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

"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."

I agree with that statement right there BC. I once bought a model 70 Winchester 30-06 and put about six boxes of shells through it and couldn't even get to under six inch groups at 100yrds. Now I've had model 70s before and since that would put bullets in the same hole and like that model. That one gun was just a lemon. I couldn't get a refund or a trade in a few weeks later. I kind of feel bad about trading to a guy for a dirt bike, except he traded it for a fastback Mustang that needed restored when he couldn't get a decent group out of it either. He wouldn't trade me the bike for the 'Stang either . That gun is still out there somewhere and I doubt that anyone has ever gotten it sighted in.

You are joking, correct? Haven't seen a Ti not shoot and can't see how adding close to a pound and $500 to the Ti made it a better rifle. I'm sure the Ti doesn't interest those that sit on their butts all day in a shooting blind, stand, what have you.


Haven't had a Ruger that wouldn't shoot either, but I've always been lucky that way.

I seem to remember a benchrest smith checked Brian's Ti and it had a bulge in the barrel, even when he reported this to Remington they wouldn't do anything. I am in the camp that these companies should be able to make a product that is good but not necessarily great out of the box. Some companies do and other don't. I don't feel I should have to bed and get a trigger job on a new gun just to make it shoot better than 1.5 inch groups so I don't. Most of my rifles are Sako's which require none of the above.

I don't believe I should be pro-active to make my life better. I should have everything given to me for a happy life, but it just ain't so and I don't mind a little work to make things Merry...

I don;t need everything perfect either, but would you buy a new truck and book the front end alignment at the time of delivery or would you make them fix it beforehand?

When I start paying $40K for a rifle, I'll get back to you.....

I'd rather a rifle not be bedded so I can do it the way I like. Unfortunately we don't come with "Life can cause death" stamped on our ass, no guarantees...

My experience with rugers has been mostly positive. The only real bad shooter I ever bought was a tang safty in .308 I bought a couple years ago cause it was cheap and in like new condidion.
It was awfull. I traded it strait across for a marlin 45/70 that shot rings around it.
But I had a tang safty 300 win that shot great. I curantly have a 77MK2 RL in the Roberts that is just excelent. I had to free float it to get it there but thats no trick.
I also have a #1A 7X57 that is remarkable.
I like rugers just fine.
If I spent 1300.00 on a rifle and it did not shoot, I dead seriously would either get it fixed a refund quite possibly wind up in jail.
That is too much money.
It seems to me it might be a good Idea to talk to a customer service rep before you buy a factory rifle. Get them to tell you what to expect from the product. and what to expect if it fails you. Get a name and employee number.
I,ll bet they will work harder for the money still in your pocket than them money you already gave them.
...tj3006

Was this ever remedied? How so?

If a company advertised a certain accuracy guaranty can you imagine how many people that dont shoot that good,keep blaming the rifle.How many that would be returned?Some guys wont shoot a group under 2 inches their whole life.There are a lot of people who shoot just once a year.......right before deer season.See where Im going?

Am I alone in feeling that sub 2moa would be just fine for big game hunting? I mean my 300weatherby vanguard is only slightly better than that, and it has been a hell of a productive hunting tool.

I get around 1 moa from my Ruger M77 in 220 Swift and it hits beldings ground squirrels out past 300 yards all the time, and I am able to take them offhand out to 100 often enough that I try it in front of witnesses.

My Ruger 7X57 (the first one) shoots under a half inch using a handload I dont like because of the bullets failure to provide the terminal performance I want. It shoots Bellier and Selliot ammo into over an inch, but the game is taken much more decisively.

So what does Nth degree accurracy really bring to the table? I think it is a placebo.

I would buy the Ruger if the factory only promised 2.5 inch MOA. After all it is a moose, elk, bear kind of gun, you know big close targets, not a varmit rig.

I applaud your boldness in sharing this inspiration.



Ruger has recently taken a very important step toward improving the accuracy of their rifles. Ruger now makes their own rifle barrels on new cold hammer-forging equipment. I have found from experience that the new Ruger barrels shoot very well indeed for production-grade sporters. It is still true that every barrel is slightly different, and every barrel has it's limitations. But I have had no trouble at all working through those limitations and finding accurate combinations with several new Rugers, and none have flunked-out altogether. If a new Ruger bolt-action rifle exhibits an accuracy "problem", almost invariably it involves the forend/barrel interface - which, incidentally, is about the easiest problem to fix if done correctly. Ruger #1s are a different breed of cat altogether. I have had success improving the accuracy of various #1s, but on other occasions I have been reduced to uttering 4-letter expletives. Happily, my latest #1, an A in 7x57, has proven wonderfully accurate right out of the box, for which I am eternally grateful (and relieved).

-

Brian
I agree with you on the accuracy if its representative, and I"ll never buy another new Ruger ever again, but due to the anti gun leaning issues the company founder had....

Jeff

Oh, Jesus H. CHrist.

Actually, in spite of the written word here & elsewhere, I think most factory rifles, including Remingtons, need a bit of work to shoot consistently
under 1"-1 1/2". Some never will.........many factory barrels have been straightened and whenever that occurs, ultra-fine accuracy from a gun with such a barrel is just happenstance and your good luck if you get such a rifle.

A little action bedding work, straighten the barrel channel side contact, fix the barrel bedding point, float the barrel or whatever else floats your boat is almost always in order & beneficial.

I also don't think that the vast majority of everyday "shooters" could should an inch consistently regardless of the capabilities of the gun.

MM

My "Benchrest Buddy" - Al Forsland, tore the rifle apart and spent the better part of a couple of days blueprinting the action, mating the lugs, recrowning the barrel, bedding the action and working on the horrible trigger - and through all this, he ended up giving me back a rifle that now shoots 3/4 inch groups.

If I had to pay him the going rate - for his hours of work on my behalf, the cost of the rifle would have almost doubled. Fortunately for me, our friendship enabled me to save a considerable amount of money.

But, even as he handed me the rifle back he said "It's still a horrible fouler due to that internal barrel swell an inch or so in front of the chamber and because of the general roughness of the bore." The internal swell is so great that when pushing a bore brush or swab though it - the rod will jump (with no resistance) past the swell until the bore narrows down again.

He said, if it were him - he send it away and get a "real barrel" from a custom quality barrel maker put on it. "Then you'd have a rifle!" he said.

So far, I haven't done that, I love so much about the rifle now - that I put up with its faults - and just clean it thoroughly every 5 to 10 rounds or so.

But, someday, it will get a REAL barrel.

Bummer to have to go to that much trouble on a rifle that wasn't cheeep in the first place. Not like it was a Stevens 200.

What did Remington say about the "swell"?

This was typical of groups with the 270gr factory load in my 375 Ruger Alaskan:





And a remarkably easy load development got me groups like this with 260gr Accubonds:




Maybe the writer was using iron sights?



In terms of acceptable accuracy- I would be happier with a very reliable rifle like a Ruger that shot consistent 2" groups at 100 rather than a tackdriver that was not as reliable.

Fortunatley most rifles these days seem to shoot around MOA with out to much trouble, so we can have reliable and accurate...

They said if I were an American, I could send it back at my own expense and they'd "look at it" - but since I was a Canadian - and they don't allow arms back into the USA, once they have been shipped out, that I'd "have to live with it".

Thus began my solemn vow to never have anything to do with Remington unless they change their policies to either give Canadians a place to return such problems, to include targets showing how the rifle shoots out of the factory, to guarantee accuracy of what they sell, or have their Canadian representatives allow for the return of rifles the BUYER considers unsatisactory.

As Remington has not moved towards doing any of those suggestions - as is, I've bought my last Remington.

Even Tikka, one of the cheaper rifles for sale in Canada, GUARANTEES 3 shots into an inch at 100 metres.

With differences in corporate policy like that - why anyone would buy a Remington in Canada - is beyond me.

In this day in age with the internet, I can't believe that companies allow bad customer service to be the standard they adhere to.

Great groups, too bad everyone can't expect such groups from their own rifles in today's mass marketed "buyer-beware" world.

The only way to be sure of such accuracy today, is to buy rifles like Weatherby's MOA Vanguard, or better yet a Tikka or a Sako - which GUARANTEE that level of accuracy in all of their own rifles.