Ruger New Model Single Six in 32 H&R Magnum

[Thomas Traddles]

The .32 aficionados here have me thinking about purchasing a revolver in that caliber. Davidson's is showing two New Model Single Sixes -- one stainless and one blued, with 5.5" barrels. http://galleryofguns.com/genie/default.aspx?item=6517 and http://galleryofguns.com/genie/default.aspx?item=6518

The stainless have sold out, it seems, but the blued fixed sight revolvers are in stock. Would a fixed sight 32 be worth the $? What do folks think about these guns?

[ReloaderFred]

I'm really partial to adjustable sight handguns, but then I'm one of those accuracy nuts, too. I find the rear sight blade on adj. sights much easier for me to pick up than those sights just milled into the top of the gun. I also experiment with a lot of different loads, and it's nice to be able to adjust the sights to match the load.

I have two of the Single Sixes in .32 H&R Magnum, and I'm still working on loads for them. I've got a good variety of .32 caliber bullet molds, but just haven't had the time to put enough loads together with all the various bullets to find which one works best.

Hope this helps.

Fred

[ejcrist]

I'm kinda with ReloaderFred. I always default to adjustable sights although there are exceptions such as for carrying in the field for critter defense (mountain lions, bears, etc.). Even then though I prefer adjustable sights for the reasons Fred stated. I used to have a stainless Baby Vaquero in 32 H&R Mag with 4 5/8" barrel and I sold it a few years back at the suggestion of a shooting buddy to finance another handgun. Even though I preferred adjustable sights I deeply regretted selling it since it was a very reliable, accurate revolver and great for carrying in the field. Eventually I found a Single Six in 32 H&R with adjustable sights and I jumped on it. I use the SS often and wouldn't sell it for anything. So in short, if you're comfortable with fixed sights I'd say go for it. The price seems to be in the ballpark for similar revolvers for sale. If you're like me and Fred you might want to hold out for a Single Six in 32 H&R but I don't think you'll be disappointed with the one on Davidson's.

[dubber123]

As an exception to the rule, the Single Sixes with the drift adjustable rear "fixed" sight actually has the best sight picture of them all. Angled back rear and front, possibly the best sight picture Ruger ever saw fit to put on one of their handguns. I am fortunate that the one I got last year shoots exactly where it is supposed to. I don't often get so lucky with Ruger, but this one was a home run.

The traditional fixed sight model in the OP's link would make an excellent trail/woods bumming gun, IF it shot to POA. I would angle the front sight forward and serrate it personally, the rounded front is all wrong for a crisp sight picture. If it wasn't $600, I might have to give one a whirl.

[rintinglen]

The versatility of that excellent little cartridge is impaired by fixed sights. You can shoot 32 S&W, 32 S&W Long, even 32 ACP out of a 32 H&R, or you can load it in H&R brass to any of those power levels. The catch, though, is that they won't shoot to the same POA. Adjustable sights are almost de rigueur in cases like this.
I have two Single 7's in 327 which I really like, but if I had been able to score a Bisley 7.5 inch SSM I would not have bothered. My brother has the Bisley that I envy, but I haven't been able to get one to match it.

[Markbo]

I had Alan Harton install an S&W rear sight on my 4 5/8" fixed sight birds head. With a tiny bit of ither tweaking he turned it into a 1" @ 25yd shooter. With ME behind the sights that is saying something. It has turned into my favorite trail/back up hunting gun

[Thomas Traddles]

The versatility of that excellent little cartridge is impaired by fixed sights. You can shoot 32 S&W, 32 S&W Long, even 32 ACP out of a 32 H&R, or you can load it in H&R brass to any of those power levels. The catch, though, is that they won't shoot to the same POA. Adjustable sights are almost de rigueur in cases like this.
I have two Single 7's in 327 which I really like, but if I had been able to score a Bisley 7.5 inch SSM I would not have bothered. My brother has the Bisley that I envy, but I haven't been able to get one to match it.

This makes a lot of sense. I had never thought about this and appreciate the insight. I do not find the new adjustable sight models attractive, however. I think I will try to find an older one.

Thanks for the replies everyone!

[Lloyd Smale]

If it were the adjustable sight version id sure have to take that wart they call a front sight off of it immediately!!

[Dan Cash]

I have a Colt Army Special and an Uberti Single Action, both in .32-20 and both fixed sights. The 1914 vintage Colt groups a little tighter than the Uberti and does shoot to point of aim with my load of 8.8 gr 2400 under a 105 gr cast bullet. The Uberti shot low when I got it but a bit of file work fixed that. As I won't be changing loads, the fixed sights have fixed my problem.

[9.3X62AL]

What Lloyd said. Ruger needs to fire the ad man or marketing mope that insisted on these Day-Glo abortions. They are like spray paint on the Sistine Chapel.

One wonders if this almost-intentional usage of ill-advised sighting hardware for the caliber/application is some kind of bust-out scam. For the love of Mike, if you go to the trouble of launching a model-series put a set of generally-desirable sights on the variant--BLACK AND ADJUSTABLE FIRST, then follow with the niches if warranted. Who are these wonks at the gunmakers? Do they ever actually SHOOT?

[Lloyd Smale]

ruger used to run by shooters. Now its bean counters. I just cant see how anyone in there right mind would prefer a sight like that to a plain black front sight. About like putting spinners and 22 inch rims on a 70 chevelle!

[dubber123]

I like picking up a shooters gun and pointing out their glow in the dark thingie on the front isn't centered in the blade. It happens a lot, and 99% have never even noticed. That says quite a bit to me. ;)

[C A Plater]

I just picked up my new .32 single six a couple of hours ago. Can't say I like to glowing green sights all that much but it's a cheap fix to get the plain sights from Brownells and swap them out. I'll order a spring kit while I'm at it. I have a Uberti 32-20/32 mag. that is nice and pretty but the fixed sights just don't work with my old eyes. I want to take it hunting and the stainless Ruger is just the ticket so I think I'll part with the Uberti.

[Markbo]

Im guessing you whiners can still see black on black in the dark woods. Your day will come. And you too will appreciate a tiny touch of color on your front sight. FWIW I dab just a tiny spot of dayglow green on my existing black blade. It aint pretty but by God I can see the sights!

[Lloyd Smale]

Marko ive fooled with painted sights ive fooled with fiber optic sights and ive got two hunting handguns with trinium front sight inserts. the trinium work but are expensive. Fiber optic of painted blades not so much. One other problem with fiber optic sights is the tube is very fragile. Twice I had them break in the middle of a ppc match. I think if you used a PROPER set of black sights youd find they work just as well or better. the trick is to ditch that fat front sight blade that fills the whole notch in the rear sights. A good post front sight blade .10 thick like the ones that clements sells allow you to see light on both sides of the front sight blade. That is what really works in lower light. Bottom line is ive done a lot of handgun hunting and I learned early that everything needs to be right before I shoot. If its so dark that I cant see my front sight blade or need even trinium to see my front blade I should have been walking back to camp 10 minutes before then.

[9.3X62AL]

"Whiners". Nice.

This is the sort of post that disincentivizes participation on this site. My preferences have formed over many years of field and street experience. I come by them honestly, and express them the same way. My criticism of the DayGlo front sights is not a personal attack on those who favor the things. If someone wishes to adorn their arm with such items, they are entirely welcome to do so and to my portion of the market as well. My objection is to the marketing of these sights as the sole OEM option for general use.

As Lloyd points out, these RayBar things are fragile and imprecise. A properly-made open sight with good light spacing and square form is far preferable for general use by most buyers. I have used tritium-insert systems in side- and long-arms pretty extensively, and they improve sighting for low-light/no-light firing, but are NOT "precise" like a Lyman aperture or decent open irons. A Ruger Single Six or SP-101 x 4" is NOT primarily a defensive tool--it is a sporting arm for field and hunting. Not every arm being made today needs the Mall Ninja/Operator/Seal Team Six/Star Wars-inspired dreck that far too many examples of field and sporting arms are equipped with. Sporting shooters have waited far too long for the production of decent 327 Federal and 32 Magnum examples to come to market, and the disappointment we feel when they finally arrive festooned with this Walter Mitty detritus is palpable. If Ruger wants $800-$900 of my money for a sporting arm, they will need to put better sighting gear in place than what I have seen to date. At minimum, put those "electric" fragile bar things in a spring detent dovetail to enable easy removal for a real front sight and/or easy replacement when (not if) the cool color element breaks.

I believe Lloyd is correct in Post #11 when he says that Ruger is no longer led by shooters, and Ruger is not alone in that regard.

[sixshot]

Since the late 60's I've always narrowed my front sights to 1/10", Skeeter taught me that trick & its worked for 50 years. Now that I'm much older I have to add some paint or I just can't see a black rear sight against a black front sight against a dark colored animal, standing in the shadows. But with a little paint I've killed a bunch of them. Its easy to see black on black in good light but who hunts in good light, I don't.
On my competition guns I always shoot with fiber optic guns (USPSA) & so does everyone else. Its a speed game but you still have to score your hits. Never, ever saw one of the better shooters shooting black on black sights in a big match. In a bulleye match you would never see a fiber optic sight, they just aren't precise enough for that kind of work, thats where black on black really shines, but the lighting is good & you aren't running & the targets aren't turning or disappearing.
Any way you look at it, you can't hit it if you can't see it, use what works.

Dick

[Jeff Michel]

"festooned with this Walter Mitty detritus " Now this is a perfect description if I ever seen one.

[Green Frog]

Well, as a guy who has been around the 32 madness for going on 25 years now, I guess I'll put in my 2¢ worth now. The 32 family of revolvers has become something of a specialty for the enthusiast only, the shooters who like to experiment with something a little out of the mainstream. The 32 S&W Long has been known as a great target round for at least the last 60+ years, but as the luminaries like Keith and Skelton observed, it was and is a bit anemic in factory loadings, even for the smallest of small game. Then came the 32 H&R, which you will notice I did not grace with the epithet "magnum" because from the factory it really wasn't. This round had the potential to be a gun crank's dream come true, but unfortunately it was tied to the relatively weak H&R revolvers instead of being limited to the much more appropriate J- and K-frame S&Ws and Ruger Single Six and Blackhawk.

I owned the S&W K-frame (Model 16-4) and the Ruger Blackhawk (Buckeye Special 32 Combo) when they first came out, but was distracted at a critical time and abandoned what would have been a very interesting line of experimentation. Fast forward about 20 years ago and I got back to my "revolver roots" and bought a couple of S&W I-frame 32s, but I had to explore the potential of the gun enthusiast's caliber, the 32. The tides had come back in and up washed the 327 Federal Magnum, born out of time and something of an orphan from birth because none of the factories really knew what to do with it near the dawn of the 21st Century. A few of us were fortunate enough to acquire one of Ruger's near mythical 8 shot Blackhawks before they disappeared into the mists, but being more of a double action kind of guy, I had to have a K-frame S&W to really be happy, so I built Project 616 (see http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/260686-project-616-a.html) to be able to enjoy all of the 32 revolver family (plus of course the semi-rimmed 32 acp.) Built on a Model 66 it had sufficient strength to let the 327 shine, but with the adjustable sites it can be adjusted to cat sneeze loads in the old 32 S&W all the way up through the 32 acp (if you lack a semi-auto) the S&W Long and the H&R (magnum wannabe unless you load for it yourself.) Is it the most practical and useful revolver ever made? Of course not, but when did that ever stop a true enthusiast?

Now, if you want a 32 of any persuasion, buy (or build) it. If you are just thinking about it, think some more until you really know you want it. It will cost you some money and a lot of searching for just the right ammo (which definition of "right" will constantly change) and you have to put up with a lot of folks saying you're wrong to even think of owning a 32.

Lottsa Luck!
Froggie

[9.3X62AL]

Froggie, your post is the most succinct summation of The Mid-Caliber Madness Disease I have ever read. Written like a true addict.

[Markbo]

9.3 if my remark was insulting to you I apologize. I meant it as a funny thing. But to say it "disincentivizes participation on this site" is an enormous over reaction. Feel free to put me on your ignore list so my sense of humor doesnt run you right out of here.



ETA: I.dont have that kind of power over any person. That was a joke too.

[saleen322]

I agree that, IMHO, adjustable sights are the way to go. I have a 32 mag Ruger single six w/ adj sights that is really a fun gun to shoot and definitely a keeper.

I am 60 years old and when it comes to precise shooting, I still do best with black-on-black sights. I hunt with handguns and with only one exception I can think of, I still prefer an all black front sight. The exception is the sights on my Sig P220s. Sig took a partridge front sight, all black except for a very small tritium dot. You do not even notice it much in good light and it makes the sight almost center itself in low light. It is the only one that I really like that has color to it and does not mess you up in normal light.

[9.3X62AL]

That is a fine idea. My Ignore List's first occupant since joining this group almost 20 years ago.......well done.

[dubber123]

That is a fine idea. My Ignore List's first occupant since joining this group almost 20 years ago.......well done.

Al, your posts often make me chuckle. Including this one :)

[Pumpkinheaver]

I have a couple single sixes in .32 mag. They are great little guns. If you get one stick to Starline brass, I've had no luck with federal brass.

Here are my two.
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w170/pumpkinheaver/Hunting/009Small-1.jpg (http://s176.photobucket.com/user/pumpkinheaver/media/Hunting/009Small-1.jpg.html)

[Markbo]

Al, your posts often make me chuckle. Including this one :)

Me too. I cant wait to read what he has next. I feel so special. :D

[9.3X62AL]

Al, your posts often make me chuckle. Including this one :)

If I stay on a thread for long enough, I often come to regret having done so. That is why 90% of my posting here is on a private sub-section of the site.

[bedbugbilly]

For a while now, I've been thinking about the .32 and the potential there is for "playing" with the different cartridges - 32 S & W Long, 32 H & R and 327. Enough so, that I find myself "looking" to see if the gun shops I haunt happen to have anything laying around in their display cases. I find threads like this to be very interesting and enjoy reading them . . but they also act as a "tease" and "come into my web said the spider to the fly". Enough so . . . that I could see a possible "addiction" starting to develop! Oh dread . . . . :-)

[Thomas Traddles]

For a while now, I've been thinking about the .32 and the potential there is for "playing" with the different cartridges - 32 S & W Long, 32 H & R and 327. Enough so, that I find myself "looking" to see if the gun shops I haunt happen to have anything laying around in their display cases. I find threads like this to be very interesting and enjoy reading them . . but they also act as a "tease" and "come into my web said the spider to the fly". Enough so . . . that I could see a possible "addiction" starting to develop! Oh dread . . . . :-)

I agree, 'billy. I'm trying to rationalize buying a .32, but can't pull the trigger just yet. I saw a Colt Police Positive in .32 S&W Long in my LGS last week. Contemplated that one for a bit. I'd like to use it on squirrel or rabbit. But my .357 Blackhawk can serve that need with WC target loads. Besides, I don't have the $ for reloading the caliber, which also causes me to hesitate. So, I'll keep reading threads (maybe even posting new ones) on .32s until I talk myself into it.

[9.3X62AL]

No two ways about it, Thomas--32 caliber rollers are ADDICTIVE. Refillable rimfires that sip slowly at your component stocks. Most bullets used in the 30/32 handguns can double as gallery load projectiles for your 30/31 caliber centerfire rifles, too.

[bedbugbilly]

9.3X62AL - What you describe on the molds is part of my problem . . . I have several that would work well in the 32s . . . and as we all know, most of us end up buying dies, etc. before we but something to use them for! LOL Don't even ask me how I know that! I have had 30/30 dies, brass, a couple of molds and some brass for a while "just in case". Last Wednesday, I finally ran across a 30/30 to use them in! Fortunately, I'd been saving my pennies in anticipation for that! Maybe that will keep me busy enough for a while to put the 32 urge to rest . . . or else to find dies! :-)

[Mk42gunner]

.32's are fun and addicting. So much so that I am trying to resist getting a conversion cylinder for an Uberti 1849 Wells Fargo Colt copy that I have (loading a C&B cylinder is not a lot of fun with out a rammer).

Unfortunately I already have two boxes of WW unprimed brass in .32 S&W waiting on the shelf. I fear I am doomed...

As Al stated, most of the .32 molds do nicely as plinking ammo in .30 and .31 caliber rifles.

The really neat thing about them is you can load plinking ammo for a lot less than scalper priced .22LR these days. IF (big IF) .22 ammo ever gets affordable in quantity again, the .32's still offer more power to ensure the targets react when hit.

I just wish I would have started playing/ messing around with the .32's thirty years before I did.

Robert