Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Single Shots A Dark Day...

Just got word from our Lipsey's rep that Ruger has notified them that they are officially dropping the No. 1, including all limited editions that they had planned. I had a feeling this was coming for awhile but there it is. We are unfortunately living in a world of f*c*ing ARs and disposable bolt guns...

It is a dark day. They are obviously not selling well to have this happen. When they went to the current marketing method a few years ago my fear was it would lead to this.

In my opinion, it was the very plain wood from 2014 and 2015 that put them in the hole. Then there was the ~1500 rifles that got "fire saled" to Cabela's in 2015- they have tried for a year and a half to sell them at $999.99. The Cabela's at Allen(TX) still has a dozen!
Now, it looks like Lipsey's has another "clean up" run of No.1's; lot's of rifles that have been out of the catalog for 4 years. Even a bunch of the AB's in 338 Federal! That is a rare bird!
Still not clear to me if the WBR Centennial and the 1S in 44 Magnum will be made this year. I have received some of all the other 2016 offerings.
Not all Lipsey's reps may be clued in to exactly what is(or has been) happening with the No.1, so I would say until you hear it from Jason(or me) it is one of those continuing rumors.

I still want the .275 Rigby my dealer has been trying to order for me since the day it was announced! I have already stocked up on brass!

AND I still want a No1S in 8x57mm to come out in a future production run!

AND my personal budget has a planned purchase of one No1 per year for the rest of my collecting career! what I am supposed to do? switch back to M70s?

What are they thinking? drop a niche product and abandon a loyal consumer base so they can put all their staff to work making AR-type rifles for the anticipated panic buying after 8-Nov.... oh wait.... something changed... 8-Nov didn't go the way many thought.... Ruger stock dropped from $64 on 8-nov to $48 two days later.... most other gun companies did the same, since the high volume sales of folks buying their 2018-19-20 guns in 2017 won't happen.... Maybe this is typical bean counter thought process: Cancel projects and lay off dedicated workers to get the stock price to go back up.... it won't work if the stock price had been over-inflated in anticipation of another panic-driven record sales year!

Come on Mike Fifer! You all are the Arms Makers for Responsible Citizens, like me! Keep building my favorite rifle! I'll take that One Shot and Make it Count!

Poole

Bingo.

If they were selling, with a decent margin, they'd still be in the lineup. Newer shooters just don't appreciate this kind of stuff, and new ones are going up against a pretty fat used market too, many with better wood. The good news is that there's still a bunch of new and used ones out there.

No. 1's never sold well, as a beancounter would define "well". They are at most, a niche gun, a loss leader to establish Rugers cred as a fine gun maker. In the bigger scheme of things, the beancounters will have their say, and it appears that time is now. I imagine Ruger, even at the current price point, makes little or nothing on them when all is said and done, due to the low volume. Bill saw value in that when he was alive, but plastic will now have its day. A shame.

I read it as a sound business decision, particularly given the change in our leadership that will make gun sales fall across the board relative to the Obama days. They are doing their best to protect their shareholders, as they should.

It's essentially the same thing that happened to Savage 99's: a shrinking market for new 99's, and plenty of used guns for those who still wanted one. Which is exactly why Savage dropped the 99, and why they never brought it back despite the dreams (and whines) of 99 enthusiasts.

Whittakers and CDNN offers select models for less than $900 at times. Hard to see much profit there.

Is seems similar to me too when Remington dropped the H&R single. Now you have 2 or 3 clones to choose from. All presumably making money. Including, I hear, a new Henry offering. I dont think it was just profit then, something else going on here. Just stupid or capacity or plant moving?

Why I mention that again? I currently own two ruger No1 and two Browning/Miruko/Winchester 1885. I like all 4 well enough to be lifetime keepers. As far as I can recall, the 85 cost about the same (or more). They sell well enough to remain in limited production. That with mega yen, Japanese labor costs and double middle man import scenarios.

I see Bill Ruger was mentioned. That I do get that. Remember Lee Iacocca, Steve Jobs or Ronald Regan. Leadership matters. Tough guys with strong ideas.

I worry for the future of Ruger. I guess, mostly I feel sorry for myself. The 77/22 is gone also. The big 416 rigby bolt gun is gone too. Not willing or able to compete with CZ? Profit margin? Low volume? Plant or logistics? Does it matter?

Cup is 1/2 full. Winchester and CZ going strong (class act strong) and Ruger, Savage and Remlin selling to the classless side. I own a Ruger American, it serves a purpose, like the tools out in my utility shed.

Gotta stop production to get folks eager for buyin em later........do a run every 5 yrs or so. One chambering.

Ought to keep prices high enough.

I been eyeing a used blue #1 in 30-06, but the wood is about the Plain Jane as Iv seen, has the Alex Henry forarm, not sure of the Model, asking 700.00 They would do better! would rechambering it to 35 rem or 35 Whelen, be worth it? I love the #1s just not big on the old 06. cal.

There are so many reasons that no one even guessed yet. It may take skilled labor which is retiring and being replaced with workers that can push a button. You would not believe the low end personnel, I spoke with at Ruger. He claimed to be a service technician on the phone. Heck, he should be posting on the web! Perhaps some production is moved and the key men dont go. Ruger is all over the country now. New people, new machines and the old location maybe flat out on something long term popular.

I see the three best, old school, wood stock, blue steel rifles all discontinued within a few years. The big RSM, 77/xx guns and now presumably the No1. The guy running the show might just pull the plug on classic and decide move on.

It is not unheard of where a CEO, positions the company for a buy out because he is sitting a pile of worthless stock options.

I get the economics of it, I really do. If it's not making money, you can't continue to offer it, like the Red Label. I'm just disgusted with what the gun industry has become. I've been in the business since 1986, with a brief sabbatical while I helped my Dad with the family printing business. In the "good old days", customers would come in looking for a quality hunting rifle, shotgun or defensive handgun. The "para-military" crowd was always present but were a small segment of the business, at least around here. Now, it seems like every two out of three guys in the door are wanting the latest AR or another gadget to hang on the last remaining slot on the rails of their "Tactical Weapon System." Everybody thinks they are GI Joe or Rambo. The ones that do come in looking for a hunting rifle usually want the cheapest, most miserable piece of crap they can buy. They spend $1000 to join a club, drive their $50,000 tricked out truck and buy the latest designer camo but don't want to spend over $400 for a rifle and scope. And that's the crowd gun makers are catering to now. It brings tears to my eyes to look through a '70s or '80s Ruger catalog and compare what they USED to make, to what they're peddling now. And it's not just Ruger of course.

I have nine No. 1s and one No. 3 that I dearly love and hunt with. None of mine are safe queens. If I never get another one, I'm pretty well set. I will mostly miss the anticipation of what limited edition chamberings they would offer. As we know, with the No. 1, nearly all things were possible and much like the Remington 700 Classics, I always looked forward to what they had up their sleeve. I fear the M77 will suffer the same fate and we will be left with the American line because cheap and disposable is where it's at today. Sorry for the rant, just need to vent...

SCGunNut,

I get what you're saying, but like many you don't recognize that lower-priced guns have always been part of the mass-produced American gun market, whether they're called "affordable" or "the cheapest, most miserable piece of crap they can buy." I suspect many people forget this because so many of the affordable rifles of previous generations are often now considered classics.

Three examples: The Model 23's were the low-end Savage bolt-action centerfires of their generation. They certainly weren't anywhere the quality of 99's, with plenty of stamped parts, including the detachable magazine, and other cost-cutting measures such as the "action" being a few milling cuts in the rear end of the barrel. Yet today a 23 in good shape will sell for the price of a new Ruger American, and even more if it's a .22 Hornet.

The Remington 721/722 are now considered "classics" by some people, but here's what the rifle reviewer of GUN DIGEST wrote in the 1958 edition: “The motto at Remington these days…is ‘all for production,’ so their rifles are designed for ease of manufacture and to sell at a certain price. Every part that can possibly be banged out on a punch press is banged out on a punch press, much to the sorrow of any real gun bug. Such methods do not affect the handling qualities or functioning of a rifle, certainly, but neither do they add up to a gun that a guy’d want to own with pride.” And he wasn't the only shooter who felt that way.

One of the old guns I inherited from my family was a Stevens side-by-side 12-gauge belonging to my paternal grandfather. It worked fine and actually fit me pretty well, though the stock was walnut-stained birch. But my grandfather wasn't much of a hunter, and I suspect he mostly used it to keep varmints out of the garden and hen house. I'd only put a few hundred rounds through it when one of the internal hammers broke, due to a machining defect--and that was after fixing a couple of more minor problems. It was designed and built as a gun for somebody who wanted to pay as little as possible, like a lot of other shotguns (and rifles) were back then.

So no, not every customer was "looking for a quality hunting rifle, shotgun or defensive handgun" back then. The reason some of us sometimes think they were is the higher-quality guns were the ones that survived, or revered enough for their owners to take care of them. But the vast majority of sporting firearms produced in America have not been high quality, and in fact many have been decidedly cheap, because that's what a very large percentage of firearms customers have always wanted.

Maybe if they installed a safety that allows brass to clear the breech they would have sold some more.





Dave

Damn! Im glad I popped for one last year!

Luckily I pretty had my fill of No. 1's a few years ago, after owning and hunting with a pile over the years. The only one remaining is my 1B .22 Hornet, one of my favorite rodent rifles--and I actually like the fact that the safety stops ejected brass. I adjusted the ejector spring so the cases would just slide into the safety's ridge, where they can be plucked off and dropped in a pocket or ammo box, depending on whether I'm walking or "road hunting."

I first became aware of Number 1's in the late 1970's - Dad bought a couple, and I looked at them & said, "damn they're gorgeous, and look at the wood you get for your money!" and so was hooked.

This one cost $295 in 1977:



They were a great value in that time, though barrel troubles plagued them in the 80's.

The parallels with the Savage 99 occur to me as well - the 99 was in most cases, not a luxury item in its day, but they were well made from forged steel & walnut, and they usually had excellent barrels. I carried a 1927 model this past weekend, and it handled quite nicely. They too were a fine value.

I've bought a couple of new #1's in the past year; I would have bought more, had I been able to find them with nicer wood, but Ruger apparently can't/won't put nicer wood on them. I agree with El Numero Uno that plain wood was a problem; I certainly am not willing to pay $1300+ for plain wood, on a line of rifles that was famous for good wood quality.

I saw a couple of Kimber Classic Selects this weekend, and they are in the same price range as #1's, yet have attractive wood. Pity Ruger didn't tap into some of that source.

I will enjoy the ones I have, and have some really nice ones, that shoot well and look good. Hopefully I'll round up a few of the other variations I wanted, like the .475 Linebaugh, and the Weatherby calibers.

Who knows, maybe the nice ones will start appreciating?

Likewise, factory wood, a Cabelas .30-40 #1-AC