Ruger Precision Rifle

[WARFAB]

Apparently the Buffalo gun center got a couple RPRs. My father got one of them and now he's looking for some scope rings that would be appropriate. Sounds like the trigger is nice. He's saying it will need some tall rings or a way to mount the scope up high. I'll be checking it out tomorrow and I'll post some detail photos and general impressions.

[WARFAB]

Checked out my father's RPR over lunch. I'm a service rifle competitor, so the F class and true long range competitors will probably have more nitpicks than me. As someone who is used to shooting a Geissele trigger set to a service rifle legal 4.5 pounds, I'm saying the Ruger trigger is very nice. I'm guessing it broke at like 3 pounds or so. Take up the safety blade gismo and you hit a solid second stage that breaks nice and crisp. I didn't notice any creep. My father is no stranger to tack drivers and has a number of rifles with nice triggers and he thinks it's nice too. That's straight out of the box without having had anything done to it. The bolt throw seems pretty nice, but it's not perfectly smooth. This was something I was trying to get a feel for since the Ruger American action this rifle is based off of has a double cam bolt. The Tubb 2000 was/is liked by match rifle shooters because it has a double cam bolt that is really easy to work for rapids. The RPR bolt has some "bumps" you have to push it through as you work it. No idea whether or not that would smooth out over time. I don't have a lot of experience with high dollar long range rifles, so I don't have much to compare it to. There were some milling marks left on the bolt in some of the cutouts. Nothing super sloppy, but if you're picky it's there. The contact surfaces of the bolt were all nice and smooth. Overall, as an AR competitor my impression was pretty favorable. The fit and finish look like what you'd expect on a black rifle.

My father had been looking for a new rifle for a while and was contemplating an AR30 before Ruger announced it would be releasing the precision rifle. I checked out an AR30 at Camp Perry and my general impression was that it was very industrial looking in appearance and overall fit and finish. Things like the visible weld marks on the (small) bolt handle and the rather crude safety mechanism just made it seem rough around the edges. The trigger on the AR30 display model I looked at didn't seems as nice as the RPR, and I'd say that the overall fit and finish weren't nearly as nice as the RPR. The AR30 retails for 3X the costs of the RPR. The AR30 is obviously a totally different animal that you'd never want to try to carry over your shoulder, but my impression of the price/quality ratio is that the RPR is way ahead of the AR30.

The big question is how it shoots. I might be able to report back on that after next weekend.

[thughes]

No gun porn?

[PY-Tactical]

Like this?

[WARFAB]

That's a much better photo than anything I got. I'll upload some lousy detail shots eventually. I couldn't find good lighting to take pictures.

[PY-Tactical]

Here's the RPR after hanging everything on it.

[Brendan2904]

Very nice!

[Meketrefe]

Nice rifle. Is that a larue QD mount? Don't you find it too high? Also be careful, overtime it bites on the rails.

[PY-Tactical]

Nice rifle. Is that a larue QD mount? Don't you find it too high? Also be careful, overtime it bites on the rails.

Borrowed off my woodchuck AR, high mount was to clear Gen 1 Magpul buis. Took off the LaRue from the AR after three years and a few hundred rounds and no marks or scarring on the AR rail at all. This is rifle I borrowed scope and bipod from:

[Meketrefe]

PY the rifle is looking great!!.

The mount is fine but I guess it depends on the finishing, how tight and how much shooting. I am not telling you this to be nagging about it and in good faith.
I know how much you like the rifle and I respect that. I just put some comments sometimes that someone can consider and perhaps
help them. I am not saying things to be a smart alex or annoying.

Let me explain why...

Larue speed lever uses a crude design with small steel cams that are biting on the rail/reciever. This is how this is designed.
It is not a bad mount but, "by design", it is not the best one could do neither. I don't care about blemishes and dings
on my rifles but I also don't want to be doing them on purpose. This depends on the hardness and finishing on the receivers
but I don't think this is the most solid design anyway.




Other designs provide a larger and wider surface area in one piece or two piece bars cut to match the rail's lip that offer even
pressure all around. Nothing presses and rotates at the same time using a small area against the receiver therefore
"biting" on it and relying on that small area for support.
Instead the tear and wear goes to that piece that is designed for that purpose, and not the receiver. IMO the way it should be.




In a bolt action I would consider tall rings or a heavier lower mount w/o a cantilever that is more sturdy for heavy use.
Also something lower to lower the center of gravity and bringing the bore and the optical axis closer that is a general directive of
precision shooting. When the heavy pounding starts a heavier sturdier system is going to help keeping that zero overtime.

[PY-Tactical]

Don't worry Meckky, I know you are just trying to look out for me. If anyone knows precision shooting, it's you...

I wondered why the Larue mount never marred the anodizing on the AR upper I took the scope off from. Thought maybe the levers were something non ferrous and soft but no, they are magnetic steel.

I was saving for a precision rifle build and was only part way there when the RPR came out, instantly fitting the budget I had saved so far. And then never thought I would find one until after the end of the year. Just don't have the money right now for a good scope and rings. Saving for a Vortex, Burris, or high end Bushnell. (A grand plus I figure.) The Millet will have to do until then. That Millet on the AR always got a bit murky at full magnification but it was a mid price point scope and you get what you pay for when it comes to optics. I could afford another Millet but don't really want one.
The scope rail is replaceable though on the RPR so it could be changed later on. I was hoping someone will come out with a steel rail for it anyway.
I have stored boxes upon boxes of AR parts and could build several from parts on hand. I need to set back up and sell off inventory to finance optics on the RPR.

[Meketrefe]

NP mang. I am just trying to see if you can avoid unpleasent surprises. Before you torque it down push the mount to the front and perhaps this way will never see a scuff after
the pounding starts. So tell me, how is the scope mount? is it integral or can be replaced independent of the reciever? Is it aluminum?
If it can come apart then I am sure soon we will see a steel one that perhaps can be bedded to the action.
The rifle has the potential to have a huge following. I hope that is the case because if accuracy is consistent it is a good price for all it offers.

[PY-Tactical]

Rail is Part #83 in schematic, held down by TORX screws, is aluminum. 20 MOA.

[Meketrefe]

Thanks! that is actually great news because I am sure someone will come up with a steel rail if the manufacturer doesn't do it first.

[WARFAB]

Anyone have suggestions/recommendations on how to mount a scope with a 50mm objective lens without breaking the bank? It needs to be higher ro allow clearance, but it seems like adding risers complicates the setup and adds more places where things could potentially move.