Home Page
   Articles
       links
About Us    
Traders        
Recipes            
Latest Articles
Ruger No. 1

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Shooting and Trapping for the Pot
Author 
 Message
vegplot



Joined: 19 Apr 2007
Posts: 21297
Location: Ynys Mn
PostPosted: Mon Jul 07, 08 10:39 pm    Post subject: Ruger No. 1  Reply with quote    

I've just had a frightening moment. I decided a while ago to free float the barrel of my Ruger No.1, in 7x57 calibre. I did a lot of research and finally settled on a method that I thought made sense. Without getting into too much detail the Ruger No.1 has a mixed reception due to variable accuracy. Theoretically, it should shoot well out of the box due to it's design as the barrel is free floating - except it's not. The fore-end grip hangs off a hanger attached to the receiver and shouldn't impinge on the barrel harmonics when the gun is fired. In reality parts of the fore-arm contact the barrel interfering with natural resonance and destroying repetitive accuracy.

The answer lies with glass bedding the stock to lift it slightly away from the barrel. I used copious amounts of release agent but forgot about the odd shape of the hanger assembly. When I tried to remove the stock after the bedding had cured it simply wouldn't come way. It was loose but stuck. I didn't want to pull it away with any great force as this may bend the barrel so but after a few fretful minutes I did manage to release it. Phew!

It seems to have worked, most of the stock, except where it meets the barrel close to the receiver is free floating. I've yet to sort out the scope, which is another story, but it looks like I'm getting there. Shame the Ruger factory quality control and design team don't listen to what the users are asking for.

I could have gone for a purpose made rifle that would of the job out-of-the-box but I happen to like the Ruger No.1. It's a great looking rifle.

SteveP



Joined: 23 Jan 2008
Posts: 155
Location: North Devon
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 08 10:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Does anyone manage to get accuracy from an out of the box Ruger?

I personally cant see the point of buying a rifle then spending loads on it just to get it to shoot straight when the likes of Anshutz are accurate from day one even though they cost a bit more in the first place.

Having said that there must be something in them because they are so popular.

Steve

vegplot



Joined: 19 Apr 2007
Posts: 21297
Location: Ynys Mn
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 08 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote    

SteveP wrote:
Does anyone manage to get accuracy from an out of the box Ruger?

I personally cant see the point of buying a rifle then spending loads on it just to get it to shoot straight when the likes of Anshutz are accurate from day one even though they cost a bit more in the first place.

Having said that there must be something in them because they are so popular.

Steve


It's adequate for hunting but is capable or more and it doesn't take a great deal of effort to make it so. There's also the fun aspect of playing at being a gunsmith it helps one understand the gun, ballistics etc. In this case the cost is only time and pence for materials. There is the risk however, that one could nadger a perfectly good gun in the process.

Ruger could do a lot to improve their image. Unfortunately a lot of US manufactured guns are of mediocre quality, as a general rule. My Marlin under lever is typically a good example of this as are 10/22's Which is a shame. Anschutz, CZ and others are often far better out of the box and make far better tools if you need to it to perform as advertised from day one.

resistance is fertile



Joined: 24 Oct 2008
Posts: 1534
Location: The heart of North Devon
PostPosted: Tue Oct 28, 08 6:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

whats the view on CZ, they seem to be inexpensive generally, but are they good value in the long run?

vegplot



Joined: 19 Apr 2007
Posts: 21297
Location: Ynys Mn
PostPosted: Tue Oct 28, 08 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

resistance is fertile wrote:
whats the view on CZ, they seem to be inexpensive generally, but are they good value in the long run?


I have a CZ452 in plastic stock. Accurate and inexpensive. They're well made and seem to last for ages.

kevin.vinke



Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 1304
Location: Niedersachsen, Germany
PostPosted: Wed Oct 29, 08 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

vegplot wrote:
resistance is fertile wrote:
whats the view on CZ, they seem to be inexpensive generally, but are they good value in the long run?


I have a CZ452 in plastic stock. Accurate and inexpensive. They're well made and seem to last for ages.


Im having a hard time finding prices for these (or Im just not looking in the right place!).

Do you think they are good enough on targets over 50m?

vegplot



Joined: 19 Apr 2007
Posts: 21297
Location: Ynys Mn
PostPosted: Wed Oct 29, 08 2:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

kevin.vinke wrote:

Im having a hard time finding prices for these (or Im just not looking in the right place!).

Do you think they are good enough on targets over 50m?


Yes, but I can only vouch for .22LR. Anchutz might be a better bet if it's small bore target shooting. Small bore shooting doesn't tend to extend beyond 50 metres in general.

In the UK the CZ452 can be purchased from South Yorkshire Shooting Supplies.

kevin.vinke



Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 1304
Location: Niedersachsen, Germany
PostPosted: Wed Oct 29, 08 2:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

vegplot wrote:
kevin.vinke wrote:

Im having a hard time finding prices for these (or Im just not looking in the right place!).

Do you think they are good enough on targets over 50m?


Yes, but I can only vouch for .22LR. Anchutz might be a better bet if it's small bore target shooting. Small bore shooting doesn't tend to extend beyond 50 metres in general.

In the UK the CZ452 can be purchased from South Yorkshire Shooting Supplies.



yes a difference in language I meant at 50m. I shoot the Anschutz 54 with diopter at the moment as a club weapon but would like to have my own at some stage.

vegplot



Joined: 19 Apr 2007
Posts: 21297
Location: Ynys Mn
PostPosted: Wed Oct 29, 08 2:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

kevin.vinke wrote:



yes a difference in language I meant at 50m. I shoot the Anschutz 54 with diopter at the moment as a club weapon but would like to have my own at some stage.


Not a language problem, it has a double meaning.

Brownbear



Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 14929
Location: South West
PostPosted: Wed Oct 29, 08 7:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

If you want an out-and-out target rifle, you'd generally be better with the Anschutz - it's what they do best and with the various types of sight, stock available it would probably be worth the extra. If you want a general purpose rife, I'd recommend the CZ 16" Varmint with a heavy barrel. There's a lot of drop to compensate for at 100 yards but I used to get headshots on rabbits at 80 yards with mine before I (stupidly) changed it for a tricked-up Ruger semi-auto.

I'm about to go back to a bolt-action for the .22, though this time a Sako Finnfire - one of the last of the new ones still available, now that they've changed to the gimmicky and rather tinny Quad.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Shooting and Trapping for the Pot All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1
View Latest Posts View Latest Posts

 

Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group
Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
Copyright 2004 marsjupiter.com

<-- -->