Ruger vs Hammerli, and both vs ME

My point here is that both guns are capable of all good tens at 50, but maybe the shooter is not always.

A while back, 208s Hammerli with a dot - the 9 was called, I think it was about the seventh shot






Ruger MkII with irons, long heavy taper target barrel, trigger job too.  Two shots were called, one of them was yelled, Aaarrrgh!.  Neither were last shots. 

Jack,
I started out with Ruger MKII for BE. Was regularly shooting 880's with it after I made Master (less than 1 year). Personal best was 889 with it. Switched to the 208 and broke into the 890's. Personal best was 895. It's more about pulling the trigger than the pistol being shot. Those are nice targets!
Jon

Jon, was it the gun or the continued experience that gave the increase?

Experience. My Ruger had excellent trigger and shot sub inch 50 yd groups. I just had opportunity to get like new 208 and took advantage of the opportunity. I have many .22's now and shoot same scores with all of them. I've always believed in shooter not the gun. 
Jon

Jon Eulette wrote:Experience. My Ruger had excellent trigger and shot sub inch 50 yd groups. I just had opportunity to get like new 208 and took advantage of the opportunity. I have many .22's now and shoot same scores with all of them. I've always believed in shooter not the gun. 
Jon

but you have the most of which model =]

I plead the 5th.....208s ;l)
Jon

Jon Eulette wrote:I've always believed in shooter not the gun. 
Jon

That gets my vote for pistolsmith quote of the year! 

I used to swear at my Ruger, but once I got the Hammerli, there was only myself to blame.

Instead you should ask who would give up their Hammerli for a Ruger. 

Only then you will find the truth.  

I am considering buying a 208.  The 208 with the two stage trigger is a lot more expensive that the 208 with the single stage trigger.  So is the two stage worth it? 

Don't know that it matters but I now shoot a S&W 41 and am looking to decrease the weight of the gun a bit to see it helps me improve my scores. My 41 weighs 53 oz. all decked out.  I have also heard that the 208 may be too light....? 

I too am sure it is the shooter more than the gun, but I don't see any problem in trying to optimize your equipment!

LSM 124 wrote:I am considering buying a 208.  The 208 with the two stage trigger is a lot more expensive that the 208 with the single stage trigger.  So is the two stage worth it? 

Don't know that it matters but I now shoot a S&W 41 and am looking to decrease the weight of the gun a bit to see it helps me improve my scores. My 41 weighs 53 oz. all decked out.  I have also heard that the 208 may be too light....? 

I too am sure it is the shooter more than the gun, but I don't see any problem in trying to optimize your equipment!

Ask Jon which model he shoots currntly:looks great:

The s is more spendy cause of the 2 stage and the ability to adjust the trigger position forward and aft

Chris Miceli wrote:

Jon Eulette wrote:Experience. My Ruger had excellent trigger and shot sub inch 50 yd groups. I just had opportunity to get like new 208 and took advantage of the opportunity. I have many .22's now and shoot same scores with all of them. I've always believed in shooter not the gun. 
Jon

but you have the most of which model =]

S&W=4

Ruger=3

Browning=2

High Standard=1

Pistols that end with a vowel=0   To be fair. If they made them for people with real sized hands I might own a couple.