Varberger757, cartridge selection Ruger #1

[HARPERC]

I finally found a Ruger #1 within my price range meaning cheap enough to rationalize changing every thing about it.

It's currently a 30-06, and could stay that way if it shoots.

Goal is a light weight stalking type rifle. Going to drop some weight by going synthetic etc.

If I change barrels it will be chambered in something rimmed, bore between 6.5 and .308, works well in a 22-24" barrel, doesn't have to be the hottest round in its class, but it has to work well with the heaviest bullets in the caliber.

What would you choose?

Everyone else welcome, but Varberger has an affinity for single shots, and rimmed cartridges.

 

[Varberger757]

@HarperC, I feel really enormously honored that you're mentioning me in this context. Thanks a lot for your confidence! Personally, I like the Ruger #1 very much with its classic shape and compactness. I would choose it in either 7x57R or 7x65R. I assume that brass shouldn't be a problem, because many (all) producers on the old continent are producing both brass and complete cartridges. Even Winchester and Hornady are producing 7x65R.
I'd like to begin with a short description of the classic 7x57R. Almost the duplicate of the 7x57, widely used and appreciated. A bunch of load-data to find. Only difference to the "ordinary" 7x57 Mauser is a slightly reduced pressure due to its use in break actions. Since you will use the Ruger #1 with its very strong action you may load the rimmed version to the level of the ordinary 7x57 Mauser. 24'bbl should fit perfectly.

The 7x65R (Brenneke), rimmed sister of the famous 7x64, is comparable to the 280Rem (AI) performance-wise, and with hard loads you'll even reach up close to the 7RM. High accuracy, flat trajectory and good terminal effect are characterizing this cartridge. 24' bbl is sufficient for the 7x65R.
Both the 7x57R and 7x65R love heavier bullets due to their traditional fast rate of twist, 1 : 8,4. One should start with 150gr (ideal for the 7x57R) and may go up to 177 (180)gr. That's what they like best. I had the best results with the 7x65R using bullets from 160gr - 177gr. Friends of mine who are shooting the 7x57R appreciate mostly bullet-weights between 150 - 162gr. Both cartridges are just great, and I want to leave the decision to the well skilled and experienced OP.

 

[Beng]

The 7x57R is great.
I love mine, can't help with load data though, since I'm using the rest of the ammo my grandpa left me with the rifle. The long necks should be great for seating long bullets though. Maybe make it an AI just for the fun of it. Mine is a drilling btw.
The game I took, a few roe deer and small boars of 50 to 90 lbs, were bang flops with RWS TIG factory loads from the 90s.

 

[Varberger757]

It is almost necessary for me to add something important / essential concerning loading / reloading of classic European cartridges. For all those who don't have enough practice and experience of reloading these certain cartridges I will strongly recommend to follow only CIP - based manuals! SAAMI - specifications er very often ridiculous performance - wise concerning load - data for the European classics. F. ex., a loss of 300 fps (8x57IS) in velocity is nothing unusual ...

 

[HARPERC]

Interesting! The 7x65R wasn't on my radar at all, but looks perfect. I've had a a couple of 7mm's over the years-none that stayed. I was surprised ammunition, and components seem available.

We'll see if this 30-06 shoots, even if it does I might have to change it. I've only had a .375 Winchester, and .45-70 in rimmed rifle cartridges but they both were so easy to get working they left me with a positive attitude about rimmed cartridges.

Coupled with the 1A light sporter I can see a nice combo for a day in the alpine.

The 1A in 7x57 always seems to be available, and simply re-chambering one might be a possibility also.

Thank You! My confidence wasn't misplaced!

 

[.358 NM]

both the 7x57 and 7x65R are great cartridges. if one wish to have something different if one like .264 bullets. One could choose the 6.5x65RWS perhaps. A very good flatshooting round, ballistics closely to .264 Win, but since its a rare duck over in the US . 7mm of some kind is the way to go .

 

[HARPERC]

I'm in good shape for 6.5's. The 7mm's with bullets in the 160-180 range sounds about right. Keeping the rifle light, no brake, perhaps a suppressor. My carry capacity, and recoil tolerance seems to slip a bit each season.

 

[Varberger757]

Keeping the rifle light, no brake, perhaps a suppressor. My carry capacity, and recoil tolerance seems to slip a bit each season.

+1! I'm in my fifties, so going light both on gun weight and recoil gets more important every year ...

 

[HARPERC]

We get so wound up in "big picture" stuff, the little things only reveal themselves along the way.

The rifle came with an old Weaver 4X with the television style wide screen that was popular for awhile, in a set of rings with no name brand, and stripped screw heads. I ordered a rail that EABCO makes to clamp on the existing rib. Looks good, but I have to remove the rear sight. Not a problem, just had not considered it.

I also ordered a Hick's Harmonizer, something I've wanted to trial for awhile, but no #1 to try it on. As it sits the entire fore end is glass bedded, and in contact the entire length. I haven't seen this work all that well, but again not an issue, just the things I don't see until I get into a project.

Typical of my "Goldilocks" approach to seeking just right. Or not leaving well enough alone if you prefer. Looking at a cartridge that's worked well for 100 years, and thinking "I wonder what a little straightening and a 40 degree shoulder do." LOL!

 

[Varberger757]

Hick's Harmonizer? Does it help the harmonics of the barrel due to vibrations and tensions?

Nice that your project proceeds, but I'm getting a little bit alarmed when I read about your cartridge plans ... you won't chamber the Ruger #! for an almost ordinary 30 -06AI?
If you'd like to get a more powerful .30 cal, then take a closer look to the .30R (rimmed) Blaser, which provides almost the same performance as the 300WM does.

But, IMO you should absolutely go 7 x 65R and never look back. You won't regret it, I assure you!

 

[HARPERC]

Mostly I was laughing at myself.

The idea/goal remains a friendly moderate cartridge to keep me company on day trips into the alpine.

I haven't used one myself before, but have had reliable reports. Hicks Harmonizer attaches to the fore end hanger of a #1 or #3, and has screw that one can apply fore end pressure in varied amounts until a "sweet spot" is found. The fore end being free floated. I have had the fore end screw pull through the stock, with a steady diet of heavy loads. The fore end seems to be the key to success, or failure.

If this 30-06 shoots as good as my #3 in .375 Winchester choices get difficult. I've not been a huge fan of the 30-06AI, a lot of the positives went away with good chronographs in common use, in comparable rifles, at comparable pressures, I don't see enough more case capacity to chase. I have a .300 magnum to chase down range performance if that's my mood. The better bullets in .308 start at 200 grains, and I would like to be a bit lighter.

I do want to use the rifle this season, and wait times can be a little long on barrels, reamers and such. I just have this quirk that single shots, and rimmed cartridges belong together whenever possible.

The standard 7.65R remains the front runner in my thinking-I have no intention of an improved version, I tend to allow my mind free rein in the abstract, but more disciplined when it comes to time to make real world choices.

 

[Varberger757]

Thanks for your explanation about "Hick's Harmonizer"! Sounds good, and I hope it'll work properly. Could be a good resource for many Ruger #1.
"God bless" that you think to continue on your way with a moderate cartridge. Such would have the best characteristics concerning the #1, IMO.

 

[HARPERC]

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#category/forums

Still didn't figure the picture thing out, takes a couple of clicks to get picture for those interested.

I hope Varberger is still following, I haven't seen him post in a long while.

It took longer than I thought to get this far, but I'm pretty happy with the stock. It's from Pendleton stocks, Oregunsmithing, and is their first attempt at a thumbhole. I thought I would like his other pattern better, but went this way as a young gut hunting with it is lefty, and this stock is more suited for ambidextrous use. Turns out I like this one a lot.

He also tuned the trigger to awesome level, I have a Canjar set trigger in the safe planning on using it here. It will stay in the safe at this point.

He pillar beds both the fore end, and the butt stock, and it's shooting so well as a .30-06, it's likely to stay this way. I've chased consistency around without success, it's teased me a time or two, but nothing satisfying, and duplicating week to week just wasn't there.

Really drives home the importance of correct bedding in the overall picture. I fooled with different things on the fore end, so Im suspecting something in the butt wasn't square or tight.

 

[Varberger757]

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#category/forums

Still didn't figure the picture thing out, takes a couple of clicks to get picture for those interested.

I hope Varberger is still following, I haven't seen him post in a long while.

It took longer than I thought to get this far, but I'm pretty happy with the stock. It's from Pendleton stocks, Oregunsmithing, and is their first attempt at a thumbhole. I thought I would like his other pattern better, but went this way as a young gut hunting with it is lefty, and this stock is more suited for ambidextrous use. Turns out I like this one a lot.

He also tuned the trigger to awesome level, I have a Canjar set trigger in the safe planning on using it here. It will stay in the safe at this point.

He pillar beds both the fore end, and the butt stock, and it's shooting so well as a .30-06, it's likely to stay this way. I've chased consistency around without success, it's teased me a time or two, but nothing satisfying, and duplicating week to week just wasn't there.

Really drives home the importance of correct bedding in the overall picture. I fooled with different things on the fore end, so Im suspecting something in the butt wasn't square or tight.