Re: Why does this call my name . . . . .
So here's a range report on the Gunsite Ruger rifle.
As mentioned above, it feels nice and handy. Definitely a carry/offhand rifle, not really suited to bench. Marginal for prone shooting because of long magazine.
Also note that I shot this after shooting my TRG much of yesterday and that was a mistake. It's probably like getting out of an Aston Martin and into a Trabant. Had I done it the other way around... I might be much more complimentary.
This rifle is set up with a 1" Nikon Buckmasters scope that has mil dots. OK scope for price. Nothing spectacular. But it’s what the owner had available. I am trying to talk him into some better glass, but we’ll see.
Overall, I like the package and think as an 'offhand' rifle, hunting rifle or patrol rifle w. a little more punch than an AR, it's a neat thing. Gunsite seems to be selling it as the fulfillment of Jeff Cooper’s scout rifle concept. It does that well.
My likes: Compact, light, nice looking. Should be pretty rugged. I like the pre-threaded barrel as it’s well-suited to a suppressor. As I mentioned above, I think this would make an excellent patrol rifle, filling the gap between an AR with iron sights or a red dot and the full-up precision rifle. Sort of a ‘designated marksman’ rifle with the right glass…. But more on this below. As a hunting rifle, I think it would be very good. Though to put any kind of hunting scope on it, you have to remove the Pic rail.
On the subject of the Pic Rail... it's definitely mounted forward for a red dot or a long-eye-relief scope. This goes against my personal preferences. I think red dot scopes are ideally suited for close-in work. Where the M4, MP5, etc. are ideal. But on a .308 that should be accurate to several hundred yards, this rifle cries out for a 1.5-6x scope with a good reticle. But to mount any traditional scopes... you have to take off the pic rail... and you probably have to find some kind of new rings. The rifle comes with a set of (different height) 1" rings. The ring heights are staggered because of the receiver design. I don't think you can get 30mm or 34mm rings, limiting optics selection severely. A long Pic rail on top might help... but does anyone make one?
My dislikes: The magazine fit is appalling. And I don't like the 'rotate' in M-14-style of mag. That's just a personal preference. Maybe just this rifle, but the mag rattles around like a baby toy. And it’s noisy. Worse, if you put ANY pressure on it (resting against a front sandbag on a bench, for example) will cause a feed jam. This gun would definitely benefit from some closer-fitting polymer mags as the steel magazine is like an amplifier. I am fine w. polymer bottom 'metal'. No worries about rust...
The feeding is also very rough. Keep in mind that I came off the TRG to shoot this… so I may be spoiled, but I feel it should be better. Prone, cycling the bolt sucked. The geometry was poor and if the magazine touched a sandbag or the ground... jam. Standing, it seemed to work ok, but had to be manhandled and sure didn’t feel smooth. This may well be the magazine’s fault. Again, I think this rifle is best shot anywhere BUT from a bench or prone.
And, I dislike the optics mounting setup for reasons listed above. With irons, though, this is moot. And if these sell well, aftermarket will come up with some very cool solutions, so this is probably moot.
Shooting: Trigger is crisp, but nothing spectacular. For its intended purpose, a crisp trigger w. some pull required is likely a good thing. Break was predictable. I don’t know if it is adjustable. I don’t want to play w. it at this point in any case.
I expected a pretty hefty recoil, but it wasn’t bad at all. Certainly no worse than any hunting rifle and utterly controllable. I don’t know if the flash hider has any ‘compensating’ built in, but it’s pleasant to shoot.
It dialed in just fine, shooting at 50 yards.
I shot two groups after sighting in. One with some generic .308 Ball and another group w. Black Hills Match .308 Amax 168. Surprisingly, it shot better with the generic ball, which shot a ragged 3/4 inch hole in the center of the target. Unfortunately, I didn’t save the first target. The AMAX seemed to shoot every second round as a flyer. See target. 3 shots in about 1/3rd of an inch… and 2 flyers touching each other. I was shooting off bags prone with the rifle fully supported. I didn’t pull any shots, all were on target when the trigger broke.
I expected better accuracy from the AMAX’s… but obviously don’t take 5 rounds Ball and 5 of AMAX as a comprehensive test. I am going to work w. the owner to load some rounds for this rifle and I bet we can dial it in to sub-MOA and we'll next be shooting to 100 and 200. My guess is that accuracy is going to be great w. handloads, but so far the flyers puzzle me.
Overall, I think it’s a neat gun and a neat concept. I doubt I would shell out for one myself, but the owner loves it, which is what counts. For the price (and I don’t know what these sell for), I’d probably stick w. my recently-acquired c. 1970’s Remington Model 600 and throw a poly stock and some great glass on it. IMHO, this rifle cries out for good (and suitable) optics. Before I’d put the Ruger Gunsite rifle in a cruiser, I’d want to wring out more accuracy and prove it’s reliability and accuracy more.
But my likes outweigh my dislikes and I think it would grow on me as I got more familiar with it.
Cheers,
Sirhr
Just for grins, here it is next to a Model 600 Mohawk Remington that I bought not long ago.
