Ruger 77/357

[this_is_nascar 162]

Does anyone here have one of these or have handled one of these before? What's your thoughts and opinions about this rifle? I'm looking for something with a bit more punch than my Ruger 10/22 and this one seems perfect for me.

[lunker 274]

I don't think the ballistics of 357 warrant a full size bolt action gun. I think you'd be better off with a Marlin or Rossi lever action. They are accurate and a lot of fun.

[this_is_nascar 162]

I don't think the ballistics of 357 warrant a full size bolt action gun. I think you'd be better off with a Marlin or Rossi lever action. They are accurate and a lot of fun.

 

Excuse my ignorance, but I don't understand what you mean.

[lunker 274]

Excuse my ignorance, but I don't understand what you mean.

 

No worries. What I mean is that 357magnum, while it is a powerful handgun round, is not a rifle round. And it does not have the speed or range of a rifle round. Generally speaking, a bolt action rifle is designed to maximize accuracy out of a projectile traveling at rifle speeds (anywhere between 2000 and 4500fps). The 357mag maxes out at about 1800fps (except for some ultralight specialty loads from Buffalo Bore, etc). There is no accuracy or ballistic advantage to having a big, unwieldy, and heavy rifle for a pistol round. Why not take advantage of the fact that you can achieve the same results with a much lighter, more mobile, and handier carbine length rifle.

[this_is_nascar 162]

No worries. What I mean is that 357magnum, while it is a powerful handgun round, is not a rifle round. And it does not have the speed or range of a rifle round. Generally speaking, a bolt action rifle is designed to maximize accuracy out of a projectile traveling at rifle speeds (anywhere between 2000 and 4500fps). The 357mag maxes out at about 1800fps (except for some ultralight specialty loads from Buffalo Bore, etc). There is no accuracy or ballistic advantage to having a big, unwieldy, and heavy rifle for a pistol round. Why not take advantage of the fact that you can achieve the same results with a much lighter, more mobile, and handier carbine length rifle.

 

Now I understand. Thanks for explaining.

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

Chris (Lunker):

 

I don't really keep up with all of Ruger's offerings, but the 77/357 referenced by the OP is exactly as you describe - a light, handy carbine-sized rifle. Here are the specs etc....

 

http://www.ruger.com...357/models.html

 

I was unaware of this also but it looks pretty neat and appropriately sized for the caliber. Doesn't really offer any advantages over a similarly sized lever gun, but also doesn't put you at a disadvantage (unless you're into mag-dumps) either. So, it really becomes personal preference.

 

To the OP: Carry on

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[lunker 274]

Good point Bob. 5 1/2 pounds is a nice light rifle.

[Wolfy 51]

I plan on getting the 357 bolt gun because I only plan on punching paper and reload for the 357 already.

[this_is_nascar 162]

Thanks. Yes, I like the Ruger offering. I like being able to use the .357 or .38 special round in it. I don't like the .357 in a pistol. I simply have too much problems controlling it. Yea, I'm a wimp, I know. Anyway, there are quite a few reviews on You Tube and net in general. It's really a nice rifle that I'll probably end up getting. I was just wanting to get some thoughts and opinions from others. I really do appreciate the feedback from everyone.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

I still think a lever action carbine in 357 would be a better choice. More capacity, easier handling, easier loading, better looking, and more fun. The new Marlin 1894 fits that bill quite nicely.

[Parker 213]

I still think a lever action carbine in 357 would be a better choice. More capacity, easier handling, easier loading, better looking, and more fun. The new Marlin 1894 fits that bill quite nicely.

I like the Marlin too. The 1894 is a handy and trim carbine. As for "new," the 1894 was first introduced in 1894 in pistol/rifle cartridges that are not too popular these days. It's been around for a while. It was re-introduced in 1969, first in .44 Mag. It's a solid, sturdy and proven rifle. The .357 Magnum chambering was introduced in the 1894 model in the late 70's.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

I like the Marlin too. The 1894 is a handy and trim carbine. As for "new," the 1894 was first introduced in 1894 in pistol/rifle cartridges that are not too popular these days. It's been around for a while. It was re-introduced in 1969, first in .44 Mag. It's a solid, sturdy and proven rifle. The .357 Magnum chambering was introduced in the 1894 model in the late 70's.

 

I meant the new model 1894 that's out with the rail on top.

[Parker 213]

I meant the new model 1894 that's out with the rail on top.

I'm not up on things then. I was unaware they were putting the Picatinny style rail on the 1894 models. I've seen the XS-style rail for standard or EER mounting on the 336 and 1895 models, but not the 1894. Are they doing that now? Interesting.

[Pew Pew Plates 358]

the link is blocked at work but if it can feed .38 HBWC rounds it would be a VERY accurate 25-50 yard rifle

[Ray Ray 3,566]

I'm not up on things then. I was unaware they were putting the Picatinny style rail on the 1894 models. I've seen the XS-style rail for standard or EER mounting on the 336 and 1895 models, but not the 1894. Are they doing that now? Interesting.

 

Yeah, but I can't find the link. It was on the cover of the latest "Shooting Times" magazine.

[Underdog 1,593]

You might also see if you can find a Puma 92 lever action.