Canadian Ranger Rifles, 2007

[K31]

I never cared much for that Ruger stock, it seems to flexible. I remember looking on the Rangers website a few years ago, and it showed a No.4 converted to 7.62, with a scope, bipod, synthetic stock, etc. They said that consideration was being given to converting the stock of No.4's to 7.62. What a mistake! Imagine the expense, and all the other "improvements" would make the rifle weigh even more than it does now. I think STEVO has the right idea about the Savage, but I still think a laminated wood stock would be better in the arctic. I see fewer problems with Savage and Ruger rifles than most other commercial rifles, but I have no idea how the new Savage Accutrigger would hold up under rough service. I think the standard trigger would probably be better.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Claven2]

I never cared much for that Ruger stock, it seems to flexible. I remember looking on the Rangers website a few years ago, and it showed a No.4 converted to 7.62, with a scope, bipod, synthetic stock, etc. They said that consideration was being given to converting the stock of No.4's to 7.62. What a mistake! Imagine the expense, and all the other "improvements" would make the rifle weigh even more than it does now. I think STEVO has the right idea about the Savage, but I still think a laminated wood stock would be better in the arctic. I see fewer problems with Savage and Ruger rifles than most other commercial rifles, but I have no idea how the new Savage Accutrigger would hold up under rough service. I think the standard trigger would probably be better.

I agree. A modern laminate would be FAR superior to Zytel. If a choice had to be made between a Savage and a Ruger, I would suggest a Ruger with some mods to include:

-BEAD BLASTED matte Stainless version.
-Trigguer guard and floorplate assembly changed to the stronger 1-piece steel assembly available from Brownells.
-NO SCOPE. Devise a peep sight for the rifle. Scopes won;t take the abuse some of the inuit will subject the rifle to.
-7.62 as a minimum. NOT 5.56. There be polar bears up there!
-Actions should be gauged to ensure they do not have a negative slope on the sides (common on Rugers) - this prevents bedding. All these rifles should be bedded IMHO.
-Ditch the stock safety and go for the Mauser-type flag. WAY more reliable.