Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Express Rifles and Big Bores Only Ruger No. 3

Guys, I don't know if this is the best forum to ask this question, but I'm looking for some thoughts on the Ruger No. 3. I can't find much in the way of a review, and don't know anyone who has owned one. If I had to guess, I'd say there's probably a reason Bill R. introduced the No. 1 and stopped making the No. 3. I'm kind of interested in getting one, but not if they are notoriously inaccurate or something. I'm sure that tiny little rifle and the .45-70 are not a comfortable mix, but can probably live with that. Thoughts? Experience? Thanks! TT

Heard that they were awfully painful in the recoil department, but that's all I've heard about them. I'll be watching this thread to see what else you hear about them. Never seen one myself.

i have had several, mostly in 45-70 although i still have one in 22 hornet. shooting the 45-70 with loads that are safe in that gun will get your undivided attention. the #3 is basicly a #1 with different wood, barrel contours and a different lever. the #1 stock will actually fit a number three if you desire. at one time they were substantially cheaper than a #1 and i bought them to rebarrel and stock. the #3 action lever has a slightly different locking system than the #1 but all other internals are the same.

I had a #1 in .45-70 for a while. The reloading manual had a section for ruger single shot loads. I had to try. 400 grain bullet, 2200 fps, 6 pound rifle, no recoil pad, just a hard plate. You do the math. Hint: "get your attention" does not even begin to describe the recoil.

I played with some lighter bullets and lighter loads as well. My gun was never capable of better than 6" groups at 50 yards. I guess that's why I found it on the used gun rack, huh?

I wish I'd known then what I know now about Ruger single shots. It'd be fun to see if I could make a shooter out of it, but honestly I'd rather have a .22 hornet, .30-40 krag, or .375 WCF given the gun's weight.

Tom

First, the #1 and #3 were produced at the same time. The #3 was not the predecessor of the #1. As you've already read, the #3 in .45-70 was/is pretty rugged to shoot, to say the least. One problem with it in .45-70 and with stiff loads in .375 Win is that the trigger guard will often warp th' hell outta your fangers. Some folks have modified the trigger guard to eliminate that problem. You can find pics and descriptions in the Single Shot part of this forum or Graybeard Outdoors.

A good friend of mine has had several different #3's. My favorite of them all is the .30-40 Krag. He's got an old steel-tubed Weaver K-4 on it and it's a really nice rig. After slightly tweaking the forearm bedding, it shoots around an inch at 100yds with several different loads and bullets, including cast bullets. I've been trying to buy it off of him for over 30 years. It's just danged inconsiderate of him to hang onto that rifle like that. You'd think he actually LIKED it or something....

I have a #3 in 45-70 , it is one of the early ones as it was not factory drilled & tapped. Besides the fact that recoil is somewhat stiff the rear sight as it came from the factory is not tall enough making the gun shoot low.

Mike

Have a #3 in 45/70 its a nice handy little rifle. Pretty stiff load of RL 7, doing 2100 fps. Get 2" and under groups at 100 yds with 300 gr. Hornady HP's. Not a real fun gun to shoot from the bench. About 10 rds. is all I want.

For one thing, Ruger DID NOT quit building the #3 when they came out with the #1. The #1 was first. The #3 was after the #2 which was never produced.

It would seem that Bill Sr. had a fixation on the carbine styles from about 100 yrs ago. (Hence the Carbine buttplates and barrel bands...) I guess when one owns the company, one can build whatever one wishes...

I always thought that the #3 was a poor attempt at a lighter #1. I own about 6 #3's, but most of them have had #1 or custom wood added. I bought them mostly for the caliber and not the configuration...

Grasshopper

Great information! I obviously came to the right place. A couple of you have straightened me out on the chronology, and it makes perfect sense that the No. 1 would have preceded the No. 3. I suppose I made the assumption it was the other way around just because you see so few No. 3s by comparison. I'm hearing loud and clear the warnings about recoil, and now wish I'd snapped up the No. 3 in .30-40 I had a chance at about a year ago. I know the .30-40, like the 7mm Mauser (a favorite of mine), is still considered a great deer cartridge, despite the passage of almost 120 years since its introduction. I much prefer the historical cartridges and guns that can still do the job, and will pick them any day over a new short magnum or whatever. Different strokes for different folks. Thanks for the advice, and happy hunting. TT

TT,

The .30-40 is a particular favorite of mine. It was the 2nd one that I bought. Bear in mind that the Krag will easily duplicate .308 Win ballistics, which makes it a viable deer rifle. If you ever get another whack at one, DO NOT hesitate. Good Luck...

GH

No 1: 1967 to present

No 3: 1973 to 1986

http://www.ruger.com/Firearms/PS-SerialNumberHistory-RI.html

As others have stated, the No. 3 with stiff hand loads is the snottiest thing I have ever shot. The crescent steel butt is bad enough, but the rap your fingers take from that lever, and the slap up side the head, make these things flat unpleasant.
Having said that, if you like to play with black powder cartridge guns, they are a blast with reasonable loads.

I recently aquired a No.3 in 45-70 and I guess I consider it like I see the 45 colt,you can make a 45 colt out perform a 44 magnum if you can stand the recoil but if you take a 45 colt down to the 900-1000 fps range they are a big pussy cat you can shoot all afternoon and tolerate it with ease,when I started messin round with this No. 3 I loaded ten rounds to the maximum with 4198 and the 405 bullet and let me tell you for certain,thats an ass kickin in the makin,that son of an itch hurt both my shoulder and my finger behind the lever but Ive also loaded some down to pussycat level and they were much more tolerable to shoot,Ive only ever had this one No. 3 So thats about as much as I know how to say bout that.........

Many moons bought I had a #3 in 45-70 for $135.00. I loved the action, the stock, the length, and the weight. Then I bought a box of Federal 300 gr. ammo at 1800fps and headed for the range.

I had my thumb wrapped over the action...and driven into my nose every shot. The stock was just too short for me. No matter how I held it, my nose got hammered by my thumb.

It wasn't tapped for scope mounts and I didn't have the money to do it. So, two strikes. Then I was offered more than I paid. Strike three, it was outta there.

About two weeks later I was looking at a Choate catalog and saw an extension recoil pad the used the same screw holes at the metal butt plate for a few bucks, and kicked myself. That's life.