Ruger M77 Hawkeye vs Weatherby Vanguard S2

Joel

Joel

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
GunNutz
Rating - 99.8%
449   1   0
What do you guys think between these two?

I've had both...liked both! But if it had to be just one? And any thoughts on a 22" barrled 270 Win vs a 24" barreled 6.5 CM? They look like almost the same critter with typical ammo.

Having a heck of a time deciding.
 
Tikka t3 lite? This coming from a guy with a vanguard s2 in the safe, mine is in 257 weatherby. I like velocity, so I’d go with the 270 personally.
 
So the option is M77 Hawkeye 22” 270 vs WV S2 26” 6.5 cm?

If so 77 all day long, my m77 Hawkeye is a dream to carry and hunt with. 270 would be a great match for a hunting rifle.
Nothing against the weatherby but not a 26” or CR fan. Guess it depends on what your going to use it for?
 
I've never tried a Hawkeye, just a couple MkIIs, but the Vanguard is a fine rifle. I have one in .257 I'm fond of. I prefer .270 Win for hunting.
 
Jimbobob08 said:
Tikka t3 lite? This coming from a guy with a vanguard s2 in the safe, mine is in 257 weatherby. I like velocity, so I’d go with the 270 personally.
Click to expand...

Never a bad idea either! Hard to go wrong with.

Simpson, its a 24" Vanguard...I figure since its a short action vs a 22" barreled long action, the actual length difference won't be as much as it seems.
 
I’ve owned 2 vanguards (223, 30-06) and 3 Hawkeyes/scouts (30-06, 338rcm, 308). For me for a hunting rifle it’s Ruger all day long. They just seem to fit me better and I like the looks (and that Mauser claw) better. The vanguard just feels like a tool, nothing wrong with that but I just don’t enjoy them. The vanguards have been more accurate but the Rugers are still plenty accurate for hunting.

I’ve got a 6.5cm in a Kimber perfect carrying rifle) but never have owned a 270, the short action and high SD bullets of the 6.5 were what made me pick it.
 
M77. Both fine rifles, Chevrolet grade not Cadillac. For most hunting, at short or medium range the 6.5 manbun is adequate. Just adequate, rifles chambered for it have match chambers and are renowned as accurate. They better be, because the caliber is adequate.
My opinion, use a bigger hammer if you have it.
 
Obviously with a username like mine I'm a CRF guy so Ruger all the way. Even if CRF doesn't matter to you, the safety alone on the Ruger is way better and would be the determining factor alone for me. That being said I do have a couple Howa/Vanguards and they are accurate and well made for the most part, better than most rifles in the price range. I really like my Hawkeye's though. Great rifles.
 
Is it better because it physically blocks the firing pin/striker and I'm guessing the Vanguard only has a trigger safety then?
 
Last edited:
Joel said:
Is it better because it physically blocks the firing pin/striker and I'm guessing the Vanguard only has a trigger safety then?
Click to expand...

I'm fussy. A 3 position safety is almost a must for me in a hunting rifle. The Howa action has that but it's a stamped metal part that looks and feels cheap. I just much prefer the Ruger or Winchester style, the way they operate, look, material they're made out of and how they feel.
 
Joel said:
What do you guys think between these two?

I've had both...liked both! But if it had to be just one? And any thoughts on a 22" barrled 270 Win vs a 24" barreled 6.5 CM? They look like almost the same critter with typical ammo.

Having a heck of a time deciding.
Click to expand...

Vanguard. I know they work fine and are proven but something about a cast receiver on the M77 just doesn't appeal to me vs the machined receiver on the Vanguard. Although worth noting newer Vanguards are not machined from forged steel. They are machined from extruded bar stock. The bolt is still machined from 1 piece of forged steel.

I've also found them to be more accurate than the M77 and the 3 position safety along with adjustable trigger on the Vanguard works very well.
 
Every time I go to ruger website looking at all their interesting stuff I have to cruise the Hawkeye section and drool over that 204 wishing it was a 6.5 Grendel. They are beautiful but also built to walk the walk, old school. I don’t wanna spend any more money so in the other hand I hope they don’t chamber my round.

I never go to weatherby site to look at anything. Howa can kiss my azz.
 
I've owned and hunted both ruger hawkeye, and a couple weatherby S2 rifles. I always go back to Tikka. That being said out of the 2 you specifically asked about I would go with the Ruger every time.
 
You can't go wrong with either, I own both, I have more Vanguards, and in a .270 I want a 24" barrel, I have never owned a Creedmoor [yet], both are honest value rifles, the stock on the Vanguard fits me better. Vanguards might be slightly more accurate. I like Ruger's safety better. Both have better synthetic stocks than many other rifles. One is a classic CRF the other a classic push feed, none of mine in either brand have ever jammed. tough choice.
 
I can't speak for the Ruger M77 as I never shot one but I do like my new Vanguard S2 in 6.5 prc.

It feels good in the hand and the plastic stock seems solid and not hollow like some other stocks.

As for accuracy the best I can do is 1.25 inch groups with Federal Fusion 140 gr. but that isn't bad for shooting deer at 100 yards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom