priced, just not as svelte as the Leupolds. They're also a wee bit higher than the factory mediums. GeoW's suggestion regarding new screws makes good sense; never had any problems with the factory rings. There's more but that's the big chunks.

Best Regards

Nothing wrong with ruger factory rings. When you take into acct. that you don't need bases, that makes up for the weight factor of the factory rings. They are strong as hell. If it were mine, I'd just replace the old slotted screws with the torx type.

Ruger rings suck. Get some Burris or Leupold. The Burris are cheaper...

I ordered torx head screws from the Ruger web sight to replace my slotted screws. Much less money than all new rings.

All my Rugers have Ruger rings. The older ones have slotted screws and they can stay that way until I replace the scopes. The newer ones have Torx and I have some spare Torx in a bag in case I ever need to replace some slots.

Have to agree the Ruger rings and mounting system are rugged. Never had a problem of any kind with them.

Another nod for the Ruger rings with torx screws...

Ruger rings work just fine. Wish they were a little lighter, but not a big deal. All that being said, I can't believe Talley won't build LWs or regular. Another thing that would be sweet is if Ruger sold QD attachment screws for the African's. That would be skookum (to quote the thonged one ) .

The rings are bit heavier than some, but most guys seem to forget that there is no separate base. Some of the other rings are lighter, but when you add in the weight of a separate base plus the weight of the rings used on other rifles the Ruger rings don't seem so heavy.

I'm with dogcatcher223, every set of Ruger rings that I've dealt with had ring-to-ring alignment issues, one set was visibly out of line.

Running a lapping bar in them quickly showed 15 to 20 percent contact with the scope, and misalignment was enough I didn't like the thought of the stress on the tube.

The Leupolds I've used to replace them are much more in line with each other, and a quick lapping job gives them 80+ percent contact.

Ruger rings are heavy, poorly cast, and good at marking up scopes.

I agree, the Leupold rings are very nice. Still not sure why Ruger casts their rings, instead of machining them.

2 minutes with a lapping bar works wonders. I've had to lap Leupolds as well. They are only scope rings. We ain't talkin' quantum physics here.

I have used a couple different setups, but if they are properly fitted the Ruger rings are exceedingly strong. I've had excellent repeatability using a set as detachable upon one rifle. I've also used Leupold and Burris. I want no part of another pair of Burris rings, but the Leupolds are a very good option. They are lighter and trimmer than the Ruger rings. Though they may not be as strong, I've not had any issues with them.

If you are disturbed by the screws appearance I recommend you buy a new set of Torx screws. At $3 per set it will make them look like new...

LINK

X2 on the repeatability with Ruger rings. I've tig welded some levers onto the nuts and also just use a coin and every set I've checked has been 100% repeatable after lapping.

I've worked a couple of examples that took far more than two minutes, and netted less than 50% contact. All of the Leupolds I've installed took minimal lapping to get to 80+% contact, and the scopes I've removed from those rings were unmarked.

The Ruger rings can be made to work, but I'd rather replace them with Leupolds at the first chance. I've not used the Burris, so I can't comment on them.

Who do you guys recommend buying the Leupold rings from? Midwayusa? brownells?

I prefer the burris rings. They don't have any large headed screws hanging out. Both sides tighten so they are each windage adjustable and they look better than anything else I've used or seen. The clamping part is flush with the rest of the ring body when tight. Midway.

Horseman,

Thanks! I'll look into them and midway!

I've seen Ruger rings so bad, that after you lapped them enough to get 80%, the top is too loose from the bottom to actually hold the scope. You would then need to mill the flanges thinner just to get it tight. Junk.

Anybody but Leupold, they want two arms and a leg for them. The last ones I bought went 50 to 60 bucks locally. I put them on my SuperRedhawk.

Here ya go:

+1, too many guys making a big deal out of nothing. I've used ruger rings for a long time and they work, plain and simple and I haven't had them "mark" up my scopes any worse than any other rings I've used.

I wished I had some pictures of the misalignment between the rings on some of the Rugers I've had through here. I've mounted more than a few, so I guess I've ample opportunity to see bad ones.

If an installation is done correctly, you won't have "any" marks on a scope, and I've noticed a marked improvement in the POI tracking scope adjustments once any tube stress is eliminated. That scope in the picture of my RedHawk has been on several pistols, and doesn't have the first ring mark.

But, I always seem to be able to get that 10 or so per cent that will cause an issue.

What do you guys know about the Redfield mounts?
I need to pick up some 30mm rings for my best friends Ruger. For $40 some bucks I was thinking of getting him some of these rings.
What ya'll think?

Kique

I get a good [bleep] laugh at guys pokin' fun at OEM Ruger when you compare them to the "Bomb Proof Steel" picatinny mounted on a couple pairs of screws...

I've swapped scopes from one rifle to another in OEM Ruger and been within MOA. More than a couple times done it from LA to SA or SA to LA and scooted the front ring...

Even a damn fool could lap them, and a damn fool could run the flats across a stone if they were loosey goosey after lapping, but in over two dozen rifles and at least that many sets of rings, I've never seen it.

I'm not poking fun at them, I've just never seen a set of OEM that aligned nearly as well as what I like. I do like the Ruger system, just not their rings.

A couple of sets I would consider junk.

Karnis - have a similar rig on my 9.3X62mm African as yours and I agree with you... a Ruger QR setup would be icing on the cake. Regards, Homesteader.

Just read a few reviews on the leupold rings for Ruger on Midway. They did not get very good reviews, at least the high ones didn't.

I have one of those NECG peep sights for the Rugers and wouldn't mind if someone made QR nuts for the rugers.

I In the field I can mount/unmount the rings as they are with the back of my knife, but QR levers would be cool.

noKnees,

Here's warne QR rings for Ruger from Midway but they didn't seem to get a good review.

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewproduct/?productnumber=869380&cm_vc=S016

Anybody use Conetrols on a Ruger?

Those Warnes suck nuts imo. Got several to try out and ditched them. Weld or braze a lever onto the factory nuts for quick detachment or simply use a coin. Return to POI every time I've tried. Warnes did not reliably. I've never seen any more misalignment with Ruger rings than any others I've use. DNZ one piece are the only mounts I've had that don't achieve any benefit from lapping.

Guess I will have to take a pic of the bag of junk Ruger rings I have laying around somewhere. I guess since they are so nice, I should be able to sell them here for a premium.

Yeah, they are so great that no other rifle maker has tried to imitate their design. Hell, nobody else has even bother to try and cast a set of rings other than Ruger. They machine them isntead. And our military uses picatinny rails...

i just started back with my M77, the burris ruger-weaver rail, and Zee rings is a great match. all steel, and seems to be good quality.

Just mounted my Leupold FXIII 6x42mm scope using Burris's medium rings.

It looks like I could have gone with the low rings. Reason I didn't is because reviewer on Midwayusa website said that Burris' low scope didn't have enough clearance with his Lepupould VX II 40mm scope.

Debating about whether to order a set of the Burris low rings.

Now I got two sets of Ruger rings to sell off

Burris lows are a wee bit taller than the factory mediums; can't see why they wouldn't work with a 6X42. Before you haul off and buy new Burris lows shoot me a pm: I have two sets, one slightly used for two seasons (call them 98%) and one new in the blister pack. Burris item number is 420102, so you can confirm if these are what you're looking for. HTH.

Best Regards