Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Ruger M77 opinions

What are your opinions on the older M77 walnut and blues steel bolt actions. They had tang safety’s and thenewer ones had the safety at the rear of the bolt. Kind of a Mauser design on the bolt.... are these good accurate guns? What about the ultralight barrel
Models?

I like the one I own, mainly based on it being my first commercial hunting rifle. It's a late enough rifle to have a Ruger produced barrel, and shoots fairly well.

They are great guns. The early ones were not full on CRF, so be mindful of that. The ultra light model's had pencil thin barrels that were pretty whippy and in some cases not very accurate. I've seen a few at gunshows around here. Don't expect to get Tikka accuracy out of a Ruger though, or you will be sorely disappointed....

I have an UL model in .308 that is my most used and liked rifle.

One thing a bit unusual about them is they hold 5 rounds in the magazine, making them a 6 round rifle with 1 in the chamber.

The first Ruger I had was chambered in 300 WM. It had to be sent back because the extractor was releasing the cases to early. I don’t think the barrel was made by Ruger. I ended up having a cut rifled barrel screwed on (30-338). The trigger had to be tuned also.

The older Model 77s are good guns, and the newer ones (MkII and Hawkeye) are much better in my opinion, with some exceptions.

The older guns main draw in terms of features is the tang safety - a double shotgun style that is easy to use and convenient. This safety prevents the trigger from being pulled but does not block the striker, a shortcoming I think is significant (though this design is very common in many other brands, including the Remington 700). It is also interesting to note, as an aside, that while this feature is lacking in Bill Ruger’s Model 77, the Ruger Number One single shot locks the trigger and physically blocks the hammer while on safe. I suppose he reasoned that the magazine rifle would mostly be carried with an empty chamber and cartridges in the magazine which can be quickly fed to the chamber, while the single shot was more likely to be carried with a round up the spout.

The controlled round feed (CRF) feature is lacking on the early versions of the Model 77, as the extractor must jump the cartridge rim while being fed into the chamber from the magazine. I had one failure to extract a fired cartridge from a Model 77 .270 in the mid 70s, an extractor that didn’t break but failed to completely jump the rim, while four other Model 77s of this vintage were flawless. Another feature of this rifle I do not like is spring loaded plunger ejector. It is possible that the plunger could be stuck with debris and fail to eject, though I have never had this happen. Only one of these rifles remains, a heavy barrel .220 Swift that is very accurate. Accuracy of these early Model 77s could be spotty. A couple of these, in .257 Roberts and a sporter weight .220 Swift, were 2.5 MOA shooters at best, while rifles in .270, 7mm RM and the heavy barreled Swift above were all sub-MOA shooters and good hunting rifles. That 7mm RM was a saddle scabbard rifle that logged many horseback miles and was vary reliable (I did glass bed the rifle and free float the barrel).

A terrific feature of the Model 77 is the scope mounting arrangement. Bases are integral to the receiver, less to go awry. This feature continues with the later Model 77s.

I much prefer the newer actions of the Model 77, the MkII and Hawkeye. These models are very similar, in metal only different in the trigger assemblies. These feature the same Mauser-based and proven CRF design, with a blade-type ejector (found also in similar design on current and ore-64 Winchester Model 70s, the idea of which was stolen from the various Mauser actions).

Also of great importance to me is that the safeties of these later rifles physically block the striker from falling as well as locking the trigger. I find the stock design of the Hawkeye about the best shape in a hunting rifle, but that is purely personal preference and “feel.” The Hawkeye triggers seem a bit better in terms of trigger pulls, but the MkIIs can be safely worked down to crisp pulls around 3#. Some may not like the lack of an overtravel trigger stop, but it has not bothered me and my rifles have shot very well. They also feature (both Hawkeye and MkII) an open trigger design that will not allow water or debris to collect and freeze up.

In terms of accuracy, I have had several MkIIs that were great shooters, not one that was sour (though my small sample size may not mean much). I view the Hawkeye as a terrific bargain in a new hunting rifle today. I have no experience with any of the Ultralight models.

There’s my take; am sure others have different views.

A tang safety(RL) ultra light 270 has been my “go to “ deer rifle for years. Tang safety 77 ‘s are one of my favorites. They don’t get accused too often of being tack drivers however ,but dead critters don’t mind.

I prefer the Hawkeyes over either of the earlier models, for the trimmer stocks, steel bottom metal, and, on the three I've owned at least, decent triggers. All are solid hunting rifles, though accuracy varies.

The tang safety on the first models is nice, but some complain that it can get switched off by the web of one's hand in normal carry. Don't recall that ever happening to me with my UL.

I have had a half-dozen tang safety Rugers since I bought my first one in 1981. All were dependable, but heavier than I like a hunting rifle to be. Box stock accuracy was generally good, and one 7mm Rem Mag (which now belongs to an ex-son-in-law) was very good. I grew up with tang safety shotguns, so I never had any problems with the Ruger safeties.

I have three heavily modified M77 tang safety rifles which I use for hunting. Two are SA with long discontinued McMillan ultralight stocks. (Rick sold me one of them years ago!) The LA is in a McMillan hunter.

All three have had their magazines lengthened and have been rebarreled many times. Two have timney triggers. According to my gunsmith the timney is very difficult to install compared to other actions.

I like these actions because they strong and the location of the safety.

Another fact worth knowing is that the barrel shank is 1" x 16 TPI so a Rem takeoff can be rethreaded with some setback and rechamered easily. A 7 Rem mag has made me several 284 Win. A 243 can become a 6mm-284 with removal of just the bolt recess.

I have never had an issue getting any of these tangers to shoot when rebarreled with takeoffs or custom barrels. FYI I full float the barrels so future barrel exchanges don't require rebedding.

They sell around the Tucson area for $325-375. Get one and give it a try.

I like all 3 variants (tang, MKII, Hawkeye). I dont care for the ultralight though as the barrel is so thin and short, they dont balance well for field position shooting...atleast for me anyway. When I buy a Ruger I just accept that it will be 9 lbs with scope. Though there is nothing wrong with a 9lb rifle, its is a bit heavy for my taste, so currently dont own any. If you had a nice light weight stock, aluminum bottom metal and modest scope, got it down to 8 lbs, then you'd have a heck of a rifle, particularly for a wilderness type rifle. They usually function great without a hiccup and are dead reliable. I'd pick one for this application over a new production M70.

Mule Deer:
" I've owned a pile of 77's of all eras. While one barrel truly sucked (a 7x57 with a bore that had numerous loose spots, with the tight spots measuring .287), all the others shot anywhere from acceptably to very well. My acceptable rating is three shots in an inch for big game rifles, and five shots in an inch for varmint rifles, and very well is half that. Most of them required some work on the bedding and trigger, but then a lot of factory rifles do."

Boxer - Big Stick:
"I've Ruger familiarity and accept them for what they are. Light or bullet proof they are not, though curiously enough they are oft maligned by the masses for "accuracy" woe which I've yet to see, though of course I shoot a bit, which tend to tip numerous scales."

A general comment about the rifles I owned and owned by others is, some would show respectable accuracy from the get go, others it would take several rounds to show respectable accuracy, some liked a clean barrel, some shot best with a dirty barrel. But, you know, I have seen this behavior in other rifle makes and models, too.

One rifle I owned shot great from the start then suddenly groups opened up...way up. A gunsmith member at the gun club shared a tip to see if it corrected the problem. He said it is possible the angle screw touched the stock hole after a few rounds. Further advised to take the gun apart and slightly ream the stock hole with a 1/4" round file. WOW! That cured the problem. I have helped 2 or 3 other club members do the same thing.

I used my 3006 as my only rifle for about 20 years. I was very happy with it. I got bored with it and tried many different rifles. And they where all judged upon that tanger. I will never sell it. I have rifles I prefer now but I am still fond with it. My brother got it in about 1988 as part of a trade in for a used vehicle. He called me up one day and asked me if I wanted it for A hundred bucks. He wanted the money to take out his girl friend. Im not sure it had ever been shot much at all. The stock was flawless like NIB. I bought it of course.

The first rifle I ever bought for myself was a Rugger MkII in 7mm Rem Mag around 1981. I was still in college, didn't have much money, and went for the Ruger because it seemed like a good gun at a good price. I had the trigger honed by the gunsmith at the shop, and it felt really good. I think the Ruger integral scope mounts are a brilliant idea and all bolt action makers should implement integral mounts.

However, that Ruger shot like total shyte. 8" - 12" groups at 100 yds. Looked like a shot gun pattern. This with multiple different factory loads and even some hand loads, and many trips to the range. I had a gunsmith float the barrel and bed the action, but the gun still shot like crap. I replaced the scope, too, with no improvement.

I sent the gun back to Ruger, they did something to it, I don't know what. When I got the gun back, it shot 2 - 2.5"" groups, again with factory ammo and hand loads. Better, but still not good enough considering all the work that went into it. I contacted Ruger again, and they said the gun now shot within factory specs and to not contact them again.

I was super excited to buy my first "adult" gun, but it turned out to be a bitter disappointment. I have not bought a Ruger product since, nor ever will.

We are big fans of the MKII/Hawkeye. I think that they are the best hunting gun going, period. I take them over a pre-64 due to better gas handling and a more secure safety system.

We've had them in long and short action, including ultralights. They are our main hunting weapons. Never a problem and I don't expect any either.

IF I were to actually start over, I'd buy a stainless MKII in 30-06, put it in a Bansner stock, and forget about all the rest that I've wasted money on.

Love my Rugers and have all three kinds, M77, MKII and Hawkeye, ranging from 1982 to 2014 manufacture.

The factory triggers triggers are best on the Hawkeyes but all are easily improved with a light polish. The barrels are floated on all of mine with wood stocks, which eliminates POI walking the target as the walnut heats up. Accuracy is superb to good (1" @ 100) depending on loads and rifles. I have used several to shoot clay pigeons on the 600 yard berm, with hit rates to 40%.

IMHO they are one of the best hunting rifles made - practically indestructible.

I have a heavy barrel Ruger M77 varminter that was given to me in the box by grandpa about 9 years ago. It is a 1978 or 79 that had never been shot. It is one of the most accurate rifles I own, it will shoot 87grn Vmax at .30 inches with 37.0 of Varget. I love the rifle.

I Shot my 1st Mule deer buck with a Tang safety Rugger 300 Win, and that rifle was a shooter.
I sold it to pay for truck driving school. A few years later i bought on in .308 That was the worst shooting factory rifle i ever owned. Had a good shooting 280, in the tanger once too.

I’ve got a tanger 77 V 308 I forgot about! Ha

You know what I would really like to see? A reintroduced M77 tang safety. Nice bluing, decent walnut, good, serviceable trigger. Too much to ask?