Ruger Distaste

[fastest45ever]

My comments about the new Single Six sitting under the bed is not about the barrel, which is actually very good, and tight for .22, even a lr.

It is about the cylinder throats. Ruger thinks .226" is OK. My gunsmith isn't in love with that, and suggests a custom cylinder, at about .224"

Apparently bullets rattling out of the cylinder are hard on the forcing cone, and difficult to create accuracy with.

As for Ruger current chambers on the .45 Colt: Friend posted this to me:

Ruger Bisley .45 Colt specs vs. FA 83 .454
Well, I just discovered something interesting. I measured the chamber and throat diameters on my Ruger Bisley and Freedom Arms Model 83 Premier Grade and here is what I found:

Ruger Bisley:

Chamber: .4835/.4840
Throat: .4510

Freedom Arms Model 83 (.45 Colt cylinder):

Chamber: .4835/.4840
Throat: .4535

I did not expect the FA chambers to be that large.

SAAMI specs call for .4862 chamber diameter so both of my cylinders are much less than that.

So, it appears Ruger is capable of cutting some excellent chambers in their
Ruger .45's.

The bearcat is supposed to, along with the Single 10, have the tightest, .22lr only barrels.

My general observations on the new .22lr Single Six is it's FAR superior to the old Single Six, in fit and finish.
It's also a couple hundred dollars more out here.

 

[45_auto]

Most folks are just happy to blast tin cans with them. As evidenced by Ruger selling all they can make for the last SIXTY YEARS.

Good observation. I believe a quote by P. T Barnum a little over 100 years ago is appropriate :

Barnum: "There's a sucker born every minute."

 

[oldbear]

Ruger makes an excellent revolver. I've owned several of them, and still kick myself for selling my Speed Six for a giveaway price. For me the problem Ruger has is they don't have the finally finished look that Smith and Wesson's have. They look like a very serous tool not a finally crafted firearm.

 

[CraigC]

It is about the cylinder throats. Ruger thinks .226" is OK. My gunsmith isn't in love with that, and suggests a custom cylinder, at about .224"

I have asked you this before, how does it shoot?

The bearcat is supposed to, along with the Single 10, have the tightest, .22lr only barrels.

Far as I know, the Single Ten does uses the same barrel blanks as the Single Six.

"There's a sucker born every minute."

Thankfully we have folks who already know everything like yourself to tell us all what suckers we are. Please. Come back with a real argument or go away. So, tell me again what's wrong with my Single Sixes that shoot 1.5" or better at 25yds? Or would that not suit your agenda?

 

[Sam1911]

[Mod Talk: Hey, guys? Seriously, get gentlemanly or get lost. Thanks. ]

 

[cpt-t]

I bought my first Ruger in 1971 7 1/2in Blackhawk 45LC Convertible, still has it still use it. And if I were going Pig hunting or just out walking around looking. That would probabley be the gunthat will go with me. I truely love SA Pistols, raised in OKLA & WEST TX and have shot them all my life. My Son and I have quite a few pistols of different makes and models, and calibers. But we have more Rugers than any other brand. And more SA RUGERS than any anything else. I have never had any problems with any of the Rugers Rirearms we own. IMHO if BILL RUGER doesn`t make it and SAM WALTON doesn`t sell it (( Maybe I don`t need it )).
ken

 

[huntsman]

I bought my first Ruger in 1971 7 1/2in Blackhawk 45LC Convertible

you remember what you paid?

 

[gamestalker]

I have no gripes with Rugers or S&W's. But S&W's as a general rule look so much nicer. But as nice looking Rugers are concerned, the SRH is one of the best looking big boy's around, especially when they have a nice Leupold mounted on them! The only way I've found to satisfy my own debate is to own the best of both worlds.

GS

 

[cpt-t]

huntsman: If I remember right, the figure $ 86.00 comes to mind. But that has been 41 years ago and my memory is getting worse all the time. The store had two of them the 7 1/2 & a 4 1/2 bought them both, I was on leave from Vet Nam and I took the 4 1/2 inch and the ACP cylinder back with me & a shoulder holster that a man that owned the shoe shop made for me. I carried that old 3 Screw every day while I was in Country and it worked just fine. When I went home, I loaned it to a very good friend to use & he was to return the gun an holster and my Randal knife when he came home. But He never made it home He was KIA just a few weeks befor he was to go home. I never got my rig back. And I have always wondered what happended to the gun. But the extra 45 LC Cylinder I have kept in the gun safe all these years in its red flannel draw string bag. I never replaced that Gun.
ken

 

[Smokin Gator]

"Feelings? No. At least I do not throw out such "evidence" without looking at "why". The why is S&W's action and faster trigger return. Period. Doesn't have a damn thing to do with quality or performance and you should know this."

You mean to say that Smith and Wesson's "action and faster trigger return" aren't performance factors? A faster trigger return is not going to allow you to perform faster? Yeah. Nearly every shooter at the IRC uses a S&W, because they perform better. Rugers are solid guns. I don't like the look of their double action revolvers, but if they performed better than a Smith, I'd use one. There actually might have been a couple of Ruger's at the IRC and 1 Chiappa, along with all the S&W's. Mark

 

[Sam1911]

All right, this is getting very circular -- we're all pretty much on the same page. There's little "distaste" for Rugers (here anyway) and like most other kinds of tools, there are some guns more suited to one task than another. Doesn't make one bad, just different -- and that's great.