Finally

[jerry_from_ct]

http://www.ruger.com/products/newModelSingleSixSingleTen/models.html

[Potsy]

Is it on the same frame as the old single six but will hold ten?
If so that's pretty cool. Aside from the fiber optic front sight.
Kinda hacks me off that I just bought a new MkIII auto.

[DragoonDrake]

I think the barrel is too short to do anything useful with. :)

[jerry_from_ct]

I think the barrel is too short to do anything useful with. :)


I'm sure if enough diligent guys and/or gals would suggest to Ruger, a longer barrel that would eventually happen.


Consider the S. barrel 10 shot a test of public interest.

[Heavy lead]

Yup, the fiber optic front sight would have to go, before the trigger was pulled.

[Potsy]

Okay, not to hijack the thread, but what's up with taking a decent looking gun and putting a fiber optic front sight on it. As my Grandad used to say; "Looks like sh** on the barn door!"
Is it a "tacticool" thing? Do young people like them? Women? Or is it just as I suspect, they're cheaper than milling a decent looking front sight so they stick that **** on there so you can buy an aftermarket unit?
Maybe they're okay on a camo pump turkey gun, but on an otherwise attractive single action pistol?

[Char-Gar]

I am holding out for the railed version.

[Bass Ackward]

I am holding out for the railed version.


I know that was meant as a joke and I did laugh at first, but nothing stays pure forever.

[44man]

THAT SIGHT HAS TO GO! :veryconfu
Look at another thing, a revolver is the very hardest to make accurate in .22 and to add 4 more chambers to a single six that was never as accurate as the standard semi to the Mark III is silly.
Fun gun but that is all.
Even a few S&W K .22's would be bad. Freedom makes a great .22 but most revolvers suffer in that caliber. The convertible is worse.
I would buy one for $150 but my Mark II's would shoot circles around it.
It is hard to shake me up with a .22 revolver! [smilie=s:

[bhn22]

Now, about that 10 shot SP101 with a four or six inch barrel...

[gray wolf]

Yes the sight would be history

Why do people have to take a perfectly fine pistol
And screw it up? Ruger get your head out of your Butt.
People gotta take whats simple and complicate it.
It's a 22 and the darn sight is only 30" away--how bight does it need to be ?
I like some glow sights but that sight is UGLY

[44man]

The single six is a fine revolver but to make it hold more must mean the market is there.
I have never liked any sight with a plastic insert or that is shiny and to make it glow is just crazy. We had to smoke sights and a flat black is best as is an undercut to stop glare. I don't even like a Baughman ramp. They are for holster draw.
A glow sight belongs on a shotgun only.
Maybe CB action shooters want them, they don't need accuracy, just speed.

[NHlever]

THAT SIGHT HAS TO GO! :veryconfu
Look at another thing, a revolver is the very hardest to make accurate in .22 and to add 4 more chambers to a single six that was never as accurate as the standard semi to the Mark III is silly.
Fun gun but that is all.
Even a few S&W K .22's would be bad. Freedom makes a great .22 but most revolvers suffer in that caliber. The convertible is worse.
I would buy one for $150 but my Mark II's would shoot circles around it.
It is hard to shake me up with a .22 revolver! [smilie=s:

44 Man, you are absolutely right about the .22's being the hardest to make.............. when they did it on a drill press. They used a very heavy drill press with power feed, and had a three spindle drill head mounted to it. The cylinnder was held in an indexing fixture. Three chambers were drilled, and then the cylinder was indexed, and the other three were drilled.. That explains many o the old Single Six groups that looked like a flying bird.... three holes headed one way, and three the other. Now they drill, and chamber all the chambers in a rigid fixture on a CNC machine using solid carbide tooling. The holes are much straighter, more even in size, and very good on location, and there is no more risk really in doing 10 holes VS the six. Once the chambers are drilled, the cylinder is located in a fixture using the chamber that will be in battery to locate the index notches. That isn't saying that they still can't mess it up though, and it will be interesting to see how it shoots. On the other hand, you have taken on one tough squirrel if you need ten rounds to do him in.

[44man]

I can see where CNC has improved almost everything and you are right. I would love to put one through tests but the sight still has to go! [smilie=l:
Today we have better .22's but ammo has gone to pot and that creates another problem.

[NHlever]

I can see where CNC has improved almost everything and you are right. I would love to put one through tests but the sight still has to go! [smilie=l:
Today we have better .22's but ammo has gone to pot and that creates another problem.

Yes, and I hate to say it, but it's still pretty hard to buy a .22 that will outshoot a Rem 541T, or even a 511, or old Marlin lever, or the older S&W masterpiece revolvers, and when my son wanted a good target pistol, I found him an old S&W 41. I've been picking up some of these guns when I see them because they are so good, and sometimes very good buys. I have a Remington 37 that I paid $169 for last year because it needed just a bit of TLC. Ten rounds in a revolver doesn't do much for me, and I guess I would rather have a six shot one that was done RIGHT. Some of the stuff, especially .22 stuff coming out of the factories in the last 10 years is a discrace to the industry.

[rintinglen]

For low light applications, doing building searches, I suppose. Maybe even for a funsy plinker, but It looks bad on a Single-Six. I suspect this one will sell to the ruger collectors out there--because no-body else will want one.