Ruger or Remington?
- Thread starter OttoJara
- Start date
Bamashooter
New member
Yes, they are good rifles. The SPS is a good rifle IMHO also. $400 for the ruger isnt too bad of a price but for less than $100 more you can get a new SPS.
Doc Intrepid
New member
I'm also a big fan of Ruger rifles, mine have been very satisfactory.
That said, the Remington 700 is a nice rifle also - either would work, and I'd let your budget decide which of them makes more sense.
Check the scope out carefully on the rifle in the pawn shop.
That said, the Remington 700 is a nice rifle also - either would work, and I'd let your budget decide which of them makes more sense.
Check the scope out carefully on the rifle in the pawn shop.
FrankenMauser
New member
There's absolutely nothing wrong with the X7s. In this case, you'd be looking at an XL7 (long action) for .270 Win or .30-06.
Most cheap rifles are exactly that: They were designed to be cheap to build, and don't have the fit, finish, and quality level of higher priced rifles. (Some "cheap" rifles: Many Savage/Stevens rifles. Remington 710. Remington 770.)
The Marlin X7s should be classified as "bargains", not cheap. They were engineered, from the very beginning, to be cheap to manufacture - yet bring the fit, finish, and quality levels of rifles nearly twice the price.
My XL7 out-shoots every other rifle I own (.30-06, gift from my wife
).As for the Ruger vs Remington question-
I prefer the Ruger stock shape, and material. I also like the three-position safety. The 700 SPS isn't a bad rifle, but I would buy the Ruger.
See which one fits you better.
coltaholic
New member
Ruger or Rem
You can't beat Ruger customer service. I've owned several of both, and I'd take the Ruger every time.
You can't beat Ruger customer service. I've owned several of both, and I'd take the Ruger every time.
sailskidrive
New member
Remington....
I'm definitely a Ruger fan, but I would go with the Remington for the simple reason that there are far more after market parts and upgrades available.
If you're buying a used gun you may want to make sure it has the new X-mark trigger given all of the bad press recently about accidental discharges from the original trigger safety set up.
BTW - I have a Rem 700 PSS; very accurate!
I'm definitely a Ruger fan, but I would go with the Remington for the simple reason that there are far more after market parts and upgrades available.
If you're buying a used gun you may want to make sure it has the new X-mark trigger given all of the bad press recently about accidental discharges from the original trigger safety set up.
BTW - I have a Rem 700 PSS; very accurate!
Yes Bud's has free shipping, but don't forget to add in a transfer fee unless you have your own FFL already. Most places charge around $20+ for this fee so now your into a $470 rifle at a minimum. AFAIKI Remington still doesn't add bases or rings to their rifles so add around another $50 now your up to $520.
Depending on the type of Bushnell scope on the Ruger you may not need to upgrade optics right away but if you do your buying the same scope so add $200. Now you have a $720 rifle vs. a $600 rifle and I'll bet you can get that pawn shop to come down 5-10% on the rifle if you go in cash in hand. I'm sure at the very least you can walk out the door with it for $400 tax included.
I seriously doubt that pawn shop rifle is shot out. For a hunting rifle it is hard to beat a Ruger they are some of the most rugged rifles made. Just realize it is a hunting rifle and not a target rifle, and don't worry if you aren't able to shoot sub 1" groups with it, as long as it will hold 1.5" or less groups you have all you will ever really need to hunt most game.
If I coudl get that Ruger out the door for $400 or less I'd sure take a chance on it over the new Remington.
I purchased my first Ruger Mark II in 300 WSM a few years ago. My only complaint is the trigger pull, very heavy and I have never had so much travel in a rifle trigger. Every other aspect of that rifle has exceeded my expectations and now that the trigger has been replaced it is my favorite long gun.
I'm with Fusion
Older Ruger M77s were not known for their accuracy. New ones are better. (same with Mini14s)
I don't really like Remington as a company. They're like the Walmart of rifles. They just bought Marlin and somehow, it caused quality to go way down in their lever actions. I have a Remington 788, and it is not super accurate. Just over MOA was the best I could do, even with hand loads. But the barrel was hot and I only had a 9X scope.
Savage has a great reputation for accuracy in inexpensive rifles. I'd either get one of those, a T/C Icon, or a Winchester 70 if I were getting a new bolt action.
I was thinking of a bolt action, but for my use, a T/C Encore makes more sense. Accurate, and a longer barrel in the same rifle length due to the short action. Interchangeable barrels, so I can get another top quality gun for only the cost of the barrel. (~$250)
Older Ruger M77s were not known for their accuracy. New ones are better. (same with Mini14s)
I don't really like Remington as a company. They're like the Walmart of rifles. They just bought Marlin and somehow, it caused quality to go way down in their lever actions. I have a Remington 788, and it is not super accurate. Just over MOA was the best I could do, even with hand loads. But the barrel was hot and I only had a 9X scope.
Savage has a great reputation for accuracy in inexpensive rifles. I'd either get one of those, a T/C Icon, or a Winchester 70 if I were getting a new bolt action.
I was thinking of a bolt action, but for my use, a T/C Encore makes more sense. Accurate, and a longer barrel in the same rifle length due to the short action. Interchangeable barrels, so I can get another top quality gun for only the cost of the barrel. (~$250)
I've got two older (bought new in 1976/77) Model 77s and two newer MKII 77s and all four rifles are plenty accurate. I've had a couple of Remington bolt-action rifles before and, though they're never a mistake, I much prefer Ruger Model 77s to any other factory produced bolt-action rifle when everything is considered, including handling properties, accuracy, extractor design, general aesthetics (I prefer "classic" lines and blued steel wrapped in walnut), workmanship and finish, customer service and value (the included scope rings are a real plus).
The biggest drawback to my Model 77s are trigger pulls that are too heavy (a 7 to 8 pound pull is simply too heavy for a sporter rifle being used for hunting). Happily, this problem can be easily rectified with the installation of after-market triggers-though said replacements aren't cheap and should never have been "required" in the first place.
The biggest drawback to my Model 77s are trigger pulls that are too heavy (a 7 to 8 pound pull is simply too heavy for a sporter rifle being used for hunting). Happily, this problem can be easily rectified with the installation of after-market triggers-though said replacements aren't cheap and should never have been "required" in the first place.
You can't. The pre Hawkeye Mk II's are very good rifles. While they are not known for extreme accuracy most will shoot plenty good enough for a hunting rifle.
Ruger slightly changed the trigger starting in 2006 when they came out with the Hawkeye. They are generally lighter and crisper than the older versions. The older rifles were more inconsistent with triggers. Some are fine as is. Many had 7-8 lb. pulls that were often gritty. Spending a few $$$ to have a gunsmith work over a Ruger trigger can make a world of difference.
I have nothing against the Remington. I prefer the features on the Ruger for a hunting rifle. I like the rugged dependability along with acceptable accuracy. If having extreme accuracy is your goal it is more likely to happen with a Remington out of the box. If not out of the box, Remingtons are among the easiest for gunsmiths to tweak for extreme accuracy. Rugers are among the most difficult to accurize.
Ruger slightly changed the trigger starting in 2006 when they came out with the Hawkeye. They are generally lighter and crisper than the older versions. The older rifles were more inconsistent with triggers. Some are fine as is. Many had 7-8 lb. pulls that were often gritty. Spending a few $$$ to have a gunsmith work over a Ruger trigger can make a world of difference.
I have nothing against the Remington. I prefer the features on the Ruger for a hunting rifle. I like the rugged dependability along with acceptable accuracy. If having extreme accuracy is your goal it is more likely to happen with a Remington out of the box. If not out of the box, Remingtons are among the easiest for gunsmiths to tweak for extreme accuracy. Rugers are among the most difficult to accurize.
FrankenMauser, you are dead on 
All I can say is check out the Marlin webpage, if a good read of the info about the factory pillar bedding, factory recoil pad,
adjustable target trigger, button-rifled barrel & all the rest of the bells & whistles doesn't do it for ya, you need help
The bonus of them coming in inexpensively is just icing on the cake
The gun mag reviewers LOVE the Marlin X-7 series & most are in awe of the sub-MOA precision out of a $300 rifle!
All I can say is check out the Marlin webpage, if a good read of the info about the factory pillar bedding, factory recoil pad,
adjustable target trigger, button-rifled barrel & all the rest of the bells & whistles doesn't do it for ya, you need help
The bonus of them coming in inexpensively is just icing on the cake
The gun mag reviewers LOVE the Marlin X-7 series & most are in awe of the sub-MOA precision out of a $300 rifle!