Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Single Shots How desirable is the Ruger No. 3 in 45-70?

I had one years ago. Let it go for some reason. Another has made itself available.
I just wondered what you all think about them.
As I recall it was a little, uhh 'sprightly', in the recoil department.

I let mine go because the barrel was either bent or threaded into the receiver crooked enough to throw everything way to one side. It was, as you say pretty lively as well.

I've looked at a bunch on GB, but they seem to go for nearly as much as the Number 1s. I found a Number 1 and was able to pick it up locally, saving shipping and transfer fee, but had to pay sales tax. I'm almost through playing with this one, so if you're still looking in a couple of weeks, PM me and we'll talk.

One of the guns that died for a reason, as far as i'm concerned. Not to mention a 45-70 in that rifle ought to kick like a rented mule. But, there is always someone who thinks that's cool.

The #1 in .45-70 is a lot easier to handle. The #3 had a slick curved buttplate and it would squirt off your shoulder whenever you fire them.

I have seen folks fit #1, or even custom wood to #3's, and they work mo' better.

I collect #1's but have almost no interest in #3's

Thanks, All. I do appreciate your views.
I'm at the point of getting a lot of accumulation moved on down the road and don't need one at all, but it is cute.

Also, Pappy348, thanks fo the offer. I'll consider it but I'm just not in NEED.

Pappy, if the original poster doesnt want the number 1, keep mee in the loop

Hornets, .223s, .44 mags, and even the .30/40s made more sense than the .45/70s in that little rifle. The .375 Win is kind of on the edge.

I always thought they missed a good bet not chambering the .30/30, as did Browning when they made the Low Wall Hunter. They did chamber the .30/30 in the High Wall, but at 9 1/2 lbs or so, it's a bit heavy for a hunter. Nice target gun though. I don't think I've ever seen one of those for sale, ever.

yeah, I have thought of getting a low wall, and having it rebored for the .30-30

I had a Ruger #3 in 45-70 for a long time, but sold it after I ruptured 2 discs in my neck, as the recoil was way too severe. It was a great little rifle and shot 1.5" 3 shot groups at 100 yards with several different handloads.
Sometimes I still wished I had kept it.

A great caliber/cartridge, but one pays a price if he things it needs to be hot rodded.

Snottiest rifle I ever shot was a Ruger #3 with "modern" high pressure ammo.
Shoulder bled, right hand got smacked by the lever and cheek got smacked, when shooting from the bench.
Guess the damn thing just didn't fit me.

iv owned 2 #3 in 45-70. the 1st was a nice shooting rifle loved the 405 rem. let it go and bought another, that rifle had a 6"group at 50 yrds I watched it jump off the bench at the range, and hit the ground, dammest thing i ever saw. no one and nothing around it! iut went down the road after that!

I like mine. It is a fun gun to carry in the woods and with trapdoor level loads of smokeless and 405 grain bullets its fun to shoot.

I'm in the camp that thinks the No. 3 was an all round bad idea. So was the Winchester Traditional Hunter. Until about age 60, I liked thumpers, except for those two.

Jack

IMO the .45-70 is the least desirable No.3. Mostly because of recoil.

If you're a hand-loader, you could always load the .45/70 down and make it at least somewhat more "reasonable".

Otherwise, I'm not much of a .45/70 fan... too much unneeded recoil in regular loads for 'most anything folks hunt.

And before you call me "chicken", you need to know that I hunted with the pre-'64 Model 70 in .338 Win. Magnum (26-inch barrel) using my "hot" hand-loads (210 grain Nosler Partition in front of 75.0 grains of IMR4350 yielding a chronographed 3015 fps) for 40 years before going to my little #1 RSI in 7x57mm in which I had my gunsmith install a Kepplinger Single-Set trigger.

This sweet combination (hand-loaded 140 grain Nosler Partitions @ 2800 fps) cleanly takes all the game I want or need with excellent accuracy and a very reasonable amount of recoil.


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

I've been playing with 300gr in a Number One and they're still a bit much from the bench to be fun, even at about 1800. The 250gr Barnes ought to be a little easier. 350gr cast over Trail Boss is very pleasant, but slow and droopy, trajectory-wise shooting at 100 when sighted dead-on at 50.

Ron_T has the right idea, I think. I started my deer hunting at about 15 using 12ga slugs and never had a problem dealing with recoil when necessary, but at my advanced age, recovery from being pushed around takes a while. The hard pad on the Ruger is likely part of the problem, as my Knight is much lighter, generates about the same ballistics, but has a nice, gooey pad and is very comfortable to shoot.

Barnes also makes a 300gr TTSX in .458, which is a pointy little football, and more streamlined than the typical lever action bullet. It's designed for the .458 SOCOM, and can be loaded above 2300 fps with a fistful of powder in a strong modern single shot, like the #1. It shoots pretty well in my #1S. Hodgdon has data online for it.

I'd say recoil is not trivial, but not that bad in the #1. Now go up on bullet weight, and they get kinda punchy.

A flat nosed, cast bullet can be slowed down a lot, and still hit game hard. I never have tried anything lighter than 300 grains. I have a couple of .45-90, and generally they get BP equivalent loads, and the #1 gets the heavy smokeless loads.

I had one and sold it.
I am much happier with my 35 Whelen.

I got one and I love it. Doesn't kick anymore than any other thumper. Some people just cant shoot the bigger calibers.