A question about the Ruger bearcat

[Jamie C.]

Does anybody know why Ruger quit offering them with a .22 mag cylinder?

Is there some mechanical/engineering reason? I can't imagine there is, given that NAA makes a mini in .22 mag.

I'm thinking about buying one, but I really like having the option to use either .22 lr or .22 mag.

And I don't figure I'd have much luck getting Ruger to sell me a second cylinder so I could have the chambers reamed out.


J.C.

 

[OFT]

Jamie, the ones in long rifle only should have a bore of .222". Ones with a magnum cylinder will likely have a bore diameter of .224". If the gun in question is a long rifle shooter the bore is probably undersize for the 22 magnum. A call to Ruger should answer your questions better.

 

[Jamie C.]

I just figured they'd bore the barrels the same as the Single-Six convertibles. ( No, I don't know what the dimensions for those are. Owned 2 of 'em and never checked.)

As for calling Ruger... I'll pass. I'm not ready to buy a gun yet ( too broke right now ), and it's more fun/interesting to ask the folks here.


J.C.

 

[danjet500]

Here's a link. These guys know all about Rugers.

http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=25625&highlight=magnum+bearcat

 

[Jamie C.]

Thanks, danjet500... I've heard the story below before, but it's never made any sense to me.

Their current explanation says "improper" indexing of the cylinder may occur during loading if the user fails to pull the hammer to full cock after loading and then gently lower the hammer to the "at rest" position.

The story I heard back in early '94 was that fanning the gun could/would result in a cartridge firing prior to reaching the "in battery" position, causing the jacketed .22 mag. bullet to strike the edge of the barrel. That can cause considerable and dangerous lead and copper splatter.

Maybe I'm just being dense, but it seems to me that an "indexing problem" wouldn't be more or less undesirable with one caliber or the other.

I'm also having trouble figuring out why the problem wasn't just... I dunno... fixed?

But maybe that's just asking too much.


J.C.

 

[461]

The barrels are compatible with the .22Mag, the specs were never changed on the new model guns after the recall. I fully believe in the "Fanning" explanation and chalk it up to another neat thing that stupid people have cost us. I had my daughters Bearcat converted to .22mag and it's an awesome shooter and makes the Bearcat come alive.

 

[theNoid]

Find out if the 22lr and the 22wmr barrels are the same part number. If that is the case, then just have a spare 22lr cylinder chambered for the mag rounds. Sounds easy enough eh?

Noidster

 

[theNoid]

If the gun in question is a long rifle shooter the bore is probably undersize for the 22 magnum.

This is just not true. I have thrown the old micrometer at many different brands and models of 22lr and 22wmr and that fact is that the 22lr can quite often have larger diameter bullets than 22wmr. One reason why 22wmr MAY shooter better in a particular convertible is likely due to the 22wmr being a better built round using better bullets and the likes. When measuring, I also found that usually speakeing, the 22wmr are much more uniform in measurement when compared to batches of 22lr, each batch being from the same box of ammo.

Noidster

 

[Jamie C.]

Whether the bore is the same for .22lr and .22mag is a rather moot point, since I doubt coming up with a spare cylinder for a Bearcat will be easy or cheap.

Unless of course one of you guys have a source? *hopeful look*

( I have to say that I'm thinking of buying a Bearcat and having it converted to magnum ammo whether I can get another LR cylinder or not. If I can get a spare cylinder, then I'd have it reamed out.)

J.C.