Ruger M77 Mark II action 16 1/2" barrel 7-08, 243, 308, and 300 WSM.
http://www.ruger.com/Corporate/images/News-11-11-2004E.jpg

Hmm,
Neat little rifle! Does the scout mount come factory installed? Gonna have to check this one out!
Hey Alyeska, how's the Martini/Hagn 280 Halgar coming along?

Bryan

Looks like the scout setup is based on a quarter rib just like the Ruger No.1. So, I think it's ready to go.

The Martini Hagn rifle is in final decision stages on a few things I wanted added to the rifle. It's much cheaper to decide all the nuances up front than try to change things after the rifle is built. Still considering a few different chamberings, which have ruled out the 280 Halger, 280 Ross, and 280 Jeffery. .287-9" chamberings are just not practical when there is only two manufacturers making quality bullets. Both make semi-spitzer bullets, not exactly long range friendly.

Back in the early 80s I put a Ruger No. 1 quarter rib on my .458 M77. When the scout craze set in I was able to mount a Leupold Scout scope out there on the rib and still be able to use the William's FP peep on the rear as well as the fold down Ruger rear on the rib. Talk about redundancy. I have had my .458 set up with the Scout scope since the first year Leupold brought out the Scout and I could never figure out why Ruger wasn't putting the No. 1 rib on the 77 like I had done so people wanting to use a scout setup could. I guess it takes them a long time but they finally got around to it.
I'm glad to see Ruger has it chambered in several calibers too. Neat little rifle.

Where did you see that it was chambered in 480? I see 243, 7mm-08, 308 and 300 WSM. Sean

Oops, it appears I engaged my fingers before I engaged my brain. You are correct LoneEagle.

I had made a post on Ruger's Alaskan Super Redhawk which is chambered in 454 Casull and 480 Ruger at the same time (in Handguns).

My apologies.

No need to apologize. But I am heartbroken!:D
A petite little bolt gun in 454 or 480, with a quarter rib, too cool!!

Bryan

Absolutely no need to apologize. I was hoping that maybe the picture you showed was of a 77/480 Frontier (An offshoot of the 77/44) that I had missed. Best Wishes, Sean

Absolutely no need to apologize. I was hoping that maybe the picture you showed was of a 77/480 Frontier (An offshoot of the 77/44) that I had missed. Best Wishes, Sean


I like it, but does anyone else think that barrel is a little too short, maybee more like 18 or 20 inches.?

I have two Custom Shop Encore barrels, one is a 250 Sav and measures 16 1/4" long. The other is a 350 RemMag and it measures 20" long. I like those short barrels.
I think the Ruger barrel should have been thicker (if it is the same as one the other compacts) to give a better feel and swing to them but there is nothing wrong with the length. Sean

Lone eagle, seems people are more accepting over here as compared to the 24hourcampfire forum. I think this is a good idea. I believe KDUB uses a Burris 2x7 pistol scope in a scout scope mount on a levergun, I'd be real interested to see if that would work out on this rifle, make mine in 308 and oh boy....

I'm not really sure what the reason for the predjudice against short barrels is. Whether it is simply how people feel about the looks or they are concerned about the velocity loss. Up here where I hunt I do have one stand location that I use on certain afternoons. From that stand I can see upto about 200 yds in 3 directions. When I goto that stand I carry an old '06, not so much for the reach (Either of those Encores will certainly do the job) but because that '06 carries a Leupold that has proven to be the brightest scope I own. Early mornings will find me working my way through mixes of cedar swamp, open hardwoods, and thick soft wood stands. For that job I prefer a short barrel/short overall length rifle that can swing easy. As I said I would like to see a little more weight in those barrels. A little extra weight out front helps the barrel hang better on target I think. Sean

I'm not really sure what the reason for the predjudice against short barrels is. Whether it is simply how people feel about the looks or they are concerned about the velocity loss. Up here where I hunt I do have one stand location that I use on certain afternoons. From that stand I can see upto about 200 yds in 3 directions. When I goto that stand I carry an old '06, not so much for the reach (Either of those Encores will certainly do the job) but because that '06 carries a Leupold that has proven to be the brightest scope I own. Early mornings will find me working my way through mixes of cedar swamp, open hardwoods, and thick soft wood stands. For that job I prefer a short barrel/short overall length rifle that can swing easy. As I said I would like to see a little more weight in those barrels. A little extra weight out front helps the barrel hang better on target I think. Sean

The barrel does look to be heavier than a regular one. I agree with a heavier barrel helping a rifle to "point" better, this is the same logic used with shotguns. On a moving target, anything with a heavier end will be easier to get on target and stay there.

Yes, the Burris Signature Posi-lock 2x7 pistol scope works extremely well on the Ashley Scout mount on the long barreled (24") Marlin 1895LTD1.

Only thing I didn't like was the "unbalance" as it threw the balance point forward of the receiver. Had an old Redfield Widefield 1.75x5 scope with crosshair/dot reticle that provides adequate eye relief so as not to brow-scar me too often. Have now mounted that back with standard receiver mounts and the balance is greatly improved.

I know folks hate to hear of scopes on leverguns, however, the eyes have reached the point where the glass is needed for clear sight pictures.

Looks like the Ruger compact didn't sell real well for them , so they are jazzin them up into a scout configuation so they don't have to fill their dumpster up with 16 1/2 inch barrels. If at first you don't succeed .....


444fitch

I don't have anything against the short barrels, they just look kinda goofy, i think, just something about classic lines, i guess

I don't have anything against the short barrels, they just look kinda goofy, i think, just something about classic lines, i guess


I know a standard rifle foreend does not do justice to a short barreled carbine. Either they should scale the foreend to the barrel or Mannlicher it. But that would probably cost money. Sean

I couldn't agree with you more, LoneEagle. Either choice, scale the forearm back or Mannlicher it. Mannlicher style forearm would work well on this and Ruger provides these types of forearms on their RSI's (both M77 and No.1's).

Scaling the forearm back can be ticklish depending on the length and width of the magazine box. On the short action, there shouldn't be a problem. But, with standard or magnum length actions, a shortened forearm can take on an angular appearance if not done right or made too short.

I personally think most American classic style stocks have more wood on the forearm than is really needed. I like the old British stalking rifle style forearms better (or Mannlicher style).

pardon my ignorance... but what is the purpose of the goofy scope mount? other than that, its an ordinary M77 with a shorter barrel...

pardon my ignorance... but what is the purpose of the goofy scope mount? other than that, its an ordinary M77 with a shorter barrel...

Long eye relief scope = you can mount the scope further away from you on the gun = quicker and easier scoping when stalking game. It's the standard for "scout" type rifles. Take a look at the Steyr Scout - Jeff Cooper package... lightweight funky looking short-barrelled .308.... great gun, especially w/ the buttstock having a cutout on the underside to hold a secondary mag and the forestock is in and of itself a built-in bipid... the sides of it fold down and out. It's a great gun if that's the type of thing you're looking for. I think the total package (gun, extra mag, leupold scout scope, rings/mounts, ching sling, and carrying case) is somewhere around $2,500.00 US - however I've seen them for a lot less than that. Here, take a look .... http://www.remtek.com/arms/steyr/scout/scout.htm

Long eye relief scope = you can mount the scope further away from you on the gun = quicker and easier scoping when stalking game. It's the standard for "scout" type rifles. Take a look at the Steyr Scout - Jeff Cooper package... lightweight funky looking short-barrelled .308.... great gun, especially w/ the buttstock having a cutout on the underside to hold a secondary mag and the forestock is in and of itself a built-in bipid... the sides of it fold down and out. It's a great gun if that's the type of thing you're looking for. I think the total package (gun, extra mag, leupold scout scope, rings/mounts, ching sling, and carrying case) is somewhere around $2,500.00 US - however I've seen them for a lot less than that. Here, take a look .... http://www.remtek.com/arms/steyr/scout/scout.htm


For my style of hunting where we do a lot of stalking in heavy wooded areas, there is a good chance you will have to take a surprise shot at a deer, that more than likely will be moveing. IMO this is where the scout scope shines. You are able to shoot with both eyes open and have a very large field of view. With the weight of the scope futher forward on the rifle, I've found that my Marlin 1894PG swings and points more like a shotgun. I use the Burris 2.75x scout scope and I like it for under 150yds, which is about all I can get out of my 1894.
With this new rifle, I'd slap a Burris 2x7 pistol scope on it, which I've been told has the right amount of eye relief for a scout set up. Keep that baby down at 2x for snap shots and close ups, but you would still have the ability to dial the scope up for a longer shot.

i see two huge problems with this otherwise awesome little package:
1) no iron sights for back-up use
2) not chambered in .350 Rem mag


monty

i see two huge problems with this otherwise awesome little package:
1) no iron sights for back-up use
2) not chambered in .350 Rem mag
monty

Just out of curiosity, how many times has your scope "broken" while hunting and you've been thankful that you had iron sights to "back you up" ? Personally, that's never happened to me... ever.

Next, why is it a "problem" that the gun isn't chambered for a .350RemMag?

Just out of curiosity, how many times has your scope "broken" while hunting and you've been thankful that you had iron sights to "back you up" ? Personally, that's never happened to me... ever.




Never challange Murphy's Law. Its a powerful thing and will bite you in the butt just when you least expect it.

Never challange Murphy's Law. Its a powerful thing and will bite you in the butt just when you least expect it.

I dont mean to challenge the all-powerful Murphy... just that most rifles these days are made w/out iron sights. Saying that there's a "problem" with the rifle because it's made like the majority of rifles that are to be outfitted with a scope is hardly a "problem" ... You may wish it had iron sights, but like I said, you really can't say it's a "problem" or that "something is wrong with the rifle" ... don't you agree?

I dont mean to challenge the all-powerful Murphy... just that most rifles these days are made w/out iron sights. Saying that there's a "problem" with the rifle because it's made like the majority of rifles that are to be outfitted with a scope is hardly a "problem" ... You may wish it had iron sights, but like I said, you really can't say it's a "problem" or that "something is wrong with the rifle" ... don't you agree?

IMO this gun seems to be designed to be more like a scout style rifle than anything else. A style gun that will be used hard and possibly treated ruffly. Kind of like a "truck gun". Its a different type gun that your everyday M70 or A Bolt. And again IMO I do think it should have iron sights for when you choose to remove the scope, or if the scope ever fail. I think all firearms should have some form of back up iron sights. You just never know when your scope may crap out on you. Even Leupolds and high dollar Euro scopes have been known from time to time to fail. A decent set of iron sights would allow you to continue your hunt, just with limited range, say within 100yds for most folks. I would hate to be out and have my rifle scope fail on me, but the hunt would most definitley be over if the gun I had bore no iron sights on it. So I guess I do think it needs iron sights. As far as it not being offered in .350 Rem Mag, well that doesn't bother me at all.

If it were me, i would just get a williams reciever sight and put on aftermarket, peeps are better than open sights for me

I don't know jb, this rifle doesn't have a front sight either. Hard to use a peep without a front sight.

here's Savage's rendition of the scout rifle

http://www.steyrscout.org/savscout.jpg

available through the Savage custom shop (reprotedly) in .308 or 7mm-08. with accutrigger too. the front end of the scope mount seems kinds "unsupported" though.

WGM, backup iron sights are part of the scout concept. the wish for .350 Rem mag is a personal wish and not ment to be taken seriuosly as a problem with the rifle.

monty

here's Savage's rendition of the scout rifle

http://www.steyrscout.org/savscout.jpg

available through the Savage custom shop (reprotedly) in .308 or 7mm-08. with accutrigger too. the front end of the scope mount seems kinds "unsupported" though.

WGM, backup iron sights are part of the scout concept. the wish for .350 Rem mag is a personal wish and not ment to be taken seriuosly as a problem with the rifle.

monty

I understand what you mean. On the other side, I never meant to imply that there would be a problem with having iron sights. If you can have iron sights on a gun as well as a scope, I agree that's optimum. However, my point was that most rifles these days that are meant to be sporting/hunting rifles only have drilled and tapped actions for recieving scope mounts. Also, most people seem to want to have their scope mounted as "low" or "close" to the barrell as possible. Therefore, even if you did have iron sights, you'd have to remove the scope, rings and bases to use the iron sights, right? I guess if you carried an allen wrench and/or scredriver in the field with you that would be possible... but still, a pain to do. Then, of course, the rest of the junk that goes along with re-bore sighting your scope and then dialing it in at the range. I guess that can be fun, and necessary, if you scope "died" on you in the field.

So I guess I have to ask you... Are those of you that basically insist on having your rifle be equipped with both iron sights and optics... do you use the scope mounts that let you use your iron sights simultaneously with your optics? Or would you mount your scope more conventionally and be forced to physically remove your scope in order to use your iron sights as backup?

the scout rifle is (in my mind anyway) more of a tactical rifle than a sporting rifle. thus the iron sight thing. my long range and most of my hunting rifles do not have irons and that's fine with me. but the scout is kinda on the other end of the spectrum. a gun to grab if you had no idea what conditions you'll be under or where you'll have to carry it. that's why they are light (usually under 6.5#) and fast to handle (intermediate eye relief scope). the detatchable box mag on many is for quick reloads.

the sighting system i'd use is a low mount scope in QD (quick detatch) rings with a peep sight on the rear reciever ring and a strudy bead up front. the rings with coin slot screws are acceptable to me for this also.

i guess Ruger may be going for a "sporting scout" at a price for less (a lot) than a true scout rifle. and there's sure to be people like me that'll gripe because it doesn't have all the features of the high dollar scouts. :D

Monty

I don't think "see-thru" mounts are a good idea. I've never liked them. But all of my rifles do have iron sights that are sighted in. I use quick detachable scope mounts on all my rifles too. Taking the rings off is done by hand, no tools required. Ruger's ingenious mounting system on the quarter rib (that I'm especially fond of on the No.1) does not require bases. This is the same type of setup on this rifle. The No.1's have a folding rear sight that works well in the folded position for medium or low scope rings provided the objective bell on the scope isn't too large. NECG makes a great little peep sight that attaches to the quarter after the scope is removed. Of course, without a front sight, it wouldn't work too well. :D

I understand what you mean. On the other side, I never meant to imply that there would be a problem with having iron sights. If you can have iron sights on a gun as well as a scope, I agree that's optimum. However, my point was that most rifles these days that are meant to be sporting/hunting rifles only have drilled and tapped actions for recieving scope mounts. Also, most people seem to want to have their scope mounted as "low" or "close" to the barrell as possible. Therefore, even if you did have iron sights, you'd have to remove the scope, rings and bases to use the iron sights, right? I guess if you carried an allen wrench and/or scredriver in the field with you that would be possible... but still, a pain to do. Then, of course, the rest of the junk that goes along with re-bore sighting your scope and then dialing it in at the range. I guess that can be fun, and necessary, if you scope "died" on you in the field.

So I guess I have to ask you... Are those of you that basically insist on having your rifle be equipped with both iron sights and optics... do you use the scope mounts that let you use your iron sights simultaneously with your optics? Or would you mount your scope more conventionally and be forced to physically remove your scope in order to use your iron sights as backup?



This is the beauty of a true scout rifle. Don't take this the wrong way, but it seems like you really don't understand the idea, or uses of a scout style hunting rifle. I hunt in very thick wooded areas where 90% of shots are under 100yds. And shots at startled deer happen a lot. (we do a lot of team stalking/driving) I needed a different style rifle to best suite my needs for my style of hunting. This is how I have my Marlin 1894PG set up. Williams Foolproof rear with firesight front. XS leverscout mount with Burris 2.75X scout scope mounted in quick disconnect rings. My can be removed by hand in the field and my iron sights shoot to the same POI as the scope. I can remount the scope by hand in the field and not loose zero. I think this is the kind of niche Ruger is trying to fill with this gun. You really ought to go to XS's website and check out what they have. http://www.expresssights.com/
They offer a lot of quality stuff and I have gotten great customer service from them.

I was taking the addition of the front sight as an assumed

ALESKA338: i thought it may be possible to sacrifice a set of
ruger rings, cut the top part off, and use the bottom part as an attatchment for irons, but the NECG sight sounds like the same, only better. the front may be made this way and put on on the front of the rib, the NECG on the rear reciever ring (it looks like the reciever is machined for mounts too) and get a useable system, although with reduced sight radius. the front sight will have to be carried seprately because the scope will set there. another option is to simply drill and tap the end of the barrel and order a front sight from Ruger (they should have a sight from something else that'll fit).
this is all just hypothetical, beacuse i have other guns to buy before i get a Frontier.

i also think it's kinda strange that Ruger picked Frontier for the name of this rifle. back in the late '60s, Redfield made a scout mount (and scout scope) for the Rem 600 and i think the Win '94 that they called the FrontIER (the IER also meaning Intermediate Eye Relief). i have a Rem 600 equipped with these (the scope is 2X and has a 3/4" tube, but still works very well). this system, BTW, incorporates a rear sight built into the rear of the scope base.

monty

http://www.newenglandcustomgun.com/
http://www.newenglandcustomgun.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/RUGERPeep.lrg.jpg
If you are a fan of reciever sights, you will find that this new offering from NECG will greatly enhance your experience afield. Designed for use with the Ruger #1 and Model 77 the Peep Sight for Ruger Rifles is machined from solid steel. Supplied with two apertures (.093" & .125"), it is fully adjustable for windage and elevation. It requires no gunsmithing. Originally designed for use on the integral scope bases of the M77 and #1, this sight has proven itself on other models as well. Since each Ruger seems to shoot differently, we cannot tell you exactly what size front bead is going to work for your rifle with our peep sight. We suggest you first shoot the gun with our Peep sight to determine whether your original front bead will work or if a different one is needed. We offer replacement beads for the centerfire M77's and #1's. For all other models we suggest contacting your local gunsmith or Brownell's at 800-741-0015 for further assistance. Owners of the Mini-14 and Mini-30 have reported great success with their original front sight, while some owners of of 77/22's have reported needing higher front sight beads.

thanks for the link. very nice stuff indeed!! (also solved a couple other sight related problems for me)

monty