Ruger #1 calibers for 2015

[timspawn]

Has anybody heard what the offerings will be?

[Deep Six]

I'm still trying to find cash for the 9.3x62mm 2014 offering.

[timspawn]

I'm still trying to find cash for the 9.3x62mm 2014 offering.

Yep, that is a tempting one. All of the 2014 offerings are still available from the wholesaler I deal with. I am wanting one of the Lipsey's K1A's in 250 Savage.

[Ben]

There are rumors that there may not be enough market to keep the Ruger # 1 in production much longer ? ?

The younger generation isn't buying any of them........they like " Black Rifles."

[Urny]

That would be a shame Ben. It's visually and mechanically one of the most appealing American rifles on the market. If it goes, the collecting crowd will shortly price these out of a lot of hands.

[dragon813gt]

That would be a shame Ben. It's visually and mechanically one of the most appealing American rifles on the market. If it goes, the collecting crowd will shortly price these out of a lot of hands.

They are priced out of a lot of hands already. I look at the ones in Cabelas Gun Library everytime I'm there. $1300-$1500 is a good bit of money. I'm sure you can pick them up cheaper. But when you can buy a Ruger American for $350 it's more appealing to a lot of shooters. I like the #1s but their price point is a little higher than I want to spend. Especially when Savage 99s can still be had at somewhat reasonable levels ;)

[seaboltm]

Yep, that is a tempting one. All of the 2014 offerings are still available from the wholesaler I deal with. I am wanting one of the Lipsey's K1A's in 250 Savage.

I got one of Lipsey's 77 Hawkeyes in matte stainless, 250 Savage, 97 or so made. Nice indeed. A K1A would be nice.

[Ben]

There have been many rifles in past yrs. that became so costly to make that the Amer. public quit buying them.

This may in time happen to the Ruger # 1.

Ben

[timspawn]

I got one of Lipsey's 77 Hawkeyes in matte stainless, 250 Savage, 97 or so made. Nice indeed. A K1A would be nice.

I've been looking at one of those too. I didn't know they existed until I stumbled upon one online.

[seaboltm]

The Ruger #1 does not seem overly complex to me, meaning production cost should be fairly low. After all, there was a Ruger #3 for a while. Same action. Things that drive up the cost of the #1 are wood, front sight assembly, finish, and the rear quarter rib. Barrel and action are simple and no more difficult to manufacture than any other action type. Ruger charges a bunch for the #1 because they can. Demand is low, so production is low, so price is high. That simple. Everyone wants a $300 bolt gun or a $225 single shot these days. And in reality, those guns do the job. I suppose you are right from that perspective. I mean, if $225 and $300 guns flood the market, why make the #1, or the 77, or the Winchester 70, or the Remington 700. Heck, there are quality rifles out there now that make the old Savage 110's seem expensive.

[Petrol & Powder]

There are rumors that there may not be enough market to keep the Ruger # 1 in production much longer ? ?

The younger generation isn't buying any of them........they like " Black Rifles."

The beautiful thing about rumors is their capacity to stir people up without being encumbered by even a shred of truth.

[bruce drake]

I own 5 "black rifles" and no desire to spend that much for a single-shot, no matter the bluing and wood.

[dragon813gt]

I own 5 "black rifles" and no desire to spend that much for a single-shot, no matter the bluing and wood.

I have the desire. Just spending that much money for a single shot, when I can buy an old lever action for cheaper, is hard to justify. I've heard of to many issues w/ getting them to shoot well. But the same could be said for my M77 Hawkeye which shoots great.

[Petrol & Powder]

The single shot, falling block action exudes class.
Bolt actions, lever actions, semi-autos and others all have their place but the Ruger #1 is a timeless classic. They cost more than they should and sometimes the two piece stock can give you headaches in the accuracy department but there is just something elegant about that simple action.

[Frank46]

When I bought my Ruger #1 in 45-70 it cost about $600. So you can be sure it was sometime ago. Now they are twice that. I don't see the younger shooters shooting #1's or #3's. Seems to be an older shooter thing. And yes I'm an older shooter (68) and love the real wood and blued steel. Frank

[JHeath]

Single shots do not impose ammo compromises associated with magazine rifles and especially gas operated rifles. SS's eliminate conflicts with throat-based bullet length and seating depth vs mag length. SS's eliminate crimping COL issues driven by mag set-back. To commit to a mag rifle and especially a gas gun, is to accept a series of handloading limitations in exchange for cranking off more rounds.

[Doc Highwall]

I just bought a Lipsey's Ruger No1A in 30-30 Winchester that has the Circassion walnut with the Boddington checkering pattern, and I mounted a Nikon Monarch Gold 1.5-6X 42mm scope on it.

[1Shirt]

Think Ben is probably right. New young shooters today have little appreciation for the quality of weapons like #1's. Glad I have a few, and wish I could afford more.
1Shirt!

[pietro]

.

IMHO, the combination of apathy towards the #1 and the wallet compromise involved in purchasing a new example will most likely move it into a Special Order item, if not extinction. (Witness the gradually-reduce chamberings over tha past 1o-20 years)

Remember, Bill Ruger has gone HOME, and there are no longer any members of the Ruger family in a position to dictate policy anymore - just the bean counters.

They would rather make/sell many thousands of budget guns (great profit margin) than make fewer dollars on a few thousand (maybe) high-end guns.


.

[Fishman]

Single shots do not impose ammo compromises associated with magazine rifles and especially gas operated rifles. SS's eliminate conflicts with throat-based bullet length and seating depth vs mag length. SS's eliminate crimping COL issues driven by mag set-back. To commit to a mag rifle and especially a gas gun, is to accept a series of handloading limitations in exchange for cranking off more rounds.

Excellent synopsis. All of the deer and targets I've shot could have been handled with a #1. I do like choice though.

[Nicholas]

Yes, the dollar cost of the Ruger No. 1 has gone up sharply, but it has never been an inexpensive rifle. A fair amount of the increased cost could be attributed to the declining purchase power of a dollar, known by the misleading misnomer "inflation". There are many other types of rifles on the market that are much more costly and way less appealing, at least to me. For example, I am amazed at the $2-3K prices posted for some black rifles. Quality bolt rifles are in the same price range. Compared to these rifles, one could conclude that the No. 1 is the better buy. As a disclaimer, I must state that I have 3 No 1 rifles and I love them. And I consider a black rifle to be too complicated a platform for launching a bullet.

[.22-10-45]

I have the desire. Just spending that much money for a single shot, when I can buy an old lever action for cheaper, is hard to justify. I've heard of to many issues w/ getting them to shoot well. But the same could be said for my M77 Hawkeye which shoots great.

Funny how history repeats itself! I have read where the Sharps company was facing the same thing in the late 1870,s-early 80's..Sportsmen particulary in the South were going in for the Winchester lever action repeaters. Same thing could be said for the classic Marlin-Ballards..the repeaters were pushing them out.

[BruceB]

[QUOTE=dragon813gt;3034419]-$1500 is a good bit of money. I'm sure you can pick them up cheaper.QUOTE

I know where there's a like-new #1 in .338 for the ASKING price of $850.

It's been there for months, and I was looking at it again just yesterday.

Can we say, "temptation"? Even though I will never hunt again due to medical reasons, the #1 rifles just talk to me.

[BruceB]

Why does "practical" have to be so important?

I like my black rifles and autoloaders very well indeed, but compared to a #1 they are soul-less shooting machines. Excellent rifles, to be sure, but they lack something that #1 rifles possess.

Are we so imprinted by the thrust of "modern", that there's no room left to appreciate grace, and beauty, and history, and quality, and.....? You get the idea.

I should mention that my #1 in .416 Rigby will put TEN RCBS 416-350 cast bullets inside one inch at 100 yards, departing the muzzle at 2100 fps. Things shot with that load will tend to "stay shot", and no mistake about it. MY .303 #1 hasn't had enough experimentation to determine its accuracy potential, but I expect it will do just fine.

[MT Chambers]

I wish they would offer more rimmed cartridges in the #1, like the 30/40, 38/55, 470, .500, and the 50/90, and yes....the 30/30.

[Whiterabbit]

I own 5 "black rifles" and no desire to spend that much for a single-shot, no matter the bluing and wood.

I own 1 "black rifle" and that was nothing more than serendipity. I would rather spend "that much" on wood and steel. I am in my early thirties, too. We do exist, though a dying breed. Frankly, my generation seems to want to instead spend "that much" on a computer and data plan to facebook quickly rather than exercise the bill of rights. The millennials are even worse.

Don't get me wrong though, you guys enjoy your black rifles, more power to you. I'll take my black in my coffee, and my gunpowder, thank you very much.

[gewehrfreund]

I wish they would offer more rimmed cartridges in the #1, like the 30/40, 38/55, 470, .500, and the 50/90, and yes....the 30/30.

Let's see. . . .they made the #3 in 30-40 (they can still be found for sale regularly on the auction sites), they did about 350 in 38-55 in the late '80s, they made the #3 in 375 Win. which is nothing more than a 38-55 on steroids, and they catalogued the 30-30 in a 1A just a few years ago.
Also, the 45-70 has been in the line-up since about 1970.
Some other rimmed cartridges that have shown up over the years: 22 Hornet, 218 Bee, 357 Mag, 44 Mag, 460 S&W, 220 Swift (semi-rimmed), 303 Brit., 9.3x74R, and I'm sure others that just don't come to mind right now.

What they ought to make and what I've been waiting for for decades, is a 1S in 32-40. That would be the ultimate retro, vintage, traditional Ruger No. 1 in my opinion.

[Shooter6br]

Old guys have nice sports cars also...Not me justa Subaru ( and a No 1 Laminate S/S 45-70 ) 123945

[nanuk]

the surge in "Black guns" makes me wonder about using pricing as a reason the No1 is losing market share...

I've been on sites where the blackgunguys routinely talk about $3000 guns like it was yesterday's breakfast.


now, I'm sure there are cheaper guns around, but I don't think price is the real reason

IMNSHO, I think it is the term "SINGLE shot"

today's shooters are not hunters, and shooting is far more fun when you have lots of bang available at your finger tip. a single shot just can't match the "Fun Factor" of emptying a 30rd mag!

[FLHTC]

the surge in "Black guns" makes me wonder about using pricing as a reason the No1 is losing market share...

I've been on sites where the blackgunguys routinely talk about $3000 guns like it was yesterday's breakfast.


now, I'm sure there are cheaper guns around, but I don't think price is the real reason

IMNSHO, I think it is the term "SINGLE shot"

today's shooters are not hunters, and shooting is far more fun when you have lots of bang available at your finger tip. a single shot just can't match the "Fun Factor" of emptying a 30rd mag!

I have to agree with you. Kids today are making $30,000 to $50,000 right out of high school so the money is there to spend. They just want another type weapon then we all are accustomed to. The precision shooter has evolved into the Johnny Rambo.

[John Allen]

I am big into single shots. I prefer sharps, trapdoors and rolling block but have a few of the Rugers. They are great rifles I hope they stay in the line.

[Ecramer]

The Ruger #1 does not seem overly complex to me, meaning production cost should be fairly low. After all, there was a Ruger #3 for a while. Same action. Things that drive up the cost of the #1 are wood, front sight assembly, finish, and the rear quarter rib. Barrel and action are simple and no more difficult to manufacture than any other action type. Ruger charges a bunch for the #1 because they can. Demand is low, so production is low, so price is high. That simple. Everyone wants a $300 bolt gun or a $225 single shot these days. And in reality, those guns do the job. I suppose you are right from that perspective. I mean, if $225 and $300 guns flood the market, why make the #1, or the 77, or the Winchester 70, or the Remington 700. Heck, there are quality rifles out there now that make the old Savage 110's seem expensive.

Number me among the mourners for the Ruger No. 3. I still want one in .45-70. Unfortunately so does everyone else, except, apparently, for Ruger's marketers since they stubbornly refuse to produce one.

I hope the prediction of the death of the No. 1 is greatly exaggerated -- I'm a fan there, as well.

[FLHTC]

Number me among the mourners for the Ruger No. 3. I still want one in .45-70. Unfortunately so does everyone else, except, apparently, for Ruger's marketers since they stubbornly refuse to produce one.

I hope the prediction of the death of the No. 1 is greatly exaggerated -- I'm a fan there, as well.

I've been watching one in a local shop that someone put $10 on, eight months ago and hasn't picked it up yet. It's an easy 98% and $850 would get it. The downside is the guy who put money on it is a fireman and the shop owner won't rattle his cage for the money. I can't say I blame him but I drool over that #3 every time in go by it.

[paul edward]

Always liked the classic American looks of the #3. The #3 just looks so much more interesting than a break-open single shot. Wonder why they were discontinued.

One of my dreams is that SR&Co redesigns the #3 to reduce manufacturing costs and offers it, at a more reasonable price, in some of the old classic rimmed cartridges.

[John Allen]

Always liked the classic American looks of the #3. The #3 just looks so much more interesting than a break-open single shot. Wonder why they were discontinued.

One of my dreams is that SR&Co redesigns the #3 to reduce manufacturing costs and offers it, at a more reasonable price, in some of the old classic rimmed cartridges.

i have one of the #3's in 45/70 it is a great gun

[rmcc]

Alas, it is sad to say that we of the silver hair (or mostly so) age are the last to appreciate blued steel and fine walnut. Such terms as wood to metal fit, exquisite bluing, points like a fine double (meaning shotgun which the younger crowd have no idea of), are no longer heard in conversations. The trend of synthetic this, tactical that, and everything but the sink you can hang on the barrel are the selling the rifles today. "Black" rifles? I own two of them. They are fun to shoot and accurate enough in their own way. I have seen some really good groups shot with them, so I am not a detractor of them at all. Hell, Obama has sold more of them than any of the manufacturers of them could have ever dreamed of!!
And if a rifle doesn't sell, why make it? A generation ago, everyone wanted to get a #1 to go "back" to the tenant of one shot make it count. We have strayed so far from that ideal that I don't know where to begin, television shows glorifying a 600 yard shot at a deer or elk. To me that is plainly irresponsible and best left to the military where those shots belong (SORRY Elmer!!). I grew up getting as close as I could to make the shot at the game. THAT was what a #1 is for!! It balances at the carry point, handles to point out like a shotgun, and was accurate enough to get the job done. I can't believe that Bill Ruger ever conceived of the #1 being as accurate as the 77 he produced. I have owned several of each. The 77's out shot the #1's everytime!! But the #1's were a lot more fun to carry and look at!!! You CAN make a #1 shot sub-MOA, but it is a lot of time and effort best spent on a bolt rifle, IMO.
#1's, I love them for what they are, were, and sadly probably will be missed by those who have owned or handled them. I guess it is up to us to teach the younger crowd the beauty of a finely crafted rifle and the woodcraft to go with it!!


rmcc

[GhostHawk]

If you are a younger person, I can see if given a choice between an AR and a Single Shot, which costs about the same, they are going to pick the AR 98% of the time.

Once bought there are virtually no changes the average person can make to most single shot rifles.

With the AR platform the opposite is true. You can change anything and everything on the rails. You can in time get a second upper in a different caliber. It is adaptable, and endlessly adjustable.

I think what most of those young people do not realise is that a little time spent learning that single shot, and you can hit the target every time at will. While some people have the patience and discipline to shoot the AR's accurately, I don't think most do. They get out to the range, and spray and pray. Ending up maybe not hitting the target at all, and not realizing why.

It has taken me 40 years to come to realise the value of single shot rifles. The value of one shot perfectly executed.
It does take patience, and practice, and perseverance. Something it seems our younger generations have not been taught.

[Love Life]

Enough bashing the young people. It gets old. I see enough "older, wiser, more learned" shooters on the range sucking at life to know that it has nothing to do with age.

I very much appreciate a fine firearm, but the Ruger #1 is not worth what they charge...to me. When $800+ flies out of my wallet, I expect the rifle to be dang near perfect and capable of sub MOA groups with minimal effort. Not that I'm lazy, but I just prefer real quality over inferred quality and a quality rifle shouldn't require voodoo and hocus pocus to be a sub MOA capable shooter. Yes, that matters to me.

The reason people choose the AR or other "young people's guns" is because of a variety of reasons, but not the "Woe is the nation and the children" reasons posted here.


Cost has nothing to do with it for me either. I have a couple rifle/scope set ups that cost more than a good used car. They are extremely accurate, built with quality parts, and assembled with absolute precision and care. The Ruger #1 does not meet that criteria for me so I spend my money elsewhere. I've played with a few, inspected a few, but none of them really equaled the asking price to me.


I wonder what the what the pre 1900 people thought about them young whippersnappers buying bolt action rifles.

[Urny]

Good points Love Life. Every generation has bemoaned the changes, perceived or real, in the next, and the next, as long as you care to repeat. I heard from my dads generation what you are hearing too, and sometimes have said those things about yours. The day will likely come when you will do the same.

It's the duty of oldsters like me to resent the loss of the things we grew up with, and the duty of youngsters (anyone under 50) to embrace the new and improved. Maybe the young could retain a bit of respect for the old; it's how we got to the new.

If the Handi Rifle and Ruger No. 1 are gone, I will be sad.

[dragon813gt]

I don't think anyone is disrespecting the #1. It's just hard to justify the purchase of one in the current market. I'd they were inherently accurate you'd fine more people buying them. Ruger Americans are a couple hundred and will shoot MOA w/ boring regularity. I love fine firearms and don't have issue spending money on them. There are plenty of high end shotguns in my safe. #1s are just in an odd position in this market.

[prsman23]

I've got one. And am not an old man by any stretch. 33. Love single shots. It's a beautiful gun with tradition. That's what I love about it. Shoots very well. Teaches discipline. When I am teaching people to shoot. After we move up from 22 rifles we shoot the Ruger. It's in 7x57. Load it up with light cast loads. Then on to hotter loads. It's a great gun to teach fundamentals on. Love it.

[Dan Cash]

I own 5 "black rifles" and no desire to spend that much for a single-shot, no matter the bluing and wood.

I have a few of those black beauties too, but about 4 years ago, a fellow from back in Virginia advertised a 93 Marlin, first year production, Turnbull restoration for $2000.00. That thing was heart palpatating gorgeous and I bought it. I don't "love" my guns but that thing is a sure enough passion. The #1s, having had one, don't pull my trigger but for those who like that sort of thing, the rifle represents their concept of wonderful and they will pay the price.

[Clark]

There is an excellent book, "Single Shot Rifles and Actions" by Frank de Haas that says ~ Ruger #1s are the culmination of everything known about how to make a good falling block rifle. That book shows dozens of actions in cross section and analyzes the design features of each one. As with other Haas books, just a few pages are worth the entire price. He writes like an engineering report, and creates new material instead of re hashing old stuff.

I have been collecting guns for over 50 years, and I have found nothing better than the Ruger #1.
From the prone position, with an ammo pouch belt, it sounds like a machine gun when I am shooting at a moving deer.124064

[Doc Highwall]

Frank de Haas has even designed a single shot rifle incorporating all the best features called the De-Haas -Miller. Here is a link showing it.

http://www.pbase.com/image/2375875

[craig61a]

An older gentleman at my legion post has a few No. 1's for sale. I was thinking about it, I have been thinking about the No. 1 for a few years. They are sharp looking rifles. But in the end, I really don't need another caliber/rifle... I believe I've got too many already - never thought I'd say that, but I'm getting older and can't take them with me...

[bigted]

An older gentleman at my legion post has a few No. 1's for sale. I was thinking about it, I have been thinking about the No. 1 for a few years. They are sharp looking rifles. But in the end, I really don't need another caliber/rifle... I believe I've got too many already - never thought I'd say that, but I'm getting older and can't take them with me...


I am in this exact boat friend. I got a few and some are pricey. most of my time now is spent with my few muzzleloaders I gotta say. my priority's have gradually changed over the years and as of now my opinion of the dear ol #1 Ruger has diminished almost completely. I used to think they were one of the best till I obtained a couple REAL pieces of art. my Shiloh and an original Remington roller flat put the Ruger in the back seat. I do like the ability to make serious power in my 45-70 #1 ... but ... in the pretty and sexy ... it don't do it for me at all.

I do wonder tho what the chambers will be tho ... I doubt very much that they will stop making them ... maybe do something to lower the cost but I bet they don't stop with a production rifle with the ease of making them like they do. shiny and nice wood but they [in my opinion anyway] do not represent art at all.

now an old worn Hiwall or used roller ... now that is something to behold. an original sharps ... or a ... on and on ... [smilie=s:

[Artful]

I have a couple of #3's - tried a 45-70 chambered one - too much kick for me - I'll stop at 375 big bore.
The premium wood and more attention to finish is what drive up the cost of the #1, but that is what it's all about.

The death of great guns is a sad thing indeed. I wish for Savage 99's and Savage 24's but it appears not to be.

[tdoyka]

i own one ruger #1 in 270 win. it was made back in 1973, i was 1 year old. i've had it close to ten years now. i still remember the day that it became mine and it will be mine until i die:p. and this ruger #1 shoots. 130gr nosler bt with a charge of imr4320 goes .3" at 100 yards(3 shot) and a 150gr nosler bt with a charge of imr4350 goes .4" at 100 yards(3 shots). i don't know who stated that they don't shot worth a d**n, but mine clearly does.
after my stroke, i decided to go single shot and then i started to make up the tc encore. 20 vartarg, 22-250ai, 6.5 creedmoor, and a 444 marlin. these girls know how to shot with a right arm that doesn't work!! .1 - .7" at 100 yards(3 shots). soon i'll get my 1898 springfield armory in 30-40 krag to shot some cast bullets along with my 444 marlin.
it seems to me(i don't have one, not interested, former army[smilie=s:) that most guys shot the black rifles once or twice, say i'm paying $300-$500:cry::mad: for a carton of shells , decide it would be better off in the closet and never see them again. the black rifles sells are going down and people are starting to see that 30 rounds can equal one round in the kill department. if they like the black guns, they can have them. i'll be 42 years old, had a stroke, and shoot my single shots....now what does MGM have....500 s&w........

[white eagle]

Ahh but the beauty and simplicity and not to mention the weight compared to those black rifles
Ruger #1 for me for sure
I have a black rifle and a #1 to pick which one goes with me on a hunt is easy,why do you think they call it #1

[Clark]

The Ruger #1 has 63 parts.
The AR15 has 131 parts
AK47 has 67 parts
Win 1885 falling block has 33 parts
Win 1897 pump shotgun has 97 parts
Remington rolling block rifle has 45 parts
Colt #4 derringer has 17 parts.

In 1969 De Haas analyzed 97 different single shot actions.
He really likes the Ruger #1.

[Good Cheer]

Thank you, Mr. Bill.

http://i791.photobucket.com/albums/yy192/SNARGLEFLERK/R_zpsdd68b640.jpg (http://s791.photobucket.com/user/SNARGLEFLERK/media/R_zpsdd68b640.jpg.html)

[OuchHot!]

if that rifle was mine I would be of "good cheer" as well.

very nice!!

[edslau33]

That would be a shame I have one of these in 25/06 with a heavy varmint barrel. I was unsure I liked the caliber when I bought it. I have to say I love it. Put two through almost the same hole zeroing the rifle the first time.

[BAGTIC]

If they redesign the #3 to reduce production costs it will no longer be the #3.

I have several Ruger SS in different styles. To me the #3 is ugly with the barrel band and comic book butt plate. The lever looks nice though it is not a practical as the #1 lever on heavier recoiling calibers. The #3 itself is too light for heavy recoil calibers. Guns are for shooting not for hanging on the wall admiring. I sold a #3 22 Hornet that I wish now I had kept for the action. With a decent stock and absent the barrel band it would have made a nice small game gun if chambered to a small pistol caliber.

Personally the 1A in 45-70 is nicer than the #3.

[singleshot]

I wish they would offer more rimmed cartridges in the #1, like the 30/40, 38/55, 470, .500, and the 50/90, and yes....the 30/30.
YES! Thank you! A single-shot rifle and a rimmed cartridge are a BEAUTIFUL combination. Maximum flexibility for loads. Subsonics...no problem and no shoulder setback. Full house loads? Piece of cake, and then some with the longer OAL as mentioned previously.

[craig61a]

I am in this exact boat friend. I got a few and some are pricey. most of my time now is spent with my few muzzleloaders I gotta say. my priority's have gradually changed over the years and as of now my opinion of the dear ol #1 Ruger has diminished almost completely. I used to think they were one of the best till I obtained a couple REAL pieces of art. my Shiloh and an original Remington roller flat put the Ruger in the back seat. I do like the ability to make serious power in my 45-70 #1 ... but ... in the pretty and sexy ... it don't do it for me at all.

I do wonder tho what the chambers will be tho ... I doubt very much that they will stop making them ... maybe do something to lower the cost but I bet they don't stop with a production rifle with the ease of making them like they do. shiny and nice wood but they [in my opinion anyway] do not represent art at all.

now an old worn Hiwall or used roller ... now that is something to behold. an original sharps ... or a ... on and on ... [smilie=s:

Yeah, I do have a CG Roller in 8x58R, I get the most satisfaction in getting a 100+ old rifle shooting again... ;)

[Good Cheer]

if that rifle was mine I would be of "good cheer" as well.

very nice!!

Thanks. That's my baby now turned thirty.
Cartridge design, barrel length, stock and of course the left handed sling set up the way I wanted it.
Deer load is 375296 and mag primer behind a compressed charge of 760.

[Doc Highwall]

I feel very lucky that I waited to get my Ruger No1 in 30-30 Winchester. I just bought mine last month and it has the Circassian walnut with the Boddington checkering pattern, and the more I look at it the more I realize how lucky I was to get it.

According to Lipsey's web site they made only 250 total production, with very few with the Circassian walnut even though they did not order them that way.

[brandoninaz]

At 26, I'm a younger guy on the forum. I love the looks of the Ruger No. 1, and personally would love to own one. With that said, I can't justify the expense.

The #1 fills in odd place in the market, as it is a production rifle with compromises emulating a luxury rifle. It has the luxury rifle "look", but from the examples I've seen doesn't follow through on fit (finish is generally good) or accuracy. It caters to a niche within a niche. Those single shot hunters (not accurate enough for target enthusiasts) who want a rifle of wood and steel that looks like the more expensive single shot rifles.

Also, whoever made the remark about people coming out of school making $30-50k being able to drop $1k+ on a #1 needs to examine the costs of tuition and housing these days, consider the costs of starting a family, and remember that pensions are mostly a thing of the past. Could someone spend that much on a rifle? Sure. Would it be wise? Nope.

[JHeath]

At 26, I'm a younger guy on the forum. I love the looks of the Ruger No. 1, and personally would love to own one. With that said, I can't justify the expense.

The #1 fills in odd place in the market, as it is a production rifle with compromises emulating a luxury rifle. It has the luxury rifle "look", but from the examples I've seen doesn't follow through on fit (finish is generally good) or accuracy. It caters to a niche within a niche. Those single shot hunters (not accurate enough for target enthusiasts) who want a rifle of wood and steel that looks like the more expensive single shot rifles.

Also, whoever made the remark about people coming out of school making $30-50k being able to drop $1k+ on a #1 needs to examine the costs of tuition and housing these days, consider the costs of starting a family, and remember that pensions are mostly a thing of the past. Could someone spend that much on a rifle? Sure. Would it be wise? Nope.

There's a lot to what you say.

But rifles are substance in addition to image. An avid handloader can do things with a single shot that would be problematic with magazine rifles. Long COL, no crimp, etc.

A falling block rifle would be ideal -- just an open/shut breech, good case support, and compact. And no bumping the bullet up a ramp. The downsides are two-piece stocks that create bedding challenges, and swing-hammer locks that create eccentric motion when triggered. A properly set up No. 1 seems to work past those issues, and is said to be extremely robust.

I think that's why a lot of us are drawn to the No. 1. We'd like a good falling block for technical reasons, not because we're looking for a cheap Farquharson to match our homemade PVC Sherlock Holmes pipes and two-baseball-cap-fronts-sewn-back-to-back hats.

The single shot action with solid bedding and quick inline striker is the push-feed bolt gun. Like a benchrest rifle. But a SS bolt rifle is 4" longer and presumably harder to achieve MG42 cyclical rates when you're keeping a fugitive muley in the scope, and not whack your cheek with the bolt-end.

[JHeath]

I googled for a Ruger No. 1 kaboom and came up empty. Anybody know of one?

[Roundball]

I recall an incident reported many years in one of the Wolfe magazines. It was pretty involved story. In the end the #1 owner had fired a round with a cleaning rod in the barrel. The barrel had been cut or sectioned away to show how the cleaning rod was riveted in the barrel. Don't recall if there was any damage to the action. The caliber was 22-250 if memory serves. No Kaboom.

[JHeath]

That must be why they say it's better to clean from the breech. . .

[lbaize3]

The Ruger #1 is one of my favorite 45-70 caliber rifles to shoot. I also have a choice of a John Bodine rolling block, a Contender, a bolt action Enfield and a trapdoor in 45-70. All of them are a joy to shoot with 405 grain trapdoor loads. I tried two different Ruger #3 rifles in 45-70 and both kicked the snot out of me with the same trapdoor loads. Figure it has to do with the stock design. Anyway, the Ruger is the most fun of all the above rifles to shoot. Reckon it might be the same for other calibers too....

[Fishman]

"You are never too old to learn something stupid."

That's so true. Love it!