Unexpected Purchase

[Highstandardguy]

I was looking for something else but found this. Not perfect by any means, but nice so I bought it. I don't know very much about single actions and this one is already confusing me. Serial number is 372776. It came with a .22 LR cylinder etched with the last 3 digits of the serial number. Called Ruger and they told me it was a .22 mag manufactured in the late 50s. RENE seem to suggest it is a .22 LR manufactured in 1963 and it's an RSSM if I'm reading it correctly. Can any of you single six experts tell me what I have?

 

[hittman]

Isn’t it true that the etched s/n was on the “extra” cylinder?
That’d make this one shipped as a 22 MAG gun?
But, it’s not roll marked 22 Mag.
In short … I don’t know. LOL

Ruger’s web site shows 1963 as a 22 Mag gun.
Ruger’s web site shows no numbers like this if it’s a “standard” Single Six.

 

[Highstandardguy]

If it were a .22 mag, would the magnum cylinder be solid or fluted?

 

[hittman]

Fluted I think but I’m not the single action professor here.

 

[arcticruger]

Both cylinders would be fluted back then. The one with the firing pin ring on the back is the 22 LR cylinder, the one without is 22 mag cylinder. Which one has the last 3 digits of the serial # etched on it?

 

[Highstandardguy]

22 LR cylinder. Don't have a magnum cylinder.

 

[rugerguy]

if its 'etched' last three digits on the cylinder, it is a type 3 transition, and could be either ONE or both cylinders, made in 1963.......unless you have the box * (shipper) that would have the RSSM catalog number with an "X" for convertible,,if not then I'd guess ( hope ) a letter from the Ruger may tell you if it was shipped as an RSSMX ( convertible or not) nice gun, we had one near that number last fall and it was a convertible sold it before Christmas, and it was in the box but NO shipper, and obviously the box by itself, ONLY shows the RSSM.....any "X" would be on the shipper.......Nice gun

 

[hittman]

Yeah, the $10 letter from Ruger would be well worth it.

 

[contender]

Nice gun!

Good info above.

Often, the factory website records can be a bit off, or not correct. And a call to them may or may not get you to true information.
The LETTER is the best way to get good info.

 

[Highstandardguy]

Thanks everyone! I'll send for a letter.

 

[hittman]

And when you send the letter, enclose a cover letter asking them if its model number has the X to indicate it is a convertible model. You don’t want them giving it a quick glance and missing something. Remember, whoever sees your request may not be a collector or know the difference on a gun likely made 30 years before they were born.

 

[chet15]

By the time 372776 was made, both cylinders of the RSSMX had the last three digits of the serial number scribed on the front face of the cylinder. If your's looks that way, it left as model RSSMX convertible.
Ruger's dates of manufacture page lists the RSSM Mag. only as continuing clear to the end of non-prefix production, and that is simply not true.... unless somebody were to come up with a Mag. only after 400000 that letters as mag. only. They may have made some, but none are known.
As it is, there are only around 15 guns known from 340xxx to 400000 that letter as Mag. only RSSMW.
No guns after 3400xx are known with Magnum markings on the side of the frame, except for the one we handled in the 342xxx range that had the standard Single-Six marking rollmarked over the Magnum Single-Six marking.
Chet15

 

[Highstandardguy]

Letter request sent. Guess I'll see what Ruger has to say. IF this is a Convertible and IF the previous owner had the magnum cylinder, there's a whisp of a chance that I might find it. Going to try today.

Update: No magnum cylinder.

 

[Highstandardguy]

Well it lettered as an RSSMX. Since the original magnum cylinder disappeared somewhere in the last 60 years, I'm guessing is has zero collector value. Seems my venture into OM single actions has been less than stelar. Best to stick with what you know.

Any ideas on what a nice unconverted .22 LR shooter might be worth?

 

[hittman]

Confirmed as a convertible sounds like great news to me!
Not unusual at all for one of the cylinders to be missing.
Easily replaced.
Be more collectible if it had the original box, manuals, etc.
STILL collectible as far as I’m concerned.
Measure the LR cylinder and put a WTB ad in Classifieds for it’s magnum companion.

 

[Highstandardguy]

I have other .22 magnum revolvers so that's not a big deal, but since this was originally a convertible model the magnum cylinder would be nice. However the prices I'm seeing are in the $175 to $250 range. I doubt an incorrect numbered cylinder would increase the value of the revolver by that much. Just sending good money after bad. Am I wrong?

 

[hittman]

Your call.
You won’t know for sure until you put a WTB ad in Classifieds.
Some folks here may not put a “pandemic price” on things for fellow members.
Costs you nothing but a few minutes to find out.

 

[rem58sport]

I wasn't concerned about collectability when an unconverted 1970 RSSMX had been sitting for a wile at the LGS. Actually, I couldn't scoop it up fast enough, living in a more restricted State. I didn't actually know the model at the time other than a SS. Over time I picked up a box, instructions and a Mag cylinder. I just like the idea of a close to complete package.

 

[KIR]

Purchased this in 1967. As one can see both the LR and the Mag cylinders are fluted. I gave this gun to my oldest son as he had fond memories of taking him out shooting, loading it with blanks and teasing him about not being able to hit the broad side of a barn.
After a year, I kinda missed that gun and came across a new single six with adjustable sights. It too has both cylinders fluted. It was mfg. in 1973. I have rarely used the LR cylinders as I prefer the .22 Mag.