Ruger no1

[Daniel Cary]

I wonder how people tell the difference between the C and D weight barrels? I do this by lining them up side by side. Is there a wonderful book or resource that tells us this? I believe the .404 was cut with a nonstandard chamber and they were on the C weight barrel. It's possible the .450-.400 were also built on this barrel.

There was a 450/400 for sale not long ago. A buyer asked if it had a D or C barrel.
A member explained, & I'm rephrasing, not exact. Anyway ..
He said, most of the 450/400's were fitted with a "C". apx. 100 or less had the "D" or Heavy Barrel.
News to me none the less.

 

[Daniel Cary]

This gunsmith, I can't recall for the life of me & I'm certain it's Not Gary Reeder makes really nice No.1 Conversions. 500 & 505 Gibbs if I recall ...

 

[SFRanger7GP]

A decelerator recoil pad makes a huge difference on a big bore rifle. I even removed Rigby’s fine, hockey puck material pad and had Todd Ramirez put on an orange decelerator pad. Really tamed the 416. If I shot my Ruger 450/400 more I would so the same.

 

[Forrest Halley]

There was a 450/400 for sale not long ago. A buyer asked if it had a D or C barrel.
A member explained, & I'm rephrasing, not exact. Anyway ..
He said, most of the 450/400's were fitted with a "C". apx. 100 or less had the "D" or Heavy Barrel.
News to me none the less.

I was recalling something like that. It appears to be a trend to claim a D weight barrel in the non .458's. You see a few folks claiming to have a .45-70 tropical model. There is nothing wrong with the C weight barrel. My .375 has one and I love it. I think it actually is more aesthetically pleasing than the true D weight which looks shotgun like especially where it mates up with the quarter rib. Everybody wants a D weight until they have to stare at it on a rifle that isn't powerful enough to need it.

 

[Aaron N]

There was a 450/400 for sale not long ago. A buyer asked if it had a D or C barrel.
A member explained, & I'm rephrasing, not exact. Anyway ..
He said, most of the 450/400's were fitted with a "C". apx. 100 or less had the "D" or Heavy Barrel.
News to me none the less.

A run of 100 was made with the “D” barrel for Lipseys. This was what Ruger told me when I ran my serial number.

 

[Aaron N]

Stick with it and it gets easier. Might also make up some reduced 'practice loads' to build confidence and familiarity with the rifle. When I first started firing my .404J It seemed like a beast. Now it seems powerful, but not beastly.

With a generous Pachmyr Decelerator recoil pad and below max loads, it will be much better.

I won’t go as far to say it’s unmanageable, but it was there. The pad doesn’t seem too bad, but I’ll look into a Decelerator. Maybe add some length to it as well.

I have also thought that casting some lead for plinking would be a good way to go as well!

The main thing is that I need to get my backyard range built so that I can practice.

 

[Aaron N]

Mike is right, just shoot it a couple of times per trip until you start to get used to it. I would second the decelerator pad and possibly consider a mercury cylinder. If you do go with the mercury cylinder, take it out for hunts. No sense lugging the extra weight and the legality of traveling internationally with a cylinder of mercury would be an interesting question.

I’m sure some strategically placed lead would be just as effective as the mercury, no?

 

[Daniel Cary]

In the No.1 H's, for lack of description: "Which Caliber Produces the Most Recoil" ?
Out of all ever offered?

It may sound irrelevant, or dismissed as mere enthusiasm. But I'm curious? Anyone?
Thank You.

 

[Forrest Halley]

In the No.1 H's, for lack of description: "Which Caliber Produces the Most Recoil" ?
Out of all ever offered?

It may sound irrelevant, or dismissed as mere enthusiasm. But I'm curious? Anyone?
Thank You.

Out of the factory offered cartridges only?
That's tricky. I'd say the .416 Rigby, .458 Lott and .450 3¼ NE would be the cake takers. The .450 NE is described as having built light, but with so few samples out there it is difficult to get a gauge on it. The .450/.400 built with a C weight barrel and the .404 Jeffrey also with the C weight barrel would be formidable.
In the customs you have the properly chambered .404, .450 3¼ again, .470, .505, .500, .600 and I think it stops short of the .700. These are harder to gauge as many were actually built correctly with respect to weight.

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

Were the Lipsy's D barreled guns marked 'Liprey's' in any way? My former Ruger No1 375 H&H has a pretty heave barrel on it, I have often wondered if that was a special or the standard ones came like that?

 

[F. Vaccaro]

You know one of the nice things about a #1 is you can load it down for practice, or deer & not worry about regulation. A few clicks & you’re there or a different leaf on irons.

 

[CJW]

Wonder what it’s like to shoot a 10 lb 600 NE?

Did you see that video of Tyson beating the guy on the airplane? Probably something like that.

 

[dougfinn]

I had one in .458 win mag. Nice looking rifle but any load approaching full power was brutal to shoot. Way to light for that caliber. Wasn’t accurate which I attribute to the .600” throat on it. It was designed for 500 grain bullets. I was loading 300 and 350 grain bullets.

 

[geoff rath]

My thought on the No.1, supported by a couple of gunsmiths I know, is that the shaping of the buttstock is "wrong". Too much drop in the comb, and the toe-heel angle should be straighter, especially for heavier recoiling calibers; a cheekpiece would help too. A custom stock is, in my addled mind, the way to go ....

 

[WAB]

My thought on the No.1, supported by a couple of gunsmiths I know, is that the shaping of the buttstock is "wrong". Too much drop in the comb, and the toe-heel angle should be straighter, especially for heavier recoiling calibers; a cheekpiece would help too. A custom stock is, in my addled mind, the way to go ....

Agreed, they’re pretty and fun to shoot up to the .30-06 class of cartridges. Beyond that the stock design turns them into a bit of a handful.

 

[Forrest Halley]

Wonder what it’s like to shoot a 10 lb 600 NE?

Somebody paid $4k to find out. You could have it built for less.

 

[Wishfulthinker580]

Somebody paid $4k to find out. You could have it built for less.

Wouldn’t be surprised if it’s available again soon!

 

[RayAtkinson]

A 375 H&H or a std 458 Win, especially in a strong Ruger no.1 would be an excellent choice and has brought many a elehant to its knees...but if we are playing big bore games the the 470 is a good choice and building one on a rebored #1 seems the best route to go short of a double in your case. I might cose a big bolt gun in a 500 Gibbs for instance..You have a cornocopia of options to think about.. I really liked the 450-400-3" and it never failed too do its job and return to battery was faster..The 404 Jefferys was my bolt gun choice.

 

[Bonefish2150]

I never develop a flinch unless the rifle actually hurts me and that has only happened when I have fired rifles without a one inch thick rubber pad. I've never fired an ultra-light elephant rifle, however, but we aren't talking about one of those here. The Ruger 1 in .416 Rigby weighs in at 9 pounds sans scope, so I would think it very easy to build a 10.5 pound scoped Ruger 1 .470.

But I've heard some people say the Ruger 1 kicks unusually hard. Perhaps it is due to the stock shape. (?)

It needs a straighter stock

 

[sestoppelman]

I real recoil pad would really help, instead of the alleged pad Ruger uses.