Ruger No1 .44 Magnum project
- Thread starter hoobens
- Start date
mxsailor803
New member
That would be a awesome little setup.
Pathfinder45
New member
If you have a fast enough twist for 300 grain bullets, it would still be good for the 240's. Don't go for a slower twist.
Jack O'Conner
New member
My RUGER 96 has 1:20 twist and shoots like a varmint rifle with Leverevolution ammo by Hornady.
Jack
Jack
johnwilliamson062
Moderator
Go with the 445 Super Magnum!
What caliber rifle are you starting with? Would it matter with a number one since there is no bolt face?
What caliber rifle are you starting with? Would it matter with a number one since there is no bolt face?
A point to consider, what will be the overall length of the rifle when finished with the 20" barrel?
The No.1 with a 22" barrel is pretty short, and while a 20" would be fine for use, you need to make sure you aren't running up against any laws about overall length.
Include a good look at your state laws (if any). I know one state which has a barrel length limit and where shorter barrels are legal if they were factory produced that way. The same length barrel installed as a rebarrel by a gunsmith is not legal.
Be certain your state doesn't have something idiotic like this about barrels or total length. Federal laws apply as well, of course, and while I don't think you would be anywhere near their limits, you should check BEFORE building it.
The entire tragedy of Ruby Ridge began with a shotgun that had a legal length barrel and a buttstock that was 1/4" too short to meet the legal overall length.
It's a legal trap that is easy to avoid, IF you know it is there. A few minutes research and tape measure will tell you if you need be concerned or not.
Another way to get almost the same thing is to find one of the No.3 rifles in .44 Magnum. Not as cheap as rebarreling a No.1 you already have, but cheaper than buying a No.1 and rebarrelling it, I would think.
Plus (if it matters) the No.3 will be lighter!
The No.1 with a 22" barrel is pretty short, and while a 20" would be fine for use, you need to make sure you aren't running up against any laws about overall length.
Include a good look at your state laws (if any). I know one state which has a barrel length limit and where shorter barrels are legal if they were factory produced that way. The same length barrel installed as a rebarrel by a gunsmith is not legal.
Be certain your state doesn't have something idiotic like this about barrels or total length. Federal laws apply as well, of course, and while I don't think you would be anywhere near their limits, you should check BEFORE building it.
The entire tragedy of Ruby Ridge began with a shotgun that had a legal length barrel and a buttstock that was 1/4" too short to meet the legal overall length.
It's a legal trap that is easy to avoid, IF you know it is there. A few minutes research and tape measure will tell you if you need be concerned or not.
Another way to get almost the same thing is to find one of the No.3 rifles in .44 Magnum. Not as cheap as rebarreling a No.1 you already have, but cheaper than buying a No.1 and rebarrelling it, I would think.
Plus (if it matters) the No.3 will be lighter!
bamaranger
New member
don't go slow
Hello hoobens. I've looked at this .44 twist rate regards my carbines and have a firm opinion on the matter. Don't go with a 1-38" twist.
The early Ruger .44 Carbines were so rifled,and their reputation for acccuracy was so-so. The Win '94 and the Marlin 1894 as well. Note too that all the .44 Mag revovlers of the same era were twisted 1-18" to 1-20" (from memory)....there were no .44 mag revovlers with the slow twist. None, ever. I've read, and my two early Ruger carbines, and my Dad's Win '94 support the story, that a good .44 revolver could outgroup a Ruger/Win carbine on occasion, and we found that to be true. Yes the revolver was harder to shoot well, but off bags, with a pistol scope, a good M29 or Super B could run with the carbines of the day, shot for shot.
Proof of all that, I believe, is that when Ruger reintroduced the .44 carbine as the Deerfield 99/44 (?) and the lever 96/44, they went with the faster 1-20" twist like on their revolvers. That firmed up accuracy with the "standard" 240 gr loads, and allowed the use of the heavier loads 265 and 300 or more, as well. My 1-38" carbines will not shoot those heavy slugs worth a hoot BTW.
Were I to build a custom .44 carbine as you suggest, I would not roll the dice with the slow twist. There's nothing to be gained with a slow twist, and a chance that it may not do the job with certain loads, likely depending on velocity. I'd go 1-20" or so, as near all revolvers as done. That faster twist will certainly stabilize the standard 240 gr, and allow heavier slugs if you want.
Hello hoobens. I've looked at this .44 twist rate regards my carbines and have a firm opinion on the matter. Don't go with a 1-38" twist.
The early Ruger .44 Carbines were so rifled,and their reputation for acccuracy was so-so. The Win '94 and the Marlin 1894 as well. Note too that all the .44 Mag revovlers of the same era were twisted 1-18" to 1-20" (from memory)....there were no .44 mag revovlers with the slow twist. None, ever. I've read, and my two early Ruger carbines, and my Dad's Win '94 support the story, that a good .44 revolver could outgroup a Ruger/Win carbine on occasion, and we found that to be true. Yes the revolver was harder to shoot well, but off bags, with a pistol scope, a good M29 or Super B could run with the carbines of the day, shot for shot.
Proof of all that, I believe, is that when Ruger reintroduced the .44 carbine as the Deerfield 99/44 (?) and the lever 96/44, they went with the faster 1-20" twist like on their revolvers. That firmed up accuracy with the "standard" 240 gr loads, and allowed the use of the heavier loads 265 and 300 or more, as well. My 1-38" carbines will not shoot those heavy slugs worth a hoot BTW.
Were I to build a custom .44 carbine as you suggest, I would not roll the dice with the slow twist. There's nothing to be gained with a slow twist, and a chance that it may not do the job with certain loads, likely depending on velocity. I'd go 1-20" or so, as near all revolvers as done. That faster twist will certainly stabilize the standard 240 gr, and allow heavier slugs if you want.
bamaranger
New member
BTW
Oh yeah, one of my bucket list rifles is a Ruger No. 3, in .44 mag.
Oh yeah, one of my bucket list rifles is a Ruger No. 3, in .44 mag.