I'm not as experienced as others here, but I'll take a stab at some of the questions;

1- If you already HAVE a Martini or Ruger, it's probably not a bad way to start.

2- Two "favorites" that come to mind are the .32 Miller, or .32 Dell (both, I think, are .357 Maximum cases necked/tapered to .32), or the .32-40.  If it was ME, I'd pick the .32-40, since there's over a century of load data out there, and NO shortage of experienced shooters to help.

3- Not a clue who's "best", but Buffalo Arms wouldn't be a bad place to start shopping.

4- I'm still a little suspicous about this whole "breech seating" thing... so I'd go with Fixed to start. But that's just me.


Back to #1:  You might consider a Uberti or the forthcoming (in a couple weeks, supposedly) Pedersoli High Wall in .38-55.   The Uberti's are said by some to have slightly "non-standard" bore and groove diameters, which would give you fits getting a bullet off the shelf to shoot with.
Those options MIGHT get you into the game faster and cheaper than having a Ruger or Martini re-built.

Others have more experience than I do, but I hope this helps!
Paul F.

Where did you order this rifle from and may I ask the cost?

Gary,

     There's the rub, a custom caliber in a Ruger #1 requires custom gunsmithing.  The rifle in question was custom barreled with a Douglas barrel some time ago and has been a "starter rifle" for several of us! 

     If I were looking for an off-the-shelf starter rifle, I would indeed look at the Ruger #1 in some "normal" caliber, such as their .375, which is a modern version of the .38-55.  You might wish to go back and reexamine a couple of recent threads on gunsmiths and gunsmithing the #1.  I might also look at Uberti or Pedersoli replicas of the high-wall Winchester in that same .38-55, and at the CPA Stevens copies of the Model 44 1/2 in whatever caliber fit my needs best.   

     Your question about multi-use suggests that maybe a single rifle to do all things is in your mind, be aware that multi-use means compromise.  If you want to shoot BP cartridge events, I would maintain that anything under .38-55 will probably come up short for you, but then the big .40s can be downright brutal for long days of Schuetzen, so the .38 seems to fill in as an all-around caliber, not the very best at any one thing, but able to do a creditable job at a variety of things. 

     Finally, the word "inexpensive" means different things to different people.  If your budget is in the $500 range, one of the tip-up rifles built on shotgun type actions may be the only thing available.  In the $1000 range, we start seeing the rebarreled Rugers, Italian copies of 'walls, etc, and at about $2000 the selection broadens out considerably.  "You pays your money..." 

     Whatever you decide, welcome to the wonderful world of single shots, and whatever you pick for a rifle, there will be other folks there that made the same choice and like it, and others who will be bound and determined to "convert" you to some other choice... that's just the way we are!

Regards,
Charlie Shaeff
the Green Frog

PM me with your email address...I'll be glad to send photos of my No. 3 in 30-20 that's quite manageable from the bench, and very comfortable offhand, with no buttplate or buttstock changes.   

David
Montezuma, IA

Brozbows wrote on Jul 20^th, 2008 at 8:28pm:


I'll try to do some pics a day or two after I receive it. like Green Frog said and I agree, it's a compromise type rifle, not a full bolwn Bench Rifle, not a full blown offhand rifle, but it can be used for both and it's a lot better than what I had which was nothing. This will get me started and most of my shooting with it will be Bench.
Shooter

Hammer47 wrote on Jul 20^th, 2008 at 10:10pm:



Not a problem, the extractor and the ejector are the same thing on the # 1, it's spring loaded and will work with rimed or rimless cases. In fact if you do a 32-40 I think the 270 extractor will work just fine. For a 32-20 you may need a 218 Bee extractor.

I think there are only four different ones, and thoses four will work for anything from 22 Hornet up to 45-70, if you have to buy one they are about $ 5.00 from Ruger, at least they were last year, but the way things are going they may be $ 10.00 now.
  Shooter

Sharps 54 who post on this board has a nice already converted Ruger for sale.  32 Miller I think.  He moved up to a CPA

Boats

2 questions
how to get in touch with Sharps 54?
where to see the cpa rifles?

Someone mention my name?

The rifle Boats is referring to was sold to Shooter_1. He should be posting pics soon as it should have arrived today. Green Frog can tell you more about it then I can, I bought it and then came across a used CPA in .32-40 so I turned it around before I even had a chance to take it to the range.

Shooter,
Hate to hear that, they were dropped off at the UPS center at the same time.

Back on topic:
Probably the best bet for an "inexpensive" starter rifle is to watch the internet and more importantly go to matches. I found that Ruger at a match. I didn't have the money to buy it but luckily for me the gentleman that had it wanted my BSA International Mark 1 .22 so we traded. 

One thing you really need to do is try some of these rifles before you put your money down, they handle very different then anything else. I have found Schuetzen shooters to be very friendly and more then willing to talk about their rifles. Chances are they will also be willing to let you try a few shots to see how they handle. Another thing to do before buying is to pick up a copy of The Modern Schuetzen Rifle by Wayne Schwartz and Charlie Dell.    

Another idea is to pick up a BSA Martini .22, either an International or a 12/15 to start with. They are pretty cheap, great shooters, and easy to turn around. I think most if not all matches have rimfire competitions and .22 is inexpensive to shoot. That way you can still shoot a match while deciding how to go with the centerfire rifle.

Most if not all of the early high-wall actions were color case hardened.  I don't think redoing it is likely to weaken the action, although some have been warped in this way.  If the rifle in question is functional, you can eliminate that concern.

As for parts, I regard the 'walls about like hot rodders regard the '55 Chevy.  Parts may be expensive sometimes, but anything and everything is available for them if you are willing to look (and pay) enough for them.  Most "consumable" parts are available in reproduction pretty reasonably.

Froggie

I agree completely with Sharps54. The easiest, least expensive, and quite satisfying way to break into Schuetzen is to get a BSA International rifle (.22 rimfire). A good example will shoot competitively right out of the box. A number of models come with an interchangeable hook and flat buttplate and they are already set up for a palm rest. What could be easier? They are more expensive than when they first hit this country (when England, in effect, banned all guns to their citizens) but can still be had for reasonable prices.

You can then attend matches, shoot the .22 and compete at a competitive level, rub elbows with the centerfire shooters. THEN you will be more apt to make PROPER decisions on the type of centerfire you REALLY want.

FWIW
Dale53

Fred,
That's just some of the propaganda that has been handed to us by the NRA. They said the same thing about the down under guys. 
Shooter

Well, pardon me . I talked to a number of British citizens who were visiting Friendship for the NMLRA matches and they had to turn in EVERYTHING, even their bullet moulds. Now, I certainly do not know the details of the regulations, but the thousands of BSA Internationals that came into this country were here for some reason.

I didn't get my information from the NRA but from British citizens. May be someone can correct my impressions with some details.

Dale53

Quote:


I am really up ion the air about those questions.  I was thinking about a 30/20 but I understand that the 32/40 is superior to the 30/20.  Was explained to me that the bore diameter of the 32/40 is larger than the 32/20.  Sounds strange as hell to me that both 32's are of different bore diameter but the fellow that told me is an ASSRA member and a match director so I assume he is correct.  Bbl length is also a question since I plan to shoot mostly standing, tha ballance has to be correct.  Anyone want to hazzard an idea on bbl length and diameter?  This action is currently complete with a 22 Hornet bbl but 22 is not my choice for target.   
My club also has "buffalo shoots" but the min. cal is 38 which makes the 38/55 a choice however I fear that the increased recoil of the 38 will begin to tell over the course of a long event.
When it comes to breech seat or fixed ammo I will prolly opt for fixed ammo since in the case of standing shooting, the shooter is the weak link.  At least that is the case in my shooting.  Can a rifle be shot both as a breech seater and a fixed ammo eater?  Again my "expert" says in the case of the 32 Miller short that one cannot use it as a fixed ammo shooter and a breech seater due to the minimum ammount of bullet in the case mouth.
There are SO MANY things that are different in cast shooting that I am afraid it may be quite a while before I can make an educated decision on many criteria concerning the build of this rifle.
I am leaning toward a 30/20 as there are a gang of 30 cal lead bullets available and I have had great luck in the past in IHMSA silhouette shooting with the 30/20, in fact since I already have the dies and cases I will prolly opt for this and if I have made a mistake I will just use it for standers and build a dedicated "bench" shooter in the breech seated 32 Miller short.
Thanx for your consideration, I appreciate the help.

Thousands of BSA Martinis went to the USA because nobody wanted them. I used to be a member of an indoor .22 rifle club which, when I joined, was 100% BSA and when I moved away 20+ years later was 100% Anschutz except for a few club rifles. Scores did not change--just fashion. 
The rapid growth of interest in Historical shooting in the UK means that BSAs made before 1946 are now desirable and going up in price: but nobody wants the Internationals as yet.
We are not allowed to keep and shoot handguns which use metallic cartridges (since 1996). When the ban came in, some shooters handed in everything, because faily generous compensation was paid. Others just kept their reloading equipment and bought a rifle in the same calibre.
Before 1996, rifles chambered for pistol calibres like 357 mag were rare in the UK--now almost every shooter has at least one, usually with a 'scope stuck on it.
Fred.

Dale53: It is now 12 years since the handgun ban in the UK and I am still upset! Especially since handgun crime has increased by about 400% since the ban.
This is a small, highly populated country with massive international trade and a very long, virtually un-policed coastline. When something is banned, a market is created for criminals--it is possible to buy Russian or Chinese handguns illegally for far less than they would have cost us legally in the old days. Handgun crime is associated with drugs in the UK---they both have to be smuggled in. We are left with rifles and black powder pistols to shoot at targets and some strange guns by your standards:
Ruger .22s dominate but we are not allowed semi-auto calibres other than .22. As a result there are target versions of the M16 in use which are manually operated. Lever actions dominate in pistol calibres but if a box magazine is preferred you can buy a Lee Enfield no4 modified to use 9mm or 45ACP.
None of the complicated legislation has done any good---so don't criticise your NRA for maximising the propaganda---support them!
Fred.

I guess my methods are derived from my years of shooting original rifles. I never thought that one should alter the chamber of an original rifle and never had trouble getting an original shooting simply by designing the bullet to fit the existing barrel dimensions. I usually did that by designing base band bullets. Using these is like putting the "throat" in the bullet instead of the barrel. If you are dealing with a new barrel of course that is not a consideration. Maybe designing the throat to fit the bullet would make it easier to breech seat the bullet, but I never found the throat fitting bullet thing to be as critical as some would have you beleive. I guess I was also under the impression that you were going to shoot fixed ammo for offhand. If that is the case you would (with a new barrel) want to chamber and throat to fit your fixed ammo bullet, wouldn't you? I think you will find a bullet that will work for both uses, but you may want to have seperate bullets for fixed and breech seating.

Folks the Ruger #1 action (disregarding the barrel for a moment) is a quality product, both in design and materials.  The price is certainly realistic and not influenced by the hype factor that most, if not all, of the various reproductions of socalled "period correct" rifles  reflect in their price tags.  I think a newbie shooter needs to be aware that there exists a certain snob factor associated with much of the hardware being toted to the line, just as it was when Harry Pope went up to the line.

Why would we like to classifiy the Ruger #1 as a good "starter rifle" and a Steven 44 1/2 reproduction as something more than that ?  Why can't our experienced and tallented shooter be seen with a Ruger #1 in their hands ?

If you know what Frank de Hass had to say about the Ruger #1 after his detailed analysis of it's mechanics, perhaps more respect would be afforded to the efforts of Mr. Bill Ruger and what some might call his genius.  The Ruger folks did not "reproduce" anything.  They started with a drawing board, a clean sheet of paper, and an open mind.  Sure they had a certain knowledge of what would work and what wouldn't, but that is called experience.  All the rifles that we see from Italy and some USA products are mostly copies of someone else's work.

Let's give credit where credit is due.  Thanks guys.

The Ruger action IMO is far, far superior to almost any other action available to the average person. It's so far above the others that it's almost ludicrous to hear 'starter rifle' in a description. The only area where it gives up anything at all to some of the others is in lock time; its strength is phenomenal and its looks are gorgeous and its materials are first-rate and its design is superior and its price is almost a giveaway in comparison.

The problem is that it's TOO affordable!

Yes, the problem with the Ruger is that anyone can have one, and in the minds of some 'special' folks that is the kiss of death. After all, a special person needs a special rifle, right? And how special can it possibly be if so many others can have one too?

This is called Conspicuous Consumption. This term was first publicized around 100 years ago and I've forgotten the originator, but the condition is all too common and is recognizable to all of us. A 'special' (usually nouveau riche and gauche) person decides that all his friends need to be made aware of just exactly how special he really is, so he goes out and buys something unique for far too much money and then shows it off widely just to prove he's special. Usually accompanied by accounts of just exactly how much it cost and just exactly how much trouble it was.

Well, the Ruger doesn't cost much and is hardly any trouble at all, so you see it simply doesn't qualify as a special person's rifle!
Sadly, Joe

Joe,

I'll agree wholeheartedly with you - the #1 was conceptually started from the Farquharson, but was both modernized and the faults of the original action were eliminated.  It is strong, affordable, well-made.  Yet most people consider it 'too modern' and 'without history' This a quote when the subject came up on one of the BPCR sites...  What about that Farq heritage?  It is at least as much related to the Farq as the new Winchester Hiwall to the original one).   

It only has 3 minor points to be corrected:
- lock time (install speed hammer and new spring, although it will never be lightning-fast.  Then again, it won't be turtle-slow either)
- complexity (trashing all the safety-related workings gives a good start...  for a target rifle at least)
- Trigger (this one is simple - install either a Moyers, or the Kepplinger - 2 pounds is easy with the Moyers)

I'll let you know the 1st CF rifle I purchased was a #1.  And I am seriously thinking of building my new prone BPCR match rifle on this very action.  I do love my Martini's but they are hard to wipe between shots when one wishes to do so.

Maybe it's a typical US thing - you only realize what you had when it's gone...

Joe,
Any idea what the max barrel diameter is the #1 will accomodate without radical changes to the hanger?  I'm looking for the heaviest round barrel it will take, length 32",  without exceeding 13 pounds...

MartiniBelgian wrote on Jul 27^th, 2008 at 12:33pm:


MB & J.D. make some great points! We tend to get caught up in the idea of "keeping up with the Jones" and for whatever reason the Ruger does not seem to be favored. I traded my BSA for Ruger (I should have kept the BSA), then sold the Ruger to fund a CPA (should have kept the Ruger) which I will now be sending off to CPA for an overhaul, not to mention all the extras I will be buying. I did fine on my trade to get the Ruger but felt I would be happier with the CPA. Now that UPS has lost the Ruger neither Shooter_1 or myself will get to enjoy using it for Schuetzen.  
I DO like the CPA, in fact I love the look and feel of it! That said I think I would have been better off using the Ruger for a few years and then moving up if I still wanted to. Of course the Ruger I had was set up ready to go so I didn't have to worry about buying a breech loader, palm rest, hooked butt plate, set it up for sights, etc. If you are starting from scratch you may find the Ruger is not that much cheaper then a used rifle already set up. I still like the idea of starting with a .22 and I should have just used the BSA instead of being in a rush to get a center fire. Oh well, hind sight is 20/20, now I just need to stay the course.

Found a fella with a Ruger # 1 chambered in 38/55 and he tells me it is a factory rifle.  Is this the truth?  From the price he wants it should be a full custom with a built in microwave and hot and cold running women.  YIPES.  If this rifle is on the level what would be it's value in 100 percent condition?

At $2500 maybe it's got TWO microwaves.......

Well, perhaps only one!   

David
Montezuma, IA

TRADE one? 
heck no!

Have one helping with the loading bench, and one on bore cleaning duty... leaving the gentleman of leisure to maximize his trigger time 

Paul F.

Why do these discussions which begin with valid questions and resulting well intended experiences and information sometime degrade to become simple esoteric one liners which have no meaning and which are unrelated to the initial subject matter?

Perhaps we should consider a new and separate category titled "Nonsense", "Who Cares", or even "Street Talk" for those of us who have such urges ?  After all, the public is watching and we don't want to appear to be a crowd of babbling retards, now do we ?

Anyway, the bottom line is this, there are no starter rifles to begin with, only starter shooters.   See you on the line, Harry Jr.

Quote:


Now, let me see, where might I find such a person.......maybe masquerading as a crotchety curmudgeon perhaps?

The reason you see many threads morph into our sometimes lame attempts at humor is, usually, that the original topic has pretty well been exhausted by that time. However we don't necessarily want to stop communicating with our friends and so take the opportunity (provided by the slowdown of hard info), to continue the repartee.

We don't necessarily request your participation but we do request your tolerance.
Thank you for your support, Joe

Well Harry, let's just take a look here... I STARTED the thread so I guess I can take a "potshot" at it if I should please and I sure wouldn't begrudge anyone else taking a shot either.  Grins are where you find 'em and sometimes are in damned short supply.  As for the "beginning shooter" it is true I am new to ASSRA type shooting but in the last few years I have won 2 IHMSA International events and set 3 world's records.....What have you done lately?

Some folks just take themselves too--WAY--too seriously!     Nuttin' this online conversation did that wouldn't happen in the clubhouse after a match, except it got folks from all over the world involved in it...including our brief trip into the gutter!   

David
Montezuma, IA