Printable View
I’m sure theirs someone around here who’s abit of a Ruger enthusiast, my question is about this lovely little rifles stock did they come like this or am I right in suspecting it’s being swapped? Year of manufacture is 1992 typically wearing the “skeleton” or “paddle” stock . Rock solid half cock terrible trigger and weighs a ton but damn it’s nice.
Thanks
nah pretty sure they came like that too...mate had one in left hand... it was definately wood.
Have seen a few with timber stock
Nearly always in 270 or rem mag for some reason
cause 270 uses have good taste perhaps LOL....
Nice to no thanks gents this is a .223 22” barrel by the looks of it
is a very lovely looking rifle,whatever the cartridge.... be proud to own it,that is for sure.
I got one brand new in the early 90's with wooden stock in 2506 - m77 mk2 as well. Then got another one a few years later in 223 that came with a laminated stock.
It sure is it won’t be getting cut or suppressed either if I decide a suppressor is necessary when the young fella comes of age it might wear a new shorter barrel but this barrel will be kept clean safe and original in respect of its vintage in which case It’d be cheaper to get him another rifle any howQuote:
Originally Posted by Micky Duck
that how I feel about all my rifles,all are threaded but none are shortened...... if I decide I really need a short rifle again...will buy another LOL...
Had one too. Blued wood 308 MK2. The stock cracked on mine behind the magwell, there was very little wood left there on that rifle.
Yeah they came like that
I always thought Ruger Walnut rifles had their stock shape worked out perfectly especially the Hawkeye model, they looked to me like a rifle should.
File photo of the African model.
Attachment 191760
It is a great shape that African looks stunning the polished stainless on these is a lot it’d look good blasted or cerocoated black it’d really be my cup of tea but I appreciate how it is and will leave it that way. The checkering is also very well done and it’s flat at the back of the tang rather than round which is odd but likeable enough I’ll take a couple of photos for reference tomorrow
@Kelton My first new centrefire was a Ruger M77 in 270. I suppose it was a Mk 1? Bought it about 1981-ish for $434 from Sutherland Sports. Paid a deposit and took it home with a laybuy book and went to New Plymouth from Stratford every Friday night in my old Morris Minor to pay it off. Can't imagine doing that now.
A beautiful wooden stock rifle with a thin red recoil pad, accurate too. It was my most prized possession. My mum hit the roof because as I was only on about $55-60 a week as a butchery apprentice then. I eventually sold that rifle and still regret it to this day.....
@bumblefoot did it have a tang safety? I think the mk1 did . I’ve acquired another in 9.3x62 not sure if it’s a mk1 or mk11 yet as I’ve only handled it once and didn’t pay much attention it’s action was silky smooth maybe the best I’ve used . It’d being trued up and rebarreled from a 7x57 for hunting wild cattle . Blued and synthetic not the paddle stock . Was a total stranger at the range about mid 60s got Charing gave me a few shots and I said in passing if you ever want to sell it let me no. He’s a resourceful bugger because I can’t even recall his name (which was bugging me for months) and he’s managed to track me down threw my mitre 10 rep
@Kelton Yes it had the tang safety, was a lovely rifle.... If only I knew the serial number I'd try to find it! But; I'd better stop talking about because I'm not sure how waterproof the keyboard is.... Too many tears of regret! :D
I know where a tang safety .25/06 is now...came off forum and is being used to great effect by new owner...adding a DPT suppressor made a world of difference and makes it rather pleasant to shoot now.
The Ruger M77 Mk1 is a superb rifle. Fully adjustable trigger and has tang safety. All came with wooden stock. When properly bedded they shoot like a dream. Sorry guy's to be negative, but the Mk 11 not so much. Manufacturing costs led to a lesser rifle. Ruger had to compete with other prime American brands who were producing cheaper, lesser quality rifles aimed at the same market. The Mk11 trigger is a case in point. It went from fully adjustable to simply not.
The rifle in the first photograph looks great. Although not a Mk1, it will have the same action, less safety and trigger. If I were intent on keeping it, especially with a young fellah in mind, I would install a fully adjustable after market trigger. Good shooting.
Re the mk2 trigger, my 2506 came set at 3.5lbs but the 223 that I got in 95 or 96 was insane and when i got it lightened the guy said it was set at 5kg!
I believe it was around the time one of the manufacturers, I think it was Remington were facing a number of lawsuits from people who had adjusted thier triggers and had accidents.
Yip this trigger is mighty heavy it will certainly be getting attention. The 9.3 stock is a funny one looks more like the weatherby synthetics the older ones
my winchester model 70 came from factory with trigger so heavy....I found deer,dug hole,rammed in a strainer post,wired rifle to post then went and fetched the D7 to hook winch rope onto trigger,reved engine and pulled,rifle would fire just short of stalling point. sometimes the deer would hang about to watch proceedings.....
seriously stupidly heavy...2 minutes with two small spanners...oh alright a 6" cresant and down to 2.5lb
I had one of these as one of my first rifles, might have been the second or third centrefire I owned, can't remember. Mine was 6.5x55. I do remember it was a very nice rifle but super heavy, as in you would pick it up and be surprised how much weight was crammed into the size package you were holding. Don't think it had an adjustable trigger and didn't have tang safety (I hate tang safety's anyhow..) was quite accurate considering those were the days when I just bought S &B off the shelf stuff.
I bought my walnut blued .243 77mk2 new. Had the trigger lightened in upper Hutt straight away, possibly the best feeling trigger of my rifles. No creep and approx 2lb.
I bedded mine which improved the groups and also made sure the mag box was floating and not bound up which helped with reducing flyers. It shoots bloody great now, even before the improvements I shot alot deer in the head with it to 200m.
How you tighten the action screws, especially the middle screw will affect how it shoots on these rugers.
Bring it around if you want me to have a look at it. I might see if there are any obvious issues with it.
I’ve being meaning to get ahold of you knowing you had that .243 I’ve being phoneless for months and now have no contacts and a new number (dedicated the other number for work) I turn it on at 7am about and hour after I leaver reception and turn it off at 5pm about 2 hours befor I get back to reception life’s good on that front . I’ll try PM you my new number now but I’m a little suspicious my PMs are not working at present might need to clear my inbox and sent itemsQuote:
Originally Posted by Roarless20
Is this rifle full stainless or blued (might be my eyes but I can't tell from the photos). The Mk2 came in stainless/skeleton or wood/blue but I don't think wood stainless. The powder coating on the alloy floorplate was prone to scratching but the trigger could be made very good by a competent gunsmith. Unfortunately the action length is way to big for 223 sized cartridges so feeding can be a problem with them. Wish I hadn't sold my left hand 270win.
It’s wood stainless the action length Is .308 with a mag box inside for the .223 it seems to feed exceptionally well the actions roughly 15mm longer than a factory loaded 50gn .223 load shorter action than my mates .270 I’ll try get a photo up when I get home
@Shearer that’s a Nosler bt loaded to mag length about 8-10mm shorter than the ejection/loading port
As long as it feeds well, that's fine. I remember coming across a couple in 223 that didn't though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelton
