Hunting Washington Forum

Equipment & Gear => Guns and Ammo => Topic started by: mossback91 on January 17, 2008, 10:17:36 PM

Title: Ruger hawkeye??
Post by: mossback91 on January 17, 2008, 10:17:36 PM: Does anybody have one? What do you think of it? Like the action?
Title: Re: Ruger hawkeye??
Post by: actionshooter on January 17, 2008, 10:30:31 PM: I looked at them and like the 77 better and the new hawkeye cost more.
Title: Re: Ruger hawkeye??
Post by: high country on January 19, 2008, 08:09:09 AM: Quote from: actionshooter on January 17, 2008, 10:30:31 PM
I looked at them and like the 77 better and the new hawkeye cost more.

a huge improvement IMO worth the money......well gas is $3.00 a gallon now. rugers were $350 when gas was $.99.................seems relative
Title: Re: Ruger hawkeye??
Post by: bobcat on January 19, 2008, 08:46:06 AM: I like them and if I was in the market for a new rifle I'd definitely take a hard look at the Ruger first. The new hawkeye is supposed to have a much improved trigger. The old 77's were known for their terrible triggers.
Title: Re: Ruger hawkeye??
Post by: actionshooter on January 19, 2008, 09:41:50 PM: The old rugers did have terrible triggers but compare an old 77MK2 with the hawkeye. Really look at them side by side. They are not as well built and all of the wood I have seen so far isn't as nice. I have only looked at 3 though. The gunshop where I was comparing them the hawkeye was $100 more.
Title: Re: Ruger hawkeye??
Post by: high country on January 19, 2008, 10:31:26 PM: I'd pay $100 for a stock, and if you own a ruger pre hawkeye you prolly bought a stock......or throw your puppy in the microwave because the factory stock pisses you off so bad.
Title: Re: Ruger hawkeye??
Post by: actionshooter on January 20, 2008, 08:09:44 AM: I was talking about the wood stocks on the M77 being nicer. Not the Zytel canoe paddles the call a synthetic stocks. :chuckle:
Title: Re: Ruger hawkeye??
Post by: high country on January 20, 2008, 09:29:37 AM: Quote from: actionshooter on January 20, 2008, 08:09:44 AM
I was talking about the wood stocks on the M77 being nicer. Not the Zytel canoe paddles the call a synthetic stocks. :chuckle:

so was I ;). the m77 wood stock is easily the worst ever, right behind the birch savage. could they have made it any chunkier? I think not. the hawkeye is way more slim and efficient then the m77......they throw in a better finish and trigger for the cost of the stock.....good deal.
Title: Re: Ruger hawkeye??
Post by: mossback91 on January 20, 2008, 11:25:20 AM: I was looking at the all weather model.
Title: Re: Ruger hawkeye??
Post by: mossback91 on January 20, 2008, 12:37:48 PM: Have any of you shot one? or do any of you own one?
Title: Re: Ruger hawkeye??
Post by: actionshooter on January 20, 2008, 02:47:37 PM: Quote from: high country on January 20, 2008, 09:29:37 AM
Quote from: actionshooter on January 20, 2008, 08:09:44 AM
I was talking about the wood stocks on the M77 being nicer. Not the Zytel canoe paddles the call a synthetic stocks. :chuckle:

so was I ;). the m77 wood stock is easily the worst ever, right behind the birch savage.
It must be the luck of the draw, I have a 77MK1 with a wood stock that would rival a Winchester super grade. With that said I don't have a hunting rifle that isn't synthetic.
Title: Re: Ruger hawkeye??
Post by: Bigshooter on January 23, 2008, 02:23:56 PM: The only thing a m77 is good for is a boat anchor. Have looked at a few hawkeyes though and have to admit they look and feel pretty nice. Am considering buy one in the new 375.
Title: Re: Ruger hawkeye??
Post by: Dakota Dogman on February 19, 2008, 06:36:06 PM: Just got one in .358 Win. before moving west. Only shot about 1/2 box of shells through it. Only one real complaint is the tiny safety has sharp edges. Not real condusive to fast work or thick gloves. Feeds well, shoots well, I'm pleased with all but that one little thing.

Just MHO, but Ruger bolt actions are work horses, not show ponies. Thick? Yes. Ugly? Probably. Reliable? Almost always.

God Bless,