Ruger rifles

Get the Ruger: lower price with fewer plastic parts than a T3!

I definitely prefer the classic looks of the Ruger. T3s look cheap and funny-looking to me. The older Tikkas were much nicer.

Generally, Mauser type actions aren't the smoothest because they have more play when the bolt is open, but they will improve as they get broken in.
 
Mount Sweetness said:
My older tang safety M77 is smooth and polished. I owned a new Hawkeye for 3 days, not smooth and nothing polished. Ruger has made the Hawkeye's cheaper, period.
Click to expand...

Ruger still makes the M77 MkII models with the gloss bluing as well as the Hawkeyes with the matte bluing.
 
out of the box the t3 is a better value as the usally shoot very well from the box. the rugers need a little breakin and trigger work much like remigtons. once tweaked ruger are your tough as nails do anything hunting rifle. most of the rugers i've owned needed a little tlc but the tikkas were used without modifications other than a trigger lightning done with supplied allen key.
 
I would take a T3 in hearbeat over any Remington or Ruger. Nice light rifles in there T3 Lite series, one of the best factory "shooters", trigger is crisp and adjustable. The stocks are very stiff and have no flex if you opt for that or you can choose a wood or laminate.
Do some reading on a number of different forums and google both and you'll see nothing but positive reviews on The Tikka's.
 
Thanks for the info guys.

As for your comments 220Swifty I'm not quite sure how to take that. I'm asking for opinions and everyone certainly has their own. As far as getting out of the truck goes, I thought that I'd made it clear that the reason for a lighter rifle is I do get out of the truck...and put on miles, as I said. I prefer not to sit in the truck and can only post up in one spot for so long before the urge to see some scenery and whats around the next bend gets me. If I did hunt in either of thoes manners then I guess I could buy rifle that weighed considerably more.

If your refering to me not being personally up to the task, I can assure you that is not the case. I am far from a light weight, I just enjoy packing light.
 
220Swifty said:
If a sporter weight Ruger is too heavy for you to carry as a hunting rifle, you probably don't get out of the truck enough to really have to worry about it.
Click to expand...

My sporter weight rifles regardless of make aren't too heavy for me, but when I'm doing a steep hike I'll take the lightest one in the safe. Never paid too much attention to the weight of a rifle till I passed the 60 mark a few yrs. ago.... :)
 
longarm28 said:
Thanks for the info guys.

As for your comments 220Swifty I'm not quite sure how to take that. I'm asking for opinions and everyone certainly has their own. As far as getting out of the truck goes, I thought that I'd made it clear that the reason for a lighter rifle is I do get out of the truck...and put on miles, as I said. I prefer not to sit in the truck and can only post up in one spot for so long before the urge to see some scenery and whats around the next bend gets me. If I did hunt in either of thoes manners then I guess I could buy rifle that weighed considerably more.

If your refering to me not being personally up to the task, I can assure you that is not the case. I am far from a light weight, I just enjoy packing light.
Click to expand...


What i was referring to was if the extra 8 oz is too much for you, then you likely don't see much exersise. Simply a little quip. Here's an idea, if you want to be 8 oz lighter before hitting the trail, take a ####, not a ####ty rifle.:D
 
I have a MK II in .22-250. Wood, blued, pencil barrel. Once I swapped out the trigger it groups 2" at 200 m. Thats off the hood of my truck. The T3 is accurate and light cycles smooth but that plastic everywhere just annoys me. I don't trust it. Buy a Tikka 595 or older out the EE if you must have a Tikka. Buy that Ruger and be open to a trigger swap out. Mine cost $100 or so bucks.
 
I dont believe anyone has mentioned the fact that the Tikka has a DM, while the Ruger has a hinged floorplate. This consideration would make the difference for me...
 
I don't own either but I too am looking at getting me a real Left Handed gun in .300 WM and between the two of them I'd go for the ruger 77. The rifle fit me much better and a little work on the action and it will smooth out.
 
Yeah, Tikkas have detachable magazines that are expensive to buy, but are cheaply made from plastic.

Also, the Tikka has a narrow ejection port in the receiver, which makes it impractical to single load from the top, unlike a conventional open top receiver.

Personally, I think detachable magazines in bolt action rifles are overrated unless you do all of your hunting from a truck.

It all boils down to personal preference. Either rifle has more than enough accuracy to get the job done.

If you want a classically styled rifle with controlled feed and a hinged floorplate, get the Ruger.

If a rifle is just a utilitarian tool, which you don't care how it looks, and you must have a detachable magazine, The Tikka will serve you well.
 
Crazy.kayaker said:
The rifle fit me much better and a little work on the action and it will smooth out.
Click to expand...


Personally, I believe that is the key in choosing any rifle. For me, Rugers fit me well and they are rugged and reliable - all things I value in a hunting rifle.

As for weight, I need to loose more than the difference between a Ruger and a Tikka.:eek:

Not taking anything away from the T3's. I had one and it was accurate and light, but it didn't feel comfortable to shoot and I don't like having to worry about loosing (or remembering to pack) the detachable magazine. Personal preference.

Accuracy with my Rugers is more than adequate for me. I enjoy hand loading and finding the load that works best in each rifle. If i miss, it's not the guns fault.;)

Cheers!

James
:D




.
 
cosmic said:
I dont believe anyone has mentioned the fact that the Tikka has a DM, while the Ruger has a hinged floorplate. This consideration would make the difference for me...
Click to expand...

Absolutely. A hinged floorplate is a much better setup for a hunting rifle, at least the way I hunt.
 
Gatehouse said:
Absolutely. A hinged floorplate is a much better setup for a hunting rifle, at least the way I hunt.
Click to expand...

I'd like to know what benefit a hinged floor plate provides if you cannot get it open with cold frozen fingers ? Both my Rugers are Hell to open in cold miserable weather...on the other hand my T3 mag and other Tikka mags are easy to handle. With respect to the "plastic" mag on the T3, a person would have to do something pretty stupid to wreck it as they are pretty tough.
 
Kevan said:
I'd like to know what benefit a hinged floor plate provides if you cannot get it open with cold frozen fingers ? Both my Rugers are Hell to open in cold miserable weather...on the other hand my T3 mag and other Tikka mags are easy to handle. With respect to the "plastic" mag on the T3, a person would have to do something pretty stupid to wreck it as they are pretty tough.
Click to expand...

I've hunted in some pretty cold temperatures, and don't have a problem. If it gets sticky, use the base of a cartridge to push in the button. I usually only have to unload once or twice a day, so it's not really a big deal. For me, the benefits of a hinged floorplate over a detachable magazine outweigh any negatives.

Although both systems will work, if set up properly.
 
I went with the m77 6 years ago when i was buying a new 3006.the tikka is nice but the ruger felt like a tuffer gun.i had them both in my hands at the same time.they both have advantages and are fine rifles.can not go wrong with either.my 2 cents.
 
Gatehouse said:
Absolutely. A hinged floorplate is a much better setup for a hunting rifle, at least the way I hunt.
Click to expand...


So it's a "much better setup...at least for the way I hunt..."
I guess mags can be lost....possibly...occasionally.....is that it?
What is so distinctive about your hunting style that makes a hinged floorplate not just a preference, but a "much better setup" than a detach mag? Because it sure sounds to me like someone trying to justify a simple preference and having no facts to support a statement.
 
A detachable mag is fiddled with even when the rifle is not in use, it can be left on the loading bench, or forgotten in the pockets of a different set of hunting pants, or in your range box. A big deal if you are hunting 400 km from home, and left your house at 2 am when you were half awake. Sure you can forget your ammo, your binos or a slew of other things, but eliminating a detachable mag from the equation makes it one less thing to forget. If your walking for the majority of the day, you only load and unload once or twice anyways, so what does it matter if it takes 2 seconds longer.

"Truck" hunters, on the other hand, prefer the quick load/unload abilities of the detachable mag, because they are in and out of the truck several times a day. This is why i may find myself getting such a mag setup for a dedicated coyote rifle in the future.

Kevan, as far as the ruger being a tough one to operate with cold hands, i have seen some detachable mag systems that aren't much easier to release. This is probably a good thing, as i would be pissed if i dropped that $80 plastic box in the snow somwhere because my finger brushed it and released it without my knowing.
 
I hope it didn't sound like I was being critical of the Rugers, Lord knows I've had several...still have, but I just prefer others. Usually my rifle is loaded / unloaded once a day.
Not trying to hijack this thread but as far as the unloading factor is concerned I quite like my Win. M 71 348 and/ or my Rem 700 TI with the blind mag.....but thats just me... :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom