Remington or Ruger?
Given the choice between the Remington 700 and the Ruger M77, which one would you choose, and why?
This will be in .308 Win.
You want precision? Remington 700. I’ve never heard of a precision ruger 77, and there must be a reason for it. The only 77 I’ve dealt with was definitely more of a hunting rifle.
With the 700 you will have far more options as far as aftermarket parts built specifically for precision shooting from stocks to scope mounts and triggers. Not to mention the number of gunsmiths who know the ins and outs of the platform.
What is your draw to the ruger?
Rem700.
… its not even debatable. Ruger can make some nice hunting rifles… sometimes.
Remington… :suicide2:
Ruger would probably be one of my last choices.
In no particular order:
Remington
Savage
Howa
Tika
All much better than Ruger IMO.
I own several of each. I dont consider the Ruger a precision rifle, only as a hunting rifle. My precision rifles are Remington factory or Rem 700 actions. If you are on a budget, the Savage is a decent rifle, if you have a few more coins the Sako TRG is an excellent rifle out of the box. Its hard to beat a Rem 700 PSS though.
Rob
Remington 700 in a heavy barrel config is one small ragged hole at 100 yards with factory Federal Gold Medal. Hard to beat for the price with both rifle and ammo off the rack.
Until Mr. Picatinny invented his wonderful rail I was a big fan of the Ruger scope mounting system. I am now using Picatinny rails on all the guns I can use it on and have no more reason to own a Ruger. That’s good because I have had a lot of disappointments with Rugers, particularly poor accuracy. For example, a 77-22 that shot 6 to 8 inches at 50 yards. I sent it back they test fired it and declared that it met Ruger accuracy specifications. The only Ruger bolt actions remaining in my possession have top quality aftermarket barrels. The only thing that would change my opinion was if I suddenly got interested in Ruger Compact Magnums which seem very interesting particularly if you are interested in medium to large bore rifles.
I assume you are looking at a tactical/precision rifle.
I have two Remingtons in .308. It is the mid-point for heavy barreled rifles. There are better and lesser rifles. But Remingtons are consistent enough to become a point of reference. There are better rifles, but they cost more. They are probably your best bet for a first HB/tactical rifle in .308. They are easy to rebarrel, and the receivers are consistent. The Howa is a little cheaper, but very similar. I don’t think you can go wrong with either. (The Howa is on page 51 of the current CDNN catalog, and is a very good deal if you are on a budget.)
I have had one Ruger .308 varmint rifle. It was an older Ruger, and actually shot pretty well. Or maybe I shot better with it. I liked the stock and barrel profile - not a fan of super heavy barrels. But you are more likely to get a consistently accurate rifle with a Remington 700 if you are staying with a factory barrel. People look down at Ruger, just as they looked down at Savage in the past. I don’t think it is justified. Rugers do take more work to get them to the same place. But there is nothing inherently wrong with them.
My preference for a .308 is the FN with a 20" barrel and claw extractor. Look at page 44 of the current CDNN catalog. It was about the same price as the Remington. I have it set up as an F-Class traditional rifle. Very heavy, long barrels have their place, but I am just a weekend warrior with a single stage press. If I only had one rifle it would be the FN.
Anyway, I would look at the FN, Remington, and Howa in that order for an entry .308 tactical/target rifle.
Get the FN, cut the barrel to 18" and thread it for a muzzle device.
’
In my experience, if you get a Ruger that shoots great (unlikely)…good for you, if it doesn’t shoot good…sell it.
If you get a Remington that doesn’t shoot good (not likely), there are several inexpensive fixes (bed, float, adjust trigger, etc) that can improve the accuracy.
In short, I’ve been able to successfully improve the accuracy of Remongton 700’s but not Rugers.
But maybe it’s just me…
.
I say Remington, I have Ruger M77 in .270 that is my go to Deer hunting gun I had a trigger job done and the action glass bedded and the barrel free floated and it still will only shoot 1.5" groups. Now my wifes Remington 700 BDL out of the box will shoot .75-1.00" all day long.
So from now on it’s Remington for us.
Dave
Remington 700. Considerable after-market support and are more consistent from one gun to the next than the Rugers in my limited experience.
Thanks for all the feedback!
Savage… Yes, I have looked at them. They do have a reputation for being a low cost, accurate rifle. Unfortunately, I just do not like the trigger.
Yes, accuracy is important to me, but I am not looking for a “heavy” barrel. Also, durability and reliability are important. This needs to be something that can be “used and abused”, so to speak, while still being able to maintain its reliability and accuracy.
Since I can not afford to shoot .308 a whole lot, I am beginning to look into reloading. I doubt that I would be able to afford to put more than a couple hundred rounds thru it per year without reloading.
I also do not plan on extensive after market mods. I will be putting a sling on it, mounting a scope on it and I “might” have backup iron sights installed, but that is probably about it. I will probably go with an unattached tripod rather than an attached bipod.
I do like the idea of the Mauser type bolt on the Ruger, but the Remington does seem to have a better reputation for “out of the box” accuracy. I’m not sure how much the different bolt types will impact durability and reliability.
I also have heard that the Remington has a slightly heavier/thicker barrel than the Ruger. If so, is it heavier enough to lessen the barrel harmonics and give better accuracy for follow-up shots? I doubt that I would be taking any shots beyond 400 yards, so even 1 – 1 ½ MOA would be acceptable IF it is able to hold this level of accuracy for successive shots, even after the barrel heats up.
Right now, I am still undecided, but beginning to lean towards the Remington. I know the military has based sniper rifles on the 700 for some time and that, in and of itself, speaks some towards it’s durability. I also like the availability of after market support that is available for it.
Thanks.
There is nothing a rem700 can’t do, that a ruger can. There are many things a rem700 can do, that a ruger can’t. Does that help?
If you want repeatable reliable accuracy without spending thousands on a custom rifle or AIAE or AW… then you need to buy a rem700 SPS tactical with a 20" barrel in 308win.
Then take that rifle and put it in a good aftermarket stock like an HS Precision, Bell & Carlson, McMillan, or Manners. Have it bedded by a competent smith.
Put a timney trigger in it, top it off with some good base, rings, and glass… and you’ll want for nothing for about 6,000rnds.
Reloading opens up a whole new level of accuracy for a reasonable cost. But it is not necessarily cheaper. But I think it is part and parcel of accurate shooting. 15 accurate shots beat 100 spray/and/pray shots.
The FN has a Mauser-type extractor.
Finally, I don’t think you will be satisfied with 1.5 MOA. Not with a good rifle. I agree that the Rem. 700 tactical rifle is a good choice. A med-heavy barrel - 20" - is a good compromise.
It sounds like you want more of a trunk gun than a precision rifle? I guess we shouldn’t have assumed you wanted a precision rifle from the get-go. But now you are saying you want something cheap, lightweight, and not expected to be shot a whole lot.
Have you looked into the Stevens line by Savage? They are savage barreled actions with a non-accu-trigger in a cheap stock. The barrels have a hunting contour rather than precision/varmint contour. You can drop them into a 110 action stock if you want something nicer than the OEM.
Put the money saved down on glass, ammo, or reloading eqpt so you can actully shoot the rifle.
Yup… that pretty much says it.
Remington without question.
OK, I guess I should step back and ask you what “Precision” means to you. (never mind the fact that I never mentioned the word, this just happens to be the only place ti discuss accurate bolt action rifles on the Forum).
No I am not looking for a 1000 yard rifle.
Yes, I am looking for a 300- 400 yard rifle.
No, I am not looking for a bench rest rifle.
Yes, I am looking for a rifle that can be used someplace other than the range. That means that it needs to be able to be carried and that it will not stop working if it gets dropped or nocked on the ground.
No, I am not looking for a target competition rifle.
Yes, am looking for an accurate rifle. I do not need to worry about getting a perfect score and have all rounds covered by a quarter at 300 yards, but I do need to worry about hitting the right target and not hitting the wrong target.
No I am not looking for something that is “cheap, lightweight, and not expected to be shot a lot”. Also, as mentioned, I have already looked at the Savage product line and have already discounted them from my short list (I have also looked at Browning, Winchester, Howa, Weatherby, and several other brands that I have also eliminated from my list for one reason or another), thus the question of “Remington or Ruger?” I have already narrowed my decision down to these two brands.
I am looking for something that is a good reliable and accurate rifle that I will be shooting as much as I can afford to shoot.
What I asked, and am looking for, for was input on these two product lines because there are some very knowledgeable people on this site and I value their input.
What I am not looking for is somebody to redefine my requirements based on words that I did not use.