Up north for "deer camp" and at the local range yesterday and the fellow on the next bench had a beautiful Ruger No. 1 in 243. He set up, fired exactly three rounds, checked the bull, packed up, gave me a nod, and left. When I walked down to pull my target I looked at his: I could cover all three shots with a nickle.

I never thought I would want a single-shot rifle but I have always had a but of a crush on No 1's and it seems like guys who can shoot can shoot the lights out with them. Are there models that are better than others? Seems like there are a lot of them on the secondary market but what should I be looking for? Of course, if I get one it's going to have to have a killer stick of wood (and it seems like a lot of them do) and in a solid caliber (like 243 or 7x57). Thoughts? Suggestions?

There are a lot of them around in different configurations but I think the models produced under the Boddington series are just about perfect. They show up on the auction sites sometimes and calibers include 7x57.

Not sure about accuracy-wise, but some of the older "red pad" Rugers had some nice wood. That's my problem with the #1....Most have Mossberg-grade wood (sorry, Butchloc!) that I can't live with.

quote:

Originally posted by Biebs:
Not sure about accuracy-wise, but some of the older "red pad" Rugers had some nice wood. That's my problem with the #1....Most have Mossberg-grade wood (sorry, Butchloc!) that I can't live with.

I feel the same way and wouldn't buy a new one unless I could get decent pictures of that particular gun in advance. Even the rifles from 5 years ago had better wood. Now many are as plain as a fence post.

On the plus side, they have generally been more accurate since Ruger began making their own barrels, which I think was in the 1990s. Don't know just when that changed. The older rifles had better wood but the barrels came from a number of outside sources. Some good, some bad.

I'm having one made now with exhibition wood and a red Old English pad; a 450-400.

quote:

Originally posted by Biebs:
I'm having one made now with exhibition wood and a red Old English pad; a 450-400.

I'll be anxious to see pictures of that one. My little No.1 collection includes a regular old Tropical model in that caliber.

I have one in .204 that has really nice wood; bought it about 20 years ago. I was writing then so maybe I got a good sample; in any event, I bought it.

Accuracy wasn't great until I tried the washer trick in the forend. Shoots pretty good now.

Agree about the red pad: no red pad, I'm not interested. The barrels... I had a M77 with tang safety, red pad, in 3006 that I bought in the early 90's. The rifle shot well, regardless of what I fed it, even with an inexpensive Swift scope. But I know others that complained about accuracy and barrels.

Like most of you, I'm a sucker for a nice piece of wood and it seems like the M77 big bores and M77's often got beautiful wood.

What differentiates the Boddington models from the others?

My goal is to find an older one (not sure what the cut off is for "older" - mid-90's?). I'm in no rush (yeah, like I have said that before) so hopefully I'll be able to find exactly what I am looking for.

Thanks,

DG

I have several #1's. Al shoot good to excellent. I hand load, so working up a good load is no problem. Buy one in your favorite caliber and get to shooting. I'll bet you will like it. Want fancier wood, it's available from several sources. I sent one to Renner in Reno, it came back a lot nicer than when I sent it in. #1's will grow on you.

quote:

Originally posted by Doublegun:
Agree about the red pad: no red pad, I'm not interested. The barrels... I had a M77 with tang safety, red pad, in 3006 that I bought in the early 90's. The rifle shot well, regardless of what I fed it, even with an inexpensive Swift scope. But I know others that complained about accuracy and barrels.

Like most of you, I'm a sucker for a nice piece of wood and it seems like the M77 big bores and M77's often got beautiful wood.

What differentiates the Boddington models from the others?

My goal is to find an older one (not sure what the cut off is for "older" - mid-90's?). I'm in no rush (yeah, like I have said that before) so hopefully I'll be able to find exactly what I am looking for.

Thanks,

DG

The Boddington series were made in five calibers: 7x57, 300 H&H, 375H&H, 450/400, and 450 NE. They nearly all had circassian walnut stocks, lighter in color compared to the regular No.1 rifles. The checkering pattern is a little different, with an additional point to the pattern. They are finished in a (very) matte blue. They also have fixed V shaped express rear sights and a white bead (instead of brass) on the front. I don't recall for certain, but I think the 7x57 rifles had 24" barrels. The typical No.1 in 7x57 has a 22" bbl with a fold down rear sight, unless it's the RSI, which is a 20" bbl, with sights, and a full length fore-end. It's strictly personal preference, but I'm not that wild about the matte finish on the Boddington rifles. It doesn't look much like a high quality matte blue finish to me (like a rust blue, for example). I do like the express sights on them though, and the wood is usually pretty nice on them.

Couple more questions: how were the barrels in the mid-90’s? What do s a fair price for a high condition standard 7x57?

quote:

Originally posted by Doublegun:
Couple more questions: how were the barrels in the mid-90’s? What do s a fair price for a high condition standard 7x57?

I think, but am not sure, that the change to Ruger manufactured barrels was around 1991 to 1993. They seem to be more consistent after that. Some of the earlier guns had Douglas barrels. Some had other makes. No. 1 loonies seem to believe that there's a greater number of poor shooters prior to the earlier '90s. No doubt there are many that shoot very well from all years of production though. FWIW, the 7x57 caliber was one of the more notorious chambering for accuracy problems in the earlier guns. They have very long throats from what I've seen. That wouldn't stop me from trying one if the price was reasonable.

For a high condition No. 1a (22" barrel, Alex Henry forearm, barrel band swivel, and sights) you would likely pay somewhere between $800 - $1,100, depending on if the seller is a dealer content to sit on it for a long time, how nice the wood is, etc. The Boddington model would probably fetch another $100 - $200, and on the higher end if the wood is exceptional.

It constantly amazes me the number of people who complain about the wood quality on a production gun. I never hear complaints about that on any other gun line. Yes, the looks of the wood is an added plus on the good guns and I've turned down No. 1s that had plain wood on them but only because they were chambered in a cartridge that I don't care for or they had the ugly Alex Henry forearm.

Find a No.1 that shoots and enjoy it. I picked up a pretty little red pad No.1 that shoots lights out with the 110 grain Barnes TTSX and it's gone on my last two antelope hunts.

quote:

Originally posted by Fjold:
It constantly amazes me the number of people who complain about the wood quality on a production gun. I never hear complaints about that on any other gun line. Yes, the looks of the wood is an added plus on the good guns and I've turned down No. 1s that had plain wood on them but only because they were chambered in a cartridge that I don't care for or they had the ugly Alex Henry forearm.

Find a No.1 that shoots and enjoy it. I picked up a pretty little red pad No.1 that shoots lights out with the 110 grain Barnes TTSX and it's gone on my last two antelope hunts.

Generally speaking, I agree with you. Look at the typical production firearm and the wood is basically all the same and you get what you get. But with the No 1's and the big bore 77's that's not the case. Sure, there are some relatively plain-Jane stocks, but some are real lookers. So, if I'm buying a M70, M700, etc I know the wood is going to be blah, but if I have 50/50 chance of finding one with great wood, why not hold out for one?

I know that the Boddington 450/400's had a slimmer, more eye pleasing barrel contour than the regular ones that had a heavier clunky barrel. I suspect that the 375 and 450 shared the same slim profile.

The 450Nitro has the slimmer barrel profile. I own one. It beings the weight down to 7.5piunds versus 9 pounds for atypical Tropical model.

I actually like the larger profile better.

If you get one in any caliber, have a pacmayer recoil pad added. They all come with hockey pucks for pads.

I think the disappointment many feel with the stocks on the Number 1s is the decline in "quality" as in the recent years. The very early Number 1s had very nice wood and checkering in addition to good barrel. You had to tinker with the bedding on the forearm to get them to shoot but I had a 243 that would shoot one hole (1/2 inch) five shot groups as long as you didn't heat the barrel up too much.

Later Number 1s sometimes had poor barrels and the wood quality continuously declined. That being said I have a couple of current production Number 1s with blah stocks that shoot quite well.

quote:

posted 13 November 2018 21:21 Hide Post
Not sure about accuracy-wise, but some of the older "red pad" Rugers had some nice wood. That's my problem with the #1....Most have Mossberg-grade wood (sorry, Butchloc!) that I can't live with.

thats why i restock all of mine

The Boddington Leopard 7x57 was a 22" barrel, express rear sight.
The 1-A .275 Rigby is a 24" barrel w/ express rear sight.

quote:

thats why i restock all of mine

Post some pix....everyone loves a pretty Ruger#1!

haven't figured out how to do pics

There is a Boddington 7x57 with a custom stock set on gunsinternational.com. I would not say the Boddington guns are "pretty" but they are almost exactly what I would do for a custom Ruger No 1 hunting rifle.

There's a red pad No.1 for sale near me right now that the guy is asking $850 for. But, it's chambered in 22.250 (I already have two guns chambered in that) and the stock has a very plain, straight grain.

I have a nice No. 1B rebarreled to .280 Remington that is a great (sub-MOA) shooter which I had listed in the classified ads here. The link to the add is:

(https://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5451078981/m/5741009642)

If you are interested, and did not want the scope, I would drop the price to $800.00 plus shipping.

I think I'd like a number one in 6.5-06 Ackley with a 26"-28" heavy sporter barrel for a long-range plinker/deer rifle.

Early Ruger barrels were made by Wilson; twenty percent were crap; the rest ranged from great to good.

Ruger quit putting nice wood on them because it got so expensive to do so; they had to reduce the cost; they are very slow sellers to young guys anyway.
They don't realize that they would actually sell more with good wood, like 20+ years ago.
Get any one you can if you like the wood; barrels are straightforward to install on them.

The Boddington Series are in 375 Ruger not in 375 H&H Mag. I have 3 extra ones. a 375 Ruger a 450/400 and a 450 Nitro Express. They are not really for sale but Money talks?

The fellow that shot the nickel size group should take it home...leave it a year and go try it again. I bet it won't do it twice.

I have had 6 different #1's. I could not find one that would shoot consistent time after time and I have no explanation for it. I love the gun, the looks, and how they carry. I just got tired of having to resight them in 3-4 times a year. Couple of them would not even maintain the common man " hunting accuracy 3-4" @ 100 yds. I wish I could have found a cure without having to put $100.00's of dollars into them. I did that with one. Worked for about a year !

Biggest problem is owners who think single shots are .5 moa varmint rifles. They should have never chambered them in anything less than a 35 caliber, maybe a 33, which is where they come into their forte. I have never owned a small bore one, and the big bore #1s are quite sufficiently accurate meaning consistently under 2 moa.

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
Biggest problem is owners who think single shots are .5 moa varmint rifles. They should have never chambered them in anything less than a 35 caliber, maybe a 33, which is where they come into their forte. I have never owned a small bore one, and the big bore #1s are quite sufficiently accurate meaning consistently under 2 moa.

I think a single shot makes perfect sense as a varmint rifle, and so does Jim Carmichel. Yes, they are not as accurate as a bolt gun, but fun to shoot and you don't have to worry about a horse scratching your stock as he rubs a tree while walking. I like two guns on a PD hunt: my .204 No1 for close range and my .220 Swift bolt gun with a fast twist shooting heavy bullets for long shots.

Only accurate guns are interesting. If I couldn't get MOA or better, the scratch isn't worth the itch.

I shoot a No.1 red pad .243 heavy bbl.
I like it fine but not crazy about Ruger rings.

This is my No. 1. It's a .243 and was treated to a trip to Jack Haugh's back in the 1980's. Jack did the wood, metal and engraved it.

It's been my hunting rifle for many years and is very accurate with carefully worked-up handloads.

I'm a very lucky person.

Stunning rifle. Great also that it gets out in the field.

I brought a used 1S 30-06 in 1978 picked it off the shelve and had to own it.

I was my main hunting rifle for may years.

A lot of game fell to it.

Decent wood that has been refinished a couple of times. It happens when a rifle sees a lot of use.

For the passed decade or so a 300 savage 99 has been my main hunting rifle.

The 1s is a fine rifle I would start there.

I lover the No. 1 ! I have several and am about to sell a .223 for a song. This .223 shoots PMC 55gr FMJ's into a nickel size hole. It is mint and has a low round count! I will throw in 100 rounds of the PMC ammo for the right person.

PM me if you are interested. Price will be $800 shipped.

Also, Ruger only built the NO. 1 in a .223 for a year or so....

quote:

Originally posted by bentaframe:
The fellow that shot the nickel size group should take it home...leave it a year and go try it again. I bet it won't do it twice.

I have had 6 different #1's. I could not find one that would shoot consistent time after time and I have no explanation for it. I love the gun, the looks, and how they carry. I just got tired of having to resight them in 3-4 times a year. Couple of them would not even maintain the common man " hunting accuracy 3-4" @ 100 yds. I wish I could have found a cure without having to put $100.00's of dollars into them. I did that with one. Worked for about a year !

I've been shooting the 110 grain Barnes TTSX with 51.5 grains of Reloader 15 and haven't touched the scope since I set it in 2015. I've only taken three animals with it though.

THat is how my No. 1 shoots. I like them a lot.

My dad bought me a new Ruger #1A in .243 for my 12th birthday in 1978. We tried a bunch of different hand loads in it, and the thing was shooting 4" patterns at 100 yards. I wouldn't even call them groups. My dad floated the front end and the groups shrank to about 2 inches.....still not good enough. Then he bedded the buttstock 100% to the back of the receiver and it went sub-MOA. I believe the best group was five into 5/8". I still have all the before and after targets around here somewhere.