Ruger Single Ten Experiences?

[CmdrSlander]

I was looking in to picking up a Ruger Single Ten revolver in .22LR, anyone on here have one? Has it been reliable? Accurate? etc.

Thanks.

 

[Crazy Carl]

Yes, yes & yes.

Very fun little gun, with perfect weight & balance. Still up in the air on the fiber optic sights, tho. They're cool, they work, but I just prefer traditional. Otherwise, an awesome gun.

 

[CraigC]

Have yet to hear a negative word, except about the sights. Which I don't care for either. I was really tempted to pick one up I looked at for $439. Maybe after Christmas.

 

[LightningMan]

I handled one, and thought about getting one, someday. What I noticed the most was how far you have to pull the hammer back in relation to how quick the cylinder locks up, it's way before the hammer locks back. Me thinks the hammer throw could have been shortened a bit and still be reliable and fire the round. LM

 

[Wil Terry]

YES !!! Shot one extensively in the U.P. a few weeks ago. It shot very well, handled very well, and looked spiffy as all-git-out. ON THE OTHER HAND, those goofy-azzed silly green sights have got to go.

We also got t extensively test fire the SP101 8-SHOT 22 at the same time and I thought it to be nothing short of a heavy clunker with awful springs, sharp edges every where and a stupidly designed hammer spur.

LET me note here also it [ neither..] is NOT as accurate as the S&W M63-4 5" HB 8-SHOT 22 revolver and is a LOT heavier than the 8-shot S&W.

 

[CraigC]

Yes, thank God the front sight is only screwed-on and easily replaced!!!

 

[BCRider]

A question for you all that have shot it. Do you find that unloading and reloading 10 rounds one at a time is a bit much?

My own thoughts are that with 10 cases and rounds to schuck and poke that I'd rather just pull the cylinder arbor and reload the cylinder outside the gun. And if I owned one that I'd soon make up a "plunger" from a block of wood with ten 1/8 diameter brass ejector pins to clear the cylinder in one go. Then I could reload it two or three at a time like I can manage with my other multi shot revolvers. Seems to me like I could be back to shooting even with all that cylinder handling a lot faster than doing all this work through the little reloading gate.

Your thoughts please?

 

[CraigC]

I don't have a Single Ten but I do have a 12-shot USFA 12/22. It's a lot of fun to shoot and more convenient than the five rounds you get with an Old Model Ruger. No, you'll never be any quicker by removing the cylinder. It takes some time but with practice, you can reload a single action very quickly. You just have to put forth the conscious effort to do it quickly every time. Last I timed it, I could fire five rounds, reload and fire five more in 15secs. Didn't get there overnight and it didn't happen by accident but I ain't no Bob Munden either. Wish I knew where to find that picture of sixgunner Jim Taylor working a Ruger with two or three empties in the air at once. Wil Terry is probably just as quick.

PS, IMHO loading more than one round at a time is not all it's cracked up to be. It's still quicker for me to load the Single Six one at a time than the 12/22 two at a time. Mostly because I can just drop the cartridges into the loading port and let gravity do the rest on the Ruger. With the USFA, it's a full sized loading port and as such, will hang up on the cylinder doing that. Cartridges must be inserted. I think one could do it much more quickly with the Single Ten than the USFA for this reason.

 

[sixgunner455]

I have a Single Six. IMHO, if you want to shoot fast, and you're worried about reloading speed, maybe you want a swing-out cylinder revolver or a semi-auto. If you want to shoot a single action, take your time and enjoy the whole process.

 

[CraigC]

By that logic just buy a semi-auto and a bunch of magazines.

The point is that it doesn't 'have' to be slow, just because it's a single action. It just takes more effort to do it quickly. Personally, I'd much rather shoot a single action and learn to manipulate it quickly than just blast off ten rounds from an automatic as fast as I can pull the trigger. A monkey can do that.

 

[sixgunner455]

What I'm saying, Craig, is that I enjoy the whole process of the single-action. I don't really get in a hurry when I'm using it, though. When I want to shoot fast, I get out my semi-auto and I guess I'm a monkey when I use it!

 

[foghornl]

I havent even seen a Single-Ten yet. 10 rounds in a "Cowboy Gun" just seems a bit ahhhhh "odd" to me....but whatever spins your fan.

I do have a Single-Six, a "Sheriff's Model" glossy stainless Vaquero and a 50th Year .357 Blackhawk, so I like the Ruger SA offerings

 

[BCRider]

Craig, I fully understand about how practice can make us faster. But when I see some of the stuff that is being done and then you tell me about this Jim Taylor fella shucking them out so fast that three are in the air at one time.... well... it just makes me feel a touch inadequite....

For single action cheap plinking I'm more than happy with the old 3 screw Single Six I got a while back for a "princely" $150 So there's no risk of any Single Ten in my future. I was just curious, that's all.

 

[CraigC]

Well, I enjoy the 12/22 but my Old Model Single Six is still my favorite!

 

[Pate]

I have one also. Nice gun and a great range plinker.

 

[Tony_the_tiger]

I actually prefer fiber optic sites to the traditional black ramp for a front site. Short of lasers and tritium, fiber optics are one of the best options out there for quick target acquisition. It is my understanding that many folks dislike fiber optic sites due to the appeal of traditional aesthetics on a single action firearm. While there is merit in this 'wood and metal' only old school mentality, as someone who values function over form, I have no complaints about the sites on the single ten. My consideration is that it is a fine firearm and a good candidate for plinking and taking small game.

 

[CraigC]

Has little to do with aesthetics and everything to do with usability. Fiber optic and other such flashy sights tend to wash out the target area. Too coarse for fine work. I'll take all black sights, thank you very much.

 

[Tony_the_tiger]

Craig, I respect your opinion. In my own training, I've found fiber optics to reduce target acquisition time especially in low light conditions. In your training, it washes out the target and limits fine work. Both of these are highly subjective reports. For my intended purpose of self defense, chances are I won't have time to use the sites. But if I do, i'm happy with my choices. I have yet to see an objective comparison of the two but I can report that my experience with fiber optic sites indicates they are just as accurate as the black ramp when installed properly and sited in. I would be interested in learning more about your experiences as well.

 

[CraigC]

We're not discussing self defense, we're talking about a .22LR single action. You might need to pop rats in the barn at 10ft, or rabbits in a field at 50yds. It's very difficult to pop rabbits at 50yds with a front sight that makes it difficult to see the target. For this, black target sights are best. Quick target acquisition has more to do with muscle memory than flashy sights. IMHO, the are at best a marketing gimmick.

 

[paochow]

I guess I'm the minority that likes the fiber optic sights. They work great for hunting, especially for squirrels where I can't always see the sights clearly under the shade of the tree canopy.

As for reloading, if after some practice you should be able to clear the empties in a few seconds. Putting cartridges is a little slower than a swing out (w/o a speedloader) but not much.