Ruger Precision Rifle - Page 4 - M14 Forum

M14 Forum


Ruger Precision Rifle

This is a discussion on Ruger Precision Rifle within the Bolt Action forums, part of the Gun Forum category; To make a good XTC gun someone will have to come up with threaded bloop tube. Either that or back the front sight up past ...


Go Back   M14 Forum > Gun Forum > Bolt Action

89Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Moderator Tools Display Modes

Old August 9th, 2015, 11:23 AM   #46
Scout Sniper
 
Wolley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: South of Houston
Posts: 762
To make a good XTC gun someone will have to come up with threaded bloop tube. Either that or back the front sight up past the 5/8-24 threads on the end of the barrel. No one wants a shorter sight radius.
The AR article stated an adjustable trigger. 2lbs to 5lbs. I believe?
The testers were impressed by the trigger.

Wolley is offline  
Remove Ads
Old August 9th, 2015, 03:00 PM   #47
Old Salt
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Southern Maryland
Posts: 1,579
I got mine in yesterday and spent a good amount of time messing with it to give a detailed first impressions:

Overall I really like this rifle, however this first impression review may sound critical of it because it's easier to explain bad things than good. I should also mention that I'm manufacturing engineer, and while I don't specialize in any particular process used in this rifle, I still have an eye for some things.



Its clear that Ruger designed this rifle with this price point in mind. Some people might call this "cutting corners", but in this case I think Ruger did an analysis of where they can cut costs with the least impact to performance.

I'll start with the barrel: I cleaned the barrel with butch's bore shine and was able to get an impression on how smooth and consistent it was. Ruger's decision to use the hammer forging process to make these barrels makes absolute sense in my opinion. They already had the forging equipment and only had to buy dies and smaller tooling, which while not cheap is a fraction of the cost of the forging equipment. I would guess Ruger can forge these barrels for 1/5 to 1/10 the cost of outsourcing the blanks from a third party manufacturer. I'll note this is purely speculation on my part, but not a total WAG based on what I know about operating costs. The accuracy of Ruger's CHF barrels is still to be determined, but FN (SPR bolt gun) and Remington (5R line) used CHF barrels in their bolt guns that are very accurate. While cleaning the barrel, it was apparent that Ruger did not lap the bore to the level that you would expect from a high end custom barrel maker. Patches simply did not go down as smoothly as with the Krieger .260 barrel that I was cleaning at the same time. Not that the Ruger was bad, about what is expected from a factory barrel, maybe slightly better. That being said the bore is very consistent which is much more important than being super smooth. The pressure required to push the patch through is consistent, better than some button rifled match barrels I'd had, which may have been a result of inconsistent rifling or bore diameter. From a cost vs expected performance perspective, I think Ruger made the right call. I wish the barrel had a slightly thicker contour, but I'm not sure if that was a design decision made by Ruger, or if that's the thickest their hammer forge was capable of doing since it requires a lot more pressure for a slight increase in thickness.

I think the design of the action is brilliant. I didn't go as far as taking off the barrel, but I do like how it is attached to the rifle. I really like how everything from the barrel to the receiver to the stock is all on the same axis. From a load path standpoint, that is brilliant and probably my favorite thing about the rifle. Once custom shops get their hands on them, I'm hoping to find out whether or not the actions need truing like Remingtons. The machining on the action is not the best. The inside bore of the receiver has some chatter marks, probably from dull tooling. This affects how smooth the bolt slides forward and backwards, but had no effect on real performance. The bolt is not super tight in the receiver like some custom actions which makes sense for this rifle. They can save money via looser tolerances that way, as well as have an action that is less affected by dirt and debris. The bolt locks up nice and solid though, which is what really matters. The end result is an action that doesn't feel super refined, but is very functional.

The bolt is something I'm undecided on. I'm a bit surprised they didn't go with a floating bolt head. It would make the receiver being perfectly true less important. Seems like it would be cheaper that way with the same or better accuracy. But I wasn't on Ruger's design team and I'm sure they had their reasons. Without knowing what they knew, I can't knock them on that. I'm not sure why the bolt needs two cocking ramps on the back of it as that's just more machine time, however I'm sure they had their reasons. There are a few things I dislike about the bolt though. The finish on mine was not very smooth. A relatively rough finish on bare metal like that is just asking for corrosion, stainless or not. I ended spending about an hour polishing the bolt by hand with a microfiber cloth and flitz metal polish. It smoothened the bolt body to be nice and slick to prevent corrosion as well as ride smoother in the receiver. I did not touch the locking lugs. I'm not really a fan of the bolt shroud as it feels cheap and flimsy on the bolt. I plan to order a backup shroud as I don't forsee this one lasting the life of the rifle.

I have nothing but praise for the buttstock and folding mechanism. Perfect and well thought out in my opinion. If they sell these in the aftermarket, I may get one for my AR-15 (minus the folding ability). I really like how there is a feature to cant the buttstock to better fit the shoulder pocket. It really shows that Ruger was paying attention.

The trigger is serviceable, but nothing special in my opinion. I'm not a particular fan of the accutrigger in Savages so I may be biased here. I've learned to treat the safety like the first stage of a two-stage trigger, although it doesn't feel quite as nice as one. The trigger pull itself has a good amount of creep before it breaks. Luckily this creep is extremely smooth. I would compare the trigger pull to similar to a Geissele 3-gun trigger where you pull through smoothly until it just breaks without hitting a second stage wall. Obviously it doesn't move nearly as much as the 3G trigger before breaking, but a similar feeling. It's certainly not my favorite trigger, but it's not bad and some people may prefer it. Once aftermarket triggers come out for it, I will take price into account before buying. One thing I was particularly impressed with was the design of the trigger weight adjustment. The screw stops on both sides of the adjustment range to tell you not to overturn it. The way they made the stops is cheap and effective. I've seen adjustable set screws where the hole where the spring rides is slightly smaller than the tapped hole for the set screw. That way the set screw will stop on the second hole instead of compressing the spring too far. This is a very effective way to do it, however it requires drilling twice. Ruger simply put a ring of locktite on the screw near the base so the user can feel when it's getting to the limit of adjust the pull on the heavy side. To adjust the screw to lighten the trigger, the user must turn the screw out. Instead of an internal stop to prevent the screw going out too far, they just designed it so the screw stops on the inside of the lower receiver. I don't know why I was so impressed with that, it extremely simple and effective. I should note that because of this DO NOT try to adjust the trigger with the lower receiver off.

The magazine cycled with the included Pmag as well as several of the M14 mags I had lying around. It did not like the Vietnam era mags quite as much as new production mags. The older USGI mags tend to be tighter fitting in my M14s and M1a making it just too tight for the Ruger. This is not a real concern to me as the USGI mags costs considerably more and are more collector items now anyways.

My least favorite part about this rifle is the Samson rail. I do not like the thermal bushing system, and the handguard to barrel nut attachment just does not seem to be very solid. Mine came off center like this one:

I ended up taking off the rail and thermal bushings, reinstalling them and it centered from left to right. However the rail is still not centered vertically and the barrel looks like it droops (although its really the rail going upwards). Whats more alarming is that when I apply pressure to the rail and barrel to correct it, it actually moves slightly. Then when I put it back on the bipod it goes back to it's droop. This tells me the rail to barrel nut interface is not very solid. My Diamondhead VRS-T, BCM KMR, and SLR rails do not do this as they are completely solid on the barrel nut. This could be due to the fact that they use a proprietary barrel nut instead of a standard one, but I'm willing to bet some rails that use a standard barrel nut are more solid than this. I am currently considering other rails that use the stock barrel nut to replace the Samson as I do not wish to remove the barrel nut. The one advantage to the Samson (and I suspect the reason Ruger choose that rail) is that the barrel nut does not have to be perfectly timed as the thermal bushings allow some flexibility for the rail mount. Obviously this applies to the RPR only as it will have to be timed perfectly on an AR-15 due to the gas tube. If my barrel nut is not perfectly timed (and it may not be as it's not necessary), then I'm SOL and stuck with the samson unless I want to remove or time the barrel nut.

These are my initial impressions from messing with the rifle yesterday. I am waiting on optics and muzzle brake (Vias) before I can take it shooting for a range report. Overall I am very happy with the rifle. I think Ruger made some very intelligent decisions to get the rifle down to the price point it is being offered at. I'm actually quite impressed with the amount of thought that went into it from the manufacturing side. Of course none of these points matter that much compared to performance and accuracy, which I have not yet tested.

Lennyo3034 is offline  
Old August 9th, 2015, 03:11 PM   #48
Old Salt
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Southern Maryland
Posts: 1,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by XUSNORDIE View Post
Tell that to the long range G'Hog hunters in PA and MD......the owners of three shops I frequent are getting requests left and right. I am an avid Ground Grizzly hunter...and hate the fact I can't use my AR's unless I remove the gas tube. This rifle will serve as an AR "Placebo"......; )
Invite me the next time you go and I'll bring my RPR for you to shoot.

Thanks from Pants and XUSNORDIE
Lennyo3034 is offline  
 
Old August 9th, 2015, 03:41 PM   #49
Lifer
 
Capona's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Illinois
Posts: 2,633
Nice review from an engineering perspective.
Well done!

QUOTE=Lennyo3034;1610589]I got mine in yesterday and spent a good amount of time messing with it to give a detailed first impressions:

Overall I really like this rifle, however this first impression review may sound critical of it because it's easier to explain bad things than good. I should also mention that I'm manufacturing engineer, and while I don't specialize in any particular process used in this rifle, I still have an eye for some things.



Its clear that Ruger designed this rifle with this price point in mind. Some people might call this "cutting corners", but in this case I think Ruger did an analysis of where they can cut costs with the least impact to performance.

I'll start with the barrel: I cleaned the barrel with butch's bore shine and was able to get an impression on how smooth and consistent it was. Ruger's decision to use the hammer forging process to make these barrels makes absolute sense in my opinion. They already had the forging equipment and only had to buy dies and smaller tooling, which while not cheap is a fraction of the cost of the forging equipment. I would guess Ruger can forge these barrels for 1/5 to 1/10 the cost of outsourcing the blanks from a third party manufacturer. I'll note this is purely speculation on my part, but not a total WAG based on what I know about operating costs. The accuracy of Ruger's CHF barrels is still to be determined, but FN (SPR bolt gun) and Remington (5R line) used CHF barrels in their bolt guns that are very accurate. While cleaning the barrel, it was apparent that Ruger did not lap the bore to the level that you would expect from a high end custom barrel maker. Patches simply did not go down as smoothly as with the Krieger .260 barrel that I was cleaning at the same time. Not that the Ruger was bad, about what is expected from a factory barrel, maybe slightly better. That being said the bore is very consistent which is much more important than being super smooth. The pressure required to push the patch through is consistent, better than some button rifled match barrels I'd had, which may have been a result of inconsistent rifling or bore diameter. From a cost vs expected performance perspective, I think Ruger made the right call. I wish the barrel had a slightly thicker contour, but I'm not sure if that was a design decision made by Ruger, or if that's the thickest their hammer forge was capable of doing since it requires a lot more pressure for a slight increase in thickness.

I think the design of the action is brilliant. I didn't go as far as taking off the barrel, but I do like how it is attached to the rifle. I really like how everything from the barrel to the receiver to the stock is all on the same axis. From a load path standpoint, that is brilliant and probably my favorite thing about the rifle. Once custom shops get their hands on them, I'm hoping to find out whether or not the actions need truing like Remingtons. The machining on the action is not the best. The inside bore of the receiver has some chatter marks, probably from dull tooling. This affects how smooth the bolt slides forward and backwards, but had no effect on real performance. The bolt is not super tight in the receiver like some custom actions which makes sense for this rifle. They can save money via looser tolerances that way, as well as have an action that is less affected by dirt and debris. The bolt locks up nice and solid though, which is what really matters. The end result is an action that doesn't feel super refined, but is very functional.

The bolt is something I'm undecided on. I'm a bit surprised they didn't go with a floating bolt head. It would make the receiver being perfectly true less important. Seems like it would be cheaper that way with the same or better accuracy. But I wasn't on Ruger's design team and I'm sure they had their reasons. Without knowing what they knew, I can't knock them on that. I'm not sure why the bolt needs two cocking ramps on the back of it as that's just more machine time, however I'm sure they had their reasons. There are a few things I dislike about the bolt though. The finish on mine was not very smooth. A relatively rough finish on bare metal like that is just asking for corrosion, stainless or not. I ended spending about an hour polishing the bolt by hand with a microfiber cloth and flitz metal polish. It smoothened the bolt body to be nice and slick to prevent corrosion as well as ride smoother in the receiver. I did not touch the locking lugs. I'm not really a fan of the bolt shroud as it feels cheap and flimsy on the bolt. I plan to order a backup shroud as I don't forsee this one lasting the life of the rifle.

I have nothing but praise for the buttstock and folding mechanism. Perfect and well thought out in my opinion. If they sell these in the aftermarket, I may get one for my AR-15 (minus the folding ability). I really like how there is a feature to cant the buttstock to better fit the shoulder pocket. It really shows that Ruger was paying attention.

The trigger is serviceable, but nothing special in my opinion. I'm not a particular fan of the accutrigger in Savages so I may be biased here. I've learned to treat the safety like the first stage of a two-stage trigger, although it doesn't feel quite as nice as one. The trigger pull itself has a good amount of creep before it breaks. Luckily this creep is extremely smooth. I would compare the trigger pull to similar to a Geissele 3-gun trigger where you pull through smoothly until it just breaks without hitting a second stage wall. Obviously it doesn't move nearly as much as the 3G trigger before breaking, but a similar feeling. It's certainly not my favorite trigger, but it's not bad and some people may prefer it. Once aftermarket triggers come out for it, I will take price into account before buying. One thing I was particularly impressed with was the design of the trigger weight adjustment. The screw stops on both sides of the adjustment range to tell you not to overturn it. The way they made the stops is cheap and effective. I've seen adjustable set screws where the hole where the spring rides is slightly smaller than the tapped hole for the set screw. That way the set screw will stop on the second hole instead of compressing the spring too far. This is a very effective way to do it, however it requires drilling twice. Ruger simply put a ring of locktite on the screw near the base so the user can feel when it's getting to the limit of adjust the pull on the heavy side. To adjust the screw to lighten the trigger, the user must turn the screw out. Instead of an internal stop to prevent the screw going out too far, they just designed it so the screw stops on the inside of the lower receiver. I don't know why I was so impressed with that, it extremely simple and effective. I should note that because of this DO NOT try to adjust the trigger with the lower receiver off.

The magazine cycled with the included Pmag as well as several of the M14 mags I had lying around. It did not like the Vietnam era mags quite as much as new production mags. The older USGI mags tend to be tighter fitting in my M14s and M1a making it just too tight for the Ruger. This is not a real concern to me as the USGI mags costs considerably more and are more collector items now anyways.

My least favorite part about this rifle is the Samson rail. I do not like the thermal bushing system, and the handguard to barrel nut attachment just does not seem to be very solid. Mine came off center like this one:

I ended up taking off the rail and thermal bushings, reinstalling them and it centered from left to right. However the rail is still not centered vertically and the barrel looks like it droops (although its really the rail going upwards). Whats more alarming is that when I apply pressure to the rail and barrel to correct it, it actually moves slightly. Then when I put it back on the bipod it goes back to it's droop. This tells me the rail to barrel nut interface is not very solid. My Diamondhead VRS-T, BCM KMR, and SLR rails do not do this as they are completely solid on the barrel nut. This could be due to the fact that they use a proprietary barrel nut instead of a standard one, but I'm willing to bet some rails that use a standard barrel nut are more solid than this. I am currently considering other rails that use the stock barrel nut to replace the Samson as I do not wish to remove the barrel nut. The one advantage to the Samson (and I suspect the reason Ruger choose that rail) is that the barrel nut does not have to be perfectly timed as the thermal bushings allow some flexibility for the rail mount. Obviously this applies to the RPR only as it will have to be timed perfectly on an AR-15 due to the gas tube. If my barrel nut is not perfectly timed (and it may not be as it's not necessary), then I'm SOL and stuck with the samson unless I want to remove or time the barrel nut.

These are my initial impressions from messing with the rifle yesterday. I am waiting on optics and muzzle brake (Vias) before I can take it shooting for a range report. Overall I am very happy with the rifle. I think Ruger made some very intelligent decisions to get the rifle down to the price point it is being offered at. I'm actually quite impressed with the amount of thought that went into it from the manufacturing side. Of course none of these points matter that much compared to performance and accuracy, which I have not yet tested.[/QUOTE]

Capona is online now  
Old August 11th, 2015, 06:49 PM   #50
Old Salt
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Southern Maryland
Posts: 1,579


Yup it shoots. Calipers zeroed at .264

Lennyo3034 is offline  
Old August 11th, 2015, 08:54 PM   #51
Lifer
 
Capona's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Illinois
Posts: 2,633
Impressive, Is that a 3 shot group, or 5 shot?

Capona is online now  
Old August 11th, 2015, 09:36 PM   #52
Scout Sniper
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Anywhere but here!
Posts: 826
Looks like a three shot group to me, but dang that is still outstanding. Good shooting Lennyo3034!

Saiyan66 is offline  
Old August 12th, 2015, 12:14 AM   #53
Lifer
 
MAC702's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Clark County, NV
Posts: 2,611
At what distance?

MAC702 is offline  
Old August 12th, 2015, 07:10 AM   #54
Old Salt
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Southern Maryland
Posts: 1,579
Only 3 shots. I was a wuss and stopped after these 3 because I didn't want to ruin it. 100 yards. I'm going to wait until I get my muzzle device on and do another 100 yard sight in and set the zerostop on the optic. Then to the longer ranges.

Thanks from NORKALNIMROD, Kazz and ChileRelleno
Lennyo3034 is offline  
Old August 12th, 2015, 06:57 PM   #55
Old Salt
 
jkh62's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc View Post
That has been my experience --- I seem to recall when Ruger tried to supply our Palma team with some rifles --- that did not work out to well.
Don't get me wrong - Ruger is a great company with great products - but they have not fared well in the precision rifle games.





I agree on the Tubb rifle - I think it is no longer made (not positive about that but Creedmoor no longer list them) --- Another aspect is the trigger ... the Tubb used an Anschutz --- how good will the Ruger trigger be and can an aftermarket be fitted?
Personally the concept is great - I will add a word to what was said in a previous quote - "potentially" like a Tubb rifle for less $$......
I still want to see an evaluation of the trigger --- and then there is the barrel.
If a person had to upgrade the trigger and upgrade the barrel - then the price structure starts to look diffidently.
Would be great to see an experienced across the course shooter slap a Warner rear and somebody's good globe on the front and see how the factory gun would preform.....
It may well be it is very competitive as is - time will hopefully tell.


The Tubb rifle had a better trigger ( adjustable for cant as well, I think ) but the Ruger has everything in place for a nice across the course rifle.

Since its designed as a switch barrel it should not be long for Krieger or others to make new tubes available. I bet the factory 6.5 will shoot better than most users can out of the box.

I still want the .308 though.......

jkh62 is offline  
Old August 12th, 2015, 07:12 PM   #56
Lifer
 
Stevie Ray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Florida's Treasure Coast
Posts: 2,547
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lennyo3034 View Post
Only 3 shots. I was a wuss and stopped after these 3 because I didn't want to ruin it. 100 yards. I'm going to wait until I get my muzzle device on and do another 100 yard sight in and set the zerostop on the optic. Then to the longer ranges.
I used to measure my groups like that but got chastised (a little) on another forum because I would measure outside diameter to outside diameter of the bullet holes rather than center to center ... so your group is actually a little more tighter than what you are showing and believe me I can use all of the help I can get my hands on so I now measure center to center on my groups and btw, that's a really nice rifle, I was just looking those online this afternoon.

Stevie Ray is online now  
Old August 12th, 2015, 07:17 PM   #57
Lifer
 
Capona's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Illinois
Posts: 2,633
Outside diameter is better really because you can measure an edge instead of somewhere in the middle.
You just need to subtract the .30 which he did.

Thanks from Stevie Ray
Capona is online now  
Old August 29th, 2015, 08:51 AM   #58
Lifer
 
Capona's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Illinois
Posts: 2,633
Lenny,

I like this rifle and want one but I would need to use it left handed . How's the bolt clearance for someone firing from the right side?

Capona is online now  
Old August 29th, 2015, 10:10 AM   #59
Banned Camp
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The FREE STATE of IDAHO
Posts: 2,951
That is some fine shooting, from any rifle! Looks like Ruger has another winner.

Mac,
JMHO, but I think that would make a fine hunting rifle. Just depends on what one is hunting!

NORKALNIMROD is offline  
Old August 29th, 2015, 11:39 AM   #60
Old Salt
 
TNcoupe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Decatur, TN
Posts: 1,117
I have one ordered...cant wait for it to get here.

TNcoupe is offline  
Reply

  M14 Forum > Gun Forum > Bolt Action


Search tags for this page
308 ruger precision rifle for sale
,
m1a vs ruger precision rifle
,
ruger 308 precision rifle for sale
,
ruger precision
,
ruger precision forum
,

ruger precision rifle

,
ruger precision rifle accuracy
,
ruger precision rifle canada
,

ruger precision rifle for sale

,
ruger precision rifle forum
,
ruger precision rifle forums
,
rugerprecisionforums
Click on a term to search for related topics.

Moderator Tools
Display Modes


Similar M14 Forum Discussions
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LRB Arms serial number database Different Reference 195 August 2nd, 2015 03:47 PM
You have to read this ribs55 Steel and Wood 11 February 4th, 2015 08:15 PM
Precision Rifle Shoot Willie_Maker Pacific Northwest 7 December 14th, 2012 09:24 AM
Krag rifle, what should I expect? 762x51shooter Steel and Wood 12 June 8th, 2011 07:49 PM
Data base - M1A under sn 004600 Different Devine M1A 15 September 15th, 2007 11:00 AM



Top Gun Sites Top Sites List