Predicting Ruger No. 1 accuracy?

26 July 2016, 01:13

Bill/Oregon

I have had a No. 1 in 7X57 made in 1979 stashed away as a donor for another project for a while now, and have never shot the thing. Now I am thinking of keeping it, and maybe restocking. Anyone know the odds on whether a red pad No. 1 of this vintage will have one of the notoriously inaccurate barrels Ruger used back around this time period? I know, shoot the damned thing, Bill, and find out for yourself.

26 July 2016, 01:19

p dog shooter

quote:
I know, shoot the damned thing, Bill, and find out for yourself.

+100
That is the only way you well find out.

26 July 2016, 02:20

Bill/Oregon

Righto. I owned one of the little Internationals in 7X57 in the early 90s that was nicely accurate, especially with the Hornady 154-grain RN. But I also owned a late 1970s Model 77 in this caliber that would not shoot, period. We shall see.

26 July 2016, 04:54

d.unger

I picked up a '84 made No.1 in 7x57 at a gun show a year or so back, I had the same concerns about accuracy. First round of testing I got a load that groups 5/8".

26 July 2016, 05:12

rnovi

what I can say is pay careful attention that you "rest" the rifle forestock the same way each time. I found that my accuracy was quite dependent upon keeping the rest closer to the receiver than to the end of the forestock.

My #1 grouped 3/4" consistently with H4350 and a 145 speer HC.

26 July 2016, 06:20

Texas Killartist

I have that rifle (and several other #1s). Follow the advice here on resting the rifle.
I have also found seating depth (when hand loading) makes a BIG difference !
My 7x57 shoots cheap Remington 140g green box ammo a/b 1 1/2 groups. Deer/hog accurate BUT not satisfactory to satisfy my analness need for accuracy.
My Handloads w/ 140g Sierras are all touching at 100 yards !
It helps a WHOLE lot to get someone (like Jim Kobe) to adjust (tune) the trigger !

26 July 2016, 19:11

Bill/Oregon

Thanks fellas. I'd be real happy if I could get 140-grain Nosler Partitions to snuggle within an inch at 100. Have to wonder if they used different barrel vendors for the M77 and the No. 1.

26 July 2016, 23:19

eny

Hicks accurizer has helped mine from 358 caliber and down, all big bore have shot well without it. Have Pachmayer pad on 450/400, fits good,looks good and works good LOP now 14 1/4, prefect!

27 July 2016, 00:57

impala#03

I have a 1977 vintage Ruger #1 in 220 Swift. It took a little tinkering, but will shoot 3/4" or so all day long. I have several others as well, same thing, if you take the time, you will find something it will like. I have heard all the stories about Ruger #1's not being accurate, but has not been my experience.

27 July 2016, 01:16

Baldhunter

I recently bought two 7mag Ruger #1's.One is a 1976 1-B the other is a 1977 1-V.After a little tinkering floating the forearm,and shooting six David Tubb Throat Maintenance Bullets through them,they will both shoot 1/2" groups at 100yds with 150gr and 160gr Nosler bullets.Before they both about 2" grouping rifles.

27 July 2016, 02:11

Big Wonderful Wyoming

A stainless 375 #1 was the most accurate rifle I ever shot for years.

I wish I still had it. Stainless #1s are kind of like redheads and you either love them or hate them. I have been married to two red heads. So the answer is out on that one.

27 July 2016, 08:38

loud-n-boomer

Don't shoot it, Bill. I made that mistake with a 1980's vintage No. 1A in .30-06 I bought for a donor and found that it will put three shots from every load I have tried under 1-inch at 100 yards, and several, including Barnes-X, under 3/4-inch. Now I have to keep the stupid thing as-is because it is too accurate to rebarrel!

27 July 2016, 16:33

TonyRumore

I have a 1969 #1 in 270 and another 243 that was made in 1977. The early gun shot sub-MOA right out of the box. The .243 however, was shooting 5 inch patterns at 100 yards. After floating the front end, the groups dropped to about 3 inches. But after bedding the buttstock to the action, the groups dropped to 5/8".

Tony

27 July 2016, 23:00

Bill/Oregon

Thanks fellas. I was just looking more closely at my donor No. 1 and darn if it hasn't been nicely bedded. We shall see.

28 July 2016, 05:40

df06

I hope its accurate for you. I had four #1s, all .22 centerfires. None would come close to 1".

28 July 2016, 17:58

cgbach

I have one from that vintage. It is ok but never has performed well. Groups are usually under 2" but that is about it. The throat is very long and the neck very large. My rifle is very load sensitive. A change of 1 gr. can double group size Try 150 gr. Nosler Ballistic Tips and Re17.
C.G.B.

12 August 2016, 06:17

Brice

Some shooters name their rifles. My No. 1 RSI 7 x 57 is called "Problem Child." Early to mid-eighties production. Despite Hicks and many other attempts,I cannot tell you how bad it is without breaking out in tears. But it is real pretty.

12 August 2016, 12:28

Rolland

I have had three number ones, a 7 x 57 RSI, 7 mm mag and a 30-06 I could not get any to shoot under 2 inches. But they had the best looking stocks for a factory gun I had ever seen. Just could not any dialed in.

13 August 2016, 02:57

JeffreyPhD

quote:
Originally posted by Rolland:
I have had three number ones, a 7 x 57 RSI, 7 mm mag and a 30-06 I could not get any to shoot under 2 inches. But they had the best looking stocks for a factory gun I had ever seen. Just could not any dialed in.

Every time I get a Ruger No. 1, I worry about this. They vary more than most guns, but I have been very lucky. I have bought 3 in the last few years; a 450/400 1H, 300 H&H 1S, and 7x57 RSI. All of them are good shooters, esp. the 300 H&H. Just got back from Namibia where it was used for everything from Warthog to Eland. Although I also took a Browning X-bolt in 338, I didn't use it at all. The RSI has been surprising. It will shoot about an inch and a quarter for 5 shots, repeatedly, even when the barrel gets very hot, and not change point of impact. Really hope to take some game with it eventually.

16 August 2016, 05:17

Duckear

Best way to predict accuracy in a No 1?

Fist, mix 12 gr your preferred powder with 12gr of coffe grounds.

Place in resized case, seal with beeswax, place in chamber overnight.

The next day, empty case contents in Pyrex container, place in oven, dry at 142 degrees for 2 hours, seventeen minutes.

Allow mixture to cool

Light with butane torch.

Let residual cool for 87 minutes.

Weigh.

If first decimal place digit is even, expect sub MOA accuracy. If odd, 1-2.75" at 100 yards is as much as you can expect.

Good luck!!!

16 August 2016, 23:10

impala#03

Duckear's formula will probably work good. Or you could just shoot your #1 and see how it shoots.

17 August 2016, 07:55

Fjold

Don't be afraid to try something odd. I bought a red pad No.1 and tried a bunch of 130 to 150 grain bullets and the only one that would stay around an inch was the 130 grain TSX. Just for the heck of it I tried the 110 grain Barnes TTSX and they shot like magic.

17 August 2016, 23:33

impala#03

Well there you go!!!

19 August 2016, 04:09

Carolina Man

Bill,
I had one of the early 7x57's. Found it had a really long throat. Finally found it shot the 175 gr bullets the best of any.

14 October 2016, 02:46

Atkinson

Load it with H414 and try the 130 gr Speer, 145 gr. Speer and the 160 gr. Nosler partition or Accubond..Try some nosler 175 gr in it..you will then know exactly whatcha got..

I remember the bad barrel days, but I never hot a bad Ruger in my life and Ive owned many..My "old" bad barrel guns are a 30-06 and a 250 Savage, both shoot under and inch..but its still best to find out before you jump.

14 October 2016, 23:53

AnotherAZWriter

Ruger used to source their barrels from a company called Wilson. I had one older No 1. in 7mm RM that was okay; not a tackdriver but totally acceptable for hunting. It had gorgeous wood but I sold it for some unknown reason, perhaps because at the time I had more than one 7mm RM. I have a No1 in .204 Ruger that is a tackdriver; I floated the forearm with a washer. It doesn't hold its zero as well as a bolt gun in a synthetic stock, but it isn't terrible. It also has fantastic wood.

16 October 2016, 23:24

Doubless

Bill, in my estimation, the biggest reason for the #1's inaccuracy is due to the way the forend is attached.

Do yourself a favor: take the rifle to a reputable 'smith and have him re-attach the forend by soldering a block of key stock to the bottom of the barrel drilled and tapped for the screw. He can plug the original hole and you probably won't ever see it, if he is good. Done correctly, the look is very tasteful, and accuracy improves remarkably.

That goofy angled fastener and the resulting downward torque on the barrel doesn't do anything for accuracy. If you get one that shoots, you are lucky. My experience with them is that the overwhelming majority just don't!

17 October 2016, 00:39

Grenadier

I have a Ruger #3 with #1 wood. It was originally chambered in .375 Winchester but has been rechambered to .375 FL NE 2-1/2". The forend puts a fair amount of pressure on the barrel. It is just a tight fit. Nevertheless, the rifle shoots 300gr Winchester Silvertips into one inch at 100 yards. I never expected that sort of accuracy from a Ruger single shot. Some are notoriously inaccurate. Some are surprisingly accurate.

19 October 2016, 06:08

TASK1

Bought a 1A in 7X57 sometime back in the 1970’s. Nice rifle, average accuracy, typical trigger, but it nose planted PA, NY and WV deer quickly and very reliably with the Hornady 154 gr RN. The stock wasn't fancy but the 1A is a joy to carry, point and shoot, you could say a “meat” gun par excellence. Though the stock was plain, I still gave it an A+ for looks. Just something about these 1A’s.

In a weak moment, I parted with that rifle, dies, etc and have been looking for another 1A since.

A few days ago I picked up a new 1A in .275 Rigby. It sits under a VXR with a #4 reticle. Scope is a little large but I’ll live with it. Dies and brass will be here tomorrow. In the meantime, since I’ll be hunting with it next week, I wanted to get it on paper so I went to the range today with a box of factory Remington 140’s.

Long story short, I was hugely disappointed (as expected) in the trigger,.... but very pleasantly surprised by the accuracy. Once on paper and centered in no time at all, a target went up. Even with the trigger that I had to lift my head and check 3 different times to see if I’d left the safety on, it grouped right at 3/4" at 100 with factory ammunition, likely under-loaded. Don’t care. With some credit to the ammunition, the rifle significantly exceeded my accuracy expectations. We’re off to a good start and I couldn’t be more pleased. This one I will keep and expect even better things from my hand loads! Gotta find a way to improve this trigger tho. Yeah, yeah, it’s all about profit but shame on Ruger for that, the #1's deserve better.

Cheers.

19 October 2016, 08:17

JeffreyPhD

Congrats on getting a tack driver. The "275 Rigby" label is tempting me too. Specs say it's a 24" barrel. Is it the 1A diameter? How is the wood on the example you snagged?

quote:
Originally posted by TASK1:
Bought a 1A in 7X57 sometime back in the 1970’s. Nice rifle, average accuracy, typical trigger, but it nose planted PA, NY and WV deer quickly and very reliably with the Hornady 154 gr RN. The stock wasn't fancy but the 1A is a joy to carry, point and shoot, you could say a “meat” gun par excellence. Though the stock was plain, I still gave it an A+ for looks. Just something about these 1A’s. In a weak moment, I parted with that rifle, dies, etc and have been looking for another 1A since.

A few days ago I picked up a new 1A in .275 Rigby. It sits under a VXR with a #4 reticle. Scope is a little large but I’ll live with it. Dies and brass will be here tomorrow. In the meantime, since I’ll be hunting with it next week, I wanted to get it on paper so I went to the range today with a box of factory Remington 140’s.

Long story short, I was hugely disappointed (as expected) in the trigger,.... but very pleasantly surprised by the accuracy. Once on paper and centered in no time at all, a target went up. Even with the trigger that I had to lift my head and check 3 different times to see if I’d left the safety on, it grouped right at 3/4" at 100 with factory ammunition, likely under-loaded. Don’t care. With some credit to the ammunition, the rifle significantly exceeded my accuracy expectations. We’re off to a good start and I couldn’t be more pleased. This one I will keep and expect even better things from my hand loads! Gotta find a way to improve this trigger tho. Yeah, yeah, it’s all about profit but shame on Ruger for that, the #1's deserve better.

Cheers.

19 October 2016, 21:43

TASK1

Jeff,

Yes and yes.

Wood is plain, not bad, just ordinary. For me personally, as I know others who care a lot about their wood and I respect that,...it's just not important to me. Function is # 1 priority in all my rifles. On and off the 4 wheeler, in and out of a scabbard / pack, less to worry about.

Cheers.

19 October 2016, 22:41

JeffreyPhD

The wood on these recent guns is disappointing (to me), but wouldn't stop me from buying one if it was set up the way I'd like. The 24" lighter barrel would be great.

quote:
Originally posted by TASK1:
Jeff,

Yes and yes.

Wood is plain, not bad, just ordinary. For me personally, as I know others who care a lot about their wood and I respect that,...it's just not important to me. Function is # 1 priority in all my rifles. On and off the 4 wheeler, in and out of a scabbard / pack, less to worry about.

Cheers.

20 October 2016, 03:03

TASK1

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JeffreyPhD:
The wood on these recent guns is disappointing (to me), but wouldn't stop me from buying one if it was set up the way I'd like. The 24" lighter barrel would be great.

Yeah,.....this one's got some heft to it, which I very much prefer. I can see the usefullness of a light rifle but I don't own or want one. To me, a reasonable amount of extra weight lends to stability and better accuracy in the field, as well as providing some recoil reduction. Don't need that with this rifle but I'll take it. Rifle does have the typical long throat.

Yeah, I completely understand the aesthetic appeal of wood but,.......if you want the Rigby, don't let the wood hold you back.

20 October 2016, 03:14

JeffreyPhD

I'm going to ask my local dealer to see if he can get one.

quote:
Originally posted by TASK1:
Yeah,.....this one's got some heft to it, which I very much prefer. I can see the usefullness of a light rifle but I don't own or want one. To me, a reasonable amount of extra weight lends to stability and better accuracy in the field, as well as providing some recoil reduction. Don't need that with this rifle but I'll take it. Rifle does have the typical long throat.

Yeah, I completely understand the aesthetic appeal of wood but,.......if you want the Rigby, don't let the wood hold you back.

23 October 2016, 23:47

Atkinson

Ruger no. 1s, like all rifles, some shoot great, some mediocre and some horrible. All of mine have shot well, I have heard some horror stories, but the only option you have is shoot them and find out, I don't pay much attention to the nay sayers because in many cases its not the gun, and since you don't know them personally, its a crap shoot..

29 October 2016, 23:08

Atkinson

Jack Belk makes a little V shaped forend gizmo out of aluminum, and it attaches to the forend screw as I recall and it sure makes all his no. 1's shoot. I have glass bedded the forends tight all the way on mine and they sure shot good in every case..I turned the screw until the wood was even with bore centerline..

I also ran a thin bead of glass around the metal to wood on at the action juncture. Same on the butt stock, just give it a nice fit and protects against oil and moisture.