Ruger American Ranch - 5.56 AR

RifleDude

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
43   0   0
Location
Not in Toronto
Well, what to do if you have a whole bunch of AR15 magazines and lots of .223/5.56 rounds that you can't use. After thoroughly researching which bolt action rifle would be suitable to substitute for my AR15s, I decided to pull the plug and purchase a Ruger American Ranch in 5.56 cal using AR mags. After some more research, I decided to give Dante the business and was not disappointed (free shipping didn't hurt either). Canada Post was slow but came through just fine. I don't blame them too much what with the covid 19 problems for most businesses. First impressions where pretty good. There are a ton of reviews on the net so I'm not going into that much. Things I like are the compact size, decent trigger, threaded muzzle, 60 deg bolt throw, AR style mag release and of course the ability to use AR mags. The stock is functional and surprisingly solid. I checked whether the barrel was free floating and it was, no issue there. The trigger is crisp but a little heavy. I adjusted the trigger down to the lowest setting and it feels good to me. I don't have trigger gauge but I estimate it's around 3 lbs. The things I didn't like were the bolt stiffness when cocking the bolt and the mag release that was partially covered by the stock.

mIkJ5uNl.jpg


It also tended to pinch my trigger finger a bit due to the sharp edge on the stock when pressing the mag release. None of these things were a show stopper and being a tinkerer, I figured I could make some improvements. First, I removed the barrelled action from the stock, then I reshaped the stock area where the mag release is using a round file and sand paper.

OjXDzZ1l.jpg


This was a huge improvement. Not only does it look better but it's a lot more functional.

While I had the stock off, I decided to add a picatinny rail to the bottom of the fore stock. I like to have the option to add a QD mount for my bipod on the fore end and don't want to fiddle with mounting the pod on the sling swivel stud. I just had a pic rail with the correct mounting screw holes in my goodies drawer. The spacing worked out perfect with the internal stock webbing (2.375") and the existing stud hole. All I had to do was drill a hole in the right place and mount the pic rail.

8isgIZpm.jpg
ZtaF1w1m.jpg


After reassembling the rifle, I got to work to smooth up the bolt cocking issue. All I did was to cycle the bolt a few hundred times while I was watching my favourite TV show (The Unit). This got rid of a lot of the roughness but I was not totally satisfied. I took the bolt shroud off and applied a few daps of moly grease to the bolt camming surfaces. Note that there are 2 camming grooves you need to do this to. These two actions made the bolt cocking very acceptable.

fxKicGGm.jpg
zNwBBO7m.jpg


I also had a muzzle brake in my goodies drawer and decided to install that as well. It's not that a .223 cal rifle recoils a lot, but it is a light rifle and I compete in CQB matches so I want minimal recoil to stay on target for fast follow on shots.

Gcswx0Ql.jpg


Here is a detailed picture of the Harris bipod mounted on the rifle.

gd3A5FAl.jpg


Finally, I mounted an old Bushnell Tactical 10X scope on the top rail using Burris Signature Z-Rings.

25jKNPfl.jpg


Initial grouping is very promising. I used an existing batch of reloads I worked up for one of my AR15s, using 55gr VMAX bullets and 26.8gr of Varget. The largest group was 1.13MOA and the smallest was 0.63MOA. Out of 8 5-shot groups, 2 were slightly over 1 MOA and 6 were sub-MOA. All groups were fired from the bench using the bipod and rear bag at 100y. So, now comes the challenge to find the best loads for various bullets. Having a 1:8 twist, this rifle should be good for bullets from 40gr to 80gr. IMHO, this rifle has a good potential for CQB and Ganderite's sporting rifle matches.
 
Nice work on that mag release! Gonna have to try that; thanks!

Already did the dry-fire smoothing operation; a few hundred trigger pulls at the TV on Animal Planet work wonders...:)
 
I am shocked how well my 22" version shoots. I bought it to use AR mags and now to undo that I am waiting for an MDT chassis to show up so I can run AICS mags and chase the rifling and velocity.
 
Good job on the mag release. I’ve noticed that it was annoying but didn’t think to just file a bigger opening. Sometimes the KISS principle works best!
 
I had just finished building a 300blk upper for my AR and getting all the reloading dies and brass then the ban happened. I saw the Ruger Ranch comes in 300blk too so I ordered one its on the way I can't wait to try it out looks like it will be a fun little rifle the Ruger Ranch. Not as fun as a AR with a 10" barrel but it will have to do.
 
I'd be interested in seeing how AR Back Up Iron Sights would attach and align. The front post would need some form of barrel band. I wonder if a conventional AR gas block with rail sections would work?

But, rather than go on about how awesome the gun is, how about showing how accurate it is.
 
What possible reason would there be for mounting sights that high on this rifle? AR-type sights need to be high because of the straight-line configuration of buttstock/receiver/barrel, which forces your cheek and eye way up above the bore so that's where the sights need to go. The AR-Ranch has a conventional stock/receiver/barrel geometry, in fact the comb on the Ranch actually looks a bit low compared to many sporting rifles today. It cries out for a set of low, conventional design sights; putting AR sights on it would make a cheekweld impossible. You'd need to use a massive cheekpad to compensate.

You'd end up with a rifle that had a bunch of AR stuff bolted on without any real reason, and then still more stuff bolted on to make up for the first bad choice.
 
What possible reason would there be for mounting sights that high on this rifle? AR-type sights need to be high because of the straight-line configuration of buttstock/receiver/barrel, which forces your cheek and eye way up above the bore so that's where the sights need to go. The AR-Ranch has a conventional stock/receiver/barrel geometry, in fact the comb on the Ranch actually looks a bit low compared to many sporting rifles today. It cries out for a set of low, conventional design sights; putting AR sights on it would make a cheekweld impossible. You'd need to use a massive cheekpad to compensate.

You'd end up with a rifle that had a bunch of AR stuff bolted on without any real reason, and then still more stuff bolted on to make up for the first bad choice.

Thanks for the free opinion. The AR platform is remarkably modular, so why not try to reuse some of the parts? Have you looked at shilouette rifles? They have ridiculously high sight lines because of standing shooting positions.
 
What possible reason would there be for mounting sights that high on this rifle? AR-type sights need to be high because of the straight-line configuration of buttstock/receiver/barrel, which forces your cheek and eye way up above the bore so that's where the sights need to go. The AR-Ranch has a conventional stock/receiver/barrel geometry, in fact the comb on the Ranch actually looks a bit low compared to many sporting rifles today. It cries out for a set of low, conventional design sights; putting AR sights on it would make a cheekweld impossible. You'd need to use a massive cheekpad to compensate.

You'd end up with a rifle that had a bunch of AR stuff bolted on without any real reason, and then still more stuff bolted on to make up for the first bad choice.
I took my Burris pepr off an AR an installed it on the Ranch with a Vortex Strike Eagle scope. It's ridiculously high. I definitely need to bring the scope down as low as possible. What mount do you recommend?
 
I took my Burris pepr off an AR an installed it on the Ranch with a Vortex Strike Eagle scope. It's ridiculously high. I definitely need to bring the scope down as low as possible. What mount do you recommend?

I used Leupold PRW2 medium high to mount a vortex Diamondback. Could have likely got away with using low rings but I plan on adding a buttstock shell holder to mine. Just need to find one in LH.
 
$50 AICS mag allows .250 extra seating length, it might get me another 100fps and can run bullets like the 75gr Amax. I only need a couple.

My understanding is there are currently no AICS magazines that will properly feed the Ruger American Ranch 5.56. If you find one that proves me wrong please share as I would be very interested.
 
$50 AICS mag allows .250 extra seating length, it might get me another 100fps and can run bullets like the 75gr Amax. I only need a couple.

My understanding is there are currently no AICS magazines that will properly feed the Ruger American Ranch 5.56. If you find one that proves me wrong please share as I would be very interested.

I think Magpul has announced a magazine that would fit lately. I think it was announced on Gravel Agency’s vendor forum

Ruger makes one, Magpul makes one and a Canadian option should be released this summer.

I'm not sure where you guys are heading with this info. The subject of the thread is the Ranch AR-mag model; it takes AR-pattern mags, and there is no way an AICS-pattern mag will fit or work. Compare the two types; they are not even remotely similar in dimension or proportions. Are you talking about switching the AR model into a different stock to allow it to take AICS mags?
 
I'm not sure where you guys are heading with this info. The subject of the thread is the Ranch AR-mag model; it takes AR-pattern mags, and there is no way an AICS-pattern mag will fit or work. Compare the two types; they are not even remotely similar in dimension or proportions. Are you talking about switching the AR model into a different stock to allow it to take AICS mags?

Perhaps this comment started it:
You could get the chassis that runs AR mags, think of all the money you'll save.
 
Back
Top Bottom