RUGER 77/357: The Charming Carbine.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't have one but seriously considered one because .357 is my primary cartridge and was my only cartridge for a while.

The action is absurdly long for .357 or .44 Magnum. Considering the price point and Ruger's capabilities with investment casting, I can't think of a reason they couldn't have made a micro-action.
The straight stock with little to no drop at the heel is fine for supported positions with an optic, but this is anti-thematic to a rifle in a handgun cartridge chambering.
An 1873 does not have these issues.
I would also be attracted to a Ruger No. 1 in .357 Magnum.
But the latter two are at least as costly and more limited in their stock options and fitment.

So that brings me to one of the good things I noted about the 77/357. Ruger sells a beautiful walnut stock for it through Brownells. It's listed for the 77/44 but fits the 357 also. Boyd's also offers fully machine-inlet stocks in their variety of designs and fits, and levels of adjustability. Unfortunately, all of these stocks keep the zero-drop.
 
I bought one earlier this year, or maybe last year. The bolt moves freely until locked. The finish is good and even. Trigger is good.

Though the iron sights are good, I took advantage of the supplied scope rings and mounted a 3-9 powered scope.

I have only shot reloads through it. All 357 loads. Some plated 158 gr. RN with Titegroup (probably what 38s would feel like) for up to 50M, and am working on some loads of 158 & 180 gr. using 300MP.

Initial sighting of the scope at 100 yds. showed a promising pattern, I had to cut it short. Too long out in the sun.

I'm looking forward to seeing how and what the 180 gr. XTPs do.

While the gun is somewhat pricy, and I would have like to seen Ruger produce an American chambered in 357. I think the gun will be well worth it in the long haul.
 
The action is absurdly long for .357 or .44 Magnum. Considering the price point and Ruger's capabilities with investment casting, I can't think of a reason they couldn't have made a micro-action.
The straight stock with little to no drop at the heel is fine for supported positions with an optic, but this is anti-thematic to a rifle in a handgun cartridge chambering.

I think you may be thinking of the M77, the 77/357 and 77/44 are different animals. The action is certainly not absurdly long, it is derived from their 77 rimfire action. .44 mag is just about the largest round that will fit though this action, and on mine, loaded cartridges will often catch on the front of the ejection port when you cycle them through. Empties eject fine though.

The stock is set up well for iron sight use, I had to mount a cheek riser pad to get my cheek weld right for scope use.
 
Last edited:
Already have a RUGER Blackhawk 6-1/2" in .357, and nothing in .44.

Besides, think a 180 gr. HDY XTP, at ~ 1800 fps, should give any .44 a run for its money.

GR

That's pretty stout for a .357, but not quite in .44 territory of 240gr @ 1,700+ fps , and 300gr @ 1,500 - 1,600 fps. I'm sure the .357 is easier on the shoulder though, the .44 can be surprisingly snappy when turnt up and fired from a 5.5 lb rifle.
 
Mine is a 77/44. It is a favourite. About the only thing, I would like to see different is that I would like a "high capacity" magazine for it.
 
That's pretty stout for a .357, but not quite in .44 territory of 240gr @ 1,700+ fps , and 300gr @ 1,500 - 1,600 fps. I'm sure the .357 is easier on the shoulder though, the .44 can be surprisingly snappy when turnt up and fired from a 5.5 lb rifle.

Correct.

It's not a .44.

But then... it's not a .44.
(and doesn't really need to be)

:D

The .357/180 gr. has a higher BC, SD, and MV than the .44/240 gr., and, while I haven't loaded any yet, bet they burrow in like a wood tick.

The .44/300 gr., on the other hand, is a Beast!


GR
 
I bought one earlier this year, or maybe last year. The bolt moves freely until locked. The finish is good and even. Trigger is good.

Though the iron sights are good, I took advantage of the supplied scope rings and mounted a 3-9 powered scope....

If your scope looks a little high, and you think you have the room at the objective lens, Ruger C/S will furnish you a set of stainless Med. height rings, gratis.

My 2-7 worked out pretty slick with'em.




GR
 
I think you may be thinking of the M77, the 77/357 and 77/44 are different animals. The action is certainly not absurdly long, it is derived from their 77 rimfire action. .44 mag is just about the largest round that will fit though this action, and on mine, loaded cartridges will often catch on the front of the ejection port when you cycle them through. Empties eject fine though.

The stock is set up well for iron sight use, I had to mount a cheek riser pad to get my cheek weld right for scope use.

The receiver is excessively long for the cartridge and the bolt has a big extension attached to it. It's not the ejection port that's too big, it's the length of the action from the chamber to the rear of the bolt. For comparison, a Ruger No.1 with a 20" barrel is 36.5" overall. The 77/357 with an 18" barrel is 38.5" overall. Both with 13.5" LoP. So the 77/357 action is 4" longer than the Ruger No.1. Now let's be fair and consider another bolt-action -- the CZ527 (chambered for .223, 7.62x39, 6.5 Grendel etc.) All of these intermediate cartridges are longer than the .44 and .357 Magnums. But the rifles, with the same LoP, would only be 36.5" long when their barrel length is adjusted to the 77/357's 18" barrel. So the 77/357 and 77/44 are 2" longer in the action than the CZ527 which chambers significantly longer cartridges.

The stock's comb is set up well for iron sight use, but the zero drop in the heel is setup for shooting prone or from a bench rather than standing, off-hand.
 
I have one and it is a great shooter. It is easy for anyone in the family to pick up and shoot. I have fun with it at ranges closer than 150 yards but after that it is harder to hit with. It is one of my favorite backpacking rifles when I am just out and about for fun. I currently have a scope on mine but might ditch it for a similar iron set up as the OP. I agree that the NECG rear sight is extremely well made, but a bit finicky. I really wish there was a no-drill XS type rear GR for the Ruger scope ring mount. Anyways there are great little rifles and helped me to move on from the Destroyer Carbine affliction I was stricken with for quite some time.
 
The receiver is excessively long for the cartridge and the bolt has a big extension attached to it. It's not the ejection port that's too big, it's the length of the action from the chamber to the rear of the bolt. For comparison, a Ruger No.1 with a 20" barrel is 36.5" overall. The 77/357 with an 18" barrel is 38.5" overall. Both with 13.5" LoP. So the 77/357 action is 4" longer than the Ruger No.1. Now let's be fair and consider another bolt-action -- the CZ527 (chambered for .223, 7.62x39, 6.5 Grendel etc.) All of these intermediate cartridges are longer than the .44 and .357 Magnums. But the rifles, with the same LoP, would only be 36.5" long when their barrel length is adjusted to the 77/357's 18" barrel. So the 77/357 and 77/44 are 2" longer in the action than the CZ527 which chambers significantly longer cartridges.

The stock's comb is set up well for iron sight use, but the zero drop in the heel is setup for shooting prone or from a bench rather than standing, off-hand.

First off, the stock is essentially set up the same as an M1 Garand... And I have no complaints with that rifle, either.


As for action length? You are comparing it to a Ruger #1... Falling Block...?!?

It's a Bolt Action. What kind of sense does that make?


It is a rugged, field accurate, and reliable action made of heavy machined stainless parts... that still manages to weigh only 5.5 lbs.

It is also essentially a controlled round feed action, that does not impart torque onto the round.

It's different - but it is what it is.




GR
 
If your scope looks a little high, and you think you have the room at the objective lens, Ruger C/S will furnish you a set of stainless Med. height rings, gratis.

My 2-7 worked out pretty slick with'em.




GR
Actually, my scope is just about right. Since the bolt moves with ease after "unlugged", there is just enough clearance for movement. Thanks for the bit of info though, never know if a different scope comes onto the scene. :)

20180804_190326.jpg

BTW, it was a year ago that I got the rifle. How time flies.
 
Actually, my scope is just about right. Since the bolt moves with ease after "unlugged", there is just enough clearance for movement. Thanks for the bit of info though, never know if a different scope comes onto the scene. :)

View attachment 854716

BTW, it was a year ago that I got the rifle. How time flies.

Yeah, that looks like a very nice fit.

Maybe think about a cheek-piece for the stock.




GR
 
I was just perusing MidwayUSA's .358 bullets... there's a couple of cast LFP's I like... noticed several JSP's... one's a heavier RN... normally considered for .35Whelan that look interesting if maybe somebody were into trying those in a heavy-built crankbolt like these Rugers. It's not a Whelan and it doesn't have to be. I'm not trying to make it one, but I've wondered what would happen. Then again, they might not have the speed to expand.
 
I was just perusing MidwayUSA's .358 bullets... there's a couple of cast LFP's I like... noticed several JSP's... one's a heavier RN... normally considered for .35Whelan that look interesting if maybe somebody were into trying those in a heavy-built crankbolt like these Rugers. It's not a Whelan and it doesn't have to be. I'm not trying to make it one, but I've wondered what would happen. Then again, they might not have the speed to expand.

The concerns are diameter, and Bbl. twist-rate.

The jacketed bullets would probably need to be sized down to .357, where as a cast lead would probable be OK.

As for twist-rate, the 77/357's pistol twist of 1:16 will only stabilize up to ~ a 220 gr. bullet.
.
The .35 rifles are, IIRC, generally 1:10.




GR
 
For those of you who are fans of Veral Smith, here are some of his thoughts on the .357 in a rifle....

Veral Smith wrote and interesting piece about using the 180gr in a levergun some years back.




Veral's Book: "Jacked Performance With Cast bullets":

THIS is something Verryy Verryy practical ... and Extremely deadly!

Those 2 Antelope both dropped at 125 and 302 yards lazered w/ 1 round, each bullet through both shoulders/bones; complete shoot-through. This done with an old "pistol" cartridge. I've never seen a more Completely Efficient use of this cartridge. This System WORKS!

1. THE KEY to this whole system is casting the LBT 187 gr. WFN (Wide Flat Nose) gas check bullet ... Randy Garrett copied the exact bullet shape; his 540 gr. Hammerhead in .45-70 at 1550 fps. will shoot completely through an African Cape Buffalo and kill the one behind it.

If you DO NOT cast your own bullets at present, you CAN order this bullet from Cast Performance Bullets: --- HOWEVER: Cast Performance DOES NOT use LBT Lube, THEREFORE, users will run into pressure problems at lower temperatures and with lighter loads than when using LBT lube. Accuracy will not be as good either. Montana Bullet Works sells them lubed with LBT Commercial lube and they'll deliver top notch performance.

NO PROBLEM shooting clean through say 4 to 6 bad guys with this 187 gr. LBT bullet depending on circumstances, any bones hit, etc., as it has already shot lengthwise completely through Elk. This .357 Magnum system is in reality a "mini-mini Garret .45-70 type set up".

Research revealed:

** You DO NOT want this combo in a .44 Magnum because:

a. It would be about double the ammo weight And size ...and so you'd carry Easily Twice the .357 rounds.
b. Not needed.
c. Excessive recoil in a big way in this M94 configuration w/ 325gr+ gr. bullets. (Like an 8lb. 30/06).

** With this 187 gr. LBT bullet you get 8% to 20% less pressure at the same velocity/output as a jacketed bullet.

** In casting, use 10 lbs. wheelweights w/ 1 TBL. of high antimony shot -- water drop them.

** About 400% more penetration than a jacketed bullet in any realistic medium from live flesh to ballistic gelatin to wet saturated newspapers with inter-spaced bones.

** The LBT Stays nose-on with no yaw while traveling through flesh or liquid medium until it goes subsonic at the least.

** 25% tighter groups. 20% more wound cavitation.

** 80% less cost than jacketed bullets or better if you cast your own.


1. Approx. 17 grns. H-110 or 296 will yield about 1920 fps. in an 18" barrel. (Work up from maybe 16.5gr. or so).
Use MAGNUM PISTOL primers and crimp the bullet.

2. .357 Mag. brass is Everywhere and cheap as dirt; everybody has it. Sometimes its free.

3. No bullets to buy; you cast your own (you will have to buy Hornady gas checks).

4. Recoil Wayyyy less than a .243/.22-250 and the report is QUIET QUIET QUIET.

5. At 17 grns. of H-110 (or 296), a can of powder goes a Lonnggg way -- 411 rounds.

6. The rounds are about Half the size, weight and maybe 1/5 the recoil of a .44 Mag. In a Grab N' Go you could Easily have over 300 rounds with you -- No Sweat, AND control your environment to easily beyond 350 yards.

7. You have a short, light, accurate, fast firing carbine holding 10 rounds w/ no recoil-induced bullet back-out problems in a spring cushioned magazine tube. You DO WANT the Marlin Model 94 as it will reliably feed this bullet, and you can clean it from the breech. It will weigh 8 lbs. fully loaded with Scoutscope mounted, OR, you can mount say a Burris Fullfield II Riflescope 2X-7X.

8. Compare this .35 caliber bullet, shape, weight, velocity, penetration, recoil, cost, and effectiveness against say a .30-30.

9. I would guess that Most of today's shooters/hunters/riflemen have Very Little idea of what can be accomplished with lead bullet technology similar to what was used 2 centuries ago. You look around and you don't see any more Buffalo wandering about.

10. THIS IS A SERIOUS, DEADLY, EFFICIENT, ALL-ROUND SYSTEM!

You could employ this carbine system say to a town's population of females from young girls 10 years of age on up, (even young girls will LOVE shooting this rifle) who have been taught only basic Riflecraft and Mindset... and have an unbelievable force to be reckoned with. It is an AWESOME combination for either hunting, or, for urban warfare if needed.

It is unbelievably deadly and it is accurate, zilch recoil and QUIET QUIET QUIET. This combination has shot lengthwise completely through Elk up in Idaho; this bullet is the KEY to this combination to be able to have such capabilities. The bullet Ballistic Coefficient is .187, the B.C. being run as a G-1 drag model.

You can easily be effective to 300 yards with this combination, and it looks plebeian and Totally Innocent. 10 rounds of this as fast as you need to shoot and as fast as you can work that lever and shoot...its Fast!

THIS SYSTEM WORKS!!

11. All of this, in a simple "innocent, plebeian, ho-hum" looking piece at an inexpensive price that is "legal" even in places like the Peoples Republik of New Jersey or California.

I FEEL THAT THIS SYSTEM REALLLYYY NEEDS TO BE EXPLOITED TO ITS MAXIMUM ADVANTAGE BY THE RIGHT PEOPLE.
 
Great post EVCMatt. I may have to buy some of those bullets to try in my Marlin 357. My Marlin 357 is my favorite gun. I bought mine in 2002 and my only regret is that I took so long to get one. I should have have one long before that. The Rossi 357 I had was a disappointment. And the Marlin feeds 38s and 357s the same. Smooth and easy.

I have considered the Ruger 357. Its a nice looking gun. I just have never ran across one for sale. But if it shoots like the 77/22 I have it should please the owner for the rest of his life. I had no idea the 77/22 I bought was going to be such an accurate rifle. It will put 10 rounds in 5/8s inch at 50 yards. A bigger version in 357 should be all you need for a woods and field gun for out to 150 yards or so.
 
I just wish they made it in wood and blue.

Well...

You can get Half your wish for a little extra "jingle".

Ruger Rifle Stock Ruger 77/44 RS Walnut


514698.jpg




GR

 
Ruger design engineers must of had the perfect rifle/pistol cartridge concept in mind when the 77/357 was drawn up. It is everything it is supposed to be and nothing is missing, nor is it carrying extra unneeded baggage. It is the ultimate in all-weather survivability with stainless steel and composite stock to beat back the elements, and equipped with a flush mounted detach magazine that does not impair carrying the 5.5 lb rifle all day. A number of after market products. i.e., receiver sights, fiber optic sights, bolt shims, and trigger springs attest to the rifle’s popularity and all enhance the accuracy of an already accurate “enough” rifle for its intended purpose.

In addition, the use of the same ammunition in a rifle and a revolver, although not a new concept, substantially enhances the potential market for the rifle. Yes, it is not as fast as a lever action rifle, but as Teddy Roosevelt once stated, “No amount of rapidity of fire can replace a poorly aimed first shot.”

Hunting effectiveness can be traced to Col Doug Wesson and his adventures with S&W 357 mag when he successfully hunted western big game with a revolver delivering 1500 FPS 158 grain semi wad cutters. The 77/357 can use the same bullet, but at nearly 2,000 FPS. If the revolver easily dispatched elk, moose, and grizzly bear, are there any who suspect the rifle’s performance? Those who suggest the rifle lacks effectiveness dismiss the historical record and demonstrate their level of knowledge about the .357 mag.

What an idea! A light weight rifle, reliable in most conceivable climates and using the same ammo as a revolver. I hope those Ruger engineers received the recognition deserved for their efforts.
 
It is fair to compare it to a falling block or lever-action receiver length because although it is a bolt-action, it is a bolt-action for a very short handgun cartridge. I was also fair in comparing it to mini-bolt-actions for intermediate cartridges longer than the handgun magnums. The Ruger is inches too long.
 
It is fair to compare it to a falling block or lever-action receiver length because although it is a bolt-action, it is a bolt-action for a very short handgun cartridge. I was also fair in comparing it to mini-bolt-actions for intermediate cartridges longer than the handgun magnums. The Ruger is inches too long.

The extraordinary length doesn't seem to be an actual issue for anyone that owns them. The rifle itself is compact and lightweight in real life, it's also the only repeating bolt action chambered in .44 or .357. The various lengths of single shots and micro actions not chambered in .44 are of no consequence if what you want is a repeater in .44.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top