I stumbled into a pristine #1 in 30-06. The gun's a "Liberty Edition" with "MADE IN THE 200TH YEAR OF AMERICAN LIBERTY." stamped on the barrel.
My books don't mention the Liberty Editions, and I was wondering if they're more collectable, or worth more than the other year rifles without this stamping?
Either way, I plan on shooting it, although I don't think this gun's seen much, if any use.. Since I think it's been fired, and I don't have the box or paperwork, I'm not going to put it in collector catagory, but instead take care of it but still use it.
My only complaint about the rifle is that it came with tall Ruger rings.. I'm going to see if I can find a set of lows or mediums to get a better cheek weld.. Sort of a stretch to the highs.
Paper,Ruger stamped that on almost every type of gun they made in 1976. I don't know if they are valued more than guns that didn't have the Bicentenial stamp on them. The Mini 14 that I had was made in 1976,but it didn't have the stamp on it.
Ruger#1's are some great rifles,and most have some pretty nice wood on them. Not all of them shoot great though,but if you have problems with the grouping,there are several things that can be done to help it get tighter groups,there is plenty of info on the web about them.
I have always been happy with my #1 300WM,it shoots very well.
There is also offset scope rings available for them if you need a set for your scope setup.
Thanks guys..
The info I found was that if I had the paperwork, original box, and an unfired rifle it'd be worth an extra 30%.. Since that's not the case, I'll use and enjoy it..
With IL's 24 hour waiting period on long guns, and the fact that I'll be working in Baton Rouge until Wednesday, I won't get a chance to pick it up until Thursday.. Hopefully I'll get a chance to slap a scope on it and see how it shoots, and go from there..
I also found that my Ruger #1 would not group well with old ammo. If I had ammo that was more than a year old it would spray bullets all over the paper. Fresh ammo and I could hold sub MOA groups.
__________________
Dedicated to SwedeSteve, Arkansashunter and Ezearln. Rest in peace my friends.
I also found that my Ruger #1 would not group well with old ammo. If I had ammo that was more than a year old it would spray bullets all over the paper. Fresh ammo and I could hold sub MOA groups.
I picked up a couple boxes of my old standby 30-06 ammo last night, being 150gr Remington Corelocks.. We'll see how it does..
I have to admit that I've wanted a No. 1 since I was a kid. One of the guys that my Dad hunted with had (and I think still does) an identical No. 1 in .270.. Been one of those rifles I've wanted for years, but never bought.
I hope my old memories and desire for one of these is as good as I hope it to be.. They're beautiful rifles, and I love single shots..
I got a chance to get a Simmon's scope mounted, and located a set of low rings from the same guy I bought the gun from. He wanted to trade the rings, but I wanted both, so he sold me the lows for $20...
And a trip to the range tonight informed me that all the reading on #1 accuracy was good reading, but not needed for this rifle!!
I bore sighted at 50 yards and tweeked a couple shots to where I wanted them, and switched to 100 yards. The first shot's windage was perfect, but it was shooting 3" high. I dropped it down a full 12 clicks and proceded to pound 3 shots into the 1" ten ring, all less than 1/2" apart..
And this was off sand bags, which are supposed to be a bad thing with the #1 rifles..
Nice! Mine is in 22-250 and has taken a ground hog with a head shot at 325 yards. I have a 10/22 made in '76 that does not have the 200th year writing on it.
__________________ Teach
Taxpayers voting for Obama are like chickens voting for Colonel Sanders.
Nice! Mine is in 22-250 and has taken a ground hog with a head shot at 325 yards. I have a 10/22 made in '76 that does not have the 200th year writing on it.
Not that I don't believe you in any way, but everything I read said that all the Rugers were marked with the 200th year writing.. I wonder why your (and maybe more?) 10/22 wasn't marked, as well as Txhillbilly's Mini??
Seem's odd, and again, I believe both of you.. Just odd..
The dealer I bought the gun from spoke to the previous owner (consignment gun) who said the gun shot well for him, what little he shot it, but the dealer said he's got a .218 Bee that hasn't ever shot as well as it should, even after several upgrades that I've read about. It's become a thorn that he refuses to give up on, even after 4 years of trying different loads, barrel work, action work, etc.. His next attempt is to have the bore scoped for any defects, and if that doesn't work, it's going back to Ruger for them to figure it out.
I didn't press the subject, but I could tell it bothered him to have a gun that should shoot well, yet doesn't..
One would think that a gun with such a simple and solid design would be a tack driver.. I know harmonics are always an issue with a gun like this, but sooner or later, one would find the key to accuracy with a single shot rifle that locks up the same every time.
My trick with my rifle was lucky? I picked up a box of Remington 150grain Coreloks and it likes them..
Although, today I helped a guy sight in his 30-06 Browning A Bolt with 180 grain Remintons and it hammered a great group. He also had a box of Winchester Silver Tips of the same grain bullet and the group was 3 times the size. Still well within Minute of Deer, but the Remingtons shot a 1" group, and the Winchesters were almost 3".. Again, weird.. At least he knows what he'll buy for this gun from now on..
Teach
