I have a question regarding the three rifles I listed. I know this might start a flame war (hopefully not), but I am curious about the best "bang for the buck" of the three rifles.

See, I picked up these 3 rifles recently at a sporting good store - in a .270 caliber (one was in a 30-06). I already have an old Marlin 30-30 lever action rifle that I love dearly. But, I am looking to extend my range a little more than the 30-30 and get a bolt action rifle.

Remington 700, brand new, in a .270 caliber.
Winchester 70 Featherweight, used, in a 30-06 caliber.
Ruger Model 77 MKII, brand new, in a .270 caliber.

I particularly didn't care for the feel of the Remington 700. I don't know.... it just felt to bulky. The Winchester model 70 was a great rifle and I liked it a lot. The Ruger 77 MKII rifle was the special one that just seemed to fit. There was something about it... it was the rifle that said, "buy me and take me home". ;)

Out of the three rifles listed, which would you say is the best? I have heard bad things about the Ruger and its trigger action. The Winchester 70 has been around for decades and is a classic bolt action rifle. Same with the Remington 700.

What do you think?

I have a question regarding the three rifles I listed. I know this might start a flame war (hopefully not), but I am curious about the best "bang for the buck" of the three rifles.

See, I picked up these 3 rifles recently at a sporting good store - in a .270 caliber (one was in a 30-06). I already have an old Marlin 30-30 lever action rifle that I love dearly. But, I am looking to extend my range a little more than the 30-30 and get a bolt action rifle.

Remington 700, brand new, in a .270 caliber.
Winchester 70 Featherweight, used, in a 30-06 caliber.
Ruger Model 77 MKII, brand new, in a .270 caliber.

I particularly didn't care for the feel of the Remington 700. I don't know.... it just felt to bulky. The Winchester model 70 was a great rifle and I liked it a lot. The Ruger 77 MKII rifle was the special one that just seemed to fit. There was something about it... it was the rifle that said, "buy me and take me home". ;)

Out of the three rifles listed, which would you say is the best? I have heard bad things about the Ruger and its trigger action. The Winchester 70 has been around for decades and is a classic bolt action rifle. Same with the Remington 700.

What do you think?


Every one of the rifles you mention is fine, and which is "best" will ultimately come down to your own personal preferences. If I had to choose between these three, I'd just look at and handle all 3, pick the one that struck my fancy, and worry no further about it.

there are a lot of models of each.. or should i say "grades"... in the 700 line there are quite a few stock and finish variations... there is a DISTINCT difference between the feel, fit and finish of an ADL (or now the SPS) and say the Mountain Rifle...

the same can be said for the model 70... and the ruger MK...

the Ruger's don't have an adjustable trigger, and the pull can be a little heavier, but still a great rifle, it really does come down to which one you liked the best. If the Ruger fit you the best, then get that one (I personally wouldn't trade my 700cdl but that's just what fit me). all are good rifles.

Marineman

Well I had a remmington for years and it was fine . Then we bought a new ruger Mark 2 in 3006.
Yes the trigger on all new rifles are a bit much so when we bought the rifle the smith said he could address the trigger with no problem , as he knew our other rifles.
We picked up the new rifle the next day with a two pound let off.
Now after two moose and one deer the crack of the barrel down to the freezer they went.
Pick the gun that fits you the best

I own a M77 MII 30-06 and I love it. However the manufactured trigger is worthless. I opted for the timney adjustable trigger (70 to 80 bucks). You can easily install this by yourself (I did being a first time gunsmith and it was not hard with the instructions provided). I have put about 1300 dollars into this gun but just the trigger helped out the most. My particular gun has grouped within 2 inches at 100 hundred yards, regardless of bullet make or type (even with military ball ammo).
However I also own a Rem 700 6mm and love this gun as well. With out a trigger job (which is as bad as the Ruger's) it groups well, but this caliber is known to do so. My choice in the field is the MII (mostly because of knock down power).
The only way to see which you like the most is to try them out. Find a friend with one regardless of caliber and go out and shoot.
Also I have found optics make the gun, dont cheat yourself by buying a cheaply made scope. You can only shoot as good as you can see.

Thanks guys... The Ruger 77MKII was the one that just seemed to come right up to my shoulder naturally. I liked the feel of it more than the others. I am just not sure about the heavy trigger pull on it, and/or non adjustable trigger. So, I am still looking at the Winchester 70 and comparing those two.

Thanks guys... The Ruger 77MKII was the one that just seemed to come right up to my shoulder naturally. I liked the feel of it more than the others. I am just not sure about the heavy trigger pull on it, and/or non adjustable trigger. So, I am still looking at the Winchester 70 and comparing those two.

I will agree with the other posters that any of the three you mention would be perfectly suitable and give you good service. I am not impressed with the current production Remington rifles. Not there is anything wrong with them, they just don't fit me right for what ever reason.

I have both Winchester M70 and Ruger Mk2. I like both very much. I hunted for over 10 years with my M70 in 30-06 and loved shooting it. A few years ago I bought a Ruger Mk2 in .260 Rem for my daughter, which is still a couple years from actually hunting. I have used this rifle ever since for deer season. ( I injured my shoulder two years ago and I just don't appreciate the recoil of the old '06 as well as I used to.)

I have read all about the the "dreaded" Ruger trigger. In my opinion, it is bunk! Yes the trigger is a tad strong on a new weapon, however you will find that the trigger will soften a little by the time you get it sighted in and get used to it. I like the trigger on mine. Not to soft to accidentally touch off a round but not too strong to effect my groups. I have owned two other Ruger Mk2's and the triggers all settled in within a box of shells. If the Ruger suits your fancy I say go with it. You will be happy and have no regrets.

I have both Remington 700 (BDL) and Win 70 Featherweight.

The smooth bolt lift/pull of the Rem 700 along with the detachable mag is great. Trigger work was simple with the factory trigger. WIth the Rem action you can load one in the chamber without chambering from the mag, which I like. Can't do that with the Win.

But the down side to that is short stroking, which I did once on a follow up shot, but fortunately was not life threatening.

The Win 70 is incredibly accurate, 7/16", 3 shot group at 100 yds after floating the barrel. And the schnabel stock is gorgeous.

Not having a Ruger...or even having shot one, I can't say. But I heard the synthetic stock was designed to double as a boat paddle in extreme case. If you boat to your hunt, that might be the deciding factor.

Being a Winchester man, I can't believe I'm about to say this, but if it fits the best, I think you should get the R-R-R-r-r-r-r-uger. Sorry, almost couldn't get it out.
I personally have not had good luck with Ruger firearms, but I know too many people who have success with them to condemn the brand out of hand. The trigger can either be gotten used to or replaced. The Timney is a fine aftermarket trigger, IMO.

Of course, the Featherweight would be my choice...

Edit- BTW, modern Winchester 70's can indeed handle a round directly into the chamber, wether Classic Pre-64 or pushfeed. The extractor on the Classic is bevelled to snap over the cartridge rim. I had read that before, and just tried it on mine to verify.

A featherweight winchester in .30-06 will kick the tar out of you, unless you put a decent recoil pad on it!

If it was a standard-weight Winchester, I'd choose that.... but not the featherweight.

I know.... That's why it was "used". Somebody owned the Win 70 Featherweight in 30-06 and probably hated the mule kicking recoil from it! :eek:

I ought to look at a Win 70 in a .270 and see how it feels too. The Remington 700 was okay, but I just didn't care for the feel of the stock on it.

So, it boils down to a choice between a Ruger M77MkII and a Winchester Model 70. Hmmm.......

Edit: I just found this out: The cartridge floorplate on the Ruger M77? Aluminum! I wonder if that ever becomes an issue and gets bent, loading/unloading the magazine.

Have a Ruger M77R in 7RM that was purchased new in 1972. Still has the original floorplate/trigger guard assembly. Never had a problem with bent, dinged, warped or other possible defects with it.

1st question: Did any of these rifles have a scope on them? Having a scope on a rifle when trying one on will change how they fit and feel.

2nd question: What is the intended purpose for the rifle? If you are "just" going to use it for hunting or is it going to visit the range frequently. Not one of my rifles are "just hunting" rifles. They all have spent plenty of time at the range, shooting small burrowing rodents and otherwise just plain plinking. It's a good way to get to know a rifle.

3rd question: Was the Remington an ADL, BDL or CDL. The new CDL's are a fine piece of machinery. That's what my new 300 RUM is in.

4th question: Wood stock or synthetic. I just can't get used to "plastic" stocks. I'll take a nice looking piece of maple or walnut every time. Wood also has a different heft it than synthetic.

I have 85% Remingtons in my gun cabinet, including my Dad's 1917 Remington Enfield. I have 2 Winchesters ( a 12 gauge. and a 100yr old 22WRF pump) and 2 Ruger handguns (22 MKII and 44 Redhawk) You can see where my loyalties lie I think. I have had the oportunity to shoot several Winchesters and Rugers of various calibres and some of them impressed me, but most of them did not. A Ruger in 280 Rem. has to have been the hardest kicking rifle I ever shot. Hit me harder than my 300RUM. Shot my brither-in-laws pre 64 modle70's in 220swift, 270, 30-06 and 338 mag. Nice rifles in their own right but then again they are REAL pre 64's

I see you didn't pick up a Sako. A friend has a Finbear in 7 mag that I've been threatening to take over his dead body ;) Those are also a nice rifle if you can spare the bones. I've always bought Remingtons because to me they are the higher end of the American made production rifles.

Remingtons have a steel floor plate. I've seen the aluminum floor plate on one Ruger break when the guy popped it open to empty the rifle. But then again it was 35 below zero. The aluminum floorplate on Gunthers Ruger in.223 does bulge a little when it's full and the bolt is closed but otherwise it's a good little shooter.

recoil junky,

Let me remember for a second....

Remington 700, Brand new, .270 caliber. I am assuming it is a CDL version. Very thick feeling forearm stock. No scope. Very nice, but not my top choice though.

Winchester Model 70 Featherweight, used, 30-06 caliber. Has a Burris 3-9x40 scope. Very nice feel to it. Very light even with the scope. Probably kicks the sh** outta you though (probably why it is "used"). I liked this one, but would need a heavy duty recoil pad.

Ruger Model 77Mk2, brand new, .270 caliber. Nice balanced feel. No scope. Very light and just comes right to the shoulder. I liked this one a lot. But am not sure of the quality of Ruger (versus the legendary quality of Remington and Winchester).

The 3 rifles all have wood stocks. I refuse to own a rifle with a synthetic stock. Sorry... that's the way I am. It's just gotta be wood. It has to live and breathe and be natural. It has to have it's own personality and character. A synthetic stock doesn't have that.

The main intended purpose of either the .270 or the 30-06 rifles is for deer hunting. See, I can only judge a deer rifle by an old Marlin 30-30 that I have. I love that classic lever gun and the way it just comes right to the shoulder without even thinking about it. I mean, I can go anywhere with it, heck - drop it on the ground, pick it up, dust it off, and keep on going.

Long story short - I am just looking for a classic bolt action rifle and can reach out double (heck even triple) the range of my 30-30.

I guess I am a traditionalist that favors classics.

Shotgun: Remington 870 Express 12GA.
Rifle: Marlin 30AS 30-30 w/ Glenfield 4x32 scope.
Long range rifle: To be determind... ;)

Are you purposely overlooking the Savage with AcuTrigger?
I shoot Remmis, Kimber, Sako, Ruger, Savage and TC but the Savages that come my way all shoot very well out of the box, have great adjustable and safe triggers and are easy to work on.

A featherweight winchester in .30-06 will kick the tar out of you, unless you put a decent recoil pad on it!

If it was a standard-weight Winchester, I'd choose that.... but not the featherweight.


I measure recoil against my 45-70 guide gun, which is brutal. Recoil in either my Rem 700 BDl synthetic ( 30-06) or my Win 70 featherweight (300 WSM) doesn't bother me much.

BTW, this noon I handed a CZ Model 3. Absolutely FINE. Every bit the fit and finish of a pre '64 model 70 but safer gas venting. Stockwork was superb with real checkering. Control round feeding, adjustable trigger and made right here. This one was in 270 WSM. If the Kinber Montana had not found me just last year...I would be sorely tempted.

BTW, this noon I handed a CZ Model 3. Absolutely FINE. Every bit the fit and finish of a pre '64 model 70 but safer gas venting. Stockwork was superb with real checkering. Control round feeding, adjustable trigger and made right here. This one was in 270 WSM. If the Kinber Montana had not found me just last year...I would be sorely tempted.


Is the CZ 3 a current model? Can't find it on their website.

It's listed under Big Bore Centerfire Rifles http://www.cz-usa.com/01.detail.php?id=52

Another great choice is the CZ-550 American. I have one in .270, and I think it's one of the best values on the market. Controlled round feed like the Model 70, excellent stock fit (for me), great recoil pad, all steel, beautifully blued and well made (even areas hidden by the stock are cleanly machined and have the same quality bluing). The set trigger is a joy, and the price is unbeatable. The action is a little stiffer than the others, but not bad.

As for the choices you mentioned, I'm a fan of the modern controlled-round Model 70's (I personally like them better than the pre-64's), and I think my son's Model 700 CDL is an outstanding rifle. I haven't been as thrilled with the quality and details in the Ruger 77's (even though I'm generally a Ruger fan).

The one you like the best is the one you will be happiest with. I am a diehard Marlin lover so I would go with a 444, but that is me. What really makes you smile seems to be the Ruger, go for it, a good gun, as are all 3 but without question your post shows your choice.

I own and shoot several Ruger M77s, I've never once had an issue with the floorplate, and $40 to a gunsmith to smooth out the factory trigger and they shoot sub minute groups... Any notion that Ruger isn't the strongest rifle made today is BS, any Ruger at that...I own a Remington too, and its a great gun as well... I didn't like the cheek swell so I cut it off, other than that its been a great gun, its a 700 BDL in 7MM-RUM. The Ruger bashing is ridiculous..

As said above - all the brands you've listed are excellent rifles in their own rights. The goal is to pick the one that feels "right" to you and in the chambering of your choice.

I've owned all makes of centerfire rifles over time, except the newer CZ's, including lots of customized milsurps. Each had it's pro's and con's, but got the job done. Presently, my gun vaults hold more Rugers than any other one make. They work up into fine hunting and target work firearms. As again stated, a little TLC will correct the factory set trigger weight on the MkII's - the older tang safety type can be home adjusted.

I own and shoot several Ruger M77s, I've never once had an issue with the floorplate, and $40 to a gunsmith to smooth out the factory trigger and they shoot sub minute groups... Any notion that Ruger isn't the strongest rifle made today is BS, any Ruger at that...I own a Remington too, and its a great gun as well... I didn't like the cheek swell so I cut it off, other than that its been a great gun, its a 700 BDL in 7MM-RUM. The Ruger bashing is ridiculous..

I think Ruger deserves some of the bashing they get! I have gotten more Ruger rifles and handguns with manufacturing flaws than I have with all the other manufacturer's products that I have purchased combined. I recognize this as MY experience, rather than that of the public at large.

So, why have I bought so many of their firearms over the years? I love their designs, and the fact that they offer interesting cartridges that most other manufacturers ignore! They also do a good job of supporting the products they sell (although I have gotten a revolver back from service that was repaired in a substandard manner).

So, I understand the bashing, but I still like the firearms.

Go figure.

I can say, that my 1st grab when hunting is a savage 7mm Mag. w/out accutrigger. Trigger has a heavy pull, but I never had work done on it, but I love it! To each his own! I would go w/ a 30-06 for the options available. You can adjust for recoil, power and accuracy makes the shot! Just .02 cents. JP

I have nothing against Rugers and have seen some very nice ones. But, their triggers are heavy and problematic. Someone above said it would smooth out and you'd get used to it. Maybe, but the M70 trigger is so easily tuned and made crisp. My featherweight had a good trigger right out of the box and the sear needed just a tiny bit of honing by a gunsmith to make it perfect. Light and crisp now for 7 years.

Also assuming equal barrel lengths, the 06 is shoots harder and is more versatile than the .270.

According to the hornady tables at 130 gr, the max 06 loads shoot 125 to 200 fps faster than the .270.

The max 150 gr load shoots 175 to 225 fps faster.

165, 180, 190, 200, 220 grains...forget about it. The .270 can't handle these while the 06 flourishes. Of course the 06 does rock your shoulder back more. But that shouldn't matter for hunting. If you want to shoot for fun, you'd be better off with a .260 or 7-08 than the .270 anyway.

BTW, Burris makes great hunting scopes IMO.

All my bolt action rifles are Remington 700s but hey, I'm just a remington bolt action guy. In lever guns I prefer Marlin. My hunting partner won't buy anything in bolt action unless it's a Winchester Model 70. I bought my oldest son a Ruger MKII in 30-06 when he turned 12 and he loves it. If you like the Ruger, go for it or you'll always wish you had one. Or, just buy one of each and be done with it! :D

I have owned a 700 and a 70, both in 7mm mag and out of those two I would recomend the 70 although I wish it had a tighter shot group I shoot about a 1 1/2 inch group at the range with factory ammo. But One thing that I suggest is to look at Savage that is my next gun. Everyone that I have ever spoken with said that theirs shot sub one inch moa right out of the box. I would not recomend Ruger, mind you I have never shot a Ruger rifle, but their handguns have a bad reputation. One other possable choice is the new Mossberg rifle the 100ATR I have not shot one yet but I have heard nothing but good things about it and it costs less than $250.

I was at G. Top 3 times before I finally laid down some major cash for a new Win Coyote in .308. Then I did my research. Of the used guns, I was not so impressed with most of the .308's and that little 30-06 looked like a great buy, but... don't think it would be fun for very long. I think they had a Tika for a decent price, and I think they also had a nice Alexanderia Arms in .308 that needed some work, but looked like a nice collector's piece. When it came down to it though, I felt shelling out the extra cash for a new gun was worth knowing that I controlled how much I was willing to abuse it.

I. I would not recomend Ruger, mind you I have never shot a Ruger rifle, but their handguns have a bad reputation. .

I must say, this is news to me! Ruger handguns, a "bad reputation"?!?!?!

I must say, this is news to me! Ruger handguns, a "bad reputation"?!?!?!
How many Police departments do you know of use Rugers? I know of plenty that use glocks, S&W, and Springfeild, but I have never seen a uniformed officer carry a Ruger. In addition to that I know ALOT of prople that are into handguns, I spend alot of time at the range (actualy I just got back from the range) and I worked in law enforcement, I have never heard a gun savy person recomend a ruger, in fact they always warned me aginst them. If I was talking about one of two people I could pass that off as somone having a bad experence with one of their guns, but to hear this from a dozen or so gun savy people, without one of them taking up for the rugers I have to believe that they are not built up to the same standards as the other guns that I mentioned. If someone has a good Ruger handgun that can out proform an XD tactical I would LOVE to see it.

How many Police departments do you know of use Rugers? I know of plenty that use glocks, S&W, and Springfeild, but I have never seen a uniformed officer carry a Ruger. In addition to that I know ALOT of prople that are into handguns, I spend alot of time at the range (actualy I just got back from the range) and I worked in law enforcement, I have never heard a gun savy person recomend a ruger, in fact they always warned me aginst them. If I was talking about one of two people I could pass that off as somone having a bad experence with one of their guns, but to hear this from a dozen or so gun savy people, without one of them taking up for the rugers I have to believe that they are not built up to the same standards as the other guns that I mentioned. If someone has a good Ruger handgun that can out proform an XD tactical I would LOVE to see it.


All I can say is we live in different worlds, my friend. Of dozens of folks I know -- including several LEO's -- respect for Ruger handguns is universal. Of all the many Rugers I have owned or handled, I can recall only 2 legitimate complaints about them -- the original P89 pistol was horridly innaccurate, and the .45 Super Blackhawks have had a reputation of chamber mouth diameters being mismatched to bore diameters. Now, I know a few folks who don't like the fact that Rugers tend to be a bit beefier than other designs, but that's a matter of personal preference and "style", not of quality. Any lousy Rugers you come across I'll glady give a home!

Might want to search the archives on some postings by Ribbonstone, whose firearm collection went through the floods in New Orleans. Seems the Ruger 101 revolver was the only one out of many that made it in sufficient form as to not being junked out.

Don't be too quick to condemn a firearm on heresay - best to actually try something and then form your own opinion. Gotta say all the many Ruger rifles and handguns I personally own have performed flawlessly over the years.

Never paid much attention to those that knock the product.

Don't get me wrong; I am not saying that all Rugers are crap I am just saying that as far as automatic pistols go they are not known for making top of the line firearms. I have never heard a good thing about them, and I cannot rent one because my shooting range does not carry them. I have fired S&Ws, glocks, XDs, CZs, baretas, and Colts, but no rugers. If anyone would like to prove my friends wrong show me some stats. I am not being sarcastic I would really like to know. Can any of them consistently shoot a 1.5 inch group at 25 yards (the FBI min requirement) like the Glock? Do they have the round capacity of a 24/7? Are they rated for +p+ ammo like the Hi-point (not that I like that gun)? Have they ever won a national shooting contest in the stock devision? Do they have any other advantages over the guns that I mentioned? I'm just saying that they seem like a very unremarkable firearm.

Ya haven't told us what ya want to use it for?

I almost made the mistake of buying a P89, or what ever it was. The company really hurt themselves with that gun. Then I almost bought a mini-14, and though the accuracy falls off sharply, so I am told and believe, I'd still own one. As far as their rifles, especially their bolt action, well, it isn't a P89. The only real experience I have with Ruger is the .22 pistol, and it is a nice gun. Plus you can get the 77MKII in .458 Lott. 1 box of ammo = 1 Savage rifle from Wally World.

[QUOTE=Kachok25] I have fired S&Ws, glocks, XDs, CZs, baretas, and Colts, but no rugers. If anyone would like to prove my friends wrong show me some stats. I am not being sarcastic I would really like to know. Can any of them consistently shoot a 1.5 inch group at 25 yards (the FBI min requirement) like the Glock? QUOTE]


Try one out sometime and see for yourself. In the meantime, don't be quite so quick to condemn what you don't know.

Opinions are easiest to form when you have no experience to prove them one way or another. They're also impossible to argue against when they're based purely on hearsay and personal predjudice. So I won't bore you with facts -- if you're interested, go out an learn them for yourself. And be aware that for every one who will condemn Rugers with nothing to back up the condemnation I can find you one who will do the same for Taurus, Springfield, S&W, you-name-it. Nothing creates certainty like pure ignorance.

Whoa, how did this thread get turned into a Ruger bashing party? :rolleyes:

I have a friend who knows a guy with a Ruger 77 (in a 7mm-08 I think). We will meet up and go to the rifle range. I will bring my old Marlin 30-30, my friend will bring his slug gun and his friend will bring the Ruger 77. Then hopefully I'll be able to check out the action of the Ruger and try it out for myself.

All I know is that Ruger makes a great rifle, but the trigger is really hard and non-adjustable. Winchester 70 and Remington 700 are both legendary rifles and great quality.

The triggers are NOT hard to work with .Mine was set up to let off at two pounds by the smith in no time.
A lot of the "NEW" guns today have Lawyer triggers on them.

The Matlin 17V we bought had something like a 7 pound let off from the factory . We had to put an after marlet trigger on it.

The ruger 77 Mk 2 is a good rifle and I really like them.If your buying one , buy it from a gun smith and have the trigger done as part of the deal.

Other than that , maybe look at a Savage.
The weather Warrior with the accu/trigger .
The new ones now have a detachable Mag and their own Boss sytem.
They are noted to shoot real good out of the box.
Then all you need to do is find a good scope worthly of the rifle.

Sounds like the decision is almost made. Both the 70 and the 77 (Mk II) have the 3-position safety, both CRF. I favor the safety system that locks the bolt closed like the 70 & 77 do (and the older 700's did). I just can't warm up to the 700 that allows the bolt to open in the safe position, but of all the actions, the 700 seems to be the slickest! Good rifles, all of them.

The 270 is going to be ideal for deer. If you might be hunting larger animals at sometime in the future, like elk, the 30-06 will give you a bit more versatility, despite many elk falling to the 270. If so, however, would be a good excuse to get another rifle (if excuses seem needed). Good luck!

If'n it was a CDL it would have matte finish on all the metal parts and satin oil finish on the wood and very deep cut checkering. A very classy looking rifle.

I'm a classicalist that favors classics :D

Ignore all of the above and get the Winchester. If, after firing it, you feel you need a better recoil pad, install one of the newer Sorbothane thick models. You won't regret it! When you say you have a Winchester nobody asks you "why?".

Try one out sometime and see for yourself. In the meantime, don't be quite so quick to condemn what you don't know. Opinions are easiest to form when you have no experience to prove them one way or another. They're also impossible to argue against when they're based purely on hearsay and personal predjudice. So I won't bore you with facts -- if you're interested, go out an learn them for yourself. And be aware that for every one who will condemn Rugers with nothing to back up the condemnation I can find you one who will do the same for Taurus, Springfield, S&W, you-name-it. Nothing creates certainty like pure ignorance.[/QUOTE]

I am not harshly condeming them you are just over reacting. I am just relaying what I have been told by people who by my own addmissson know more about handguns than I do (which is quite an bit). I figured since there were so many hardcore Ruger fans here they could give me their stats off the top of their heads, saving me the time and trouble of looking it up myself, but since everyone wants to get snappy about it I will go right now and find the anwsers myself. If I find anything worth talking about I will post it for you.

Ok I have been looking, and thus far the only thing I see is mixed oppions with no hard data to back them up. I went to the companys homepage hoping that they would have some lists of awards or grouping data....Nothing, but I did find one that has hi-cap magazines finaly (P95) 15+1 not bad, not quite tha capasity of a Glock17 or a 24/7 but if I need more than 15 shots to get the job done I don't need to be shooting anyway. If I can find one that can beat my $300 SIGMA or my friends tactical XD Ill be impressed.

OK, that's enough flaming about Ruger pistols. The topic is rifles.

Bye
Jack

[I particularly didn't care for the feel of the Remington 700. I don't know.... it just felt to bulky. The Winchester model 70 was a great rifle and I liked it a lot. The Ruger 77 MKII rifle was the special one that just seemed to fit. There was something about it... it was the rifle that said, "buy me and take me home". ;)

What do you think?

ButchA, I think you have answered your own question. I have a 700 and a new 77 mark2 in 30-06. Both are good rifles. I plan to take the 77 on a deer/hog hunt in FLA this week. Will let you know how it went in the Southeast hunting forum. I took it to the range today to finsh checking it out. I have no problem with the trigger. But I am use to shooting old mil-surp rifles.

I think you should get the Ruger as it is a new rifle. As the Winchester is used, I would have to look at it really close. Never know how the previous owner treated it. Also you have the warrenty to fall back on. My 2 cents.

Dave

Since I already have a 700, I'd say get the Ruger. I've always wanted one of those. Seriously, if the Ruger "felt" the best...that would be the one to get. I don't know of any trigger problems with them.

Thanks...

The Ruger 77 did feel great. It just came right to my shoulder like it was meant to. The Remington 700 was okay, but I didn't care for the bulky-ness of it. No offense to Remington 700 lovers but it felt heavy and bulky. The Winchester 70 was also nice and was like the Ruger, but the Ruger just felt better and had a better balance. All three rifles were in wood (probably walnut) stocks.

not sure that the ruger isn't birch, I love my M70 Featherweight. I also like rugers, the trigger is horrible, but can be fixed fairly easily, either by gunsmith or timney trigger. I was once tempted by a Ruger in 270, ended up telling my best friends wife about it and she bought it for him for chirstmas, I still get to shoot it on a regular basis. all said, I would probably take the winchester, if money wasn't an issue, but thats just me, i would say that you couldn't go wrong with the Win or Ruger, I am NOT a remington fan but I know that flies in the face of popular opinion around here

I think the Ruger 10/22's are mostly birch (standard model carbines), but I think the sporters (w/out the barrel band) are walnut. I believe all of the M77's are American walnut.

Fit and feel is more important than brand, IMO. If it (the Ruger) shoulders more naturally than the others, I'd buy it. You'll probably be another happy customer among millions.

Now that the predatory lawsuits have been stifled by the passage of the "Lawful Commerce in Arms Act", maybe our firearm manufacturers can make some deserved coin.

All M77s have been and continue to be American walnut...

ok, wasn't sure, now I know

I got gas to throw on the fire! Try a Howa 1500! It's a Mauser action, very accurate, and just to beat the Howa extractor you would need to have a Sako one installed! Affordable,accurate, and very reliable! I love my .308!!! JP

have you seen the extractors on the ruger and winchesters? they're not small

Size does not matter in this case. Quality does!

I got gas to throw on the fire! Try a Howa 1500! It's a Mauser action, very accurate, and just to beat the Howa extractor you would need to have a Sako one installed! Affordable,accurate, and very reliable! I love my .308!!! JP
The Howa 1500 is a push feed action, isn't it? I don't think it's a Mauser or Mauser copy. It doesn't have the controlled feed or the big claw extractor. Or am I missing something? :confused:

The Howa 1500 is a push feed action, isn't it? I don't think it's a Mauser or Mauser copy. It doesn't have the controlled feed or the big claw extractor. Or am I missing something? :confused:

You're right, Alyeska. You can see in the picture that the extractor is not an external claw, like the Mauser or Winchester pre-64. It looks more like the Sako.

That's not to say that the Howa isn't a good rifle. Other than being made in Japan, they are quite nice. (Yeah, I know the Japanese make some very nice rifles... ;) )