Why no Ruger #1s?

Discussions of powders, bullets and loading information.

Moderators: Kirk, Lucinda

User avatar
omgb
Posts: 169
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 11:21 am
Location: SoCal, Santa Clarita

Why no Ruger #1s?

Post by omgb »

I see all kinds of rifles being shot in BP matches and informal shooting. However, I never see any Rugers. I know, the design strays from the 19th century, but the Farquarson it is inspired by, was 19th century. Still, I never see them. Why?
Reece Talley
James Madison Fellow
Cal Hunter Ed Instructor/NRA Rifle/Shotgun Inst.
Woody
Posts: 6060
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 9:02 am
Location: Freetown, Indiana

Re: Why no Ruger #1s?

Post by Woody »

They are prohibited by rule in BPCR silhouette. No exposed hammer. They are allowed in BPTR competition.

Woody
Richard A. Wood
If you are surrounded. You are in a target rich environment.
SSShooter
Posts: 2910
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 7:06 am
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Why no Ruger #1s?

Post by SSShooter »

The Ruger No.1 is based on the Farquharson action from 1872, so is older than the 1874/77 Sharps, 1885 Winchester, 1879 Rem-Hepburn or 1906 Stevens 44 1/2. Only the Rolling Block is older in design. But, rules are rules and there is not enough interest to make the change for BPCR, so the No.1 and Borchardt will languish in BPTR.
Glenn
James
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:42 am
Location: Colorado

Re: Why no Ruger #1s?

Post by James »

What we call a 1874 model Sharps came out in 1871, no one seems to know why we call them a 74.
There’s no horse so dead it can’t be beat a bit more.
James
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:42 am
Location: Colorado

Re: Why no Ruger #1s?

Post by James »

A correction, it was late 1870 that the rifle we call a 74 was first produced according to Sellers book. And the lack of an exposed hammer is the rule as stated.
There’s no horse so dead it can’t be beat a bit more.
User avatar
omgb
Posts: 169
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 11:21 am
Location: SoCal, Santa Clarita

Re: Why no Ruger #1s?

Post by omgb »

I figured it had to be the hammer issue. I just bought a custom 45-70 with a 30” barrel and AA wood. I won’t have my hands on it for a few weeks. I’m anticipating it will shoot as well as my Sharps and better than my trapdoor. Time will tell.
Reece Talley
James Madison Fellow
Cal Hunter Ed Instructor/NRA Rifle/Shotgun Inst.
gunlaker
Posts: 2764
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 6:16 pm

Re: Why no Ruger #1s?

Post by gunlaker »

Up here in Canada when long range BP shooting got going back in the early days there were lots of Ruger #1's in use.

Chris.
User avatar
Luke
Posts: 416
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2002 12:26 pm
Location: Central Missouri

Re: Why no Ruger #1s?

Post by Luke »

Sharps reorganized in 1874. When the stillborn model we now call the 1875 was being shown at the Worlds Fair they decided to rename their "Old" model by the date of that reorganization.
Limber Up!
Ray Newman
Posts: 3810
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2002 1:22 pm
Location: between No Where & No Place, WA

Re: Why no Ruger #1s?

Post by Ray Newman »

Maybe this will help:

RE. origins of some of the NRA silhouette rules, from the Fall 1999, Issue 27, “The Black Powder Cartridge News”:

“a limited equipment” sport…

“Thanks Al and Doc for BPCR by Bill Pace

“When Carlsen and I conceived of BPCRS, we thought in terms of a very simple game without a lot of gadgetry, especially one that would avoid the usual equipment race you see in so many other shooting competitions. You know just basically a rifle – a Sharps or a Rolling Block – and the stuff a Buffalo Hunter would have had.

“Al Hill, NRA Silhouette Committee member and one of the co-founders of BPCRS, was speaking to another shooter at the 1996 NRA BPCRS Championship. I listened as Al talked about their early shooting experiments, how they arrived at the models allowed and dimensions, etc. This was my first national BPCRS match at Raton and over the next three days I had an opportunity to consider and remember Al’s comments.”

The rest of the article is a tongue in cheek discussion of what equipment/gadgets are needed.
Grand PooBah
WA ST F. E. S.

In real life may you be the bad ass that you claim to be on social media....
User avatar
omgb
Posts: 169
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 11:21 am
Location: SoCal, Santa Clarita

Re: Why no Ruger #1s?

Post by omgb »

It all makes sense I guess. Since there were enclosed hammer guns in the 19th century, it would be nice if they were permitted. I suppose the faster lock times and coil springs might pose too much of an advantage over the hammer guns.
Reece Talley
James Madison Fellow
Cal Hunter Ed Instructor/NRA Rifle/Shotgun Inst.
User avatar
Luke
Posts: 416
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2002 12:26 pm
Location: Central Missouri

Re: Why no Ruger #1s?

Post by Luke »

Hasn't happened it BPTR, so I doubt it. I think the barrel is far more important than the lockwork.
Limber Up!
bohemianway
Posts: 161
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 3:58 pm

Re: Why no Ruger #1s?

Post by bohemianway »

And yet a CPA repro of the 44.5 Stevens is allowed and it was a smokeless action primarily and came out when?
SSShooter
Posts: 2910
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 7:06 am
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Why no Ruger #1s?

Post by SSShooter »

bohemianway wrote: Sat Apr 01, 2023 10:43 am And yet a CPA repro of the 44.5 Stevens is allowed and it was a smokeless action primarily and came out when?
1906. With 20-30% of competitors shooting one (including me), I don't expect them to go anywhere.
Glenn
Woody
Posts: 6060
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 9:02 am
Location: Freetown, Indiana

Re: Why no Ruger #1s?

Post by Woody »

The CPA was specifically approved as being in the "spirit" and as the safer alternative to the 44 action. Not all our pet actions made the cut, but I will say the originators of this silhouette variety did a good job in preventing the classic arms race a lot of these games turn into. I've been shooting BPCR silhouette since 98 and am still not tired of it. Willie Pool just won the BPTR cartridge Creedmoor in Tennessee last weekend using an early Bryon Shiloh. So much for an arms race. (I know the rifle. It was my first Shiloh. Shouldn't have parted with it.)

Woody
Richard A. Wood
If you are surrounded. You are in a target rich environment.
RB1Shooter
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2022 2:03 pm

Re: Why no Ruger #1s?

Post by RB1Shooter »

I believe the originators of the BPCR Silhouette game, did a superb job in designing a terrific team sport, while including the little nuances that make the game so compettitive. It is the little things, barrel weight for example; which even the playing field for all, while incorporating natural vibration phenomena that every shooter needs to be aware of and take into consideration. And there are countless other aspects from load deveopment, to eqipment, to shooting, to spotting that make the game what it is. It really forces each of us to really know and understand the art of BPCR Silhouette shooting in a simple, open format.

Many of the monthly match directors will allow, shooters to use non-regulation guns. However, as far as competing against and classifications in the BPCR Silhouette game, they are not ellegable and rightly so. If you want to play and compete in the game, follow the rules otherwise, simply enjoy shooting. Personally, I love it and grateful for such a well thought out team sport.

Just my thoughts.

"There are no shortcuts in match BPCR Silhouette load development & shooting"
Post Reply