Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: The Ruger Hawkeye Chambered in 338 Ruger Compact Mag.

  1. #1
    Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction
    Posts
    4,078

    Default The Ruger Hawkeye Chambered in 338 Ruger Compact Mag.

    I've been pricing rifles for the past year now. It's been a full year since I've actually bought a brand new rifle. The last rifle in my battery is a light weight mountain rifle. I've always been a major fan of classic standard cartridges. Like the 30-30, the 308, the 358, the 9.3x62 mauser, the 260, and the 223 rem. I originally wanted a Kimber in 338 federal, but in respect to the advice from other forum members that's not going to happen. There were different criteria that I seeked from a mountain rifle that would be out of character with the norm of sheep and goat hunters. I wanted it to be above 30 caliber, have a short barrel, be a short action, and have open sights. Many of the mountain rifles are just too expensive for my tastes. Then......I found the Ruger Model 77 chambered in a 338 compact mag with a 20 inch barrel and open sights. I was given a quote of 630 dollars on a brand new one.......you can't beat that. I'm sold, end of story. It weighs in at 6.75lbs. perfect.....with room for a future plans involving ways to shave some ounces off the rifle. I want to be able to shoot the bonded core 180-185 grain ballistic tips for the sheep and goat, then stash the scope and load up with 225-250 grainers for the decent/ and float trip out. Looks like I can do this with a short action rifle that kicks (supposedly) about like a 30-06. Looks like the rifle can fit a full four cartridges in the internal magazine too. Just perfect in every aspect of the word.

  2. #2
    Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction
    Posts
    4,078

    Default a couple more additional thoughts regarding shaving a few more ounces.

    The bottom metal on that paticular rifle is made of steel. Brownells sells a ruger original aluminum bottom metal that costs about 23 dollars. Stockystocks will sell a bell and carlson caberlite for about 150 dollars. The magazine follower is made of a solid chunk of steel......overkill. I may be the first one to think of this, or attempt this but I'm planning on making a mold of the magazine follower, injecting the mold with black epoxy. pop it out the mold, and bond the magazine follower spring directly to the follower with an additional amount of epoxy. This should end up being half the weight of of the solid steel magazine follower. Removal of some metal off the bolt handle (drilling an appropriate diameter hole in the knob). Finding an alternative set of rings other than the heavy steel ruger rings. This should put the weight around 6-6.25lbs. Does anbody else have some innovative thoughts on how to lighten a Ruger Model 77? Constructive criticism is welcomed (since forum induced knit picking always happens anyways).
    Last edited by mainer_in_ak; 06-29-2009 at 12:11. Reason: additional info.

  3. #3
    Member Matt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    3,410

    Default

    Do you reload? You're gonna have to with that cartridge. And you're only going to save so many ounces due to Ruger's hefty action. Excellent rifle though.

  4. #4
    Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction
    Posts
    4,078

    Default

    matt,
    Money talks my fellow shooter. The weight of a ruger receiver is quite chunky, hopefully my planned mods work out to get the target weight around 6 lbs. Most of what I've used hunting have always been handloads.

    Murphy,
    I hear yah about the bottom steel and the walnut. It was a good long time before I ever had a stainless rifle with a synthetic stock. glad to hear some positive feedback regarding the 338 compact. I'm heavily inffluenced by short, carbine style rifles......especially the short action ones.

  5. #5

    Default

    On the B&C carbelite stock... do NOT get one of those if you intend to reduce weight, they are hefty, they weigh more than the wood stock and weigh more than any other synthetic stock I have had my hands on.

    If you care to pony up the cash, get a McMillan or Brown precision etc. they are 1lb lighter on average.

    I own 2 of the B&C carbelite stocks and only like the way they look, though they are really tough. 1 of the stocks I fitted to my Ruger M77 .338wm., the other is fitted to a Mauser .243win. I had to relieve much of the barrel channel on both in order to get them free-floated, the barrel channel was not centered, or not wide enough to prevent interference with the barrels. I also had to add spacer shims between the recoil pad and the butt stock to get any sort of decent L.O.P. and eye relief. B&C shortens the L.O.P. considerably in order to take weight off of the stock.

  6. #6
    New member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    8

    Default

    I've been thinking about one of these also. Seems like a good little gun.

  7. #7
    Member Yukoner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Whitehorse Yukon
    Posts
    1,345

    Default Out of curiosity...

    And imagining we are having drinks around the fire, why a mountain rifle above .30?
    Bear factor? And if so, fair enough.
    Was out Sheep hiking, er hunting last fall, and my partner had a .338WM along, which seemed like a heckuva lot of rifle to me.
    Cheers
    Paul

  8. #8
    Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction
    Posts
    4,078

    Default

    Yukoner,
    Yes the short little cartridge would handle the 220-250 gr. bullets for the 3-5 day float out. The 180-185 gr. bonded core ballistic tips would all be great long range bullets. Then dropping the scope after the hunt is complete and having the open sights aligned to the "bear protection" load is an idea that I've been throwing around for sometime now. Any cartridge that has enough smoke to throw a 250 gr. bullet above 2,400 fps. is exceptional in my book.

    .338WM,
    Thanks for the info on your caberlite stocks, def. out of character to all the info out there about the caberlite. I didnt realize that is was heavier than wood.

  9. #9

    Default

    What did you end up doing? Curious as to how it turned out and what it looks like! Thanks!

  10. #10
    Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction
    Posts
    4,078

    Default

    give me a few weeks

    ill get back with yah!

  11. #11
    Member Magnum Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Juneau
    Posts
    364

    Question Personally

    I prefer the good ol .300 winchester magnum for most of my hunting. Sure dont hear much about them these days. Anybody hunting with 200 grain handloads?

  12. #12
    Member tustumena_lake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    tustumena & kasilof
    Posts
    899

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 338WM View Post
    On the B&C carbelite stock... do NOT get one of those if you intend to reduce weight, they are hefty, they weigh more than the wood stock and weigh more than any other synthetic stock I have had my hands on.

    If you care to pony up the cash, get a McMillan or Brown precision etc. they are 1lb lighter on average.
    Thank you for the suggestion as I would like to lighten up my 338 RCM if its possible. But I contacted McMillan and they don't seem to offer this service for Rugers.

    Sorry, but no. We do not offer the Ultralight Edge technology for any of the Ruger rifles. These are fine rifles but the bearing surface of the recoil lug is the smallest of any of the commercial actions and it is just not large enough for the EDGE technology. In our R&D work on developing these stocks we found that even a .308 caliber showed signs of lug set-back in the very light weight EDGE tech filling material in these stocks.

    Regards, McMillans

  13. #13
    Member marshall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Near Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    1,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tustumena_lake View Post
    Thank you for the suggestion as I would like to lighten up my 338 RCM if its possible. But I contacted McMillan and they don't seem to offer this service for Rugers.

    Sorry, but no. We do not offer the Ultralight Edge technology for any of the Ruger rifles. These are fine rifles but the bearing surface of the recoil lug is the smallest of any of the commercial actions and it is just not large enough for the EDGE technology. In our R&D work on developing these stocks we found that even a .308 caliber showed signs of lug set-back in the very light weight EDGE tech filling material in these stocks.

    Regards, McMillans
    Having toured the plant I find this odd. It seems that they could use a stronger fill in the lug area and use their light weight fill every where else. I just picked up my Remington Hunter Edge technology stock a few days ago for my 300 RUM. I have not had a chance to shoot it yet but it is my sharpest recoiling rifle.

    I have considered ordering an A5 in edge for my Ruger 308 Tactical, your information is interesting. I realize the Ruger lug is shallow but it still seems odd. I will call Lynn personally and inquire. I asked about this project last week and the only feedback was that they could do an A5 in the Hawkeye only, no comments about Edge technology fill options at that time.

  14. #14
    Member marshall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Near Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    1,814

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marshall View Post
    I have considered ordering an A5 in edge for my Ruger 308 Tactical, your information is interesting. I realize the Ruger lug is shallow but it still seems odd. I will call Lynn personally and inquire. I asked about this project last week and the only feedback was that they could do an A5 in the Hawkeye only, no comments about Edge technology fill options at that time.

    I made the call this morning. Lynn handles all of the phone, internet and walk in stock sales to the public. She said the issue is with the front action screw being angled. Evidently McMillan uses aluminum pillar bedding with their Edge Technology stocks and the angle screw fitment doesn't work with their vertical pillar design.

    Standard fill stocks with glass bedding can handle the recoil just fine but there is no weight savings with the standard stock designs.

    When I get home I'm going have take a look at my aluminum pillar Hogue stock and see how they did it. I'm sure McMillan could build one if they put their collective minds to the task.

    Cheers,

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •