Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Ruger receivers.

Learn something every day. You mean those hollw POS's. I thought "canoe paddle" referred to the basic design. All my Rugers are walnut or laminated.

I don't find Rugers a poor design at all, and have several that shoot quite well. I don't think they are the basis for a BR rifle, but then I wouldn't build one of those with a Remchester either.

I suspect that so many people have done so much work with the 700 action that a few are bound ot shoot straight. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> After that, you don't want to confuse the issue with facts. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I knew a couple of BR shooters (brothers) who liked the concept of the angled guard screw well enough they built that feature into the BR actions they built for themselves. When they were active they were consistent winners.
The Ruger 77 of any vintage is not a suitable action for a BR rifle. Nor is any open bottomed hunting rifle action. While I have used a lot of Model 70s as the basis for long range target guns, I wouldn't consider one for a serious BR rifle.
The ruger is not more flexible than the 700. In fact it is less so.
Generally speaking I think a 77 can be made to perform every bit as well as a Model 70 and either one can equal a 700. It is just easier to accomplish the task with a 700.
Some of the most accurate factory rifles I have worked with have been 77s. Properly bedded, they shoot every bit as well as anything else. They just are not BR actions.
As far as investment casting is concerned, the process should be able to make as good a receiver as any other method. In practice though, this doesn't seem to be the case. Ed Shilen used invevtment casting to produce his DGA actions and, while the design was great , the quality (froma BR standpoint) was inconsistent. The actions simply came up a bit short when it came to "trueness". At least on a consistent basis. This may have more to do with the methods used to machine the castings but there it is. GD

I think you hit the nail on the head. Unless the castings are poor quality to begin with (a different problem), there is no reason investment castings cannot be machined as true as forgings.

A friend asked me, just today, if I thought a Tikka was good action as he has $800 to spend on a new rifle. I told all of the current rifles are fine and will do the job, just that some are better than others. However, a good rule is to look at what the custom 'smiths are working with, usually a rem 700 or win 70. I know there are some exceptions but I would be that the rem and wins make up 90% of all custom applications. by custom, I mean installing new barrels and other features. really, there have been no ground-breaking improvements since the introductin of the mauser 98. I think remington is the easy choice for the fellow who wants to buy a rifle, mount a scope and go hunting. the win 70 typically needs a bit of fine tuning but, in my opion, is better in the end. still, most ugly ole barrel lug nut savages shoot pretty well!

The 'flex' people refer to in Ruger rifles is indeed there on many. It is because of poor bedding into the stock - not any particular failing of the invest ment cast reciever. A Remchester will flex as much or more if you put 3 screws in it and don't properly full-length bed the reciever.

Bed a Ruger (or a Remchester) reciever flat, in glass or pillars there is no flex, and it will shoot, other things being in spec. Rugers, in my experience, are mostly not properly factory bedded - Some of them are downright scary, there is so much flex as the screws are tightened down! I have several as hunting rifles, myself, all glass bedded and free floated. I can't claim .5 groups, but they all do under 1.25 which does me just fine. Except for one load with my .338 which will do right around 1.0 groups at either 100 or 200 yards. I haven't quite figured that one out yet! But then I don't use that load for hunting usually anyway.

My standard that if any screw in any action starts to snug up and doesn't come fully tight in a half turn, the bedding is not sufficiently flat and incompressible. And that too, is exactly what pillar bedding does.