Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Single Shots Ruger #1 in 7.62x39

I was at the LGS helping my wife pick out my valentine's present...was looking for a 270 but came home with another colt 1911....Anyways, they had two nib #1's a 7.62x39 and a 7mm mag.

I've always liked the looks of the #1's but have never owned one. Any thoughts on the 7.62x39 or the 7mm mag one? I have rifles to cover everything I need, but like to dabble.

-John

#1s are handsome rifles. Have owned 3 and they all required substantial work to find success. A #3 likewise. Nothing wrong with the 7 mag, but the 7.62x39 is a joke. Many better alternatives available.

A friend and I snapped up No.1A rifles in 7.62x39 when on sale a couple years ago. He has shot his and says it may be the most fun to shoot No.1 he owns. The x39 proved very capable as a deer round when I had an SKS years ago and was interesting to handload for.
Odd matchup with the Ruger No.1 but why not!? I doubt I would shoot anything but good brass and game bullets in mine, avoiding most military ammo.

I’ve owned four. All required substantial work aka $$$, and success ( accuracy) was not found.

I have taken my (4) Ruger #1 rifles to the range and been pleased; 223, #1V 223, 270, and 7mmRM.

The 270 has not killed anything yet. But the other 3 have killed a boat load.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have (6) SKS, (1) AK, and (1) 1903 Turkish Mauser I converted to 7.62x39mm [single shot].
One of the SKS rifles went to the range. The rest of them I have never shot.
I do not consider that cartridge adequate for deer, where I hunt over sage brush.

I hear folks saying their No 1s weren't accurate, but that hasn't been my experience. I currently have three, a B in 22 Hornet, an A in 30-06, and a 45-70. My first No 1 was a B in 7 Rem Mag. All have been capable of three shot groups with all bullets touching at 100 yards with loads they liked. Random handloads and even the cheapest factory ammo seldom do more than an 1 1/2" to 1 3/4".

I see no reason at all for that chambering except to stir up the “Gotta have ‘em all” crowd. A .30/30, also available here and there, is far more useful and compelling, and I say that as a grandpa whose grandson has killed three bucks in three seasons with the little Russky.

I would try it in 7.62. If it didn't I would mess it up and rebore to 9X39 fast twist. Then thread and load some heavy cast .358 bullets. But I am a medium bore whore. Be Well, RZ.

I too am in the camp of #1 owners whose rifles all deliver(ed) good accuracy. One of the current ones, a .250-3000 that started life as a .270 40 years ago, took a little coaxing (set screw in the hanger) to get from 1.25 MOA down to a consistent .75 MOA. Truth be told it was deer-whacking accurate enough but, well, you know how it is. A 6.5x55 1A I'm shooting is a good 1/2-incher with nothing having been done to it, but then again I load for it using Wilson straight line dies, Lapua brass, and Bergers and Scenars. It by damn better shoot!

As for the Russkie caliber, meh. It may be the best thing since girls' thongs for some folks but it's origins leave me feeling like I can find better cartridges to spend my Yankee greenbacks on.

For the money they cost, I cant get excited over a #1 in 7.62x39 . Kinda like finding a 63 vett, and putting a vw engine in it.

DD: youre just biased bc ppl have fired 7.62x39s at you. i would be too ...

I like the x39, but somehow my mind puts it in a Handi-Rifle, not a Ruger No. 1.

Agree ..... The #1 is a classic rifle whereas the 7.62x39 not so much a fitting classic chambering.

OTOH, I wouldn't have an SKS re-done in 30-30.

I’d rechamber to .303 Redgwell (aka British) or the full-sized Russky.

Not so much 'cause they shot at me, but because they never did much more than give me a scratch. Here's one that went thru a thin layer of fiberglass and a couple layers of aluminum sheet before bouncing off my boot heel...AP core on the right. Range from gunner to boot heel was about 30 yards. I doubt the Quigley bullet on the left would have bounced off.

I would prefer more 30/30’s, 300 H&H or even 38/55.

A # 1 in 7.62x39 is a waste of a perfectly good rifle.

10X

Times 10 more

i like collecting Ruger # 1`s ,i do hunt with a couple of Ruger # 1`s too both shoot very well. and if i get a chance someday a would enjoy buying a Ruger # 1 in a 7.62 x 39 too !

Good analogy.

Buy the one mentioned in the OP.

need a little help where is this rifle listed ? thank you ,Pete53

7.62x39 is alright for a short range rifle. I think the chambering is like as mentioned earlier, just an attempt to make a rare caliber collectable.

The Handi Rifles did come out with 7.62x39 barrels. By the time I found and ALMOST bought a Handi barrel that was for sale in a LGS, there were rumors of folks having some troubles with the x39 barrels. Don’t remember what, possibly sloppy ammo dimensions or maybe misfires what with tough military primers??
Anyway I had my fun with a couple of SKS rifles. My Ruger No.1 in x39 is unfired as of now but I’m starting to get curious if it’s an accurate shooter or not🤔

I agree completely!

I have owned 3 myself, and put considerable amounts of time, money, reloading components, only to have them shoot like crap!

It is a real shame, because they are a pretty rifle!

The number one is just not designed to be an accurate shooter, but a dependable shooter. For 95% of hunting they are plenty accurate enough.

If a person is a shooter who prizes precision or groups in the MOA range or better, your chances are not very good with the number 1. It happens, but it is the exception.

The forend hanger is one of the poorest designs I have ever encountered. If Ruger wanted to improve their potential accuracy, that alone would make a massive improvement!


I have owned 5 or 6 browning B78’s, and 1885’s, and every single one was distinctly Sub-MOA with little to no load development. I think that speaks volumes as to the superior shootability of the Browning design.

The number one is typically much lighter, and better suited to carry. If they could improve the accuracy potential, I would own them again.

My #1 in 7.62x39 shoots well enough. It's a good inch in a half shooter.
My son loans it to his buddies that don't hardly hunt. They do well with it.
I loaded up some Gamekings in it and they have smacked a few deer down with it with no problems.
It's good for what we use it for.

Update.
I said I’d never buy another #1. I was wrong. Bought a 218 Bee couple months ago. Put in a Jard trigger. It’s pretty accurate, 1”, sometimes better.

You want a 7.62x39mm rifle with a 308 diameter barrel. That way, you can load a large number of bullet weights and types and shoot them all accurately. It really is a good cartridge, but there are too many used surplus rifles around and too much crappy ammunition sold. And too much confusion about which ammunition to shoot through which barrel.

Look for the zen of the 7.62x39mm.

Hi, I went by the gun store and they still have it...one in 7.62x39 and one in .243 now. It's Jim's in Pensacola if people are interested.

Ive had four and none were crappy.

The .243s ( B and RSI ) shot the best.

Someone on here was hoping Ruger would chamber the No.1 in 7.62X54.

Would these be a good candidate to rechamber?

Jerry

The 30-303 shoots well. As you know, I have two rifles chambered in 30-303. A No 4 Lee Enfield and a TC Encore. A couple of weeks ago, I took possession of an MGM 7.62x54r. I haven't fired it yet, but will soon. Both these rifles have .308 diameter barrels - 1 inch untapered tube, 26 inches long.

I agree with DD, my No1s needed some work to get them to shoot. Not so with the TCs. I might have just got lucky, but my Encore shoots 6.5 Grendel and 30-303 very well. Some 30-303 targets are below. The only thing I did was get rid of the plastic OEM stock and replaced it with a Boyds laminate.

I have a 7.62x39 barrel for my Contender. Like the Encore barrels, the 7.62x39 is a 308 diameter tube. There are lots of bullets around.





---

‘63 Vette with a VW engine in it”!?
HECK YEAH! I’d buy that, too!

I can't see a #1 in 7.62X39 but I have #1's ranging in caliber from 22 Hornet to 405 Winchester. I load for all of them and can constantly get them to MOA. The action makes a nice platform for a custom job as well so it's a dual purpose rifle

That's okay. Can you imagine a world where everyone had to shoot the same cartridge and rifle?

Slightly off topic, but a Ruger #1 in 35 REM would be really cool

That would be cool. I have one in 35 Whelan thats a nice rifle. I'm waiting on a build project on a #1 action in 300 Savage.

I have often wondered why Ruger never offered the M77 in 300 Savage....

I think there was a limited run of them several years ago. maybe a Lipseys exclusive but I've never seen one.

The 7mm Remington Magnum Number One is not avail any longer?

Good combo. Mine quickly became a favorite hunting rifle. It's accurate and quite powerful enough for my purposes. I put a 3.5-10x Leupold on it, which is working out well. Took a mule deer and a pronghorn antelope with it a year ago. I was using the 160 grain SPBT Sierra Gameking.

Wish I'd had it with me last week, mule deer hunting when I passed on a chance at a nice buck, quite a ways out. I would have had confidence in the 7mm Rem Mag Number One.

Ah - Edited - I just saw that this is a rather old thread. My bad. But my 7mm Rem Mag Number One is still a fine shooting hunting rifle.

Regards, Guy