Single-Nine & Single-Ten: why?

[Ale-8(1)]

I note that Ruger still offers both the Single-Nine as well as the Single-Ten. While I applaud Ruger for pursuing the "optimization" of the Single-Six envelope, I have to wonder about the necessity for offering both models.

One of Ruger's biggest selling points for the Single-Six over the last fifty years has been the practice of furnishing both .22LR and .22WMR cylinders in the now-famous "convertible" package, beginning a practice that fathered the .357/9mm and .45 Colt/.45ACP Blackhawks, and later the Buckeye converts and their cousin the .44Mag/.44-40 and a couple others.

I cannot help but wonder why Ruger does not just offer a .22LR convertible cylinder in the Single-Nine and be done with it. Yes, I suppose having a ten-shot single-action rimfire in the lineup can be considered a plus to the marketing boys, but I'd surely be interested to know how many of those are sold compared to the present Single-Nine version, and if that difference wouldn't be more than covered by a nine-shot convertible at a considerable economy of effort when compared to having two different guns in the line . . . particularly when the current Single-Nine is only offered in a not-extremely-popular chambering.

Yes, I'm aware that the .22WMR is limited to nine rounds by the size of the cylinder.

I have no dog in this hunt . . . just wondering what the rest of you think about it.

:mrgreen:

 

[jjas]

Two points....

1. Perhaps Ruger is looking not only for additional monies by offering new models, but is also trying to keep the revolver relevant for many shooters who prefer higher capacity firearms.

2. Along those lines.....I read where Uberti has brought out a 12 shot .22lr single action revolver.

 

[hutchman]

I have wondered the same...... One issue might be that ugly capitalist issue of profit margin. Probably more money to be made on two revolvers rather than one with an extra cylinder. The conspiracy theorist in me says they planned this from the beginning!

 

[Ale-8(1)]

I suppose it's theoretically possible that the combined sales of the two single-chambering models might exceed the sales of a single convertible model. That said, I have strong doubts. I just have a hard time believing there's a huge market for a .22WMR-only gun . . . a market large enough to make it an attractive offering on its own merits. One imagines the marketing boys have convinced upper management the market justifies a separate model, but it surely seems unlikely to me, particularly when the single-chambering guns list for the same price as the convertibles.

All JMHO, of course.

 

[hutchman]

It is hard for me to believe that the separate models are an afterthought though. With the success of the Single Six Convertible over the year, you would have thought that would have been part of the higher capacity plan from the beginning. Other than profit, what other reasons might there be? I am very curious also as the profit issue was somewhat tongue-in-cheek.

Are the barrels the same diameter? That might be the issue, but seems to me they are the same.

 

[eveled]

I won't buy one of either because of that, they should have made a 9shot convertable. IMHO.

 

[Ale-8(1)]

The concept of a "high-capacity, single-action .22 revolver" makes me giggle.

Probably gives Senator Feinstein heartburn, though.

Sorry.

:lol: :lol: :roll: :lol: :lol:

 

[Uncle Howie]

I won't buy one of either because of that, they should have made a 9shot convertable. IMHO.

This about sums it up for me, too.

I "sort of" like the idea of the Single-Ten, but haven't bought one. The (.22WMR only) Single-Nine doesn't do anything for me.

For now, I guess I'll just have to shoot my tin cans in groups of six... :mrgreen:

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Six-packs . . . six rounds . . . coincidence?

I think not.

 

[jjas]

The concept of a "high-capacity, single-action .22 revolver" makes me giggle.

Probably gives Senator Feinstein heartburn, though.

Sorry.

:lol: :lol: :roll: :lol: :lol:

Think she (Feinstein) will refer to these revolvers as "assault single actions"? :lol:

 

[Stainless22]

I agree, Hawkeye. I don't see the reason for having both. A "nine" convertible is a good idea and I think it will happen, and the Single-Ten will be obsolete. I think the Ten will be a short production, so I bought one just to collect. Well, I did shoot it, but that's another post.

 

[mohavesam]

Same reason they make a 5" 1911 and a 4.5" 1911...

"'Tis better to have two models and eventually drop one due to lower sales... than to have only one model ever."

"One choice does not in itself, make a choice.

Or as Clint would say:
"You've got to ask yourself one question: Do I think the Single-Nine or the Single-Ten is gonna be the "collectible"? Well, what do ya do, punk? 8)
Buy both and be happy.

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Well, if "choice" is the issue, then they should be offering the Nines and Tens in all the barrel lengths, and in blue as well as stainless.

"Take yer pick, punk!"

 

[Bucolic Buffalo]

Have any of you guys thought that the reason Ruger has the Single Nine and the Single Ten is because there is a market for them. Some people may want just the .22lr caliber of the Single Ten and others just want the .22wmr caliber of the Single Nine.

I myself have the Single Six Convertible but I got that back in the 1990's which was long before the Single Nine and the Single Ten came out. I usually shoot .22LR because it is lot cheaper than the .22 WMR. The .22 WMR cylinder is nice to have when I do want to shoot that caliber.

 

[CajunBass]

You know. I've never wondered about it. I figure either they'll both sell or neither will. Or one will and the other won't. The ones that sell will get made, and the ones that don't, won't before too long.

If you make it and it doesn't sell, you know nobody wanted it. But if you never make it, you'll never know for sure. You'll always wonder.

 

[The Blackhawk Kid]

It makes sense to keep making the Single Six convertible, but marketing now a days is the rule of thumb. When did Ruger stop making Single Sixes converts? I have a friend who is looking for one. 22 mag ammo is expensive. 22 lr still gets the job done on skunks and possums, mostly cans.

 

[Ale-8(1)]

The SS converts are still offered in the product line.

There's a "market" for almost anything. The question is always whether the size of that market is sufficient to justify all the hassle of manufacturing and marketing that thing.

I guess we'll eventually see if there's adequate demand for the Nines and Tens. I'd assume the marketing department was able to convince management of a market, or these two versions would have never gotten produced. I have just never been able to imagine a large enough market for either/both of them, whereas I COULD see a market for a nine-shot convertible . . . simply the logical maximization of the Single-Six convertible.

Strictly a personal observation and not a condemnation of the individual variations on their own merits. I'll guess the New Model collectors will be gathering them in, but I doubt that's a large enough market on its own to justify their existance.

JMHO

 

[Stainless22]

Well, if "choice" is the issue, then they should be offering the Nines and Tens in all the barrel lengths, and in blue as well as stainless.

I'd love that. My bank account might not, but I would :mrgreen:

 

[Floridaoutdoors]

The six shot cylinder ratchet just has to be more durable.

Market demand drives in multiple directions.There was a time when we dreamed of a Ruger five shot 357.
By the way-why not a compact five shot .44?

 

[Ale-8(1)]

In the July issue of GUNS Magazine, John Taffin reviews the Nine and the Ten. He's quite happy with them in general, and notes that there's a 4-5/8" version of the Ten available through Lipsey's.

He notes the seemingly fragile nature of the cylinder ratchet on the Ten, and was assured by Ruger that, properly handled, this should prove to be a non-issue (!).

His inquiry to Ruger about the possibility of a convertible Nine was met with the response that at this time they are so busy the convertible is not in the immediate future. John hopes this changes, as he is as enamored of the convertible concept as I am.

He was quite satisfied with the accuracy of all the test guns, and his closing comment was a hope that Ruger would produce both models in the other barrel lengths . . . including perhaps a 7-1/2" version.

No mention was made of the possibility of blued versions.

 

[rugerguy]

Problem I see is there is enough and LOTS of "confusion" by so many people already on the "basic" first designs and the "spare" cylinders, add all this "other" variations and I SEE 'more problems, issues, as Bubba will do his damdest to make one fit hell or high water...guess its just the 'lawyer' in me, yikes, scary thought!!! :shock:
and YES, the smaller, finer size of the ratchets, and I KNOW they will not hold up to what SOME folks can and WILL put them through, time will tell... 8)

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Yeah, anyone playing "Fanner 50" with one of those is likely in for trouble . . . and they will totally deserve it.

JMHO

 

[SteveRuger]

I like mine! I enjoy it out shooting varmits! J/S

 

[popplecop]

I use an old Bearcat from the 50s and a Single Six 3 screw for plinking, shooting a squirrel etc. Usually have one or the other with me while bird hunting or just prowling the outdoors. Always loaded with 5 rounds and has proven to be adequate for me. Lot easier to unload at the end of the day and fewer chambers to clean. Besides that I'm just old fashion.

 

[dakota1911]

Glad I have my "old" Single Six convertible. I do not plan on buying one of the 9s or 10s.

 

[AKDRSS]

My two cents worth after owning half a dozen or so of the convertible .22's.

None that I ever owned would shoot both .22LR and .22 Mag accurately, it was one or the other. Then add in the fact after you changed the cylinder you would have to re sight the revolver and well, its just a PITA.

I own both a single 10 and 9 and both are accurate and sighted in. When I grab either one I know it is ready to go with the cylinder in it. The 10 is for fun and the 9 is for small game. The 22 mag is vastly superior to the .22LR for shooting critters.

 

[9x19]

I'm not tied to the convertible nature of the Single Six, but I do like both the .22LR and .22WMR... I just prefer having a revolver for each cartridge.

 

[Bucolic Buffalo]

I'm not looking to get either the Nine or the Ten. It's not that I have anything against them. I just happen to have a Single Six convertible that is a good shooter with both cylinders. If I didn't have the Single Six and was in the market for a.22 It would be the Ten simply because 99.99% of the .22 ammo I shoot is .22lr.

 

[chet15]

Ruger's already done plenty of experimenting with the Single-Six in different calibers. It started in 1959 when they introduced the .22 Mag. only Single-Six, along with the other three barrel lengths of Single-Six which were LR only. Then a few wise consumers began sending their Single-Sixes back to have the extra cylinder fitted to them (at $10 or $15). By early 1961, so many people were sending their guns back (and probably tying up the service department) that somebody at Ruger decided a convertible Single-Six would be the way to go. And in March 1961 they were first offered alongside the original LR only and Mag. only Single-Sixes. By the time 1964 rolled around, the percentage of orders of convertibles vs. non-convertibles was about 95%/5% in favor of the convertible so Ruger dropped all but their 5-1/2" LR only which would serve as an "economy" model throughout the rest of Old Model production. Didn't matter if the consumer shot the .22 Mag cylinder or not (a huge percentage never did shoot Mags), but they still liked the "added value" of a convertible Single-Six if they ever wanted to use that option in the future.
So when the Super Single-Six came out in November 1964, they were all convertibles. And when the NM Super Single-Six came out in 1973 those too were all convertibles.
But Ruger experimented in 1975 with four barrel lengths in blue and stainless of a LR only series (the star marked guns), finding after a year that they really weren't that popular, so they were discontinued.
Forgetting about their past history, they tried again in 1986 offering only a LR only series (temporarily suspending production of the blue convertibles) and brought out the "arrow" marked models in all four barrel lengths. They lasted only a few months before the public again "balked".
So...it kind of surprised me when the Single-Nine came out after the Single-Ten, because they could have greatly increased interest and sales in the NM Single-Six if they had just come out with a Single-Nine to start with. Such a model would have the potential to completely knock out the six round convertibles from the lineup.
As far as worries with the ratchet on the rear of the cylinder, it would take abuse to make that happen. Just like the abuse that happened even with old model centerfire SA's from fanning (the model that took the worst of it was the Bearcat where everything is in miniature).
Normal wear and tear with somebody responsible enough to operate a firearm safely would probably get several lifetimes out of a Single-Nine or Single-Ten.
Chet15

 

[Ale-8(1)]

"So...it kind of surprised me when the Single-Nine came out after the Single-Ten, because they could have greatly increased interest and sales in the NM Single-Six if they had just come out with a Single-Nine to start with. Such a model would have the potential to completely knock out the six round convertibles from the lineup."

Absolutely . . . if the New Model Single Nine had been introduced as a convertible from the get-go.