Ruger M77 MkII vs Ruger Hawkeye

Ive never handled a Hawkeye, but like I said in my original post the MkII I had in .280rem was a thing of beauty for me to handle and shoot!


So, Im in the market again for an original MkII in .280rem. if anyone whats to sell one��
 
RT said:
Ive never handled a Hawkeye, but like I said in my original post the MkII I had in .280rem was a thing of beauty for me to handle and shoot!


So, Im in the market again for an original MkII in .280rem. if anyone whats to sell one��
Click to expand...
I don't think you can go wrong with either. Just noticed you're also looking for a M77 MII 7-08 on the EE.

A short story- My 15 year old saved up for a new scope for his Hawkeye M77 7-08. I mounted it for him and took him to the range a little while back. Helped him sight it in, then he fired a couple groups. He's very pleased with his rifle. It's a box stock M77. 🙂
VtZUICE.jpg

RSdGFux.jpg
 
Buckmastr said:
So how do those that like the MK2’s feel about the original tang safety M77’s in comparison?
Click to expand...

The tang safety rifles are excellent, fit and finish is usually very good as is the accuracy... I just prefer the 3-Position safety to the tang safety... solely a personal preference thing. There are more collectors of M77 tang rifles than there are of M77 MKII rifles... probably a reason for that. The most accurate rifle that I ever owned was a M77 RS Tang .358 Carbine that is now owned by another member... that rifle shot many 1/2" groups at "200" yards with 200's, 225's and 250's, it was not fussy about what it ate... for a 20" carbine hunting rifle in .35 cal that is exceptional.
 
While none of them are true Mausers (several differences, the ejector being the biggest, Mausers use a split lug and fixed blade, Ruger went the Model 70 way with a sprung / hinged ejector for a stronger bolt), the tang safety is push feed. Never owned one and didn’t realize this til Dogleg pointed it out, always presumed the safety was the only difference from the MkII. But the tang safety uses a Remington style plunger ejector, and has to be push feed to operate that.
 
Ardent said:
While none of them are true Mausers (several differences, the ejector being the biggest, Mausers use a split lug and fixed blade, Ruger went the Model 70 way with a sprung / hinged ejector for a stronger bolt), the tang safety is push feed. Never owned one and didn’t realize this til Dogleg pointed it out, always presumed the safety was the only difference from the MkII. But the tang safety uses a Remington style plunger ejector, and has to be push feed to operate that.
Click to expand...

Maybe it doesn't make sense, but for me the point of owning a Ruger 77 is to have a CRF action. But there are a lot of RS tang safeties out there that do catch my eye.
 
Funny talking safeties bought a NIB Hawkeye African in .375 Ruger early model first run and the safety would not move.Was locked in the fire position ,contacted factory rep in Montreal said I would have to ship it to him $40. and pay for return ship to do the warranty work,really,,,,,down to my old gunsmith who machined out the piece on the safety as well as cleaned up the bolt and yes she is a nice shooter now. Really was shocked it left the factory like that but not the first NIB firearm I have had issues with.
 
reddog said:
Funny talking safeties bought a NIB Hawkeye African in .375 Ruger early model first run and the safety would not move.Was locked in the fire position ,contacted factory rep in Montreal said I would have to ship it to him $40. and pay for return ship to do the warranty work,really,,,,,down to my old gunsmith who machined out the piece on the safety as well as cleaned up the bolt and yes she is a nice shooter now. Really was shocked it left the factory like that but not the first NIB firearm I have had issues with.
Click to expand...

They paid the shipping when I had to send mine in.
 
Gatehouse said:
Although lots of people enjoy the tang safety models, I was never a fan of the tang safety Rugers compared to the MKII style action.
Click to expand...

The easily adjusted triggers of the tang safeties more than make up for the lack of crf imo. The mk2 trigger is the only part of the rifle that I dislike. And I have had better out of the box accuracy with tang safety m77s when compared to the mk2’s.
 
Buckmastr said:
The easily adjusted triggers of the tang safeties more than make up for the lack of crf imo. The mk2 trigger is the only part of the rifle that I dislike. And I have had better out of the box accuracy with tang safety m77s when compared to the mk2’s.
Click to expand...

The MKII trigger was easy to replace. Impossible to change the tang safety models to a CRF. Never had an accuracy issue with either models.
 
Gatehouse said:
The MKII trigger was easy to replace. Impossible to change the tang safety models to a CRF. Never had an accuracy issue with either models.
Click to expand...

Why would you want to change it to crf?
Of rifles that I’ve owned that feed poorly or don’t extract/eject, tang safety Rugers haven’t ever had an issue
 
Buckmastr said:
Why would you want to change it to crf?
Of rifles that I’ve owned that feed poorly or don’t extract/eject, tang safety Rugers haven’t ever had an issue
Click to expand...

You said that the trigger made up for it not being a CRF action. I was pointing out you can fix a MK II trigger and have both CRF and good trigger.

Another reason I like the MKII is that I prefer a 3 position safety on a hunting rifle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom