1) I watched a youtube video where they tested several deer rifles in 30-06 and they stated that they had problems with the barrel rusting on the Ruger. They did admit that they neglected proper maintenance,
2) I know that any barrel has a potential to rust, and the importance of proper maintenance.
3) but I don't think they had the same problem with some of the other guns.
4) So my question is, do you think this is due to Ruger using a cheaper grade stainless on the barrel to keep costs down?
5) If you own this gun I would really appreciate any feedback you can provide on how this gun is holding up for you.
6) I have handled this gun as well as many others and for the price I don't think it can be beat.
7) If the barrel is not going to hold up though, then I think it is a deal breaker and I need to go to the next price bracket. Thanks.

Mike J

First of all, Welcome to the Forum!!


Did a little re-arranging to keep your thoughts in the same vein.

1 & 2) You sort of answered your own question here. They admitted neglect, so "problems" with the rifle may be a bit of a stretch don't you think? There will be a huge difference in required care for me in the desert, Vs. Someone on the coast of Florida.
3) Based upon...? Unless they told you they didn't while subjecting them to the same conditions, I'm not sure you can make that call with any confidence.
4) Again a rather large leap of faith is being taken here, with no specifics other than admitted neglect.
So if they admit they didn't care for something, not sure how that automatically defaults to a company selling junk.
5) Just fine. The finish is different than some of the M77's in stainless, but no worse for the wear after a couple years banging around in the back of a pickup. My best friend bought the stainless version shortly after I bought my RAP, and talked to him about it. I see him almost every day, hunt with him constantly. An irrigated farmer here in the basin doesn't take care of a truck gun with any sort of tender care.
6) This confuses me. If for the price you don't think they can be beaten, then why the assumption they were worse than the supposed competition on the video?
7) Again, this strikes me as being based upon some rather large assumptions.

I make no bones about the stocks not being what I prefer, I made that pretty clear in my reviews of my RAP. I don't think they are as nicely finished, or "done" as the M77's; but I knew that going into the deal. As far as the metal on my Blued RAP, I don't let it clang around in the back of my truck everyday, but I certainly don't baby anything I have. I buy appliances, not heirlooms.
As I said, my climate is different than the coastal regions. Which is why you need to consider things indivdually, and not as a blanket statement.

Cheers

 

There is a reason the American stocks looks and feels cheap...because it is. Consider the rest of the Rugers attributes make it worth overlooking or replacing with something better.
Normal care will cure the rust issue which could happen to any firearm subjected to neglect.

 

Darkker, I understand everything you are saying, and I probably should have asked my question differently. To simplify, do manufacturers use a lower grade stainless steel in their entry level rifles vs what they would use on their upper tier models? If this is the case, then I would expect a higher priced gun to be less susceptible to corrosion and something I need to consider. I don't plan on mistreating the gun, but I would imagine a week at deer camp and it will be subjected to some abuse.

 

I don't know that Ruger states what the alloy is, in either the M77 or American lines. But I also don't know anyone that does, or does that specifically states they do.

I lived and hunted in the mountains of northern Idaho for the better part of a decade with regular 4140 steel rifles with varying states of blueing. None of them ever gave me issues with rusting. When you do get home, give them a wipe with your prefered magic juice. Either a silicone cloth, FrogLube, Ed's Red, etc. Unless you have some really tough conditions, any SS that is fit to use for a rifle, should be at least as well off as a standard chromemoly barrel with worn blueing.

 

I bought that very rifle back in January. I wiped it down when I bought it and have done nothing to it since. I have not noticed any rust on the rifle at all. I bought it as a beater gun if you will. It will spend most of deer season in my truck. It will get wiped down at the end of season when I put it back in the safe. I can let you know then.

Darin

 

I bet it's 416 or 416r stainless in the barrel. Good stuff for most uses. It's what all the match grade AR15 barrels are made of... I assume it's used in a lot of other firearms too. It's the stainless equivalent to 4140 steel (most common steel used in firearms).

It's a good stainless steel. I've had no problems from any of my stainless Ruger firearms. Definately more corrosion resistant than regular bluing but you do still have to take care of it. Stainless is very corrosion "resistant" not proof. My favorite material is Nitride treated stainless or even stainless that has been cerakoted. Good luck getting that to rust! But it costs a whole lot of $$$...

 

The Ruger American stainless rifles in the rack outside the gun library in the Gonzalez Cabelas often have rust/stain on them. With care, that probably wouldn't be an issue. Over the years several Ruger models were more prone to rust than others. I had a P-89 that would rust easily. My SP101 won't rust. Their Stainless Hawkeyes and M77 rifles must use a different stainless, because you can't get them to rust either. Don't worry about the cheap stock. It doesn't seem to adversely affect accuracy. It's just a handle, and it works.

 

I have multiple stainless Ruger 77's & Hawkeye's that have been subjected to sever winter hunting conditions for years with out a speck of rust. Other than an occasional wipe down no other special care has been needed. Remember you get what you pay for. If you plan on keeping this rifle for years to come do your self a favor & spend the extra money for a stainless Hawkeye. When you look back over time you will be glad you did. Me personally, I would rather purchase a used stainless Hawkeye than a new Ruger American,

 

Though I own no Americans, I do own a number of Rugers that are stainless. All have had excellent rust resistance with what could be called routine maintenance. That being said, I have a Knight muzzleloader, that while very accurate, I swear the stainless will rust if I stare at it hard.

I'd have no qualms buying a Ruger in stainless.

 

I'm a manufacturing consultant, and have worked with hundreds of companies around the country, helping them to reduce their manufacturing costs. I own a couple Ruger M77s (Stainless) and a couple Ruger Americans (Matte Black).

Although I never consulted with Ruger, and I don't have access to their specifications, but I seriously doubt Ruger tried to save money by using a different grade steel in their guns. Their cost saving are predominately done through:
1) Design changes that allow many fewer parts
2) Reducing the number of manufacturing operations that are largely cosmetic (rougher finishes on barrel instead of high polish bluing, machine marks on bolt that produce the "zipper sound", etc.
3) Plastic formed stocks that don't require more expensive wood and additional operations to finish

The stock is the most common complaint, but you can buy if it really bothers you, you can get an aftermarket stock like a Boyds, and still have less money in it than an M77.