Ruger No 1 280 Rem

Very nice rifle. Never was much of a .280 fan myself, .30-06 has always been the apple of my eye. That said I don’t know why it couldn’t do much if not most of the same things.

I was just thinking today about how I will need to get another No.1 as I sold my 6mm a short while back. It will likely be a .30-06 or a .220 Swift, or a .375, or a…..
There is a 1980 1B in 30-06 on GB. :LOL:
 
Very nice! I also have a Ruger #1B in .280 that also carries the stamp 280/7mm Express. It unfortunately doesn't get used much. The reason why is that I also have a .280 Rem Mountain Rifle that is just a little lighter to carry and shoots well too. Maybe it's time to get the #1 out again and get the dust out of the barrel.
It's screaming to be pulled out and shot as well as hunting with it. What are you waiting for!
 
What kind of work needs to be done to make them a tight to touching group rifle with a good load work-up?
It's hard to say. Sometmes it'll fall in love with a particular hand load. Sometime bedding work and even slaughtering a young goat over the keyboard while asking what do I need to do won't give you an answer. Been there and did that. I have two Rger #1 B's in 30-06, one being my first one ever bought back in 1975. To this day, I have never gotten either rifle to do a usable group.

I have five rifles chambered to the .300 Win. Mag., four of which are Ruger #1's. All five rifles shoot the same load running a 200 gr. Speer Hot Core over a charge of Winchester's now very long gong WMR powder. All five shoot sub MOA. Odd ball out is a Winchester M70 glass bedded into a McMillan stock with no other work. I use it as my foul weather .300.

I have to ask, just what are your expectations regarding accuracy from your rifle? Would you be satisfied with a 1.5" groups or is sub MOA what you're looking for? Frankly, if you can get it to do better that one inch ir less you'll be a lucky man. Most of my #1s run in the 1.25 to 1.50" range and that that's good enought for any hunt I'll do. Two run around 2.25 to 275") but part of it may be me as I don't was to put scopes on elephant guns. (.404 Jeffery and .416 Rigby)They'd mostly be used at 50 yards or less and probably less on something big and nasty. My point being if you get 1.50" or better, that's more than good enough for big game atany reasonable distance. I try to keep shots at 300 yards or less and only three times in a hunting carreer that started in 1954 had I had to shoot anything that far out.

I have various versions of the Ruger #1's in my collection running from the .22 Hornet to the .416 Rigby. Other tha the .300s mention I've had to do a bit of tinkering on just about every one.

If you're having a problem with your #1, let me know nd I'll see if I cam give you an answer. I guess I should ask, is your gun a red pad or black pd? Black pads have Rugers own barrels while most red pads have Wilson barrels and some worn't so good.
PJ
 
It's hard to say. Sometmes it'll fall in love with a particular hand load. Sometime bedding work and even slaughtering a young goat over the keyboard while asking what do I need to do won't give you an answer. Been there and did that. I have two Rger #1 B's in 30-06, one being my first one ever bought back in 1975. To this day, I have never gotten either rifle to do a usable group.

I have five rifles chambered to the .300 Win. Mag., four of which are Ruger #1's. All five rifles shoot the same load running a 200 gr. Speer Hot Core over a charge of Winchester's now very long gong WMR powder. All five shoot sub MOA. Odd ball out is a Winchester M70 glass bedded into a McMillan stock with no other work. I use it as my foul weather .300.

I have to ask, just what are your expectations regarding accuracy from your rifle? Would you be satisfied with a 1.5" groups or is sub MOA what you're looking for? Frankly, if you can get it to do better that one inch ir less you'll be a lucky man. Most of my #1s run in the 1.25 to 1.50" range and that that's good enought for any hunt I'll do. Two run around 2.25 to 275") but part of it may be me as I don't was to put scopes on elephant guns. (.404 Jeffery and .416 Rigby)They'd mostly be used at 50 yards or less and probably less on something big and nasty. My point being if you get 1.50" or better, that's more than good enough for big game atany reasonable distance. I try to keep shots at 300 yards or less and only three times in a hunting carreer that started in 1954 had I had to shoot anything that far out.

I have various versions of the Ruger #1's in my collection running from the .22 Hornet to the .416 Rigby. Other tha the .300s mention I've had to do a bit of tinkering on just about every one.

If you're having a problem with your #1, let me know nd I'll see if I cam give you an answer. I guess I should ask, is your gun a red pad or black pd? Black pads have Rugers own barrels while most red pads have Wilson barrels and some worn't so good.
PJ
I don't own one but have been intrigued by them since the mid-80's. I've looked into them again recently and then again more recently because if this thread. There were frequent mentions of modifications to improve accuracy and finicky.
 
I must be lucky because all of my #1’s will shoot an inch or less with no modifications. Some take a little load development but they have been easy to load for including the RSI models.
 
I don't own one but have been intrigued by them since the mid-80's. I've looked into them again recently and then again more recently because if this thread. There were frequent mentions of modifications to improve accuracy and finicky.
I think the finicky problems with the #1 rifles was more wih the red pad guns. Those and a few early black pads had Wilson barrels until Ruger got their barrel making machinery up and running.
The last Ruger I bought was a black pad "S" model. An time I shoot a group larger than .75" with that one I know it's the shooter (ME( and not the gun, Most groups run .50" or less. Some red pads were so bad people sent them back to Ruger or just sold them off at a gun show and not telling the buyer. I bought a red pad #1A in 7x57 that the guy wouldn't say was highly inaccurate. I called Ruger about the problem andthey said to send it in with a note decriing the problem. When the gun came back, the paperwork just said the gun was accurate. It should be what with a new barrel and stock.
PJ
 
I think the finicky problems with the #1 rifles was more wih the red pad guns. Those and a few early black pads had Wilson barrels until Ruger got their barrel making machinery up and running.
The last Ruger I bought was a black pad "S" model. An time I shoot a group larger than .75" with that one I know it's the shooter (ME( and not the gun, Most groups run .50" or less. Some red pads were so bad people sent them back to Ruger or just sold them off at a gun show and not telling the buyer. I bought a red pad #1A in 7x57 that the guy wouldn't say was highly inaccurate. I called Ruger about the problem andthey said to send it in with a note decriing the problem. When the gun came back, the paperwork just said the gun was accurate. It should be what with a new barrel and stock.
PJ
Excellent information. Thank you!
 
I always thought the Ruger No 1 in 25-06 would be perfect for hunting WT deer in the woods. Maybe one day I’ll scratch that itch

JD338
I have a Red Pad #1V in 25-06 and it loves 115gr Partitions. I got lucky and the load I put together to zero the scope shot 3 shots at 3/4 inch at 100 so I left good enough alone and never took load development any further.
 
Back
Top