204 number 1

[GlennGTR1]

I was heading back from the Shop Stewards Seminar for DOC officers when I decided to swing in through Sportsmans wherehouse. They have a stainless laminate heavy barrel number one in 204 ....thats a mouth full aint it. It comes with a 26 inch tube and weighs a good ten pounds Im guessing. I was wondering if anyone had one of these cut to twenty inches and what it weighed after. I would guess six inches of that steel might weigh two pounds. It would sure make a very handy varmint rifle with that short barrel and action. Your thoughts please. I have to say I like all my varminters to be walking varminters/predator rigs.

[greystone]

Ruger used to chamber the #1 Sporter in 204. I believe it weighed somewhere around 7 lbs. Its now discontinued. I should have bought one when I had a chance. I haven't seen any used ones but I can't afford it now anyhow. Your idea should work.

[Va varminter]

Please don't cut up a #1. If you really want a single shot, then get a t/c encore. I had a #1 and it looked great. But as they say about them. You either get one that shoots, or you don't. Plus, the way the action that is on the #1 it makes the scope set farther away from your eye. The encore with the same length barrel is quite a bit shorter. And a little liter as well.

[Rick in Oregon]

Glenn: The Ruger sporter was available as the No.1A and the No.1B. The A version had a much shorter (22") and lighter barrel with open sights with the Alexander Henry forearm, the B version would be considered a 'standard' sporter weight barrel (24" & 26" depending on caliber) w/o sights and regular forend.

If the Varmint version was cut to 20", not only would velocity suffer, but the resale value would be reduced substantially if that matters to you. With that nice short action though, it would indeed make for a handy little walkabout rifle, and that heavy barrel would indeed be very stiff being so short. Interesting and practical concept, but afficianados of the No.1's would cringe at cutting one down, myself included.

A much less expensive and more reasonable approach for the rifle you have in mind, would be to find a used No.1B or even an old No.3 Carbine, and rebarrel it short and light, similar to my Ruger No.3 .17 Ackley Hornet shown below. The rifle is the size of a Ruger 10-22, has a new stainless Pac-Nor barrel contoured to the original shape, carries like a pellet gun, and has 350 yard effective range for varmints. You can stock it with wood, or as I did using a Bell & Carlson synthetic setup to save more weight and make it impervious to weather conditions.



One attractive feature of the Ruger falling blocks, is that no bolt face work is required for any centerfire cartridge, just rebarrel and shoot. Another alternative for a falling block would be a used Browning Low-Wall or High Wall, but the latter is a much heavier rifle. My Low Wall has the original .224" octagon Hornet barrel, rechambered to 22 K-Hornet. This would be another short, light single shot falling block walkabout varmint rifle that would be a good candidate for the 204 you are contemplating.



I greatly prefer falling block actions over break-open types, as they are much more convenient to shoot from prone or from the bench, usually more accurate by virtue of a more solid breach lockup, and also much quicker to reload when hunting. With a little home smithing, the No.1's and No.3's can really be made to shoot quite well with only a little work. The perceived scope eye relief issue mentioned above is easily solved using Leupold Offset Ruger Rings. My No.1 Varmint in .223 Rem shown below had no such issues, but some No.1B's sometimes have this problem, especially if you are a Burris fan. No such problem if using Leupold or similar scopes that give more room for mounting on the scope and are not short coupled as most Burris scopes are.



Consider a used Ruger falling block versus cutting up a nice new one......

[GlennGTR1]

Well maybe Ill just keep it the way I buy it and see how that works. I already have the ultra light with a twenty inch tube so I can dress that up a little. It does shoot nice. I did see the 1A light sporter but for some reason they discontinued it. They had the 1A in stainless also because I had one in my hands once and let it slip through my fingers. Kicking myself now for sure. I am still amazed at how accurate my ultra light is with factory ammo.

[stevecrea]

I have not had the stainless, but I bought a new Number 1 in the walnut and blue configuration in 204, and it had a 26 inch medium weight barrel. It was the second Number 1 I have had. The first was a Number 1V in 22-250 and a 24 inch varmint weight barrel. Unfortunately, and despite some tinkering with it , I could not get the 204 to shoot a wide array of factory ammo better than about 1.25 MOA or so. While this is not terrible, and handloads probably would have improved it, I expected more and it went down the road.

I also had an aftermarket trigger installed, and it did not work properly, so that was part of the problem and was not the fault of the rifle. However, I believe that the lock time on the Number 1 trigger mechanism is quite slow, and can be a factor if you are seeking a high level of accuracy.

[Rick in Oregon]

stevecrea: Too bad you sent your No.1 down the road, as there are aftermarket speed-lock kits and hammers for the No.1 to reduce lock time. I've lightened the hammer in my No.1V .223, added a Canjar single set trigger, bedded the hanger, floated the barrel, and with Nosler 40gr BT's over H335, it shoot in the 1/4" range on a regular basis, with the factory barrel. It's pure death on ground squirrels, and is the only rifle I've ever been able to go 100 for 100 in the field on rats. (That was a very good day indeed. )

It's common knowledge that any No.1 usually requires some TLC to shoot up to its full potential, but some shooters are not willing to spend the time or money to get there. You may have only been one more tweak away to a good shooter.

[stevecrea]

Rick,
That is very good accuracy. I have read quite a bit about the upgrades and tinkering that one can do to a Number 1 to improve them. I have always been drawn to the good looks of the Number 1, and I like the tang safety. There are some things I like about a single shot, and others that I do not.

I do find that most of my shooting actually occurs in the real world, and not at the bench. With wind, heartbeats, breathing, unknown wind velocity, unknown distances, runners, foragers, among many factors. Accordingly, I have found that I prefer repeaters, where you can walk a second or third shot in.

Despite all that, the Number 1 is very popular, and it sounds like yours is a keeper.

[Rick in Oregon]

Steve: Yep, it is a keeper, and it will stay that way....if it ain't broke....

I love single shots, and most of my bolt guns intended for what I call "BR Varmint Shooting" have single shot BR followers installed. But.....I also like repeaters for all my walkabout rifles when it's time to grab the stix, bipod, fanny pack and ammo and head out to see what's on the other side of that butte. Coyote rifles should be repeaters for obvious reasons. Many times I'll deer or coyote with a single shot falling block just for the challenge factor. That adds a level of self satisfaction to hunting in the 'real world' to me.

I should mention that most of my bolt guns set up as single shots would never feed from the magazine, as the bullets are seated much too long to function from the magazine in order to properly reach the lands for the accuracy edge it almost always offers.

Most of my PD and squirrel shooting is done from the bench just to stretch the legs of the rifle and test my ability at extended ranges. It's a good day when we set up benches in the early morning and never move until we break down for dinner. That is a real target rich environment, and one of my favorite pastimes. On the other hand, it is also a good day to set out in the early morning with fanny pack and a repeater varmint rifle, and not see another person all day in the outback. Both types of rifles appeal to me, which is why I own and shoot both. To me, the 'real world' could be trying to hit a rat behind his mound from my field bench at 450 yards when he peeks over it, or laying on a hillside in the open desert sniping a jackrabbit under a sagebrush using my stix or bipod....both require skill, a bit of luck, and an accurate rifle, both are extreme fun in Rick's book. But only accurate rifles need apply. In the end Steve, it's all good.