|
|
Post by pacecars on Dec 17, 2022 20:03:36 GMT -5
How about Ruger introducing a “Single One” with a slightly stretched Single Six frame in a .25-.357 Maximum? Would it work since the chamber is in the barrel?
|
|
|
|
Post by pacecars on Dec 17, 2022 20:04:35 GMT -5
Bisley grip of course or contract with Ronnie for grip frames
|
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Dec 17, 2022 20:09:13 GMT -5
I've advocated for a Single Five 9mm for years. Everything about that gun would work.
Ruger has built five shot revolvers and 9mm Revolvers.
It fits the loading gate without getting into the transfer bar channel, etc.
Ultra popular caliber too...
|
|
chaos
.30 Stingray
Posts: 118
|
Post by chaos on Dec 17, 2022 22:45:35 GMT -5
I'd like a 10 millimeter revolver. I'd like to handle one first or I'd take a single shot based off the Blackhawk or whatever. I "need another Gun Like I need a hole in my head".
Finally got my BFR, 475 on a deer this year. Was lights out upon impact.....funny how I need a new gun now.
|
|
|
|
Post by contender on Dec 18, 2022 1:35:18 GMT -5
Unless Ruger can get enough interest to sell tens of thousands of something,, I doubt you'd see a "25-357 maximum." Lots more engineering & such goes into such ventures that depart from the already known & production items to where the profit margin dictates the necessity to build tens of thousands of a new design. A 25-.357 Maximum would not fit the bill.
And then there's the potential for handloaders & kitchen table gun wreckers to modify a centerfire frame size such as a 9mm 5 shot,, to where again, if not the designers,, it's the lawyers who'd nix such ideas. Add in the extra power level of a 10 mm & again,,, the lawyers would nix the idea.
I'm NOT saying they can't or won't do such stuff. But you have to look at "potential sales levels, as well as liability" before delving into such things nowadays.
|
|
44guru
.240 Incinerator
Posts: 78 
|
Post by 44guru on Dec 18, 2022 8:29:56 GMT -5
I am sure they still have the engineering for the old Hawkeye. I never expect them to build another single shot but who knows!
|
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Dec 18, 2022 8:33:59 GMT -5
All pipe dreams now. Heck, you can't even find standard caliber Blackhawks.
But, there were a lot who predicted we'd never see a S6 327 Federal due to the high pressure. Guess what?
Ditto on the Nay Sayers predicting we'd never see a factory 5-Shot Blackhawk. Again?
|
|
|
|
Post by pacecars on Dec 18, 2022 9:36:17 GMT -5
I would love a 10mm Single Six and may have one built one day. I would love to see the birdshead .327 reintroduced. The .357 Maximum guns again and the Hawkeye. Since they have a custom shop in house now they need to really be custom
|
|
|
|
Post by potatojudge on Dec 18, 2022 10:27:24 GMT -5
Somebody has posted on here a Single Six stretch frame 357 Max. That'd have to be your base gun.
|
|
|
|
Post by contender on Dec 18, 2022 10:29:13 GMT -5
Unless the management totally changes,, I doubt we'll ever see a Hawkeye handgun ever again. Remember,, it was a marketing failure for Bill. And now,, even though many of us would buy one,, it still wouldn't be enough to sell the quantities the stockholders would like.
The Single-Six sized guns in bigger calibers,, is also a niche market. Again, not enough general interest to sell the quantities necessary for a good profit.
The Birdshead .327's,,,, they are more likely. The .357 Maximums,, a distant possibility.
But look at the overall gun market nowadays. Black, plastic, tactical, and in the "cool" factor for the Gen Z types. We older guys who appreciate such stuff as the SA design etc. are a limited market. And let's face it,, Sturm, Ruger is run by a corporation,, & NO Ruger family is involved anymore.
And the Custom shop,, very limited & only specific things are to be built. Not a true "Custom" where they take orders & build a specific single gun.
|
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Dec 18, 2022 11:37:27 GMT -5
How about Ruger introducing a “Single One” with a slightly stretched Single Six frame in a .25-.357 Maximum? Would it work since the chamber is in the barrel? ***** During testing of SRM .357 Maximum prototypes, Bill Ruger, Jr., brought from Southport a Hawkeye .357 Maximum. In mind of a production Hawkeye in .357 Maximum, Bill, Jr., converted it to transfer bar ignition. Special parts were cast. Not sure it had been test fired in Southport, as I discovered interference in loading the untapered 1.605-inch case. Bill slightly relieved the chamber to ease the load & extract cycle. My handloads with Hornady .358 200 Round Nose dragged against the loading flute of the rotating-cylinderbreech block. according to Bill. Jr., this was only one. Had the gun gone into production, loading clearance would have been made on the breechblock, not the chamber. Barrel was 10-1/2” bull, with 1:16” twist and screw attached target front sight. My lack of enthusiasm may have discouraged Bill, Jr., from making cartridge-specific prototypes. My resistance was fed by Warren Center’s Contender, which loads/unloads faster, has a lower bore axis, and notably faster lock time. These advantages, along with the most practical of all interchangeable barrels----not to mention cartridges----of the Contender, would handicap the Hawkeye in the Production and Standing categories of handgun silhouette. (Despite the 150 fps advantage over a cylinder gap.) David Bradshaw |
|
chaos
.30 Stingray
Posts: 118
|
Post by chaos on Dec 18, 2022 14:28:15 GMT -5
How about Ruger introducing a “Single One” with a slightly stretched Single Six frame in a .25-.357 Maximum? Would it work since the chamber is in the barrel? ***** During testing of SRM .357 Maximum prototypes, Bill Ruger, Jr., brought from Southport a Hawkeye .357 Maximum. In mind of a production Hawkeye in .357 Maximum, Bill, Jr., converted it to transfer bar ignition. Special parts were cast. Not sure it had been test fired in Southport, as I discovered interference in loading the untapered 1.605-inch case. Bill slightly relieved the chamber to ease the load & extract cycle. My handholds with Hornady .358 200 Round Nose stuck on the loading flute of the breech block (faux cylinder). Having onverted a .256 Hawkeye to .357 Maximum, there was only one. Had the gun gone into production, loading clearance would have been made on the breechblock, not the chamber. Barrel was 10-1/2” bull, with 1:16” twist and screw attached target front sight. My lack of enthusiasm may have discouraged Bill, Jr., from making cartridge-specific prototypes. My resistance was fed by Warren Center’s Contender, which loads/unloads faster, has a lower bore axis, and notably faster lock time. These advantages, along with the most practical of all interchangeable barrels----not to mention cartridges----of the Contender, would handicap the Hawkeye in the Production and Standing categories of handgun silhouette. (Despite the 150 fps advantage over a cylinder gap.) David Bradshaw I dont think they are making contenders or encores anymore. I've got the danged new gun itch. Not something I am good at fighting off. Hell, Id buy a blackhawk in 40/10mm if I could find one. Single actions are non existent at shops in these parts. I mean, I had to have that .475..... against my better judgement, went with the banana grip. Boy was I wrong. Looks like the south end of a north bound mule, but works like a champ. Got moulds,etc....all the goodies. Developed a load and waited 2 years to fire it on a deer. Ive killed a dump truck load of them with 44s but got the itch and had to have something that'd drop em with more authority. Well, it did. Bang, flop. Have lost interest, although its the best shooting Iron that I own. Will never let that one go. |
|
|
|
Post by mikewhiskey on Jan 13, 2023 0:52:59 GMT -5
My Single 5 would chamber 5 38 Spl rounds. With the transfer bar, I could still carry 5 cartridges, just like John Wayne did!
73,
Rick
|
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Jan 13, 2023 9:23:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by mhblaw on Jan 14, 2023 17:20:50 GMT -5
I'd like a 10 millimeter revolver. I'd like to handle one first… Find a Buckeye… |
|
