The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Single Shot Rifles Is there anything functionally better than a #1?Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Is there anything functionally better than a #1? | Login/Join |
| One of Us |
Before I buy another one, is there anything that works better? I don't care about looks. | ||
|
| One of Us |
To my knowledge you can't beat a Ruger #1 for price,and cal. availability... Browning/Winchester 1885 would be second...If money is no object then you might try a Hagen... www.martiniandhagngunmakers.com/pricelist.htm There are all sorts of rifles in between the price range of a Ruger and a Hagn Sharps Ballard CPA Merkle Blaser Krieghoff Dakota #10 etc....  I can't say that any of them are functionally better although I have read that the Hagn maybe better designed...I can't afford 13 grand on a rifle so I'll stick to Brownings,Rugers,Sharps and maybe a Merkle,Kriehhoff or Blaser later down the line...Oh I have also read good things about the Baikal single shots(cheap and accurate) which Remington are suppose to be importing...If they ever import them in 9.3X74R, 7X57R or 7X65R I'll give them a try... | |||
|
One of Us |
I have 4 #1s, 3 bng 1885s and I love em..... However, until Ruger improves their trigger and hanger bar system they certainly AINT the best bang fer your buck...... Nobody's mentioned Encore yet..... Other than having to manually cock it, and if looks are no object, they are a much better value for your dollar..... Beer is proof that God loves us, and wants us to be happy....Benjamin Franklin | |||
|
| one of us |
What will the rifle be used for? Any gun can be loaded with just a single round. If you "don't care about looks"...what DO you care about? Hunting, target shooting, collecting? | |||
|
| One of Us |
try an original farquharson ! TOMO577 DOUBLE RIFLE SHOOTERS SOCIETY | |||
|
| One of Us |
I want to replace my .223 #1. I will get another one if there is nothing clearly functionally better. All I ever shot with my dearly missed #1 .223 was targets and ground squirrels. I had just put a Kesslinger set trigger in it 13 days ago, and the rifle went missing 3 days ago. I have a Uberti 1895 30-30 that I have never shot. I have some more #1s, a 7mmMag that shoots great and a 270 I have never shot. I have an NEF 45/70 that shoots well, but is no #1 for being nice to shoot. Is there a chart? like, and I am making this up: NEF Handi Rifle / H&R break action $250 C+ Encore $600 B 1885 $600 B Ruger #1 $900 B+ Dakota 10 $6000 A- MartiniHagn $11,000 A+ http://www.martiniandhagngunmakers.com/pricelist.htm | |||
|
| one of us |
Sorry about the #1 223. Stolen? Sounds like you have some very nice SS rifles. Another you might consider is the C. Sharps Arms 1885 Highwall. I have one in 45-70 and (to me) it's as nice, or nicer, than the Ruger #1. They are a little pricey buy you get a custom rifle and lots of choices of options. | |||
|
| one of us |
I feel that as hunting rifle the Blaser K95 is very difficult to beat: Strong action, nice factory trigger, VERY light and VERY precise. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I have two Dakota model 10, a 270 and a 375 Dakota. Both shoot well under an inch and balance well for me. I bought both used but like new and paid about $3000 for each. I really like the lines of the Dakotas. I don't think the "Dakota Bashers" on the forum give them a fair shake. I have some Ruger #1s as well so Ruger fans need not start bitching either! | |||
|
| One of Us |
I don't think there's a better designed single shot rifle, at any price, than the #1. Some complain about the forend hanger, but it's a brilliant design. It just needs a little pressure put on the barrel in some rifles for optimum accuracy. No rocket science and certainly worth the little annoyance at having to do that. I like the old style high walls & many of the other SS's out there, but for the money, looks, performance, etc etc. I'd recommend the #1's. "You can lead a horticulture, ... but you can't make 'er think" Florida Gardener | |||
|
| one of us |
it all depends on what you mean by functionally better. A real highwall (of the original make and design) is hell for dependable. And if it fails, any one with hand tools can swap out any part. Perhaps this is possible on a #1 but I don't own one so I can't say. Is there anything simpler and more infallable than a Remington Rollingblock? Probably not. When it comes to dependability, that's pretty much a benchmark that few can touch - not surprisingly a few gazzillion were made by Remington and under license from Remington to be used all over the world as a military rifle. I don't really care for them but they are hell for dependable. Ballards are pretty fool proof as well and have an excellent history for dependability. But if you want a modern action modern cartridge rifle, then a new made Ballard Highwall is probably as dependable or more dependable than a #1 - and also a lot more expensive. Brent When there is lead in the air, there is hope in my heart -- MWH ~1996 | |||
|
one of us |
My No.1 worked pretty well, but I had trouble with ejected cases hitting the safety button, causing them to end up in the loading trough. It's a very smooth action, and extraction of the rimless cartridge always worked. It has a zillion parts, more than many repeaters, and more than some semi-automatics. The trigger/sear arrangement is needlessly complicated. It's a big action, but if you want to fire big, high pressure cartridges, it can take them. I doubt I'll own another, but I won't try to discourage anyone from getting one. It's a fine gun for the money. I'll second Brent's comments that the rolling block is a superior action, if you can live with its limitations. It won't take more than a .30-40 or .45-70 level of breech thrust. It's also far less safe in the event of a case rupture, so inspect cases for reloads with care. However, for simplicity and ease of use, it's hard to beat. The most enchanting single shot I've handled was the Ballard, but it is even weaker than the rolling block. There's something about the smoothness of that breech on opening and closing that is magical. | |||
|
One of Us |
I'm not sure. I've never fired a Dakota # 10, but it may be functionally better. I know its stock design is more ffunctional, in addition to merely looking better. I have no use for SS rifles that must be manually cocked, because I'm too stupid to remember to cock them. I prefer a hammerless design that has a top-tang safety. Those TC - TCR's were pretty and functional rifles in almost every way, but had the dumbest damn abortion for a safety ever put on an otherwise nice rifle. "Bitte, trinks du nicht das Wasser. Dahin haben die Kuhen gesheissen." | |||
|
| one of us |
ED, sounds like you need an original Winchester then. They cock just fine. A Sharps Borchardt would too, but they are considerably more rare and take more specialized skills to get up and running acceptably. Brent When there is lead in the air, there is hope in my heart -- MWH ~1996 | |||
|
| One of Us |
Hmm, I found the #1 very easy to work on & extremely well designed, as have most of the gunsmiths I know. You can do anything to it with a screwdriver & a punch. Frank Dehaas loved it. I also find the action not to be large at all, given the strength & overall weight factor. Maybe a few ounces on the high walls but for the features, it's well invested. It does have a lot of parts, but that's all part of Bill Ruger's design, and it functions perfectly. I all my years gunsmithing, I've never seen one fail. No idea why your cases hit the safety, but I haven't seen a problem with that. Should be easy to fix though. One thing that is universally loved is the adjustable ejector. Another thing is the stock design which would be hard to improve on, IMO. The old RB was about as simple a design as you could find, but it had it's limitations. I guess there's no perfect SS action for everyone, but the fact that the #1 is still selling great, and has so many devoted followers after all these years speaks a lot about it's quality & function. "You can lead a horticulture, ... but you can't make 'er think" Florida Gardener | |||
|
| one of us |
There's a real simple fix to that problem. With the rifle at yor shoulder, as you work the lever to eject the round, simply tilt the rifle slightly to the right as you work the lever. With a little practice, you'll find the sweet spot where the cases stop hitting the safety button. Paul B. | |||
|
One of Us |
Ditto what Paul B wrote. When shooting my #1 in .405 from the bench in an upright position the safety stops the empty brass. When shooting in the field I tilt it to the right which lets the ejected brass miss the safety. Then I leave the rifle tilted slightly to move the scope eyepiece over and allow easier access to drop a new cartridge in the action. | |||
|
| One of Us |
It would also be very easy to just grind/file a little off the front of the safety button & bevel it a little. I've never had a problem with one, as I said. Nor have my customers. "You can lead a horticulture, ... but you can't make 'er think" Florida Gardener | |||
|
| one of us |
My solution was to tilt the rifle upward on working the lever; the cases tended to roll out on their own. The prettiest fix for this problem was seen on a custom gun, where the safety button was replaced by a shorter one riding in recess milled in the receiver. On my No.1, just beveling the button would not have been a fix. The case was catching on the lower edge of the button, so I would have had to shorten the nose of the button. The No.1 was sized for high pressure cases the diameter of the magnums. My shooting has gravitated to cartridges more like the .30-40, both smaller and lower pressure. For me, then, it is an unnecessarily large action, but it is certainly correctly sized for its intended purpose. The fundamental design is sound. If scaled down for more modest cartridges and if the safety and sear linkages were simplified, it would be a world beater. It's ok as it is, but it's not for me. | |||
|
| one of us |
I much prefer the Browning 1885 to the #1. Scope mounting on a #1 is clumsy unless you have a scope with a long tube behind the turret. #1s don't have a tang for tang sights.... I really don't care for scopes on single shots anyway so what is the use ? | |||
|
| One of Us |
I think I will get another .223 #1 for the one that was stolen or lost 6 days ago [I am in morning over the gun]. If I have 200 guns, that was my favorite to shoot. I have a .223Rem 250" neck reamer and an 8 pound 26" Lothar Walther .224" bull barrel. I think I will have some bench rest smith chamber it, instead of my own ham fisted lathe technique. This time I will get a side focus scope instead of that miserable adjustable objective. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I am also a No.1 fanatic. But I am not blind to some of its potential problems. I have a .450/400 3". When ejecting empties, the case rims would regularly get hung up on the safety catch. My smith redid the catch - inset into the tang with a lower profile. It looks and works great. I got the idea from an old gun magazine article years ago where a .458 was rebored to .470 Nitro. Same problem, same cure. | |||
|
| One of Us |
AK, who's your smith? i know Hamilton Bowen used to do that modification, but his web site says they dont do it anymore. thanks in advance. DRSS | |||
|
| One of Us |
I've re-done a lot of Ruger tang safeties on big bore rifles (tang safety 77's) that bothered people or made them think the ridge would cause a problem in the web of their thumb. I just milled them off flat & silver soldered a piece of steel on, rounded it off & checkered it. That would probably work fine on the #1's too, the button can be made quite a bit smaller without exposing the slot it rides in. "You can lead a horticulture, ... but you can't make 'er think" Florida Gardener | |||
|
One of Us |
The No1 does not hang up the round on the raised portion of the safety but rather the FRONT part of the safety. It's a simple matter to remove the safety and cut the front tang of the safety back about 1/8"-3/16" and slightly bevel it. Apply a little crocus and cold blue an d reassemble. No more catching of ejected rounds. Just pay attention to not cutting the part back too far or there will be an unsighly gap when safety is in the rear position. Just pencil mark the opening when safety is removed and put safety in slot and move to rear and mark appropiately. Simple cheap fix. SCI Life Member NRA Patron Life Member DRSS | |||
|
| One of Us |
I have 3 #1`s .None have any problems with the shell hitting the Safety.Mine are all 70`s manufacture.Does it make a difference when they were made???? I don`t know if they are the Best single shot around,but they are hard to beat for the money.Glassing the front wood and putting a set screw on the hanger works very well and is easy to do.Replacement triggers are cheap,but I never thought they needed to be replaced.You could adjust the older ones.  OB | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Rifles Single Shot Rifles Is there anything functionally better than a #1?
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia