Bearcat 22 mag?

[sheepman]

Does any one know why Ruger discontinued the dual cylinder Bearcat? I have heard that some have the 22 lr cylinder re-chambered to 22 mag and apparently have no problems. Personally don't need a magnum cylinder but an curious to what the problems were. Thanks : Bill :roll:

 

[Danjet500]

I am sure a certain gentleman will be along shortly to give you an explanation and some photos.

 

[flatgate]

Hmm, who's Danjet500 talking about.... :roll:

While we're waiting I'll toss in my two cents worth. When Ruger began production of the New Model version of the Super Bearcat they also introduced the "transfer bar" kit for the Old Model and, in a surprise move, put a miniature version of the Super Blackhawk hammer on the New Bearcat and in the "conversion kit" lockwork, as well.

So, we then had a nice little revolver with a smooth top strap and a wide spur hammer....... gee, I bet a guy could fan this thing and really "get with the program"!!!

Soon thereafter Ruger began receiving reports that the guns were "out of time" and, especially with the magnum cylinder installed, shooters were getting hit with "splattering" bullet jackets!!! (How in the world could that happen unless the "fanners" were short stroking the hammer and letting it drop prior to the cylinder rotating completely into the battery position?) :roll:

Ruger's only recourse was to issue a "recall on the mag cylinders" in an effort to get them "out of the field". Approx. 1,000 convertible New Bearcats had been shipped and around 300 cylinders were returned for the $40 rebate check.

There's not a damn thing wrong with the gun and it's magnum cylinder, IMNSHO, it's the stupid humans that are the problem.

I, too, have heard of many rechambered .22 LR cylinders.

flatgate

 

[edlmann]

I, too, have heard of many rechambered .22 LR cylinders.

Have I read that the bore size for the current Bearcats is correct for .22Mag, not .22LR?

 

[flatgate]

I've not seen any data, however, I'd assume Ruger is using similar bore sizing as they do with the convertible Single-Sixes which is, to the best of my knowledge, a compromise between .22 LR and .22 Magnum.

My New Model Single-Sixes are "tack drivers" with cheap, "by the brick" .22 ammo. I've a very good friend with a New Bearcat that shoots 1 inch groups with common .22 LR ammo.

flatgate

 

[sheepman]

Thank you flatgate for the information, it didn't seam right that the magnum would be a problem. Any way I traded fro a new Bearcat and am enjoying it, shoots good but takes some getting used to (size and light weight) thanks again for you enlightenment. Bill

 

[paleocaver]

OK, I'm really confused. I want a Bearcat for my son. Not a Single Six because the barrel is sized for 22 mag (right?) and we like to shoot .22 LR. Now I read that bearcats are not sized for .22 LR but a comprimize between .22 Mag and .22 LR? Is that right? Hate to go looking elsewhere (other than Ruger) for a true .22 LR revolver.

 

[Papa]

paleocaver, quit fretting over it and go get one of these....

I bought this for my grandson Seth and I've never ever heard anyone say anything bad about a Bearcat. You can't go wrong IMHO, and you'll both treasure the experience for a lifetime...

Papa

 

[stubbfarmer]

That is a beautiful gun papa. Sure would be nice if Ruger or someone else made a stainless ejector housing.

 

[Papa]

Yeah, kinda looks funny in the sun light

 

[flatgate]

Not a Single Six because the barrel is sized for 22 mag (right?)

I do NOT have the current production specifications, however, my Stainless New Model Single-Six is a wonderful shooter!

OK, one of these days I'll take some of the .22 Percussion bullets that came with my most recent purchase of a Freedom Arms .22 Percussion Revolver and "slug" the bores of my New Model Single-Sixes and New Bearcats.

Damn waste of time, though. Get Paco's Accurizer and go shooting!

flatgate

 

[airwin]

+1 for a stainless steel ejector housing !!!

 

[461]

I had my daughters Bearcat rechambered to .22mag and it shoots like a dream. It shot pretty darn good as a .22lr too though.

If you measure a whole mess of .22lr and .22mag, you'll find that the majority of both mics out at .224. I doubt anybody can really tell much of an accuracy difference.

 

[Ale-8(1)]

The best info I have is that Ruger long ago settled on the proper .22 Magnum bore dimensions for its convertible Single-Sixes. This also happens to work quite well with .22LR ammo as there is only 0.002" difference between the two cartridges, and that's less than the allowable tolerances. The SAAMI specs bear this out.

One can only assume that Ruger used the same approach with the convertible Bearcats. It will be interesting to see flatgate's test results.

IMHO the "compromise" rumor is just that.

 

[chet15]

IMHO the "compromise" rumor is just that.

I agree! What compromise? SAAMI specs went from .222 to .224 and Ruger specs went from .222 to .224. The only compromise is compromising the .22 LR to shoot out of a larger bore.
Chet15

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Now that we've well and truly pirated this thread, consider the following info from SAAMI . . .

The .22LR bullet is specced at .2255" while the barrel's groove diameter is specced at .222", producing a .0035" interference fit.

The .22Magnum bullet is specced at .2245" and the groove at .224", producing only a .0005" interference fit.

The .22LR is intended to use those relatively soft lead bullets, while the .22Mag is intended for use with the lightly-jacketed bullets.

Note that a .22LR bullet produces a .0015" interference fit in a Magnum bore which would seem to work nicely, while a .22Magnum bullet would produce a .0025" fit in a LR bore, probably not optimal considering the jacketed bullets used in the Mag rounds. This goes a long way to explaining how the Rugers work so well with either bullet size in what is now assumed to be a .224" barrel groove.

WBR was a sharp cookie.