Review on Ruger M77 Mark II

So 13 positives and one quack reply doesn't cut it? You sound like you need somebody to tell you what to do, won't find that here, just people extremely happy with their rifles. The Ruger story is universally known, no matter which forum, which review; hell for strong, great value, tough, a bit heavy, good accuracy.

All I can tell you is go to a retailer and pick one up,you'll learn everything you need to know.
 
My Ruger M77mkII stainless steel, canoe paddle plastic stock in .300 win. mag has been an incredible rifle. I got mine for $7.00 CAD - possibly the best $7.00 CAD that I have ever spent.

It shoots 180 grain Hornady bullets under an inch. Has been great for bear, moose, mulies, and whitetails.

It has always worked on all kinds of weather. Even when other guys rifles were freezing up, my Ruger always worked. Great rifles.
 
Honestly, the opinions expressed here by the regular poster's are infinitely more valuable than anything you'll read in a monthly publication.

We have some rather humorous people that continuously harp about their favourite action or calibre, and the constant whiners that bash the same cartridge or manufacturer over and over again as if they think anyone cares, but in general, the opinions here are true and educated.

For what it's worth... the only negative opinion expressed so far is completely unrelated to the Ruger M77 itself...
 
I have the same rifle, different scope. Great shooter! It shoots Czech surplus 7.62x39 inside 2" anytime @ 100yds and that ammo is the worst accuracy wise I've ever shot. Handloads shoot 1/2" for 3 shot groups. Not bad for a hunting rifle.

h t t p://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpQDlWdhIdY


Truth be known, I'm a Rem 700 fan, but it's hard to fault the M77 MKII. Accuracy is good, trigger [like most rifles] needs a tuneup and built tough.
 
Last edited:
Reports from " Gun Tests", which is the Consumer Reports on guns:

Ruger M77R Mark II
The Ruger .270 accounted itself well in our test, consistently developing groups very near 1 inch, satisfactory downrange performance in a hunter-class silo rifle or hunting-only rifle.

Also, cosmetically and operationally, the M77R was one of the test’s best. The Ruger’s straight stock, which was a beautifully grained light walnut, was accented by a low-sheen finish and sharp, deep checkering on the grip and forearm. Its stainless-steel bolt and stainless bolt handle also gave the gun a distinctive appearance we liked, and the bolt operated very smoothly.

On the downside, the test rifle had a horrible trigger, which suffered from substantial creep before the shot let off at 51/2 pounds. However, Ruger factory guns have a well-earned reputation for atrocious trigger adjustment when they come from the plant. But in our experience, those triggers can be lightened, smoothed, and made crisper by a gunsmith—usually for around $35. That, plus a bedding job, would draw the price of the Ruger about equal to the Browning in value for the dollar. There’s only 1/4-pound difference in weight between the M77R and the Medallion, and the difference in how well they shot was thin: the Medallion performed 1/10-inch better overall.

On the other hand, the Ruger had an edge in that it came with integral scope rings and bases, while the Medallion didn’t. Also, we liked the Mauser-style bolt on the Ruger better than the bolt on the Medallion. It was very smooth and fed and extracted shells more smoothly than the others.
http://ww w.gun-tests.com/performance/apr97FT270.html

Ruger M77 Mark II Magnum, Model 7501

375 H&H Magnum, $2404

We were severely disappointed in the Ruger before we ever fired a shot. When we opened the box we were slapped in the face by what appeared to be a plank into which the metal had been inletted. Per the Ruger website, this particular rifle comes with a Circassian walnut stock, and the online photo shows gorgeous wood, just like you’d expect, especially on a rifle costing over two grand. But the wood grain here had almost no figure. The grain may have been tight and the wood may have actually grown in the Circassus, but in a brief search online we found Circassian blanks costing less than $250 that would knock your eyes out, compared to this one. To our eyes, this stock is a plank, not worthy of being on this rifle.

There was no cheek piece on the stock, and we wanted one. The checkering and stock finish were well done, fully up to Ruger’s usual standards. The stock was attached to the barrel by the usual slanted Ruger bolt at the action, and also by two screws through the bottom of the forend.

The recoil pad was much harder than the pads on the other two rifles. It was fairly large in area, but still only a fraction of the area of the Kimber’s soft pad. We thought it would hurt us on the bench, and we were not disappointed. Despite Ruger’s recently putting an updated recoil pad on all its rifles, the company still has not got it right on rifles that kick really hard.

The metalwork was notable in its excellence. The Ruger’s rear sight was set into a marvelously machined rear ramp, or quarter rib, integrally cut into the steel of the barrel. This is by no means an easy operation, but it was flawlessly done, as was its juncture with the flat-top rib on the action. No separation line could be seen at the joint. The overall metal finish on the Ruger was just off shiny, very uniform, and perfectly executed. There was a hinged floorplate, so the unfired rounds could be removed by diligent poking of the stiff release button. We found the front corners of the rear sight sharp enough to cut you easily, and the same problem was on the Kimber. A file would fix this.

The front sling-attach point was on the barrel, where it belongs on hard-kicking rifles. We already discussed the rear sight shape. We found it was windage-adjustable by drifting, and clamped in place by a screw. The front blade is easily replaceable by pressing on a plunger, so it’s possible to change the impact point of the iron sights rather easily. We’d like to see a protective hood over the front blade. The trigger pull was excellent but way too heavy. It broke cleanly at 6.2 pounds, about three pounds too much. That’s not easily fixed, if we understand Ruger’s new trigger.

We again borrowed the 1.5-5X Leupold and put it onto the Ruger in the fine rings that came with the gun, and took it to the range. Like the other guns, the Ruger didn’t like the heavy Hornady loads, but with the Remington and Federal ammo it shot about as well as the other two rifles. Best groups were just over an inch, and there were no problems at all with the rifle’s function. But we got kicked into next week by that lousy pad. Once again we wish the designers could be made to spend a day on the range shooting these poorly set-up rifles from the bench. They’d quickly change their ways, we’re sure. It matters not that some shooters might shorten the stock. If they do, wouldn’t it be nice to simply move a really good recoil pad forward and trim its edges, thereby reducing the cost of fitting a new pad? A pad like this one on such a rifle is nearly worthless, we thought. The rifle was also a heavyweight, tipping our scales at 10.9 pounds scoped, but all that mass didn’t make up for the brick of a recoil pad.

Our Team Said: All in all we were disappointed with the Ruger M77 Mark II Magnum Model 7501 and gave it a grade of C. In light of what you can get from CZ for $1200 less, half the price, we could not justify spending $2400 for this rifle. In fact, for $2251 you can get the fancy CZ Magnum Express rifle, set up any way you want it, with fancy walnut, barrel-band swivel, your choice of matte or glossy finish, and other choices that can make your rifle suit you and only you. And it still costs $150 less than the Ruger. If the Ruger’s stock were of decent wood, if the pad were thicker and a lot softer, and if the trigger pull were half as heavy, then we’d say this rifle is worth a good look. Despite its wonderful metalwork and excellent scope rings, we’d pass on this Ruger as we found it.
http://ww w.gun-tests.com/issues/22_3/features/Safari-Hunting-Rifles-CZ-Ruger-Kimber5787-1.html

Ruger KM77RFP MK II 270 WSM No.17839, $695
Perhaps the most striking feature of our Ruger rifle was its stainless-steel finish in bold contrast to its flat black polymer stock. Listed as a member of the All-Weather family on the website, there are 18 different rifles in the MKII family.

Among the useful features on the gun was the hinged magazine floorplate latch that was mounted flush with the front of the trigger guard. Another was the use of integral scope rings that attach directly to the receiver supplied at no extra cost. Our rifle arrived with medium height Ruger S100R series rings. Additional rings are available in a range of heights, color and inner diameter from ruger-firearms.com for about $64. The barrel featured a 1-in-10-inch twist. The one-piece bolt with two lug surfaces also differed from our Browning and Savage Arms rifles. The bolt included a non-rotating, Mauser-type controlled-feed extractor and a fixed blade-type ejector. The bolt was easily removed by pulling the stop lever, which hinged outward from the left hand side of the receiver. The trigger, which was not operator adjustable, was controlled with a three-position safety. The safety lever had to be swung fully to the rear for ignition. Pushed fully forward the trigger was prevented from moving, as was the bolt from opening similar to our other rifles. The third, central position also neutralized the trigger but allowed for operating the bolt for the purpose of loading or unloading. The more familiar we became with this system the more we saw the value in it. The three positions were instantly recognizable but we could nevertheless envision some confusion in adding a second safety-on position.

The stock on our Ruger rifle was checkered at the pistol grip and at the fore end including the Ruger insignia front and rear. The contour of the stock above the pistol grip was much thinner than on our other test rifles and the top of the grip area was sculpted with a variety of angles. We liked the way it looked but some of our staff felt it was distracting and uncomfortable. The rubber butt pad was cleanly applied but as was the case with each of our lightweight magnum rifles we would have liked more protection from recoil than a simple rubber pad can offer. We might go so far as to change to a recoil reducing stock such as the CompStock by Knoxx Industries, (www.knoxx.com).

Comparing the data on our accuracy chart showed that the Ruger rifle finished third. We thought that part of the problem was that the thin pistol grip was making it difficult for our hand to settle to the task of releasing the trigger. Resistance was measured at 6 pounds. The trigger broke cleanly but still offered a hard feel to the shooter. Target model M77 MKII rifles are available with two-stage triggers, but not in caliber 270 WSM.

The Ruger also lagged in production of velocity and power. We did manage to shoot a single 1-inch five-shot group coupled with the Winchester Power Point ammunition but the accuracy chart does not tell the whole story. Before our groups opened up we managed to shoot a number of three-shot groups measuring approximately 0.8 inches. In fact nearly all our groups started out with at least two tight shots. One explanation that we think has merit would be heat. Each of our rifles were negatively affected by heat but since the Ruger rifle did not have a free floating barrel the reduction of surface area exposed to the air meant that the barrel heated up sooner and took more time to cool. In our field test that focused on repeat fire we noticed that the ball like knob on the bolt was harder on the palm and not as easy to reach despite length of pull being comparable to our other test guns. Also, we found our hand brushing up against the safety in the forward, (safety off), position as we pushed the bolt upwards. We could foresee the possibility of a gloved hand snagging on this lever.

http://ww w.gun-tests.com/issues/18_6/features/5337-1.html
 
Before I bought my first Ruger-a stainless 77mk II 30-06 I asked everybody I knew that had owned or owned a gun. For reliability the Ruger always came up first. Although mine is not a tack driver I think that working a proper load rather than shooting something someone else thought is good will make a difference. Either way it will hit a 9in pie plate at 300yds all day long as is and would from the start. Once the trigger was run down to 3lbs, bedded and floated I stopped messing with it. I did have the stainless glass beaded to cut the glare but thats the only cosmetic thing it needed. I would buy another in a heartbeat. Tests only deal with new guns out of the box as someone previous mentioned. Aside from that its pretty hard not to get a decent rifle pretty much no matter what you buy as long as you stay with a regular brand. Quit obsessing and get something to shoot. You will likely have to tinker just about anything you get anyways. Just get on with it.
 
cvenne said:
No like i said, a report LIKE CONSUMER REPORTS which is unbias. The issue with getting opinions on here is that you get 10 different ones and i am no farther ahead than i am now!!! As you saw in one post after a PRO RUGER one, the guy says its garbage..

Thank you..
Click to expand...

You want a consumer report from some guys that take a new rifle out of the box, put a scope on it and shoot it at the range a bit and comment on cosmetics, or you want the opinion of guys that have used the rifles in hard hunting situations, developed handloads, tweaked triggers, and bashed the shcit out of them?

I'd say:

What Ardent said+

Get a RUger
Take to good gunsmith and have the tirgger smoothed out
Get him to bed it if it's a wood stock
Go hunting
Kill everything...
 
I have had well over a 100 mk11 rifles and over 20 custom rifles built on the mk11 actions, can't say I've ever had a dud.All would shoot within 1.25", most better.
 
Thank you bearkilr and to all of those who gave honest opinions with the stats to back it up... To those who supplied the snarky remarks,,, :jerkit:

Thx again, I now own a Ruger M77 Mark II 30-06 stainless with a Bushnell elite 4200 firefly..
 
Reports from " Gun Tests", which is the Consumer Reports on guns:

There’s only 1/4-pound difference in weight between the M77R and the Medallion, and the difference in how well they shot was thin: the Medallion performed 1/10-inch better overall.

The Ruger also lagged in production of velocity and power.
Click to expand...

Gun tests... what a joke. How do the above statements have anything to do with the actual firearm being tested?

To the OP, im glad you got the M77 MkII. For the price, it's an outstanding firearm, and in .30-06 it'll serve you well for pretty much anything in North America.

About the only thing I would recommend is a trigger job if yours is in the 7+ pound range, as is common with new Rugers. Or, you could just install a Timney or Spec-Tech and you'll have a fully adjustable trigger for about the same price as a trigger job done by a gunsmith.
 
HMMM!
I like Rugers, Sako's, Tikkas, Winchesters, Remingtons, Savage, Marlins and more.....!
They are all good for the most part. They all have a few models i like and some i don't.
Ruger makes a nice bolt. I have three 77/Rimfires and a really nice Ruger Ultralight in
257 Roberts. All work really well.
Go buy ruger and don't look back, unless you can affford to buy Sako's... i like them the most .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom