Ruger Single Six: After ACCURATE REVOLVER SUGGESTIONS?

[Triggernosis]

Ammo is the holy grail in .22 rifles, too. I have a collection of over 20 varieties that I test my target rifles with.

 

[bubba15301]

gather up some different .22lr ammo and shoot the gun

 

[robhof]

I guess I'm blessed with my, bought used Single Six; it gets 1"to 1 1/2" groups at 20 yds all day with cheap Remington bulk ammo. It came with a scope, that I was going to remove, but decided to try it first, well I shot a cloverleaf at 10 yds with my first cylinder and now 5 yrs later I still have the scope on and rabbits and squirrel in the freezer. It also came with the unused mag cylinder that wasn't mentioned in the sellers ad. I have since tried it too and get similiar results, with a different POI.

 

[BCRider]

Prosser, you keep looking to find a way to get a tighter cylinder bore. Yet from all I've read the last thing a revolver should have is chamber mouths that are sized at or less than the barrel bore. The idea is that the bullets are to be kept a bit large and guided to the forcing cone where the forcing cone squeezes them down and eases them into the rifling. This way the rifling gets a good bite on the side of the bullet. This both guides the bullet better and at the same time seals the bore more effectively by blocking any blowby gasses.

So with the slightly oversize barrel bore the last thing it would appear to want is a "tight" chamber mouth. You want to keep things matched up size wise so they work together. The one size sets the needs of the other.

The one or two places where there may be room for improvement if you really must is at the forcing cone and at the muzzle crown. Apparently all else being equal a longer forcing cone angle eases the bullet into the rifling with less deformation. And of course a match grade muzzle crown lapped onto a truly accurately cut muzzle will ensure that the front end of the barrel is doing its job the best it can. Do the Ruger's need this work? That would depend on what the angles and crown are like from the factory. The results of most of us would suggest that overall the gun is already pretty darn good and that it shoots better than most of us can hold the darn thing.

There is also much testing to be done both with various factory ammo as well as then redoing the same tests with accuraized ammo I'd be willing to bet that at some point you find a combo which suits your stanadards.

Besides, from what you suggested above about your shooting ability you won't see any difference in most of the ammo, accurrized or not, unless you borrow a Ransom Rest to do your ammo testing.

Speaking of Ransom Rest shooting I did a quick google on "ruger single six ransom rest" and came up with a couple of interesting links. The first in particular using various ammo types is very interesting in terms of grouping sizes when shooting from a new Single Ten.

http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-SingleTen.htm

Nothing else came up but I did find a few more items when I googled for ".22lr ransom rest".

This one showing the results from a Marvel .22LR conversion kit for a 1911 shows that the Single Ten groupings may well need a bit of help after all. Although other references to the Marvel kit suggest that it's a well done item which allows shooting a 1911 to the highest of match standards. So comparing it to a Single Six or Single Ten may not be all that fair.
http://www.marvelprecision.com/target.php

The first post on this page from the Smith&Wesson forums doesn't have any targets but it does claim that the fellow remembers a K22 shooting consistently at less than the size of a quarter at 50 yards. Darn good if it's true and supportive of the "less than one inch" for the Marvel kit.
http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1961-1980/215401-accuracy-k-22-a.html

Fourth post says that this guy's Model 17 shoots about 2 inches from a RR at 50.
http://www.handloadersbench.com/forum34/16777.html

Another RR test without targets but with group sizes given. Check post #2. It further suggests that the targets in the Marvel link are truly "match grade" since they guarantee less than one inch at 50 yards.

There's other links but I've read and posted enough of them to tell myself that the Single Six isn't any worse than a lot of other options out there. However the SS, as well as a number of other well respected guns, are not of the highest match grade standard.

So where does this leave you? You wanted the gun to achieve match grade standards for groupings. From all that has been said in this and the other thread to convert an SS into such a gun is not going to be a one step process. It would involve totally rebuilding the gun taking into account a wide variety of factors. In the end such a gun will have cost you many times the cost of what you could buy a Freedom Arms revolver. Or, as much as I hate to say it since this IS the revolver forum, it comes down to if you want match grade performance of around 1/2 inch at 25 yards then you may need to pass on the idea of a single action revolver if you're not willing to pay the going price to have such a gun made for you. Really when it comes down to it a Marvel Unit 1 kit at $450 or so installed on a RIA 1911 frame would provide you with a $1000 match grade .22 pistol which shoots as accurately as one could wish for.

Where's this leave the Single Six you have? Since it's clear that you are not able or willing to spend the money to have such a gun totally rebuilt to optimize it for shooting .22 I'd suggest that "it is what it is" and you just need to come to terms with that. There's no magical single factor that will make this gun suddenly shoot match grade groups.

You're far better off to just try some various ammo with and without the accurizer and to use the accurrizer to "crush" in carefully measured and controlled amounts to determine what works best in that gun. One of the links (can't find it again now) was from a guy who used the accurizer with a dial guage mounted to the press to consistently control the amount of crush given to the bullet. The targets he also displayed showed that it made some amount of difference. So obviously the use of the accurrizer needs some amount of control to it as well.

And if after all that if the SS doesn't meet your standards then there's always the Marvel kit mounted onto a cheap 1911 lower..... or any number of the old Colt or Hi Standard match grade pistols. There's also the well respected S&W Model 41 and the Beretta 87.

 

[Prosser]

BCRider:
I did a bit of research, and a bunch of folks had business issues with Marvel conversions. Seems the guy was a bit of a flake, IIRC. Started as a company with another name, Ceiner? I think the guy that is the owner of Marvel started
as the owner of Ceiner, and was famous for no customer service. I stand corrected on the Marvel conversion. My recollection was inaccurate. The issues were with Ceiner. I incorrectly associated the two.

http://forum.m1911.org/archive/index.php/t-11751.html

I thought about buying a kit like that, and putting it on my 1911 Kimber, but, I just had it chromed, and refinished. I think I'll leave it like that.

The new Ruger SP101 8 shot maybe my next gun. It's got the 22 barrel, 8 shots, nice sites. Trigger specs look like they might need a bit of work.

The Smiths might be a better option. S&W has a LOT of .22lr pistols Kali certified.

 

[tallpaul]

Before you spread misinformation you need to check your facts!

I have never seen where marvel had issues like ceiner and unless you add a link you need to get rid of this statement. Johnathan ceiner is not bob marvel ! Two separate companies ! And unless you can prove it you are doing marvel an injustce!

 

[BCRider]

I know nothing about that one way or the other. The point of the links was to bring up some Ransom Rest results to try to show what sort of performace the different guns can produce.

There IS something a little different and magical about shooting SA revolvers. I really like mine. But I also enjoy my DA revolvers and semi autos (THERE! I said it in the revolver forum and lightning didn't hit me... ). If you're not wedded to the idea of an SA revolver for your .22 shooting then there ARE a lot of options which will produce good results. But first it still seems that you need to come to terms with what sort of results are acceptable for basic ammo shot from basic guns. If they won't serve your needs then you should look to the higher precision performing options and premium match ammo... or just join the rest of us in "making do" with the performance that the commonly available options provide.

 

[Prosser]

Tallpaul:
Thank you for the correction. My mistake, and I changed the above post to reflect my inaccurate memory.

 

[ArtU]

Well said about expectations.

I have several Ruger 22 pistols, among them the Mark II Government Target and the Charger with 2-7 power scope; those shoot tiny dime size groups.

But Shootin' Easy Minute of Beer Can with my newest Ruger, the Single Six 22lr/22WMR convertible, has more involvement then the semi-autos and that has lead to more fun for me.

I just love watchin' the cans dance about, and when I am loading six rounds; any cans still rattlin' about get real scared

 

[Confederate]

The Acu'rzr that Paco Kelly sent me reforms bullets to .224, but if you want it .225, you can write him and request his tool resize .22LR ammo to that size. If you go that route, it's advisable to keep the ammo aside for use only in that gun. I don't know whether it would fire in a Ruger .22LR auto or not, but I wouldn't try it.

 

[Hoppes Love Potion]

I would think a stainless steel Bearcat might make the whole issue go away.

 

[oldfool]

Bearcat might make the whole issue go away.

No offense friend, but the man worries about cylinder bores re: ultimate revolver accuracy potential
a stock Ruger SP-22 or Bearcat or Single Six ain't going to take him home
even a K-22 Masterpiece might not take him all the way home
an FA 83 probably would, but he already knows that

me, I need/want a Bearcat !

PS
I have a stock 10" bull barrel Ruger MKII that might could make a run at what he wants the gun to do
but I think he is a 'mostly' revolver guy, like me
(he just shoots better offhand than me do)

 

[Prosser]

FA 83 252 shot 3/8" @ 50 yards, out of a rest, with match ammo. Front side of one chamber was so tight it would consistently be a pain to get the bullet into the cylinder. The barrel was too long, needed new grips, and I just didn't feel like spending the money, least of all to open the cylinder up. Figure some matchgrade nut would pay well for the gun, and, he'd put up with the very tight chambers, and buy matchgrade ammo for it.

I would also like a DA/SA as well, so the new SP 101 looks pretty good, and a stainless bearcat does to, except for the sites.

But, rugers cylinders are intentionally throated .226" or so. That means a new cylinder no matter what, on a ruger, or, live with it.

 

[BCRider]

I'm still in doubt that the cylinder needs tighter chambers given that the barrel bore is rather generous. As I said in a post above the chamber mouths need to be sized to work with the barrel bore. A generous barrel bore size requires a generous chamber mouth.

Of course all this is speculation and based on what I've read about blue printing center fire revolvers. Take it for what you will. But don't blame the chamber mouths of the SS in isolation. They need to be considered jointly with the rest of the gun to draw a proper conclusion.

If you tested the FA gun to get that result it says a heap about both the FA quality and why you are on the hunt to try to get the Ruger to perform better. But by now I hope we've all shown you that there's no $3 solution.

By the time a Ruger was shooting half as good as the FA results you'd have already spent as much on the gun as the FA gun costs. If you shoot the Ruger and find you can't live with it then there's really only one option that makes financial sense. And that is to sell the Ruger and buy another FA gun. But this time one in the size and options that you want.

This may seem like an expensive solution but as I approach 60 I find my time is getting too short to tolerate toys or tools that don't meet my needs and expectations. If you try the Ruger and find that it frustrates you and if it won't prevent you making a mortgage payment or otherwise preclude you making the usual payments to live I'd say suck it up and buy another FA gun. In the end it'll make you feel better each time you take it out.

 

[Coal Dragger]

Prosser,

If I were you I would just buy a M97 Freedom Arms in .22lr, those should have sporting chambers on them since match chambers are now an option on the spec sheet.

Probably that will get you where you want to be, and in the end probably come out a wash on cost.

 

[Prosser]

I'm taking the gun out, and shooting it. JRH said the barrel was on the low side of .223", which is a very tight, for a single six, barrel. Might be the cause of the accuracy problems.

His answer is to custom fit a 120 dollar Story cylinder, with .224" throats, see if that works. If it doesn't, match grade barrel. I guess that's around 500 dollars.

It is possible that the .224" cylinder is tight enough to match and work with my .225-9" barrel. I might just be in the cost of the cylinder.

Still I'll have to see if it shoots myself.

 

[BCRider]

I'd talk to story about the relationship between the chamber mouths and the barrel bore before doing much.

You seem to want to focus on one or two aspects in isolation and not consider how they relate to each other. Like I already said previously the reading I've found on revolver accuracy suggests that the chamber and barrel bores have to play together in a very specific way. Remember that the chamber mouth is just to feed the bullet into the barrel. It isn't the final arbiter of accuracy. It's just one more building block. Equally important is that each chamber index into very close alignment with the barrel axis. And on and on each factor goes with each piling on the top of the next to form a supportive chain that results in the final accuracy of any gun. That level of accuracy in each aspect is why your old FA cost so much and shot so well. Any one or even two things without the others and you don't have enough of a "chain" to give you the sort of accuracy you'd expect from the changes.

So go talk to him and see what he thinks are the important factors in setting up an accurate revolver.

 

[ljnowell]

I bought a single six in 2009, brand new. Its plenty accurate at 25 yards with LR or Magnums.

 

[Triggernosis]

Until you try various kinds of ammo, I personally think you're wasting your time.

 

[Prosser]

Here are pictures of the gun. They sure are beautiful, and very well made.

Cocobolo grips by Hogue.

 

[CSA 357]

trade it in on a mk2 target six shot and single action just dont fit my needs but the single six is a good revolver