https://ruger.com/products/HawkeyeFTWHunter/models.html

What's the problem? That 375 Ruger looks pretty nice

I have an early ftw 260 rem that had a laminated stock. Sits in a full length bed block Houge now. Fine rifle. No 20 min rail on top on mine. Paid $750 for it new.
F01

WOW THAT'S FANTASTIC

Maybe just another "bitch and moan" thread on the Campfire?

No way Jose.

Inflation happened. Would’ve been $1k or a tick more back in 2018. Over the last several years, it also seems like Ruger has come to view the 77’s as a super premium line. Almost like #1’s.

That said; they are really nice rifles.

The problem for me is, custom componentry doesn’t seem to have skyrocketed the way factory rifles have. For a bit more money, you can Bartlein, Bighorn Origin, Trigger Tech, plus the stock of your choice, smack it together yourself, and KNOW what you’re getting.

A friend just bought a new Hawkeye off GI. He didn't pay anywhere near $2K (wood stock) BUT new factory ammo is hard to chamber in it.

Someone will be along shortly to explain how since some idiot is willing to blow his money on one, that it's the appropriate market based price.

In real life, companies see inflation and COVID and excitedly jack their prices because they now have someone to blame for their greed.

I watched it happen while working with factory management in 2020.

Maybe, maybe I'm just old and out of touch with the Ruger business model going forward.

I've been a fan of the M77 since they first came out in 1968. Always a working mans firearm.

Great blast from the past magazine cover…includes, of course, an Askins pot-stirring article. The following month he probably put one out highlighting the advantages of a revolver over an auto

Being old and crotchety at time, I wish they’d kept the 77’s in that original configuration, nice classic lines, tang safety that locks the bolt, user adjustable trigger…

This^^

The M77’s are nice looking though…

I wonder who makes the FTW stock and how much it weighs?

Ruger lost money on every single No. 1 made. That is why it is only offered on special runs now. The M77, since it's conversion to CRF, was always marginal profit due to the fact that a CRF action is far more costly to produce than push feed. The increases in pricing are probably more to do with maintaining a similar profit margin as the rest of their products (yes, likely done to take advantage of recent events) so that it remains a viable production model for them and doesn't go the way of the No. 1. Does it suck everything costs so much now- absolutely. Were they out of line for doing this, probably not. They are still one of the best firearm manufacturers to deal with and are #1 in the customer service department, IMO, based on several experiences over 20 years, the last of which was only a month or 2 ago. 10 day door to door turn around time to get me back a 25 year old rifle that is now better than the day it was first sold. Unfortunately, as with most everything else in life these days, this is what we have to live with. Just look at the price difference in new Parkwest rifles compared to when they were Dakota- one of many examples. I have no affiliation with Ruger- just been pretty happy with everything I've ever gotten from them except my one and only original American rifle, which was junk. May try the new generation if they produce it in LH though.

as a FFL dealer for a reasonable priced rifle , revolver ,pistol Ruger guns sure sell well and are a great gun too own . my only problem with all American gun manufactures except maybe Henry rifles is why so many black guns ? yes i know they sell , but like an example with Ruger build more wood stock rifles in many different cartridges , make Ruger #1`s , start making Ruger O/U shotguns again many of us mis the Red Label shotgun ! many of the other gun manufactures do the same lots of black guns , but very few wood stock rifles and or different cartridges .

HS Precision stock is a big chunk of what happened. What’s one of those run directly from HSP?

Inflation is hitting everything, everywhere. Find yourself a Democrat and thank them…….

Not to worry, Blackrock’s Larry Fink says it’s gonna get worse, and we’re actually gonna like it!

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/202...-how-bad-inflation-was-in-2022-and-2023/

Are you saying they should stop/slow down making what sells for stuff that doesn't sell as well?

its funny you say this because I was at my LGS last week and the ruger rep was there talking to the owner. He introduced me to him since I have been shopping at his store and buying rugers for a long time. The rep asked me if I had questions about stuff that might be coming out. I asked him if they were ever going to bring back the red labels and he immediately said "no chance." Apparently they are too expensive to make for ruger to make any money off of them

FTW not WTF, unless you are talking about the price tag...........then WTF Ruger.

I'm not buying that one single bit.

Ruger's "CRF," both MKII and Hawkeye, is just the original MKII action with the front bottom lip of the bolt ground flush to the bolt face. It was a simple conversion, and a lot of us did it before the CRF model was available from the factory. I'm also not buying the MKII action was any more expensive to produce than the original M77 action. I'd bet it was more economical to produce than the original M77 tang safety PF action with adjustable trigger.

Since your last 2 sentences contradict, I'll assume there was a wording mistake in there and you are saying they cost the same to produce? That very well may be the case- within $50-100 or so I'd guess, but the fact remains the original M77 action was Ruger's version of the Mauser action without CRF until they rightly made the switch, which is still more costly to make than a standard push feed action, then add the (minimal that they are) cost increases for CRF, which isn't just a matter of opening the bolt, you also need to change to a blade ejector as well. All this would certainly add up to the original M77 being more economical to produce than the new, but would also therefore mean the New is more expensive to produce.

It is just a laminate that's been dipped.

The last two sentences do not contradict.

The PF MKII, or the CRF version of the same, was likely less costly to produce than the original M77 PF action with tang safety and adjustable trigger, not the reverse as you claim.

From FTW spec sheet:

Pro-Series® H-S Precision® tan-black speckled synthetic stock features a full-length aluminum bedding block and slender pistol grip with Pro-Center® technology.

My bad.


They have changed them from the original that had the adjustable buttpad.

I laugh at these prices. I will not even pay $1k for any Ruger 77.

For $2k? I can build a tackdriver for that.

Now a #1??????.....that's different!

No different than new Remington BDLs.

I looked at one last month, $1149.

Inflay Shawn. He’s back.

That's about $300 less than the 1962 price for a 700 BDL after running it through a CPI calculator.

Wow! A gun magazine without a Black Gun on the cover!

I'll give you the change from tang safety and adjustable trigger was based on limiting cost, but I guarantee you that decision was made due to the increased cost of changing it to CRF. At best, the current CRF is running the same cost basis as the original pushfeed did back then. But again, that pushfeed was more expensive than the average pushfeed due to the fact it was still a direct variant of the Mauser 98 minus the CRF.

That being said, I'd never buy an FTW at that price and will wait until someone is dumping it off used. I sure would like to see a new change to keep CRF but go back to the tang safety and adjustable trigger, but can only imagine the pricing then.

It is worth noting the rifle I just got back from Ruger was a MK II and they installed the new LC6 trigger for $100. It's still not adjustable, but is a very good trigger and for $10 I got a spring that took 30 seconds to change out and now have a 3.5# trigger that is crisp with no creep.

The change from the tang safety to the MKII was a move away from the liability of the original (adjustable) M77 trigger, to the simpler, more cost effective MKII action. The removal of the bottom lip of the MKII PF to make it CRF (a couple years after the MKII's introduction), was not, as you claim, "far more costly."

It's apparent you're pretty much making all this up as you go...

Diogenes can put away his lantern; he found him.

Yep. But most folks I've seen on the range buy rifles for bragging rights and can barely shoot 2 MOA with a tackdriver.

The Rugers are about $1,500 on gunbroker.com, about like a Winchester Model 70 Extreme Weather, Remington 700 Alpha1, or any of several other similar rifles. That's not bad if you can abide a mass-produced stock and a factory barrel, plus you don't have the wait time of dealing with a custom rifle maker.


Okie John

What does a new BDL cost at $1200, with the Timney trigger and 5R bbl, after running through the CPI calculator?

I'm not sure I follow. I used the calculator to move the 1962 price to current. $140 in 1962 would be about $1440 today.

I've got one of the original FTW guns with the laminated stock. It is the most accurate factory rifle that I've ever owned and probably the only rifle in my vault that I haven't tinkered with in some way. I took it to FTW and shot it out to 1,2000+ yards (with a Nightforce SHV). Awesome rifle. Whether it is worth the money is up tot the consumer to decide. As a RGR shareholder, I hope they sell.

If that's all they had to do for the conversion, but it was not. As for the liability part, if that was in fact the case and only reason to go away from it, why then do most manufacturers offer them currently? Maybe the M77 was a faulty design then, however, they have adjustable triggers in the American and have for years. If it wasn't any cheaper for the non-adjustable, what possible reason would they have to not use that same trigger in the Hawkeye (different version to fit the action of course) when so many people are constantly complaining to them about the non-adjustable trigger it currently has? You obviously are simply looking to ruffle some feathers- I do not care. I know I won't change your mind, and your opinion doesn't matter a bit to me or Ruger- nor does mine to Ruger for that matter. I actually make sure I know facts before talking about something rather than taking something me and my buddies did way back in the day to suit our needs and then just assume the manufacturer did the same and give it out as gospel. A little education goes a long way. Good day to you and best of luck.

Hate to admit it but I had to look that one up 🤣

Lol.

You're not wrong...just that Adam Smith got kidnapped by American colluders

Looks like blue steel and walnut went the way of the dinosaur.

You are one dumb cluck .

In 1964 when Winchester went to PF it was a money saving feature. By the 1990's and CNC machining it isn't SIGNIFICANTLY more expensive to make CRF than PF. A little maybe, but that isn't why these cost more.

They still offer both together, although there are only a few options in just the African and Compact lineups. Certainly not what it was. The stainless/grey lam is only offered in Compact now as well. Traditionally the best seller (blued/walnut) and lately, the fastest selling (stainless/grey lam) have almost no representation in Ruger. Clearly they know something we don't, but as stated in one of previous posts, they don't seem to care much about any of our opinions. Still like them though, lol

When I read those two sentences, they are in complete agreement with each other.

At 8.1 pounds, they may be charging by weight.

Let me clarify what I was saying a bit more- The Ruger M77 action is more costly and time consuming to make than say a Rem 700 action. Ruger has always sold these (up until around 2020 give or take) for a much lower profit margin than anything else they regularly produce. Yes, they absolutely took advantage of the situation to raise the price, but it was (roughly, though a bit excessive) to levels they always should have been- as someone else stated, comparable to the Win 70 CRF model currently produced. I beleive this was in an effort to be able to continue to produce them, although at lower production rates, rather than do away with it altogether like the No. 1 and Red Label shotguns. There is still a huge following for the M77 action and they did not want to lose it, but could not afford to keep selling at the prices we are accustomed to. This was proven out with the demise of the No. 1 and Red Labels. The FTW is another story altogether. While the lower levels of the M77 lineup are higher than we would like, they are in line with competitors, but this one puts it up into semi custom territory, and I'm not sure theres an advantage there other than easy aquisition.

You are correct, I read it too fast and that was an error on my part- I missed the "than" part between "produce" and "the". However, it still did not change what our opposing views are, and minus that line, didn't change the dissagreement. I do however appreciate you bringing that to my attention.

what is not to like with that rifle? I really like the ruger mk2 action. last weekend had the 22-250 licking its chops on some P dogs. its an early 2000's model. deep blue back when they actually did that. walnut stock. its a sexy rifle with an actual soul to it. the action feeds 22-250 like a fat chick giving a BJ on a first date. I recently had the firing pin bushed, which it badly needed. its always a good day when I have that going out smacking varmints.

what I DON'T like about the hawkeye is IMO the name is stupid! The other is they overly bead blast the action which makes the bolt not run as smooth, its more prone to show scratches. I miss the older more polished stainless models and of course the deep blue and walnut guns are always and always will be classics with a soul. but guess what no one would buy those anymore.

Lol

Ruger being Ruger doesn't always offer something we all want.

Sometimes they offer certain configurations, combinations, chamberings for a year or two then change it up.

Otherwise we have the used market.