am currently looking at a number 1 in a 222 rem.
never been an owner of a #1 before.
what are the pros and cons of the #1?
are they accurate?

Well, some are and some are not. Kind of the luck of the draw. You did not state which model #1 you were looking at so It's hard to say. I'm guessing that because it is a .222 Rem., it's probably a #1V. I have one in .223 Rem. that is an absolute tack driver.
Out of 13 Ruger #1 rifles that I currently have, only one was not sufficiently accurate for the cartridge involved, a #1A in 7x57. The barrel had a bad throat from the factory. Ruger replaced it and the gun now shoots just fine.
If the gun really is way off in accuracy, Ruger will mostlikely make it good.
Paul B.

I have a #1V in .223. It was a good shooter right out of the box. My wife shot a .467 5 shot group at 100 yards last weekend. BTW, mine prefers 40 Gr V-MAX over 28 Gr of 748.
Pete

I have heard of inaccurate No. 1's, but have never actually seen an inaccurate No.1!!! I have owned six of these, and all were capable of at least 1.5 MOA right out of the box. My 7mm Rem. Mag. still shoots 1" groups @ 200 yards with at least three different bullet weights!! I have a No. 3 in .30/40 Krag, and it is a 1" rifle, with no changes to any part, including the forend/barrel band!!

Eldeguello. I had an inaccurate Ruger #1. My 7x57 had a throat that was over 2" long as determined by a chamber cast. If I got a four inch group from it, it was a good day. Five to six inches was the norm. I sent it, along with the chamber cast to Ruger and they put on a new barrel. Shoots just fine now.
Just my thoughts on the subject, but with all the .5" BS coming from the "eggspurts" in the gun rags, if a rifle doesn't come close, people think they're inaccurate. I talked with a Ruger rep at an NRA convention and the accuracy standard for a Ruger #1 is 2.0" at 50 yards. That's it. Frankly, I find that unreasonable for as much money as they want for the gun. But, most of them do a hell of a lot better than that, and anyway, I do know how to tune one up. Can't wait to get me another #1. The 13 I have now are wanting to make new friends.
Paul B.

Paul, I sure agree that 2" @ 50 yards is really sorry!! One could hardly characterize that as a "standard". More like a "substandard"!!

I'm sorry you had to go through such a hassle to get some accuracy, but it sounds as though your rifle has been fixed! ALL of my No. 1's are 1976 guns or earlier. I had two No.1's and a No. 3 that were Liberty models, but sold one (a 1V .25/05), which was the least accurate. It only shot into about 1.25" or so. However, it would shoot that well for ten shots, probably due to the heavy barrel. I also had a Ruger 77 in 7X57 that I bought in 1972. It was one of the round-receiver types that you had to put scope bases on to mount the scope. It was quite accurate also, but my son borrowed it for a deer hunt in 1976, and I haven't seen the gun since!! He lives in Colorado, so it isn't likely that I'll ever get it back! Oh well. He's a better hunter than I am.

From what I've been told the #1 in .222 was
made in limited numbers in the early 70s. So
it probably wont be easy to find right away,
a friend of mine sold one for $800 a few years
ago and it went quickly.

The very first #1's were 222s and 308s with 22" lighweight barrels, 1-B forends, no sights. If it's one of those with a 4 digit SN, it's a collector item.

I've got a 1B in 218 Bee as does a bud, we bought them from the same dealer at the same time. Both are very accurate with the right load. You'll probably want to do something about the trigger. Ruger factory triggers, generally speaking, suck. That aside, I really like these rifles.

I have a No1 Ruger in 22PPC that was a factory offering in 1993.
No special tinkering apart from a trigger job and a 25x Lyman scope produced a 5 shot 0.182 at 100yds.
This is certainly the most accurate centerfire I own. Have other #1's in 222, 243, 270AI, 7x57, 30.06, 340Weatherby, 38/55Win, 404Jefferies, 458Lott, 45/120, 500Nitro.

Wow, Wallace! What accuracy!! Maybe Ruger is sending their best guns to Australia!!

Na smucks in Aus !
I forgot ta mention the competition die set, the neck turning tools, the primer pocket unifying tools, the Berger match projectiles, the $1.50ea shells and the dear-as-hell BR primers; but it does shoot despite the cost!

I've owned four Ruger #1's. None of them were accurate enough to allow them cabinet space.
I swore I'd never own another number one, but have one on the way now in 218Bee. They are pretty. I just wish Ruger would learn how to build them to be accurate! I'm hoping for better things from this one than the last four.
T.D.

My #1, 22-250, Model 1B with a Tasco 6-24X Target scope shoots 3/8" groups with Hornady 55gr PSP. Not bad for an inaccurate rifle. It has had no gunsmithing done to it at all. It is straight out of the box.

I most decidely DO NOT AGREE that Ruger does not know how to build accurate No. 1's!! But having four of them that will not shoot is certainly no recommendation for them, and is just the opposite of my experiences with No. 1's (and No. 3's also)!!

Well I've got to jump in and defend the #1A in 7x57
Mine shoots just about everything into less than 1.5". The load I settled on for whitetails averages about MOA.
I've owned two other #1's.
One was a #1B in 22-250. It was accurate enough as rifles go, but it wasn't not varmint hunting accurate. Its best groups were about 1.5".
The other one was a rifle I wished I'd never gotten rid of. It was a #1AB (sightless 22 in. barrel with "B" type forend) in .270. It was about the same as the 22-250 in the accuracy department, but balanced just right.
Wish Ruger would figure out that that relatively rare "AB" model is a much better feeling rifle than those excessively heavy "B" models.
The #1 is one of the great rifles available from the big gun makers.
Ken

I have owned a couple of No. 1's and think they are very accurate. I have found if you measure the overall chamber length and make your bullets the maximum safe distance from the lands, plus load them hot, they shoot real tight groups. I shoot 300 Winchester Magnum caliber, and can put all bullets (3 to 6 shot groups) touching each other at a 100 yds. No brag just fact. Nosler 180 gr. Partitions with 77.5 grains of Reloader 22 or hotter. No. 1's can handle it. My gun is a No. 1 Stainless, gray and black laminate stock with a Leupold 4.5 x 14 x 50 mm Vari-X III with factory target turrets. A four inch sun shield, and a few other accessories. A little homework and most guns will shoot well. This is the only big game rifle I will buy in the future.

Huntor, my 1B in 7mm Rem Mag shoots just like your .300 Win.

[ 06-21-2003, 16:31: Message edited by: eldeguello ]

Mine in .300 Weatherby wasn't accurate no matter what I tried including a Hicks Accurizer, Moyers trigger, and so on.
It now has a Pac-Nor barrel and shoots MOA.

Some of the early #1'a had crap barrels. It has always been luck of the draw, but it's often like that w/ anything mass produced. I have a #1S/7mag that was a great shooter. Just over MOA w/ most ammo & under that w/ many handloads. No tweeking, straight out of the box. I had it rechambered to 7mm Dakota & if anything, it shoots a bit better now.
I had a #1H in .375 that just shot ok, under 2MOA w/ the occasional MOA group. I am having it rebarreled to a funky .338 wildcat. They are fun to hunt w/, something a bit different.

Ruger #1s are capable of very good accuracy. I work on a lot of them. I have 40 of them in the shop now. I can always get them to shoot under 1".Of course, sometimes it does take a new barrel.Most of the time I can tweak one and get it to shoot under 1" with the factory barrel. A good custom barrel will get under 3/4" at least, and most of the time 1/2" 3-shot groups.

I tend to agree the newer ones shoot better and the stainless even better. The older one I had was blue and had a very long chamber. My new stainless has alot smaller chamber, in other words closer to reloading book specs. I had to seat the bullet way out to get close to the lands. I always load to the most accurate powder tested in the book and have good luck. The stainless seems to get better velocities too. I don't seem to get any copper fouling either. I am going to start shooting moly coated Nosler's next. I set up a 270 for a friend and used the Nosler Partition Gold moly free and they shot higher velocities.

I have a #1 in .458 Win that shoots about 1 MOA groups (at least at the start of the day - before the recoil of 500 grainers starts to make the shoulder a bit sore...)

I own many Ruger #1's in calibers ranging from .223 rem. to .458 win. mag. I have found them to be very accurate out of the box. I am not happy with the factory triggers. You can also bed the forearm and greatly decrease group size. I shoot a 25-06 Rem. bull barrel, which I have fluted and ported. It is my favorite hunting rifle. I shoot everything from varmint to deer and black bear with it. It has never failed me.

One of my most accurate #1's is a 458 Win Mag. Load it @ 1600 - 1700 fps with 405 grain swaged Lead bullets @.460 Dia and it's allways one hole if there's no wind. Up to 100 yards. Big hole though. If three ever leave a gap then two more will fill it in.
Messed around with it four summers ago with a 6 to 20 variable with parallax adj. off of my "true" varmint rifle for load workup. The eye relief is 3.8 inches at 20X. (Love those Leupolds ). Used a competition front rest and sandbags on the rear. Boy did that combo get some looks at the range. But everybody just had to shoot it. I would tell them to keep the targets to show their friends and say "Hell; I did that with an elephant gun".

[ 08-22-2003, 08:52: Message edited by: Old & Slow ]

I have a Ruger No. 1 in 280 Rem. Extremely accurate and hard hitting. Here in Western Kansas it is a great white tail and mule deer gun. My son will be using it this year to take his muley buck with.

Dave