I see references to #1 red pad. Are the red pad rifles more accurate, or more desirable than black pad?
What the deal on “red pad?”

Early Ruger No. 1s were built with red colored recoil pads. They had adjustable triggers and were in many cases more accurate than the later models with black pads. I have owned 3 different 7mm Mag No. 1 Bs, 2 were red pads and 1 black pad. One of the red pad rifles could hold a 25 shot group at 200 yards under 1 ½ inches. The other red pad rifle couldn't hold a 3 shot group on a paper plate. The black pad rifle that I own now is a ¾ to 1 ¼ MOA rifle depending on bullet and powder selection. Back in the early days Ruger didn't make their own barrels for the No. 1, they bought barrels from Douglas and Wilson. In the beginning Quality Control was pretty high but fill off after a number of years. Poor QC and the “lawyer” triggers that replaced the adjustable trigger, accuracy became questionable. Today Ruger makes their own barrels and are about as good as any they ever bought from Douglas or Wilson but the reputation was already damaged. So the red pad is associated with early made No. 1s that were accurate and will made.

https://i.postimg.cc/8c46909k/Ruger-No1-Names-001.jpg

All Black pad and all pretty accurate.

https://postimg.cc/dZ73T4Jg

Accuracy with the red pad guns has been a hit ot miss proposition. The early ones with Douglas barrel were for the most part quite good. Then Ruger started using Wilson barrels and accuracy became hit or miss. I have two #1B models in 25-06. One is a tack driver and other more of a scattergun. One was made in 1978, the other in 1979. Both have Wilson barrels. I don't remember which is which.
Paul B.

SturmRuger also used 4000 to 5000 Green Mountain Barrels during these time periods and there is no way to identify the difference between Barrels. This source from the Factory Supervisor of Barrel Machining.

The Ruger bbl myth continues. having owned/own 100+ they all will shoot very well if fed the proper ammo.
Those who can't get them to shoot would rather complain or spend money on tuning trinkets.
All at/under 30 cal w/shoot MOA. All over 1.5 MOA. That will kill anything you would hunt with one.
If you have a red pad you can't get to meet that, I'll take it off your hands for $500.

Thanks for the generous offer, onetimehunter. I don’t own one, but I’m looking at one.

Red pads also usually had much better wood figure than black pads. I say "usually" !

From my experience and mostly with friends who have owned more red pads than me, this sums it up pretty good. Sometimes you get a good shooter, sometimes just a so-so shooter. I've owned a string of black pad #1s and they all seemed to be more consistently accurate. Still, most are plenty accurate enough for hunting so I wouldn't shy away from any red pad at all - especially if you handload. Every gun has its sweetspot.

My lone remaining red pad #1 is a 4-digit from 1968 which I believe has a Douglas barrel. It will not put much into a dime at 100 yards, but it will put absolutely everything into about an inch if not better.

Not to mention great wood usually

I never had a black pad gun, but had four red ones, one 1-B, one 1-H, and two I-Vs. I always though the #1s were the best looking of sporting rifles. All of mine were accurate, but the 1-H was the only one that didn't have to be re-zeroed regularly. My #1s are long gone.

My '74 B needs a new pad. And I got a used buttstock extra that needs a pad.
Black ones would be fine, as its function over form and neither is a collector rig.
Will call Ruger and order them if I can. The '74's is splitting. LOL that might be covered under warranty.