Ruger #1 Opinions and Thoughts?

[dubbleA]

My 416 Rigby No.1 shoots pretty good, I know they are only 3 shot groups but firing from a bench isnt all that comfy.

 

[BruceB]

The #1 rifles are pretty much a "niche" rifle, for a certain type of shooter. I fit that niche perfectly.

There are many other rifle types in my rack, but the #1 has always spoken to me and I heed its call. Soon there will be a new one here, in .303 British, as Ruger has announced production in that caliber. The stock number will be 11348, and the model will be #1A (the lightweight one). This seems to be a match made in heaven, in my opinion. I placed my order the day I heard of the new chambering.

Not long ago, I was testing some loads in a light Interarms Mark X .223, grouping around the 1" area but nothing spectacular. After finishing with the .223, the #1H in .416 Rigby was put to use. Firing 370-grain cast bullets at 2050 fps, the .416 fired a TEN-shot 100-yard group of 7/8"...one of the proverbial ragged-hole groups, and better than my best .223 group of the day.

The #1 has strength, versatility, and above all else, CLASS.

 

[BruceB]

dubbleA, that is VERY impressive!

I know what you mean about firing such loads from the bench, and hoo-boy, there's NO doubt that the primer functioned.

Shortly after my wife and daughter gave me my .416 #1, I tested a load that drove the 300 Barnes X-bullet at 2990. After that, I figured I'd best keep my dentist on speed-dial.

Lately most of my .416 shooting has been with cast bullets, but even then your 2600 figure is easily attainable with the cast bullet. However, I find there's little need for such loads here in Nevada....unless some poor sucker just HAS to experience "the real Rigby". Very few want to fire the second round...