Home Forums Hunting & Shooting BPCR why is it that you don't hear of folks shooting Ruger #1 for BPCR?

why is it that you don't hear of folks shooting a Ruger #1 (or a #3) for BPCR?

Are they lacking in performance?

They are lacking in legality (and they suck and are ugly).

For beginners, they MUST have a hammer. The kind that gives one's thumb something to do. There is more, but that is sufficient to keep the Rugers at bay - thankfully.

aesthetics duly noted.

Aside from competition shooting, do they still suck for black powder?

i.e. if I have on my list a gun for black powder shooting, and someone I know has a Ruger they are looking to unload, am I shorting myself on the capabilities of the gun, performance wise - if I have no intention of doing competition shooting

I have no idea why they would suck for bp specifically. They just suck for ugly. Just my opinion of course. Should probably shoot bp just fine if one wanted to mess with one.

They are a pain in the butt to mount a sight capable of reaching the distances needed to even shoot in the "gong" matches. Altho there are a few of them around that have been modified. Not to mention just the bare bones cost rapidly approaches a hiwall, sharps , or rolling block from the Italian manufactures, that all are legal to go into any type of bpcr match with just the addition of sights in the already drilled and tapped holes in the gun.
I did see one that Ron Long had modified and rebarreled to 32-40 for a Schuetzen rifle.

ugly my ass

Ruger developed them in the 60's as an update of the Fahrquharsen action, and part of the update was to use modern smokeless cartridges. That was before BPCR gained in popularity.

The #1 is not as easy to take down for cleaning as say, a Sharps, but as long as they have a good barrel I suspect they'd shoot fine with well crafted loads. My .45-70 is about MOA with heavy smokeless loads.

The safety is in the way of a tang sight, is another downside to the #1. Competition rules require exposed hammers, as Brent noted but I don't know the specific reasons why.

Ruger made a limited edition for Lyman, that came in a case with long tube scope and long heavy barrel in .45-70. I've never heard of anyone who actually shot one, however, and that was before they starting making their own barrels.

Yes, their phylogenetic relationship to the Farq is duly noted and is often used as a means of justifying their existence. But it is also, not really a Farqueson nor nearly as picturesque or as well balanced as its progenitor, just as a Ruger Blackhawk is not Colt Peacemaker.

They, I believe, legal in BPTR (Creedmoor and midrange), but I have never seen one in that application. I have no doubt they can be made to work and even shoot accurately. But there are so many other rifles that can do all that a Ruger can and still look good doing it.

BPCR rifles must have hammers, must be American made or reproductions of American made rifles of an era that has some sort of cut off that I do not recall. Farqs and, hence Rugers, are out, as are Sharps Borchardts (original or not) and Martinis, and many other serviceable, if somewhat complexion-challenged rifles of various parentages.

In my opinion, if you want a good bcpr, you can start and stop with a highwall. New (cheap) or old (maybe not quite so cheap), they will shoot at the top of the game, they are easy on the eyes, and they will win any game that the operator is sufficiently competent enough that he can get the job done.

But that's just me. Some say the same thing about Sharp's, and others about rollers, or Ballards, or Wessons, or even the slightly questionable Stevens among others.

I won't comment on whut yer ass looks like 'cuz I don't head in that direction, but the Ruger #1 is BUTT ugly compared to a Sharps, even a Borchardt

Damn. Now I gotta wear a paper sack on my head when I take the Ruger out. Might have to get drunk just to dance with the old girl.

You as$es are giving me a complex.

Giving you a complex is pretty challenging since you only have about 2 neurons to trip over.

Nothing really wrong with a Ruger #1 but if they were the only singleshot available, I'd probably own a bolt rifle.

[bleep] you and the goat you rode here on.

Having a bad day already I see. Could be a long one for ya.

Nah, great day here. Just don't care for little arrogant pricks like you.

Enjoy.

If this is a good day for you then you live a sorry life. But that's not news is it?

Do you even know what a BPCR is?

Rant on, you are, at least, entertaining.

Hey Spanky, keep on plugging. No rant, my comment was tongue in cheek ( look it up ) and meant to liven things.

If the black powder world is plagued by your kind, then have at it. I'll stay smokeless.

But as I said, enjoy.

Good. We don't need ya here. Bye

and let me guess, Renee Zellweger is your dream girl?

what, pray tell, is ugly about this? It's way prettier than I am



That said, I do like High Walls, and Sharps, too.

Oh where to start? So many possibilities.... And prettier than you? What does THAT say?

Just kiddin'. It looks right smart - for a Ruger.

Egad, that IS funny. Bricktop couldn't do better, more vulgar yes, but not better.

Cheers all.

If one is narrowly focussed,and sees "BPCR" as NRA sanctioned BPCR competitions,....yes they are illegal, one of many practical avenues that COULD have been left open to new shooters. As is most often the case the NRA's goddam rule book got thicker and thicker by the year, and as is the case with so many of the other NRA sanctioned matches / disciplines, is a waning and basically DYING game. LOTS of the clubs are still holding BPCR matches, but have given up on screwing around with a bunch of fundamentally pointless, and chickenchit "Rules".

If one broadens one's focus just a bit and looks at a bigger picture, the #1 IS allowed in some pretty damn fine BLACK POWDER CARTRIDGE RIFLE events. Ones put on by some pretty damn fine INTERNATIONAL Historic Rifle associations. here's an example of but one of em'.

Link: http://www.ssaa.org.au/competition-info/stories/big-game-rifle_may2.pdf

Where the NRA obsesses page after goddam page about minute details, The World Creedmoor and SSRAs are liable to limit things a bit, in that regard, thus:

"Types of Rifles Allowed

Any muzzle-loading rifle with a pre-1900s design is allowed. If you shoot a breech-loading rifle, it must be set up like a pre-1900s rifle, and its chamber must allow an original black powder cartridge. The cartridge may not be smaller than a .32 caliber and may not be a bolt-action rifle. Sights for competition rifles must use a metal sight that are similar to pre-1900s rifles, or a single corrective tang sight lens may be used. Sights that allow for magnification of the target are not allowed. The stock of the weapon must be made to a pre-1900s rifle specification."

I've handled (and competed against) some Canadian guns, tricked out and fitted up as Long range Creedmoor rifles,......awesome guns, and run by some savvy operators.

In few words, there's "BPCR",....and than there's the BLACK POWDER CARTRIDGE RIFLE game.

One's PATENTLY a "Big Fish, Small Pond" racket, and the other little more urbane, tolerant, and sophisticated in it's approach to rifle sport.

# 1 s can be spooled up into GREAT "BPCRs"

GTC