Ruger Hawkeye
- Thread starter getfoxy
- Start date
getfoxy, my neighbor is a Ruger Freek. He has the 243, 270, 25/06, in the Stainless sporter versions, and the 243 V and the 25/06 V, both with laminated stocks.
The triggers must be honed, which is perhaps the biggest down fall of the rifle.
The barrel quality on these new rugers are really special. I clean all his guns, and they are very smooth and not one of them being copper pigs(they are all the stainless versions).
Now comes the best part, they are all tack drivers. We load at the range, and all them were easy to work up a load for in one trip to the range. All the rifles shoot with the bullets touching at 100 yards.
The quality of these new Ruger barrels are so good, it makes you wonder what the heck Bill Ruger was ever thinking in the late 70's and early 80's!
The triggers must be honed, which is perhaps the biggest down fall of the rifle.
The barrel quality on these new rugers are really special. I clean all his guns, and they are very smooth and not one of them being copper pigs(they are all the stainless versions).
Now comes the best part, they are all tack drivers. We load at the range, and all them were easy to work up a load for in one trip to the range. All the rifles shoot with the bullets touching at 100 yards.
The quality of these new Ruger barrels are so good, it makes you wonder what the heck Bill Ruger was ever thinking in the late 70's and early 80's!
bighornboy
New member
I have one in 7mm rem mag. I love the gun, it's my pig and deer getter. The trigger is an improvement over the older rugers, still wish it was adjustable. Breaks real crisp and just guessing it is in the 3.5 pound range. I am still yet to find a great load for it, mainly because I have been shooting Black Hills out ot if and they shoot great (3/4" at 100). Most of my loads have been in the 1" range, which is good enough for what I use it for. Mine is the matte stainless with a camo synthetic stock. Stock seems to be of higher quality than most synthetic stocks nowdays. The barrel is very easy to clean, just like ackley man stated. I have not had any feeding problems with mine. I added a Sims butt pad to mine, which really help to reduce recoil. My buddy has one in a 243, and it will shoot. Overall, I thinks it's a great rifle, and I doubt you will find anything wrong with the gun.
Rick James
New member
I had one that I bought for my fiance last year to hunt with. It was a 7mm-08. Great little gun, but when she decided she didn't want to hunt, I decided to sell it to fund an AR.
Bearcat 74
New member
Just bought one in a .358 Winchester stainless/synthetic and it is accurate. I have only shot it at 75yds because that all I can see with the hay up at my house but my last 3 3 shot groups were in the .4's - .6's. I know those aren't 100yd groups, but I think they are pretty good for a stock rifle and no load work.
Trigger on mine is much better than my old MKII77 triggers. The Hawkeye is around 5lbs I guess, it is smooth though break crisp. The barrel on mine is not free floated and I am not changing it. All my other Rugers are floated and it helped, this one doesn't need it.
Here is mine: http://www.noslerreloading.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=10716
Trigger on mine is much better than my old MKII77 triggers. The Hawkeye is around 5lbs I guess, it is smooth though break crisp. The barrel on mine is not free floated and I am not changing it. All my other Rugers are floated and it helped, this one doesn't need it.
Here is mine: http://www.noslerreloading.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=10716
kshuntercb
New member
I like my Hawkeye in 22-250. I consider it accurate and easy to carry in the field for coyotes. Mine has good quality, no complaints. I would recommend the Ruger Hawkeye. I did paint the bolt handle on mine black because I thought the silver stood out too much. I think it looks pretty good. I have the wood stock version.
6mm06
Well-known member
Gary,
I too have been looking at the Hawkeye, today actually. I found a .204 in one and it's a really pretty little rifle, walnet and beautiful stock. I have been searching the Internet this evening, trying to find reviews on the Hawkeye as to general accuracy and trigger pull. Then I found your post. I wish more people would respond that know about this rifle.
Years ago I purchased a model 77 in 257 Roberts. Nothing I did could make that rifle shoot well. I tried everything, from various bullets (brands and weight), powder and primers, to free-floating the barrel, changed stock to a composite, glass bedded the action and even glass bedded the entire barrel later. I even sent it back to Ruger and they recrowned it. I really liked the mauser-type action and so wanted that gun to shoot, but it would not. It was a pethetic case, so it found a new home.
I've been Ruger shy ever since.
But, today I found the Hawkeye in .204. It's rather heavy, which I like for my intended purpose - groundhogs from a bench. And, as usual, I like the action and looks of it, but that Ruger shyness remains. If I thought it would be a winner, I would get it. I'm also wondering about the trigger and what might be done to improve it, if anything, or if there are good after-market triggers available. Right now I'm thinking and searching for more facts and data.
Hopefully someone else with some experience with the Hawkeye will chime in.
I too have been looking at the Hawkeye, today actually. I found a .204 in one and it's a really pretty little rifle, walnet and beautiful stock. I have been searching the Internet this evening, trying to find reviews on the Hawkeye as to general accuracy and trigger pull. Then I found your post. I wish more people would respond that know about this rifle.
Years ago I purchased a model 77 in 257 Roberts. Nothing I did could make that rifle shoot well. I tried everything, from various bullets (brands and weight), powder and primers, to free-floating the barrel, changed stock to a composite, glass bedded the action and even glass bedded the entire barrel later. I even sent it back to Ruger and they recrowned it. I really liked the mauser-type action and so wanted that gun to shoot, but it would not. It was a pethetic case, so it found a new home.
I've been Ruger shy ever since.
But, today I found the Hawkeye in .204. It's rather heavy, which I like for my intended purpose - groundhogs from a bench. And, as usual, I like the action and looks of it, but that Ruger shyness remains. If I thought it would be a winner, I would get it. I'm also wondering about the trigger and what might be done to improve it, if anything, or if there are good after-market triggers available. Right now I'm thinking and searching for more facts and data.
Hopefully someone else with some experience with the Hawkeye will chime in.
MountSweetness
New member
6mm06,
I owned the exact gun you are looking at. .204 Hawkeye in wood with 24in. barrel. I had to have one, searched all over for weeks.
I am actually a Ruger fan, my go to rifle is a M77 with tang safety in .22-250
This is my opinion and I won't be shy:
- The Hawkeye is made cheaper than 77 models of the past, there are no improvements...period
- LC6 Trigger is marketing hype, maybe it is cleaner and slightly lighter than other Rugers of the past, but it will still require work by a smith. It is in my opinion the worst of the new triggers...period, absolutely no comparison what so ever to the Accutrigger etc etc etc
- Everything from the butt pad to the matte finish to the rough safety to the rough bolt to the stiff magazine hinge latch.....doesn't compare to the older Rugers that were polished
- This particular rifle did not balance very well for me, heavy and long. Much heavier than is needed for a .204.
- The bolt is very rough and cannot be cycled smoothly from the shoulder. The action was not in anyway designed for a short small cartridge like the .204. Very long rough action for this round.
- The magazine is grossly oversized with a massive section of it blocked off with sheet metal to accommodate the short small cartridge.
- Accuracy will not be better or worse than others in this price range.
- Worst of all the feed ramp does not have the proper geometry for this particular round. I believe Ruger simply used components from a .222 or .223 and did not put enough effort into perfecting this action. Due to the smaller bottle neck of the round and steep cartridge angle....combined with the feed ramp and the rough long bolt.......many of the cartridges will not feed properly. Cartridges will jam before entering the chamber, they will slip up the ramp at an odd angle and crush the bullet into the case at 2 o'clock on the chamber face.
I went through 3 boxes of various ammo, just cycling it. And before long, I was left with 3 boxes of useless ammo with the bullets pushed back into the case. Cycle the blot fast or slow, didn't matter. Can't be cycled from the shoulder, must be gingerly cycled and visually monitored for feed issues.
I returned the rifle for refund after owning it for 2 days.
I won't buy a Hawkeye again, they are made cheaper from top to bottom, corners cut in manufacturering, cost cuts in components.
My opinion, and I am a huge Ruger fan.
I owned the exact gun you are looking at. .204 Hawkeye in wood with 24in. barrel. I had to have one, searched all over for weeks.
I am actually a Ruger fan, my go to rifle is a M77 with tang safety in .22-250
This is my opinion and I won't be shy:
- The Hawkeye is made cheaper than 77 models of the past, there are no improvements...period
- LC6 Trigger is marketing hype, maybe it is cleaner and slightly lighter than other Rugers of the past, but it will still require work by a smith. It is in my opinion the worst of the new triggers...period, absolutely no comparison what so ever to the Accutrigger etc etc etc
- Everything from the butt pad to the matte finish to the rough safety to the rough bolt to the stiff magazine hinge latch.....doesn't compare to the older Rugers that were polished
- This particular rifle did not balance very well for me, heavy and long. Much heavier than is needed for a .204.
- The bolt is very rough and cannot be cycled smoothly from the shoulder. The action was not in anyway designed for a short small cartridge like the .204. Very long rough action for this round.
- The magazine is grossly oversized with a massive section of it blocked off with sheet metal to accommodate the short small cartridge.
- Accuracy will not be better or worse than others in this price range.
- Worst of all the feed ramp does not have the proper geometry for this particular round. I believe Ruger simply used components from a .222 or .223 and did not put enough effort into perfecting this action. Due to the smaller bottle neck of the round and steep cartridge angle....combined with the feed ramp and the rough long bolt.......many of the cartridges will not feed properly. Cartridges will jam before entering the chamber, they will slip up the ramp at an odd angle and crush the bullet into the case at 2 o'clock on the chamber face.
I went through 3 boxes of various ammo, just cycling it. And before long, I was left with 3 boxes of useless ammo with the bullets pushed back into the case. Cycle the blot fast or slow, didn't matter. Can't be cycled from the shoulder, must be gingerly cycled and visually monitored for feed issues.
I returned the rifle for refund after owning it for 2 days.
I won't buy a Hawkeye again, they are made cheaper from top to bottom, corners cut in manufacturering, cost cuts in components.
My opinion, and I am a huge Ruger fan.
6mm06
Well-known member
Thanks for your post and words, even if they are of a negative nature for the rifle. Truth is truth however you stack it.
Seems that some people like them and others don't. Some have good results and yet others don't. As I mentioned before, my experience with the M77 was pitiful, to say the least, and that despite all my good efforts, not to mention cost in trying to make it shoot. My gunsmith wouldn't have one and always gives a thumbs down when I ask him about a Ruger.
It's a shame that Ruger builds, in my opinion, good looking rifles, but ones that don't perform well. You would think by now, after all these years, that they would get the message from a lot of hunters that the product needs improvement.
I guess the continued negative report keeps me from buying one, especially considering the price. I had hopes though that things had changed for the better. I'm not inclined, if I can help it, to pay a big price and then have to start work of all sorts to get it to shoot properly.
Seems that some people like them and others don't. Some have good results and yet others don't. As I mentioned before, my experience with the M77 was pitiful, to say the least, and that despite all my good efforts, not to mention cost in trying to make it shoot. My gunsmith wouldn't have one and always gives a thumbs down when I ask him about a Ruger.
It's a shame that Ruger builds, in my opinion, good looking rifles, but ones that don't perform well. You would think by now, after all these years, that they would get the message from a lot of hunters that the product needs improvement.
I guess the continued negative report keeps me from buying one, especially considering the price. I had hopes though that things had changed for the better. I'm not inclined, if I can help it, to pay a big price and then have to start work of all sorts to get it to shoot properly.
I own one Hawkeye (375 Ruger) and have shot a friends (257 bob) extensively. Both are the matte/walnut option and I think that both are bargains for what we paid. I really couldn't be any happier for the price......when I buy a gun in this range I am not expecting it to look like an expensive custom job, just that it be useably accurate and reliable and so far both are this and more through several hundred rounds each.
I would not hesitate to buy another. I agree that the LC6 is not quite as nice as an accutrigger, but IMHO it is way better than the old one and the equal of the X-mark in the new remingtons (own two).
Matt
I would not hesitate to buy another. I agree that the LC6 is not quite as nice as an accutrigger, but IMHO it is way better than the old one and the equal of the X-mark in the new remingtons (own two).
Matt
Dave- They are a very nice looking rifle and I think a .257 would be a good caliber to mate the gun with. I just need this rifle to shoot minute of deer lol/ /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
Im going to see if I can find a store where I can go handle one and see how it feels.
Thanks for the input guys. It was very Much appreciated /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif
Im going to see if I can find a store where I can go handle one and see how it feels.
Thanks for the input guys. It was very Much appreciated /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif
Last edited: