I am apparently reaping the benefits of old age (this may be the only benefit, I'm finding there aren't many.....) Anyway, am about to receive a Ruger No. 1 in .45-70.

Can have either a 1-A with 22" bbl, or a 1-S with what I think is a 24" bbl., but can't have both. Both are ANIB, so condition is not a deciding factor in this instance.

My question is, Which would YOU prefer, and why?

I have no experience with the 1-S, dont really care for the look but I do own 45-70 in 1-A and 270 Win in 1-AB and loe them both. Just make a choice you can not go wrong on these fine rifles.

My only Ruger no 1 experience is with a 7x57 1a.
Once I bedded the foreend,lightly polished the hammer sear notch and found some loads it liked, I couldn't imagine a better setup for woods hunting.
It's a little butt heavy, but very quick on target.

In 45-70,I would opt for the longer heavier barrelled version just to get the additional weight and velocity.

Probably would be a little nose heavy,but that is not necessarily a bad thing.

Covey16

Velocity changes with barrel length are minor with the low velocity 45-70. My 1885 now has a 22" barrel ,plenty for velocity and very handy for the woods.

I just looked at Ruger's web site... They only show one No.1 in .45/70. the 1S. And it has a 22" barrel, as does mine..... Looks like a 1A though, as the barrel is as light as you can make a .45 cqaliber rifle barrel..... Mine has hoorendous recoil with my favorite load (58 foot-pounds thereof), a 400-grain Barnes Original semispitzer (B.C. .389) at 2270 FPS MV.

I put a Limbsaver pad on it-it helps some. But I'd RATHER shoot my 1H in .375 H&H - it is more pleasant......

I'd opt for the longer barrel, if there is one, to maximuze weight and help with recoil, not to add velocity! But those barrels are pretty light, 2" more won't help much.

Thanks for the comments so far....

ElD - Neither of these are new guns, but are actually a few decades old. Both have never yet been out in the woods though and look as new. Anyway, there was a 24" barreled model at one time...I owned one in the late 70's. It was sold because at that time I was one of those folks who started at the top loads and worked down. Recoil was too much to be comfortable with the 500 gr bullets and heavy powder charges I preferred in that day.

So far am sorta leaning toward the #1-A because of the handiness of the shorter barrel.

Unfortunately I have suppressed memories of the 1-S recoil which keep coming up to the surface. They are making me a little leary of going to the even lighter 1-A.

Any other comments on choosing between the two would sure be appreciated. I need someone to knock me off this fence...

Have a couple #1's including the shorter barrel version in 45-70. Now sure, you put together some max loads it kicks. But with off the shelf ammo or handloads the equivalent it isn't bad at all.

Ran across chrono data on the 45-70 at different barrel lengths. They weren't doing max loads, but were using a bit more than store bought ammo. And the two inch difference was only something like 48 fps. Rather small difference in the heavy 45-70 bullets.

To me the shorter barrel makes the #1 the best balanced, handiest rifle I own. The others with just a little more barrel are good, but not perfectly balanced like the 22 inch 45/70 seems to be.

Alberta Canuck.
To knock you off the fence is a good idea, and then fall on something that won't hurt you.

Forget about the 45-70 and go for a 338Win Mag with a 26" barrel if you think you need the power.

I never ever could unstand the hype about the 45-70 and then complain about the recoil punishment, then load it down to squip loads to what purpose?

quote:

Originally posted by ZERMEL:
Alberta Canuck.
To knock you off the fence is a good idea, and then fall on something that won't hurt you.

Forget about the 45-70 and go for a 338Win Mag with a 26" barrel if you think you need the power.

I never ever could unstand the hype about the 45-70 and then complain about the recoil punishment, then load it down to squip loads to what purpose?

Thanks for the effort, Fred. Still on the fence, though.

Already have a .338 Win Mag...and a .375 H&H, and a .404 Jeffrey, .405 Win., and .458 Win Mag. Don't need more power. Already have a M86 Browning in .45-70 too, and load it hot with both light bullets and heavy bullets. But recoil is not a problem there, the Browning weighs a good deal more than either Ruger No. 1 does and I have a spare buttstock for it with a decelerator pad.

I keep trying to balance handiness vs. milder recoil in my calculations, but neither wins out. Was hoping someone would come up with another consideration which would be decisive one way or the other between these two rifles.....

(Am receiving it just because it is well known around here that I love Ruger No. 1's, "2's", and 3's. By Ruger "No. 2", I mean a No. 3 with a No 1. lever and buttstock.)


Well, having written this answer, Zermal, maybe you DID knock me off the fence to a gentle landing. Proofreading my answer to you, the solution to my puzzle is probably there in plain English. "Don't need more power." Guess that means I should go for the No. 1-A and just enjoy it with factory equivalent loads or just a little bit hotter.....thanks!!

(Where are you in The Great White North? I'm a prairie provinces person.)

Canuck, While in some calibers it would truly matter, the difference between the A or the S... In 45/70 I would base my choice on the wood!

quote:

Originally posted by 308Sako:
Canuck, While in some calibers it would truly matter, the difference between the A or the S... In 45/70 I would base my choice on the wood!

Good thought! I'll have to go take a look at both sides of both rifles, and also check how well the fore-ends match the buttstocks.......I'm addicted to nice wood. Thanks, .308Sako

Alberta Canuck.
I am a halve baked not a native Alberta Canuck, from Calgary.

Ah you missed my revamped #3, I did not know it was known as a #2. Mine is a 375Win with all the kick I am willing to take.

Shot it on deer the first time last week. At 100yards it made a big mess. Shot through the neck the bullet angled back through shoulder toke out three ribs and exited.

Well I have to take a better aim next time,

Zermal -

Nice looking #2. I used to have a #3 chambered in the same cartridge...one which was stocked by Weatherby back in the late 70's/early 80's when they were considering retailing No. 3's with their own wood and styling. I bought it from the widow of one of Weatherby's stock makers.

Interesting you are from Calgary....so am I. Used to live on Hunterburn Hill, N.W. before the area all built up and they cut that damned freeway around the hill, about 50 feet behind my house. When we move back in a couple of years after my wife retires from her practice, we'll probably go somewhere west of Nanton....

Do you happen to know Gene Wong or Jay Winfield, Eddie Mech or Gunter Kautsky?

Alberta Canuck.
Eddy Mech is a good friend of mine, we shoot Bench rest together. I see him quite often he lives on Huntington Hill.

I live in the South end. Eddy and Gunther had a falling out when Gunther sold Guncraft and left Eddy out in the cold. Wong and Winfield I don't know.

I have not seen Gunther for many years, his wife died. If you send me an e-mail with your name I tell Eddy.


He just build himself a beautyful 270 on a Mauser action with a maple stock, a real piece of art with double set trigger.

Back to your original question - all else being equal, go with the 24". You will have a better sight radius, better handling, and a bit more muzzle velocity with reasonable powders. You can always cut it shorter if you must, but a singleshot is always a bit shorter relative to a magazine rifle, so you will find the 24" barrel both handy and better balanced.

Brent

You may want to check with a Ruger collecter, the longer barrel version has not been produced since the late 70s, and not many produced then. You may have a rifle worth significantly more than the average #1-S.
Best.

quote:

Originally posted by 50 Calshtr:
You may want to check with a Ruger collecter, the longer barrel version has not been produced since the late 70s, and not many produced then. You may have a rifle worth significantly more than the average #1-S.
Best.

Thanks 50 calshtr - That is a thought pregnant with possibilities. I didn't realize the longer barrel version had been discontinued, but it does explain why I don't see many of them at the range any more.

Speaking of rare No 1-S's, the one I wish I really had now is one I sold at Guncraft in Calgary in about 1977 or '78. Was an original 26" barreled "S" model in 7x57 Mauser chambering.

Then, of course, the one I have always wanted but never managed to snag is the one they advertised for one month in 1970...the No. 1-S in .30-40 Krag. I know they made a few, because Lynn Laudice of Prescott Valley had two of them which he sold in about 1991 for about $3-Large apiece...

Anyway, thanks again. For such a simple decision, this one sure is tough!

quote:

Originally posted by ZERMEL:
Alberta Canuck.
Eddy Mech is a good friend of mine, we shoot Bench rest together. I see him quite often he lives on Huntington Hill.

I live in the South end. Eddy and Gunther had a falling out when Gunther sold Guncraft and left Eddy out in the cold. Wong and Winfield I don't know.

I have not seen Gunther for many years, his wife died. If you send me an e-mail with your name I tell Eddy.


He just build himself a beautyful 270 on a Mauser action with a maple stock, a real piece of art with double set trigger.

Fred - Was in having the surgeons chop on my foot again today. will get a personal e-mail to you tomorrow. You are very lucky to have Eddy for a friend. He is an absolutely No. 1 "Stand-Up" guy. You should ask him some time to tell you about his life during WWII as a kid drafted into the German army (and sent to the Eastern Front, if my memory serves correctly...which it may not).

Anyway, Eddy lived fairly close to me and I used to go over to his house on Huntington Hill NE. He's done a number of rifles for me including a Springfield, a Husqvarna 9.3, and a Magnum Mauser.375 H&H, and I consider him one of the nicest, most honourable people I have ever met. Of course, it was hard to get him to do many for me, he always had at least two in progress at any given time in those days for Baron Carlo Von Maffei...

AC

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:
Thanks for the comments so far....

ElD - Neither of these are new guns, but are actually a few decades old. Both have never yet been out in the woods though and look as new. Anyway, there was a 24" barreled model at one time...I owned one in the late 70's. It was sold because at that time I was one of those folks who started at the top loads and worked down. Recoil was too much to be comfortable with the 500 gr bullets and heavy powder charges I preferred in that day.

So far am sorta leaning toward the #1-A because of the handiness of the shorter barrel.

Unfortunately I have suppressed memories of the 1-S recoil which keep coming up to the surface. They are making me a little leary of going to the even lighter 1-A.

Any other comments on choosing between the two would sure be appreciated. I need someone to knock me off this fence...

OK! Thanks for the info! I do agree that you can ride one of these .45/70 No.1's to town, just from the recoil alone......

But of course, the No.1 allows you to maximize the versatility of the .45/70 round, from using round balls all the way up to bullets that weigh over 500 grains, and with any poowder charge you choose.

For my "standard" deer load, I use Elmer Keith's old M1886 Win. load of 53 grains of IMR 3031 with any cast or jacketed 400-grain bullet. This has relatively mild recoil. By "big bear buster" load is 60 grains of RE7 with the Barnes Original 400-grain semispitzer. From my 22" barrel, this exits at 2270 FPS. Actually, If I were going after a really big critter, I'd use a Barnes "X" 400-grain spitzer with this powder charge......

El ...
Try that charge with a 500 grain jacketed (the 3031 that is)
but ONLY in a Ruger #1 or a Highwall. Hang on !!!

quote:

Originally posted by ireload2:
El ...
Try that charge with a 500 grain jacketed (the 3031 that is)
but ONLY in a Ruger #1 or a Highwall. Hang on !!!

One day, I did, except cast bullets!.... Was in Regina, in 1973. Had one of the 1971 Marlin Centennials. Got my loads for my .444 Marlin and that M1895 mixed up. Ended up using 53.0 grs. 3031 and the 500 gr. Ly457125.

First shot at the range and WAS I SURPRISED?!! YES!! But, as I attributed it to something else, have no idea what, maybe poor stock design, whatever, doesn't matter now....I shot the rest of the box, 19 more rounds!

Every single shot, it would automatically eject the empty case. That is, it recoiled SO BAD that my hand couldn't move back with that straight-grip stock, and the lever would of course stay with my hand while the rifle recoiled. Results? My hand forward, rifle back, lever and bolt completely open.

Needless to say, by the time I got home, I had had enough of that load forever, plus a month!

So looked the load up, discovered that it was my .444 Marlin load for the 265 gr. bullet, and that with those 500 grainers, I should have been loading 43 grs. 3031, NOT 53 grains.

Thank you Marlin for not letting me kill my fool self. And, need I say, that is the very last time I ever loaded ammo from memory? Now I look up EVERY load before setting up the powder measure, even the 4895 loads for my match .308s, of which I have fired maybe a zillion rounds over the years.


BTW, it is a real tribute to Marlin that the loads didn't tear that gun in half at the locking lugs, which is the way overstrained Marlins sometimes fail. As it was, it didn't even loosen the gun up (it was a new gun at the time), but it sure as heck "proofed" it!

According to my old hHornady manual, 53.1 grains of IMR 3031 gives 1800 FPS with their 500-grain jacketd softpoint. I suppose a cast bullet of the same weight might go a little faster.

Recoil of that load in a 7.5 lb No. 1 would be around 55 foot-pounds.

quote:

Originally posted by El Deguello:
According to my old hHornady manual, 53.1 grains of IMR 3031 gives 1800 FPS with their 500-grain jacketd softpoint. I suppose a cast bullet of the same weight might go a little faster.

Recoil of that load in a 7.5 lb No. 1 would be around 55 foot-pounds.

I'd guess the figures you cite above for recoil and velocity are both right about on the money.

Don't know what the weight of my Marlin was,but flat guarantee you the stock wasn't shaped to help the shooter absorb 55 foot-pounds of recoil! I've owned all kinds of big rifles, including a .475 A&M, a .577 double, and a lot of others. Never had ANYTHING that in terms of "felt recoil" kicked any worse than that load in the Marlin.