The #1 (#3) is an updated copy of a Farquharson.
http://luxusgunstock.com/500ne-1.jpg
(image form http://luxusgunstock.com/html/body_500ne.html)
oldred, Very nice work.
Printable View
The #1 (#3) is an updated copy of a Farquharson.
http://luxusgunstock.com/500ne-1.jpg
(image form http://luxusgunstock.com/html/body_500ne.html)
oldred, Very nice work.
I have a Ruger #1 in 45-70 that I really, really, really like. I have never had a Winchester high or low wall. But I really, really, really want a low wall in 32-20 with double set triggers.
WOW SCB, that is one class gun.
That piece of French walnut is real eye candy as is the color case hardning on the action!
Have stocked a #1 barreled action a time or two, and wow what a beautiful end result.
CDOC
Thanks SCB, I had't noticed the link.
Still one class firearm!!!!!!!!!!!! A beauty for sure.
However, sure glad that Bill Ruger and company saw fit to give the design the "RUGER" treatment, for a number of reasons.
#1, Ruger put a class single shot into the hands of people such as myself, where I could NEVER afford to own a rifle such as the one pictured.
And #2, after looking at the link, clearly Ruger retained the finer points of a great gun and greatly improved the lines and contour of the action. Much trimmer and smoother.
Kind of like the Public Broadcasting "road show" where they show a lot of really nice and many times VERY pricey vintage items, I'd quickly say, "SOLD" knowing that for the value of that great English rifle, I could buy a number of #1 Rugers and have great fun and enjoyment using and handling my plain Ol'RUGER #1.
Sure fun to look!!!!!!!!!! EYE candy kind of like going to the COOPER OF MONTANA web site and slobbering over the rifles they sell, or the Sharps rifle sites ---- What beautiful examples of the craftsmans art in gun making!
Keep em coming!
Crusty Deary Ol'Coot
Thanks for all the input guys. What I need to do now is try and save some coin. Hard to do with a son in college and a daughter who will be next year. I expect them to pay for 80% or so of their education but dont want them to be saddled with debt when they get out either.
If only I would have thought to marry an eskimo maybe the govt would give me some financial aid.
That homemade rifle is very gorgeous and I wish I had the talent to make one half as nice. The Farquarson is also gorgeous.
I like the 300H&H as its old and just a little different. Not intended as a SHTF rifle. I know its just a souped up 30/06, but whats wrong with that. I always leaned toward cartridges that have fallen out of favor which is why I like the 222RemMag, 6mmRem,257Robts,35Rem,218Bee,6.5Swede,etc.. I realize there are more modern cartridges that may be ballistically better but none of the above make me feel wanting something different.
Anyway I appreciate the input and thoughts and IF I can get the cash together I will certainly post what I get and my results with it.
I have used the Ruger's for years and I really like them. I have a Browning B78 in 22-250 which shoots great, but I like the #1 better--aesthetics I guess. I have some #1's chambered in the heavy hitters like the 505 Gibbs and the .577 Nitro and they work flawlessly. The 300 H&H is a grand old cartridge. The 300 Win. mag might be good choice also. Good luck on whatever you decide--single shot rifles are addictive.
Ol Red...that is a truly amazing and Beautiful Job!....
Terry
Thanks, I had always liked those high walls but a really nice original or a new Winchester/Browning was just more than I wanted to spend so I used an original that belongs to a buddy of mine as an example to copy. I made what I consider some improvements in the 100+ year old design by securing the trigger group internally and mounting the sear in a carrier instead of suspending it on a pin run through the receiver like the originals. This eliminates the two screw heads that show on the outside of the originals and also the sear pin ends that would normally appear just under the hammer on an original, it was done to give a cleaner outward appearance but also allows for trigger adjustment which was an added benefit. I built this rifle on a 14x40 lathe using a milling attachment since I don't yet own a milling machine but it was a fun project and I am now in the planning stage of building a much lighter scaled down version, probably a 17 HMR.
oldred that rifle is magnificent. I envy your skill and art. How did you broach the breechblock race ways? thanks
Fitting the breechblock seemed to be one of the more challenging tasks at first but in the end turned out to be not so difficult. I toyed with the idea of using a broach but the inside corners need a slight radius for strength and this would have required a special broach so I had to come up with another way. What I did was to start with a drilled hole at the correct 7 degree angle to the breech face and then I milled it out to the point in the pic below with a long 1/4" end mill, this left it with a 1/8" radius in the corners. Since the raceways were now to the proper dimensions except for the corner radius it was as simple as using a small file with a safe edge so that only metal in the corners was removed, by using the finished-to-size breechblock and lay-out fluid to insure bearing surfaces were left untouched the corners were easily fitted. This resulted in a very closely fitted block that slides smoothly with no detectable slop.
http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/h...e/IMG_3724.jpg
thanks! IT was buggin me how you did that. Very nice work.
I have original highwalls (3), #1s (3), and #3s (2). Wow…don't tell my wife that I have that many.
All are fun and elegant, but I'd give the nod to the highwall for a classic design, especially with a Unertl scope. What a combination! Kind of like the Browning .22 Automatic with the old 3/4" Redfield 4x—another lovely combination. Which leads me to my wish list—
What I'd REALLY like, though, is to find someone who makes aftermarket #3-style finger levers for a #1. Any suggestions?
Richard
Somewhat off topic maybe,,,but what do folks think about the Uberti Highwall???
OK, I sit corrected. The latch arrangement is different between a #1 and #3. My wish won't work.
Richard
oldred....again I envy your skill.
I tried makin a double barrel shotgun once by strappin together two single shots with balin wire...didnt work too well :redneck:
I'm going to resurrect this thread.....just saw oldred's work, and I'm in awe. I hope you post more photos when it's finished.
As to the original OP's question, I don't have a high wall answer.....but, FWIW, I owned a Ruger #3 in 22 Hornet (I think they made them in only 22 Hornet and 45-70!). Anyway, I never could get it to shoot, so when the Browning Low Walls came out ('93-'94?), I bought one in 22 Hornet. Accurate out of the box; I still have it, and it will put many bullets into tiny holes @ 100 yds.
I liked it so much I bought one in .223, .243 and .260. But that's another story.
If I were to consider this a 'one gun solution' I would go with the Ruger and hate myself for it.
I have a No.1 and it is superbly accurate (25-06 Varminter, does 1/2 ~ 3/4" groups all day with pet loads). It ain't bad to look at, and it has taken the bumps and knocks of a camp rifle and keeps on ticking. Everyone sells them, everyone can afford one, and the gunsmiths know them inside out. For practicality, for me - the Ruger has it hands down.
But practicality be damned - I see the octagonal barrels, the exposed hammers and the fine wood of the 1885 - and cost be damned, I am going to have one shortly. The gun has soul, history, romance and nostalgia that the Ruger does not.
The Brits are kind of touchy when it comes to someone calling them "Europeans".
Well, you could use the terminology my sainted Irish Grandpa used: "G*d#@)@!*n murder'n thievin' no-good Brit ba&^%*s^ds!" :Fire:
And he didn't care how touchy they might be.....!