In Today's World, Are Single-Shot Rifles Still Practical?

The latter end of the 19th Century was the golden age of big single-shot rifles. The bolt-action wasn’t yet perfected and lever-actions capable of housing large cartridges were scarce and costly. The single-shot was more accurate and stronger. Big single shots—Remington rolling blocks, Sharps, Winchester high walls—were premier hunting rifles. Then they died away.

When Bill Ruger introduced his No. 1 falling-block single-shot in 1966, no American centerfire single-shot had been produced for 30 years. Many were skeptical. One well-respected scribe opined that hunting with a single-shot was unethical. Bill Ruger was not amused.

The No. 1 has always been a premium product, often the costliest, always gorgeous. They have never made large numbers, in recent years few. As he often was, Bill Ruger was right: Many Americans appreciate the clean, smooth lines of the Ruger No. 1. Perhaps more appreciated was its message: “One shot, one animal."

Thompson/Center introduced their Contender break-open action just a year later, first as a “specialty pistol,” later carbine and rifle, still later the Encore, all with a myriad of barrel options. In time, Browning/Winchester would bring back the M1885 (both high-wall and low-wall). There would be numerous reproductions of classic single-shots, inexpensive break-opens like H&R’s Handi-Gun, plus high-end single-shots like Dakota’s M10.

Caveats

With practice, a single-shot can be reloaded quickly. But never so quickly as any repeating action. With a single-shot, you can only count on one shot, and sometimes that is not enough. Even if you’re certain your first shot is well-placed, it’s impossible to be sure (or know how your bullet performed) until you’re standing over the animal.

So, whether essential or not, if an animal isn’t DRT (Down Right There), we endeavor to fire again. Regardless of action type, sometimes additional shots aren’t possible: The animal dashes into cover too quickly or other animals get in the way. Other times, we have all the time in the world. You can’t count on that with a single-shot.

All you can rely on is that one shot. To me, there is nothing unethical about it. The magic of hunting with a single-shot is you know this. That knowledge tends to make you extra-careful with that one shot. Even with utmost care, sometimes it isn’t enough; you reload as fast as you can and let the chips fall.

Dad and I got our first Ruger No. 1 in about 1968, a .243, and have had many since then. Most of my single-shot hunting experience is with No. 1s, but I’ve also hunted with break-opens (mostly T/Cs) and I have a beautiful Dakota M10 7x57. In my experience the No. 1 is the fastest single-shot to reload. While most single-shot actions only extract a fired case (meaning it must then be manually plucked from the chamber), the No. 1 has a strong ejector that throws the case clear. With the lever down, the chamber is well-exposed, easy to throw a cartridge into. Fast, but no single-shot is fast enough under all circumstances.

Experiences

Over the years, I’ve hunted with single-shots in Africa, Australia, Europe, and North America. In now 60 years of hunting big game, I have lost a few animals. Hunt enough and this tragedy will happen. I can honestly say that I have never lost an animal when I carried a single-shot.

To some extent, this is luck. Not all my animals taken with single-shots dropped to that one shot. Most did, as is most common with all action types, but there have been occasions when there was time to reload and fire again. Others when the animal dropped to the shot and stayed put. Reload and watch; there’s no reason to shoot again. More occasions happen when things went too fast for a second shot. The animal got behind cover or terrain and went out of sight.

This is much the same with any action type. You feel good about the shot, you are hopeful, but can’t be certain what happened. You wait, the length of time depending on confidence level. Then you make your way to where the animal was last seen, look for blood. You ensure the rifle is loaded, safety on, then you proceed slowly, simultaneously staying on the trail and looking ahead. With a single-shot—or anything else—most of the time the animal is found dead, and you can breathe a sigh of relief. If not, you continue and stay ready. The only difference with a single-shot: Now you have just one certain follow-up shot. Best be extra-careful.

I’ve done at least some hunting of just about any type with a single-shot. Nothing I can think of that it’s wildly unsuited to, and the mental advantage of that one shot must not be underestimated. That said, there are some situations where the single-shot is more awkward. With a repeater, one can have the chamber empty, thus the rifle safe, loaded magazine in reserve. The single-shot is either fully loaded or fully empty. It isn’t legal in all jurisdictions to have a loaded magazine in a vehicle, but it is legal in many places. With a single-shot, bumping around in a 4x4, on a snow machine, mountain bike, whatever, the single-shot must be empty. It’s an extra step to unlimber, grab the rifle and fumble for a cartridge.

Considerations

Single-shot rifles are probably the most awkward on horseback hunts. The flat profile of a single-shot is wonderful in a saddle scabbard, like a lever-action. However, when you dismount, you have the reins, creating an extra step to load a cartridge. With a repeater, just work the action and you are ready. Whether wrist-band or belt slide, single-shot users quickly learn a system for keeping a cartridge handy. Buried deep in a pocket simply isn’t accessible enough.

Dangerous game requires discussion. I have hunted elephant, hippo, leopard, and various large bovines with single-shots. None of the big bears. Of them all, I would be most reluctant to hunt brown, grizzly, or polar bear with a single-shot. Because, in my experience, the bigger the bear, the tougher. One shot is often not enough.

There is an important caveat to this discussion: I am rarely hunting any of these animals alone. Almost always another rifle is present. If I were an African PH or Alaskan guide responsible for the party’s safety, I would not choose a single-shot. Equally, and for obvious common-sense reasons, if I were a resident African hunter pursuing dangerous game alone, I would not choose a single-shot. Likewise, if I were a Canadian or Alaskan resident, hunting big bears alone, I would not choose a single-shot.

I have no problem hunting big animals with a single-shot, but there are times when additional shots are called for. When a dangerous animal is hit and moving rapidly toward cover a judgment call must be made. A double, repeater, or second rifle can solve the problem before potential hazards become reality. With a single-shot, no one is fast enough all the time. So, on Big Nasties, using a single-shot invites collaboration from a guide or companion that might not have been necessary. You can’t know until you come up on the animal and learn where that first shot struck and how the bullet performed.

So, if you choose a single-shot for dangerous game, you are inviting backup shots that might not have been necessary. I suppose I’ve shot a dozen Cape and Asiatic water buffaloes with single-shots. Only once has my guide fired. Post-mortem suggested his shot wasn’t necessary, but it was close and thick. In my view, he made a good call. It didn’t bother me that he put an extra bullet in my buffalo. If that concept bothers you, then don’t choose a single-shot for dangerous game.

---