User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/8/2002 7:53:01 PM EDT
[#1]
I have one in .243 -- love it. There is just something about haveing only one shot - makes you more careful -- more respectfull of the game and sure of your shot.
They don't put as nice wood on them as they used to so you may have to shop around for one that you like. Trigger is a bit heavy out of the box, but very clean -- I am told you can get it lowered or replaced with no trouble. Every one needs at least one No.1 in the safe IMHO. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2002 8:52:56 PM EDT
[#2]
I had one in 7mag. Nice wood, blueing ect.....but the accuracy was nothing to write home about. 1 1/2- 2". Kicked like a mother too. The biggest turnoff was I had to FL size every time. Traded it off a few years ago.If your looking for something unique, pickup an old pre 64 winchester.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2002 10:37:41 PM EDT
[#3]
Get a Browning BAR.
 The new "Stalker" model is all matte black. www.browning.com/products/catalog/firearms/bar/bar_stalker.htm Autoloader, yes. Accurate, yes. Nice. At least take a look. I know it's not what you asked about, but, it's different. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/8/2002 10:46:36 PM EDT
[#4]
They are heavy, but man they shoot nice. Have one in 25-06 and it will put three shots on a postal stamp at 100 yds. Did I mention they are heavy?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 7:09:54 AM EDT
[#5]
Here's my #1B in .257 Roberts:
 The only "heavy" #1 is the #1V. Mine weighs in at about 8 1/2 pounds with a scope. Not much more than my M77. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 7:15:28 AM EDT
[#6]
Oh yeah. Mine shoots sub-MOA all day. Occasionally I hear of individuals, some of whom I find hard to take seriously, complain of accuracy troubles. The #1 is no more problematic than the average bolt gun, however it requires different tuning with regards to the forend hanger. Those who can't/won't/don't try to understand this are quick to condemn the rifle. There's an outfit called Hicks Designs who manufacture a replacement forend hanger that eliminates any trouble with the gun. Cheap, too.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 7:59:50 AM EDT
[#7]
I plan on getting the laminated stainless in a 25-06. My father had a few different #1's over the years, even some of the older ones with target bases (instead of what they have now) for a Unertl scope
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 10:15:41 AM EDT
[#8]
That's not exactly correct. Most of the #1s have ALWAYS had a quarter rib, while versions like the 1V have had target blocks. Both versions have always been around since 1966. Here's the link for the Hicks Designs Accurizer: members.tripod.com/Hicksdesigns/accurizer.htm |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 10:24:28 AM EDT
[#9]
I have a 280 and a custom 22LR and love them both.They are so damn good looking.
cpermd |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 2:41:00 PM EDT
[#10]
I’ve never owned one, but I’ve certainly heard good things about them.
Personally, I’ve been looking at, but not yet bought, a New England Firearms Handi-Rifle. It’s basically a single shot, break open shotgun design that’s been converted to fire various centerfire rifle cartridges (to include 30-06). It certainly doesn’t have the elegance of a Ruger No. 1, etc. In fact, it’s downright ugly. Also, the hammer has to be manually cocked. However, it’s got a good reputation – and the full list price is $261 !! Also, while I don’t know the cost, supposedly it can be returned to the factory to have barrels of other calibers fitted to it. Just thought I'd run an alternative by you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 4:57:13 PM EDT
[#11]
I had a #1 in 270 Wby.Mag, Never missed a deer in two years. The single really makes you take aim. I went to a Winchester 1894, was getting bored with the Ruger.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 5:04:13 PM EDT
[#12]
Dont waste your money.Get a NEF SB2. The are far more accurate than the Ruger and a lot less money.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 5:41:30 PM EDT
[#13]
A bonehead statement like that leads me to believe you think Old English 800 is good beer and pork rinds are good nutrition. I'm sure you've also been a Jerry Springer guest. GAWD. Give me a where and a when, I'll be there to go head to head, my #1 against your Wal-Fart NEF. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 7:56:53 PM EDT
[#14]
hee-hee-hee 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 8:14:45 PM EDT
[#15]
Guns and Ammo ran a feature on 4 varmint rigs recently that included a NEF Handi-Rifle that outshot both the Weatherby and a Remington IIRC. the only rifle included that outshot it was the Savage. The author claimed 1/2 groups with Win 45gr varmint loads. I don't own one but have seen a few and they were shooters. I have heard many anecdotes about #1's being poor shooters including one from my brother who swore off Ruger altogether after his experience with his #1. He just could not get the gun to shoot. They are indeed fine looking rifles. I'd look for a Savage single shot if you can find one, Savage stated recently they will no longer produce single shot models. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 8:27:56 PM EDT
[#16]
And just WHAT, may I ask, is wrong with PORK RINDS??!??!?!??!?!    [I like mild barbecue flavor, or salt 'n' vinegar, dipped in sour cream with salsa!!! YUM!!!]  
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/9/2002 11:08:31 PM EDT
[#17]
Occasionally I hear of individuals, some of whom I find hard to take seriously, stateing that they have a 257 #1 which will shoot sub MOA all day long
JimBob relax.... Lay off the Hee Haw and the pork rinds. You think you got a #1 that will whoop ass.....do ya? Enter it in a Hunter Class benchrest match....it wont be fit for a tomato stake when they get done with you. When all else fails......baffle them with bullshit |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 2:31:04 AM EDT
[#18]
Guns & Ammo get PAID to write articles. Figure out that one.
Again, totally ignorant of how to tune the rifle so he condemns. Another fan of Old English 800.
Come back when you have some first hand experience with the rifle. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 4:06:45 AM EDT
[#19]
If you believe what you read in Guns and Ammo,I have a gorgeous piece of real estate for a house place on the banks of the Arkansas River.
cpermd |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 11:49:24 AM EDT
[#20]
I don't have any experience with a No. 1 in .30-06, but I have an early one in .45-70 that I like a lot. It isn't the most accurate .45-70 I own, by quite a margin, but while I've found only a few loads that it really likes, I've found none that it really hates. The worst of them are still good for about 3" off the bench with a Weaver K1.5. The best will do 1 1/4" to 1 1/2". For what it is, that's good enough for me.
I used to own a No. 3 in the same caliber that was usually slightly more accurate (but really punishing from the bench.) I haven't experimented with the aftermarket forearm hanger an earlier poster mentioned, but can confirm that even in .45-70 they are quite sensitive to forearm screw tension. I glassed my forearm for the first 4 inches or so from the receiver (huge pain in the behind to do it too) and then relieved the remainder of the forearm channel to eliminate or reduce this sensitivity. Helped, but it's still not a tack driver. Friend has one that's much later than mine in .270 Win, and it's good for 3/4" to an 1 1/2" with most loads right out of the box. This leads me to suspect that Ruger was sensitive to the early reports of poor accuracy and made some minor changes, but that's just a guess. Pat |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 12:53:04 PM EDT
[#21]
Given the fact that he reported that this $249 dollar rifle outshot a $1300 rifle I wouldn't be so sure that he misreported anything. I don't see advertising for either make in G&A so that should not have been a factor. Also I believe that they have staff writers but also accept articles written by Joe Shmoe but I understand your inferrence.
So you know of my brothers gun tuning skills? You take quite a bit for granted. I don't remember the entire litany he ran off when I asked about his rifle but it was extensive and he was using handloads, varying seating depths, different propellants, different primers and the gun would not group. You free to dote over the Ruger #1 and defend it to all who would listen but I would not own one due to the volume of people who have said these rifles are a very iffy propostion with respect to accuracy. Plus they are horrendously overpriced. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 12:54:10 PM EDT
[#22]
My No.1 is a .416 Rigby, and I have no complaints about it in any respects. With 350gn Mag Tips at 2525fps it will shoot sub MOA @ 100yds from the bench with the factory open sights. I am going to get another No.1 in .30-06 to round out my "Two Rifle African Safari Battery". (Walter Mitty, I know!)
smoken44, I can cure your recoil sensitivity issues. Three rounds off the bench with my .416, and you will swear that 7mm "Magnum" is a pop gun! Jim_Dandy, Mine is a H Tropical and tips the scales at over 10lbs with out ammo, scope, or sling. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 1:25:04 PM EDT
[#23]
Yep, I sure do. You just ran through the same list of things used for a bolt gun. This is a different animal. You and your brother are ignorant of what affects a #1 so you condemn it. Bad gun? Nope, bad mechanic. These so-called horror stories all have a common denominator: "My brother/friend/cousin (insert name of trailer park relative) had one," or "I had one." Take those for what they're worth.
Compared to what? A Browning Low Wall goes for around $795 and I gave $479 for mine and they're going for about $525 now. Overpriced in your head.
I forgot about that one. Hope it came with a native to carry it. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 1:50:39 PM EDT
[#24]
I listed no actual tuning work on the rifle itself. None nadda zip. I wrote about his efforts through handloads. Once again you assume a lot. You can't seem to accept that Ruger makes a bad rifle every now and then. Every #1 that has ever left the factory is a shooter? Never a rough bore, never a bent barrel? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 3:20:09 PM EDT
[#25]
No assumption, you just don't know what you're talking about or have credibility on this issue. In short, you're out of your element.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 4:26:40 PM EDT
[#26]
Well Little Miss Maynard, you did post some statements to the effect of the #1 being an inherently inaccurate rifle did you not? That's where I'm going to call bullshit and say you're out of your element. A #1 is no worse than an average bolt gun, but due to its design, requires a different method of tuning. You're incapable of understanding this, so you've got to run it down. Don't go away mad Little Miss Maynard, just go away.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2002 5:27:29 PM EDT
[#27]
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
