My curiousity is peaked on this caliber and I am looking for path of least resistance to get one.

First don't go into its not suitable for dangerous game cause, when and if I ever get to do that I will purchase a rifle for the task at hand. Purpose here is I just want one to shoot and play around with, and maybe a domestic buffalo hunt, or working with downloaded ammo on deer/elk sized game. In short it has little real practical function other than I get to work with and shoot a old classic cartridge.

I also put the 470 NE in consideration but the 45 cal seems to make more sense as bullet selection is excellent and I don't need to use a five dollar bill every time I pull the trigger. The Hornady bullets look to be a good and resonably priced starting point and possibaly a set of bullet molds later on.

Anyway, I was thinking that a Ruger #1, rebarreld to the 450 NE would work. Here is a pic of one:





Link: http://www.billsaccuracy.com/nitro.htm

And yes I am aware of this rifle in the 458 Lott, which makes a lot more sense and doesn't need anything other than me writting a check. But its not chambered in the classic cartridge and want is the only real justification under consideration here.

Is this a straight forward conversion? I was thinking a 45-70 as a starting point cause its already set up for a rimmed cartridge, but I think it needs to be opened up for the larger rim diameter on the 450 NE.

Anyway thoughts a comments either good or bad would be appreciated.

works for me, though i would start with one in 458 lott, as it would be a more straightforward ---less $$$--- to rechamber and rework...

and the lott would have a heavier barrel and longer length than a 45/70.

i know where you can get one of each as a starting point

jeffe

Jeff,

Are the extractors different betwwen the rimmed and the belted version. Please elaborate.

I saw the other thread on the Fraser action and when finsihed that would be a class act!!!

Sounds like a good project if you are starting from scratch.

Those of us with .470 NE doubles would go with the .470 NE. Bullets are not so hard to come by, even 400 grain .475 pistol bullets (Hornady) at low velocity for plinking and varmints.

.470 NE brass and dies will be easier to find, and factory ammo at ridiculous prices if desired.

If starting from scratch, I would pick the 500/.416 NE due to better bullets for long range use and up close.

The main thing is getting a rimmed cartridge for single shot use, though my Ruger No.1 in .416 Rigby worked just fine on 1800 pound water buffalo at 50 yards and 100 pound fallow deer at 342 yards, with the 350 grain X bullet at 2700 fps.

I have a 45/70 Ruger No1. I would NOT rechamber it to 450 Nitro. It is too light. Start with a 458 or a 458 Lott.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

The main thing is getting a rimmed cartridge for single shot use

This about a classic cartridge in a big bore, common sense will prevail, I was looking at Midway and there didn't seem to be much difference in the brass availability, except Norma makes the 470 NE.

Anyway what did you mean on the above quote, I am asking questions and opinions here in an attempt to start the downselect and planning part of this.

schromf,
Many will badmouth any rimless or belted cartridge in a singleshot (or double rifle) ... saying the extractor will occasionally slip over the minimal rim in such a cartridge ... that there is no camming power for extraction as with a turnbolt, etc. ...

There are no critics of the rimmed cartridges in singleshots and double rifles.

Remember that the Rugers have some pretty deep bore holes right over the chamber section for the studs and screws that hold the quarter rib on. You have to be careful to stay near the donor rifle chambering diameter at these holes.

An integral rib would be the best way to go.

It all adds up to a rebarrel job to me.

Any decent smith can open up the extractor and fit it to a larger rim. It is pretty simple.

as the extractor will have to be recut anyway, it wouldn't matter where you started (rimmed, rimmless) but the barrel WOULD matter.

the #1 has been done to 577 nitro.. and the weatherby cases are larger than the 450#2, which is the one i would do.

sounds like a great project

jeffe

I was figuring a rebarrel anyway, Ruger's aren't known for top drawer barrels and by the time it was fiddled with to clean up the stampings and such whats the point? My big concern was the extractor and I sounds like that is a relitively minor issue.

I was just out looking in gun stores for a #1 to eyeball, no luck, I should have known looking while I am in California is a waste of time, this is one of the "WORST" places to go look for rifles, poor selection, overpriced, and then when I asked if they had a #1 in anything large bore I was told they couldn't sell them and the last one they had dislocated somebodys shoulder in a 45-70. What a crock and a waste of my time

Edit: Jeffe thanks if it can go to a 577 the 450 or 470 shouldn't be an issue.

Your call on the rebarrel... if you are going to go down the road of the ruger, with buying a reamer, I would cut the ruger barrel first.. and if it didn't shoot well, you can always rebarrel.

dies and brass will cost you more than the gunsmithing, if it's just a chamber and extraction

jeffe

I need to check out the geometry, I like your idea and I could always fiddle with it later if I wasn't happy.

In a double the .450 Nitro makes for a slenderer and better handling rifle, even in the same weight, than a .470, but unfortunately the .470 has become the current baseline for a double altho the .450 is preferable in every way.

Don't let anybody scare you away from the 450 3 1/4. It is the base line for DG cartidges. I would bet there are more different bullets available in 45 caliber than for the 470. Probably a lot cheaper also.

A pretty straight operation and the 458 will clean up great in the 450. There have been quite a few Doubles in 458 that have been rechambered to a 450.

After you get the right caliber than you can work on the Ruger stock.

You know, i just had a moment!!!

While the lott full house loads in a ruger are, well, surprising unpleasent, that's a 510gr at 2300 (hornady heavy... yeah, it's 2300)

the same load at 2150 aint all that bad!!

so, either i just saved you a ton of money (buy a lott, load it down to 2150) or you should have every confindence that a 450 nitro in a ruger would be bearable...

I realize the lott aint the nostalgic round that the 450 NE, whatever flavor, is.

as for "contronversy" between the 450 and 470..well, have you SEEN the merkel in 470? it feels like a 410 shotgun... there is ZERO reason for a 470 to weigh an oz more than than 450.. the ballistics are identical.. 500 at 2150...

sure, a 470 would have a SLIGHTLY larger barrel diameter.. but USER DEMAND and nitro powder called for a heavier gun

jeffe

I was doing some looking at the diagrams aand whatnot yesterday on the #1's and since the 458 Lott is available as a standard rifle it makes sense to start with that and tweak. I didn't find good case dimension drawings on the Lott but I assumed it was the same as the 458 Win only longer. Which seems if I converted this it would be just a chamber reamer as the base diameter on the Lott is .513 vrs .548 on the NE, which is more than enough to clean up the old chamber.

I also did some looking at the the extractor. Ruger calls it an ejector and it doesn't look too awful diffucult to remake, refit, to make this work, I had something a lot more complicated in my mind than this actually is. Amazing what looking at the diagrams can answer

One note is that the link above is quoting a 2500 FPS load I am pretty suspect of that load. I would be working on the original velocity spec's and have no reason to attempt hot roading.

Question for anyone who might know has anyone run across a on-line resource that shows the mechanical drawings or dimensions of the 450 NE? Second I didn't see much on reloading data either any links would be aprreciated.

ask and ye shall receive!!

http://www.clymertool.com/cgi-bin/reamer.cgi?

http://ammoguide.com/

jeffe

Thanks Jeff, now I am cooking with fire

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso ...

... have you SEEN the merkel in 470? it feels like a 410 shotgun ...

jeffe

Jeffe, I reckon that 10.75# Merkel .470 NE is so well balanced that it feels lighter, eh?

Schromf,
That .450 NE 3-1/4" would be a great rechamber for a Ruger No.1 in .458 WinMag or .458 Lott, of course. I want one too.

Yeah, I have two rifles in the works right now, and I want to get one at least finished up first, but I think is a going to get funded next project. Sounds like a project I could really get to fiddling with, the possibilities with the spread of bullets from cast, cast with gaschecks and commercially availble bullets leaves a tremendous amount of potential for shooting pleasure.

schromf

I would rather have the Ruger # 1 in 458 Lott than 450 Nitro and for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, cast bullets and general stuffing about the 458 Lott will simply be easier and cheaper.

I am for nostalgia in cartridges but I think the rifle needs to be part of the equation. For example you tell me...I have a 450 Nitro.....then you explain it is only a Ruger. Kind of like having a blow up plastic doll that looks like your favourite woman.

A 577 would be somewhat different as that needs the 577 to get the case capacity and bore diameter.

In short I think in the longer term you will be happier with the 458 Lott for it ease of ownership and because the Ruger in 450 Nitro won't have the same ease and is not a real 450 Nitro.

Mike

I would agree that the 450 NE would be more desirable in a double or high dollar Farquarson action.

Trouble is with taking that thinking too far is the old classic rounds quit being chambered and because there are no rifles available they fade into history. There are some other much more modern cartridges on that slide currently.

I am not convinced that the Lott has any real advantage except cost. Brass is a lot cheaper, dies are cheaper, but bullets are the same. It also is a stock item from Ruger not a rebore job.

Frankly though if I wanted a Lott a bolt action rifle is more suitable than a single shot of any flavor. Its a belted magnum, not a rimmed and belongs in a bolt.

A 45-90 or a 45-120 would probably fit the RUger a little better when theme was considered but it just isn't a 450 NE.

schromf,
Mike375 can be a stick in the mud when it comes to propriety of cartridge to action. He especially likes Weatherby cartridges in Mark V actions, etc.

The only thing the Ruger No.1 lacks is a powerful rimmed cartridge, and lesser rimmed cartridges besides the .45/70.

Now, how about a Ruger No.1 in stainless and laminate for a .450 NE 3-1/4"?

Has anybody seen any synthetic stocks for the Ruger No.1 lately? Might as well go all the way, sort of like a stainless and synthetic .404 Jeffery on a M70 RUM rifle. That will give Mike some dyspepsia too.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
schromf,
Mike375 can be a stick in the mud when it comes to propriety of cartridge to action. He especially likes Weatherby cartridges in Mark V actions, etc.

The only thing the Ruger No.1 lacks is a powerful rimmed cartridge, and lesser rimmed cartridges besides the .45/70.

Now, how about a Ruger No.1 in stainless and laminate for a .450 NE 3-1/4"?

Has anybody seen any synthetic stocks for the Ruger No.1 lately? Might as well go all the way, sort of like a stainless and synthetic .404 Jeffery on a M70 RUM rifle. That will give Mike some dyspepsia too.

Rip,

Might as well add a Red Dot scope and Lazer, for those low light conditions.

Hog Killer

Ron,

It would be a toss up between a 404 on a stainless and M70 or a 375 H&H in a Weatherby Crown Custom with birds eye maple stock

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Hog Killer:

... Might as well add a Red Dot scope and Lazer, for those low light conditions.

Hog Killer

Perfect! Why haven't I thought of that yet: Laser and red dot, and night vision scope, and ballistic reticled scope, extra scopes in separate rings with QD levers, man-o-man the possibilities for updating the .450 Nitro Express 3-1/4" ...

Quigley Down Under ain't got nuthin' with his old antique .45-120 Sharps.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike375:
Ron,

It would be a toss up between a 404 on a stainless and M70 or a 375 H&H in a Weatherby Crown Custom with birds eye maple stock

Mike

Yup, real tough decision there.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike375:
schromf

I have a 450 Nitro.....then you explain it is only a Ruger. Kind of like having a blow up plastic doll that looks like your favourite woman.

Mike

Now THAT's funny! Except we married gents have to play that game at home all the time.

bill's shop is a great place to do biss with, I had him straighten out the 45o nitro conversion awhile ago, he tried to talk me into a rebarrel job,as NE450 said its just a tad light lite for full bore loads,but load it down to the old black powder levels,and put a 600 grain solid cast lead hammer head slug on it,and its a real hoot TUFF ON SCOPES THO!

Oh geez! Now I own a set of .450 Nitro Express 3-1/4" dies made by RCBS. They have been gathering dust in Mt. Juliet, Tennessee for the last 2 years, but I have liberated them.

What's next?

A plastic, blow-up love doll that looks like Rebecca Romijn-Stamos, or Natasha Henstridge?

Decisions, decisions ...

It is inevitable.

If the .450 NE 3-1/2" (0.080" rim) is the .450 No. 2 NE ... that means the .450 NE 3-1/4" is the .450 No. 1 NE ... and that has got to mean that it belongs in a Ruger No. 1.

The logic is undeniable!

Now, red dot, holosight, or laser sight? How is the parallax with a red dot on a rifle?

RIP, I haven't found a "red dot' that will hold up on mine, I'm sure its due to the weight of the beast, so far a cheapie simmons 2x shotgun scope and an old steel tubed weaver 4x, have seen about 300 rounds a piece and are still kicking

Dave,
Sounds like I won't be trying a red dot.
Next is the quest for brass to feed Rebecca with.

Could neck that .450 NE down to .450/.400 ... nah, I am not that old and feeble yet.

Well, it is decided, a stainless Ruger No.1 in .458 Lott will be rechambered to .450 NE.

Let us not call her a blow-up love doll.

Rather let us think of her as a Mutant, like Mystique in X-Men 2.

This laminate/stainless single-shot in the 1898 chambering that set the standards by which all others were compared, will have a low power scope and fold-down open rear sight or NECG peep ... and a laser and a SureFire with red lens will be clamped to the barrel.

Think of the speed of the first shot: sight in the scope at 100 yards. Zero the laser to match the scope reticle at 100 yards.

Point and shoot when the laser dot is on target, head up and both eyes wide open ... so you can find those cartridges and the loading port for that not so fast second shot.

With a Ruger No.1, and a wrist band ammo carrier, I am almost as fast as with a bolt action. Maybe the laser will be the edge I need, with the sun or moon at my back. "Now spit."

RIP,

Your having way too much fun with this thread


Seriously though, I was checking wieghts on the #1 its 9lbs, which I think is at least a pound little. Any cleaver ideas without the addition of a Laser Scope?

schromf,
Thanks for the prompts.
9 pounds bare is perfect! Add a 2.5X Leupold scope in Ruger rings on that quarter rib, and a sling and ammo in a butt carrier, and you will be close to 11 pounds: Keep adding rounds to the ammo carrier on the butt until 11 pounds even is reached.
Thanks again for the idea.

hay RIP,

did you block me or something? I tried to PM you but got:

"The user RIP has not allowed you to send him/her private messages."


I don't recall having any e-fights on AR....

Stryker225,
Ever since a certain moderator took to PM-ing me about a squabble with another member here, unfairly siding with the other member of course, I decided to keep everything out in the open.

I like to show off in public rather than private.

You may find my email in the profile if you wish. I don't do the Private Message System (PMS) at all. I do not suffer from PMS.

So if somebody wants to correct me on something, I appreciate their doing so in public, for all to see. And if I am really BAD, then BAN me.

If it is really personal : e-mail.