Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters New Ruger's Hawkeye's Awful Accuracy

In a report in a gun magazine, I read last night, that the new Alaska Model of the Ruger Hawkeye shot groups that averaged 1.8 inch groups with the 270 grain bullets and THREE INCHES with the 300 grain bullets - using their OWN AMMUNITION!!!

Am I alone, in thinking - this is just awful?

Why, in a world where cheap rifles such as Tikka's, Weatherby Vanguards, Savages, Brownings, Mossbergs, Howas etc. are tested, and show they are capable of regularly breaking the MOA standard - should this be considered "Acceptable"?

Having paid almost $1400 for a Remington Ti that only shot 2 1/2 groups from the factory - and being told by Remington they wouldn't do anything about it - I've got a real problem with companies releasing modern bolt action rifles that are that poorly constructed! You feel totally "ripped off"!

Why are some companies still producing such crap?

Personally, I think EVERY rifle should have a return policy - that is - if they don't already guarantee the accuracy of what they sell. If, say, after a week or so, you can't get a rifle to shoot like most bargain priced Savages or Tikkas do - you should be able to return it for a full refund.

If we, as consumers, insisted on it - I think we'd get it.

Felt the same way about the Kimber Montana that I sold.Rick.

The only rifle that had unscceptable accuracy (to me) was a Remington 7600. In the last 20 yrs. or so I have had 20 or so rifles and with the exception of this 7600 all have been excellent shooters.

Now I have several new rifles that haven't been given the test...........we will see!!!

Brian: I've been following posts regarding the Hawkeye both in wood & synthetic and that seems to be the average or maybe a bit less, but to me that is unacceptable. jorge

Way too many unknown variables in a report like that to draw any conclusions whatsoever.

1 -- Shooter skill/recoil tolerance,

2 -- Scope quality/focus/parallax,

3 -- Mounts/tightness/alignment,

4 -- Stock bedding/screw tension,

5 -- Range conditions,

6 -- Ammo/rifle compatability,

7 -- Benchrest quality...

And probably a bunch more that don't occur to me at the moment.

Rare for any rifle to come from the factory all sweetened up...always some work to do.

I wouldn't, personally, get too exercised until I had experienced poor accuracy after dealing with all the variables to my satisfaction.

DN

The Ruger Hawkeye I bought for my son, a 7mm-08 All-Weather, will shoot 2" or better groups at 200 yards with handloaded 120 gr. Ballistic Tips. That's good enough for me from a factory rifle.

Am I alone in wondering why people so eagerly accept anectdotal information as fact?

Darrel,

The same author has regularly tested much cheaper rifles in the past that broke 1 MOA.

I'd assume he knows what he's doing.

I don't buy those excuses.

If you mean you want the author and magazine - I can provide that...

It is in this month's issue - and it WAS published.

I don't know about the Alaskan but, I just got a new Hawkeye all weather in 280. It gave me a couple of gropus in the 1.5" range with plain old Rem Core-Lokts. I expect good things from handloads and Accubonds when I get to it.
I also am getting good accuracy from a Ruger 1AH in 25-06. As far as American manufacturers go I think Ruger's quality has improved while Remington's has gone downhill. Had two new Rems l this year that are already gone and will not buy another from recent, (2003 or newer), manufacture.
JMHO.

Is the shooter good enough to shoot small groups with a rifle in this recoil class? Not all folks can.

I shot my .375 Ruger Hawkeye African from the bench with the Hornady factory 270 gr and 300 gr loads, and IIRC I didn't shoot a group over 1.5". These are 3-shot groups, and I had the scope set at 6X. I have not worked up any loads yet, this is very limited data, and with only a single rifle. I would not get too exercised with this data without context.

The makers with accuracy guarantees also condition it on bore size: the over-30 stuff is not quoted the small numbers of the small bores.

By the way, Ruger does not make ammunition.

jim

Oh, therefore it MUST be true and it MUST be accepted as fact and it MUST be representative of every other Ruger Hawkeye rifle. Great logic, dude. Should carry you quite aways in this life.

FWIW:

I consider a 375 that will get 1.5 inch groups just fine. 1.8 with factory fodder is OK by me. Handloads can shave half an inch pretty easily.

Exactly just how small a cape buffalo/griz/elephant am you'all gonna shoot?

BMT

My 375 Ruger Alaskan shoots the factory Hornady 270-grain ammo at just a hair over an inch, but the 300 grainers ain't something I'd like to talk about. Though, the factory ammo is going out the door since I have 270-grain Swift A-Frames and Barnes TSX bullets to load up tomorrow.

Those aren't excuses -- those are reasons I don't pay a hell of a lot of attention to one test by one guy with two boxes of factory ammo. I don't know who screwed the action into the stock; I don't know who bolted the scope on; I don't know the range conditions the day the groups were shot. The fact the author could apparently shoot a Mossberg .243 or some such into less than an inch once and couldn't repeat the feat with a .375 don't impress me all that much.

But hey, if you want to use that as an excuse not to buy a rifle, it don't matter to me.

Be happy...we're living in the Golden Age .

DN

I would be as inclined ro blame the scope as the rifle

An analysis of one rifle with two types of ammo, the conclusions made in that article border on statistical irrelevance.

I've had off the shelf Rem 700s shoot sub MOA with factory fodder and I've had off the shelf Rem 700s shoot 3 inch groups with factory fodder. My point is, you can't judge a whole lineup by one rifle with one or even two types of ammo. There are way to many variables.

+1 on muledeer, Royce, 300WinMag & BMT.

And to add to BMT's query: Just how far am y'all gonna be shootin' yo .375???

2" @ 100yds is still Minute-of-Griz @ 400yds!.. Or elk, or moose, or rhino, or buff, or elephant.

Ruger is well known for producing rifles that are hit and miss in the accuracy dept. This is one reason why this accuracy report is so believable. If this report came out about a CZ, Tikka, Browning etc. then the authors abilities and equip would sure be questioned. Because it is a Ruger it is just more of the same from them.
I know there are a lot of Ruger owners that have some real tack drivers and swear by them. I also know that there are just as many Ruger owners that swear at them instead of by them.
Rugged, Reliable, Ruger, but not accurate.

I can honestly say, that of all the rifles I have owned, I have never had one that I couldn't make shoot well, with a good hand load, plus some rifle tuning. Three of my most recent rifles that are shooting very well are Ruger 77's, not Hawkeye's though. By very well, I mean 1/2 MOA for three shots at 100 yards.

Don