Ruger #3 rifle in .223

[David LaPell]

I ran across a Ruger #3 rifle in .223 the other day, the gun is in excellent condition, I would put it at 95%, and it's wearing a Nikon Buckmaster 3-9 scope at the moment. The sights are there. The shop is asking $795 for the whole package. I don't know a lot about the Ruger #3 rifles, but it's a nice set up for varmints and small deer with heavier rounds, maybe for my son when he gets older. Is the gun worth the price?

 

[gewehrfreund]

That's sort of a loaded question; pardon the pun.

I'm not a great No. 3 fan, preferring the No.1 which, for only a little more money (or the same, in some cases) offers a lot more style, ergonomic sense and retained value (again my opinion).

That said, in a weak moment, I did buy a No. 3 in 223 a couple of years ago that had a Leupold 2-7 scope on it. My records indicate that I paid $675 for it. I sold the stock set and added some aftermarket wood that improved the looks and handling about 200%. I also recently bought a No. 3 Liberty gun (1976) in 22 Hornet, but I bought it for the caliber and for the fact that it had a set of No. 1B wood on it to include a non-prefix buttstock (oh, and a 3-9 Leupold scope )! Again, I had a nice set of custom wood for it, and now it is a dandy, beautiful walking around varmint rifle.

Depending on what the scope is worth on the one you saw, and how much you want a No. 3 in 223, it might be a "good buy" for you, especially if you can talk them down a little on the price.

 

[pisgah]

They're nifty little rifles. My main question, given your stated desire to use it as something of an "all-around" .223, would be the rifling twist. I don't know how the #3 was rifled, but it wouldn't surprise me if the twist rate were unsuitable for the heavier bullets. Someone else will likely know.

 

[kmoore]

x's 2 on the last post.

 

[dfletcher]

That's sort of a loaded question; pardon the pun.

I'm not a great No. 3 fan, preferring the No.1 which, for only a little more money (or the same, in some cases) offers a lot more style, ergonomic sense and retained value (again my opinion).

That said, in a weak moment, I did buy a No. 3 in 223 a couple of years ago that had a Leupold 2-7 scope on it. My records indicate that I paid $675 for it. I sold the stock set and added some aftermarket wood that improved the looks and handling about 200%. I also recently bought a No. 3 Liberty gun (1976) in 22 Hornet, but I bought it for the caliber and for the fact that it had a set of No. 1B wood on it to include a non-prefix buttstock (oh, and a 3-9 Leupold scope )! Again, I had a nice set of custom wood for it, and now it is a dandy, beautiful walking around varmint rifle.

Depending on what the scope is worth on the one you saw, and how much you want a No. 3 in 223, it might be a "good buy" for you, especially if you can talk them down a little on the price.

My most recent No3 was a couple of years back and about $495.00 in excellent condition. No scope.

 

[trapperon]

David

I picked up a nice 223 No. 3 about a year ago and happily paid $800 for it. Grea shape and no scope. The thing about these is you just dont see them very often for sale. I have been shooting open sights with milsurp 55 grainers with great success. they do have the slower twist, as when they were produced that was basically all that was available and the military had not gone to the heavier loads yet.

Many think this platform/caliber combo is a bad match--too big for the 223 and I used to feel that way too. I have grown to appreciate it and the standard barrel contour with the 223 makes it perform like a heavy barrel contributing to accuracy.

With all the plastic throw away stuff that fills the gun shops these days, I love my Ruger single shots more than ever!

I would give it a try!

Ron

 

[picketpin]

I have to admit it's as much a cosmetic thing as anything else. I've just never liked the look and frankly not being a rimmed cartridge enthousiast none really were something I wanted to work with ballistically. Add to that, for not a lot more you could get a #1 and with luck great wood.

I hadn't really handled one till I bought a 22Hornet CHEAP from a guy. in the early 80s.

The only mechanical/engineering difference between a #3 and a #1 is how and where it locks up. A number #3 utilizes the lever itself latching into the trigger guard to secure the breach block in battery The #3 having a completely lever locks in the front interior with a spring loaded strut that seats in a detent.

The only issue I have ever had with hunting with a #1 is inadvertently unlatching the lever and ending up with an empty chamber!! This exacerbated by what I usually wear, a long sleeve wool shirt and a down vest in most hunting conditions. Carried on a sling the lever inadvertently catches on the pocket (lots) It's easily solved by simply putting a rubber band around the stock securing the lever closed.

In looking at the first #3 I owned I started making hunting rifles as #2s. The #3 action with #1 wood and barrels. At first I just had the #3 levr modified to fit the pistol grip #1 stock. Hiowever the last three have been modified to be straight wristed with the lever fitting flat against the stock then turned to a half circle about the size of nickle fitted with a walnut wood lozenge like a lot of the old Winchesters in the MIdas boo. It doesn't hang up on my pocket, release the lever and it is after all a single shot and I can operate it at least as fast as I can a #1 for a second shot.

For years you could find them for under $600 but those days seem to be behind us. ;-)

Worst case of scope eye I ever saw was a friends younger brother that rechambered his #3 in 375 Winto 375 H&H. "For a light quick handling elk rifle". He, his brother and I were headed out elk hunting . Prior to the trip we went to the range. I fired the #1 ONCE and felt the scope just touch my eye brow. I suggested to Kev he might want a scope with a bit more eye relief. Then I left to finish packing. That night his brother called me and insisted I take Kev to lunch. I called him at his office the next morning and brow beat him into going to lunch.
When he walked in he had the worse black eye you've ever seen.Complete with 14 stitches in his brow and 6 in his nose.

I bought it from him real cheap and made it into a #2 in 257 AI.

Nothing wrong wiith them but other than the actual method of latching has caused me to buy them. I have five #2s. ;-)

If you like the look it will certainly handle the smaller stuff it's chambered in but the few guys I know that have 45-70s and 375 Wins shoot reduced loads. An "A" 3! in 223 can't really weigh all that much more??

RWT

 

[azleite]

David, I picked up a #3 in .223 about a year and a half ago for $650.00 otd with just scope mounts on it. I found a glossy blued Bushnell Banner scope (1.5-4x20) over on RFC nib. Looks great-shoots great & not leaving my collection. Great for grandkids. Mine shoots 60 grn. V-maxes over Varget pretty darn good. These guns in original condition are getting rare-Dave

 

[trapperon]

David

Are you the new owner??!!

Ron

 

[Buckeye Bill]

I also came across one 4 months ago at a local shop. Sounds like about the same condition as the one you are looking at. Dealer was asking $850 and I offered $750. They would not deal with me. I later saw it on their auction site and it sold for $765. Auction fees and tax would have put it well over what I was willing to pay. Twist rate would not bother me. So much plastic and tactical stuff on the market that the Number 3 appealed to me. Price was major draw back for me. At that price, I have found Number 1's on occasion. Rather hold out for my true love.

Bill