I don't think anyone should be blaming Ruger on this one. The owner said it has been rebarrelled and restocked and that it is a lightweight barrel. In my experience minute of deer is not as demanding as a benchrest target rifle. One must be careful what one wishes for.

Having owned many No 1s, I have had some that shot exremely well, and some that were sorely lacking. I have also tried all sorts of fixes, but again, some helped and some did not. I ultimately found that the best way was to replace the barrel. Ruger outsourced their barrels for a long time, and I feel that was one of the reasons some did not shoot well. The first I owned was shortly after they first came out. It was a beautiful rifle, which is the reason I was attracted to them in the first place, also because they were single shots. That rifle was more than accurate for antelope hunting, which is the purpose I bought it for. It was a heavy barreled 25-06. When I switched to using a 38-55 highwall for antelope hunting I put the No.1 away. After buying more Rugers I had the same acurracy issues that lots of folks were having. About thirty or more years ago, I pulled the 25-06 out, and decided to rebarrel it to 219 wasp. It had shot well enough for antelope, but after the new barrel it shot consistent half inch groups, which is what I was hoping for, to use as a Rockchuck rifle. Not knowing if the barrel alone was responsible for the better accuracy, I rebarreled a few others that had not shot as well as I would like,even after trying all sorts of remedies. These barrels were top makers barrels, Shilen, krieger, and Lilja. All were vast improvements. Fitting a new barrel these days is an expensive proposition, even if you can do the labor youself, most really good barrels are in the three to four hundred dollar range for a match grade tube. I do have one fairly new No. 1, and it is a 22-250 that shoots very well. It may or may not have something to do with the fact Ruger is now making their own hammer forged barrels in house. I would be very curious to know how other new ones are shooting. And no, I won't use the 22-250 for deer hunting. That is my choosing, from experience in the field!

The easiest solution is to remove all that crap under the forearm and to replace it with a simple flat spring similar to those on a HiWall and problem solved. But no one really wants to solve the problem or listen to the fixes that have worked for others as it would end the conversation as it's doubtful anyone is going to run out and buy a rifle to try anything thats been mentioned.

Wow what a dissertation!
Yes I will load my own ammo, this was my first chance to shoot it, with the ammo that came out of the estate with the rifle
No the barrel is not standard, neither is the stock
Yes it was put together by a REAL gunsmith, can’t believe he would have tolerated these groups
And yes my .22 hornet no.1 shoots beautifully
And for the record, the military would rather wound an enemy so two soldiers have to carry him off the battlefield, of curse that doesn’t work with those bastard radical isis guys

Wow
Jerry

MartiniBelgian wrote on Oct 9^th, 2018 at 3:27am:

^yep.
Not to mention all the $$$, minutia and accoutrements that Schuetzen, etc. types here go through to get their rifles to shoot their best.

There's a lot of arrogance and ignorance in the shooting world, just like the rest of the world; some disciplines more than others.

Didn't production of the Ruger #1 and the Ruger M77 start within a year or two of one another?
Wonder if some of the barrel blanks that Ruger used for production that shooters had problems with ended up being used in both lines?

It's true they were never meant to be target rifles, but who doesn't want to get the most in accuracy out of any given rifle?
Bill Ruger would bristle at some of our expectations, reminding us in brusque terms that these were designed for hunters.

It's also true that up to "about" 1971", they were using Douglas premium barrels. When Douglas couldn't provide the numbers needed, they went to Wilson (a Connecticut company, I believe). Some Wilson barrels were less than perfect, but most were just fine. In 1993, Ruger started making their own hammer forged barrels and by all accounts, they are excellent and accurate.
Here is the first 3-shot group at 100yds (with a 6X scope) with a used light barreled 222 Rem. #1A made a few years ago and using Rem. department store 50gr. SP ammunition.
One group does not an average make, still . . . . .