M77 or MKII Best?

Help Support Ruger Forum:

Ronniet

Single-Sixer
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
169
Location
Texas
Thinking of buying a used .220 swift bolt.
Probably been asked many times before but so far I dont know of it.
Which is best?
M77 or the MKII.
Buying walnut and blue, no plastic or stainless. so it boils down to barrels
triggers and safeties.
No laminates but fond of beavertail forends and blue/Walnut.
Did they make any MKII with the tang safety?
Or only 3 postion?
Which barrel/bolt type is better or more accurate?
thanks for any information.
Ron
 

B.Roberts

Single-Sixer
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
101
Location
Gig Harbor, WA
My Dad has had an old m77 in 30-06 for many years. The tang safety has got to be the quickest, most ergonomic safety ever designed. I bought a stainless mkII in 30-06. The safety isn't flipped off as quickly, but I have never missed an opportunity at a game animal because of the tiny fraction of a second difference in flipping the safety off. I do think ruger's current safety set up is safer than the tang safety. You can load and unload while the rifle is on safe. You can move the safety all the way to the left and lock the bolt from movement. The safety will never accidently be bumped to fire from its left, bolt locked position.

I really think there is no "better" between the two. Both versions of the m77 have proven themselves in the hunting fields. Probably more a matter of preference. I would feel superbly armed with either while stalking game animals.
 

mattsbox99

Hunter
Joined
Jan 12, 2009
Messages
3,391
Location
Montana 'Merica
I believe both models are quite accurate, I have several different M77s and MKIIs and they are all plenty accurate. I personally like the 3 position safety of the MKII, & the CRF of the MKII.
 

6mmsl

Single-Sixer
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
153
Location
Utah
MKII is new safety-3 position that is currently in production. No tang safety.

Any MKII /M77 that is in good condition/NIB you should find accuracy acceptable no matter which saftey design was used.

In my experience the rifleman has as much to do with accuracy as does the rifle. A Ruger is not a bad place to start.

Good shooting-Steve
 

Ronniet

Single-Sixer
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
169
Location
Texas
Safeties then are not a issue.
Anything one triggers good or bad , good or better?
Same with barrels?

(In my experience the rifleman has as much to do with accuracy as does the rifle. A Ruger is not a bad place to start. )

Correct but have seen rifles with bad triggers , barrels and stocks thatthe shooter could not get around without some money or work.
Any bedding problems with either?
Thanks
Ron
 

mattsbox99

Hunter
Joined
Jan 12, 2009
Messages
3,391
Location
Montana 'Merica
Ruger triggers are no worse than Remington, Winchester, Savage, or Tikka. Ruger's are the simplest to tune, and replacements are pretty cheap if you are not happy.

One tub of JB Borepaste and you will have enough to hand lap 100 rifles, it costs $12 and a little elbow grease. I'm not saying that it will need it, but it doesn't matter what brand of rifle or handgun, I've seen embarrassingly rough new barrels. Bedding is up to you, it can be done to any rifle. Ruger's pose no problem in that area.

All of my Ruger's shoot well, only one is bedded, and only one has an aftermarket trigger, I've tuned a few others and the majority are factory.
 

Ronniet

Single-Sixer
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
169
Location
Texas
Does the 220 swift use a Short Action, medium length or a Long action?
Are they the same lengths in the M77 and MKII
is there a beavertail walnut tock in either new or old?

Ron
 

3DTESTIFY

Single-Sixer
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
246
Location
Skiatook, OK
The best Ruger 77 in .220 Swift is the short action flat bolt 77V model that came out in 1973. These rifles had a heavy varmint barrel with 26" length and, according to the early #70 prefix serial number, may have a Douglas barrel of excellent quality. Barrels from 1973-74 to around 1990 were of Wilson make. The walnut stocks had a full forend, but certainly no beavertail. The tang safety 77's also had an adjustable trigger that can be fine tuned by a competent gunsmith.
The MKII's have an easily tuned non adjustable trigger with good quality barrels of Ruger make. Mark 2 VT varmint/target rifles have laminated stocks with beavertail.
 

JimHnSTL

Single-Sixer
Joined
Jul 28, 2006
Messages
379
Location
St. Louis, MO
in regard to the safety of the Mark II, i do like the fact that in the full safe position the wing tucks in and actualy blocks the striker from being able to move. in the middle position you are just blocking the trigger mechanism from moving. personaly i think you should get one of each!
 

6mmsl

Single-Sixer
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
153
Location
Utah
Ronniet":3efmmwv8 said:
Safeties then are not a issue.
Anything one triggers good or bad , good or better?
Same with barrels?

(In my experience the rifleman has as much to do with accuracy as does the rifle. A Ruger is not a bad place to start. )

Correct but have seen rifles with bad triggers , barrels and stocks thatthe shooter could not get around without some money or work.
Any bedding problems with either?
Thanks
Ron

Ron- My statement was that most Ruger rifles in most calibers including the .220 Swift can be catorgized as having acceptable accuracy so, in most cases if you can shoot so will the rifle.

My definition of acceptable accuracy may be different then yours. If you want a sub-moa rifle out of the box most current mass producing rifle makers may have trouble achieving that expectation and even if their rifle can meet that standard you have to be able to shoot it that well.

I will go out on a limb here a little further- it probably could be said that most mass produced rifles with a little tweaking will shoot slightly better than stock. In my experience all my Ruger rifles have shot reasonably well and with some ammunition experimenting I have achieved acceptable accuracy. My standard and (all my rifles are used for hunting) is as close to MOA as possible at reasonable hunting distances.

I meant no disrespect on your shooting ability-I am sure that with some money or work you should be able to get around any of your new rifle's inadequacies that it may possess in your evaluation of its accuracy potential. (A Ruger is a good place to start) because in my experience all my Rugers have not possessed many if any accuracy issues that you may be requesting information on.

The MKII has aftermarket trigger kits that can be used-one of mine has a trigger kit that I installed. I believe most M77's tang safety triggers could be adjusted.The new Hawkeye has a new trigger assembly that is different than both it's predecessors,I think it is better. None of my rifles have needed bedding work but, I did do it to one as an experiment.

Good luck in your quest for a new rifle -if your final choice is a Ruger I,m sure you will not be dissapointed.

Good shooting-Steve
 

Ronniet

Single-Sixer
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
169
Location
Texas
No offence taken , the swift I buy is going to be a used M77 or MkII because I like the design .
But never had a Ruger bolt and didnt know if there were any glitches in any of it, and if there were wanted to get the better of the 2.
I do my own gunsmithing , stocks, bedding and rebarrling but wanted
to have one that was good out of the box so anything else I did would only enhance it.
Thanks
Ron
 

Ronniet

Single-Sixer
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
169
Location
Texas
So a flatbolt is and early gun?
What is it that determines it from others and why better?
Hard to find?
Ron
 

mcknight77

Blackhawk
Joined
Aug 12, 2003
Messages
657
Location
Caldwell, ID
They are early M77s with a different bolt handle than the current one.

Serial numbers below 70-20000 should have Douglas barrels.

You'll see them occasionally on Gunbroker.com and the other auction sites.
 
A

Anonymous

Just adding a bit to the wealth of accurate information above in regards to your Flatbolt question: I'd add that the earliest M77's bolt is also sometimes referred to as a Dog Leg bolt, which might be a bit more visually descriptive.

The earliest M77 bolts swept back, then downward (mimicking a dog's leg in profile) and were virtually flat in profile except where the bolt knob is slightly oval. I prefer Flatbolts, esthetically, but they were said to be controversial in the general public, which is likely what brought about the change to the more conventional bolt design.

I own a pair of Flatbolt Swifts and they are exceptionally accurate; able to hover on either side of 0.5 MOA with loads that they prefer. The Hornady 40 gr V-Max factory load pushes over 4000 fps on my chronograph and prints slightly under 0.5 MOA consistently.

Ruger didn't offer beavertail forearms until the Mark II era with their wood laminate broad forearm design that reduces cant and enhances accuracy. For serious long-range use, I use a Hart's Accuracy Asset (available through SincliarIntl.com or Brownells.com -- now the same company) which functionally provides a very flat-bottomed forearm. So equipped, my wife connected on two consecutive prairie dogs at a lasered 625 yards with but a single near miss between the two hits.

The early Flatbolt Swifts' reputation for fine barrels and fine accuracy is quite well deserved.

Lance
 

308longdistance

Blackhawk
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
864
Location
Stoneham
Ronniet":3h9kp9i3 said:
So a flatbolt is and early gun?
What is it that determines it from others and why better?
Hard to find?
Ron


Early flatbolt/dog leg
pix245555046.jpg
 

Latest posts

Top