Winchester M70 vs Ruger RSM/M77 in .375

[WisconsinKen]

Hello everyone.
My current .375 H&H is a Remington 700 Custom shop. I would like to add a CRF .375 to the stable next.
It seems like the Winchester M70 is the benchmark that most CRF rifles are judged against. How does the Ruger RSM/M77 stack up against the M70? Most M77s I have handled do not seem to have the fit and finish of the M70s I have handled but I have only handled a few in my defense.
This is probably like asking blonde vs brunette but which rifle do you all think is the best between the two and why?

 

[318AE]

I’d go with the M70. I like the RSM M77 a lot, it just seems too stout in 375. The weight feels more appropriate to me in 416 Rigby or 458 Lott, and even with those, it’s stout. Others will likely talk about the recoil lug etc etc.

There are no bad choices, but the Winchester M70 375 is the classic.

 

[Tokoloshe Safaris]

M-70 .375 H&H proper betting job properly torqued action locktight screws and you have a damned near perfect rifle.

Lom

 

[Tokoloshe Safaris]

Meant to type bedding. Not betting.
Lon

 

[cajunchefray]

Hello Sir,

Based on experience, amongst the 3 versions of .375 H&H Magnums, from Ruger (1) and Winchester (2):

-The Ruger RSM .375 H&H Magnum is a nice rifle, great wood (usually) and the integral milled quarter rib, is nicely finished. It weighs too much for a .375 H&H, typically close to 10 pounds +, and the stock design is "block like".

Nice to look at but unwieldy handling. I sold mine.

-The Winchester Safari Express is a good rifle, no doubt, but the large barrel contour, and the large stock make it a bit heavier than needed for a 375 H&H (about 9.5 pounds). Still, I could shoot it better than the Ruger, and I wouldn't not use one to hunt.

-The Winchester Alaskan .375 H&H is the best in this category, in my humble opinion.
Lighter barrel profile, overall lighter weight (8.5 to 8.75 pounds) and the ergonomics just work for me (medium height skinny 170-pound guy).

While I am not a fan of Monte Carlo stocks, this rifle just "fits", and I can mount the rifle, find the crosshairs instantly with a low mounted low power scope, and fire accurately and quickly.

Can cycle the bolt from the shoulder effortlessly, and the new MOA trigger is nice.
For rugged hunting reliability, some replace the trigger with a more traditional Timney

Quarter size groups at 100 yards with a moderate handload with Siearra 300 grain Game Kings, or Nosler Partitions behind a Leupold 2-7 scope.

Winchester Alaskan is the best of the bunch. Currently dealers have a new run of these in stock.

You will find the metal machining with tight tolerances. Feeding, extraction, and ejection just work every time, all the key attributes of CRF.

Winchester does not, nor will not pay me for this. I have tried several .375 H&H rifles. This is my favorite.

Good luck with your search for a CRF .375 H&H!

 

[Tokoloshe Safaris]

Hello Sir,

Based on experience, amongst the 3 versions of .375 H&H Magnums, from Ruger (1) and Winchester (2):

-The Ruger RSM .375 H&H Magnum is a nice rifle, great wood (usually) and the integral milled quarter rib, is nicely finished. It weighs too much for a .375 H&H, typically close to 10 pounds +, and the stock design is "block like".

Nice to look at but unwieldy handling. I sold mine.

-The Winchester Safari Express is a good rifle, no doubt, but the large barrel contour, and the large stock make it a bit heavier than needed for a 375 H&H (about 9.5 pounds). Still, I could shoot it better than the Ruger, and I wouldn't not use one to hunt.

-The Winchester Alaskan .375 H&H is the best in this category, in my humble opinion.
Lighter barrel profile, overall lighter weight (8.5 to 8.75 pounds) and the ergonomics just work for me (medium height skinny 170-pound guy).

While I am not a fan of Monte Carlo stocks, this rifle just "fits", and I can mount the rifle, find the crosshairs instantly with a low mounted low power scope, and fire accurately and quickly.

Can cycle the bolt from the shoulder effortlessly, and the new MOA trigger is nice.
For rugged hunting reliability, some replace the trigger with a more traditional Timney

Quarter size groups at 100 yards with a moderate handload with Siearra 300 grain Game Kings, or Nosler Partitions behind a Leupold 2-7 scope.

Winchester Alaskan is the best of the bunch. Currently dealers have a new run of these in stock.

You will find the metal machining with tight tolerances. Feeding, extraction, and ejection just work every time, all the key attributes of CRF.

Winchester does not, nor will not pay me for this. I have tried several .375 H&H rifles. This is my favorite.

Good luck with your search for a CRF .375 H&H!

A question, with the monteCarlo stock can you see the iron sights?

 

[cajunchefray]

Hello everyone.
My current .375 H&H is a Remington 700 Custom shop. I would like to add a CRF .375 to the stable next.
It seems like the Winchester M70 is the benchmark that most CRF rifles are judged against. How does the Ruger RSM/M77 stack up against the M70? Most M77s I have handled do not seem to have the fit and finish of the M70s I have handled but I have only handled a few in my defense.
This is probably like asking blonde vs brunette but which rifle do you all think is the best between the two and why?

Another thought:

I prefer Brunettes. But that's just me.

 

[Ruraldoc]

I bought a Model 70 Alaskan in 375 and it’s just about perfect in 375.

Mine will feed and eject empty cartridges from the magazine as well as any profile bullet. My gun was made about two years ago in Portugal by BACO so it’s not not a New Haven gun but it’s a great working rifle.

I killed a big wild boar with it last week because I just like hunting with it.

 

[Ruraldoc]

I prefer the new Alaskan to the heavier Express Model 70 in 375. It feels much better balanced and lively in your hands.

The Heavier Express Model 70s are best suited to 416 and 458 in my opinion.

 

[Ruraldoc]

The big Ruger is better suited to 416 Rigby and 458 Lott, not a 375.

 

[cajunchefray]

A question, with the monteCarlo stock can you see the iron sights?

Interestingly, yes, I can. I am not a fan of the folding iron sight on the rifle (looks like a Williams, or weak knock off) but I test fired with and without scope to validate the POA/ POI.

I think Winchester engineered the proper geometry for front sight height, rear sight, and Monte Carlo.

I was actually surprised that the irons worked well. My eyesight sucks, so this is at 50 yards +/- range.

 

[WisconsinKen]

Hello Sir,

Based on experience, amongst the 3 versions of .375 H&H Magnums, from Ruger (1) and Winchester (2):

-The Ruger RSM .375 H&H Magnum is a nice rifle, great wood (usually) and the integral milled quarter rib, is nicely finished. It weighs too much for a .375 H&H, typically close to 10 pounds +, and the stock design is "block like".

Nice to look at but unwieldy handling. I sold mine.

-The Winchester Safari Express is a good rifle, no doubt, but the large barrel contour, and the large stock make it a bit heavier than needed for a 375 H&H (about 9.5 pounds). Still, I could shoot it better than the Ruger, and I wouldn't not use one to hunt.

-The Winchester Alaskan .375 H&H is the best in this category, in my humble opinion.
Lighter barrel profile, overall lighter weight (8.5 to 8.75 pounds) and the ergonomics just work for me (medium height skinny 170-pound guy).

While I am not a fan of Monte Carlo stocks, this rifle just "fits", and I can mount the rifle, find the crosshairs instantly with a low mounted low power scope, and fire accurately and quickly.

Can cycle the bolt from the shoulder effortlessly, and the new MOA trigger is nice.
For rugged hunting reliability, some replace the trigger with a more traditional Timney

Quarter size groups at 100 yards with a moderate handload with Siearra 300 grain Game Kings, or Nosler Partitions behind a Leupold 2-7 scope.

Winchester Alaskan is the best of the bunch. Currently dealers have a new run of these in stock.

You will find the metal machining with tight tolerances. Feeding, extraction, and ejection just work every time, all the key attributes of CRF.

Winchester does not, nor will not pay me for this. I have tried several .375 H&H rifles. This is my favorite.

Good luck with your search for a CRF .375 H&H!

What you indicate on the RSM is kind of my feelings on my 700. The barrel feels like they got a deal on M1 Ambrahms tank barrel blanks. If I am shooting from sticks or resting it, it is a dream. But it is SOOO barrel heavy.
Thanks for your input. I am looking at doing a trade with a forum member for a NIB Alaskan.

 

[cajunchefray]

The big Ruger is better suited to 416 Rigby and 458 Lott, not a 375.

Very True about the Ruger RSM. In .458 Lott, seemed properly proportioned, and weighted.

I had dreams of reboring a .375 H&H to .416 Remington. Then costs feasibility got in the way.

So then I went to Winchester.

 

[cajunchefray]

What you indicate on the RSM is kind of my feelings on my 700. The barrel feels like they got a deal on M1 Ambrahms tank barrel blanks. If I am shooting from sticks or resting it, it is a dream. But it is SOOO barrel heavy.
Thanks for your input. I am looking at doing a trade with a forum member for a NIB Alaskan.

Good deal. You will not regret the Winchester 70 Alaskan.
I'm shopping now for another.

 

[Ruraldoc]

A question, with the monteCarlo stock can you see the iron sights?

The iron sights on my Alaskan work fine with the Monte Carlo. I have Talley Quick Release rings on my rifle and it works with or without the scope.

If I were going to change anything about the rifle, it would be to move the front swivel to the barrel and install a heavier fiixed rear sight.

But I shoot the scope 99% of the time and the irons are just for back up for me. But they do work well.

 

[Tokoloshe Safaris]

Interestingly, yes, I can. I am not a fan of the folding iron sight on the rifle (looks like a Williams, or weak knock off) but I test fired with and without scope to validate the POA/ POI.

I think Winchester engineered the proper geometry for front sight height, rear sight, and Monte Carlo.

I was actually surprised that the irons worked well. My eyesight sucks, so this is at 50 yards +/- range.

Thank you for the reply. It is good to hear that the iron sights work. If Iron sights were tp be my primary sight I would replace it with a non folding.

Lon

 

[rgsiii]

The Rifleman's Rifle--Winchester Model 70.

 

[WisconsinKen]

Maybe the Ruger lovers are in a different time zone but the consensus seems pretty much for the M70. Why are RSMs commmanding such a premium compared to a similar M70 in .375?

 

[Nkawu]

I don’t mean to derail the thread but how does the Ruger M77 African in 375R compare to the M70 and M77 RSM using the same metrics; proportions, weight, sight usability etc?

 

[Razorback]

Ruger RSM is way too bulky in 375. Winchester Alaskan is just right. Recently picked up this pair for my two boys and was very impressed with the fit and finish for the price point.