My local gun dealer just called me to say that the Ruger #1 in 9.3x62 that I asked him to order is now in stock at his distributor (I think it is Davidson's), so I should have one in a few days. Apparently they are only making them this year, so I wanted to get one as soon as possible.

Dale, that's a nice choice. Post up some photos when she's made it to your custody.

I was able to pick up my rifle from the dealer, but have not fired it yet. My first impressions are: 1) very plain walnut, 2) mediocre wood-to-metal fit, and 3) feels great as far as balance. I have a number of No. 1s, and the wood quality appears to have generally decreased over the years. The barrel is only 22", so it feels a lot like my 1A in 7x57, but is a little heavier. My 1A is my favorite deer rifle so I think I will enjoy this one also.

Bill - I have not learned how to post pictures yet, and this rifle looks like all the other No. 1s.

I forgot to mention the rifle has a great trigger for one right out of the box. It is right about 3 pounds. It has a very slight amount of creep, but overall very good.

quote:

Dale: My first impressions are: 1) very plain walnut, 2) mediocre wood-to-metal fit....wood quality appears to have generally decreased over the years

True. Not just the figure but the checkering too. Nicest are those made late 60s-70s. Warning stamps on barrels also off-putting, since late 70s.

I'll have to agree with the decline in quality of wood and checkering.

In addition to the decline of wood quality, I was shocked yesterday to find that No.1s have gone up in price a lot. I am probably just getting old, but it seems just a FEW years ago that I was buying my 450/400s for $700.

I went to my LGS to order one of these 9.3x62s in a No.1, and my dealer said they were running about $1200. I bought my 450/400s from this same man.

I canceled the order and walked out of the store a little depressed. Oh well, life just gets more expensive every year I guess. If I want it badly enough, I'll probably go back and order one anyway, but I kinda' like rimmed cartridges these days in single shots. Decisions, decisions,...

While I think it's great that Ruger offers/has offered such a broad spectrum of cartridges in their NO.1's, in a way, the 9.3x62 seems like an odd choice. The rimmed 9.3x74R seems more like the "classic" fit for a number one. However, with the somewhat broad selection of factory rounds now available for the 9.3x62 (though not at your local Wall-Mart), the 9.3x62 makes even more sense. Who'd-a-thunk-it!
Matt

9.3x74R is a much better choice for a #1; (for no good reasons, mind you); leave the 62s to the bolt actions. Not that it won't work.

I considered a 9.3, but then CDNN came up with a few left over No 1As in .303 and I got one of those. This thing shoots into under an inch at 100 with a 7X scope. I too think that the 9.3X74R is a better cartridge in this bore size for the No 1, except that the 9.3X74R is a No 1 S and it is considerably heavier that a No 1A.

ever wonder why Ruger does not make them with a 26" barrel?

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
ever wonder why Ruger does not make them with a 26" barrel?

It's the same reason, they hardly ever offer any 1-S in 26" with open sights- THEY ARE STUPID

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
ever wonder why Ruger does not make them with a 26" barrel?

Because they sell as many as they can make with a 22" barrel.

Duckear,

if that were true, they would not be cutting production so deeply.

I'm going with the "STUPID" option.

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
ever wonder why Ruger does not make them with a 26" barrel?

Because they use the cut off ends for their pistols?

Because they use the cut off ends for their pistols?

Ha Ha Ha Ha, very funny!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The 1-S was a 26" gun in the beginning, but public opinion was screaming for short tubes!!

My favorite two No. 1-S rifles were my orginal 30-06 and later a .338 Win. They balanced so well for off hand and running shots, but after I, in the heat of battle, sliced a .338 case in half, I went back to the bolt rifles for DG..

The #1 market is for a bit more traditionalist hunter/shooter than, say, the 77. I would have thought that the four inch shorter oal could have better served by a longer barrel.

Trimming them to suit is very easy, compared to trying to stretch one.

This dates me considerably, but I bought my first #1, a 6mm Remington 1V back in fall of 1978 for the princely sum of $240 plus sales tax.

I have had a few No 1's over the years but I have only one now, a .204 Ruger that has a gorgeous stock. In my opinion, No 1 stocks started to go downhill when Ruger came out with the Red Label shotguns; seems to me the good wood was diverted to that. My Red Label has a great looking stock.

I just posted a note on the Hicks Accurizer thread about putting one on my 9.3x62. It worked really well. I only had time for three 5-shot groups, but they went 0.88, 1.06, and 0.88 inches at 100 yards.