Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: New Ruger .44Mag bolt Action??

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Off the road system,AK
    Posts
    318

    Default New Ruger .44Mag bolt Action??

    I have been eyeing up the new Ruger bolt action stainless .44mags lately and was wondering if anyone has one and what they think of it. I reload and have a ton of .44 stuff so I thought it may be a fun and inexpensive to feed rifle to have around the homestead.

    Thoughts??



    Mountaintrekker

  2. #2

    Default

    It looks like a nifty little rifle.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    welfare state of Alaska
    Posts
    4,078

    Default Rear Locking Lugs

    Looks like this one has rear locking lugs for ease in feeding and manufacturing.

    According to some every rear locking centerfire rifle to date has been a marketing flop. Can Ruger buck the trend?
    Living the urban lifestyle so I can pay my way and for my family's needs, and support my country. And you?
    ".. ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK

  4. #4

    Default

    Mountaintreker, it's a nice lightweight rifle that boosts the .44 magnum performance compared to a handgun. Excellent accuracy with several loads, and sweet to shoot. One fault that my partner found was the bolt handle was hard to grasp and work with a scope on. Had to use thumb and index finger. I found no issues with this rifle.. He sold his and I kept mine. In hindsight to that small issue, my partner is now looking for another one.

  5. #5

    Default

    Here is a good little review of the gun with some good pictures and load data:

    http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-77-44.htm

    I have toyed with getting one of these for a while as a companion to my Ruger Redhawk. Haven't made the leap yet but these types of threads keep pushing me closer to the edge.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Homes in MT and ID
    Posts
    247

    Default

    The problem with Rugers 44 mag. rifles as of late has been that none of them will feed the longish 300gr.+ bullets. They have mag. boxes/feeding mechanisims that allow for only the original (SAAMI spec) 240gr. legnth bullets of 1956 design, but now days folks want the versatility of using 300gr. + bullets for game heavier than whitetail deer.. Further, it makes even less sense for Ruger rifles to have this limitation, when thier revolvers have the cylinder length to accept the longish 300gr.+ style bullets. A 44 mag. that wont accept 300gr+ bullets is useless to me.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    S.E. Alaska
    Posts
    198

    Default 44 Mag Ruger rifle??

    I thought they were neat, so several years ago I bought one. It was the worst rifle I ever owned or shot for accuracy. I thought surely the "problem" could be found and fixed, so I threw more good money after bad with gunsmith work, bedding. No improvment. I traded it for a 308 Ruger.

    So, IMO they are just junk, and frankly I don't believe any of them are accurate. If you say they are, show me pictures. Not only is it rear lockup bolt lugs, but it has no recoil lug. It's basically the same design action as the bolt action 22. The whole action acts a a recoil lug, which may be ok for a 22, but in my opinion it's not ok in the 44. The action has to spring and flex with the recoil of the 44, all the way back to the tang. It's a very poorly thought-out design. It wouldn't take much for Ruger to put a recoil lug on it, so it's a very bad reflection on them for selling this crap.

    KB

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Sundles View Post
    The problem with Rugers 44 mag. rifles as of late has been that none of them will feed the longish 300gr.+ bullets. They have mag. boxes/feeding mechanisims that allow for only the original (SAAMI spec) 240gr. legnth bullets of 1956 design, but now days folks want the versatility of using 300gr. + bullets for game heavier than whitetail deer.. Further, it makes even less sense for Ruger rifles to have this limitation, when thier revolvers have the cylinder length to accept the longish 300gr.+ style bullets. A 44 mag. that wont accept 300gr+ bullets is useless to me.
    Hey Tim check out the Gunblast review he shot a couple of 300gr. through it and a 320gr. WFN.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Homes in MT and ID
    Posts
    247

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by theONE73 View Post
    Hey Tim check out the Gunblast review he shot a couple of 300gr. through it and a 320gr. WFN.
    I tried to get on Gun Blast and thier site was down, but if this is a brand new model or an updated model, it would be great if they solved thier short amgazine issue. That short magazine issue is what kept me from buying one of the Deerfields.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    stuck at 7500' in CO for now
    Posts
    50

    Default Someone needs to get real about rear locking lugs

    Quote Originally Posted by tvfinak View Post
    Looks like this one has rear locking lugs for ease in feeding and manufacturing.

    According to some every rear locking centerfire rifle to date has been a marketing flop. Can Ruger buck the trend?
    The Remington 788 is a rear locking action. It is more accurate, in an accurate cartridge, and has a faster lock time than the 700. When I purchased mine it was $150.00 out the door which was about 1/2 of a 700 ADL in those days. Plain jane you bet. Small action only 308, 243, 6mm, 22-250, 44 Mag, & I think 30-30. Remington sold so many it was cutting into the 700 sales. The fast lock time turned a lot of them into silhouette rifles when that was popular. The loss of 700 sales was the end of the 788 & a poor reason at that. Compare the surface area of the 2 lugs of the 700 against the 9 lugs of the 788 and see what you get. I only wish Rem had made a long action and I had purchased more of them when they were cheap. Try to buy one now for $150. If you think about the idea that Rem could have sold 1 700 for every 2 788's they sold then it was a flop. The only mistake they made was not making more of them. The idea of rear lugs is a proven concept. Most field artillery is based on an interrupted thread design. If one can throw a 155mm shell 16 miles accurately a bolt action is just the proper application of scale for intended use. I do not know anything about the Ruger design. I would think that if you pull the trigger & it goes bang without poking a hole in your face, then That is what Ruger intended. After all we are not talking about a world class accurate or power house cartridge here.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Sundles View Post
    I tried to get on Gun Blast and thier site was down, but if this is a brand new model or an updated model, it would be great if they solved thier short amgazine issue. That short magazine issue is what kept me from buying one of the Deerfields.
    Tim as soon as I posted that I tried to get on their and couldn't LOL!!!

    It seems to be back up now...

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    S.E. Alaska
    Posts
    198

    Default rear locking action ??

    Quote Originally Posted by carysguns View Post
    The Remington 788 is a rear locking action. It is more accurate, in an accurate cartridge, and has a faster lock time than the 700. Small action only 308, 243, 6mm, 22-250, 44 Mag, & I think 30-30. The fast lock time turned a lot of them into silhouette rifles when that was popular. Compare the surface area of the 2 lugs of the 700 against the 9 lugs of the 788 and see what you get. The idea of rear lugs is a proven concept.

    I do not know anything about the Ruger design. I would think that if you pull the trigger & it goes bang without poking a hole in your face, then That is what Ruger intended. After all we are not talking about a world class accurate or power house cartridge here.
    I agree about the Rem 788. I had several in 30-30, and wish I still had at least one. As I remember, the Ruger 44 mag bolt action is not fully a rear lug design, it's more toward the middle of the bolt. The reason the bolt lugs are not up front is obvious, and it's not about cutting corners, but it's because the cartridge has a rim. I think I remember that the head of the bolt rotates, in front of the lugs, and it has an extractor on both sides.

    It's not so much the rear (or middle) lugs that is the source of my complaint. It's the lack of a recoil lug on the action, which I think is the cause of the inaccuracy. There is the big difference, comparing the 788 to the Ruger 44 mag. the 788 had a functional recoil lug in front of the receiver. I think the Ruger rifle would be fine, with a recoil lug to bed into the stock, like the rest of centerfire rifles. Heck, if it was just a long washer, clamped between the barrel and the receiver, like the Rem 700 or 788, that would work, but Ruger failed to do it. I don't even know if the barrel is threaded onto the receiver or not, but maybe just swaged in there like the 22lr. If Ruger intended to make a rifle that goes bang - they succeeded. If they intended to make a rifle that's accurate, they failed.

    KB

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
  •