Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Your thoughts on


Slowhand Bob, 24229

Recommended Posts

Though it has been far from a landslide notion, I have seen more than a couple of pards wish for Ruger to come out with a Single Six in ,38 spl. Since Ruger has not really pushed the 32 version, perhaps they are just not interested in offering selections of specialty guns. My thought is that this might actually turn out to be a standard, if chambered for the most popular caliber in SASS. I think that many people who are not willing to chance the little Uberti small frame 38, and it does seem to have quality issues according to some, might jump at the same thing offered by Ruger. Face it, the 38spl would make the 32 an orphan without a cause, nothing you can do with the 32 that the 38 couldn't do as well or better and you would have a model to fit that small frame niche that so many frequently use as an excuse for the 32s. Is it possible that Ruger does not consider the Single Six frame as suitable for the 38spl?

Link to post
Share on other sites

For about 7 or so years, Ruger has been mostly on a program of offering a small number of what they figure to be most "popular" guns, reducing their fixed costs. Good luck going beyond that UNLESS ya could convince Davidsons or someone to BUY 500 of em as a special run. That they might do

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know of a gunsmith who can convert them if you're interested. I agree that it would be a nice gun. About six years ago when I started shooting gunfighter, for a period of time I used Single Sixes. Of course there was some inconvenience at having to load a different round than I used in my rifle and besides liking the idea of loading just one round, I just thought it would be cool to have a pair of Single Sixes in .38. I considered converting them, but switched pistols before getting very serious about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alan Harton can do it and has done it. But you will wait and waite.

I asked why they would build a 45 colt NRV and not a 38-40 or 44-40. Response I got... tolerances. The case head tolerances have to meet the standard that Ruger has set for cylinders.

I pointed out that Colt does it and was told Ruger is not Colt... Different tolerances. So even if you did order a special run of Single Sixes Ruger most probally would not build them as the case heads would be to close to each other, nothing to do with strength.

There is a pistol made by Uberti on a small frame in a 38 the Lightening. http://www.cimarron-firearms.com/Specialty/Lightning.htm

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard about these conversions, and have thought about getting it done. Even bought a SS as a preliminary step. Then I had a casualty to one of the Lightnings I already have, and used the SS as is in .32 in matches. I had some difficulty getting the .32s through the loading gate, let alone any .38s!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will never happen. Simply not enough market. The idea that Ruger didn't "push" the .32 is nonsense. There was simply a limited market, people bought them when they first came out, the market dried up and they were discontinued. The same thing happened with the Marlin .32 rifle. Limited market. Initial good sales, people that wanted them bought them and the market dried up and they were discontinued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard about these conversions, and have thought about getting it done. Even bought a SS as a preliminary step. Then I had a casualty to one of the Lightnings I already have, and used the SS as is in .32 in matches. I had some difficulty getting the .32s through the loading gate, let alone any .38s!

Not to hijack, but what happened to your Lightning? And what are the quality issues of which Slowhand Bob spoke?

Just curious, as I have a pair of Lightnings I shoot quite a bit. Is there something I should be especially attentive to?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Larsen, was trying to say, in mt dumb redneck fashion, perhaps if Ruger would try the Single Six in 38 it might attract a much larger audience than the 32 did. The 38 can not be considered a limited market in SASS. How many shooters do we hear claim they can not shoot in this category or that due to the gun being to large for their smallish, or often times short fat hands? Then again another problem crops up here that would prove a problem to this idea, the newer Single Six has gone to the full size New Vaquero grip frame. If there are other tolerance issues, such as stated by Marshall TKD, then naturally all bets would be off as I would not even want a gun that fell below the engineers preferred specs.

 

I have not seen a huge rash of complaints concerning the Uberti small frame revolvers BUT there has been a trickle that shows up here on occasion. Perhaps the .38 does crowd the available tolerances a bit to tight on revolvers of this size???

 

The biggest problem with buying a new gun with the idea of going with a conversion, for me, is the cost. I start out with a basic low end Pietta '58 Remington, add a conversion cylinder, a cartridge ejector and get the shield milled, Im now into the premium price range for a pistol and do not even have a decent trigger pull yet. Do not know how expensively this would play out with the Ruger as a .38 conversion but we do know it will be considerably higher than the same gun offered as a stock item.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to hijack, but what happened to your Lightning? And what are the quality issues of which Slowhand Bob spoke?

Just curious, as I have a pair of Lightnings I shoot quite a bit. Is there something I should be especially attentive to?

My substitute front sight became un-affixed.

Among several other niggling little problems*, my Lightnings shot WAAYY off POA- at about 10-12 yards, they shot about 2' left and 2-2 1/2' low. "Low" I could fix by filing down the front sight, but the "left" finally required that I cut the front sight down to a stub and affix a new front sight to the side of the stub. Had "JB Weld"ed it-probably should have soldered it, but I didn't (still don't) like the idea of applying that much heat to one of my guns.

 

* Sight issues, ejector rod wasn't quite long enough to eject empties, chambers didn't quite line up with the ejection port, heavy hammer spring, tiny rear sight notch, slightly rough action, "safety" notches on the base pin made it just too long to pull far enough forward for removing the cylinder (have to slightly press in the ejector rod so the angled groove in the housing moves the rod head out of the way- a three-handed operation).

Link to post
Share on other sites

...the base pin made just too long to pull far enough forward for removing the cylinder (have to slightly press in the ejector rod so the angled groove in the housing moves the rod head out of the way- a three-handed operation).

 

I do find that extremely annoying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.