Ruger no. 1 erratic accuracy due to long barrel?

[PTS1]

I have been craving a new Ruger no. 1 in 300 win mag not cause I need one, but I have always loved the look of that rifle. However, in researching I have come to find that accuracy in the no. 1 is hit or miss (pun intended). After doing more research, I find that most people blame the inaccuracy on ruger barrels or the fact they are not free floating. After reading an article by Daniel Lilja of Lilja barrels, it occured to me that maybe the cause of the erratic accuracy is the 26 inch long barrels of the no.1. According to Lilja, the shorter a barrel is, the stiffer it is, and therefore (all things being equal) the more accurate it is as it vibrates less. My question is, does anyone have any experience with the ruger no. 1 light sporter version which has a 22 inch barrel? Does anyone know if they are more accurate? I am still fairly new to the great world of firearms, so please forgive me if I am way off base here.

[Fremmer]

It seems to me that if a 26" barrel is inaccurate, a 22" barrel won't be much more accurate if the barrel length is the true cause of the inaccuracy. We're only talking about a difference of 4".

Is 22" long enough for the 300 mag? I don't know. You may want to use a longer barrel for that magnum caliber. I'll let someone who knows more about the mag calibers advise you about that.

Wish I could help more....

[BUSTER51]

very strange,never heard of this B4

[Sarge]

The problem is that 'all things' are not equal- beginning with Ruger's barrels.

My late nephew was an absolute 'Ruger No. 1 Nut' for awhile, he had several in 30-06 and one in 7mm mag. Spectacular groups were never acheived with any of them. There are tweaks for the forend attachment, etc. and he tried most of them. We could occasionally get the groups close to one MOA, with select factory loads or good reloads. We also had a couple of Savage 110's on hand in the same calibers, and they would routinely shoot rings around the Number Ones. Kenny was one heck of a rifle shot, and if those No. 1's would have been accurate, his targets would have reflected that fact.

This is not to say that there are no exceptionally accurate Ruger No. 1's, or centerfire rifles in general. I have seen a couple of 77's and one No. 1 that would hover between one-half and three-quarters of an inch- with about anything. Oddly enough, they were all 270's.

The whole experience convinced me of a couple of things. First, if I wanted an accurate No.1, I would buy a .270 at the outset. I think it would inprove your odds. Second, if I wanted one in 30 caliber, I'd buy the first one I found at a good price, and see how that one shot. If I couldn't get it to group, I'd have a reputable riflesmith install a top-quality barrel, and resolve any forend issues at that time.

I am a simple man however, and the old standby Remington 78 (in '06) serves our needs just fine.

[PTS1]

It seems to me that if a 26" barrel is inaccurate, a 22" barrel won't be much more accurate if the barrel length is the true cause of the inaccuracy. We're only talking about a difference of 4".

Again citing Lilja's article, a barrel increases rigidity about 35% for every two inches shorter it is beginning with a 26 inch barrel. Here is the link to that article.


http://www.riflebarrels.com/articles...est_rifles.htm

[Huntergirl]

I had a #1 varmint in 25-06 that I used for antelope. Had a Burris Signature scope on it. I traded the rifle because I could never completely rely on it. Tried all the tweaks and still, I'd get a few flyers. Always used a bipod, the scope was quality glass. It was perplexing. I really wanted that rifle to be reliable, but I didn't want to throw more money at it. So its Tikkas and Remingtons now, and I'm happy.

[Jim Watson]

Lilja is talking about benchrest accuracy.
When you get out to Long Range shooting, long barrels predominate because the extra velocity to fight the wind - and added sight radius for the iron sight events - is worth more than a fraction of a MOA up close.

I think a No 1 is a bit more of a crapshoot than a bolt action. But a friend has a No 1 V that is as accurate as he can hold... and he is a Master shooter.

[trooper3385]

I have a stainless steal Ruger #1 with a 26 in. barrell in a 7mm Rem Mag and I've always shot 1/2 to 3/4 in groups with mine. Accuracy has never been a problem with this rifle. I always wanted one and researched it quite a bit before I got one. It seems that there were more problems with there older guns. When I first got it, I used the factory 150 gr ballistic tips and it shot fine. I took a deer last year with this load at 330 yards and it hit right where I was aiming. I've been reloading 140 gr barnes XLC now and the accuracy has remained about the same. If your going to go with a 300 win mag, I would definetly go with the 26 in barrel. With the large powder capacity of the round, you want to burn as much of the powder before the bullet leaves the barrel. If you were going to go with a 308, it wouldn't be as much of an advantage because a 308 burns the powder in about 16 in. The 300 win mag holds much more powder and generally uses slower burning powders, so you would have more of an advantage using a 26 in barrel as apposed to using a shorter barrel.

[BUSTER51]

Pardon my ignorance on the subject,but don't they (Ruger) test fire the rifle to ensure that it is accurate befor it leaves the factory ? those #1 rifles look sweet and ain't cheap you would expect a accurate rifle in a single shot .

[Jim Watson]

No.
They screw them together, fire a proof round to be sure they won't blow up, and ship them out.
Not a No 1, but a friend has a M77 that was not much accurate. He sent it back, they crowned the muzzle and scraped the bedding and sent it back including a target with about a 1.5" group. He thought that was kind of mediocre but adequate for a hunting rifle... until he noticed it was shot at 50 yards instead of 100.
It now has a new aftermarket barrel and shoots fine.

[mete]

If you get an inaccurate #1 the first thing to look at is the forend. That's always been a potential problem because of the way it's mounted.There are a number of different ways to fix it. Browning 1885s are mounted differently and haven't had the problem. #1 potential accuracy is there as long as they make everything right !

[Scorch]

Having reworked a few Ruger #1s over the years, I will tell you that they are capable of very good accuracy. First you have to deal with the forend and the trigger. Then, if it won't shoot, put a good barrel on it. Most Ruger barrels up until about the last ten years were garbage, absolutely worthless. Even the new barrels are so-so, although I have seen some newer Rugers that shoot MOA right out of the box.

It does make you wonder about a new rifle when you have to change the barrel to get it to shoot.

[Crosshair]

I have heard that the No. 1 rifles have a long lock time compared to other rifles. Is this true?? I can see where that would degrade accuracy.

[Charles S]

The Ruger No. 1 do have long lock times compared to a Remington 700 or most modern bolt action rifles, but that is not the reason for the accuracy problems IMHO.

[Crosshair]

OK thanks, that is something I had heard about long time ago and didn't know if it was true or not.

[hodaka]

I have experience with only one Number 1. It is a beautifully stocked 30-06 B. It shot 2-3 inches at 100yds out of the box. I finally figured out that if I shot off of the bench with the rest under the receiver instead of the forend I could get some decent groups. Now with 150 Sierra's and 155 Noslers and 4064 I can get 2 inch groups at 200yds which is acceptable, just as long as the rifle is resting on the receiver, not the forend. The barrel does heat up fairly quickly so the groups must be shot with cooling in between. I forget how long the barrel is but I guess it is in the 24-26 inch range( it is upstairs in the safe).

[44 AMP]

I don't have any No 1s, but I do have a pair of No3s, .22 Hornet and .45-70, and both are accurate enough for me.

I have one target from the .45-70, three shots, two holes, just about 1 inch. Considering this was done with a 2.5x Post w/crosswire scope, that's good enough for me.

Haven't shot the Hornet enough to find what it really likes, it is currently giving me about 1.5 in groups with 45gr Remington factory.

Now, these guns have 22" tubes, and shoot pretty well. But they have a barrel band as well. So, maybe they are the exception?

[steveno]

I have a #1A in 270 (made in 1978) , #1S in 45-70 (made in 1989) & #1B (made in 1996) in 22-250 and they will all shoot under an inch at 100 yards. none of them have been modified in any way. heck I have never even had the stock off of them. the 22-250 will shoot under .5 inch on any given day. I no longer have a #1A in 7 x 57 (made in the early 80's) that shot just as good as the 270. I also had a #1B in 270(made in the middle 80's) that shot just as good as the #1A. I should have kept the 7 x 57. I didn't keep the #1B 270 because I didn't seen any reason to keep a heavier rifle that only gave about 50 fps more velocity than the #1A 270

[Art Eatman]

I have a bolt-action .30-'06 with a 26" barrel. It has always gotten five-shot groups inside one MOA at both 100 and 500 yards. Generally, at 100 yards, just over 3/4 MOA.

Google for "Houston Warehouse". The testing at their indoor 300-yard range led to the conclusion that the proper barrel length for best accuracy is 20-3/4", IIRC.

Art

[Fremmer]

If your going to go with a 300 win mag, I would definetly go with the 26 in barrel. With the large powder capacity of the round, you want to burn as much of the powder before the bullet leaves the barrel. If you were going to go with a 308, it wouldn't be as much of an advantage because a 308 burns the powder in about 16 in. The 300 win mag holds much more powder and generally uses slower burning powders, so you would have more of an advantage using a 26 in barrel as apposed to using a shorter barrel.

That's what I thought, too -- but I don't own a 300 mag. Anyone else with a 300 mag want to chime in on proper barrel length?

[Dave Haven]

If you get an inaccurate #1 the first thing to look at is the forend. That's always been a potential problem because of the way it's mounted.There are a number of different ways to fix it.

Ah, yup. The forend is mounted on the hammer spring housing. Is that a brilliant design feature, or what?

[Art Eatman]

Fremmer, as a general rule the overbore cartridges such as the long-case magunums do best with long barrels. The drop in muzzle velocity per inch of barrel shortening is around 100 feet per second per inch.

The '06 is just at the beginning of overbore. Such as the .264 WinMag and on up definitely are overbore.

The whole point of the short, fat magnums is to increase the efficiency of the case as regards the burn rate of the powder, and the uniformity of the burn from shot to shot.

Art

[Charles S]

QUOTE]That's what I thought, too -- but I don't own a 300 mag. Anyone else with a 300 mag want to chime in on proper barrel length?[/QUOTE]

I really think you are at the optimal ballistic performance of a 300 Winchester Magnum at about 25 inches of barrel.

I think that with hand loading proper powder selection one can do quite well with a 24 inch barrel and rifle that is not awkward to handle.

That being stated I have one 300 Win Mag with a 27 1/2 inch Shilen barrel and I can rival the book velocities of a 300 Weatherby with proper powder selection and bullet choice.

[iraqimedic]

To all that have posted here about the question of accuracy in the ruger #1,
It is a problem of user error not flaws in the gun. It is not the long barrel, infact the longer barrel allows (depending on the length most 26 Inch) about 2 extra inches for powder burn time and maximum muzzel velocities as well as other various hand load fine tuning. It is also not the fact that the Ruger # 1 barrel is not floated. These guns are extremely well build with exacting precision and expert craftmanship. The front stocks are almost individual to the gun, though there are standard forends, they most always have to have small individual touches to accomidate each individual gun. In actuality, these guns are as close to a custom rifle as a factory production can get and still be called factory. (note there are others as wel but Ruger is my primary specialty)

In all actuallity you have to reload to understand the particulars of the ruger #1's traits. If you do not it is as I read in one of the other posts, "a hit or a miss". I own 3, my brother owns 2 and my father owns several. With the exception of a new 300 Win Mag, that I have not shot yet, they will all shoot 5 shot groups a 100 yards with no fuss. One of my favorites it a pre-warning Ruger #1 in 25-06 and I can shoot 0.3" group with it, and take into consideration the size of the bullet, which is a 25 caliber. I also have a 338 win Mag that I can shoot under 1 inch groups regularly. My brother routinely kills deer at over 500 yards with his 300 win mag free hand and my father has done the same with his 30-06. I have been shooting a single shot ruger since I was 10 years old, and I will soon be 36. I would not choose another rifle over the ruger #1, now if that does not speak volumes, what can I do to convince you. Feel free to contact myself, and if you need more proof, I will let you contact my brother, father or any of our shooting aquaintances who are farmiliar with the Ruger #1 and its outstanding capabilities.

Final word: When all explanation fails you, it is most likely Opperator error until proven otherwise!

[Martyn4802]

The issue with problematic accuracy with Ruger No.1's is barrel harmonics, not that the barrels are inaccurate, The barrels Ruger puts on No.1's are very accurate. The solution for those No. 1's that won't shoot well is to tune the barrel/rifle combo.
My No.1 in 22 Hornet had a problem with serious vertical stringing, like a 2" vertical spread and a 1/4" horizontal spread, at 50 yards.
Tuning my rifle involved drilling a hole in the forearm hanger, and installing a set screw that engaged the bottom of the barrel. By adjusting the set screw force on the bottom of the barrel, I was able to tune the barrel, and achieve good accuracy, with no vertical stringing.
That is the classic "fix" for most no. 1's that don't shoot well.
I read three articles in gun magazines that described that "fix" before I fixed mine.
I free floated the forearm and galss beeded it to see if that would solve the problem. It didn't. I then relieved the interference between the rail on top of the barrel where it meets the receiver, and that didn't work. I also relieved the interference between the forearm and the receiver, and that too didn't work. What did work was drilling and tapping the hole through the forearm hanger.
That procedure is well detailed in the three articles I mentioned, one by John Barsness, in Rifle Magazine, one by Ross Siefried in that same magaze, and another article in Precision Shooting by a guy named Wright, IIR his name correctly.
The tuning set screw is THE fix, if all else fails.
I have a friend with a No.1 in 25-06 who had the same problem I had with vertical stringing. His was fixed with the set screw also.

Martyn