I have always admired the #1 but have only aquired a couple in the last 2 years, 9.3x74R and the Boddington model in 450/400 3" because of its matte finish and express type rear sight. I can'y help but feel that this action type is better suited to rimmed cases for absolute reliability of extraction. This brings me to my question. For a light deer rifle the #1A light sporter is chambered in 7x57 Mauser. Could this be easily converted to 7x57R by a good gunsmith and would the project be feasible for the gain? I would also appreciate any input on the cartridge itself. Does it use 7x57 dies with a different shellholder? etc. Thanks

Gpopper,
When you say, "would the project be feasible for the gain".
Just what is it your trying to gain ?. There is no practical difference between the 7 X 57 and the 7 X 57-R. As to absolute reliability of extraction, I'm pushing 10,000 rounds fired in six different # 1's, all but one, the 47-70, is rimless and I've never had a problem with extraction or ejection of rimless cases. I'm sure what you want to do can be done, but just what is the gain ?, if it's just something you want to do, go have it done. If nothing else it's a good way to support your gunsmith.
Ruger # 1 Guy

Probably no real gain other than the +50 I give you for "cool" points. 7x57R is a classy cartridge!


Hank

gbanger,

Gain in this case would be subjective for the most part, IMHO. Perhaps some greater reliability of extraction could be had, but as Ruger #1 Guy says, the Ruger No. 1 has proven extremely reliable over the years in that department even with rimless and belted rimless cases.

Nevertheless, right-thinking people know that falling block actioned rifles are meant to and should chamber rimmed cartridges only!

It seems to me that all you would need for your project would be to have a gunsmith:

1. Remove, set back and rechamber (really only partially rechamber) and replace the barrel.

2. Fit a proper extractor for the rimmed case.

That should be achievable for a few hundred dollars or so, I would think.

As for the dies, yes, you are right on target. A set of 7x57 dies can be used for the 7x57R, but a properly fitting shell holder is needed for the rimmed case.

I have a Gibbs-Farquharson in 7x57R and it is a terrific little rifle and cartridge.

quote:

Originally posted by gbanger:
I have always admired the #1 but have only aquired a couple in the last 2 years, 9.3x74R and the Boddington model in 450/400 3" because of its matte finish and express type rear sight. I can'y help but feel that this action type is better suited to rimmed cases for absolute reliability of extraction. This brings me to my question. For a light deer rifle the #1A light sporter is chambered in 7x57 Mauser. Could this be easily converted to 7x57R by a good gunsmith and would the project be feasible for the gain? I would also appreciate any input on the cartridge itself. Does it use 7x57 dies with a different shellholder? etc. Thanks

The7X57R would use the RCBS #26 shellholder. Everything else would be the same as for the rimless 7X57mm. I doubt that the extractor/ejector would require modification at all.

You would gain nothing by going to the "R" cartridge. The No.1 handles rimless cases perfectly well. IF you had a cut made in the breech to accept the 7X57R's rim, you could use both the rimless rounds and the rimmed ones intergangeably in the gun due to the way the No.1 extractor/ejector works.

Thanks for thr info and opinions, guys.

gbanger-gpopper,

I've seen many Ruger #1's chambered for the 7x57R here in Europe.

Heym used to import Ruger #1 actions and sold their own customized versions of a Ruger-Heym, too. Tuetonic wood, no quarter ribs, all in various rimmed cartidge chamberings.

Definately stick with the #1A or the Mannlicher version - anything else is gonna be way-y-y too heavy!

The #26 RCBS is the proper Shell Holder and a brand-name set of vanilla-flavored 7x57 F/L Dies work fine.

I also use a #7X Lyman Shell Holder but it can be a tight fit with some batches of RWS cases. Geco, Norma, Hirtenberger & Jaguar cases fit perfectly.



Here's a .270 Winchester that I've been considering morphing into a .270x65R - why? I couldn't say....'cept I feel the need for a rimmed cartridge. Yes, I made the fatal mistake of using a #1B action/barrel, very heavy rifle....but then again; very accurate, too.

Gerry, thanks for the advice. That was my thought too for the 7X57R in a light rifle. If I was going to go with a heavier rifle I would try for, and the caliber eludes me right now but it's the rimmed version of the 7mm Brenneke, wich is a ballistic twin of the 280 Rem.

quote:

If I was going to go with a heavier rifle I would try for, and the caliber eludes me right now but it's the rimmed version of the 7mm Brenneke, wich is a ballistic twin of the 280 Rem.

g-banger,

The 7x65R, the rimmed version of the 7x64 Brenneke (can also be loaded witha 7x64 Brenneke Die set and the appropriate rimmed Shell Holder (# escapes me at the moment).

quote:

ballistic twin of the 280 Rem.

The 7x65R & 7x64 Brenneke certainly have a much improved case shape; with the shoulder further forward compared to the .280 Remington and a trifle % more case volume, too. Seen here in many Drillings. The 7x64 sorta the European version of a .270 Winchester.

Hey Gerry, moving to the 7x65R you're talking my language. I never saw a reason to have any of the shorter cases on a falling block action, so I decided to have my Ruger done over as 7x65R.

Got a couple of pictures of my new metalwork that were snapped by a mate in Melbourne.






I've been speaking with the stocker and it's almost complete now. He's putting on the last coats of finish and doing the checkering. Still got a way to go but I should be picking it up late July.

With its sturdy, 26" octagon-to-round barrel, it's definately no lightweight. I think this rifle really needs to whack something from a highseat in the Fatherland


cheers,
stu

Stu,

Appears very tasty, my friend.

When your Ruger is finished give me a call.

I've got 7x65R cases, Boo-lets, powder & recepies in the basement. I'll Gin-Up something that will probably shoot fine in your Boomer.

We can do a Tag-Team Ruger #1 weekend - I'll offer you a "First Blood" option with a Small-to-Medium-Large Wild Boar on your 7x65R Ruger #1!

quote:

Originally posted by gbanger:
I have always admired the #1 but have only aquired a couple in the last 2 years, 9.3x74R and the Boddington model in 450/400 3" because of its matte finish and express type rear sight. I can'y help but feel that this action type is better suited to rimmed cases for absolute reliability of extraction. This brings me to my question. For a light deer rifle the #1A light sporter is chambered in 7x57 Mauser. Could this be easily converted to 7x57R by a good gunsmith and would the project be feasible for the gain? I would also appreciate any input on the cartridge itself. Does it use 7x57 dies with a different shellholder? etc. Thanks

I suppose it could be done, but as the #1A in 7x57 works perfectly as is, why bother? I can't
say how many rounds have gone through mine, but it has never failed to extract a case, even with some of my very hot handloads worked up for my bolt action rifles.
I suppose that if it'sjust because you want something different, then what the hell. Go for it. I think the 1A in 7x57 rimless is cool enough already.
JMHO.
Paul B.

Thank, Gerry and Paul. That looks real special, Stu. Thanks for allowing a look. Whish I didn't live so far away.

You most likely do not need to set the barrel back or rechamber if you buy a rifle chambered to 7x57 rimless. All you really HAVE to do to use rimmed cases is have the gunsmith cut a slight recess at the base of the chamber to accept the rim of the case, and otherwise use the chamber as it already is. I know that will work because I have done it with a Ruger No.1 in 9.5x57, which has become a 9.5x57-R.

Mine was set up so the reamer and its holder were turning in the lathe chuck; the barreled action was between centers and NOT turning. That way the extractor could be more easily re-cut at the same time as the chamber-base .

Now that the recess for the case rim is there, it is used for either rimmed or rimless cases, and functions perfectly well with each.

If it was my rifle and if I was going to opt for a 22" barrel (which I wouldn't), I would stick with the 7x57-R over the 7x65-R.

In my own case, I went for the 7x65-R, but did so with a 26" barrel. I like the looks and balance of the 26" barrels better (a strictly personal preference). I also feel that if I am going to go for greater case capacity for slow burning powders and heavier bullets, I might as well have the longer 26" tube to best utilize whatever that larger powder charge can deliver.

I am NOT suggesting you should need make the same cartridge or barrel length choices as I. The important thing in YOUR rifle is to make it suit YOUR tastes. If anyone doesn't like that, they are welcome to build their own.

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:
You most likely do not need to set the barrel back or rechamber if you buy a rifle chambered to 7x57 rimless. All you really HAVE to do to use rimmed cases is have the gunsmith cut a slight recess at the base of the chamber to accept the rim of the case, and otherwise use the chamber as it already is. I know that will work because I have done it with a Ruger No.1 in 9.5x57, which has become a 9.5x57-R.

Mine was set up so the reamer and its holder were turning in the lathe chuck; the barreled action was between centers and NOT turning. That way the extractor could be more easily re-cut at the same time as the chamber-base .

Now that the recess for the case rim is there, it is used for either rimmed or rimless cases, and functions perfectly well with each.

If it was my rifle and if I was going to opt for a 22" barrel (which I wouldn't), I would stick with the 7x57-R over the 7x65-R.

In my own case, I went for the 7x65-R, but did so with a 26" barrel. I like the looks and balance of he 26" barrels better (a strictly personal preference). I also feel that if I am going to go for greater case capacity for slow burning powders and heavier bullets, I might as well have the longer 26" tube to best utilize whatever that larger powder charge can deliver.

I am NOT suggesting you should need make the same cartridge or barrel length choices as I. The important thing in YOUR rifle is to make it suit YOUR tastes. If anyone doesn't like that, they are welcome to build their own.

AC,

Nice to have you back!

quote:

Originally posted by Gerry:
gbanger-gpopper,

I've seen many Ruger #1's chambered for the 7x57R here in Europe.

Heym used to import Ruger #1 actions and sold their own customized versions of a Ruger-Heym, too. Tuetonic wood, no quarter ribs, all in various rimmed cartidge chamberings.

Definately stick with the #1A or the Mannlicher version - anything else is gonna be way-y-y too heavy!

The #26 RCBS is the proper Shell Holder and a brand-name set of vanilla-flavored 7x57 F/L Dies work fine.

I also use a #7X Lyman Shell Holder but it can be a tight fit with some batches of RWS cases. Geco, Norma, Hirtenberger & Jaguar cases fit perfectly.



Here's a .270 Winchester that I've been considering morphing into a .270x65R - why? I couldn't say....'cept I feel the need for a rimmed cartridge. Yes, I made the fatal mistake of using a #1B action/barrel, very heavy rifle....but then again; very accurate, too.

Gerry,
Can you talk some about the stock on the #1 pictured? Did you do the work?

Cliff,

Sure.....It is a Fajen Classic w/L-H Cheekpiece inletted to a Ruger #1 2B in .270 Winchester. I asked them for a full-length Mannlicher-Type forearm to fit the hefty IB barrel. I ordered it @ 1988 (IIRC) and paid $299.00 for it 95% inletted & 95% final shaped in their AAA grade American Walnut. These days long-g-g gone for Fajen (or anywhere else such a stock would be contemplated today for that matter....).

At my request Fajen installed a checkered metal Buttplate and Pistol Grip Cap as well.

I'm pretty confident at undertaking projects but a friend counselled me not to attempt this one myself since the wood was so nice. I'm glad I listened to someone's sound advice for once. I gave the action & wood to one of Frankonia's (Würzburg) "Meisters" who did a fantastic job on it; installing a barrel band for the sling swivel, a barrel band front sight, the checkering (Flat English Skip-Line) and a few other Bits & Pieces.

The slim forearm really sets-off the rifle and it is quite thin, something I'm sure to have botched had I attempted this myself.

Frankonia assembling my parts was actually fairly inexpensive at the time and at today's prices it was an absolute steal, Ugh, bargain.

I was very pleased with the finished rifle and then patiently set aside a several month project for a Hand-Rubbed Oil Finish.

After all of this I figured I'd have to learn to live with a good-looking but sub-par accurate rifle as the scuttle-butt comcerning #1 Barrel Hanger's & a Full-Length Forearm would certainly take it's Toll - WRONG! Since it's completion it's been a sub-MOA; well, actually; 3/4 MOA rifle. It just shoots little Clusters - with both factory ammo or handloads.

Sadly, my Low Resolution photos and poor photographic skills aren't up to the quality presentation this rifle deserves.

Thank you for spending the time to explain all that. I appreciate you doing so and think the rifle is beautiful.

Cliff,

Thx for the compliment...any time!

quote:

All you really HAVE to do to use rimmed cases is have the gunsmith cut a slight recess at the base of the chamber to accept the rim of the case, and otherwise use the chamber as it already is. I know that will work because I have done it with a Ruger No.1 in 9.5x57, which has become a 9.5x57-R.

Yes, and I'd wager that the rifle will still work OK with rimless cases as well, if you have not altered the extractor/ejector.

Stu and Gerry,

What kind of dimensions/profiles did you guys use for your 26" and 28" barrels? I'm building a Wesson #1, leaning towards 30-40Krag Imp. I really like the looks of the thick barrels, and I want 28" to wring out fps. But I'm afraid of having a really heavy barrel.

I love the 1/2 oct, 1/2 round with the wedding ring. What's the diameter at the receiver? Across flats? After the wedding ring on the round part? At the muzzle?

Steve

quote:

Originally posted by El Deguello:

quote:

All you really HAVE to do to use rimmed cases is have the gunsmith cut a slight recess at the base of the chamber to accept the rim of the case, and otherwise use the chamber as it already is. I know that will work because I have done it with a Ruger No.1 in 9.5x57, which has become a 9.5x57-R.

Yes, and I'd wager that the rifle will still work OK with rimless cases as well, if you have not altered the extractor/ejector.

Yes it does. You must have missed this line in my original post:

"Now that the recess for the case rim is there, it is used for either rimmed or rimless cases, and functions perfectly well with each."

Steve,

I didn't have choice on the barrel as mine was one of the Ruger 1B 26" barreled/actions. The barrel; which on a 1B is a round, straight-tapered medium/heavy (more medium than heavy) tube. A 1B rifle weighs 8lbs. without rings & scope. Makes mine the exact opposite of a lightweight IMO.

Therefore I asked Fajen to provide the forearm to fit a 1B barrel - they delivered. Couldn't tell ya what the dimensions are - sorry.

It's not a Varmint or Heavy Barrel but the way it's currently set-up it's a 9 lb. plus rifle and that's not my description of a Carry-Rifle. When you heft mine you notice the weight right away. In .270 Winchester and it's pin-point accuracy it makes for a great longer(ish) range Stand rifle though.

If I had to do this project again I would work with the 1A Sporter which has a 22" lightweight barrel.

OR,

For those that don't want the hassle; purchase a #1 RSI International with Mannlicher-style Forearm & 20" lightweight tube in 7x57.

Thanks, Gerry.

The Wesson #1 I'm building has a hammer that'll preclude a scope, so that'll save a little weight (could probably put one on if I REALLY wanted to). That, and I won't have a full stock. I really want a tack-driver, even at the expense of weight. I'll probably look at a medium heavy, too.

Steve

Steve-

I hope you won't be offended if I make a few comments here.

1. My own Ruger No. 1 in 7x65 has a 26" #3 contour barrel and it is plenty easy for me to carry...matter of fact it is my favorite elk rifle for use in the Oregon mountains. BTW, it wears a Leupold 3.5x10 variable which is not a featherweight scope.

I suspect I find it easy to carry for a couple of reasons...one is that it does not have a long, heavy, action and magazine, saving the weight of both that steel and the cartridges which would be in a magazine. Another is that the rifle is also the same length as a bolt gun with a 22" barrel, thus there is no great weight hanging out some inordinate distance in front of my hands. It is plenty accurate too, shooting RWS factory ammo into 3/4" groups.

2. My 6.5x53-R (which also shoots rimless 6.5 M/S ammo) has a 28" barrel. The barrel is a very light contour (#1-1/2 contour),but is also a tack-driver, despite the small diameter and long length. It has shot 100-yard groups as small as 1/2", though the typical group is more like 3/4".

I suspect the reason it works fine for me is that it is a hunting rifle, not a target rifle, so I virtually never send enough rounds down it in a hurry (in the field) to heat it enough to degrade accuracy.

I sorta believe that the quality of the barrel is more important than its weight, at least in hunting rifle barrels.

The major contribution of heavy barrels to accuracy may often be their ability to absorb and distribute heat. But if one is not firing enough rounds in quick order to create an excess of heat, that is a non-starter in the accuracy race. True, heavy barels may be stiffer, but no matter how much a barrel may "whip" on firing if the "whip" is consistent, the barrel will likely be accurate... And, the consistency of the "whip" may be due at least as much to the design of the rifle itself and the quality of its "bedding" as to the weight of the barrel.

I guess what I am trying to say is that you don't have to lug a cannon to get accuracy, but you may not have to cut the tube to 22" to get it either. There are lots of options to make whatever you like the looks and feel of work well for you.

BTW, I do have an RSI in .308 too, and it is also very accurate, so I am not dis'ing the 22"barrels, just pointing out there is no big handicap necessary with the longer tubes if you like their appearance & balance in the hands, as I do.

Thanks, AC. I appreciate the input.

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:

quote:

Originally posted by El Deguello:

quote:

All you really HAVE to do to use rimmed cases is have the gunsmith cut a slight recess at the base of the chamber to accept the rim of the case, and otherwise use the chamber as it already is. I know that will work because I have done it with a Ruger No.1 in 9.5x57, which has become a 9.5x57-R.

Yes, and I'd wager that the rifle will still work OK with rimless cases as well, if you have not altered the extractor/ejector.

Yes it does. You must have missed this line in my original post:

"Now that the recess for the case rim is there, it is used for either rimmed or rimless cases, and functions perfectly well with each."

Sorry. I did miss that.