Ruger Single Nine

[jp9mm]

For some reason Ruger decided to use the formal name "WMRF", when they just use "WMR" with the others... donno why.
They mean the same thing

 

[Jaymo]

Yes, but the OP posted .22 WRF, which is the obsolete .22 Winchester Rim Fire. Looks like a shorter .22 mag.

I looked at the Single Nine on the Ruger website, and I like it, but I just bought a 1978 Single Six at the local fun shop, today.
I like it a lot, but the factory rear sight is a shiny black anodized aluminum and glares too much. I think I'll install a set of Williams FireSights.
I also want some thicker grips. I don't like the thin wood factory grips.
I'm thinking about sending some mahogany, sweetgum, and/or micarta to CLC and/or Private's and have some grips made.
I guess I could make my own, but it would take me a lot longer than the 6 weeks it takes for Private Schultz to make them.

Noticing how much space is between chambers on the Single Six, I better understand why Ruger started making it as a 10 shot.

As much as I love Taurus revolvers, I'd buy the single Nine over the Taurus in a heartbeat. What's not to like about a 9 shot Ruger .22 mag revolver?
I just wish Aguila would make a 60 grain, wide/flat-nosed .22 mag load.
That would be a bit of a thumper out of the revolver.
Just imagine a 60-80 grain jacketed (or hard cast) soup can projectile.

 

[TrailWolf]

I'd like to know how long until the Single Nine "convertible" 22lr/22mag comes out... I will buy one.

 

[Jaymo]

It would be cool to have a 9/10 shot Ruger .22 Mag/LR.
I think I'll have to wait till they start hitting the used gun market.
My wife had a cow over the flattop .44 special.

 

[theautobahn]

So here's a question for you... three extra shots in the "Single-9" equal out the the same cost as an entire second cylinder in .22lr in a Convertible? The Single-9 has the same MSRP as the stainless 6.5" convertible. We'll have to wait to see what they actually retail for, but what is up with that?

 

[CraigC]

Rugers tend to go for 70-80% of MSRP.

 

[theautobahn]

Rugers tend to go for 70-80% of MSRP.

Thank you, but my question was why they were priced the same when to me, the additional cylinder adds more value (and theoretically should cost much more) than an extra three shots.

 

[BCRider]

Because the tooling costs on the 6 shot convertable were paid for long ago. The Single 9 is just staring out with new development costs.

I'd lay odds that 99.99% of all the convertable Single Sixes were used for one box or less of "the other ammo" and from that point on were exclusively used with LR or WMR depending on the needs of the owner. So to me it makes perfect sense to go with separate guns for each caliber so folks can choose and get a gun which, hopefully, uses barrel bore size and twist rates to work best with each ammo.

 

[bergmen]

Because the tooling costs on the 6 shot convertable were paid for long ago. The Single 9 is just staring out with new development costs.

I'd lay odds that 99.99% of all the convertable Single Sixes were used for one box or less of "the other ammo" and from that point on were exclusively used with LR or WMR depending on the needs of the owner. So to me it makes perfect sense to go with separate guns for each caliber so folks can choose and get a gun which, hopefully, uses barrel bore size and twist rates to work best with each ammo.

I bought my Single Six new in 1976 and I have swapped cylinders dozens of times. To me it is two guns in one and that is one of the reasons I bought it.

I would think the same on a Single Nine if it was a convertible. I see no reason to have to buy two guns when they could easily do a 2-for-1 with a convertible. As a result, they can keep 'em, I'm not interested.

Dan

 

[CraigC]

As a result, they can keep 'em, I'm not interested.

Yet folks buy K-22's all the time for twice as much money and they do not come with extra cylinders. Yet you turn up your nose at a non-convertible Single Nine or Ten? Fact is, most .22 handguns are not convertibles and Ruger built their .22 Bisley for over 20yrs as a .22LR-only, so it seems silly for folks to get bent outta shape about this one.

 

[jp9mm]

Yes, but the OP posted .22 WRF, which is the obsolete .22 Winchester Rim Fire. Looks like a shorter .22 mag.

Yes, but OP corrected that in post #25. This is what i was responding to.
The source of confusion is Ruger suddenly calling it a .22 "WMRF"

 

[CraigC]

There's nothing incorrect or confusing about WMRF. What is confusing is when you say WRF but mean WMR, WMRF or .22Mag. It's the "M" that makes all the difference.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

They should have started with a nine in the first place and made it a convertible.

Agreed

Are the barrels for the Single-10 designed for the 22 LR and are the barrels for the single-9 designed for the 22 Magnum? One of the concerns with the Single-6 is that the barrel is designed for the 22 Magnum and that accuracy when shooting 22 LR was not as good as it could have been.

This is why I didn't buy a single six. It's also why I didn'y by a single ten. It's my understanding that the Bearcat and the new SP101 are the only two revolvers with bbls specifically designed for the .22 lr. All the others will lack accuracy, but many people are perfectly satisfied with their single sixes. I'm probably just being nit picky.

 

[CraigC]

IMHO, the issues with the bore diameter are greatly overblown. There are other factors affecting accuracy but the bore is always the one that gets the blame. Unfairly, if you ask me. It's a mass produced rimfire sixgun, not a target pistol. That said, I have had no problem finding loads my Single Sixes (four of them) will pile into 1.5"@25yds.

 

[bergmen]

Yet folks buy K-22's all the time for twice as much money and they do not come with extra cylinders. Yet you turn up your nose at a non-convertible Single Nine or Ten? Fact is, most .22 handguns are not convertibles and Ruger built their .22 Bisley for over 20yrs as a .22LR-only, so it seems silly for folks to get bent outta shape about this one.

Not bent out of shape at all, I just find the advantages of having a convertible in a single action a wonderful advantage. In DA, I have spent ten times what I paid for my 1976 Single Six for a new 617 and absolutely love it as a dedicated .22 S,L,LR, no complaints at all.

I just have a personal opinion that a convertible Single Nine would have been a smarter product and within the context of the single action series in general, that's all.

Dan

 

[bergmen]

IMHO, the issues with the bore diameter are greatly overblown. There are other factors affecting accuracy but the bore is always the one that gets the blame. Unfairly, if you ask me. It's a mass produced rimfire sixgun, not a target pistol. That said, I have had no problem finding loads my Single Sixes (four of them) will pile into 1.5"@25yds.

I agree, I have never found there to be an accuracy problem at all with having .22 LR and .22 Magnum shot through the same barrel. I think this is much more of an academic issue than a real one.

Even though they are not considered "target pistols" I do find mine to be exceptionally accurate and always have.

Dan

 

[gazpacho]

FWIW Gallery of Guns now has them in stock and is taking orders. I ordered mine, as I am a freak for 22 WMR and Ruger single actions.

Of course, this new friend will have to have its own leather rig.