Odd Duck Standard 22 Query

This is probably better asked in the Ruger Collecting section...? I'll start here.

Ran across a rimfire gun which is something of a quandry. A Standard model shorty 4.75" tapered barrel pistol. It is an A-54 frame gun but it references as a 1970 gun. The prefix is a very, very lightly-stamped "10-" and a heavy stamped "44xxx" suffix. The "10-" characters appear to be a bubble off horizontal from the roll stamped numbers... Did I describe that adequately? Obviously not roll-stamped all at one time.
The employee bought it from Ruger stock-on-hand a few years ago and had it refinished internally.

First does it sound like a 1952 gun, that got lost until 1970?
Second, is it known to have been part of a 'cleanup' batch released in 1970?
Third, wth was it doing in factory stock in 2008-ish? :?

- I have seen no finer finish work on any metal-framed Ruger 22 pistol. :shock:

Thx in advance for your opine.

If it is a 44XXX gun and shipped in 1952 it would have a 2 piece tapered ear bolt. If it was shipped in 1970 then it could have any combination of parts from 1952 to 1970. I would send off for a letter from Ruger.

You will see many of those lightly stamped ,off center rollmarked 10 dash guns,,,not sure if this was a result of the 1968 GCA when Ruger had to assign the 'prefix'?? doubt very seriously it is a OM, left over, early red eagle RST-4....just a matter of the guys learning "how" to roll mark all those extra digits, dies breaking, new dies for the numbers "10"??? who knows if only they could talk... 8) :roll: :wink:

Thx.

Checked my scrouging book, This is the second "10-" standard I have seen. Both are A54 frames, not the A100 later revision. Both had 1953 or '54 five-digit roll stamps. My third question above is pure speculation unless a pro knows what I don't?

All 10- prefix guns are A54 frames. The A100 didn't come in until about 11-40000.
I have also noticed the discrepancy of the prefix (on early prefixed guns) in regards to lighter or more heavily stamped, and out of whack horizontally. Have some great pictures that would also seem to indicate the 10- and the other five digits were stamped at different times, although IF that were the case, it would have been not long after either was stamped, in the same batch. The large size serial numbers are the first indication of that, and of course, 1969 era parts on the gun.
Spoke to a Ruger employee about the possibility of the prefix ever being stamped separately from the rest of the serial number and he said that all prefixed numbers were stamped at the same time.
But it is curious as to why even the dash of the prefix sometimes even touches or just overlaps the last digit of the prefix.
Also, you would think that with the 10- prefix stamped so high or low from the other 5 digits that if it was stamped AT THE SAME TIME, the upper portion or lower portion of the 10- would be lighter than the other portion of the 10-. I have two different pics where on one gun the 10- is lighter stamped than the 5-set and on another pic the five set is lighter stamped than the 10- prefix.
You will also note that the 0 in the earliest prefixes is a different font than any 0 found in the 5 set.
If somebody would like to post some pictures for me I can send those.
Chet15

My time in machine shops learnt me a thing or two. The "10-" prefixes were definitely not made by the same machine. Or even the same stamping method?
I suspect the pistols in question were stores-cleanup guns restamped for sale after the GCA took effect, and in anticipation of engineering revisions we know as the A100 grip frames.
The A54 original tooling had been made and in constant use since 51 or '52, and probably wearing down quickly at that point, even guessing the revision frame tooling was in the works by 1970, making the prefix addition to existing stock imperative by expedited means. This possibly involved a jig to impact-stamp the three characters we discuss today, adding to the existing deeper roll-stamped five digits. ?
Suspect being the key term. Those of us who recall a machine shop environ in 1969-70 can only surmise. Remember there was a war machine promising "unlimited" purchasing of similar pistols...

As to WHY a 1970 or earlier gun was in factory stock in 2008 (when this employee purchased it direct), I can only concede "Ruger stuff happens" ??

mohavesam said:

My time in machine shops learnt me a thing or two. The "10-" prefixes were definitely not made by the same machine. Or even the same stamping method?
I suspect the pistols in question were stores-cleanup guns restamped for sale after the GCA took effect, and in anticipation of engineering revisions we know as the A100 grip frames.
The A54 original tooling had been made and in constant use since 51 or '52, and probably wearing down quickly at that point, even guessing the revision frame tooling was in the works by 1970, making the prefix addition to existing stock imperative by expedited means. This possibly involved a jig to impact-stamp the three characters we discuss today, adding to the existing deeper roll-stamped five digits. ?
Suspect being the key term. Those of us who recall a machine shop environ in 1969-70 can only surmise. Remember there was a war machine promising "unlimited" purchasing of similar pistols...

As to WHY a 1970 or earlier gun was in factory stock in 2008 (when this employee purchased it direct), I can only concede "Ruger stuff happens" ??

Click to expand...

Well, being devil's advocate... how do you get so many guns numbered 0xxxx then? And large serial numbers at that? And with INC. in the address rollmarks?
If somebody can post some pictures for me though, I have a picture that could back your theory up.... but not for early made guns.
Chet15

rugerguy said:

You will see many of those lightly stamped ,off center rollmarked 10 dash guns,,,not sure if this was a result of the 1968 GCA when Ruger had to assign the 'prefix'?? doubt very seriously it is a OM, left over, early red eagle RST-4....just a matter of the guys learning "how" to roll mark all those extra digits, dies breaking, new dies for the numbers "10"??? who knows if only they could talk... 8) :roll: :wink:

Click to expand...

Dan. Serial number 44XXX would not be a left over Red Eagle. It would be a Black Eagle Tapered Ear Auto.

my point was any left over old model RST-4 red eagle or black eagle,,,,as noted the rollmarks of the address are totally WRONG for an early gun, like Chad said (INC" happened much later......and that being said I have seen my wifes low number red eagle serial number #2720 and it has the "INC" rollmarked on it???? wrote a story about it in the RENE long ago,,,,she has BOTH guns, SAME serial number,,,but I get away from the OP and the difference in th efonts, size, location, and just "how hard or soft" they were stamped...............

who said anything about a red eagle gun?

rugerguy said:

You will see many of those lightly stamped ,off center rollmarked 10 dash guns,,,not sure if this was a result of the 1968 GCA when Ruger had to assign the 'prefix'?? doubt very seriously it is a OM, left over, early red eagle RST-4....just a matter of the guys learning "how" to roll mark all those extra digits, dies breaking, new dies for the numbers "10"??? who knows if only they could talk... 8) :roll: :wink:

Click to expand...

I have a 1957 RST4 that is roll marked "Sturm, Ruger and CCO". An extra "C" was added!

daveg.inkc said:

rugerguy said:

You will see many of those lightly stamped ,off center rollmarked 10 dash guns,,,not sure if this was a result of the 1968 GCA when Ruger had to assign the 'prefix'?? doubt very seriously it is a OM, left over, early red eagle RST-4....just a matter of the guys learning "how" to roll mark all those extra digits, dies breaking, new dies for the numbers "10"??? who knows if only they could talk... 8) :roll: :wink:

Click to expand...

I have a 1957 RST4 that is roll marked "Sturm, Ruger and CCO". An extra "C" was added!

Click to expand...

Can you post a pic of that please?