Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Alexander Henry Forend on Ruger No. 1 Medium Sporter

One of the more distinctive features on the Ruger No. 1 Sporter and Tropical models is the Alexander Henry forend. In fact, that rather odd forend has become something of a trademark for those models.



It�s certainly distinctive and cool, but I find myself wondering where that forend came from, what its history might be, what the original purpose was and who was Alexander Henry?

Do any of you rifle-history buffs have any of those answers? What�s the history of the Alexander Henry forend, what was it originally designed to do and why did Bill Ruger put it on some of the Ruger No. 1s?

I ask because I just purchased my first Ruger No. 1, a Medium Sporter in 9.3x74R. It�s a fascinating rifle, but I just know that someone is going to ask me about that curious forend.

Way way back, when Bill Ruger had just finished his first #1, he was leaning it up in the gun rack when old Alexander Henry, the janitor at the time, came through with his mop and bucket and knocked that rifle clean out of the rack. It came crashing down and put a chip in the forend. Bill kind of like they way it looked, so he kept it as a tribute to the now "late" Alexander. He sure did miss that janitor!
How do I know this is how it happened? Well, I was a consultant to Bill back in the day. I did it for free though, cause my day job was lining up hussies for JFK.

Scottish gunmaker/gunsmith who often used that style forend. He was better known for his rifling, as in Martini-Henry.

http://www.thomasdelmar.com/Catalogues/as280606/187.jpg

http://www.soldusa.com/detail.asp?id=2763&bigpic=0#img

Bruce

The distinctive AH foreearm slots originally may have had utilitarian beginings; use with crossed shooting sticks on longer range shots in the field. Englsih and European stalking guns of the period were often used with the sticks.

I have never have heard of a Ruger #1A or #1S with the A-H stocks being used in that manner. The reason might be that best accuracy with #1s -- mine ast least -- comes with firm support nearer the receiver, than at the other end of the forearm.

Anyway, I personally prefer the longer heavier barreled B models w/o the AH stock. And, on my custom restocked #1 rifles I do away with both the beavertail and AH foreends in favor of a sleaker, more conteporary/classic, look. I have seen several very nice reductions of beavertail foreends by skilled amateeurs. They also make me wish Ruger's designers had not been so uniformly eclectic in their choices for the major #1 models.

1B

I never could fall in love with the AH forend, and the standard forend (and buttstock, too) on No. 1s just seem so, well, excessive and out of place on what is supposed to be a sleek single shot. I've only owned one, and traded it largely because I found it too heavy and clunky for a 6mm deer rifle.

If they'd make a featherweight No. 1 with a slim classic pistol grip stock and trim forend, and lighten up the metal with a slimmer barrel, I bet they'd sell like hotcakes.

Steve,

I agree.

I have two custom stocked #3s, in 7mm BR and 6.5x55, that have trim straight (no pistol-grip) English style butt stocks and slim forends with a muted schnabel -- a bit like the Model 70 FTW XTRs. They have heavier barrels on them than you might like, but they still weigh in just over 7 lbs 4 oz with scopes.

1B

That groove is so's you can rest the rifle between your toes when shooting a Creedmoor position.

I too have wondered about the function, but found the look displeasing. 1Minute

Glad they offer both options. I love the Henry.

Aesthetically the groove never bothered me but it wouldn't break my heart to see it gone.



+1 on that. I like the Number 1's but the B models always end up at 8 1/2 pounds scoped. Even my recent 1A 7X57 with scope weighed at least 7 1/2 pounds. Not heavy by any means, but a single shot just begs to be a slim little fast handler.

Make something that feels and handles like a Dakota Model 10 or Merkel at the Ruger price and they'd really have something.

something that would go 7 pounds or a little under with a slim 26 inch tube, scoped, would be just the ticket. The Dakota was near perfect, but not at four large. A Ruger featherweight No. 1 at a grand would print money.

I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. tell you what. All those who do not like the Alex Henry forearm, send yours to me and I'll send you a "B" forearm as a replacement. I'm blessed with small hand and the "B" forearm feels like an ungainly club to me.
Paul B.

Oh, I don't like the big fat one either....in fact between the two I'd take the AH, even though it looks weird to my eye.

[If they'd make a featherweight No. 1 with a slim classic pistol grip stock and trim forend, and lighten up the metal with a slimmer barrel, I bet they'd sell like hotcakes.]

Ruger does, and they do. It's called the RSI, or International.

yeah, the RSI is nice, but the 20 inch barrel and 7 pound weight without scope aren't what I'm looking for.

Alexander Hendry is kown for the type of rifling that bears his name - Henry rifling. I've seen it and handled it first-hand on a rifle that bore his name, but would not attempt to describe it in print. I could have owned that 450/400 rifle for $1500 but passed - one of those regretable decisions. I even called Ross Siefried to alert him of the availability of the rifle but was met with a response that was less than enthusiastic.

The single-shot, Farquarson-style rifle mentioned above indeed bore a forend similar to the AH/Ruger forend, but I haven't a clue as to it's utility other than what has been offered herein. I do appreciate it's looks though, and have owned several variants, including the two #1As I currently own in calibers 7x57 and 30-06. They are short, handy little carbines and very handsome, though they would likely benefit from some weight reduction measures, such as a receiver made of titanium.

-

FYI - That .30-06 RSI weighs 6lbs 4oz, bareback, on a baby scale.

It used to wear a 7.5oz 2.5X scope (that had 5.5" eye relief) in Ruger rings, coming in at an ounce over your critical mass of 7 lbs - but I decided to switch to a "no-batteries" IR scope, and mounted the 11oz Trijicon Safari - for a grand total of 7.5lbs, less sling, etc.

The best way to reduce a #1's weight further is to use a NECG peep ILO any scope - which is the way I went on one of my .45-70 #1-S'.

I also would consider a lightweight #1, but not the RSI type.

You msut have gotten one with a not-very-dense stock, since they catalog at 7, and of course they ususally lie on the light side.

I always thought that little peep was the perfect sight for the lightweight straight stock .45-70.

I like all of the No. 1�s especially the 1A�s because of the Alexander Henry forend.
My stalking rifle is a No.1A, .257 Roberts and it weighs in at 8.5 pounds with scope and sling.
My beanfield rifle is a No.1B, .270 Weatherby and it weighs in at 10.25 pounds with scope and sling.
The recoil is almost nil.