And I'm not talking about the RPR.  I'm thinking I want a 6.5 Creedmoor and have been looking at the various offerings out there.  One rifle I looked at was the RUGER HAWKEYE VARMINT TARGET RIFLE.  Nice looking rifle and seems to have all the blocks checked but I am not finding much on it.

I notice other than the RPR, Ruger rifles don't get much mention here.  Is there some inherent weakness or issue with them?

Many years ago, Bill Ruger supported a magazine limit law.

His son has changed his company's position.

Whadda ya mean, OP. Besides the RPR, the 10/22 gets MUCH love here. Oh, and let's not forget all the Mini-14 love....  

Ruger makes good rifles. Some people like them, others don't. The Hawkeye series are nice rifles. More of a premium offering for a lack of better word.  The introduction of the American series has been well received. And are at lower cost to get into. Over the last few years, Ruger has been cranking out some really cool stuff. This year especially. Buy what you like and have fun.

Not really precision type rifles, and they have pretty much zero aftermarket for them.  

The American at least will have the option of the magpul stock as an upgrade in the new future.  You just don't see ruger's out being used in precision roles other than the RPR and the odd american.

My dad has an older m77 short action in .308, I killed my first deer with it. Newer ruger stuff seems cheap to me

A few years ago Ruger's customer service screwed me quite badly.  Ruger is on my permanent fuck you list.

I was really impressed with how well the $350 Ruger American 6.5 Creedmoor shoots, especially with a SiCo Harvester on the end of it.

Guy with one up at Boomershoot was making way more hits on small targets at distance than anyone with a .308, and he had never shot past 100yds before our Precision Rifle Clinic.

You can buy performance.

I had an older Ruger 77 Tang safety. Varmint weight barrel. Had it bedded and a trigger job done..It was an ok rifle with zero aftermarket support. I sold it and bought a Savage 10T......Much happier now......

My Ruger American 6.5 is a tack driver and all I have in it is a scope, nothing more...cabelas 8-32-50 I think I paid 265.00 for it on sale.
barrel is too light for my liking but a great rifle to get started with. Hoping to take it out more and it will be my dedicated deer killer.
I got a project I am working on currently. Just purchased the new Howa 1500 HB 6.5 action in 24in bl and threaded. Hope to get the Bell and Carlson stock soon with a Vortex or Sig Sauer Scope for it, but that means $$$$$

Mini 14 love here!  I spread the news where ever I can.  I'll write a book some day - "My life in California" or "how I learned to love the Mini 14".


Have you seen my videos?

I have a Ruger M77 Mk II VT - dating back to the late 1990s - in .308.

It's a solid 5 shot group 3/4 MOA rifle.  I like the controlled feed and the 26" medium weight barrel and it's proven to be very stable and very durable with a bit over 5000 rounds through it.

The original lamented stock was stable, but heavy due it being about half glue (like laminated wood stocks) and with a wide fore end more appropriate to a bench than the field.   I replaced it with a composite stock almost immediately and never looked back.  

Ruger's current Varmint has the same overly heavy stock, and while the fore end contours on the Predator are narrower it also has a 22" barrel, which is either a pro or con, depending on what your priorities are.

The trigger on mine was quite nice right out of the box and I prefer a controlled feed action for some applications, and that's an advantage with the M77 Mk II Rugers.

-----

Ruger M 77s had a spotty reputation for accuracy as Ruger switch barrel companies (Hart, Douglas, etc) over the years before starting there own hammer forged barrel production.  Cold hammer forging creates a great deal of internal stress so proper stress relief is vital for stability.  However my experience with Ruger suggests that Ruger knows how to do it right.  The advantages of a hammer forged barrel are a very smooth bore that needs almost no break in, produces very little copper fouling and is extremely hard and durable, giving excellent barrel life.    

---

"Zero aftermarket support" is hyperbole, but it doesn't have nearly the support as a Rem 700 - more like a Win 70 or 98 Mauser.  You can however find after market stocks from McMillian as well as various after market rings, bases and triggers, and like any pretty much any other bolt action rifle you can always find an aftermarket barrel.

Love my Ruger rifles, always had really good luck with them, I have a 250-3000 and a Roberts that are amongst my favorite guns.

because of accuracy?

Only love for Ruger rim-fire... their center-fire sucks, in my opinion.

Oh man, I love my Ruger american ranch in 223. Its a sub moa gun with some handloads. I had the standard American in 308 shot only 3 rounds out of it then never shot it again. Love what they are doing especially since magpul is finally making a stock for the thing. Only company I see getting no love right now is rra and Springfield.

I have a Hawkeye FTW in 6.5CM that I bought this past winter that is extremely sensitive to load variations. Hasn't liked any factory ammo I've tried, won't shoot Bergers in any load I've tried, and I've finally seemed to find a sweet spot it likes with 130 Accubonds.

I bought the rifle strictly for hunting, and if I can keep that Accubond load shooting sub-MOA that will be good, but I don't think I would buy the rifle again if I could go back.

A bunch of Fudds if you ask me

Ruger's long guns have not enjoyed a good reputation for accuracy.  The Mini-14 gets lambasted for poor accuracy (this criticism is not entirely unfair either, before they retooled the plant that makes them some of them were truly horrible.  AK-like accuracy, and in many cases, worse than AK accuracy).  Their bolt action rifles are good, rugged machines that will last a lifetime, but they've tended to come in at 'meh' on their grouping.  Not completely horrible, not great.  The controlled round mauser type feed is nice if you're planning on hunting something dangerous and need to count on the rifle to feed every time.

Before the RPR, there was little that Ruger made that did notably well in the accuracy department besides some of the six guns and the MkI-IV pistols.  Most of their stuff has always been overbuilt, tough, able to withstand hard use in bad conditions, and sold at a reasonable price.  The RPR represents a departure somewhat from their original formula, and it has served them well because they're now tapping into a market that they had essentially no presence in.

Ruger bolt guns have very little to no aftermarket, and I think that's why you see few precision rifles built off Ruger actions.  I suspect the reasons are myriad why no aftermarket sprung up around Ruger firearms (obviously discounting the 10/22 and MkI-IV pistols).

One reason is that Ruger won't sell factory fitted parts to end users, so I imagine the tinkerers don't tinker much for that reason.  You can mess something up and not be able to get a replacement part without mailing it back to Ruger.  Too much hassle.  Shipping charges piled on top of parts AND labor charges, whereas with any other manufacturer you just order a part.  No labor charges since you are the labor.

There's also the bit about the scope mounting system.  Ruger's proprietary system works fine, but it has issues that, while not insurmountable, are not worth messing with when you have alternatives.  I find that Ruger receivers are usually not entirely straight, and scope rings need to be lapped for good alignment.  If you have ever tried to lap Ruger scope rings, you understand the depths of rage a man can descend into, where not even the most vile curses are sufficient to describe his feelings on the matter.  While slightly misaligned rings don't matter much for non-precision applications and cheap scopes, for a good long range shooter with high end optics, you need it.  Ruger's bolt guns (not including RPR) do not deliver on this, and the nature of the materials they use make it extra hard to achieve it.

Continuing on the scope mounting deal.  Companies producing higher end scope rings for precision applications are going to spend their R&D developing Weaver and Picatinny rings since that's what practically everyone uses.  They might develop for Ruger, they might not.  If they do, it's often an afterthought.

On Ruger receivers often not being completely straight....it's easier to build a precision rifle from a receiver that's already straight, or close to it, than to try to correct one that isn't.  Besides that, if controlled round feed is your thing, there's no shortage of Mauser pattern receivers to build off of, none of which will suffer from the usual Ruger issues or have the Ruger optics-mounting situation to deal with.

Basically, the reason Rugers aren't built into precision rifles is because it's easier to do it with other common, existing actions.  Remington and Savage as companies are both friendlier in terms of supplying parts for tinkerers and don't suffer from proprietary, one off optics mounting situations.  The Remington 700 and Savage 10/110 are both easier to work on in general, especially the Savage.  The basic Remington and Savage rifles are cheaper up front as well, being simpler designs.  The whole reason Ruger came out with the American Rifle was to compete in that market segment that the 700 and 10/110 were dominating.

This got long winded, but basically, Rugers aren't built into precision rifles simply because there are much easier paths to get there.  Doesn't mean it can't be done, and I'm sure someone somewhere has done it.  Also doesn't mean the Rugers are poor rifles; they tend to be very rugged and durable.  Purposed as medium range or less hunting rifles, they do very well, but there are easier ways to get a rifle that shoots tiny groups than to start with a Ruger M77.

I have a Ruger M77 MkII VT in 308 and it gets ALL the love - beautiful rifle and heavy at ~12# w/ scope.  I had it measured by Ruger's techs while trying to resolve a problem (turned out to be ammo-related) - they sent me their set of specs (min and max) and my rifle's measurements - right down the middle on everything - perfect product.  My rifle printed a 1/4" group at 50 yards in Ruger's test setup while they had it.  Ruger QC was always great, BTW, at least up until 10 or so years ago when I had my last interaction.  The typical 5 round group from my rifle at 100 yards (36x scope) is 4 holes touching and one just a hair out with FGMM or handloads - always seem to get that one 'flyer', which pushes it out to ~0.5MOA.

I am the same way about Vortex.  My first experience was bad, there won't be a second.  My CS experiences with Ruger were pretty good.

I had a 181 series Mini-14 I bought I think in about 1980.  It was very easy to hit the side of a barn with, as long as I was inside the barn.  I still have my Security Six I bought in 79.

I really like Ruger revolvers, my last was a Vaquero in 45LC.