Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles How would you improve the Ruger Hawkeye

Why not put the trigger out of their target rifle into the Hawkeye. It's a nice trigger.

Good point.....

A detachable magazine on a bolt action is like mounting curb feelers on a 4x4 pickup. I like Ruger's scope rings. A nicer trigger would be nice. Of the Ruger rifles I've shot the accuracy is plenty good. I've never had a problem with the MKII safety. I like the angled fron action screw. It works so why change it?

Extend the safety maybe, but I like the 3 positions. When the safety is engaged making it impossible for the firing pin to fire is perfect.

Build the stock that would accept a mercury cyclinder to absorb recoil (like the Benelli).

A recoil pad that absorbs recoil.

With a boat paddle stock that had inserts to be able to change lop. One or more of the inserts could be limbsavers. Then you could forget the mercury cyclinder.

I hope Ruger doesn't listen to all this. I can just barely afford them now which was Bill Ruger's intention all along. This rifle is the best out there in it's price range. Having said all that, an affordable " Super Grade " might be nice.

Sold the only one I've bought to hunt with because of the dang safety. And it was a 6.5x55 too. Three position tang is my choice. You can't make the existing safety but very little wider or it'll overlap the bolt when it's in "fire" position. But it could at least be taller, rounded on top sloping down to the wing, with some checkering on it. Still, a 3 position tang would be great.

The trigger is stupid simple and I like that. But all I've ever tried were creeeeeepy as all get out. That and the overtravel could be fixed with a couple of set screws with limits. I know a real trigger guy can fix them but Ruger's factory triggers are way over-lawyered.

I don't get the problem with the angled bedding screw. However, i pillar-bedded mine, which is cheap and easy and i can't see why Ruger shouldn't do that with factory rifles. If it adds $20 to the cost of the rifle, i'm sure everybody would gladly pay.
And personally, i think Rugers 77 are very accurate. In fact i have no doubt that majority opinion amongst those i know would be that Rugers now outshoot Remington and Winchester. I might not choose them to build a target action from, but they have certainly sorted their barrel problems out.

Ruger's had 40 years to try and prove the angled front screw does something that other systems don't. Is anyone convinced that it accomplishes anything significant????

The wing safety needs a re-design. It's just too small to use easily. Make it bigger or go back to the tang safety.

Boat paddle stocks are ugly. Virtually everyone thought they were ugly until they stopped making them. Now everybody thinks they're cool??

Re-introduce the round-top. It would be nice to throw some Talleys on there.

Can I get a flat-bolt RSI???

Spend a few extra bucks and clean up the casting marks inside the action/smooth up the action.

Make it lose weight, and put on a safety lever I can get my thumb on.

i don't really care how they do the bedding or what not if they could give the rifle a 1" accuracy guarantee (which probably means they would need to change the current bedding method ...). after that i'd like em to put a consistent 3 lb trigger on it. i like that the .257 bob is a regular catalog item, but i'd like for them to bring back the 6.5x55 swede and the 7x57 as well. i kind of like the current weight and LOP, but then i prefer a little heavier rifle because they are easier for me to shoot well.

i have both an old tang safety m77 and a m77 mark II, and i would prefer the tang safety if i had the choice.

I sent then a photo of this mod I do to M-77s with Devcon. How hard can it be? They are simple cast parts

Most of the suggestions would actually be really cheap to do. Changing the safety is the main theme, and it probably wouldn't cost a cent. Better, thicker recoil pad - a few bucks at most. If you have a look on the Ruger website, a lot of the options they listed would be quite expensive - adjustable stock, detachable magazine...

I looked at that list of options and thought Ruger was heading off in the wrong direction. I just want a plain, old boring mauser-actioned hunting rifle and for what it is worth, i like blued-steel and timber. I just want the current rifle to have a smoother action, the old safety back, and a longer length of pull and a recoil pad that works. In comparison to what Ruger looked to be proposing, my list looks pretty cheap and simple.

And i bet you they have already listened to us here, and i'll put money on the fact the new rifle will have a better safety. I might not get my tang back, but i bet it will be bigger.

Ugly, yet effective

Just make it a little bigger and more rounded so it doesn't cut your thumb and is easier to operate. Not too much to ask for is it?????

Removable magazine. Tom.

Ok. I'll go along with the wing modification on the safety. But not a box mag.

It would be tough to be a manufacturer trying to satisfy all of us.

On a wood stocked hawkeye I looked over, the pistol grip area seemed way too thin. I prefer a more hand filling grip than it had.
What others have said about the safety, It feels like you have to pick at the safety before you can push it forward. Would prefer a bigger wing or go back to theor p;d tang safety, or better yet a Savage 110 style tang safety.

The wobble in the bolt is similar to some other mauser style bolts, but they would be wise to make it smoother even if they needed to charge more.

Weird, I have never noticed the safety was hard to "flick" on any of my MKII's. Not sure what you guys are complaining about. I like that it doesn't stick out.

OK. I missed it. What was Phil's fix for the Ruger too small safety?

Enlighten me....