Ruger No. 1 - 45-70

[KnotRight]

Made it to the range today with only 44 and 45 caliber stuff (RSB 44, Citadel 1911 3.5" and the Ruger #1.

I took the scope off the #1 and shot it at 50 yards. Everything was about 4" low and 4" to the left. Really could not get the gun to move over that much. I was shooting off a rest and could not get the sights lined up correctly. Then tried shooting standing up and shot it better. The 2 loads that I was shooting were: 39.0 gn of RL7 under a Missouri 405 lead bullet and 63.0 gn of H335 under a Nosler 300 ballistic tip. There is about 500' sec difference in the loads but the Nosler had less felt recoil.

I am thinking about putting a peep sight on the gun if I can find one that does not need to be drilled and tapped. If not, then I will go with a scope.

[Clay M]

Made it to the range today with only 44 and 45 caliber stuff (RSB 44, Citadel 1911 3.5" and the Ruger #1.

I took the scope off the #1 and shot it at 50 yards. Everything was about 4" low and 4" to the left. Really could not get the gun to move over that much. I was shooting off a rest and could not get the sights lined up correctly. Then tried shooting standing up and shot it better. The 2 loads that I was shooting were: 39.0 gn of RL7 under a Missouri 405 lead bullet and 63.0 gn of H335 under a Nosler 300 ballistic tip. There is about 500' sec difference in the loads but the Nosler had less felt recoil.

I am thinking about putting a peep sight on the gun if I can find one that does not need to be drilled and tapped. If not, then I will go with a scope.

http://www.newenglandcustomgun.com/G...ces/Sights.asp

Take a look at these sights. I have one for my .405 win and I also have their bronze partridge post front sight. Excellent for hunting.

I know there are some on here that say they are no count, but I have not found that to be true.

Skinner also makes a great sight if you don't want to use a scope.
I always keep the NECG sight in my field bag in case I want to use it.

My Ruger #1 in .405 win is one the top three favorite rifles I have ever owned.
It is a fabulous cast bullet shooter with the correct bullet .
It is a deadly rifle in the field.
I shot a wild hog with it. He was running away at 80 yds. He went down so fast I thought I missed.

Also killed a nice ten pointer with it at near dark. He was dead right there.
Nice since I don't favor following wounded animals at night.

[Biggs300]

Clay M, I don't think I've ever seen a Ruger #1 in .405 Win. I can understand why it is one of your favorites. A few years ago, I had an opportunity to buy a "newer" model of Teddy Roosevelt's Winchester .405 Win. The case alone that came with the rifle let me know that it was a work of art that was a real investment. I still think about that rifle. Maybe someday……

[Clay M]

Clay M, I don't think I've ever seen a Ruger #1 in .405 Win. I can understand why it is one of your favorites. A few years ago, I had an opportunity to buy a "newer" model of Teddy Roosevelt's Winchester .405 Win. The case alone that came with the rifle let me know that it was a work of art that was a real investment. I still think about that rifle. Maybe someday……

I believe Ruger made the #1 in .405 win for only a year or two. I believe back in 2003 0r 2004
They also made it in stainless steel.

I found two or three of the rifles at a gun shop in Cody,Wy.
I knew I had to have one.
Mine is blue and walnut.

The rifles need cast bullets sized to .414 in order to shoot accurately.
I use the Hornady .416 crimp on gas check.

It shoots beautifully at 100yds.

[scattershot]

"I am thinking about putting a peep sight on the gun if I can find one that does not need to be drilled and tapped. If not, then I will go with a scope."


I have one of the NEGC sights for my 45/70 no. 1. Great sight, but I'm gtting old, so prefer a scope. I would sell this one, shoot me a PM if interested.

[sleeper1428]

After trying several different combinations of scope and Ruger rings, standard and offset, I stumbled on the Bushnell Banner 3-9 with 6" eye relief and it solved all the problems related to limited eye relief scopes requiring 'climbing' up the stock to get a full field view. I have mine set up with a standard ring at the front and an offset ring at the rear, the combination placing the rear of the scope at just the right position to allow me to have a full field view without risking getting smacked by the scope in recoil. I was a bit worried about whether or not the Bushnell would hold up to the heavy recoil of the 45/70 with full power loads but I've been using it for over two years now with no problems noted. It's not an expensive scope, selling over the 'net at a price of around $90, but it certainly seems to be up to the job.

sleeper1428

[Texas by God]

I'd pay the $500 even if it came with no wood!

Ditto.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Drm50]

Ruger #1 & #3 are both a pain to get scopes that allow you to get correct eye relief. Some even
with offset rings. The main problem is where the turrets are located in relation to the short space
between rings. I other words all scopes won't work, you have to get a scope with the rifle in mind.
I have old Burris Signature series 2x8s on two of mine, the turrets on them are past center toward
the front, allowing scope to be positioned futher back. One other note, I put a Bushnell 3x9 SC on
a 375H&H, 3 shots later it turned into a maraca. I have k3s on 375win #3 and #1 in 30-06.

[Four Fingers of Death]

I have only seen one 45/70 Ruger No1 in Australia and it was the Lyman cased special one with the long, old fashioned telescopic sight. I twas lovely, butttttttttttttttttt a lot of money at the time.

[Crusty Deary Ol'Coot]

Having had a number of #1s in a verity of cartridges over the years, I have NEVER had an issue of having scopes that didn't worked well and that includes NEVER needing to use anything other then the standard rings supplied with the rifles.

Crusty Deary Ol'Coot

[Ramjet-SS]

I have used the standard rings as well and also the extended. I at one time was obbssesed with #1 had 27 of them. Including 218 Bee and 22 Hornet and the venerable 416 Rigby, 458 Winchester, 375 H&H , 338 Winch, Killed my first elk with a 300 Winchester in a #1. I had just about all of them
many of the limited run editions. A they are fantastic rifle for customizing and re-barreling. I sold the entire collection for my first home down payment many years ago. Since then I have owned several more. Including 475 Linebaugh (first one John loaned us his reemer) Then a factory built one. Also a 460 S&W. Great rifles I am seriously considering the little 450 Bushmaster in number one.

[pietro]

Ruger #1 & #3 are both a pain to get scopes that allow you to get correct eye relief.
Some even with offset rings.
The main problem is where the turrets are located in relation to the short space between rings.

They problem doesn't lie with the rifle - it's lies with scope selection.

The #1/#3 rifles were designed before the days of compact scopes - which today dominate the marketplace (design-wise).

It's easier to find/use an older scope that has a (relatively) longer tube body, to address the combination of short ring spacing & eye relief requirements.

The Weaver K-3 you're using is a good match, as are Weaver/Leupold/Redfield/Bushnell 4x, 6x, & variables scopes - just look for the long tube/body.

.

[Crusty Deary Ol'Coot]

That and the fact that some folk, possibly due to body make up or poor training early on, simply do not mount a rifle well.

Was watching a young grandson shoot a number of long guns a few weeks back, so I was quick to watch how he mounted the firearms.

Not sure if it was because of one of my son's instructions or possibly due to his Califunnyia grand father, but his head and body position was correct when mounting/shooting.

At 15, he shows all the signs of being a big man, but as far as mounting the long guns he was doing it well and correctly.

Many young shooters due to no or improper training mount a long gun with the head positioned well back on the butt stock. This of course will lead to less then a full field of view with a properly positioned scope.

As said earlier, I have never had a scope mounting problem with a RUGER #1 and this has also held true with a good number of other RUGERS with the built in scope mounts.

Crusty Deary Ol'Coot

[Lloyd Smale]

All my #1s have gotten leupold 1x4s and 2x7s. Both of those scopes have a bit better eye relief then average. Most scopes will work until you crank them up to over about 6x then eye relief gets sketchy.