Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Single Shots Loading the Ruger No 1

I just picked up a Ruger No 1-A light sporter in 280 Rem from Cabelas.

Any tricks to loading for the No 1 ?

Full length or neck size?

No real tricks.

I've FL sized, partial FL and used a Lee Collet Sizer all 3. They don't have the "camming action" of bolt guns so I suppose you need to be more careful about bumping the shoulder back, but personally I found them easier to load for than my Savage 99. The Hornet I only sized about 1/2 the neck and it worked great.

I have two (7mm Rem and 22-250). Neck size only.

It depends on what you plan to do with the rifle. Shoot from the bench or hunt with it. If no more than from the bench it wouldn't make much difference, at least until the brass get to be too tight fitting. One a hunt I'd full length to insure the shell goes into the chamber with ease. Makes a big difference if one had to do a rapid reload on game. Me? I just resize the brand so that when the muzzle it tilted toward the ground the fresh cartridge slides right in with just the aid of gravity. I reload and shoot for several Ruger #1's and a Browning B-78.
Paul B.

I neck size for my No.1V - 6mm Remington.

Kaiser Norton

I have several rifles of the same caliber so I FL size everything.What's great is,finding a load and seating depth that works great in all of them.The biggest problem I've had with No.1's is the forearm.I have one that shoots really great after I floated it,the other I floated and then put a soft neoprene washer near the tip and now it shoots great.Before I did this,verticle stringing was a big problem.They were also a little fussy about loads.

IT is possible to load 'kiss' loads in the #1 as long as all else fits well enough so that the block only has to barely squeeze the round the last few thousands. But if you're a hair too long, the PITA involved will have you wishing you hadn't tried to squeeze that last "nth" of whatever it is you're pursuing, out of the ammo. Small stuff like Hornet or Bee ammo may not always drop solidly into the chamber with the muzzle point downward, and I'm okay with them as long as a finger flick gets them 'there'. But anything that burns 40 grains, or more, of powder isn't 'good enough' for me if I can't 'drop and lift' (raise the lever).

Getting good hunting accuracy out of easy chambering ammo has never been an issue if the rifle is capable of it in my experience.

Great info from everyone. I really appreciate it. Thank you!

The biggest "problems" I've found in handloading for No. 1's isn't the loading itself but the rifles. If yours is a "black pad" rifle there's usually no problem that can't be fixed by epoxy-bedding the tip of the forend, but many of them shoot fine right out of the box.

If the recoil pad is red odds are it will be quirky, and may have a really long throat and wide throat, requiring heavier bullets to be seated near the lands for any sort of accuracy. Other tricks may be necessary.

Other than those possibilities, loading for No. 1's is pretty straightforward.

Thanks MD, it's a black pad.

And after 20 years I'm back into the 280 again.

So far, I plan on just using the iron sights on the rifle for hunting.

Not that I won't stop using my scoped LR type rifles with knobs and dials. It's like shooting fish in a barrel now with today's tech.

I'm going to the single shot and iron sights for the challenge.

As long as your eyes are cooperative, sans scope is the right way to set up the #1, the bigger game chamberings anyway. (IMO) Most of these rifles balance and handle so well naked, and the loading process is so natural. I really hated to put a scope on my 45-70, but there came a time.... (Though I found great satisfaction in thumping things across irons. I don't mind the precision it is capable of with sights which not only allow me to focus, but also magnify some.)

SU35,

Good deal!

As Klik says, No. 1's are great with irons. The buttstocks are actually dimensioned more for irons than scopes, and the rifles are much handier without scopes.

One option you might want to eventually try is the NECG aperture sight. I used one on a No. 1 .375 H&H for a while and took a number of animals, including a Cape buffalo at maybe 60-75 yards, and a lechwe (about the size of a northern whitetail buck) at over 200. In theory the rifle should have kicked harder without the pound or so of a scope, especially with the load I used, 300's at around 2600. But it actually seemed to kick a little less, because it fit me better.

I also suspect there something about having a metal tube being driven back sharply mere inches from one's eye to make 'perceived recoil' seem a bit greater! (I like the NECG aperture sight on my #1 375 .....especially when I get to watch my 15 year old son use it. )

MD and Klik, good post,,,thx!





And just how is this done?