1959 Ruger single Six

Status
Not open for further replies.

buckeyefan

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2006
Messages
5
Hey guys great site. I purchased ($135.00) a single-six .22 cal. today at the PRO gun show here in Columbus. The guy I bought it from does not know it's history. According to ruger, the serial no. shows a 1959 mfg. date (124***). On the side it states that it is a ".22 cal." Does anyone know if this model was designed to accept a .22 mag. cylinder/rounds? Or, does the .22 mag version actually say on the gun that it is designed for the mag. round. Also, it has target sights and what seems to be a really wide trigger (wider than the trigger guard itself) would these be after market pieces? Any help would be appreciated.
Thanx
 
Hi Buckeye Fan...

It is not able to shoot the 22 Mag. The Rugers that shoot both 22 and 22 mag do so by using two different cylinders. Such models were referred to by Ruger as "convertibles".

The target sights are probably factory. There were some Single-Sixes made with adjustable rear sights before they started referring to that model as the "Super Single-Six". The trigger sounds like an after-market gig.
Methinks you got a very good deal even with the "irregularities".
Thumbs up, Dude!

I was at that same show this afternoon. Bought a Bicentennial Ruger Old Army .44 stainless, adjustable rear sights, rosewood grips and complete with box/papers/wrench/warranty card and appearing in absolute mint condition.
Had to pay $375 but it's a gem. Oh well. I suppese I can't steal all of 'em. :)
 
Wait a sec, if his is a dedicated .22LR, wouldn't it be way more accurate than the convertible .22 Single Sixes?

From what I understand, the convertible .22LR/.22Mag SS has a slightly oversize bore, since .22Mag fires a bullet just a hair wider than the LR. Thus, the .22Mag gets great accuracy, and the .22LR middling.

But if this guy's bore is proper for a .22LR, then it'll be more accurate than a convertible, right?

Hey guys great site. I STOLE (at a measly $135.00, the cost of a dozen Wal-Mart DVDs) a single-six .22 cal.

Fixed it for ya! (grin)

-MV
 
Hi Matt...

I think you may be confusing the 22 Mag (WMR) with the old 22 WRF (see the CCI site).
Fact is, if buckeyefan's new gun had the non-adjustable rear sights found on most single-sixes, the accuracy advantage would fall to the SSS6 - but even then it would take a very excellent shooter to make it show. That's because, beyond sighting equipment, factors like trigger pull and that long (relatively) single-action hammerfall will affect accuracy in any 22 single-action more than anything else. :)
 
1959 single six

Thanx Matt and Shawnee, great info. Just wanted to let you know that the rear sight is fully adjustable for W&E, there is an adjustment screw on top and a screw on the side of the rear sight with the word "micro" written in italics next to the top screw, it has a tall front target sight as well. Like I said, the only thing on the side is "Ruger .22 cal." no mention of magnum or not. I wonder, why did this man feel compelled to tell me 3 or 4 times about the "4 click trigger". Is that something else I should take note of?????

Thanx again guys!!!!
Brett
 
Hi Buckeyefan...

You bet! Methinks you would do well to take it to a gunsmith and ask him to take it apart and assess the trigger situation so you'll know/understand what you've really got there.It may be just fine - even real fine, but if it is "other", you definitely want to know about it.

Would be interested in hearing what you learn about it. Good luck! :)
 
I wonder, why did this man feel compelled to tell me 3 or 4 times about the "4 click trigger"

You're sure he didn't mean "4 click hammer"? The older Rugers had four "clicks" as the hammer was drawn back, and loaded from the half-cock. Overall somewhat similar to a Colt.

The newer Rugers are loaded with the hammer completely down, and have no half cock, so sound different when cocked.


@ Shawnee

think you may be confusing the 22 Mag (WMR) with the old 22 WRF (see the CCI site).

I'm pretty sure I'm clear on the difference: the WRM is the lengthened version of the WRF, right? And both of them propel a bullet slightly larger in diameter than the .22 S/L/LR, right? I was reasonably sure about that, but might have missed something.

-MV
 
Hi Buckeyefan & Matt...


To answer part of your question, Matt... the WRF is an old cartridge from the early 1900s and it ruled the 22 rimfire roost until 1960 when the WMR was brought out - the WMR being a couple hundred fps faster. I bought a WMR rifle in 1963 if I recall correctly.
While both the WRF and WMR were longer and had heavier/longer bullets than the 22 LR, I have never heard or read that their bullet diameter was larger, and I don't believe they are because somewhere in the boatload of firearms reading I've done I would have come across that fact. What is the source of your info that says the dia. is different, Matt?

Here is a link with a good discussion of the WMR...

http://www.handgunsmag.com/ammunition/wmr_072804/

:)
 
Oi Shawnee:

I'm looking a few different places, and getting some mixed info on this. Some say that WMR is .224 "like the .22 centerfires", but don't compare it to the .22LR directly. This seems to square with my understanding, as I also always hear that .22LR chamber adaptors aren't so hot in .22 centerfire bores, not just because of twist rate, but also bullet diameter.

This comes up on THR all the time, here's a sample post:

The bore diameter of a .22RF is generally around .222 and the chamber about .225", not to mention the headspace difference between .22RF and .22WMRF.

For less trouble, you could just pick up a used Ruger Single Six with a .22 Mag cylinder. Bore is about .224 on these so mag ammo is ok but accuracy suffers with .22RF

Might need to post this one as its own thread, and see if we can get someone to weigh in. Heck, I'll go do it now.

-MV
 
Hi Matt...

Better idea. I just sent an email to Winchester asking about the bullet diameters. If they don't know, nobody does. :D
Their auto-response said they would get back to me within 2 business days.
Meanwhile, let's pick up some cheap rum and go a'wenching! :what:
 
22 short, long and long rifle rimfires all use bullets that are nominally .223" for a .222" bore - that's why the 22 Jet cartridges uses .222" bullets, so the S&W Model 53 could be very accurate whether shooting 22 Jet jacketed bullets or using the inserts or a second cylinder to shoot 22 LR with the soft swaged lead bullet.

22 WMR does use a .224" bullet that have a very thin or plated jacket for a .224" bore - which is why S&W refused to make a second cylinder in 22 WMR for the 22 LR guns (Model 17, 34, 43, 63 etc), but used to make a second 22LR cylinder for the 22WMR guns (Model 48, 51, 651 etc).

Look in Cartridges of the World or other reference book that gives the dimensions of the rimfire cartridges, it's kind of amazing how many 22 rimfires there are and how the bullets change diameter from .222 through .223 to .224 - and my copy doesn't even list the 22 S&W. It's a 22 long rimfire clone that was only loaded with smokeless powder around the turn of the century for the very small M-frame 22 ladysmith 7 shot revolver. Everything about this revolver as so small that S&W didn't want black powder loads (that were still available in 22 long) used in it because the revolver's clearances couldn't handle the fouling produced.

A 1959 Ruger Single Six would not be a convertable model, and Ruger won't fit a second 22 WMR cylinder to one either. That's not to say that you could get a second 22 WMR cylinder off ebay etc that might just drop into your gun and start shooting 22 WMR, or re-chamber your existing 22 LR cylinder to 22 WMR. The forcing cone will accept a .224" bullet and swage it down to fit the barrel with no problems if everything lines up well; if the chamber is a little of center to the bore you'll get spitting out of the barrel/cylinder gap.
 
Last edited:
Hi CM, Matt & Buckeye...

Interesting facts/history there, CM, and thanks for digging it up and posting! I'll post whatever Winchester says if/when they get back to me.
Even if there is a .001" difference in bore diameter between the single-sixes and the "convertibles" - it seems to me that can't be enough to effect a significant, or even noticable, difference in accuracy unless the gun is shot indoors and in a machine rest, and I think, probably not even then. I don't claim to be the sharpest knife in the drawer but I simply can't see an actual shooter under actual shooting conditions ever being able to see a difference due to a nominal .001" in bore diameter. Speaking only for myself, that sounds mostly like academic hairsplitting. There are just too many other factors and variables, including shooter-based factors, that have major effects on the accuracy for me to ever worry about a nominal .001" worth of bore diameter.:rolleyes:
Let's talk Buckeyefan into posting a couple of his targets on here so we can see what we're talkin' 'bout. :) And Hey Buckeye, I meant to ask about the trigger which you mentioned is wider than the guard - maybe there is a trigger shoe on it and it just isn't real obvious that it's a shoe?????

Local opinions may vary. :D
 
Last edited:
Hi BuckeyeFan, et al...

As promised, I emailed Winchester asking if the diameter of the bullets they use to manufacture 22 Magnums (WMR) is different from the bullets they use to make .22 long rifles. Here is their brief response...

"From: [email protected] Add to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
To: [email protected]
Subject: Winchester
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 08:37:43 -0500
Thank you very much for taking the time to contact us here at
Winchester Ammunition. We are always glad to hear from our many friends and customers who share in the shooting sport.

They are the same

Thank you again for contacting us here at Winchester Ammunition. If
you should require additional information, do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,

Winchester Technical Department

___________________________________________________________

Muddy those waters !!! :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top