Ruger American Gen 2 6mm arc

I've got 3 of the Gen 2s. I like them better than the Gen 1s as far as looks go. My only gripes are the trigger, which is heavy and has a lot of creep, and the cheek riser, which is too low. You can replace the trigger with a Timney or a Jard, which I did. If you want the higher cheek rest, it will cost you $29.99 from Ruger. For the cost of these rifles, they should come with the extra cheek risers and stock length adapters like Savage does.
 
I've got 3 of the Gen 2s. I like them better than the Gen 1s as far as looks go. My only gripes are the trigger, which is heavy and has a lot of creep, and the cheek riser, which is too low. You can replace the trigger with a Timney or a Jard, which I did. If you want the higher cheek rest, it will cost you $29.99 from Ruger. For the cost of these rifles, they should come with the extra cheek risers and stock length adapters like Savage does.
It is amazing what changing out the trigger does for these rifles, whether Jard or Timney. I put a Timney in my 6 Creed and the first group I shot with 105 JLK's went .188".
 
I've had a handful of Gen 1 and two Gen 2's now. Yes triggers aren't great but ended up doing the poor man's trigger job by cutting the trigger spring back 2 coils and polishing the sear portion of the trigger piece. This mod alone I can get it down to .5 lb but lets you keep the range from there up to 3 lb and doesn't cost anything.

I have tried a few options like timney and the mcarbo trigger springs too. This seemed to be good enough for me, FWIW.
 
I was fondling one of these at Cabelas this evening. I know they shoot well, but I was not a fan of the gen 1 for some reason. The gen 2 looks pretty nice. The stock seemed flexy though seemed to have generous float so maybe not an issue? I know inexpensive gun so not going to be perfect, but Anybody shoot these with bipod have any issues?

Lou

I'm pleased with adjustments that Ruger made on Gen ii. Stock is stiffer and shooting unsuppressed (at moment) no flex in stock. Stock is more ergonomic for sure. The LOP kit is nice and have them on both rifles. When I try suppressed shooting I do think I'll like the weight kit. Bolt and handle are enough upgrades and was something I can avoid from prior model. Barrel is a thicker taper but is offset by the fluting. No accuracy differences in the rifles I've bought assuming due to same barrel making process and bedding.
 
I've only had Gen1 rifles, .300 BLK Ranch and 6mm CM Predator. I still use the rotary mag on the .300 BLK, and never had an issue. I really like the rifles, and they're pretty darn accurate.

I don't like the AR magazine versions, because it has AR magazine limitations. I get that the ARC was designed with those limits in mind, but I still don't like it. I'd just like a little liberty with seating depth if the throat allows. I don't like the mag limitations on my .300 BLK rifle either, but I'm living with it.

My buddy just got a Gen 2 Ranch in .224. It's a decent shooter as is, several of his loads for other rifles shooting MOA or better out the gate. He said he'd like a better trigger, he'll probably go Timney as he doesn't like the bladed trigger anyway.
 
I've only had Gen1 rifles, .300 BLK Ranch and 6mm CM Predator. I still use the rotary mag on the .300 BLK, and never had an issue. I really like the rifles, and they're pretty darn accurate.

I don't like the AR magazine versions, because it has AR magazine limitations. I get that the ARC was designed with those limits in mind, but I still don't like it. I'd just like a little liberty with seating depth if the throat allows. I don't like the mag limitations on my .300 BLK rifle either, but I'm living with it.

My buddy just got a Gen 2 Ranch in .224. It's a decent shooter as is, several of his loads for other rifles shooting MOA or better out the gate. He said he'd like a better trigger, he'll probably go Timney as he doesn't like the bladed trigger anyway.

Yes I agree the AR mag is an attraction at first to not have to switch mags if used also for an AR15 in the arsenal . They are clunky to use though in these Rugers (don't have experience with any other AR mag fed bolt) but that doesn't seem to matter much precision wise for me. I ended up going the AICS adapter from Ruger and that improved the feeding immensely. I never did change seating depth after as I've got a regular 5 shot 5/8" group with a 69 Nosler CC load at the AR Mag depth.
 
Last edited:
I'm pleased with adjustments that Ruger made on Gen ii. Stock is stiffer and shooting unsuppressed (at moment) no flex in stock. Stock is more ergonomic for sure. The LOP kit is nice and have them on both rifles. When I try suppressed shooting I do think I'll like the weight kit. Bolt and handle are enough upgrades and was something I can avoid from prior model. Barrel is a thicker taper but is offset by the fluting. No accuracy differences in the rifles I've bought assuming due to same barrel making process and bedding.
Should note that the standard barrel is not 20". More like 18.75-19" to muzzle crown. I think Ruger is counting the muzzle brake in that length.
 
Thanks for the posts - I've been giving some thought as to which rifle to build/buy for my up coming 20 caliber addiction. I'm going to try the Ruger thanks to this thread. Keep the info com'n.
 
Top