» Advanced

Go Back   Shooters Forum > Rifle and Rifle Cartridges > Rifles and Rifle Cartridges
Register FAQ Members List Donate Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-10-2004, 10:50 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 23
Angry Ruger 77 vs. Remington 700


Registered Users do not see the above ad.


This one is for the guys that have tried both the Ruger 77 and the Remington 700.

I have pondered on this idea for years. After shooting good Remington 700s for years, Remington has changed to the point that I dislike virtually every centerfire rifle they now make (degrading trigger quality, loss of the chamberings I enjoy, the bolt lock, etc.). I am now looking at just having a custom barrel put on an action and end this quest of finding a really great shooting factory rifle. MY QUESTION is how do the Ruger 77 actions perform compared to the 700 short-actions. I have only owned one 77 and it was in a 6PPC plus I love my Remington 40-x bench rifle so my accuracy experience is biased. I like heavy barrels, light triggers and little groups. Does anyone have considerable experience with mid-range (6mm - 7mm) chamberings in accuracy, although hunting type rifles? The earlier 77 actions have some features I like for hunting but I do not know how they perform.

The 700s can shoot great, but can the 77s perform comparably?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-10-2004, 12:00 PM
The Troll Whisperer (Moderator)
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 19,952
'Course, I'm biased also! Have a half dozen or more Rugers in the vaults and nary a Remington. Had Rem 700's in the past (even a .35 Whelen Calssic), but managed to trade them off in favor of the Rugers.

The cast investment Ruger action is about as strong an action as is made today. The older tang safety models have the adjustable triggers, however, are of push-feed construction.

Having the scope mount integral with the receiver frame is a big plus on the Rugers. additionaly, the Ruger stocks were originally designed by Ed Brown of Brownell's and combines the classic features of the Winchester M70 and stocks built by the premier gun stockers of the day. It generally fits most folks quite well.

With the addition of a Moyers steel trigger guard and floor plate, these rifles are beautiful and functional. Can't complain about mine - all are shooters, including the M77/22 Hornet that gets miligned by others.

Like I say - a little biased, also!!
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
NRA Certified Police Firearms Instructor
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NAHC Life Member

"Firearms only have two enemies - rust and politicans" author unknown
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-10-2004, 01:59 PM
IDShooter's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: North Idaho
Posts: 2,076
Olympian - I'm equally biased against Rugers. Have had exactly two really good ones over the years. I've had them in 22-250, 6mm, .243, .257 Rob, 6.5X55, .270, .308, 30-06, and .338. Only the 22-250 and 270 were problem-free, good shooters. These represent a mix of M77 and 77MKII.

By way of comparison, I've only had one Remington that wasn't a good shooter ( out of 222, 223, 243, 270, 7mm Rem Mag, 308, 30-06, and 300 Win Mag). Some of the Remingtons have had other problems (cracked stock, feeding and ejection problems, etc) but they all shot, except for the 270. It was one of the first stainless mountain rifles, and had a poor bore.

Like you, I don't like the recent Remingtons. Since you plan to rebarrel, why not pick up an older Remington action and rebarrel it as you wish? Seems like the best of both worlds.
__________________
IDShooter

"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." - Mark Twain
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-10-2004, 03:25 PM
flashhole's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Owego, NY - USA
Posts: 2,978
Sorry I can't help you with your question.

I logged on to add a similar post comparing the Ruger 77 and Weatherby Accumark V so I am paying keen attention to the comments about the Rugers. I don't/haven't owned either but would like to buy a varmint version. I have decided to go with a 25 caliber rifle. I was looking at the Ruger 77 Target in 25-06 (quoted $619), and the Weatherby Accumark in 257 Weatherby (quoted $1416). I'm wondering if there is more than 2 times as much gun. Granted the 257 is the entry in the Magnum category, but feature to feature, almost 3X the cost is something I just don't see. Any Weatherby fans? I'll probably get a quote on the 25-06 tomorrow to make an apples to apples comparison.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-10-2004, 07:32 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 40
Well I got to say I like them both. And I own them both, (5- 77's, 6-700's, 2-No1's, 1-673 and 1-600). The biggest advantage I have found the 700 has over the 77 is the amount of after market parts. Everybody makes parts for the 700, espcially when it comes to stocks and triggers.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-10-2004, 07:33 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 23
If I were looking for a new heavy-varmint, factory rifle in a long range caliber, I would look at Remington's 700VS or 700VSSF if you like stainless steel, or Browning's 243 WSSM before considering a Weatherby ($$$) or Ruger. Even better, if you are looking at .25 cal then I would try to find a 700 Sendero in 25-06. 6mm Remington in the old Varmint Special is another winner.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-10-2004, 08:00 PM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Jefferson Parish (via N.O.)
Posts: 9,035
And the average Ruger trigger doesn't suck? I'll agree that the Remington triggers of late have been pretty putrid, but the Ruger triggers haven't been something to juump up and down over either.

(Here you have to give a big "well done" to Savage...may not like the new trigger system (I do), but at least they recognize the problem and have a working fix.)

Have used both Rugers and Remingtons and still have a Ruger as well as a couple of Remingtons. Rugers are all wood stocked; Rugers have all given some bedding problems over the years...nothing immeidate, but definate shifts in bedding. Here I have to say, when working to correct a bedding problem, the Ruger is a bit more work.

Guess: don't belive the Ruger stocks like being down here in Humidity Land. Could be the way the blnaks are cured or it could just be bad luck on my part...but the stocks seem to move a bit more than the Remington wood stock. Then again, it may be beacuse the Ruger's wood is actaully well figured and the Remington wood is rather straight grained and plain.

It's a minor annoyance if you're use to a little bedding work.

If I were to build a rifle, would start with the Remington action and go from there. BUT to buy one and use it in factory configuration, would be as pleased to have the Ruger as the Remington.

Ruger had a bad time with barrels some years back (a bit rough) but they seem to have that under control (at least as well as Remington does). But shooters have long memories, and some that got one of the fouling prone rough tubes have a tendencty to condem all Rugers before and after.

Pays yer money and takes yer chances...but for me I've made it more simple: prefer Remington heavy barrel synthetic stocked models, and the Ruger sporter weights.

Last edited by ribbonstone; 08-10-2004 at 08:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-10-2004, 08:53 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Peoria, Az.
Posts: 43
Well,,,,
I've owned both Rem's and Rug's and liked them. Both have their ups and downs just like any other brand, model, etc. But, like any other rifle, either could be worked into something fantastic. Remington has a definite edge in this regard as more 'smiths are used to tweaking them as opposed to Rugers.
To bring up another view, if you look at the Weatherby Vanguard, you get a decent rifle for low bucks. Just another thing to think about.
Good shooting,
HP
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-10-2004, 09:11 PM
mtmrolla's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rolla Missouri
Posts: 849
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiPressure
Well,,,,
I've owned both Rem's and Rug's and liked them. Both have their ups and downs just like any other brand, model, etc. But, like any other rifle, either could be worked into something fantastic. Remington has a definite edge in this regard as more 'smiths are used to tweaking them as opposed to Rugers.
To bring up another view, if you look at the Weatherby Vanguard, you get a decent rifle for low bucks. Just another thing to think about.
Good shooting,
HP
I have a M77 stainless in .223. At first I couldn't get it to group...it patterned.....and when I put my bipod on the front sling swivel it pulled out! They had put a rear sling swivel stud on the front! So...I installed the proper stud and coated the barrel with witness solution. I relieved the barrel channel and then used a Sinclair bullet comparator and chamber measurement tool to determine what the OAL should be for my chamber. I then neck sized and loaded one half grain off max adjusting the OAL to put the ogive .01 off the lands. It shoots like a video game now...almost boring....after 400 rounds the trigger has smoothed out and is releasing at four lbs. I have set up a M77 in .35 Whelen too...and it shoots the same way....

I don't own a M700 but have set some up. The trigger can be adjusted on the Remington...and there are a lot of aftermarket goodies for them...to me..I like the safety on the Ruger...and the rifle fits me....I don't like the plastic on the Remington...other wise....they are more alike than dissimilar.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-10-2004, 09:14 PM
MikeG's Avatar
The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 27,460
No problems with either.... but if I just had to have a new, highly accurate custom gun with a good trigger, I'd start with a Savage.
__________________
MikeG

Quote:
Originally Posted by faucettb
Welcome to the forum. Rules are simple, be nice and join in.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08-11-2004, 03:51 AM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Maine Woods
Posts: 81
Have 2 Model 700's, .223 and .308 varmint units. No compaints and excellent triggers. Have a model 7 in .308 that's a nice gun for the size and purpose.
Have a few 77's in 30-06 through .223 and a few rim fire versions, 22LR, 22 Mag and a 17HMR and although the triggers aren't as nice as the 700's they've all treated me well.
Thing is it seems I can get the Rugers for less money, the built in scope bases are a nice touch, as one less thing to frig. I also like the 3 position safety on the Rugers.
All this has been said before.
Haven't tried an AccuTrigger savage yet, but may be an option.
__________________
NRA Member - Life 1991, Benefactor 2001
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-11-2004, 08:46 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Lawton ,Oklahoma
Posts: 4
If you want a re-barrel deal, buy a new rem 700 at wally world,sell the barrel as a new take-off,have action barrelled the way you want it, if you don't like the lock you can get an upgradded firing pin,spring and bolt end for 50 bucks.
Or you could buy you a new CZ with an accurate barrel,best factory trigger on the market,with a great piece of wood for less than the 700 to start with.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-11-2004, 06:51 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Casper, WY
Posts: 73
I am biased as well I guess. I have nver owned a 700, but I have shot several owned by friends. I have two 77mkII's one in 338WM the other in 30-06. Both of these guns will shoot really small groups. I have done no work to them other than atrigger jobs which I do myself, and the 30-06 will shoot .89" and the 338Wm will shoot .73" groups at 100yds using my handlods. I'll admit the trigger pull is not the best from the factory, but that is about the easiest thing to fix on these guns.

George
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-17-2004, 12:14 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by olympian
This one is for the guys that have tried both the Ruger 77 and the Remington 700.

The 700s can shoot great, but can the 77s perform comparably?
I don't care for either of them anymore, but that doesn't answer your question. I had an old M700 (from 1963) that I'm sorry I sold. I don't care for the bolt feel on the new ones I've hefted, and there seems to be an on-going controversy over their trigger's safety. I don't care for the gloss stock, nor the black fore-end tip. I don't care for the round receiver bottom. All of these are personal preferences, and don't really affect function, except possibly the trigger issue.

I just bought (and sold) a Ruger M77 MkII, and I don't expect to buy another. It worked fine, had a barrel that was so fine that it might have been hand-lapped. It shot some five-shot groups under half an inch. The stock fit me. It looked right. All in all, though, I never warmed up to it. Even after I fixed the trigger to a 3.5 pound weight, it felt much heavier than my tang-safety M77 with a 4.5 pound pull. The trigger fell with a "clank..nk..nk" that vibrated throughout the stock, instead of a glass-breaking "snick." I needed a tool to disassemble the bolt to clean it. It had excessive headspace and went back to the plant to fix. The bolt throw felt better after a few thousand cycles, but was never what I'd call "smooth." The safety position (ergonomically) was awful, having to swing a full 180 degrees, which meant I had to reposition my thumb in the middle of the swing.

Both are good, safe rifles, but I'm past the point of searching for a "best buy." I'm moving upscale in my life - my son refers to my move as "buying the cheapest scotch that has a cork instead of screw threads." I'm looking at Sakos and have just bought a Kimber. FWIW.

Jaywalker
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-17-2004, 05:09 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Valdez Alaska
Posts: 12
Olympian.
I have a few Ruger 77's. Three are the old ones, one has a douglas 6mm bbl. All are good 1.25 " groups or less and one is excellent 1/2 to 3/4 inch groups. However I have a new 30-06 R77 and it is a poor, very poor shooter. It gives about 9 inch groups at 100 yards. It hase been back to the factory, and is going to be sold. I have also owned 6 other R-77's all were junk in the accuracy department.

Good Luck, Tekaan

Quote:
Originally Posted by olympian
This one is for the guys that have tried both the Ruger 77 and the Remington 700.

I have pondered on this idea for years. After shooting good Remington 700s for years, Remington has changed to the point that I dislike virtually every centerfire rifle they now make (degrading trigger quality, loss of the chamberings I enjoy, the bolt lock, etc.). I am now looking at just having a custom barrel put on an action and end this quest of finding a really great shooting factory rifle. MY QUESTION is how do the Ruger 77 actions perform compared to the 700 short-actions. I have only owned one 77 and it was in a 6PPC plus I love my Remington 40-x bench rifle so my accuracy experience is biased. I like heavy barrels, light triggers and little groups. Does anyone have considerable experience with mid-range (6mm - 7mm) chamberings in accuracy, although hunting type rifles? The earlier 77 actions have some features I like for hunting but I do not know how they perform.

The 700s can shoot great, but can the 77s perform comparably?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-19-2004, 03:17 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: FL
Posts: 441
I'm biased to the Ruger. I have two Remington 700's, one that started in .30-06, and was rebarrelled to .280, both 1.5 MOA. The other is an M40 in .308, which is a sub MOA tack driver, but the only thing Remington on it is the action. I have M77's in .250 Savage, .25-06, .260, .300 WM, and .338 WM. The .25-06, .300WM, and .338 WM, are MOA, and the others are 1.5 MOA. This is with handloads tailored to the particular rifle. I prefer the Ruger because of stock finish, design, and fit, and strength of action, availability of calibers, and on the newer MK II's, the Controlled Round Feed Mauser action. The older M77's are Mauser based actions, but are push feed like the M700's. M77 bolt handles are not brazed in place as are the Remingtons, but are one piece cast, then machined to final dimension, which I consider stronger. Also, the older M77's have triggers that are easily adjustable, whereas the M700 is adjustable, but it's not for the uninitiated to perform. The M77 MK II's are not adjustable, but are replaceable with a $35.00 Timney, if you don't like the factory trigger, which are typical lawyer triggers. The best trigger from the factory is the Savage Accu Trigger as was mentioned above, but your question was between the M700 and the M77.

Bottom line is that it is your preference as to which one you like the best, and if it is available in the caliber you want, and at the price you want to pay. IMO the best rifle for the money on the market today is the CZ, but you didn't ask about that one.
__________________
Opinions are like...noses...everyone has one, and some are bigger than others
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-19-2004, 05:19 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: state of ohio
Posts: 63
I followed the text and drawings on www.centerfirecentral.com to rework a couple Remington triggers for myself and a friend. They all shoot WELL.

I reworked the triggers on three Rugers according to the same website's article....using a fine-toothed file and then 400 and 600 grit wet/dry machinists paper. The three of them shot well.....and the trigger on one of them actually lightened up too much and had to be made a little heavier!

No kidding, no balogna. I'll take a Remington for its adjustable trigger....even on the Model 700ADL synthetic which I've seen very reasonably priced; and I'll glady rework a Stainless Steel Ruger 77 Mk II All Weather from Wal-Mart. The Ruger is somewhat more my favorite due to its price and its factory-stock rings, sling swivels, 3-position safety, and simplicity of design.

They both are super!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-30-2005, 11:25 PM
MMichaelAK's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Anchorage, Alaska
Posts: 3,661
I have a couple of Ruger 77 mkIIs, one in 243 (synthetic pre 2000 stock w/ stainless) and the other an RSM in 416 Rigby so there is a lot of variation between the two. Then there is the Remington 700 in 270.

The trigger in the Ruger 243 leaves a little bit to be desired but it will shoot one hole groups all day long if I am patient with the trigger. It is getting an aftermarket trigger next month so this is a moot problem. The RSM in 416 Rigby has no problems other than shooting it isn't cheap. Groups are under one inch at 100 yards and the trigger is beautiful. Both are the controlled feed, 3 position safety regular Ruger action that is nearly as solid as a bank vault.

The Remington is a 270 Winchester and has been on and off a problem child. It is smooth as glass and the trigger breaks like it should but the magazine follower failed on two different hunting trips and it reliably groups 1.5 to 2.5 inches with factory and handloaded ammo. I know that some of Remington's rifles work nicely, but between this one and the others I have seen, they are no better than any other rifle and undeserving of the hype or the price Remington or the dealers want for them.

Pluses for Ruger:
controlled feed
well made
extremely reliable
inexpensive up front
rock solid built in scope bases

Pluses for Remington:
Factory custom shop
parts are everywhere
lots of people work on them
triggers usually nice out of the box

I cant just go throwing money around so my money is on Ruger. They cost less and Ruger service is fantastic. If all you do is drop in a new trigger, you are already way ahead on the deal as just the need for bases for the Remington on top of the higher cost up front make it a lesser choice in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-31-2005, 11:16 AM
faucettb's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Peck, Idaho
Posts: 12,620
Boy olympian you sure got an earfull with that question. I to have owned and shot both and seem to gravitate to the Remington.

I've had some really great shooters in both Ruger and Rem. Seems like overall I've had best luck and groups from the Remingtons.

I've had to fix or send back to the factory more of the Rugers. Never had to return a Remingtjon to be fixed.

One fella above talked about the new CZ's being an excellent rifle. I've got a 452 22 long rifle and the fit and quality and accuracy are excellent. I've looked at both the 527 baby mauser they make and the 550 and have to admit that I really like the look of their guns.

Think I'll add a 527 varmiter with the set trigger in 204 ruger to my gunsafe this summer.

I now only own one Ruger rifle a 1979 #1B in 243 with a 26 inch bbl. It shoots very well and feels really good (high fondle factor). I owned several of their all weather bolt guns a 300 winchester magnum that would cut three shot clover leafs all day, a 22-250 that I could not get better than a 2 inch groups st a hundred and a 22-77 that would not group better than 2 inches at 50 yards. I liked the stainless steel but hated those ugly plastic stocks. All of them have went down the road by now. I see Ruger has changed to a better looking stock now.

Frankly you pays your money and takes your chances. You can get a really good one or a really bad one from anybody. After 45 years of gunning I've ended up with a safe full of keepers. This after a lot of sorting and trying.

One way to sure accuracy is to have a gun built up, i.e. Honed trued action, custom barrel, aftermarket stock, so on and so on. This is going to cost you more money, but so will going thru several factory rifles til you find the right one.

Good luck in your search
__________________
Bob from Idaho
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-11-2006, 08:50 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: kansas
Posts: 52
having owned both models and still do i have to go with the rem700.ive been going the custom route of late and the 700 is by far the most preferred action to work with by most gunnys.i just had a 700 short action reworked with all the goodies ie.jewell trigger, stock work, kriger barrel, every thing you can do to it, and im here to tell ya it shoots.for under 1500$
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Win, Browning, Remington or Ruger? TPM Rifles and Rifle Cartridges 45 09-22-2009 01:44 AM
Remington 700, Browning A-bolt, or Ruger m77, and why? fender817 Rifles and Rifle Cartridges 52 04-27-2009 09:36 AM
Ruger announces new cartridge - the .204 Ruger alyeska338 Rifles and Rifle Cartridges 39 12-14-2008 08:39 PM
New Ruger Pistol Announced gunwriter Handguns 8 04-17-2004 08:55 PM
Ruger M-77 not feeding Remington Brass Dutch4122 Gunsmithing 4 08-11-2002 09:15 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:31 PM.

< Contact Us - Shooters Forum - Archive >

 
 

All Content & Design Copyright © 1999-2002 Beartooth Bullets, All Rights Reserved
View Privacy Policy | Contact Webmaster | Legal Information
Website Design & Development By Exbabylon Internet Solutions
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2