Ruger American 1st impressions
- Thread starter Float Pilot
- Start date
- Status
OrangePwrx9
Member
Not a lot of love here for cheap pieces of junk. I should've stopped after buying 3 "cheap pieces of junk" (cpoj): Rem. 788s in .22-250, 6mm Rem. and .308. Thought they shot pretty good, but what did I know. Later on, when I got a few bucks in my pocket, I thought I'd buy some nice guns that would put those old cpoj 788s to shame.
How wrong I was. Found out just how good those cpoj were. Glad I kept 'em.
You can't tell a rifle by its price tag.
How wrong I was. Found out just how good those cpoj were. Glad I kept 'em.
You can't tell a rifle by its price tag.
Captcurt
Member
788's surprised everyone. They were not supposed to shoot that well. So much for theory. When a rifle stacks 4 or 5 shots in the same hole you can't really classify them and junk. Most 788's will do that. If I could find a clean one in 222 that was even half way affordable I would jump on it today.
splattergun
Member
My RA in .243 shot 1 " groups out of the box with my old Bushnell scope and 100 gr Remingtons. 1 inch ain't great for a .243, but it's not horrible, either. Handloads have got it down to 7/8", but I'm still playing with it. My factory trigger setting is at 4 1/2 lbs so maybe that's part of the group size. But it breaks clean and sharp. The box magazine is a sloppy fit when empty, but full and engaged, it fits fine. I have had zero feeding issues.
I haven't shot a deer or 'yote with it yet, but I have killed a couple rock chucks with it. One off hand at 50 yards, the other around 200 yards using a fence post rest. It hit where I pointed it. All in all, it is very much worth the $325 I paid for it. It is not as finely made as my Howa 1500, but I have no complaints.
I haven't shot a deer or 'yote with it yet, but I have killed a couple rock chucks with it. One off hand at 50 yards, the other around 200 yards using a fence post rest. It hit where I pointed it. All in all, it is very much worth the $325 I paid for it. It is not as finely made as my Howa 1500, but I have no complaints.
JR47
Member
Why is it that somebody just HAS to call anything that THEY don't personally like "pieces of junk"?
Compared to a multi-thousand dollar custom build, anything that they own is a "piece of junk", too. Handguns? I own both a Korth and a Korriphila, so the rest of the people own "pieces of junk", too, I guess.
There are a LOT of hunters who cannot see to owning a $700.00 gun, topped with $1000 worth of optics, to hunt deer with. As long as their choice hits minute-of-deer at their usual range, what difference does it make?
Save the smug remarks for things that matter. There is nothing in the Second Amendment about what guns are good, or what caliber is better.
Compared to a multi-thousand dollar custom build, anything that they own is a "piece of junk", too. Handguns? I own both a Korth and a Korriphila, so the rest of the people own "pieces of junk", too, I guess.
There are a LOT of hunters who cannot see to owning a $700.00 gun, topped with $1000 worth of optics, to hunt deer with. As long as their choice hits minute-of-deer at their usual range, what difference does it make?
Save the smug remarks for things that matter. There is nothing in the Second Amendment about what guns are good, or what caliber is better.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,341
JR47,
Read the OP. That is a less than impressive range report. If you own and like your RA good for you. But bringing up the 2A in regards to an opinion about a rifle? Nobody including myself has even vaguely intimated that you should not have the right to own an inexpensive cheaply built rifle.
That was a stretch.
Read the OP. That is a less than impressive range report. If you own and like your RA good for you. But bringing up the 2A in regards to an opinion about a rifle? Nobody including myself has even vaguely intimated that you should not have the right to own an inexpensive cheaply built rifle.
That was a stretch.
JR47
Member
My point, ignored, was that there is little but OPINION here.
I also made the point, or attempted to, that what one person regards as a fine product, such as the Remington 700, is a "piece of junk" alongside many other makes. Yet, we continue to use it, defend it with qualifications, while refusing those same qualifications to other makes and models.
As for the Second Amendment, obviously, we need an icon for sarcasm. Sorry if it was too obtuse.
OK, it wasn't his rifle.
#3, no attempt made to adjust it, even though it is adjustable.
#4 & #5. Different physical types will not find this a problem, as it is significant only to the individual.
#7 is an observation, not a point of contention.
#6, #8 & #11. Normal behavior for light-weight rifles, and their barrels.
#9 & #10. Two brands of inexpensive ammunition were tried. One was unacceptable, the other shot 50% tighter groups. I cannot remember when a rifle was tested for accuracy without using Match-type loads, or Premium ammunition.
I object to calling such testing objective, and the rifles pieces of junk. It's fine to state what your results were, but they are hardly grounds for calling things names. There are other rifles available if you don't like this one. But WHY do we have to always denigrate anything that we don't personally care for?
I bought a left-handed Remington Model 700 twenty years ago, in .308. It was a disaster. I sold it to another lefty, who used the receiver for a build. Yet, I don't go around calling every Remington 700 a "piece of junk".
For over twice the price, does an out-of-the-box Remington 700 always deliver groups half of the size with cheap ammo? Does it always have a nicer trigger without adjustment? Does the barrel never heat up on a light-weight version?
For punching paper, minimal groups is what people look for. For hunting, the difference at normal ranges between 1" and 1.5" groups makes no difference to the animal. There are no degrees of death.
I also made the point, or attempted to, that what one person regards as a fine product, such as the Remington 700, is a "piece of junk" alongside many other makes. Yet, we continue to use it, defend it with qualifications, while refusing those same qualifications to other makes and models.
As for the Second Amendment, obviously, we need an icon for sarcasm. Sorry if it was too obtuse.
OK, it wasn't his rifle.
#3, no attempt made to adjust it, even though it is adjustable.
#4 & #5. Different physical types will not find this a problem, as it is significant only to the individual.
#7 is an observation, not a point of contention.
#6, #8 & #11. Normal behavior for light-weight rifles, and their barrels.
#9 & #10. Two brands of inexpensive ammunition were tried. One was unacceptable, the other shot 50% tighter groups. I cannot remember when a rifle was tested for accuracy without using Match-type loads, or Premium ammunition.
I object to calling such testing objective, and the rifles pieces of junk. It's fine to state what your results were, but they are hardly grounds for calling things names. There are other rifles available if you don't like this one. But WHY do we have to always denigrate anything that we don't personally care for?
I bought a left-handed Remington Model 700 twenty years ago, in .308. It was a disaster. I sold it to another lefty, who used the receiver for a build. Yet, I don't go around calling every Remington 700 a "piece of junk".
For over twice the price, does an out-of-the-box Remington 700 always deliver groups half of the size with cheap ammo? Does it always have a nicer trigger without adjustment? Does the barrel never heat up on a light-weight version?
For punching paper, minimal groups is what people look for. For hunting, the difference at normal ranges between 1" and 1.5" groups makes no difference to the animal. There are no degrees of death.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,341
JR,
That is the sarcasm emoiticon.
Any and all opinions about rifles on the net are just that opinions. My opinion about the Ruger American is that it is a cheaply built rifle that is manufactured with the lowest cost and lowest quality materials that are capable of maintaining average performance. I own plenty of inexpensive rifles that I am interested in. I absolutely love finding a low price sporterized military Mauser or Kraig or 03. Those rifles are tough, rock solid, built to very high standards with tight tolerances. They do not have flimsy plastic parts or magazines that wiggle and are loose.
If the Ruger American tends to shoot well that's fine by me I'm still not interested in owning one. Just like I have no interest in a 788 or a Savage Axis. That is my opinion and my opinion only. Just like it is your opinion that a light weight thin profile barrel should start to wander when it gets hot. A properly bedded light weight rifle with a thin profile barrel should not do that. I own several light weight thin profile barrel rifles that are properly built and they do not wander when hot. The problem with the RA is that the stock is so soft and the material quality is so poor and cheap that when it heats up it actually softens and looses rigidity making accuracy impossible. The plastic stocked Ruger Hawkeye rifles do the same thing. The new Ruger injection molded stocks are extremely poor quality. The old ugly boat paddle MK II's were actually a much better, more rigid stock.
That is the sarcasm emoiticon. Any and all opinions about rifles on the net are just that opinions. My opinion about the Ruger American is that it is a cheaply built rifle that is manufactured with the lowest cost and lowest quality materials that are capable of maintaining average performance. I own plenty of inexpensive rifles that I am interested in. I absolutely love finding a low price sporterized military Mauser or Kraig or 03. Those rifles are tough, rock solid, built to very high standards with tight tolerances. They do not have flimsy plastic parts or magazines that wiggle and are loose.
If the Ruger American tends to shoot well that's fine by me I'm still not interested in owning one. Just like I have no interest in a 788 or a Savage Axis. That is my opinion and my opinion only. Just like it is your opinion that a light weight thin profile barrel should start to wander when it gets hot. A properly bedded light weight rifle with a thin profile barrel should not do that. I own several light weight thin profile barrel rifles that are properly built and they do not wander when hot. The problem with the RA is that the stock is so soft and the material quality is so poor and cheap that when it heats up it actually softens and looses rigidity making accuracy impossible. The plastic stocked Ruger Hawkeye rifles do the same thing. The new Ruger injection molded stocks are extremely poor quality. The old ugly boat paddle MK II's were actually a much better, more rigid stock.
sappyg
Member
If it weren't for the opinion of others I would have very few reasons to visit here.
The OPs opinion of he rifle carries a great deal of weight for me. He obviously knows rifles and has verifiable experience with several types over many years. Who better to give an objective impression?
I think JR's point is, if you can hit the same target with a "cheaply built rifle that is manufactured with the lowest cost and lowest quality materials" as you could with a "tough, rock solid, built to very high standards with tight tolerances", what difference does it make? Will the a deer or wild bore know the difference?JR,
Any and all opinions about rifles on the net are just that opinions. My opinion about the Ruger American is that it is a cheaply built rifle that is manufactured with the lowest cost and lowest quality materials that are capable of maintaining average performance. I own plenty of inexpensive rifles that I am interested in. I absolutely love finding a low price sporterized military Mauser or Kraig or 03. Those rifles are tough, rock solid, built to very high standards with tight tolerances. They do not have flimsy plastic parts or magazines that wiggle and are loose.
If the Ruger American tends to shoot well that's fine by me I'm still not interested in owning one. Just like I have no interest in a 788 or a Savage Axis. That is my opinion and my opinion only. Just like it is your opinion that a light weight thin profile barrel should start to wander when it gets hot. A properly bedded light weight rifle with a thin profile barrel should not do that. I own several light weight thin profile barrel rifles that are properly built and they do not wander when hot. The problem with the RA is that the stock is so soft and the material quality is so poor and cheap that when it heats up it actually softens and looses rigidity making accuracy impossible. The plastic stocked Ruger Hawkeye rifles do the same thing. The new Ruger injection molded stocks are extremely poor quality. The old ugly boat paddle MK II's were actually a much better, more rigid stock.
I can own a BMW that's build with the best quality leather, engine, and bells and whistles. It can be completely fined tuned with very high standards with tight tolerances. All that's nice and all, but what's the difference between the BMW and a Honda Civic when all I need it to do is get me from point A to point B which either would have no problem doing?
For a "hunting rifle", it'll do the same job as a $1000 gun just as a BMW and a Honda will do exactly the same job when it comes to taking you to and from work... For me, the only reason that I could use to justify pending close to a grand on a rifle that I only planned on actually firing once or twice the couple of times a year while out in the field would be if I wanted it to be a family heirloom.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Float Pilot
Member
UPDATE:
The trigger pull on this particular rifle is now 3.75 pounds after backing the adjustment screw all the way out.
I loaded up some match grade ammo for my neighbor, but it was too damp for him to leave his house today. So no shooting... at least for his rifles.
Maybe I will get to see how better ammo improves the shooting....
Although the new owner had to resort to single loading it during his last range session because the magazine was not feeding correctly.
The trigger pull on this particular rifle is now 3.75 pounds after backing the adjustment screw all the way out.
I loaded up some match grade ammo for my neighbor, but it was too damp for him to leave his house today. So no shooting... at least for his rifles.
Maybe I will get to see how better ammo improves the shooting....
Although the new owner had to resort to single loading it during his last range session because the magazine was not feeding correctly.
Fella's;
An interesting read. I was particularly amused by the comparison to the Remington 788. The 788 which is accurate and was produced as an inexpensive alternative to the model 700, is anything but a lightweight gun. They are solid little buggers!
The first Ruger American I ran across was the .22lr version. After handling it in the local shop, I decided I wasn't interested in owning one. From what I've seen of the centerfire guns, the same holds true for me. All of the category are built-to-a-price-point guns and it shows regardless of brand. Not that I'm shooting nothing but high-dollar or custom guns either, that isn't happening. But, I'd rather pay a bit more & get something like a Tikka T3 than a Ruger American.
900F
An interesting read. I was particularly amused by the comparison to the Remington 788. The 788 which is accurate and was produced as an inexpensive alternative to the model 700, is anything but a lightweight gun. They are solid little buggers!
The first Ruger American I ran across was the .22lr version. After handling it in the local shop, I decided I wasn't interested in owning one. From what I've seen of the centerfire guns, the same holds true for me. All of the category are built-to-a-price-point guns and it shows regardless of brand. Not that I'm shooting nothing but high-dollar or custom guns either, that isn't happening. But, I'd rather pay a bit more & get something like a Tikka T3 than a Ruger American.
900F
JR47
Member
Praxidike, that was my point. Thank you.
I would love to know where the idea that the stocks heat up, soften, and lose accuracy, comes from.
An objective, and factual source, please. I own a number of Ruger synthetic stocked guns, and have never noticed any signs to back up that declaration. If this were true, there would have to be some signs of degradation from structural shifting. Crushing marks, heat burnishing, or places where the stock touched the hot barrel should all be present in some degree.
Thanks in advance.
I would love to know where the idea that the stocks heat up, soften, and lose accuracy, comes from.
An objective, and factual source, please. I own a number of Ruger synthetic stocked guns, and have never noticed any signs to back up that declaration. If this were true, there would have to be some signs of degradation from structural shifting. Crushing marks, heat burnishing, or places where the stock touched the hot barrel should all be present in some degree.
Thanks in advance.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,341
I've had heat related accuracy problems with a few of them. A stock change fixes it. As far as objective and factual, you've got a guy here giving you just what you are asking for. Objective and factual information on the Ruger American it's pretty clear to me that the rifle being reported on has some less than desirable features such as poor magazine fit, unreliable feeding, a horrible trigger and lousy accuracy. Your response to that has been to rationalize that information and disregard it.
The fact is the the Ruger American is a cheaply built low cost rifle that has issues that are typical with a rifle of this price point, it is nothing less and nothing more. If you are happy with yours that's fantastic but it does not change what the Ruger American is a cheap rifle that may or may not shoot, feed and function well.
Stephen1956
Member
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2014
- Messages
- 49
I looked at one at the World of Wally beside a Savage Axis it just looked cheap and puny not well made at all. I have a Axis not the worlds best rifle and I bought it3 years ago at a gun shop. But it's a decent .308 shots reloads well and not that heavy and for $280.00 back then a decent rifle and if I'm deer hunting I'm not shooting at paper for MOA. I've seen a lot of deer come out of Jefferson Forest brought down by several calibers of the Axis.
- Status
