Which 223, Ruger 77 or Rem 788?

rballi

September 13, 2002 12:40

Which do you prefer and why? The ruger is a 77 MKII, the 788 is a longer barrel version.

0

• 

  cpermd

  September 13, 2002 13:36

  788 is more accurate but has the protruding mag.
  I would take it every time though.
  cpermd

  0
• 

  captkirk3@dslextreme.com

  September 13, 2002 14:13

  77MK2 for me...Get a better sight picture...Long Barrel tends to make me shoot low...And never cared for Extended Magazines....Personal preferance...If I was to shoot off a Log or Branch...stand the risk of bumping the Protruding Mag...
  
  Captain Kirk, Tech Staff

  0
• 

  BT99

  September 13, 2002 18:48

  If you want one that looks good, take the Ruger.
  If you want one that shoots good, take the Remington.

  0
• 

  richbug

  September 13, 2002 19:09

  i have both guns in 243. i like the ruger for the mauser type action, brass seems to last a lot longer because of the lugs being in the front of the bolt. the 788 was my first deer rifle. both will shoot a 1" group at 100 with many loads.
  
  rich

  0
• 

  gskyhawk

  September 14, 2002 05:28

  rballi: both guns are great but the 788 has been out of production now for a long time and some parts are getting hard to come by, where the ruger is still current production, just some thing to think about

  0
• 

  25-06

  September 14, 2002 06:24

  Buy the Ruger, and if you want to spend a little extra, install the Timney trigger, well worth the extra money. The accuracy depends on the individual gun. I have a Ruger 77 MKII Varmint, obtained as a barreled action when they first came out. Put in a Bell and Carlson stock, shoots under 5/8" with its favorite load. Have had some 788's, but not a 223, they were good shooters, but lack the quality of the Rugers and other nicer guns. However, they were made to sell at a cheaper price than the others. The biggest drawback to them is the way the bolt is built and the trigger is not adjustable and replacements are not available. The bolts were made in three pieces, not counting the extractor and ejector. The body was two pieces and they used the different lengths of the front piece (if memory is correct) to make the different caliber bolts. Then the bolt handle and the body pieces were furnace brazed together. It was not one of Remington's better ideas. The bolts are prone to breaking off the bolt body. They can be tig welded back on, but they are prone to tear a piece out of the body when they break off and then you are screwed. Bolts are almost impossible to find, and this problem is not that uncommon. I have probably repaired over two dozen of them in the last 25 years.

  0
• 

  rballi

  September 16, 2002 05:05

  Thanks for the replies. I already had the 788 and just got the 77 through a trade deal. I have had the 788 for a long time and it is exceptionally clean and shoots really well. The 77 was in fair shape.
  
  I ended up keeping the 788. What I did not like about the 77 was the pencil thin barrel. I sold it to a friend of mine who was looking for a small size gun for his son. He is happy, I'm happy and I still have a rifle that I know shoots good.

  0
• 

  Nighthawk

  September 16, 2002 08:02

  The Ruger Model 77 MKII has my vote,it is quick to shoulder and acquire good site acqusion.In my opinion it is a better shooting gun.
  
  Best!!
  
  Rugster
  
  
  Toujours Pret

  0
• 

  buddyb

  September 17, 2002 17:17

  I had a 788 in 308 that was a tack driver but I hated it because it had a clunkly,noisy,crude action.

  0

Please sign in to leave a comment.