Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Ruger M77’s

Ruger changed their safetys from the original model 77’s with a Tang safety to the later years with a three position rear bolt safety. The actions look basically the same (not sure ). So were there any issues with the tang safetys that Ruger switched? Or are both types GTG?

I've found both to be GTG - the switch from tang safety to 3 position also coincided with a change to being really CRF. It went from a plunger ejector to a slot and blade style that operated more like a pre-64 M70 - picks up the cartridge, controls it into the breech etc.

Up to you to determine if that's something important or not.

What Teal said. I have both, am my preference is the tang-safe by a small margin.

So which model is really CRF??? Tang?

3 position.

The Tangers have a plunger ejector, which is a PITA on the bench, IMO.

Current Hawkeyes have steel bottom metal, and all three I’ve owned worked perfectly. Easy pick for me, and I’ve owned all three major editions.

I haven't had a Hawkeye - they've seemed to been replaced primarily with the American line at local retailers.

I have a couple of Hawkeyes, in .308 and 6.5 CM, and they've both been good shooters. I had to bed the .308's synthetic stock before it shot well though.

After the original tang safety Model 77, Ruger came out with the Mark II which had the three position safety and the long, non-rotating extractor but was still push feed. There was a slight lip which went all the way around the bolt face so the round had to be chambered and then the extractor snapped over it.

After a while they ground off the bottom of that lip and made it a true CRF, then later came out with the Hawkeye series which had a different stock design and different trigger.

The main thing to look out for with the original Model 77's is that they were made during Ruger's cheap barrel period, you could get a good one or it could be total crap.* Sometime around the 90's Ruger began producing their own barrels which were and still are good to very good.

All this IIRC.



* Friend of mine in the mid-70's had a standard Sporter model .220 Swift that was decently accurate by the standards of the day, at least it would put five shots into an inch or just under. Later on in the early-mid 80's I had a heavy barrel tang safety "Varmint" model 25-06 that wouldn't group anything into less than 2" and most loads into around 3". Very frustrating rifle that went down the road to a guy who just wanted to shoot deer in his back yard with it, a task for which it was well suited.

Callin For Mule Deer HELP !

Jim in Idaho said....

"The main thing to look out for with the original Model 77's is that they were made during Ruger's cheap barrel period, you could get a good one or it could be total crap.* Sometime around the 90's Ruger began producing their own barrels which were good to very good.

All this IIRC."

IIRC - Jim you are partially correct in that "for a time SOME 77 blls" were poorly made.
The reason I say that is ALL my 77s were PRE 1990 and very good.

UNLESS I'm mistaken that was corrected BEFORE the Model Name Change.

It's MY opinion that NOT all 77 blls were made during the P P period.

All the 77s I had were accurate, 243, 2 - 270s, 300 WM (ouch).

M D please correct me Ifn I'm rong. LOL

Jerry

They very well could have been, I'm definitely no expert on the exact dates Ruger changed over but sort of remember things in a general way.

And definitely not all Ruger barrels made during that time were dogs, noting my friend's .220 Swift. A No. 1B 25-06 purchased in 1975 would consistently put 3 shots into about 3/4". It would even put them into a generally consistent pattern, walking them up diagonally from lower left to upper right. The 4th and 5th shots would continue that line while straying out farther and farther, but the first three from a cold barrel were always close together.

I’ve had a few wilson barrel No.1’s.

I believe there were some No.1s with Douglas barrels early on.

I've had 3 (still have 2- never should have sold the 77V in 25-06) tangers, none of the rest..

Had the same experience with the V, except when I started using hand-loaded fire-formed, neck-sized only brass, it went to MOA or better from about 5" MO factory ammo (oversized chamber?). Killed over 20 caribou with it and handholds out to 500+ yards. Average probably 300 or so.

I've had no accuracy issues with the 30-06 (17 inch bbl after I whacked the bulge off the end, bought used....) 1/4" MOA most anything factory- never reloaded for it), have killed to 375 yards or so with it, nor with the .338WM (also bought used). 338 is MOA or less with fire-formed, shoulder -sized brass. Factory belt-chamber- sized goes 1/4 to 1/2 inch larger group sizes. I can live with 1 1/2 MOA in a 338WM. If I must.... I've killed 2 caribou (about 15 seconds apart) , at 250 yards or so with it, one moose at 140, and at least half a dozen more under 100 yards.. Good enough is good enough, sometimes.

The V was factory standard, un-tweaked (my first 77). The other two are glass bedded, free-floated, factory triggers tweaked down to 3-3 1/2 trigger pull weight. I prefer 2 1/2, but they will do.

Mechanically, and on the bench, never a problem, as long as clearances are met. Just had to scrape a couple thousands off my full- receiver bedding on the '06 for safety wire clearance, which was rubbing and a bit stiff. Smooth now! Not sure how that suddenly came to be/ after decades of no-problem.

On my 77s, the bolt is locked down, on safe. As on all tangers, I think. Safety must be moved off to unload a chambered round - I can live with that, but 3 position safeties have their points! I surely do like my Rem 725, and Win 70 for that reason.

Oh yeah - If you are going hunting with the thing, it's best not to leave the bolt behind on the cleaning bench.

I have some m77’RL models and all the RSI models. Love them all. Regrets selling my 308 77 varmint

My favorite tang safety 77 was Jack O'Connor's custom 280 Rem in French walnut:

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/3344906/3


Every Ruger 77 centerfire rifle I've ever owned, would shoot better than 1/2 inch groups with budget scopes in factory rings.

Since the inception of the mighty 77, over hundred thousand Alaskan hunters can't be wrong..........

Get the latest Bill Ruger book.......

Geeze, I sure wish this wasn't a one piece bolt on my 77, so I could unscrew the bolt handle for titanium one. The boat is too heavy pulling over beaver dams.

Would you mind picking some lottery numbers for me?

Even tho I hunt with a Kimber these days - I'm a huge fan of the 77. Was my first rifle ever and have had several. I'd buy another in a hearbeat.

I like the 77s, my first one was in .280 (1977) and I started handloading then too. Its trigger left much to be desired! I tried one of the first "Ultralights" (308/20" bbl) around '83, but I couldn't hold it still with its 5# trigger pull, off it went. Years later tried another tanger/338 win mag...3" was its best, off it went. I had a MKII in 338WM that shot one type of factory ammo exceptionally...had issues with handloads. I had a Hawkeye 77 257 roberts...2" shooter, a Hawkeye All Weather in 338 Federal was great...just not enough "oomph" for me. I'm now waiting on my Hawkeye 338 RCM 22" model from the smith. I hope its a shooter. To me Rugers are built like a tank, may or may not shoot, and kinda heavy in wood stock models, but worth the "trying it out" time. Nowadays you can get aftermarket triggers or work on existing, ( I'm not a trigger tinkerer...to OCD! ha)

I did have an early 375 Ruger Alaskan that was a steaming pile of sht. It had to go back to Ruger.....

My 338 RCM carbine had a large piece of casting slag on the feed ramp. Wiped out a chainsaw file on that heat treated steel, taking down that big piece of slag.