Has the Ruger American Gen 2 been out long enough to be considered “proven”?

[FunkEyeMissed]

Tell me why the gen 2 American sucks and I should buy a tikka instead. Other than the typical “smoother action and better trigger”.

 

[Pilsner]

I have one in 5.56 and its a tack driver. My neighbor brought her 8 year old daughter up and she did first round hits out to 700 yards. Dont like the stock but the rifle is money.

 

[Castle Rock]

Well the smoother action and better trigger is a given, as is the crappy magazine system, shitty stock design, but those damn rough and ugly things do shoot really well.

 

[BLJ]

but those damn rough and ugly things do shoot really well.

22 ARC

 

[Castle Rock]

Yep, last week I shot a sub MOA group with 75 grain factory ammo at 700 yards with a mates gun.
I have one on order

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Tell me why the gen 2 American sucks and I should buy a tikka instead. Other than the typical “smoother action and better trigger”.

Because you would not be asking this question about the Tikka. They just work.

Maybe Ruger really has finally gotten something right with the gen 2, but my experience with Rugers over the last three decades has been pretty poor. Triggers that suck (I just had the trigger on a No. 1 completely rebuilt because it not only sucked, but would get stuck and become unable to fire). Barrels that aren’t worth a crap.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[Deere_Man]

My hunting buddy purchased the 5.56 ranch and loves it. Shoots great for him, a perfect truck gun with a Vortex Crossfire 2 3-9 scope. Groundhogs, coyotes, crows, deer, and feral cats all hate it though.

 

[PredatorSlayer]

Because you would not be asking this question about the Tikka. They just work.

Maybe Ruger really has finally gotten something right with the gen 2, but my experience with Rugers over the last three decades has been pretty poor. Triggers that suck (I just had the trigger on a No. 1 completely rebuilt because it not only sucked, but would get stuck and become unable to fire). Barrels that aren’t worth a crap.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

They don’t always though. Some don’t shoot, the triggers aren’t great and neither are the stocks. This forum has romanticized Tikkas and put them up on a pedestal. Often times they end up as nothing more than a donor action. They have become what the rem 700 used to be.

 

[Long84]

From my experience. I now own two Gen 2 Predators. They both shoot great. My biggest complaints are the magazine system and the triggers. I learned to deal with the magazine flaws, but, I just couldn't get over the spongy trigger. Thankfully Timney makes a replacement. Comparing the price of the Ruger + Timney against a Tikka T3X lite and there's not a lot of difference. It all boils down to what you want and what is available.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

They don’t always though. Some don’t shoot, the triggers aren’t great and neither are the stocks. This forum has romanticized Tikkas and put them up on a pedestal. Often times they end up as nothing more than a donor action. They have become what the rem 700 used to be.

Thankfully this is just my opinion. And admittedly, it is based off a small sample size. I’ve only owned or fired 5-6 Rugers in my lifetime. None of them had good triggers. Even the newest one (a No. 1 made in 2014) not only had a broken trigger, but doesn’t have an exceptional barrel. I heard that Ruger finally figured out how to make a decent barrel around the turn of the millennium, but Sako/Tikka has been doing that for a lot longer than that.

This forum is a different place than the rest of the shooting world. It’s full of fairly-well-off serious hunters who are very comfortable customizing everything possible to make themselves $5000 rifles. But, even if you are correct when you say, “Often times they end up as nothing more than a donor action”, that is still more than can be said for a M77 or RAR.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[Balderdash]

Tell me why the gen 2 American sucks and I should buy a tikka instead. Other than the typical “smoother action and better trigger”.

That's not enough? Seems a lot to me.

In addition to whats been stated, I'd say better barrels in terms of not getting fouled quickly, a more reliable action, and better aftermarket parts/modifications availability.

Set up a RAR for a friend's daughter. Cleaned factory oil out of it before shooting. Shot around 60 shots through it with factory fodder. Went to clean it before I turned it over and the difference in both accumulation and interior finish between that and one of my Tikkas that had shot hundreds more rounds of the same ammo before cleaning was significant. And the bolt had a habit of binding if not worked very carefully, thus inhibiting quick follow up shots.

Not saying they don't shoot accurately or that they don't fit a niche; however, IMO, the extra for a Tikka is small in the grand scheme of ammo, optics, tags, etc, etc, and very well worth it.

 

[Balderdash]

They don’t always though. Some don’t shoot, the triggers aren’t great and neither are the stocks. This forum has romanticized Tikkas and put them up on a pedestal. Often times they end up as nothing more than a donor action. They have become what the rem 700 used to be.

Its not just this forum; it seems widespread in the gun world. As they say, 50 million Elvis fans can't be all wrong! I was late to the Tikka party, but I was on it long before I found RS.

I've worked with 20+ OEM Tikkas, many my own that I still have; several have had multiple barrels. Certainly, my sample size is small in the grand scheme of things, but not a single one wouldn't shoot tight groups with minimal finessing or function as it was supposed to. I don't doubt that there's folks out there who have had poor experiences with Tikkas; however, the relevant question in this context would be what percentage of Tikka buyers are displeased with their purchase over time vs the percentage of RAR buyers who are displeased with thier purchase?

 

[CMF]

I like our 6.5 so far, smoothed the action with some compound and the kids cycling the bolt 100 times. Didn't like the stock mag, but picked up and aftermarket.

 

[SloppyJ]

Way more aftermarket support for the Tikka. But if you're trying to justify what's already been all but proven, just get the Ruger since you want it so badly.

 

[FunkEyeMissed]

Its not just this forum; it seems widespread in the gun world. As they say, 50 million Elvis fans can't be all wrong! I was late to the Tikka party, but I was on it long before I found RS.

I've worked with 20+ OEM Tikkas, many my own that I still have; several have had multiple barrels. Certainly, my sample size is small in the grand scheme of things, but not a single one wouldn't shoot tight groups with minimal finessing or function as it was supposed to. I don't doubt that there's folks out there who have had poor experiences with Tikkas; however, the relevant question in this context would be what percentage of Tikka buyers are displeased with their purchase over time vs the percentage of RAR buyers who are displeased with thier purchase?

I like the way you frame the question at the end of the percentage of buyers displeased with their purchase that’s a good way to think about and kind of what I was getting at in a roundabout way

 

[Deere_Man]

I like the Gen 1 Ruger just fine. I have a Gen 1 5.56 Ranch and a 350L Ranch. The only upgrade that I see on the Gen 2 American, that I like, is the three position safety that locks the bolt into the down position.

 

[FunkEyeMissed]

Way more aftermarket support for the Tikka. But if you're trying to justify what's already been all but proven, just get the Ruger since you want it so badly.

Don’t necessarily have my mind set on the ruger but on a surface level it would seem it packs slightly more value into the oem rifle with a more ergonomic stock, rail,threaded barrel, muzzle break, AICS and already shorter barrel. This seems more enticing to me than a smoother action, as long as the RAR is a reliable feeder

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Don’t necessarily have my mind set on the ruger but on a surface level it would seem it packs slightly more value into the oem rifle with a more ergonomic stock, rail,threaded barrel, muzzle break, AICS and already shorter barrel. This seems more enticing to me than a smoother action, as long as the RAR is a reliable feeder

I think I read that next year’s Tikkas are supposed to have more short barrel and threaded options? Not sure though.

The basic Tikka synthetic stock is nicer than the Ruger synthetic ones I handled, but it does have a standard LOP that is too long for what I am used to.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[SloppyJ]

Don’t necessarily have my mind set on the ruger but on a surface level it would seem it packs slightly more value into the oem rifle with a more ergonomic stock, rail,threaded barrel, muzzle break, AICS and already shorter barrel. This seems more enticing to me than a smoother action, as long as the RAR is a reliable feeder

I understand the allure. The reliability isn't even in the same category though. If you want to get down to it, look at the life cycle cost. The tikka can be made into whatever you want down the road and will last you a lifetime. I could pinch the Ruger stock and make it touch the barrel, I don't think it's more ergonomic or functional, just looks "cooler".

The new Tikkas come threaded so make sure to find one of those unless you're going to chop it anyway.

 

[Castle Rock]

The other budget option that is much nicer than the Ruger is the Sauer 100 or Mauser M18