Single-Six vs. Mark III Hunter

[Daekar]

I've got a Mark III Hunter that I like to shoot. It is, however, an absolute bugger to clean! I don't think I'll ever get some of that gunk out of the grip area without totally ripping the thing apart. As I continue to put more and more rounds through it, the magazines have started to get harder to remove too, and the only solution has been to use far more gun solvent than I would like to try to flood the junk out. It works, but it's enormously wasteful. As somebody whose gun background is primarily milsurps, this is agonizingly painful to see. My other guns are simple, reliable, and easy to clean. I fail to see why Ruger chose this complex system, and the new "safety" features only make it worse. But either way, I'm considering trying to trade the Hunter for a stainless steel Single-Six with a 5.5" barrel and the WMR cylinder.

What is everybody's opinion of revolver durability and functioning under adverse conditions (environmental and lack of cleaning) compared to the Ruger? Since there isn't a big open space in the gun and it's simpler, it's easier to clean, right? If SHTF and I've only got but some much gun solvent, which gun would be best to have?

I know the shorter barrel will compromise the accuracy somewhat compared to the Hunter's superlative performance, but the Hunter is difficult to carry about as I'm working outside. I'm hoping the shorter barrel will help me to actually have the gun with me when the little critters that eat my vegatables actually need shooting.

Opinions on this trade plan?

P.S. I'm thinking the new Hornady Critical Defense ammo for 22WMR will be a nice upgrade in range and power for particularly stubborn or clever varmints. I'm betting performance out of a 5.5" barrel will be great.

 

[zippyfusenet]

Swabs

I own a Ruger 22/45 Mark II. I don't understand the problem you report cleaning inside the grip. I use cotton swabs dipped in Hoppes #9 to clean inside the grip, inside the magazines, any awkward place. They get the gunk out. Mostly I use ordinary Q-tip swabs or generics. I also keep a bag of long-handled swabs that I bought at Radio Shack (sold for cleaning electronics) to get way down inside when I need to.

Nothing wrong with a Single Six. Be well.

 

[pilpens]

I, too, use cotton swabs to reach inside the Ruger MKII grip.
When the trigger gets gritty and/or the slide stop gets too gritty, then I disassemble (just the top half from the frame) to clean -- approx every 1000-1500 rounds. Otherwise I clean with cotton swab and sometimes WD40 spray.
===
I used to have a S&W 617-- lead builds up around the forcing cone and the cylinder would bind after several hundred rounds. Do not know if this is normal for any .22 revolver
===
Buckmarks are pretty good at staying clean with very minor cleaning - I just swab the areas i can reach but no disassembly.
===

 

[Pilot]

I have four Ruger MK II's and they are a breeze to clean. I rarely clean the barrels but do field strip the pistol and spray out the receiver (top tube) with solvent, wipe and lightly lube. I do the same for the bolt assembly and that's about it. Takes about five minutes. They all perform flawlessly.

 

[L_Killkenny]

however, an absolute bugger to clean! I don't think I'll ever get some of that gunk out of the grip area without totally ripping the thing apart. As I continue to put more and more rounds through it, the magazines have started to get harder to remove too,

Operator/owner error hands down.

LK

 

[Daekar]

I wonder what I'm doing wrong? Should I get some spray solvent?

 

[Cascade1911]

For magazine area I spray some Ballistole down there and drag a rag through. Are you braking the firearm down. It can be a pain to get the MkII/MkIII back together at first but once you get used to it it's a snap.

 

[curt.45]

practice, practice, practice, practice. taking it apart and putting it back together, it will also help loosen it up. I still have to have the book out when I do mine.

 

[jersey_emt]

No problems cleaning the internals of my Ruger MK II here either. I use a small soft-bristled auto interior detailing brush (basically like a small toothbrush), and can reach everything just fine after removing the grip panels and the barrel/receiver assembly.

I don't need to break it down that much very often. For normal cleanings after a range session (200 - 500 rounds fired on average), I do a quick clean without removing the barrel/receiver assembly from the grip frame. This includes getting into the magazine well from the bottom with the brush to clear out any junk there.

I only break it down and do a very thorough cleaning every 2,500 rounds or so.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

Well, I've had my MKII for 20+ years and have never experienced any problems related to cleaning.

I take the pistol apart every year or so, this is probably 1000 - 5000 rounds, depending on the year, life and budget.

I've never had a problem with the magazines.

Are you dropping them (the magazines) on the ground? The MK series was never designed as a combat weapon (though it has been and is used as such, in very limited applications) and the mags aren't meant to be dropped in the dirt and re-inserted.

The MK series disassembly/assembly is really not that hard at all once you get accustomed, I think these pistols get a bad rap for being hard to take apart and put together.

 

[madcratebuilder]

I use compressed air for most cleaning on my rimfires. I also use a speed strip on my 22/45's, just pop the bolt out and blow clean.

Majestic Arms speed strip.
http://majesticarms.com/id10.html

 

[Zhillsauditor]

What is everybody's opinion of revolver durability and functioning under adverse conditions (environmental and lack of cleaning) compared to the Ruger?

I won't criticize your views on the ruger hunter as I hold similar views, and have long since parted ways with my ruger mk III (may it rot in hell). BTW, you can disable the magazine safety, which makes reassembly easier (comparable to a Mk I-II). There are many threads here that discuss that ruger.

Revolvers are simpler machines than automatics, and tend to be more reliable. I've not personally owned a single six (although I have fired and handled them on occasion), but I have owned a blackhawk in 357 and never had a problem with reliability. It was more accurate than I was, and a breeze to clean, too. However, it was a heavy bugger, and I think the single six is relatively heavy too, so that may be a negative for you. But they are sturdy.

 

[Rifleman1776]

Ruger uses that design because it has long proven to be very reliable.
But, as said, revolvers are simpler machines.
However, my first thought was that you are using some really gunky ammunition. What are you using? I have never seen serious problems like you describe with modern ammo.
Now, some may disagree, maybe many, but I often clean pistols by simply removing grips and magazines the putting the whole gun into a pan of hot soapy water and swishing around. If possible I'll get into crevices with q-tops or whatever and drag out what I can reach. Then swish some more. To dry I put on top rack in oven, set to about 150 degrees and leave for an hour or so. Take out, lube, reassemble.

 

[Daekar]

Let's see, which reply first:

While the reassembly process is annoyingly complex compared to a normal gun, I don't have trouble with it like I used to.

I'm shooting a variety of bulk-pack 22 from Walmart. I prefer Federal, but I can't always get it around here. I've been shooting lead, copper coated, and brass coated from Remington, Winchester, and Federal.

Definitely NOT dropping mags on the ground! It's a pretty gun, I treat it like a pretty lady (get your minds out of the gutter!)

If I decide to keep the Hunter, I'll definitely disable that darn magazine safety. What an annoyance.

Still waffling back and forth about what to do. I like the Ruger despite the issues. Really, the thing to do would be to buy the Single-Six and keep the Ruger. Darn it, why can't I just have all the money in the world to buy whatever guns I want!?

I wonder if some of the ammo I have stocked (I bought a bulk pack whenever I was in the store and they happened to have some during the ammo shortage a while back. Walmart was sold out constantly) is of lower quality than usual?

EDIT: Was rereading thread, and noticed the comments about weight. To clarify, I don't mind the weight of the Ruger in practical use so much as the inconvenience of the long barrel (the very thing that makes it so awesome). I'm thinking I should try a different holster (Fobus makes one). But anyway, the weight of the Single-Six won't bother me.

 

[Clifford L. Hughes]

Clifford L. Hughes

Dear Daekar:

I'm still shooting a Ruger Single Six that I purchased in 1956. I have ran thousands of rounds of ammo through it. With it I have shot jackrabbits, squirrels and a gray fox. To this day, it is still as sound and as accurate as the day that I purchased it. I purchased it in pre adjustable sight days so I've installed a Micro adjustable sight.

During the mid 1960's I shot on several Marine Corps pistol teams. My .22 competition pistol was a Ruger Mark 1 (if I remember correctllyl) with a 6 7/8 inch barrel. I won many matches with it.

Because I had two .45's, one 38 special, and one .22 to clean each day, I developed a method to speed up cleaning. In my younger and dumber days I filled a large ammo can 3/4 full of gasoling (don't do this it's dangerous) and placed my pistols in it, with their grips removed, sights down and then I drove home. the sloughing cleaned them thoroughly. The magazines were placed in the gasoline also. At home all that was left to do is punch the bore and set the pistols in the sun to dry. When the pistols are thoroughly dry I sprayed them with a lubricant like Break Free or WD 40 or I oiled them with Hoppies #9

I still use a modified version of this method outdoors. I fill the ammo can with a good solvent and soak the pistols for a half hour and then brush them with a paint brush. This removes all traces of carbon and oil. After the pistols dry lubricate as above.

By the way, Ruger .22 pistol magazines can be broken down to clean.


Semper Fi.
Gunnery Sergeant
Clifford L. Hughes
USMC Retired

 

[spacecoast]

I took my MKII magazines apart the other day and used a barrel rod and patch to swab quite a bit of sand and grit out of a couple of them. The disassembly is easy, just press a small screwdriver in the hole on the bottom of the mag and slide the end cap off. Watch the spring, it's under tension.

 

[jersey_emt]

Revolvers are simpler machines than automatics

Ruger uses that design because it has long proven to be very reliable.
But, as said, revolvers are simpler machines.

Actually, while revolvers are simpler to operate, the typical revolver is a more complex machine with many more small parts than the typical semi-automatic pistol.

 

[Rogervzv]

Taking apart a Mark 22 can be intimidating (well, it intimidated me for a time) until you get the hang of it. However, once you figure it out (it really is simple) it is a snap. Really.

So in deciding between the Single Six and a Mark pistol (my two favorite 22s) don't let the cleaning/assembly issue be the decider.

Fact is, the Single Six and the Mark I/II/IIIs are the best 22 handguns out there, so you are not going to go wrong either way.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I have a .22/45 Mark III, heavy barrel and target sights, and a Single Six convertible with target sights. I love shooting the Single Six, and I never use the .22/45.

For your purposes, if you're comparing to a Mark III Hunter, I think in the Single Six you'd be better off with the 6-1/2" barrel. The 5-1/2" barrel will not be enough to generate nearly maximum velocity out of .22 WMR ammo. It won't matter for plinking, but if you expect to use it against varmints, you want all the velocity and energy you can wring out of it.

 

[Daryl]

I've got a Mark III Hunter that I like to shoot. It is, however, an absolute bugger to clean! I don't think I'll ever get some of that gunk out of the grip area without totally ripping the thing apart. As I continue to put more and more rounds through it, the magazines have started to get harder to remove too, and the only solution has been to use far more gun solvent than I would like to try to flood the junk out. It works, but it's enormously wasteful. As somebody whose gun background is primarily milsurps, this is agonizingly painful to see. My other guns are simple, reliable, and easy to clean. I fail to see why Ruger chose this complex system, and the new "safety" features only make it worse. But either way, I'm considering trying to trade the Hunter for a stainless steel Single-Six with a 5.5" barrel and the WMR cylinder.

What is everybody's opinion of revolver durability and functioning under adverse conditions (environmental and lack of cleaning) compared to the Ruger? Since there isn't a big open space in the gun and it's simpler, it's easier to clean, right? If SHTF and I've only got but some much gun solvent, which gun would be best to have?

I'd take either one, but the Single Six (also made by Ruger, btw) is a very rugged, very dependable platform that will likely function more reliably when neglected and/or very dirty. There just isn't much to jam up a single action revolver.

I know the shorter barrel will compromise the accuracy somewhat compared to the Hunter's superlative performance, but the Hunter is difficult to carry about as I'm working outside. I'm hoping the shorter barrel will help me to actually have the gun with me when the little critters that eat my vegatables actually need shooting.

The shorter barrel might make it harder to shoot accurately, but they're not that bad. Accuracy of the Single Six will likely be less than with your Hunter, simply because the Single Six is generally not a tack driver to begin with. Their accuracy is very adequate for plinking, hunting, and varmint shooting, but it'll leave you wanting in a bullseye competition.

Opinions on this trade plan?

Depends on your intended uses, and only you can decide that. They're both fine handguns that should serve you well. If ruggedness and reliability are your concerns, then have no fear of the Ruger Single Six. They're very reliable handguns that will last several lifetimes with proper care.

P.S. I'm thinking the new Hornady Critical Defense ammo for 22WMR will be a nice upgrade in range and power for particularly stubborn or clever varmints. I'm betting performance out of a 5.5" barrel will be great.

Should work fine, but there's a lot of options on .22 WMR ammo, and most are pretty decent. The Win 40 gr JHP is one of my favorites.