Ruger No. 1

[ligonierbill]

I am thinking of adding one to my collection. They are pretty, but I understand it is literally hit or miss on their accuracy. Can folks here who have or have had one share their experience? Regarding new ones, only a limited caliber selection is being made for Lipsey's. If I buy one, it will be a .243 (long story), which is fairly common on line for what seem like reasonable prices.

[kraigwy]

I have one in 204 Ruger, I got it when the 204 first came out. I love it, accurate and the 204 is super fast. Great PD gun.

[mete]

There used to be a problem caused by the way forend attachment was designed . Has that been corrected ? In any case various methods to correct it have been made.

[Tony Z]

I've had a Ruger #1 in 45-70 for better than 30 years. One of the nicest stocks you'll ever see on a #1 and shoots with the best of .45-70s. I originally wanted a #3, but there were none to be had, and IIRC, were discontinued, but there was this #1. Price was not much more than $400, if even that!

[NoSecondBest]

I had one around thirty years ago I bought new. It was in 25-06 caliber. I'm a very experienced reloader and a very high level competition shooter so I have an idea what to expect from a gun. I never could get that rifle to shoot to my expectations. I could get about half my groups (five shot) 1moa or less and the other half just over. Basically, a gun that shot 1.25" groups on average. Not good for a varmit rifle. It took a walk down the road and I got a Savage 112v that shot circles around it. I guess some shot very good and some didn't. I got one of the "didn't" ones.

[SaxonPig]

First of all let me admit to being totally biased. I think the #1 (with the small fore end) is the most beautiful production rifle made. I have a bit of an addiction...




I have read and heard that the #1 can sometimes string shots vertically. A cure was devised involving the fore end mount that is quick and easy. Can probably find it with a Net search. Mine seem to shoot OK.

This was with the 7x57 (about 1.25" at 100 yards). More than good enough for a hunting rifle.




This was with the 458 at 50. Does exhibit the vertical tendency I mentioned earlier.

[reynolds357]

I have 2 Ruger #1 rifles. One is .416 Rigby. It shoots about 2 1/2 inches at 100. That is considered acceptable accuracy for a Rigby. The other one is a .45-70 with an extremely high grade stock. It is the best looking stock I have ever seen on a Ruger rifle. Due to that fact, it is still un-fired and is at the moment a safe queen.
You can make the #1 be extremely accurate. It is an extremely strong action. The only problem is barrel quality and stock attachment. Assuming you get a rifle with a good barrel, you can work on stock fit to mitigate thee inherent issues with the stock mounting.

[Nathan]

They are great looking guns. Not sure how to say it, but the Ruger #1 has always been a premium gun model. Many models get a barrel band front sight, a barrel FR sling mount, nice bluing and select wood. The wood seems to vary from slightly better than a Std m77 to amazing walnut. Not only that, the triggers are great for a Ruger! The action is still a little crunchy, but quite functional.

All this greatness comes at a price...they cost more than most other Ruger's. On a nice gun, prices start at about $900 and climb from there. Anything under $900 should be looked at with a keen eye!

Mine is a 45-70 med sporter. Unfired by me for now. It will likely see a small 2-8 scope and some light deer hunting. I can't wait for warmer range days.

I don't know if this is ideal, but I plan to protect with reinessance wax and Hornady One Shot Tac lube on the metal.

[Paul B.]

OK, I guess I'll address the accuracy problems first. He first #1s had contract barrels, first Douglas for a short time, the Wilson. Those rifles had red pads. Ruger finally started making their own barrels and accuracy problem seem to have gone away from those I have talked to about it.
I have a few Ruger #1 rifles ranging from .22 Hornet to .416 Rigby. All mine are red pad guns BTW with prefix serial number so all have Wilson barrels. Some are quite accurate, some not so good and a few are out and out dogs that I'm still fighting to get decent accuracy. FWIW, the two dogs are both #1Bs in 30-06. The B models other than those two are quite accurate. I have two B's in 25-06, one a tack driver and the other a shotgun. Go figure.
Probably my favorites are the #1A in 7x57 and a #1S in .300 Win. Mag. The 7x57 was so bad with a throat so far out of spec that it had to go back to Ruger for repair. When it came back it had a new barrel and shoots anywhere from .75" to 1.25" depending on the load. I have here in .300 Win. Mag., a B and two S'. The B and one S are sub-MOA guns with my pet load, a 200 gr. Speer Hot-Core over a stiff load of WMR, now long discontinued powder. The second S model has not yet been shoot, a 200th Year gun. I just have to mount a scope and shoot it one of these days.
I hunted with thee rifles for years but not in the last five. Due to bad knees I hunt on a private ranch that caters to old geezers like me that have health problems like bad knees or like my partner that has had open heart surgery plus. the ranch does not allow single shot rifles, as does the outfitter who handles the hunts. I've done four hunts in the last five years, brought sown four elk with one shot each. It's beyond me why I can't use my #1 on the hunt.
If the OP decided to go for one, and has problems I can probably give some answers regarding the problems. I've come across some new ideas for those two recalcitrant 30-06's and just have to find the time to get it done.
Paul B.

[south_ridge]

I've had my hands on three new #1s in the past 2 years. I haven't shot one of them yet, but the other two were pretty accurate. One of them is a 1A in .204 Ruger that has shot several half-inch groups (and is easily sub-MOA on average) with factory ammo.

The other was a 1A in 6.5x55. It was a ~ 1" gun with the only factory load I ever tried in it.

During that time I also had a mid-90s 1B in .22 Hornet. It was accurate as well.

I've also shot my dad's #3 in .223 Remington. It is a sub-inch gun with factory ammo as well.

So...in my experience, they have been very accurate rifles. I like them and highly recommend them.

SR

[ammo.crafter]

Had one as well and yes they are stunning to look at.

Mine was in .257 Roberts and a joy to shoot.

But as some of the others had mentioned, accuracy was unacceptable.

As a 50+ year reloader, I was never able to get that rifle to group under 1-inch at 100yds. At the time I had the rifle the general consensus was the forearm attachment points prevented consistent accuracy.

[Buzzard Bait]

I had one long ago I think it was the early 80s it was a 243 and was a beautiful rifle luck of the draw I guess it had a exceptional piece of wood that was just beautiful. But in the accuracy department it was a dog, I wanted it to shoot and I tried every combination of bullet and powder I could think of but it didn't group it patterned I finally traded it for something else. I might try again some day I liked the rifle I'm thinking that at that time they had Douglas barrels which are usually pretty good this one wasn't any body's best effort.
bb

[dgludwig]

I bought a Ruger No.1, "Varmint 1 V" model, chambered in .220 Swift, new in 1995. This rifle remains the most consistently accurate factory rifle I have ever owned (and I have owned-and still own- my fair share over the years). Three shot groups well under an inch with Hornady factory ammunition @ 100 yards are the norm.

[oldscot3]

The fore end "cure" mentioned involved drilling and tapping a hole in the hanger, installing a set screw, then carefully adjusting it to tune the tension.

Some swear by it, others... not so much. I'm in the camp that believes barrel quality is the primary factor. My brother had a couple rebarrelled years ago by a gentleman who was a top notch barrel guru. His Rugers can still turn in amazing groups all these years later.

[Clark]

The first #1 I lost, or left behind in a snowstorm, it is unclear.
That was AFTER I left it at the range twice with the rangemaster calling my wife [to be avoided]. It was a 1" gun, standard 223.

But since then the other 3 have not run away.
#1V 223 will put 5 shots inside 1/2" if there is no wind.
#1 270, have only shot a few times.
#1 7mmRM, a killing machine for long range mule deer.

I have zillions of other rifles, and they are interesting, but Ruger #1s, are, in many ways the best rifle.

[Paul B.]

The more I think on it the more I believe the problem was due to the contract barrels. Also the rib was a potential problem as well If the rear if the rib makes contact with the receiver, then as the barrel expands as it heats up that rib will press even harder against receiver affecting the barrel's vibrations.
I had one custom #1 I found at a gun show where someone put a Remington M7 barrel in .223 Rem. and did a custom restocking job. The gun never shot worth two hoots in hell so it went down the road. I'd even put a Hick's Accurizer on the gun with no help there. Too bad as it was a great little walkabout gun for trying to spot and stalk coyotes. The coyotes won but I still had fun.
Paul B.

[WCWV]

I personally have a #1 Varminter 25-06 that I purchased new in 98 and it's a shooter, 3/8 groups with my loads and 1/2 groups with Federal factory. The only issue I had after a few years I lost some accuracy. After checking, the weight of the gun on the sling was pulling my fore arm which mess with the pressure point. I moved my sling to the barrel, problem solved. I've pack the rifle for years and took a truck load of deer. I'm getting older and hunt in very rough terrain, so this past January I purchased a lighter rifle, but I'll still use my #1 at times.

[Fritz34]

I have a older No.1 b in the 6mm Rem., it is very accurate!!