- Thread starter QRE23
- Start date
Re: Savage 93 vs Ruger 77/22
I can't speak to the Savage as I've never handled one but I've put a few rounds downrange through Ruger 77/22s and a 77/22 Magnum. They're both very accurate and well made guns. If I remember right the trigger was a little heavy on the Magnum but it was very clean and crisp. When I get ready to buy another bolt action rimfire a 77/22 is definitely on my short list.
I can't speak to the Savage as I've never handled one but I've put a few rounds downrange through Ruger 77/22s and a 77/22 Magnum. They're both very accurate and well made guns. If I remember right the trigger was a little heavy on the Magnum but it was very clean and crisp. When I get ready to buy another bolt action rimfire a 77/22 is definitely on my short list.
Re: Savage 93 vs Ruger 77/22
What do you want to use it for?
Pure target shooting I'd go with 17 HMR as the ballistics blow the 22mag out of the water.
PDog/Ground hog hunting, I'd go with the HMR as the terminal ballistics are something else out to about 175 yards.
Plinking? 22LR
Squirrel? 22LR or 17 HMR if you don't eat them or will go for head shots only.
In fact, I can't think of any reason to go after a 22mag with perhaps the exception that ammo is cheaper (though not by much).
What do you want to use it for?
Pure target shooting I'd go with 17 HMR as the ballistics blow the 22mag out of the water.
PDog/Ground hog hunting, I'd go with the HMR as the terminal ballistics are something else out to about 175 yards.
Plinking? 22LR
Squirrel? 22LR or 17 HMR if you don't eat them or will go for head shots only.
In fact, I can't think of any reason to go after a 22mag with perhaps the exception that ammo is cheaper (though not by much).
Re: Savage 93 vs Ruger 77/22
I think I've settled with the idea of the 17hmr it's which rifle to buy that has me hung up. Seems to be ALOT of Savage 93's and Marlin's out there and is that because they are cheaper or is one of them clearly better.
My dad has and older 77/22mag and it shoots great. I really like the flush magazine system of the Ruger but I'm not a big fan of how they look. I never, ever, thought I would say this considering I think their centerfire rifles are fugly but I like the looks of the Savage the best.
Any thoughts on the Marlin???
I think I've settled with the idea of the 17hmr it's which rifle to buy that has me hung up. Seems to be ALOT of Savage 93's and Marlin's out there and is that because they are cheaper or is one of them clearly better.
My dad has and older 77/22mag and it shoots great. I really like the flush magazine system of the Ruger but I'm not a big fan of how they look. I never, ever, thought I would say this considering I think their centerfire rifles are fugly but I like the looks of the Savage the best.
Any thoughts on the Marlin???
Re: Savage 93 vs Ruger 77/22
Either is good.
Savage definitely has a better trigger.
Get what you like best. Bull barrel, thumbhole stock, whatever. You won't go wrong with either.
I have 2 for different purposes (both Savages). A 93r17 BTVS with a stainless bull barrel and laminated thumbhole stock for target/lying in a field shooting, and a 93r17 Camo with sporter barrel and ultralightweight camo stock for trekking in the woods.
The bull barrel is more accurate, but heavy.
Either is good.
Savage definitely has a better trigger.
Get what you like best. Bull barrel, thumbhole stock, whatever. You won't go wrong with either.
I have 2 for different purposes (both Savages). A 93r17 BTVS with a stainless bull barrel and laminated thumbhole stock for target/lying in a field shooting, and a 93r17 Camo with sporter barrel and ultralightweight camo stock for trekking in the woods.
The bull barrel is more accurate, but heavy.
Re: Savage 93 vs Ruger 77/22
I had bad luck with a 77/22, it shot poorly. The best I could get was about 4" at 100. tried every ammo I could find. I sold it and I would not my another. Other have had good luck.
I had bad luck with a 77/22, it shot poorly. The best I could get was about 4" at 100. tried every ammo I could find. I sold it and I would not my another. Other have had good luck.
Re: Savage 93 vs Ruger 77/22
ultimately, i would have to also believe you have to consider what your intents of the rifle is. paper punching, hunting, competition, or a combo.
while the .17 .22 mag and 22lr all have their seperate advantages, they also have their seperate drawbacks depending on what you are ging to use them for.
without turning this into a ammo "one vs. another" thread, some of my generalizations (and i think we can all agree) are:
i prefer the .22 lr for target (paper punching / plinking), as it has the widest selection of ammos (the cheapest to the most expensive ammos) depending on what shoots the best out of the rifle and the application. there are many more competitions available to the .22lr. although it can bring down big game for culling and such, for hunting, it's mostly restricted to squirrels, rabbits, and smaller critters of this type. can be used on turkeys, but a better percentage / ethical choice would be a .22 mag. there are a few choices for sub sonic and other quieter ammo for pest control and "non attention getting" shooting.
when i'm hunting i prefer the .22 mag as it offers more distance and energy than the 22lr, and is good from squirrels to turkeys, to coyotes. ammo is relatively inexpensive compared to centerfire or the .17 hmr, but more expensive to comparable .22lr bullet types for "plinking". several ammos offer low expanding bullets like fmj and cci gamepoints that are nice for penetration on bigger game (turkeys / coyotes), and more "exposive" v-max and hollowpoint bullets on groundhogs, squirrels (head shots) and so on.
the .17 hmr is the flattest shooting and is phenomenal at longer distances, but gets tossed around in the wind, and with the type of "explosive" tipped ammos currently available, doesn't offer the type of penetration on edible game without excessive tissue damage as some .22 mag ammos offer. is generally more expensive to shoot than the .22lr and mag, but has hands down beats both in trajectory. if i had the $ to afford shooting a few hundred rounds every month with tight groups on paper, and don't plan on shooting any competitions, would probably go with the .17hmr.
there is the sako quad that allows you to use all of them with a barrel change, and the cz 455 that does the same.
as a traditional dedicated caliber / barrel rifle, i would suggest looking into what you actually are trying to accomplish, any future interests that may deviate from the immediate need, and how much your budget will allow you to shoot. and of course do the research that your doing to see which caliber best suits those and anticipated future needs.
hope this helps some.
i believe the savage to be more accurate, however i think the ruger is "prettier" and is better built.
ultimately, i would have to also believe you have to consider what your intents of the rifle is. paper punching, hunting, competition, or a combo.
while the .17 .22 mag and 22lr all have their seperate advantages, they also have their seperate drawbacks depending on what you are ging to use them for.
without turning this into a ammo "one vs. another" thread, some of my generalizations (and i think we can all agree) are:
i prefer the .22 lr for target (paper punching / plinking), as it has the widest selection of ammos (the cheapest to the most expensive ammos) depending on what shoots the best out of the rifle and the application. there are many more competitions available to the .22lr. although it can bring down big game for culling and such, for hunting, it's mostly restricted to squirrels, rabbits, and smaller critters of this type. can be used on turkeys, but a better percentage / ethical choice would be a .22 mag. there are a few choices for sub sonic and other quieter ammo for pest control and "non attention getting" shooting.
when i'm hunting i prefer the .22 mag as it offers more distance and energy than the 22lr, and is good from squirrels to turkeys, to coyotes. ammo is relatively inexpensive compared to centerfire or the .17 hmr, but more expensive to comparable .22lr bullet types for "plinking". several ammos offer low expanding bullets like fmj and cci gamepoints that are nice for penetration on bigger game (turkeys / coyotes), and more "exposive" v-max and hollowpoint bullets on groundhogs, squirrels (head shots) and so on.
the .17 hmr is the flattest shooting and is phenomenal at longer distances, but gets tossed around in the wind, and with the type of "explosive" tipped ammos currently available, doesn't offer the type of penetration on edible game without excessive tissue damage as some .22 mag ammos offer. is generally more expensive to shoot than the .22lr and mag, but has hands down beats both in trajectory. if i had the $ to afford shooting a few hundred rounds every month with tight groups on paper, and don't plan on shooting any competitions, would probably go with the .17hmr.
there is the sako quad that allows you to use all of them with a barrel change, and the cz 455 that does the same.
as a traditional dedicated caliber / barrel rifle, i would suggest looking into what you actually are trying to accomplish, any future interests that may deviate from the immediate need, and how much your budget will allow you to shoot. and of course do the research that your doing to see which caliber best suits those and anticipated future needs.
hope this helps some.
i believe the savage to be more accurate, however i think the ruger is "prettier" and is better built.
Re: Savage 93 vs Ruger 77/22
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: samson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Was going to get the Savage thumbhole in blued but for only $20 more I went with the stainless. I would have to say the trigger was probably the biggest selling point.
Thanks for all the input. </div></div>
Accu-trigger = good
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: samson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Was going to get the Savage thumbhole in blued but for only $20 more I went with the stainless. I would have to say the trigger was probably the biggest selling point.
Thanks for all the input. </div></div>
Accu-trigger = good
Re: Savage 93 vs Ruger 77/22
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the .17 hmr is the flattest shooting and is phenomenal at longer distances, but gets tossed around in the wind, and with the type of "explosive" tipped ammos currently available, doesn't offer the type of penetration on edible game without excessive tissue damage as some .22 mag ammos offer.</div></div>
CCI has hollow points,game point,vmax and fmj. ammo for the 17 hmr now
but it is still not cheap though!!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the .17 hmr is the flattest shooting and is phenomenal at longer distances, but gets tossed around in the wind, and with the type of "explosive" tipped ammos currently available, doesn't offer the type of penetration on edible game without excessive tissue damage as some .22 mag ammos offer.</div></div>
CCI has hollow points,game point,vmax and fmj. ammo for the 17 hmr now
but it is still not cheap though!!
Re: Savage 93 vs Ruger 77/22
good choice
dgwelsh
good choice
dgwelsh
Re: Savage 93 vs Ruger 77/22
I have had very good luck with the all weather 77/22lr and 22wrm. both have outshot other makes. Recently sold the 22mag as I don't need rimfire for varmints in this part of PA, whereas in Bucks CO. PA you were restricted to rimfire..
The 22lr is outstanding.
I have had very good luck with the all weather 77/22lr and 22wrm. both have outshot other makes. Recently sold the 22mag as I don't need rimfire for varmints in this part of PA, whereas in Bucks CO. PA you were restricted to rimfire..
The 22lr is outstanding.
Re: Savage 93 vs Ruger 77/22
My 93 in 17hmr will shoot sub MOA at 100yds....
My 93 in 17hmr will shoot sub MOA at 100yds....
Re: Savage 93 vs Ruger 77/22
The first time I took out my 77/22 was to an indoor 50ft. range and I fired at a regulation 50ft rimfire target with five different targets on it. I don't know how good this is regarding rimfire at this range but it put all five shots on each target into a 1/8" group in the x-ring. I was impressed. The first time I shot it at an outdoor range at 100yds. it grouped easily around the size of a nickel. I used a 3-9 variable scope on it in both places.
The first time I took out my 77/22 was to an indoor 50ft. range and I fired at a regulation 50ft rimfire target with five different targets on it. I don't know how good this is regarding rimfire at this range but it put all five shots on each target into a 1/8" group in the x-ring. I was impressed. The first time I shot it at an outdoor range at 100yds. it grouped easily around the size of a nickel. I used a 3-9 variable scope on it in both places.
Re: Savage 93 vs Ruger 77/22
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: David300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have not tried the savage but I like my 77/17 it shoots 1/2" groups at 100 yards easily. </div></div>
Same!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: David300</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have not tried the savage but I like my 77/17 it shoots 1/2" groups at 100 yards easily. </div></div>
Same!
Re: Savage 93 vs Ruger 77/22
Another vote for the Ruger. My all weather 77/22 shoots sub moa out to 100 yards. with lighter winds I can ring small steel at 200 yards pretty easy. I did change the wood stock out for a free floated fiberglass stock however. With that said however I have never shot a savage or Sako before.
I have been looking into the savage but I think if I get another rim fire I am going to look into a sako quad in .17 and build it up nice but that would be costly.
It all comes down to money really. Nothing wrong with any of them. As far as I see it the savage is the cheapest, the ruger a little more expensive, and the quad (depending on where you buy) is the most expensive.
Another vote for the Ruger. My all weather 77/22 shoots sub moa out to 100 yards. with lighter winds I can ring small steel at 200 yards pretty easy. I did change the wood stock out for a free floated fiberglass stock however. With that said however I have never shot a savage or Sako before.
I have been looking into the savage but I think if I get another rim fire I am going to look into a sako quad in .17 and build it up nice but that would be costly.
It all comes down to money really. Nothing wrong with any of them. As far as I see it the savage is the cheapest, the ruger a little more expensive, and the quad (depending on where you buy) is the most expensive.
