Ruger Hawkeye vs. Early MKII

[98s1lightning]

I'm considering a Stainless Ruger for my sons 1st rifle.

Read some review articles with complaints about the Hawkeye LC6 (?) Trigger.....

I've got enough years shooting experience where a bad trigger is going to bother me.
Will it come down to 4-5lbs? (Its adjustable I believe) 4.5# would be OK for beginner scope gun

I'm wondering if the Hawkeye is something I should avoid and go for the older MKII because of trigger??????

I don't want to have to dump more money into trigger.

Its going to be a under 250yd hunting rifle.

I never liked the 3 position safety but am seeking one now, its nice to be able to see mechanical condition when looking over for us to pass rifle off to each other.

Also not really feeling a tang safety Browning A-Bolt for beginners as you need to go hot to unload, I don't want to introduce that scenerio.

Ruger hasn't let me down over the years so maybe I'm over thinking it??

I know sometime quality goes away on box store rifles and depending in the years produced quality can be better or worse. I consider them better than an average box store rifle though.

 

[nksmfamjp]

My Hawkeye 6.5x55 is about 6 yrs old, but the trigger is great. Maybe 3.5lbs. I can measure it, if you want. It's for sale.

 

[MagnumManiac]

I have both, early MK II all have Timney replacements set exactly at 2lbs. I also bead blasted all of mine, too shiny as standard.
My newer Hawkeyes have the LC6 trigger, which I find heavy & creepy, YMMV.
It's not a game changer, have seen worse triggers.

Cheers.