Hi Guys,

I was talking with a friend today about the sight. We got to discussing rifles, hunting and such. Eventually, we got back to rifles and our choices for different game and things. Anyway, long story shcrt is he mentioned the Ruger #1 and I told him that many years ago....back in the 70's, I owned three number ones. I had a 375, a 458 and a 30-06. He stated that he always wanted a #1 in a big caliber, but did not like the way they kicked.

Well, having a little bit of a memory left from those years in Alaska, I had to agree with him that the #1 did kick with the bigger calibers. My #1 .375 kicked a whole lot more than my Win. Model 70 .375 did. Or...maybe it's just my memory fading....anyway.

Well, we kept this up for awhile and I came up with the idea of asking you guys on this sight if anyone has ever changed the rear stock on a #1 to a Monte Carlo-roll-over type? If so, did this help handle or tame the recoil any??

Secondly, if he were to buy a number one and want to change to one of thcse stocks, where would he get one at?

I appreciate your feedback and comments. I'll pass on anything you guys can provide for his enjoyment.

Thanks.

Dbl, this is an excellent question. For some reason #1's kick the snot out of me. Body shape I guess. Actually, I think it has something to do with the angle of the barrel to the angle of the stock butt. I'd like to find someone who knows how to restock #1's correctly, like my 375, so the recoil is more tolerable.

J.

Josh,

I think it is the stock. If I remember correctly, many people have complained about the recoil of #1's. Most of the people I know who are more knowledgeable about #1's have told me it was the stock that caused it. I used to wonder....way back when I shot that #1 .458 more than 5 times straight, why someone didn't design or come up with some sort of Monte Carlo type stock to take the sting out of it.

I understand the "classic" style of the #1 and all that, but man, wouldn't it be nice to tame one of those big calibers to the point you could enjoy it.

I don't have any plans for picking up a #1 anytime in the near future due to some serious financial problems I'm experienceing right now, but wouldn't it be nice to have one you could shoot and enjoy shooting at the same time.

Mind you that I know there are numerous calibers out there that probably don't kick like a mule, but some of my big favorites like the .375, the .416 Rigby, and a few others, would be nice to have without the headaches and body pains that come with them.

So, if anyone has any ideas, I would love to read about them.

Thanks.

I might suggest the John Barsness article on stocks and body shape in the latest "Rifle." My #1 in .375 used to beat me mercilessly, too. It's gone. I think my long neck and sloping shoulders need a monte carlo--I guess pretty is as pretty does!

i never owned one but i reload 4 a 1st cousin that has one in 7mag # 1-b,beautiful rifle , but twer she mine i''d change that hard solid red recoil pad into a de-celll er-ator darn quick.
regards

One thing I have allways said about rugers #1s and 77s, is that the recoil pad is only a little softer than the wood.
I hapen to like #1s as deer rifles. I have a 1 A in 7X57. Shoots great and packs easy.
I want build a #1 in a .257 magnum, either a weatherby or a .257 cat on the wsm.
But I really don't think I would want a #1 in .375 or bigger just cause I don't want to hunt really big game with a single shot.
...tj3006

Now the No 1 I had in 458 did have a heavy recoil, however, the No 3 is even worse. Jim

I guess I'll play odd man out. I own three #1's right now (1A in 7x57, 1S in 300 Win. Mag, and 1H in 375 H&H)
Now I'm not a guy who is very tolerant of recoil, but I can shoot all of these with no problem.
The worst kicking rifle I own is a Browning Stainless Stalker in 30/06. I honestly dread shooting it, and have basically retired it because of that.
Ken

I have never owned nor shot one, that said.
Are they not lighter that repeaters?
I have shot some light weights that really kick.

I would think that you could retain look, by installing a recoil reducer, like the trap guys use. They fit in butt of your rifle and some are filled with mercury, others just steel.
A heavier gun really tames recoil.

Just my $.02 RC

My 45-70 was very unpleasant with heavy loads then I had a 26" barrel installed and the extra weight tamed it considerably.

Ken in VA, no need to be the odd man out. I don't find the No. 1 to have any sort of magic ability to multiply felt recoil. I will qualify that by mentioning that my No. 1 is in .458 Lott. Though, I won't discount the opinions of those that think otherwise. Obviously, it's a personal issue.

Here's something to consider: My father has a No. 1 in .458 Win, so it's nearly identical to mine in .458 Lott, just older. His recoil pad has the same dimensions as mine, but is significantly harder. I couldn't say whether Ruger used a different rubber years ago or the pad simply didn't age well. Could this be where all the fuss is coming from?

Although about half as thick as a good aftermarket pad, my new No. 1 pad is just as soft. Maybe some others of you with older No. 1's could lend some more data in my impromptu study...

I have always felt that Ruger screwed the pooch when it comes to that silly pad they put on their rifles. It might be fine for say, a .243 or .257 Bob, but in the harder kicking rifles they should have spent the extra money and installed something like the Pachmeyr Decelerator or Limbsaver. I shoot various #1s ranging from .22 Hornet to the mighty .416 Rigby and the only model I have that has any form of recoil reduction is my .404 Jeffery which has a muzzle brake. It came with the rifle when I bought it or it would not be there. I will admit though that it does tame things down. Ugly looking thing though. So far, all my #1s are the older red pad versions and yes, those pads are very hard. Guess I just got used to them.
Paul B.

I have No. 1s in .458 Win and .375 H&H. I replaced the factory recoil pad with a Decelerator and added a 16-oz mercury recoil reducer to the butt stock. These changes inproved the balance of both rifles and significantly reduced felt recoil.

My Lott No. 1 is basically box stock outside of the trigger job I did and it's never bothered me. I got a deal on it from somebody that shot it twice and was fearful of it.

Compared to some of the historic pieces in the Westley Richards and Holland gun cabinet, it doesn't kick at all and doesn't have a hard metal butt plate. Spose it depends on what you like and how much shoulder meat you have. 10ga duck gun from my grandpa's generation or one of my Martini carbines will beat you up a lot worse.

If it bugs you, put a recoil reducer or better pad on it, maybe both...if not, just shoot the thing.

Take it for what it's worth. I think .45-70 is a revolver/Contender/Encore cartridge so my tastes might vary from yours.

quote:

My Lott No. 1 is basically box stock outside of the trigger job I did and it's never bothered me. I got a deal on it from somebody that shot it twice and was fearful of it.

That's how I got my #1 in .416 Rigby. Guy bought it new, plus the ammo and dies to load the ammo. He shows up at the range, fires five rounds and is cussing up a blue streak on how painful the gun is to shoot. Well, being the 31 nut that I am, I walk over and ask him what the problem is and he says it kicks way too hard. he shows me a round and offers to let me try it out, which I jump on. My wife was at the range withme that day and when she saw the cartridge, she says, "You're not going to shoot that thing are you?" I said that I was going to shoot it, aimed at a rock about 6" around and made gravel. I got the whole package, gun, ammo and dies for $500. Not too shabby for a gun that only had six rounds run through it. Now, if I can only find oil in my back yard so that I can afford to shoot the damn thing.
Paul B.

I think the hard rubber pad on my #1 in 7mmMag was put there to protect the stock, not me.

It doesn't bother me when I have a big jacket on.

If I were shooting varmints with it in the summer, I would put a Limbsaver recoil pad on that rifle.

I have a Limbsaver on my 300 Win Mag VZ24, and I don't feel any recoil pain or disturbing shock.

The only No.1 I own, that I would consider a "hard kicker" was originally a .458 Win, and is now being converted to 450 #2 NE. It was one of the older "red pad" Rugers. The first thing I did to soften the blow a little, is put a real recoil pad on it. When I took the factory pad off, on the underside it said "Goodyear"....no shit! That helped some. Then, to correct the horrific balance of the gun(the barrel is huge, and balance is incredibly muzzle heavy), I added a mercury tube to the butt. Gun balanced much better, and the extra pound of weight, helped tame a little more recoil. It's plenty tolerable. Doing a total makeover of it now, whith a L-W barrel, that actually tapers, as opposed to the damn near paralell factory tube.

Jeff

quote:

Originally posted by dblhunter:
Hi Guys,

I was talking with a friend today about the sight. We got to discussing rifles, hunting and such. Eventually, we got back to rifles and our choices for different game and things. Anyway, long story shcrt is he mentioned the Ruger #1 and I told him that many years ago....back in the 70's, I owned three number ones. I had a 375, a 458 and a 30-06. He stated that he always wanted a #1 in a big caliber, but did not like the way they kicked.

Well, having a little bit of a memory left from those years in Alaska, I had to agree with him that the #1 did kick with the bigger calibers. My #1 .375 kicked a whole lot more than my Win. Model 70 .375 did. Or...maybe it's just my memory fading....anyway.

Well, we kept this up for awhile and I came up with the idea of asking you guys on this sight if anyone has ever changed the rear stock on a #1 to a Monte Carlo-roll-over type? If so, did this help handle or tame the recoil any??

Secondly, if he were to buy a number one and want to change to one of thcse stocks, where would he get one at?

I appreciate your feedback and comments. I'll pass on anything you guys can provide for his enjoyment.

Thanks.

Contact Treebone Carving. http://www.treebonecarving.com/id18.html

Their No. 1 wood is superb!

I have a No. 1 in .375 H&H and must admit it kicks for than the Model 70 I once had in the same caliber. But that Winchester weighed 11.75 pounds with Lyman Alaskan, full magazine, and sling. The No. 1 is only 9.5 with Leupold 2.5-8X, loaded with sling. I think the weight difference accounts for the difference in recoil. Havew a No. 1 in .45/70. With max 400-grain loads, it is MUCH WORSE than the .375!! I put a Limbsaver on this one, and it helped alot.

ElDeguello

A Spanish screen name and quoting Pennsylvania Dutch.

I'm getting pretty rusty on my German but are you referring to a hard drinker avoiding drinking water. And something about a cow?

Bitte, ubersetzen.

Having owned a No. 1 in 460 Weatherby I can tell you a little about recoil in a No. 1

1 - The recoil pad is a joke and continued use by Ruger is just plain stupidity. Adding a "pre-fit" pad will work but unless you're a big guy the stock will be too long, so now you have to cut it, which (a) can cost $$$ unless you do it yourself, (b) ther's always the chance of damage, and (c) the gun is no longer original.

2 - The front sight on the Tropical models (the big calibers) complicates installing a muzzle brake.

3 - The classic No. 1 stock design is not the best for big kickers. Look at a Mk 5 stock, it works a lot better, even if many people find it ugly.

4 - Making a No. 1 heavier is a real problem because the action is much lighter than a standard bolt action and you have 4" less of stock wood. But it gets worse: the forend hanger limits the barrel to no more than 1" OD at the end of the hanger. That is real bad because you want to add weight around the middle of the gun, not at the front or the back because that makes the gun awkward. But you can't, so to get the weight up in the tropical models Ruger makes the barrels overly thick for the whole length and front heavy. The best solution here is what many (including myself) have done: put some steel bolts or lead weight in the stock for an extra 1-2 lbs.

The tropical No. 1's are beautiful and reliable, but they will give you a jolt. If you can't handle that recoil I think you are better off going another route (I did) rather than try to modify a No. 1.

What is the big deal, I could never shoot any rifle or shot gun unless the LOP was 13.5" and to hell with the red Ruger pad.

So every #1 and #3 of mine has the stock cut and a Decellerator Pad put on. When you cut the stock you also have th option to improve the pitch. When pitch is to little the butt toe digs into your chests. For big chested man and more so for women, proper pitch is very important it reduces felt recoil.

So you guys can have your red Ruger Pads and get hammered. The top is a #3 375 Win.
The botton is a 25-06

times 2 what TreeFarmer said

Interesting points here. While the 7x57 mauser is not what one could call a hard kicking round by any means, at one time I had four rifled chambered to the round. I'll ignore the custom mauser, but the other three, a Ruger M77 and #1 and the Winchester XTR Featherweight. Felt recoil from the heavier M77 and #1 was was greater than from the lighter featherweight. About the only thing I cam think of is there is a subtle difference in the stock shape that seems to accentuate felt recoil. Rubber pads on all three rifles are about the same dimension.
The M77 is long gone. I thought it was way overweight for the cartridge.
I haven't had any real problems related to recoil on most of my #1s up to at least the .300 In. mag. The .375 is reasonably tolerable most of the time and the .404 with the brake is no problem. However, after about five rounds from the bench, the .416 gets put away. Even offhand that one smarts just a touch. I'm thinks a Decelerator would be a good idea on that one now that the artritis in my shoulder has gottem worse.
Paul B.