Went to the range today with Zach, my soon-to-be son-in-law. We started at the 100/200 yard range zeroing a new scope on the Ruger 22-250 and rezeroing the.30-30 for my 170g hunting loads (its been shooting 130g plinkers all summer).

After a while we backed off to 300 yards and proceeded to shoot clay pigeons. Zach decided it was too easy with the Ruger VT .22-250 and Ruger .257 Roberts so we decided to do something I had never done before � back off to 500 yards.

I gave the steel gongs a whack with the Ruger .300 Win Mag, then pulled out the Ruger .22-250. The scope I had just installed and zeroed was a Simmons 44Mag with a mil-dot reticule. I used the first dot below center and missed the pigeon by a couple inches. A slight adjustment so that the dot covered only half the pigeon did the trick Zach took a turn and within 2 shots had it figured out as well. 1 pigeon each at 500. Next I pulled out my sporter-weight Ruger .257 Roberts. A couple of shots and I had another pigeon. Same with Zach. 2 each.

OK, had to show him up, as he isn�t a regular shooter � hadn�t shot in 4 years in fact. We backed off to 600 yards. I took the Ruger .300 Win Mag and used the Burris Ballistic Plex reticle, trying for a steel gong. Missed high, just over the top. No surprise since I had never fired at that range before. Made a slight adjustment and whacked the steel. So did Zach.

All this talk in some threads about how hard it is to hit anything at long range, how expensive your equipment has to be, and how much trigger time it takes. And Zach does it with rifle he has never seen before, after 4 years of not shooting. Using crappy Ruger rifles to boot!

I think I�m going to like this guy!

You might not like him very much if he keeps out shooting you with your own rifles. ha!ha!ha! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

They're ugly too... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Don

You ought to do that when there are a bunch of aftermarket barreled 700's around. I really burns their shorts when you match or out do their tricked out toys with a $400 Ruger. I love my Rugers. If I were to be dumped in the wilderness with one rifle to live out my days it would be a stainless Ruger.

I had a 77 in 7x57 once, it didn't shoot worth spit either...(grins)

That's why Ruger and Weatherby DOMINATE the various BR disciplines,Sillywet,Highpower,Palma,Tactical and F-Class events.

Then again?!!?......................

Imagine what you could have done if it had been a T3!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Now let's ask how many Savage rifles are in the BR disciplines....

how big are the steel gongs?

Most Rugers can be made to shoot with some tinkering. I live an hour from the range so it's hard to keep messing around with them. I can buy a Remimgton 700 and a box of cheap Remington ammo at Walmart that will shoot 1/2" groups at 100 yards right out of the box. The choice is pretty easy for me.

They range from 8" to 24". We were shooting the small gong until we went to the 600-yard line. There we shot the 24" gong because the paint was fresh and it was easy to see where the bullets impacted. After the first miss and the subsequent POA adjustment, the two shots we fired hit roughly between 10 and 11 o'clock about 3-4" from center, only a couple inches apart.

I thought this same thing until I bought a Ruger in 300 SAUM. It shoots under .75 MOA with 165 grain Hornady Interbonds. I was very pleased and surprised after hearing all of the comments about how you have to tinker with Rugers to get them to shoot.

I now have bought a Ruger UL in 257 Bob for my son this year for deer season so we will see how this one shoots once it gets here tomorrow.

Can match and better that from the Howa 1500 out-of-the-box. Both Remington 700 and Howa 1500 are by far the most accurate rifles using any commercial ammo.

I laugh when I hear most hack on Japanese products. Last time I looked, they make and own the best of just about everything involving engineered products.

Gotta say that the lines of the 77 stock are as good as it gets.
Bought me my first 77 this last week. As soon as I get the trigger parts I ordered from Brownell's, do a trigger "fix", mount scope, shoot groups, I'll let you know.. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Ruger 77 stock design=Excellent!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Smooth action too...
Bad trigger... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Don

I have a Ruger 77 MKII in .338 mag, the last trip to the range I shot and put one bullet almost through the same hole. So if you say Ruger rifles can't shoot, it's just you....

Unless you have unbiased hard evidence that I'm unaware of, such a statement is both unfounded and completely unsupportable.

No, its pretty much my biased opinion. But I'll stick to it.

HOLY S#$T ---- No offense to either party but that has to be the first time someone has actually admitted to being biased like that and said so right away......

I completely agree, I'm biased toward Remingtons. Years of watching them shoot fantastic groups right out of the box made me this way.

I've never cussed a Ruger boltgun,have had many and think highly of the notion.

Have shot them as issued,slightly massaged and rebarreled/restocked.

Same goes Weatherbys.

The 700 will repeatedly dazzle,far more easily and with less
exdpense.........................

I own/have owned a [bleep] of different makes of rifles and while I may think some are better than others, I still don't have one particular make that I would claim to absolutely be the most accurate out of the box rifle with factory loads. I've simply seen to many good, and some not so good specimens from too many different makers. Sometimes I wonder whether or not guys that make such claims have simply not even tried the other brands, or have shot 1 bad rifle and decided that brand sucks. I have at least 1 rifle from Remington, Winchester, Savage , Ruger, Sako, and Weatherby that will shoot as good as it gets. I've also laid eyes upon ones that would not---2MG

Can't know,who does/thinks what,or for which reason(s).

I've got them all,shot them all and have reached numerous conclusions that repeatedly bear the same fruit.

I'm slow to weigh a quantity of one,for most dissertations.....................

I hear ya, you weren't one of the uneducated posers in question...I have my opinions also, but hate saying 1 particular brand is absolutely the best, then I have to listen to some guy tell me he bought one ONCE and it didn't shoot. On a different note, do you find the Vanguards generally out-shoot the higher priced, "real" Weatherby's?---2MG

2-lugs trump 9.

The Vanguard has it all over the '5 .........................

My sentiments exactly. I do have a German made(Sauer) that's pretty damn accurate though, but it kicks somethin' fierce---2MG

Hmm..., lets see, Wby Vanguard, thats a Howa 1500 barreled action. Please educate me.

Howa makes it's 2-lugger under numerous names. S&W 1500,Howa,Weatherby,etc.

Old news....................

Heck, don't forget Mossberg. Or is that the etc? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Never seen a Mossberg by Howa,but admittedly haven't looked very hard.............................

Laffin' here....

Ruger barrels have come a long way. I have stock .308 that will shoot about 1 to 1.5 inch at 100 with any ammo just to different points of aim. She will shoot 1" at 200 with handloads. I have a Rem Ti that will shoot 1" or a little better with Just about any ammo, but less than an 1" with handloads. I have a Model 70 that will shoot about 1" or better with just about any ammo, but less that 1" with handloads. I don't own any Howas or weatherbys, but I imagine if you haven't bought the lemon that everybody makes now and then they will shoot about an 1" with any ammo and better with handloads.

Mossbergs are made in the USA. The Howa is an excellent rifle and is made in Japan.

ruger, like Steyr and CZ have shown that cold hammer forging is a superior prosses.

My four CZ's flat shoot..

Don

Rugers are machined pot metal. They only use hammer forging on the 10-22 bull barrels.

Not sure where that came from, but at a minimum it's inaccurate. All of their barrels are hammer forged.

Also not sure it's accurate to say that hammer forged barrels are superior, but they are certainly good barrels.

mtnman1 - +1 My four Ruger's shoot very well and the trigger and saftey lever have never broken off like they have on my last Remington's. CEJ...

Swampman1 -

Your first statement, about Rugers being made of pot metal, is as patently false as your second that only the 10/22�s get hammer-forged barrels.

Ruger has been an industry leader in the use of high-quality cast steel parts. Ruger receivers are known for their strength, as are Ruger revolvers, which use cast frames. The Ruger .454 and .480 revolvers use a special very-high tensile strength stainless � hardly what you can call �pot metal�. Ruger not only casts parts for themselves, they cast parts for many other companies and industries and are a highly respected vendor of such parts.

As to the barrels, all Ruger barrels are hammer forged using Ruger�s own equipment.

Howa's were also imported by Ithaca and Interarms with the 1500 moniker. How many rifles of "Brand X" that shoot poorly could be atttributed to operator error?

The current Mossberg ATR may be made in America, I don't know and don't care. The bolt actions they used to sell were Howas with Mossbergs name on them. I believe they were the 1500 and 1700.

What exactly do you need educating on here. It does not seem to be any secret that everyone posting on this thread knows that Howa makes the Vanguards. Nor did anyone say that they didn't shoot <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />---2MG

the vanguards sun moas are $700 and shoot under .75" or wong get the "sub-MOA" designation.
all ruger BBLs are CHF and its superior in that it is consistant and not prone to worn buttons. how often do you hear of steyrs, CZ, and rugers not shooting well because of the BBL?

Don't wanna get in a pissin' match, but I still don't think that makes it superior as the cost of a hammer forge to make the barrels will offset a ton of worn buttons, and I haven't seen many bench matches bein' won with hf barrels. No question that they're good, but not sure they're superior...

once the machine is paid for the prosses is less expensive as it is automated. 4 men make all the rifle BBLs at ruger.

It's hard to get an accurate feel of what factory rifles are capable of when you have to factor in average shooters, factory ammo and budget optics mounted by the average shooter. Another way of saying that most factory rifles will outshoot most shooters, but that doesn't mean that factory rifles are comparable to good tuned rifles.

Kinda like motorcylces. The "rice rockets" are capable of performance that most riders can't obtain. But put a good rider on a factory bike, and put a good rider on a race bike, and the factory bike will get spanked.

I've been very happy with Ruger factory rifles. Amazed no, but certainly happy.

Sorry to hear you're having such accuracy problems. Just to show how nice I am, I'll offer you a nice discounted price to take those off your hands. ;-)

I'm aware of what a "sub-moa" Vanguard is. I've owned California made Vanguards also, before they were makin' 'em in Japland. Guess what, they shoot every bit as good, same design. What you don't seem to know is that the majority of the Vanguards will shoot moa, and as far as I'm concerned, it's just a way of Weatherby milkin' a little more money out of those who buy into it. I would put money on it right now that if you took 10 SMOA's and ten "standard" models, it'd be a crapshoot as to which ones shot tighter groups. If you want to pay a couple hundred more bucks for that fancy floor plate, be my guest. If you want to believe hammer forged barrels are more accurate than button rifled or cut-rifled, go ahead, I won't stop you---2MG

Coyote,

Well done, but 600 yds is just barely long range...............

2muchgun,

There were never any Vanguards made in California. They have always been made in Japan.

I have never owned one, but you get more than a different floorplate with the sub moa rifle. Know a guy who has one, and the stock is considerably stiffer and better finished than the one that comes on the std Vanguard.

I agree with you on the accuracy of the std vs the sub moa rifle. I would be surprised if there is much difference. Without exception, every Vanguard I have owned has shot under an inch.

The triggers sure aren't much to write home about, though. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Ted

Ted--I've had people tell me the same thing. I had Vanguard in 22-250 that is at least 20yrs old that does not say made in Japan on it anywhere. My friend still has it. All it says is "Weatherby...Alto Vista or Palo Alto or somethin", California". If it was made in Japan, it does not say so anywhere on it. Anyway, the point I was trying to make was that the standard models routinely shoot moa and cost less money. Believe it or not, the most accurate Vanguard I've seen wears wooden attire. I used to take roofing nails and stick them in a big cardboard box and shoot until all the nails were knocked out of the box at 200 yds. It usually didn't take long.......2MG

I just looked at the Blue Book, and all it said was that Vanguards were made from the late sixties to early seventies. Then it had a separate category that said new model Vanguard, importation started in 1997. So I'm still not sure. Probably are all Jap made. Can anyone think of the name of the city in California I'm trying to remember, it's drivin' me crazy now!---2MG

"high-quality cast steel parts."


huh!

Coyote Hunter, I believe he is addressing you---2MG

Ruger also casts alomst every Ti golf club sold in the US -- they do it for all the major golf club mfgs as ruger and the Pine Tree Castings facility is recognized as the WORLD leader in casting technology.

As to cast objects being inferior - I think the VERY VERY low number of "blown up" Rugers out there is reason enough to put this old wives tale to bed. I haven't seen ANY but I am sure there is 1 possibly 2 out there that have blown up.

Ruger also offers their rifles in the big boomers such as 338 Lapua, 458 Win Mag and such - no change cept length. They can and do take a beating.

Guess that depends on who is doing the shooting! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> I think in my post I said I had never shot beyond 400 yards, but was thinking only of my local range. I�m a member of the NRA Whittington Center and the one time I shot there it was with my .45-70 and .375 Win Marlins. Was deadly on the rams at 500 once I got the elevation and windage figured correctly (+ 10 feet or so and far side of the adjacent ram), never figured out the 1000-meter buffalo thing. Was estimating a 30-foot hold-over for the buff but my wife never saw any dust. Later calculated the hold-over at 33 feet. (Maybe I was hitting it, but I REALLY doubt it! More likely not enough compensation for the wind and my bullets were landing off in the trees?)

At any rate, I always thought 400 was long (but very doable) for me, even with the bolt guns. This last trip to the range opened my eyes a bit more to what the rifles can do as well as to what I can do. The range is spending $6,000 to redo the range so that you can shoot 100 through 600 from one position instead of having to back up from the targets as we have to do now. Should be fun, and I will definitely spend more time at the longer ranges than I do now.

Maybe to the 1K yd benchrest crowd 600 yds isn't long range, but 600 yds to me is quite a stretch. That's good shooting Coyote. Well done!

I've tried to like the Remingtons. I know that they're quality and accurate, but they just feel peculiar to me. The Ruger 77's just fall in place like they've been fitted to me.

I'm on my third 77. I haven't gotten an inaccurate one yet. In fact, the little stainless/synthetic .223 example that I recently purchased is shaping up to be a very nicely accurate rifle.

i just love it when someone inflates themself by pushing thier standards on others.
so if i think 600 yards IS long im what, a novice?
people in the desert probably dont think 95 degrees is hot either. your reality may vary.

That Leonard Brownell stock design Ruger uses calls for me, it beckons me, to BUY!!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Don

When I was a kid I read that mankind can only survive in a very narrow band of temperatures. At the time I thought about the people living north of the Artic Circle and in the various desert areas, and thought the statement was rather stupid. Only later did I realize the truth of that statement. Reality didn�t change, just my perception of it.

It�s the same thing with long range shooting. While 600 yards may be long for a particular individual � or even most of us � it is not particularly long in the greater scheme of things. The guys that shoot to 2500 yards, while they are relatively few, probably think 1000 yards is a chip shot. I�ve tried 1000 yards with my .45-70 and .375Win Marlins at the NRA Whittington Center. Didn�t hit the white buffalo as far as I know, but that didn�t change the fact that some people do so far more often than not. Yup, I was a novice. And still am. Pretty much a novice at 600, too.

I wouldn�t lose any sleep over someone saying �600 yds is just barely long range�.

I was at the range last week and there was a guy spouting off that he heard you cant get tighter than 2 inches at 100 yards with those lousy Ruger 77's but that was what he was "stuck with" this year so it would have to do. He said it to some other guy next to me that he knew also. Said it at the same time that I was making the bullseye of my target a raged hole with MY Ruger 77.

Jack a$$ should clean his gun or stop flinching.

I would have to ask why he feels the need to shoot out to 600yrds. Maybe hes an x sniper or hunts out west. If he hunt's whitetails shots are usually under a 100 yds My main gun is 77 MK II SS/Lam .280 shoots 200 yds finger tip apart.
Also took out varmint at 175yds, and has almost 7mm mag ballistics with 1/3 the recoil.

I see you haven't learned any manners here yet.

But you are correct about one thing. 95 degrees is NOT hot in the desert.

the guy in my story was shooting a 280 also
My buddy has one and it shoots great groups and he hasnt even smoothed out his factory trigger

jwk1113 �

No, I�m not an ex sniper. Nor do I hunt whitetails. I do hunt out west � Colorado. Elk is the primary quarry, mule deer and antelope are secondary. In 25 years I have never taken a shot at big game over 350 yards, although I have taken a couple coyotes at 480+ and had many opportunities to go long for big game. But that has nothing to do with why we backed up to 600 yards. We did it because we could and because we were curious what the results would be.

For what it is worth, my only big game rifles for most of those 25 years were a 7mm Mag and a .44 Mag carbine. Hunted elk with both. The Ruger 7mm Rem Mag, despite its age, shot its best group ever when I was doing load development for the 160g North Fork bullets. Three shots, 0.266� at 100 yards. Another crappy Ruger. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

jwk1113 -

I don�t have all my load books with me, but the claim of 1/3 the recoil is preposterous.


Here is some load data from IMR and Hodgdon, with the calculated recoil for an 8.3 pound rifle/scope combo:

160g
19.8 foot-pounds = .280 Rem @ 2714fps, 61.0g compressed H1000
24.0 foot-pounds = 7mm Rem Mag @ 2915fps, 69.5g compressed Retumbo

175g
18.9 foot-pounds = .280 Rem @ 2650fps, 51.0g IMR4831
21.3 foot-pounds = 7mm Rem Mag @ 2710fps, 58.0g IMR4831

Ignoring the question of relative performance, the .280 Rem has about 83% the recoil of the 7mm Mag with the 160g bullet and 89% with the 175g bullet. Both are a far cry from 1/3 or 33.3%.

I have a Ruger #1 in 220 Swift that has consistantly shot 3/4"
groups with either factory or handloads since it was new.
I used to work in the back fixing guns and chuckle while the owner told customers that Ruger number ones were not accurate. The other gunsmith had a Ruger #1 in 22-250 and he got a pretty wide grin when he heard his rifle couldn't shoot either. " In the land of the blind a one eyed man is king." Any time someone tells me that something is ALWAYS
TRUE or ALWAYS BAD I quit listening to them because there is no point in arguing with someone whose mind is made up already.
whelennut

First of all I do not load myown. Look at ballistics chart from Winchester all I use is 140gr BST. The ammo in my opinion is as accurate next to handloading. I have never had a whitetail another step after they have been hit. Further more my .
280 doesn't seem to kick any more than my SKS.

Ruger 22-250's,Swifts and 25-06's,have always shone brightly........................

Guess you art familiar with powdered metalurgy, high speed turbines etc.

Casting does not equate to junk, and forged and billet recievers were cast at one point in their life.

Ruger can be chided for trying to cast to such tight tollerances that they forego machining some parts, which is a shortcut it would be nice they didn't take. But it does make for one of the best hunting rifles for the $. I'll post some pics of what some Rugers can do.

One of the most acuurate rifles I've ever owned was a tang safety Ruger 77. Never found a load it didn't shoot acceptably well in 80 or 100grain bullets. With 42.3gr of IMR 4350 and a 100gr Sierra GK, it would stack holes continuously. This load also took out deer as if they'd been hit by lightning for those of you who think 6mm's are marginal for deer.....---2MG

I retain a 77-V MK I that thinks it's a Remington....................(grin)

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />Double grin---2MG

There is no free lunch, and relative performance or accuracy is not the question. You simply cannot get �almost 7mm mag ballistics with 1/3 the recoil�.

If you can, let me know and we�ll both get stinking rich � there are a zillion industrial applications for such a secret, just as there is for �free energy� and �perpetual motion�.

Since you all are obviously experts I should only have to do this once. Just got the info from Winchester website. Pay attention you experts muzzle .280 140gr BST velocity 3040 energy 2872/ 7mm mag muzzle velocity 3100 energy2988. Now is there anything you don't understand? So I was wrong saying 1/3 the recoil it just seems alot less than my 7mm mag I used to shoot. So to all you experts GET BENT. I had thouht this website was about advice not ridicule.

"forged and billet recievers were cast at one point in their life."

Yes the original huge pig of metal was poured in an ingot. Having worked in the Aerospace Industry for over 30 years, I can tell you that cast parts are nowhere near as good as forged or billet parts. But back to the topic. Ruger rifles can be made to shoot pretty good. Should we have to make new rifles shoot good? I don't think we should.

Trying not saying anything stupid...it's a great premise.

No need to comment on the watered down 7Remmie figures,as they are commensurate with your Thesis.

Nice batting average................(grin)

Screw you aholes

The average continues.

Does your Mom know you talk that way,when she's out of the room?....................

Well I'm new to the ruger ownership in long guns anyways. Some of you may have seen my post "ruger M77 fans?" which still hasn't quite fallen off the page. I took the brand new M77 standard blued & walnut rifle in .243 out of the box & began some basic improvements before even shooting it. I kind of wish I had time to shoot it first, that would have made for a more interesting post. But anyways, I sure couldn't be happier with the abilities of my daughter's new M77. Her personal abilities with the new rifle are pretty amazing to me. I'm very happy with my decision to give the M77 a chance & we hope to take my daughters first deer with the rifle this weekend (early youth rifle hunt).

Look for Sister to poke some Venison via 77/22 K-Hornet,223AI and 25-284.

Prolly Saturday morning,unless she sees a Bear first...................

You aren't gonna last very long around here......

It was cogent though.

What part of the aerospace industry did you work in? I thought turbines and such were always investment cast... ? I think when most people think of a cast part, the 40 some year old cast junk metal toy cars from Japan come to mind, not an investment cast Callaway driver or the turbine in a commercial jet liner.

BTW, if investment cast receivers are junk, Weatherby charged some huge premiums for their "junk" Mark Vs.

There is something I don�t understand and that is why you got so BENT about this. You made an assertion that was wrong and got called on it. At the same time you were right about the .280 and 7mm Rem Mag loads AS PROVIDED BY WINCHESTER.

I wasn�t going to question the relative performance of the two cartridges - but since you seem to insist on discussing it I�ll provide a few more data points. People can draw their own conclusions.

Here are a few maximum velocity loads for the .280 and 7mm Rem Mag for 139/140g/145g bullets:

Lyman 48th
2989fps, 2757fpe = .280 Rem 139g
3275fps, 3334fpe = 7mm Mag 140g
286fps, 577fpe = Difference

Speer #12
2976fps, 2851fpe = .280 Rwm 145g
3153fps, 3200fpe = 7mm Rem Mag 145g
177fps, 349fpe = Difference

Hornady 5th
3000fps, 2778fpe = .280 Rem 139g
3200fps, 3180fpe = 7mm Rem Mag 139g
200fps, 402fpe = Difference

Barnes #3
3002fps, 2801fpe = .280 Rem 140g
3210fps, 3203fpe = 7mm Rem Mag 140g
208fps, 402fpe = Difference

Nosler 5th
3152fps, 3088fpe = .280 Rem 140g
3248fps, 3279fpe = 7mm Rem Mag 140g
96fps, 191fpe = Difference

Hodgdon Annual Manual 2006
2927fps, 2663fpe = .280 Rem 140g
3107fps, 3001fpe = 7mm Rem Mag 140g
180fps, 338fpe = Difference

Your statement is an absolute and in my experience absolutes are almost never correct. In this case the anisotropic structure of forgings causes them to be strongest in the direction of the grain and less strong in the perpendicular direction. Castings, on the other hand, have an isotropic structure and are equally strong in all directions.

These characteristics make castings a preferred choice over forged when the stresses to be applied are multi-axial, as is the case in a rifle receiver.



I had to float the barrel and adjust the trigger on my Remington .308, and that my buddy�s Remington .30-06 needs the same work done (its trigger is atrocious). I do this to all my rifles, however (unless they come floated from the factory), so I don�t consider it a big deal.

I tweak triggers and pour bedding,before even thinking about shooting a new rifle.

My Titanium an exception(no bedding),as a curiousity experiment of sorts.

Same reason I load for everything,whether it's an over the counter specimen or a High Speed Zinger....................