I have been told that the design of the Ruger #1 is not ideal for handling heavier recoiling calibers (375's, 416's, 458's). I've never fired one, and was wondering what some of you heavy No. 1 owners have to say on the subject...

Are they un-necessarily unpleasant to shoot?

Thanks.

I have owned several. I have only kept one, a 1S in 338 Win. Mag. I started shooting .458's when I was about 16 or 17 and have found them very easy to shoot, but the one I had in a Ruger No. 1 was quite unpleasent. I don't know if it is the design or just how it fits me, but I find them very unpleasant to shoot in anything above 375 H&H.

Tell you what ... My #1 in 450 Nitro was almost un-shootable. On the scale it showed slightly under 7 lb.

That said,my 458 Lott #1 was not bad. I has it ported and it did a hell of a job on a Cape Buffalo with little felt recoil.

Juice up a 600 in one & it'll clear your sinuses

The No 1 is pretty light for bigger bores. I bought one off a friend in 450 NE. He recommended additional weight. So, we took a few 30 cal bullets and taped them together and put as many as I could in the hole in the stock.

I have shot several full power loads and they are fine. Reduced loads are like a light 20 gauge.

That being said, I do not think I would want one in a hard kicking magnum like a 300 Wby.

Matt

I have custom Ruger #1s in 458Lott & 375H&H. In terms of recoil, I find them no different than bolt actions of like caliber, weight.

My Ruger #1 in 450/400 is a delight to shoot.

My 110lb wife calls her No1 in 416 Rigby 'Baby'. She has shot up to 18 full power rounds in a sitting and it is her favorite hunting rifle. I find it more pleasant to shoot than my M70 in 416 Rem Mag.

I have 2 #1s a 375 H&H and a 300 Weatherby, I have found the 375 even though it pushes a heavier bullet than the 300 more "comforable" to shoot.

The 375 gives you a good push where as the 300 will smack you a good one. I wood suppose that bullet velocity and there fore initial recoil is the difference.

I enjoy shooting both just a little more aware that the 300 could hurt me. --- John

quote:

My Ruger #1 in 450/400 is a delight to shoot.

+1

My #1 in 450/400 with a Kickeze pad is great to shoot with full power loads.

They are stocked to come straight back. They can be light weight in Larger calibers. From the factory, they have hard rubber pads. The rest is math but felt recoil can be mitigated by a good pad some.

My No. 1 .458 is a beast for sure, even with a better pad. It can be loaded up to Lott velocities (it has a very long throat) but the recoil is huge. I think that with a proper stock it would be much more manageable. I believe all the No. 1's use the same basic stock shape, from the .22's to the .470. I have fired a couple of shots from a .375 and didn't find the recoil bad at all.
C.G.B.

Wade
I am loathe to shoot a real big bore #1. And I can soak up recoil

Much like the Gibbs / Farquarhson that they copy, they are light-for-weight for the caliber, but that's how these rifles were designed. If you want to add weight, it's easy to do so by adding lbs. to the butt. These rifles generally shoot great in the heavy calibers and are idea for the occasional African hunter when backed by a competent PH. Plus, one can get into a really nice Safari grade #1 for a quarter the price of a double prifle, and still find it on par historically with the Farquarhson.

I have a 450 Nitro and it is a beast. After I learned to shoot the thing properly, it became more manageable. I can put down 30+ full power rounds a session without a hitch. I think it wouldn't be so bad if you replace the recoil pad.

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:
Much like the Gibbs / Farquarhson that they copy, they are light-for-weight for the caliber, but that's how these rifles were designed. If you want to add weight, it's easy to do so by adding lbs. to the butt. These rifles generally shoot great in the heavy calibers and are idea for the occasional African hunter when backed by a competent PH. Plus, one can get into a really nice Safari grade #1 for a quarter the price of a double prifle, and still find it on par historically with the Farquarhson.

To show how feeble my skills are, when I sighted in my No. 1 in .458 Win Mag in front of my PH, he told me to put it back in the case and use my .375 H&H.

For some reason, my later acquired 500/450 3-1/4" double, despite having performance similar to the .458 and using identical bullets, has a recoil very much like the .375. Design and weight are no doubt the key.

Those old nitro express doubles are worth the price in terms of handling, if you can find one. I hate to make grown men cry, so I won't say how little I paid for mine. Fully refreshed by H&H, too!

quote:

Originally posted by mdstewart:
Much like the Gibbs / Farquarhson that they copy, they are light-for-weight ... Plus, one can get into a really nice Safari grade #1 for a quarter the price of a double prifle, and still find it on par historically with the Farquarhson.

Not sure what you mean here.
I have a few genuine Farquharsons and they all handle recoil better than a Ruger regardless of the weight of the rifle.
It is all in the stock geometry.
The Rugers are stocked with the option of mounting a scope, so the combs and heels are higher up in relation to the bore than a vintage rifle.
This results in a straight rearward force rather than a rolling force.
A high comb and heel requires the shooter to "hunch" down on the stock to get a good sight picture whereas a lower stock geometry allows the shooter to use a more "heads up" stance which lets the shooter absorb recoil rather than resist it.
That said, there is a happy medium somewhere in between. I own and have shot vintage rifles with a lot of drop in the stock which then gives rhe shooter a bit of a slap in the face which ain't good either.
My .375 H&H No.1 is very heavy on recoil. Almost unpleasant but is an early gun with the red recoil pad.
My 450/400 is actually nicer to shoot but I have only shot handloads which aren't close to max loads but it has a softer pad too.
Now, I have a 458 Lott coming so I will have a better comparison at that performance level.
Good thing I can load it down to performance levels which will suit both my recoil tolerance and the requirements of the game here in North America.
I guess that is the beauty of the No.1. You can work up a load which specifically meets your needs and not reach the limits of recoil tolerance.

quote:

Originally posted by Huvius:

It is all in the stock geometry.

My .375 H&H No.1 is very heavy on recoil. Almost unpleasant but is an early gun with the red recoil pad.

I agree(I think). I had a No. 1 in 375H&H and it was fairly heavy, but recoil was a bear. It was worse than any 375 bolt action I have dealt with.

I would love a No 1 in a light cartridge, but I believe they are useless in anything that generates real recoil.

My experience with the No1 in 375 H&H.

As factory issued it was a very unpleasant rifle to shoot off the bench, the rifle would rear up off the front bag and was hard to hold onto, I think I managed 13 shots before my shoulder said enough. The stock was too long, the scope too far forward and the recoil pad was too thin and at the wrong angle for me.

To be fair to the rifle though it didn't fit me, which isn't the rifles fault.

I had the stock shortened and the pitch changed to fit me. Fitted a mule and Kick Ezz pad, now the rifle is quite pleasant to shoot off the bench, comes straight back. Weight is 10lbs including scope after mods.

The most powerful load I used generates 44ft/lbs of recoil, but I usually use a milder load of 262gn Lead projectiles at 2350fps, this load generates around 25-27ft/lbs of recoil, last weekend I fired 50 rounds of this and a similar jacketed load (33 ft/lbs)all from the bench with no ill effects.

The most powerful loads are pleasant to shoot from any of the field positions except prone (Wouldn't recommend trying it)

I recently fired a Ruger No1 in 50 Sharps off the bench, This rifle weighed 14lbs and while it was a little too long for me the pitch angle was good, total recoil movement was more than my 375 and seemed to be slower, it does tend to stretch the neck a bit.

Don't tell Will that a minimum drop stock kicks worse than one with greater drop of comb!

If you build them right, the Ruger No.1 kicks no worse than the same weight bolt action.
These two .510/460WbyIJAB (aka 510 JAB or 500 Jabi) rifles both weigh 12.75 pounds and have the same length,
one with 23" heavy barrel, the other with 27" heavier barrel:



Ruger No.1 accuracy for 3 shots at 100 yards:



It also helps that they both have muzzle brakes and slip-on recoil pads over another pad underneath.

Of course a sub-7-pound 450 NE Ruger No.1 (or No.3, or any rifle that light) is going to kick!!!

Rechambering the heavy-barreled Ruger No.1 from .458WinMag or .458 Lott is a winner, not a bad kicker. There is some drop on that stock's comb:



The slip-on pad helps again, not just for getting my LOP on the factory stock.

Enough ugly Ruger No.1's. I gotta spray paint the silver scope flat black,
and hang a laser and a light from the barrel of that stainless 450 Nitro Express 3.25" Thin-Rim ...

Anybody got any pretty ones?
Pretty factory wood on a Ruger No.1 happens more often than not on a walnut and blue one, eh?
And they usually get the grain flow in the grip correct.

Factory walnut stock from a 9.3x74R Ruger No.1 rebarreled to 400/.395 Nitro Express 3" Aboriginal, aka 10.03x75R:







There is plenty of drop on this factory Ruger No.1 stock for even my fat face to use the factory iron sights (on a custom barrel).
Rusty McGee rebarreled this Ruger No.1 and re-fitted the quarter rib and sights,
and copied a John P. Beck flintlock similar in conformation to George Washington's J.P. Beck rifle,
but in the caliber of Davy Crockett's original 40-cal "Ol' Betsy."

Recoil tolerance is a very individual thing. That being said, my Ruger no. 1, 375 H&H mag, is very easy to manage, once I installed a pachmyer decelerator pad. My son bought a no. 1 for our trip to Zim. in 2011. It was new, and had the factory pad on board. He is more recoil sensitive than me, and it beat the he** out of him. I let him shoot mine, and we immediately ordered a decelerator pad for his.


Mad Dog

I think the main culprit behind the notion that #1s kick more than other rifles is the small, hard factory recoil pads. Replace those and a big part of the problem is gone. Stock geometry is little different from factory bolt action rifles, about 1.25" drop at heel, just right. My Lott (top rifle) kicks me less than my ZKK602 because it has a large buttstock, Decelerator pad and additional weight in the butt, but is still perfectly balanced. 375 at the bottom with smaller area butt and hard rounded factory pad hurts more.

Definitely something to be said for getting a good recoil pad on a Ruger No.1 big bore.
And it looks like the wood on Forrests' two Rugers is quite good.

Hi guys, i have owned the no.1 in 458 lott and 450 nitro i currently own. the lot was worse than the nitro the nitro is sharper than it needs be ( i think just the weight is th main issue) and i just started shooting my 585nyati today......750gr pills at 2477, and i can tell you the nitro is worse to shoot, neither are bad but the nitro is sharper.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

Hi RIP

Nice stock on the No 1. I am thinking this is not Ruger issued?

Hi Bwana_500,

That is a Bell & Carlson fiberglass stock that came with both moulded-in checkering and black texture-paint.
It is a good stock and economical, just has a very short length of pull, as only negative.
Hence I had to use the Galco leather slip-on pad with a piece of dense foam cut to fit, just for proper LOP,
not that I really need it for recoil comfort.

quote:

Originally posted by poprivit:
Tell you what ... My #1 in 450 Nitro was almost un-shootable. On the scale it showed slightly under 7 lb.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Moore:
The No 1 is pretty light for bigger bores. I bought one off a friend in 450 NE. He recommended additional weight. So, we took a few 30 cal bullets and taped them together and put as many as I could in the hole in the stock.

I have shot several full power loads and they are fine. Reduced loads are like a light 20 gauge.

Matt

The funny thing about this is that they're talking about the EXACT same rifle.
Recoil is subjective to each shooter. What's OK for one is too much for another shooter.
Different LOP's, height. weight all contribute.

In my limited experience, when trying to achieve bottom end velocities for a 458WM in a 45-70 chambered #1S with a paper thin barrel the recoil was tremendous. My 458WM #1 Tropical was a pussycat to shoot. The heavy barrel made all the difference in the world.

But.....everyone feels recoil differently.

quote:

Originally posted by Eland Slayer:
I have been told that the design of the Ruger #1 is not ideal for handling heavier recoiling calibers (375's, 416's, 458's). I've never fired one, and was wondering what some of you heavy No. 1 owners have to say on the subject...

Are they un-necessarily unpleasant to shoot?

Thanks.

If you want a Ruger #1 in a Safari caliber, then buy one and learn how to shoot it properly. There is no such thing as perfect recoil vs. caliber or best caliber for game targeted.

I have owned and shot many Ruger #1's, and although I think the action is extremely strong for any caliber, it is also light in weight for caliber. But that hasn't bothered me yet.

If you like the #1, then get it and learn to shoot it, you will come to love it.

I like Ruger #1s and in 585HE with heavy 27" long barrel,
weight in butt so it is 13 lbs, thick pad, shoots 12,000 ft lb
loads just as easy as a bolt gun.Ed

I'll chime in with my .02 on the Ruger No. 1-

I have one in .405 Winchester (I know, just an oversized cap gun for you seasoned hunters) and I do not find it particularly unpleasant to shoot, unless I try shooting more than ten rounds in one sitting. I've shot as many as 15 through my chrono on the bench, but that's it.

Then again, maybe I'm somewhat of a recoil junkie...

I do wish they made the No. 1 in different chamberings, on a regular basis. A truly beautiful rifle IMO.