The market seems to favor the concept that no rifle is worse than its best attribute - assuming accuracy is that attribute.
In looking at 223 bolt guns this Christmas, the shop handed me a RAR - though I am already familiar enough with the 243 we bought for one son a couple of years ago. But I obliged the salesman and looked it over briefly. And that magazine is still just as cheap and junky as any gun part ever devised. It is certainly not deserving of sitting at the same table upon which Ruger has built its reputation: reliable and rugged. That design is truly the weakest link in the rifle, and my experience suggests that nothing is better than its weakest link rather than the opposite. I'll take the somewhat less likely accuracy of the M77 over an RAR any day. (My money went overseas in acquiring a 223 BTW.
)
Well, as someone once wrote, only accurate rifles are interesting.
I don't use a firearm in the harsh conditions that you do, so while I agree that the RAR magazine is a compromise, it isn't deal killer for me. Besides, I'm, most, a 1-shot hunter, so the magazine is just a place to carry additional cartridges. My 2 RAR-Ps in 223 are both MOA or better shooters and the magazines seem to feed fine.
