Re: 350 Legend
Posted: 26 Nov 2019 14:26
I really looked forward to receiving my 77/44, but the experience ended up being the same as yours. It didn't take me a year to get rid of it. I should have held out for a Rem 788 in the 44 Mag, I bet I would have been happier.Jeff H wrote:Without intending to hurt anyone's feelings, disparage a favored maker or bursting any bubbles, my own personal experience with the 77/357 left me with the single most disappointing firearms purchase ever, with no contender for that title anywhere in my rear-view mirror.
I bought one new and messed with it for a year. For the money, the "finish" was sloppy and incomplete. I won't relate all the picky details, but it's a Ruger, right? One shouldn't expect the look of a custom gun, but this was pathetic.
Accuracy was mediocre when it was at its best, and that's with a lot of experimenting over the course of a year. The magazine didn't work right from the start and the trigger was awful. I fixed both of those issues, but the stiff bolt left me with a bruised cheek after I slapped the bolt-handle after firing the first round.
It was slower to reload than an H&R Handi-Rifle. Never got that fixed. OAL of cartridges is very strictly limited, but it did at least feed the RDO 350-190 (with shortened brass) and the NOE 360-180 OK. The stock was a complete wast of material. It crowded the left side of the barrel, so I relieved the barrel channel and the stock moved more to the right every time I removed more material.
I finally wrote Ruger and explained my issues - specifically the stock and never then heard back. Many months later, they called and asked how they could help. I told them I didn't know because the guy I sold it to didn't give me his number and he didn't care if it shot 4" groups at 50 yards (he said do) using jacketed bullets. I told him he was on his own because all I'd shot out of it was cast. Please note that this is completely atypical of Ruger service in my experience. I figured they saw "77/357" in the subject line of the e-mail and were afraid to open it. They are usually on the ball, just not this time.
What I loved about the gun - it was cute as a bug, light, slender and handy as all get-out. I just could not get it to consistently shoot under a couple inches at fifty yards and working the action was, well WORK. The 16" Rossi 92 I had was shorter, lighter, had a larger magazine capacity, was slicker'n snot and shot significantly better than the Ruger. The H&Rs I've had blew it out of the water for accuracy. Comparing it to my Contender would just be unfair.
Maybe I got a lemon or was "doing it wrong" or just not pushing all the right buttons, but I've made a lot of guns work, work well and shoot very, very well in my time - just not that one. After I'd tried for a year, I'd call it a $250 rifle, not a $750 rifle. No "hate" here, just what I think would been a more honest price for what I got.
I'm not just venting - rather providing a heads-up to anyone seduced by the platform, package or concept of this rifle - I know I was. It's compact, light and just a neat idea. Study up on the XXX/77 line and make sure you're OK with what you could be getting. Some people get them to shoot OK, but that stiff bolt makes it not so much a repeater.
I had not followed the 77/357 at all, so, back to the bolt action 350 Legend! Still, the bullet thing bothers me about it. Component crunch coming on with the next election, it always happens, might end up waiting on bullets.
