Hi all, a quick question for those of you with experience with both Ruger #1's and Browning/Winchester 1885 Hi-walls. I've had several of each over the years, and love them both. Although not particularly recoil sensitive, I find #1's to be much more punishing in the recoil department than most other rifles, and find a .375H&H #1 to be no fun to shoot at all...despite finding most other rifles in that caliber easy and comfortable to shoot, including many that weight much less than the Ruger.

I've also owned 1885's in .22-250, .30-06 and .45-70 and found them comfortable, but haven't fired any in chamberings with significant recoil. Now I have stumbled across a new-manufacture Winchester 1885 in .375H&H and I quite like it. It has a 28-inch barrel, open sights, straight-grip stock and good recoil pad. Since the #1's fit me so poorly that they pound the snot out of me (my cheekbone takes the brunt of the punishment) I wonder if the stock geometry of the 1885 will treat me similarly. I don't have either of these models at the moment, so can't compare measurements or "feel", and since the gun is located across the country from me I can't even shoulder it to get an idea.

Can anyone comment on how these two guns handle and feel? Different or similar? Thanks.

John

The 1885 has a good bit straighter recoil.
You still get about the same push back in the same weight rifle but your checkbone does not get blasted. One difference is the stock of a #1 is designed for a scope. The 1885 seems to be primarily designed for iron sights. If you cram your face down on a #1 to shoot iron sights it will smart if the rifle produces significant recoil. An 1885 requires you to lift your face a little with a scope.

I much prefer the 1885 in the 45-70 and similar recoiling rounds. I shoot 500 grain cast bullets in the 12 lb 1885 BPCR but I would not touch them in the 8.5 lb Ruger #1.

I have a Ruger #1s in 45/70 I shoot .350 grain bullets at about 2300FPS.It seems to not recoil as much as a 45/70 in a 1886 or in my 1885 45/70.

What's the old saying,
Opinions are like noses, everyone has one and most of them smell,
so with that in mind,

I'll take a B-78, Browning or Winchester HighWall over a #1 eleven out of 10 times...........




















Best,

GWB

Hi,
I have a Ruger No1 Tropical in 375 H&H and a 1885 Browning in 45/70.With loads that generate equal recoil, they both feel the same, And they both kick hard. What has been the most important part of reducing the recoil is stock fit, I had the stock shortened and the pitch changed to suit me, Now the 375 recoils straight back with almost no muzzle lift.
For my money I'll take the ruger every time, the ruger is easier and faster to reload and has better ergonomics after the stock work, I recently took the 1885 shooting donkeys and camels, I put it away after a few rounds as it was awkward and slow to reload from the shoulder, ,hit me in the face, the Ruger is so much better to use.

I have both rifles in several calibers. To me, recoil is recoil regardless of the rifle. It does seem that the 1885 does rise a bit more in recoil than the Rugers. My 1885's are more accurate out of the box than the Rugers and have better triggers. Good shooting.

Thanks for the insights, gentlemen. I had a chance yesterday to fire and compare a #1 and a model 1885, both in .45-70. Using the same ammo, I noticed significantly more impact on my cheekbone with the #1. Despite my affection for its cosmetics, it looks like the #1 will always remain a small-caliber proposition for me. The 28-inch-barreled 1885 in .375 is coming to live with me!

I bought the same "safari" version gun in the 300H&H, it is 10.2lbs with a 4.5-14x44 Zeiss on it. So, putting a scope on the 375 will get it into the low 10lb at least, that will make it decent to shoot.
The 300 is a sweetie to shoot. I have considered the 375, but, can't seem to work up the "want" on it.
Latest sawdust burning episode, came up with the notion of rebarrelling another Browning 1885 I have, to 450-400NE 3", octagon 26".