Rimfire Central Firearm Forum banner
  • Whether you're a greenhorn or a seasoned veteran, your collection's next piece is at Bass Pro Shops. Shop Now.

    Advertisement

Single six barrel bore diameter?

4.1K views 44 replies 17 participants last post by  fourbore  
#1 ·
I know that on the Single six dual cylinder .22lr/.22mag models that the barrel bore is slightly larger to accommodate the larger .22magnum projectile.

My question is on the single cylinder .22lr only models is the barrel bore still slightly oversized to be able to convert also to the .22 magnum or since it is sold as a single caliber just .22lr is the barrel bore tighter to better fit the .22lr smaller diameter?
 
#3 ·
Most people think that the .22lr would be a little more accurate out of a tighter correctly sized bore and that was why I was wondering if there was a difference in the single caliber guns.

Personally I sort of doubt it if for no other reason for production simplicity of turning out single six barrels and not worrying about a mistake of having a wrong barrel installed on a dual cylinder gun.

But if it were a difference a person wanting to shoot mainly .22lr may be better off accuracy wise buying a single cylinder model if the bore was a tighter fit.
 
#5 ·
I also doubt Ruger would bother to offer a reduced bore in 22LR only. But, I dont agree that it 'probably' does not matter. I think it 'probably' does but I am not 100% sure either. It seems like a significant deal to fans of Anschutz and CZ to have a rifle with a tight bore. Even a slightly choked bore.

This is also the issue around 357/9mm convertibles although bullets are jacketed. And similar doubt by me that Ruger offers true 9mm barrel in the 9mm only revolvers. I think it matters here as well. The 9mm Ruger revolvers have had mixed reviews.

The only convertable that seems to work well is the 45lc, 45 acp that share a common bore. And AFAIK the 22mag is on average a little more accurate than 22LR in the convertables. But I could be wrong on that. Maybe only my limited experience.
 
#10 ·
I can't answer your question about bore size.
I can answer with certainty that other 22/22mag revolvers I own,
The 22 mag is significantly noticeable more accurate 25 yards than 22lr in the swapped cylinder. Enough difference that ** hunting, with 22 lr cylinder and ammo we miss 3 outa 5 shots dispatching treed *** with the hounds.
With 22mag it's 5 for 5

E
I will say that when it comes to accuracy I think every variance can matter.
I will say for a single six I had decades ago I always shot better with the .22mag ammo than I did with the .22lr.

My thinking is the difference although small could be enough difference in comparing say a new tight bore gun to a gun with excessive wear as far as accuracy is concerned.

If Ruger uses the same barrel as I suspect for both single cylinder and dual cylinder models then my original question is moot.
The reason for the inquiry was if the barrel bore was smaller on the .22lr only models then I would think it worthwhile to buy that for shooting just .22lr. aand buy a dual cylinder model for shooting .22wmr.
 
#9 ·
I can't answer your question about bore size.
I can answer with certainty that other 22/22mag revolvers I own,
The 22 mag is significantly noticeable more accurate 25 yards than 22lr in the swapped cylinder. Enough difference that Coon hunting, with 22 lr cylinder and ammo we miss 3 outa 5 shots dispatching treed coons with the hounds.
With 22mag it's 5 for 5

E
 
#12 · (Edited)
I read that Ruger did produce a run of .22 LR only Single Sixes marked with a star that were not compatible with magnum cylinders.
I have several Single Sixes and some of them shoot magnum very well and others shoot 22LR very well. Each individual gun is a little different. Most likely there is more than one thousandth of an inch variation between one barrel and the next. Bring them all to the 25 yard range and take notes.
 
#15 ·
On at least one of the Single Sixes I owned I found Velocitors to shoot just as accurately as it's preferred .22wmr ammo and to the same point of aim at 25 yards a happy coincidence I imagine. I've not compared with my curremt Single Six Hunter.
 
#17 ·
My 1970's something SSS shoots 22m very well, at 25-50yd better than 22lr. Imo it 'may' be because that 22m is getting out of the barrel a lot quicker, not because of a tiny bit bigger bore. (btw, I used to shoot some NRA Bullseye so Im sorta familiar with the issues of pistol shooting from shooter through gun) Slow exiting projectiles Require better user follow-through. Even the diff between a percussion muzzleloader and the slower lock-time flintlock show this.
Im also a long time cast bullet reloader for handguns (45ish years). It has been definitively found that for accuracy with cf handguns the cylinder mouths MUST be at least the barrel groove dia. regardless of what the actual barrel inner dimensions are. Seems the lead projectile does not like coming out of a cylinder undersize to the barrel groove dia (duh). Btw, The same is true of cast bullets in rifles.
I have seen these posts about the 'oversize' Sgl Six barrels for decades yet do not remember once seeing anything about someone checking the chamber mouth dia's. Nor have I checked it! It has not been enough of an issue for me to chase it down. Maybe my OCD is waning?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cascade2
#20 ·
I’ve got two old Ruger S-6s, both shoot decent for fixed sight guns. At one time when I was a kid I had one of each handgun Ruger made, in each barrel length. Two things I never acquired was a S-6 that had acceptable accuracy with 22 mg. In both the Convertible & later Super Single. The other thing was a .357 Blackhawk 45/8” that was accurate. I also had the Colt New Frontiers with dual cylinders with same results as well as several Colt clones.
To me results were so dismal I gave up on 22mg combo revolvers. In early 70s I got a S&W m48 on a trade that changed my mind on 22mg revolvers. Cant fault that one but I never was that much into 22 magnums.
 
#25 ·
I believe CraigC is correct, that Ruger may have made the Single Six in two bore diameters prior to some early date, around 1968. I have one of the preferable second generation Single Sixes, to which I fitted a second .22 WMR cylinder, which came with my second Single Six, third generation, two cylinders. The earlier Single Six has screws in the frame instead of pins; gives the nice multi-click cocking feel and sound. As far as I can tell, it shoots super accurately and pretty much to the same point of aim with either caliber, having come with a .22 LR bore. I milled it to take an LPA low adjustable rear sight for the Beretta 92 and my hybrid ramp front sight; plus I fitted a brass grip frame and slightly widened smooth walnut grips. Wonderful gun. The brass makes it feel slightly heavier in the hand.
 
#26 ·
I have a Single Six made in 1958, a dual cylinder Single Six made in 1999, and a Colt Buntline made in 1967. Running a patch thru the earlier Single Six and the Colt takes more effort than the SS Made in 1999. Both earlier guns are a little more accurate for me. The Colt is the most accurate, probably because of the longer sight picture.

Image


Image
 
#30 ·
A person could pull a bullet and drive that bullet down as in slugging a barrel. Not me, but a curious person. For me the proof is in the shooting and theory comes in 2nd. But point is well taken. There might be too wide vs optimum being something else? Again, not saying one way or another.

I do tend to fall in the school of though that everything matters while you never actually know for sure or maybe surprised. Whcih is to say, I dont know.
 
#36 ·
For me the proof is in the shooting and theory comes in 2nd.
Shooting proves nothing. All you can prove is what load a particular gun shoots best. You cannot prove why. It does not discern what factors are to blame. Nor does it account for all other guns. A wise man who has tested far more revolvers than I ever will, once said that every revolver is a law unto itself. There are myriad factors present in a revolver that affect accuracy that are not present in any other firearm type. There is the cylinder itself, that turns on a basepin that engages holes in the frame. All sorts of tolerances can stack up there. There is the barrel/cylinder gap interface. There are no less than six individual chambers. Ruger used to gang ream them on all revolvers, which means the six chamber reamers can wear at different rates, cutting six distinctly different chambers. Those chambers have to line up with the bore upon lockup. If that was always perfect, then lineboring wouldn't be a thing. Then there's the rather crude way Ruger "fits" cylinders to these guns. Which is to say they have a parts bin full of them and try one after another until it fits acceptably. These are not match guns but my S&W's don't shoot any better. Being a lifelong revolver nut, having owned over 130 of them and spent the last 23yrs getting customs built, I think I have a fair idea of what it takes to build an accurate revolver. I could very well be wrong but I don't think this tiny theoretical difference in bore diameter is worth the time it took to type this.
 
#32 ·
Another thought is that IF a barrel is being specced for a slightly larger projectile to begin with if the larger projectile size is the minimum tolerance in the interest of safety shooting the magnum loads then I guess it is possible the looser upper end acceptable production tolerance would then affect the smaller more LR projectile even more in the accuracy department.

So like anything else the buyer is still at the mercy of the barrel lottery when it comes to accuracy and even more so when we are talking about LR accuracy.
I cannot agree that a loose bore will not have an effect on the accuracy of a fired round and where it lands.
 
#33 ·
Vfourmax, you left something out. You should have inserted the word "significantly" before "loose". The difference between the two bore diameters once used was no more than a couple thousandths of an inch. And it did not affect .22 LR accuracy one iota.

Ruger is one of the world's largest firearm manufacturers. It has always employed some of the world's best designers and engineers. Their market share proves that buyers agree that these guys are not exactly clueless, regarding their firearms expertise. More than half a century ago, the Ruger engineers collectively decided it was silly, inefficient, and pointless to make two different barrel diameters for .22 LR and .22 WMR. So they used the God-given cranial resources between their ears and stopped doing it. In the ensuing half century plus, nothing negative has come out of it.

As in "N-O-T-H-I-N-G".

Perhaps if somebody on this forum points out to them the error of their ways, they might reconsider. Or maybe not.

I think that is a "barrel lottery" where the Ruger owner wins 100% of the time.

Of course, that is assuming that people on this forum do not have greater experience and technical knowledge than the entire engineering department at Ruger.

Another factor which nobody here has yet mentioned is that, since its introduction by S&W in the mid-1800s, the soft lead .22 rimfire bullet has been designed with a concave base so that, upon firing, gas pressure and inertial forces slightly enlarge bullet diameter to fill and seal the bore. A fired standard .22 rimfire bullet, while flying, is the diameter of whatever bore it was fired through, unless that bore is really, really severely worn larger. This may not be true of some of the harder specialty bullets, of course.
 
#35 ·
In the weeds again :rolleyes:
There is.....theoretical accuracy, practical accuracy, real accuracy, my accuracy and your accuracy. Your demands, and skills may be and likely are, somewhat different than mine.
In a shootoff with my Sgl 6 or yours between us is the failing going to be some tiny diff in bore dia. 22LR vs 22Mag or in the shooters?
I'll bring my two constant shootin buddys as observers, Bob and Weave.