No.1Rant

[trauma1]

Is anyone else tired of the over-inflated prices for used No. 1's? Or is it just me? While there may a demand from a limited amount of the population it does not seem to support the prices being proposed on these firearms. I am talking about those on this forum and other popular firearm website's. Must be why they are still for sale. Anyway, I feel better.

 

[wunbe]

trauma1,

"Over-inflated prices for used Ruger #1s"?

How could the used prices not go up when the factory is not making them anymore in most of the standard calibers and the MSRP on new ones ordered by Lipseys is nearly $1500 now? Do you really expect the used prices to stay stable? The upward glide is only going to get worse as soon the MSRP will be marching towards $2000. I'm sitting on a bunch of them.

The only major mystery in the price issue is why Ruger has done nothing at all to improve on specific design flaws unique to the the original #1 since its inception -- just raised prices every year.

wunbe

 

[Kevin]

I don't have a No. 1...wish I did. But what are the specific design flaws in them?

 

[gtxmonte]

Is anyone else tired of the over-inflated prices for used No. 1's? Or is it just me? While there may a demand from a limited amount of the population it does not seem to support the prices being proposed on these firearms. I am talking about those on this forum and other popular firearm website's. Must be why they are still for sale. Anyway, I feel better.

What price range is it that you feel is "over-inflated" for a nice used Number 1. Few of these rifles seemed to have been beaten thru the woods very much and many used ones appear good as new. So what is it that you feel would be a "fair" price for a used one

 

[RSIno1]

I'm sitting on 4 of them all 98%. Didn't pay through the nose for them either. 3 are red pads. I'm looking at getting a 5th one it's only 90% and I'll end up with $500 in it once I deduct the value of the scope and ammo that comes with it. The deals are there if you shop. Would I part with them for as cheap as I got them? You better believe I wouldn't since they all have nicer wood than you get today.

 

[gtxmonte]

I don't have a bunch like wunbe, but I do have 12 of them, all red pads, bought new by me or my dad over the years. Wonder if they will ever be worth enough for me to retire.......LOL!!!

 

[toysoldier]

Unlike used cars, quality used guns DO NOT lose value. Even the cheap Chinese SKS rifles that could be purchased for $125 twenty years ago are now going for $300. In 1969, I gave $70 for a new Marlin 39. It's now worth at least $400. I passed on a like-new, in-the-box Hawkeye for the same price. What's one of those worth now?

 

[picketpin]

Wunbe: What do you consider design faults??

Trauma: The over inflated ones simply do not sell. It's a damned small niche market. You can still buy most commons even back to the non prefix era for under $1200 unless it's especially nice. Used 98% rifles in common calibers and configurations are routinely being sold for $850 or less and often with Leupolds on them, so all o sudden it's a $750 rifle.

Yes, the days of the common $350 and probably even $550 used #1 for a parts gun are probably gone.

On the other hand I JUST bought a 131 serialed 22-250 "V" with a 3 screw trigger and very good wood that appears unfired for $650. I plan on punching it to 22-250 AI and shooting ground squirrels. 7 mags and 300s of no particular rarity are still $850 rifles most of the time. It's probably less than they sold for new.

A guy asking $100+ for a 270 is on the other hand, probably a BIT ahead of demand.

My first one was $285 NIB in 1967. On the other hand most of us #1 nuts have probably paid a whole bunch for the wood on a rifle with no care at all for caliber, configuration or actual rarity.

I have more than 1 and less than 100 spread from 1967 through 2014 when they shipped me a 264 Win Mag "S" in exchange for a 7mm Mag "V" they couldn't fix. The 264 is way more rare as an "S" than the 7mm Mag is as a "V"

If a person is going to be in the #1 market it behooves them to be knowledgeable. There are truly rare #1s though even those are inexpensive when compared to other stuff. With 2 to 4 million guys chasing Winchester levers that's where I see over inflated prices.

The #1 niche is simply way to small to support outrageous prices. Heck I've personally never seen even one of one NIB box prototypes go for more than $6500. I bowed out at $4K.

Last week I paid $1275 for a 222 non prefix AB that's probably one of 25-30 made and consider most #1s a bargain.

Just don't buy those that you perceive as overpriced.

Value is relative. I have the only known non prefix 257 Roberts "B" it's my annoy Bill Sr for 5 years rifle. What's it worth? Zero, because it'll never hit the market.

Ross

 

[wunbe]

My top of the head short list of #1 flaws would include:

-- positioning of scope rings that is appropriate for the longer scope designs of the 1960s but incompatible with many/most? more compact modern scopes.
-- junk iron sights that are difficult to adjust and not suitable for low light/dark background shooting.
-- little or no sealing of the wood.
-- wafer recoil pads on the heavier kicking calibers.
-- high profile safety nobs that catch and hold ejected cases on the longer cased, larger, rounds.
-- the unsupported hanger which vibrates erratically from the barrel thereby often making reliable precision shooting dependent on reloading experimentation.

With five decades since introduction and regular MSRP hikes these fixable problems -- many are fixed in the aftermarket -- should have been resolved long ago.

By the way, I have a longer list of things I really like about the #1 but that is not the topic at hand.

wunbe

 

[Cooperhawk]

I loooove my number one. I will not find fault with it or sell it cheaply. Say what you want. :roll: