Glock4ever
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Edmonton, AB
I thought I would share a review of my Ruger 77/22 Hornet. I originally got this same rifle in the late 90s and man did it really suck. I spent countless hours trying to get it to group - everything from freefloating the barrel to shimming the bolt. It would not shoot anything well and I eventually traded it off at a loss. Having heard that recent Rugers were much better quality I thought I would try it again. Call me a sucker but I really like the features that this rifle has, 6 shot flush mag, lightweight 20" blued barrel, and nice blued steel.
The first thing I noticed when I got my new one was that the bolt was not blued like in my original 77/22 hornet. I don't know if the non-bluing was a cost saving measure or if the bolt truly was stainless but it definitely looked sharper. As well, I noticed that Ruger put a proof mark on the barrel to indicate that they produced the barrel themselves, this was also absent on my original Ruger. Here she is below, I took the bolt out because I was cleaning the rifle but the bolt is indeed stainless.
After slapping a Bushnell Elite 4200 3-9x40mm scope, I took her to the range to see what she could do, it was windy again (35KPH with gusts up to 45KPH) but the wind was primarily coming from the rear. I set up 3 targets and started firing at the 50m target with a bunch of old loads that I had produced for my Anschutz.
At 50m, I found the rifle grouped very decently. The load was a 45 grain Sierra Hollow Point that was not tuned for this rifle. I wanted to recoup the brass so I decided that I wasn't taking any prisoners on this ammunition. My first group was .393" (3 shots) and about 1" right and .5" high. I decided to leave the elevation but adjust the windage. The second group (3 Shots) was .292" and a little bit high. I then fired a 1.051" group with a full magazine (6 shots). Groups 4,5,6 were fired along the top three targets and were .691", .457", and .770" respectively. I was pleasantly surprised but as this was only 50m not overly impressed.
At 100m, I fired the remaining 26 shots at a sighter target and the overall group was 2.203". After firing this group, I was fairly confident that the rifle was rock solid and that heat was not going to be an issue. When firing I would let the barrel cool after 2 mags (12 rounds) and it was impressive that I could keep all the rounds together.
After the remaining Sierra loads were done, I started firing my 35 grain VMax/Lil Gun Loads to see how she would perform. To say that I was amazed was a pretty big understatement. Group 1, 2, and 3 showed no improvement being .866", 1.078" and 1.155" respectively but as soon as the charge hit 13.0 grains the load improved dramatically. with .214" and .515" respectively. I will likely need to do more work as these were only 3 round groups however I am confident that this rifle is a real shooter.
So to summarize this whole experience, I would say that my opinion of Ruger has dramatically changed. After owning 3 dogs (.243, 22 Hornet, and .270) I have seen a dramatic improvement in Ruger's rifles - my 17 HMR and this 22 Hornet are incredibly good shooters and definitely are worthy of a spot in anyone's gun cabinet. The only advice I would offer is to avoid purchasing any pre 2005 rifles as those rifles could be a crap shoot, the ones I had ranged from 1985 to 2004 and they sucked something fierce. Ruger offers a neat link on their website to see the year of production if you have the serial number. My 17 was a 2008 gun and this hornet is a 2009 gun. The only thing I would change on this rifle is the scope, I am slowly moving away from the Busnell line, my eyes don't seem to like the view through these scopes. Either that or Swarovski, Leupold, and S&B have ruined my eyes for the Bushnell line, I was finding that my eyes were straining quite a bit to use this scope. Anyone else have any Ruger hornet experiences to share?
The first thing I noticed when I got my new one was that the bolt was not blued like in my original 77/22 hornet. I don't know if the non-bluing was a cost saving measure or if the bolt truly was stainless but it definitely looked sharper. As well, I noticed that Ruger put a proof mark on the barrel to indicate that they produced the barrel themselves, this was also absent on my original Ruger. Here she is below, I took the bolt out because I was cleaning the rifle but the bolt is indeed stainless.
After slapping a Bushnell Elite 4200 3-9x40mm scope, I took her to the range to see what she could do, it was windy again (35KPH with gusts up to 45KPH) but the wind was primarily coming from the rear. I set up 3 targets and started firing at the 50m target with a bunch of old loads that I had produced for my Anschutz.
At 50m, I found the rifle grouped very decently. The load was a 45 grain Sierra Hollow Point that was not tuned for this rifle. I wanted to recoup the brass so I decided that I wasn't taking any prisoners on this ammunition. My first group was .393" (3 shots) and about 1" right and .5" high. I decided to leave the elevation but adjust the windage. The second group (3 Shots) was .292" and a little bit high. I then fired a 1.051" group with a full magazine (6 shots). Groups 4,5,6 were fired along the top three targets and were .691", .457", and .770" respectively. I was pleasantly surprised but as this was only 50m not overly impressed.
At 100m, I fired the remaining 26 shots at a sighter target and the overall group was 2.203". After firing this group, I was fairly confident that the rifle was rock solid and that heat was not going to be an issue. When firing I would let the barrel cool after 2 mags (12 rounds) and it was impressive that I could keep all the rounds together.
After the remaining Sierra loads were done, I started firing my 35 grain VMax/Lil Gun Loads to see how she would perform. To say that I was amazed was a pretty big understatement. Group 1, 2, and 3 showed no improvement being .866", 1.078" and 1.155" respectively but as soon as the charge hit 13.0 grains the load improved dramatically. with .214" and .515" respectively. I will likely need to do more work as these were only 3 round groups however I am confident that this rifle is a real shooter.
So to summarize this whole experience, I would say that my opinion of Ruger has dramatically changed. After owning 3 dogs (.243, 22 Hornet, and .270) I have seen a dramatic improvement in Ruger's rifles - my 17 HMR and this 22 Hornet are incredibly good shooters and definitely are worthy of a spot in anyone's gun cabinet. The only advice I would offer is to avoid purchasing any pre 2005 rifles as those rifles could be a crap shoot, the ones I had ranged from 1985 to 2004 and they sucked something fierce. Ruger offers a neat link on their website to see the year of production if you have the serial number. My 17 was a 2008 gun and this hornet is a 2009 gun. The only thing I would change on this rifle is the scope, I am slowly moving away from the Busnell line, my eyes don't seem to like the view through these scopes. Either that or Swarovski, Leupold, and S&B have ruined my eyes for the Bushnell line, I was finding that my eyes were straining quite a bit to use this scope. Anyone else have any Ruger hornet experiences to share?
