Early Ruger Single Six 32 H&R

[dangt]

Recently purchased a lightly used older (1986) Ruger Single Six 32. It has a problem accepting cartridges , rims hanging up on the ratchet column. Lots of Google searching and searches on various forums led to this Cast Boolits thread, the only hit:

https://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?410129-Ruger-32-H-amp-R-Mag-cylinder-problem

Cases that hang up on the ratchet are new, empty, virgin Starline 32 Magnum, reloaded R-P 32 Long, as well as my various reloaded Starline cases that I've shot in S&Ws and a H&R. All cases that hang up can be removed, rotated some and then they will load with a different spot on the rims oriented against the ratchet.

Careful measurement of the cases show variation in concentricity of rim to case body, much greater than I expected. Marking the points of interference on the rim perimeter and mounting in a lathe usually shows the high spot elsewhere. I dont yet understand this so I'm moving away from the cases themselves.......they work in other guns.

Chambers are tighter on this Ruger than my S&W model 16-4, but the chambers are very close to the ratchet column with no relief cut there to give clearance.

In the link above referring to an earlier similar problem in Larry Gibson's gun, a machinist apparently milled clearance cuts for the six rims. Larry, can you post a pic of the ratchet area of that gun, if you still have it. The variation in the cases I've examined is so widely varied I am not sure how much , or how little , I can mill to allow chambering without fear of causing a problem with hand operation.

Someone on that thread acknowledged that some or several early 32 H&R Single Sixes had that problem. Does anyone know how Ruger handled it. Apparently Single Sevens have a small diameter ratchet but the cylinder does not have to rotate as far between shots.

A far easier fix would be to reduce the entire diameter of the column. A risk I do not want to take without hearing of someone else already doing it that way. My particular column diameter is .562" .

My greatest concern about the alternative milling operation, that of cutting six part-of-a-circle cuts at each chamber, is the possibility of hitting the rear face of the cylinder while trying not to leave a step near the ratchet.

[Dale53]

I would call Ruger (as Froggie suggested in the link above)and talk to their customer service rep. He may offer to send a shipping order so the only cost could be just waiting for it to be returned.

That would be my first action.

Dale53

[minus1gun]

I had this same issue with a 1987 Single Six .32 H&R magnum that I purchased as new old stock in 2019. With mine, one chamber was causing almost all of the problem.

I used a small file with a safe (smooth) edge to file the part of the rachet stem that showed brass being rubbed off onto the cylinder. This worked pretty well, and I used a touch up bluing pen when done.

Sending the gun back to Ruger was not an option, since I had already had DougGuy open the throats to .3135. It is my understanding that if Ruger discovered the modification, they would trash the cylinder and replace it with a new one.

[dangt]

At this point, I don't intend to send it to Ruger but may call hoping to talk to a real gunsmith . I intend to mill the sides of the ratchet myself. I have Kuhnhausen's book on order and it should be delivered tomorrow or Saturday. Possibly he has a note about such interference fit of cartridge rim to ratchet column on 32 Magnum cylinders. It is certainly not up to SAAMI spec drawings of chamber dimensions.

On that drawing, however, a really large clearance dimension is called for. I could not go that far.

[curiousgeorge]

Dangt,
Hello sir. I'm the one who posted the thread that you referenced above. I'll be glad to share my experience with Ruger concerning this problem and what I did to solve it.

I sent my gun back to Ruger with a complete explanation along with several fired cases that would not chamber. They called to tell me that parts for this model were no longer available and there was no way for them to repair. They offered me some number under $300. in credit to be applied to the purchase of any current firearm at retail price. I declined their offer and told them to just return my gun as is. Eventually and reluctantly they did, after more than one conversation in which I was told that since it couldn't be repaired they would rather see it taken out of service.

Once I had it back in my hands I sat and measured the raised notched area and determined that it would take the removal of a very slight amount of the circumference to allow the rims to have clearance and chamber. I took a small, thin fine cut end mill file that doesn't cut except on the face and worked my way around taking off no more than a dusting of metal. Most brands of brass now chambered but not all would go. I went around the circumference one more time again removing no more metal than the first time. Now all brands chambered with no problems and I didn't remove enough metal that you could hardly measure the difference.

I really like Larry's fix on his gun, but I couldn't find anyone in my area to do the machining. I hope this helps or at least encourages you to modify your cylinder. Ruger's solution was not the right answer for me. These are great little guns and one of the most accurate and pleasant to shoot of all that I own.
Steve

[dangt]

Thank you couriousgeorge, your description seems like you possibly removed .002" at the most. It would be a lot of filing to remove more around the entire column. You did not say, but apparently the ratchet and hand operation were not affected at all. I would not think so with so little material removed but it would be disastrous if it had.

This report makes me lean toward removing .002" in a lathe, a much safer method compared to plunging or milling .001" or .002 above the rear cylinder surface and far simpler than setting up on a rotary table in the mill.

I would like to know if any owners of later production Single Six 32's can report what it looks like Ruger did to correct the problem on the series. Again, my own ratchet column now measures .562" in diameter.

Thanks

[GhostHawk]

I have a New Model Single Six in .32H&R that I have experienced zero problems with.

I have been using 100% Starline .32sw long brass in mine. While I have a box of Starline .32H&R brass I just have not felt the need for "more power" in this pistol. I have/had a couple of other pistols in .32sw long so I had loaded ammo available. It shoots so well out of the NMSS that I have just not taken the time to do load development in .32H&R brass. If it ain't broke don't fix it. And my Ruger NMSS shoots .32sw longs like a lazer.

[Larry Gibson]

At this point, I don't intend to send it to Ruger but may call hoping to talk to a real gunsmith . I intend to mill the sides of the ratchet myself. I have Kuhnhausen's book on order and it should be delivered tomorrow or Saturday. Possibly he has a note about such interference fit of cartridge rim to ratchet column on 32 Magnum cylinders. It is certainly not up to SAAMI spec drawings of chamber dimensions.

On that drawing, however, a really large clearance dimension is called for. I could not go that far.

Had the same problem with my original run 32 Single Six when I got it back in the '90s. I just flattened the point of a 25/64" drill bit making it an end mill. With the cylinder in a mill table on my vertical drill press, I made a very, very light cut on the ratchet hub at each chamber. Again, a very, very light cut flush with the cylinder face that was hardly perceptible. That's all it took. Haven't had anything but shear enjoyment out of that revolver since.

[contender1]

I think the idea of a slight removal of material on a lathe would be the fix.

"Ruger's solution was not the right answer for me."
Ruger has to listen to lawyers & such. Their attitude come from people who are "sue happy" & think they can get wealthy off a big company. And this mentality is NOT confined to ANY business or even a single person. Lawsuits are promoted by lawyers. Lawyers write laws to keep themselves in business.
Heck I recently saw where a woman tried to sue a guy for standing her up for a date.
Stupid lawsuits and yet,, they happen.

Ruger is just trying to do the things the lawyers say should be done.

But they will document everything, and if that gun ever comes up in a lawsuit, they can say they tried to remove it from use. But legally, they can not keep YOUR personal property, so it must be returned.

In short,, if you have the machinery, and the skills,, by all means work on your gun. Your gun, your work, and your solution.

PS; I love the .32's as well.

[shooting on a shoestring]

I just measured my three 32 SSMs.
0.560”
0.560”
0.559”
The wear area where the hand engages the ratchet teeth in the rear of the cylinder is approximately 0.110” wide.
So, if you turn your’s down to 0.560” or 0.559” you’ll only lose 0.001” to 0.0015” of ratchet engagement width. Nothing to worry about. Cut it and live happily ever after.

[dangt]

Thanks to all for the replies and measurements. Whichever method I use, by lathe or milling machine, I'll remove as little as .002" at first and try cartridges before dismounting from the machine tool.

The three measurements given by shooting on a shoestring on three different single sixes is exceedingly helpful. That seems to indicate Ruger's fix for the early 32's problem was just to reduce the diameter of the ratchet column by very little.

This problem with this particular gun has shown me just how irregular brass cases are. I should not be too amazed, after all, because they are not machined but are drawn. All cases that would bind on loading could be ejected, turned 180 degrees, and then they would drop into the chamber completely.

Thanks again for all help. The story of sending a gun into the Factory for repair was enlightening !

Dan

[Green Frog]

dangt, the brass/rim problem may be the reason that sweet little Single Six became available to you in like new condition. The previous owner(s) was/were not savvy enough to analyze the problem and get it sorted out properly. Their loss=your gain! :mrgreen:

Other than the difficulty you mention, I've never heard of anyone having problems with them, and honestly, I could be perfectly satisfied with that revolver in that chambering rather than the later Single Seven with 327 FM chambering. I love my 327s (like my stud hoss of a Blackhawk 8 Shooter) but I'm starting to warm again to the cartridge I long regarded as a "magnum wannabe"... it has its place in the great pantheon of 32 cartridges. ;)

I hope you will get yours sorted out and will then enjoy it for a long time to come. I think it has the potential for greatness. :bigsmyl2:

Froggie

[Larry Gibson]

dangt

The reason I went with the end mill is on my cylinder there is a slight dished area in the ratchet hub the fits the cartridge rim. I would have had to remove several thousandths if I had used the lathe to turn the hub circumference smaller. As it was only a very small cut with the end mill adjacent to each chamber was needed.

[shooting on a shoestring]

I concur with Green Frog.
I’ve lucked into 2 Ruger revolvers that looked almost unfired.

One was a low back Security Six. I loaded it, fired six and it would not eject. Could not budge the ejector stem. I turned it muzzle up and four of the spent brass fell out. I was able to tap out one of the remaining brass but the other felt like it was brazed in. Back in the shop I pulled the cylinder and drove out the last brass knowing I’d found why the revolver looked un-used. Upon measuring I discovered that chamber was reamed by a very dull reamer under power feed. The muzzle end of the chamber was several thousandths bigger than the breech end. I ran a finishing reamer into it and cut metal all the way leaving me with a proper chamber. While I was at it I ran the finishing reamer into the other 5. They all cut from a little to a lot. Reamed the throats to 0.358 and finished with a flexhone. That revolver shoots great now and the brass falls from all chambers. I feel sorry for the poor guy that bought it new and never got it fixed.

Second one was a bird’s head Single Seven. It would not chamber factory ammunition in a couple of the chambers. The rest required heavy thumb pressure to seat them enough to rotate the cylinder. Ended up giving it the same treatment as the Security Six and it is a real sweetheart now.

[shooting on a shoestring]

The 32 H&R is plenty of power for the SSM. I prefer it to 327 in that gun because the 32 H&R can be loaded with any boolit I care to shoot. The 327 in the Single Seven is limited to short nosed boolits or deep seating. Deep seating reduces powder capacity back to about the same as 32 H&R.

I find the SSMs don’t need to be driven hard to be very useful, pleasant, fun and amazingly easy to hit with. But, they are also much stronger guns than the H&R guns (which is why the 32 H&R cartridge had to be limited in pressure). The SSMs can be driven, ummmm, enthusiastically! But I have 327s in bigger guns for over 1400 fps fun.

[Green Frog]

Mr String, I heartily concur. I shoot the BH and a custom stainless K frame in 327 and they’re both plenty stout for the job. For a Single Six and a J frame the 32 H&R is plenty. My old 32 H&R Buckeye Blackhawk would do fine with a rebore to 327, but I can’t bring myself to do it. :| Anyway I’m starting to warm up to the H&R a little. I don’t need to make the ground shake with every shot like I would have 30 years ago. [smilie=l:

[dangt]

This is not my first 32 H&R Magnum. I've had five in that caliber and did most of my loading and shooting in the mid-1990's. This Single Six is my first Ruger in that caliber. I'm mostly interested in how it does with longer, heavier (100 grain) bullets since it has a different rifling twist rate than my S&Ws. My 16-4's would keyhole at least one in five rounds fired, many times 2-3 in 5, with a LBT 100 grain wide flat nose. Lighter, shorter bullets did fine.

After several days thinking about which way to correct the ratchet interference on this gun, I went for the more involved fix. I did not have a 3 or 4 jaw chuck that I wanted to mount in my rotary table so built a simple fixture for mounting the cylinder. After indicating on a chamber, I cut from the side instead of plunging. A 3/8" end mill is the same size as the cartridge rim diameter, so it was cut to that point and then .003" further. The end mill started cutting before reaching chamber centers.

Lots of cartridges were tried in differing rotated positions before removing from the rotary table. Many times the tight spot of the rim had been adjacent to the caliber stamp but not always.

Before doing the work, mounted the cylinder on v-blocks to check run out of ratchet O.D. (.003"), chamber center-to-cylinder pin center (.003"), and O.D. of cylinder (.001"+). (All these measurements were in relation to cylinder pin hole center)

Now to fire it a bunch and prove the work.303156303157

[Jtarm]

I had this same issue with a 1987 Single Six .32 H&R magnum that I purchased as new old stock in 2019. With mine, one chamber was causing almost all of the problem.

I used a small file with a safe (smooth) edge to file the part of the rachet stem that showed brass being rubbed off onto the cylinder. This worked pretty well, and I used a touch up bluing pen when done.

Sending the gun back to Ruger was not an option, since I had already had DougGuy open the throats to .3135. It is my understanding that if Ruger discovered the modification, they would trash the cylinder and replace it with a new one.

I recently sent them a 10mm GP100 MC that Doug had opened up to .4035. Came back with the same cylinder.

[Larry Gibson]

dangt

That's very close to exactly what I did. I'm sure you'll find it works perfectly as it did for me. The Single Six 32 H&R has become my most shot revolver.

[Green Frog]

I’m a bit surprised that our friend beagle hasn’t chimed in on this. He has discussed this revolver and cartridge combo with me extensively in the past.

Froggie

[dangt]

A problem I did have after the ratchet column modification was the pawl began "digging into" the ratchet at the edge of the milled locations. I broke the edges there but the cylinder was still hard to turn. This did not seem to be noticeable at first after the milling job.

I had to remove the pawl and file and stone the upper right corner. Cylinder rotation is still not as smooth and easy as it was before the modification but is does not seem to be suffering from pawl dig in.

[FergusonTO35]

I would love to see Ruger come out with a Single Six or even a Wrangler as a five shot .38 Special. Perfect do it all wheelgun!

[shooting on a shoestring]

Glad you cut your cylinder to accept ammo. I’m sure you’ll enjoy that revolver. I’ll bet several folks after you will enjoy it as well.

I’m surprised you could feel the difference in the action. I understand your pawl digging description and your breaking and stoning the cut edge. Please post back after you’ve run the gun a while and let us know if it cleared up or how it turned out.

Nice job jigging up and side cutting.
An old saying from our machine shop, “If a job’s worth doing, it’s worth doing the hard way”.

[shooting on a shoestring]

FergusonTO35, I’ll second your motion.
I’ve followed a few threads over on Single Actions of people converting SSMs to five shot 38 Supers and even 10mm. I’d opt for the 38 Super over 38 Special to save on rim diameter cutting into cylinder ratchet and hand engagement. Still plenty of powder capacity and I doubt boolit slip would be an issue.

But I don’t think I’d ever give up one of 32 H&R SSMz to go custom. They’re getting pretty scarce and they’re darn good in 32.

[Green Frog]

FergusonTO35, I’ll second your motion.
I’ve followed a few threads over on Single Actions of people converting SSMs to five shot 38 Supers and even 10mm. I’d opt for the 38 Super over 38 Special to save on rim diameter cutting into cylinder ratchet and hand engagement. Still plenty of powder capacity and I doubt boolit slip would be an issue.

But I don’t think I’d ever give up one of 32 H&R SSMz to go custom. They’re getting pretty scarce and they’re darn good in 32.

Mr String,

You have nailed my philosophy of choosing donor guns for customization! I will only use a fairly common, easy to find base gun, preferably (but not always) one being currently made. The inherent value of the gun that is “lost” must be calculated against the potential value of its custom derivative. If the gun you’re building is going to be worth the cast and you can’t get it some other way, go for it! Good post!

Froggie

[arlon]

I recently got one of these 32 Single Sixes that was made in 1984. Haven't had time to shoot it but got some Federal ammo with it. No chambering issues with that or Starline 32 SW long. I don't see any issues with it at this point. I doubt I ever shoot anything in but the Starline 32 SW Long and as long as that chambers I guess I'll be ok. I guess it's a random issue or someone already fixed this one.

Love 32s, also have a Lipsey special GP100 in 327.

[gwpercle]

If the rims are over size or out of round or otherwise the problem ... I would chuck them in my drill and turn the rims down untill they fit ... the brass case is the cheapest and easiest thing to modify .
Once you get you brass rims turned down ...keep those for reloading .
Is going for the easy answer allowed or should we complicate it !

Could be the spec's for the early 32's rim has changed with the new and improved 32's / 327's that have come out lately .
Gary

[dangt]

I considered turning all cases I had in stock since so many of them seemed to have rims of maximum diameter and non-concentric to case sides. However, when I marked the supposed high spots of the rims and then mounted them in the lathe with 5C collet, the "high spots" were not the first part of the rim to be cut. These were on fired and sized cases. I could have gone through this procedure with new cases ( which I do have) but at that point returned to the gun's cylinder ratchet column.

It would have been a long process of cutting all 32 Magnum cases I had and lots of turning on and off the lathe to mount each since I do not have the 5C collet attachment that allows opening and closing without turning off the lathe. And then there is the anomaly of how the marked areas on the rim were not the same as the high spots mounted on the lathe (marked from trying to chamber in the most problematic chamber in the one position of interference). I could have spent hours figuring that one out on the couple of thousand cases in stock.