Boy's,

  I'm not trying to run down the CPA's or Stevens 44 1/2's. My competition bench gun is a CPA and I wouldn't trade it for most anything. Also own a coupla original 44 1/2's. They are mighty fine guns.

  But as SS says the Ruger #1 is a fine gun and if it's all you have to work with and don't have a coupla thousand to spare, I don't see why you can't make a #1/3 into a fine Schuetzen gun. 

  Mori has a Ruger #1 on hand, so that won't cost him a thing. I'd be willing to say that for half the cost of a CPA, and sending it to a smith who specializes in #1's, he'd have a gun that would win matches if he does his part.

I have been rethinking this project after reading the many fine posts on this thread. What I am thinking of doing now is ordering a .375 barrel (for a 38-55) from Badger. Maybe fluted and in chrome moly as I can rust blue it myself. Besides, I really like the look of a fluted barrel. Probably 28 to 30 inches in length. If I get a fat barrel, I can make a new forearm for it. Any thoughts? Thanks, Mori

I shoot a Ruger #3, with a #1 buttstock, in 32/357 (32 Miller Short). Barrel is a 30" #3.5 Green Mountain octagon. Forend is a flat bottom forend mainly for bench but it does work for offhand. I have scope blocks for a modern scope and iron sights are Redfield Olympic front and rear. The rear sight is on a removable base that fits on the rear Weaver base. The lever is a modified #3 lever to work with the pistol grip. Inside I have a Moyer trigger and a Zika speed hammer. 

The forend is bedded to the barrel only and the original hanger is free floated inside. Like FB, it has shot a 248 but I have a long way to learning how to shoot it consistently. 

The 'smith who did the work was Steve Durren of Adrian MI who has since went to work for Ballard Arms.

Shooter,

  Those articles I mentioned in a previous post, that you can get from the Cast Bullet Assoc., or possibly from the ASSRA archives, as Paul pointed out, are geared to set up for cast bullets. Albeit not those we use in Schuetzen. But should be valid.

  Your mention of the mainspring hitting the barrel is one I've heard before, and I've had about the same conclusion you have. I'm tending to look at it like this.... without any proof..... There is quite a bit of vibration of the mainspring and this could be passed to the barrel thru the hanger/frame connection. Not to mention if the barrel is max. diam. of the mainspring slapping the barrel itself. There is already barrel vibrations from firing the gun and adding, possibly, counter-productive vibrations from the mainspring is probably not a good thing. The mainspring is really far heavier than needed, and I would suppose that Ruger did it this way to promote positive ignition. You sure don't want a misfire when that Cape Buffalo comes to collect that money you owe him!

  When a lot of the guys re-barrel they tend to put in as heavy a barrel as possible, which is not all that great, especially for bench shooting. This certainly doesn't help things. The articles address this and how to be sure the barrel doesn't touch the hanger, and still keep a positive pressure between the forend and barrel.

  The upside is that you might get lucky and not have to do any of these cures. From what I read it's not unusual. Most just seem to benefit from some tweaking to get the last little bit of accuracy out of them.

The Ruger rifle is one of the best looking singleshot rifles of all time [IMO] but, there are issues about its accuracy--I don't pretend to know what they are but, there has to be some reason why so few #1-3 show-up on the ASSRA firing line.  I don't believe the solutions mentioned have solved the accuracy problem.  leadball

There's no doubt that the Winchester Hi walls, CPA's and all the others are good looking rifles but if what I read about what makes a Single Shot Rifle action accurate is correct the Ruger should fit in very nicely, in fact it has all the things required, including the stock through bolt. 

I've heard that gunsmiths convert some of the other auctions to this stock bolt system but the Ruger already has it. What I like about the # 1 is that it's readily available at a reasonable price and it's easy to do the speed lock hammer thing and the set trigger. 

I don't buy the part about having to "free float" the hanger from the barrel thing as I've never seen one that wasn't more than free from the barrel. I don't really know just how accurate the others are but do know how good the # 1 will shoot,  and if the others are going to do better they would have to shoot under 1/2 inch at 100 yds.  I wonder how many of the different actions can clam to do that. anyone know of any accuracy destroying issues that the Ruger actions seem to have ?.
  Shooter

The ASSRA Ruger #1 that steve durren converted to 22 rf for me is as accurate as any rifle I've ever owned.   I'm willing to bet that if it was fed the correct ammo, and put in the hands of a better shooter and wind reader than it's present owner, it is capable of firing 250s at 200 yards.   However it IS set up as a bench gun.
It has a GM barrel (#3 win profile or so) with the Zika light hammer & spring kit and steve gave it a real nice crisp light trigger ---- while leaving in all the "extra" factory parts.   I've tried it in the mini-hudson and it's too heavy for me in its configuration and my skills are too poor to judge it for offhand;  but I see NO reason to think that if set up right it would do equally as well in that side of the sport.

I see no reasonal why similar treatment would not provide a top notch offhand rifle in a suitable schuetzen calibre.   I supect that some of us are more "comfortable" with a more traditional (read "hammer" action) rifle; and the hammerless ruger action may be off-putting to some.  I think a lot of it is a chevy/ford type reaction.
I'm convinced that ALL of our top end rifles are more than capable of good schuetzen accuracy and that the shooter and his/her skills is a bigger factor than the gun itself.

Sorry,
Being new at this I really did not know that "schuetzen" was considered offhand shooting only, I was always under the impression that "schuetzen" was more of a style or type of gun, such as something with a two piece stock, hook type butt plate, non bolt action single shot, etc. etc., it's fun learning new things, but no matter.

I realize that some guns that are shot off a bench are so heavy they would be very hard to shoot off hand, but if a so called "schuetzen" type gun such as a Ruger # 1 shoots great off a bench and it's set up as a "schuetzen" type off hand gun why wouldn't it shoot great offhand. ? 

Another question from the new guy, if off hand is "schuetzen",  or "schuetzen" is off hand,  is there a different name given when shooting bench rest, if it was called "schuetzen" bench rest that wouldn't make sense, I guess what I'm asking is what is the sport of shooting a "schuetzen" type gun off a bench called, "off hand bench rest", I know that doesn't make much sense, but ?.
  Shooter