Source criticism may shed some light on this question. If the documentary hypothesis is correct, then Numbers was written long after the story of Samson occurred.
This begs the question as to whether Samson could have known the Nazirite rules as expressed in Numbers. Of course the Nazirite tradition probably predated the supposed late date for Numbers, but if so, we don't know much about what it entailed. From this perspective we might want to consider Samson's story as representing a developmental stage in the Nazirite tradition that eventually found expression in Numbers, centuries after the story takes place.
So no, the rules in Numbers don't necessarily apply to Samson, but Samson's story may have contributed to the rules in Numbers.
Let me add that if Samson was a formal Nazirite, he was a very poor one. Not only did he go near dead bodies and allow his hair to be cut, he committed violence, married a foreign woman, failed to honor his father and mother, and committed fornication. Did he redeem himself by causing the deaths of many Philistines in the temple? Or is the story in Judges meant to provide us with an object lesson in how not to be a true judge and Nazirite?