Will Ruger ever

[Mike Armstrong]

Make .32 cal Single Sixes again? I'd really like to have a .32 cal. SS, but used ones are getting scarce and pricey, especially out here in CA. Do you suppose Ruger will ever make the SS in .32 again?

I think they would have to retool the gun to fit the .327 Magnum because the frame is a little too short for that round (Right?). And a .32 H&R Magnum version might not sell well because of the presence of the .327--some guys just HAVE to have the hottest thing going! (Personally I don't need magnums and would be very happy with a .32 S&W Long version, but I may well be the only one in the universe that feels that way).

For me, the best of all possible worlds, .32-wise, would be for Ruger to lengthen the frame of the SS enough for the .327 and .32-20 and then make a dual cylinder stainless Bisley 6 1/2" version for the two "big .32s." Uberti makes one, but it isn't a Ruger....

There's nothing wrong with the Blackhawks and GP-100s in .327 except they are overweight and too big for an easy carry .32. All that extra weight would be better spent on food or water (or less gravitational pull on your spine), when you are hiking the boonies. The SS is just handier.

I know I could save my pennies and have my dream gun made by one of the custom gunsmiths, but at the price it just isn't going to happen. Rather Ruger would just run some SS .32 H&Rs, like they used to!

Any chance of that happening? Did the original ones live up to Ruger's expectations as far as sales went, or are they kinda scarce just because few were made? Or is it just that you guys who have them hang onto them?

 

[Rclark]

but I may well be the only one in the universe that feels that way.

Might be . I just can't get any steam up for the .32. I have .22 and .357 . Can load the .357 up or down to meet my needs.... So why the .32 (I use same argument for .41)? I may be the only guy in the universe that feels this way though .

Never say never with Ruger. They did bring the medium frame back which I never thought would happen. Now if they'd just drop the Large frame .357 and make the medium frame .357 BH flattop the standard again ... Anyway, so who knows you might see the .32 on the Single Six again. Or Lipseys may do a 'trial' run to test the waters for product demand.

 

[jeffnles1]

A medium frame Vaquero or a full frame Blackhawk in 32-20 would perk my interest. I have a Marlin 1894 in 32-20 and a companion single action revolver would be nice to have.

Unfortunately the special run 32-20's from a few years back seem to have become 'collectable' and the price is way out of my league for a 'nice to have' revolve. However, if Ruger were to reintroduce them at a normal Vaquero or Blackhawk price, then I'm a buyer.

Jeff

 

[JCW64]

Mike,
I saw one yesterday in a gunshop. It was the John Wayne model made for TALO distributors. It is the 4th gun down on this link. The gun was NIB and was around $650 I think. PM me if you want more details.

http://www.taloinc.com/strum_ruger.htm#JWE6

 

[Lee Martin]

I'd also like to see a 327 Single-Six but Ruger would likely have to do a 5-shot. That said, we should lobby for the 32 H&R to be reintroduced. Seems like the round has gained steam in recent years.

 

[rugerguy]

I don;t know, I usually have a few 32 H&R mag parts, cylinders and barrels for sale at the gun shows, and most of the time there is at least ONE Buckeye 32-20 , 32 H&R mag and they do NOT sell hardly, little or no interest...........................last stainless 32 Single Six took about 5 shows to move, and at that the price was LOW..................then again, this is in Ohio.................so go figure

 

[gak]

A couple of misperceptions here I'm surprised haven't been corrected yet. NO frame modifications are required for conversion to .327. The custom smiths have proved this time and again. The frame window is adequate as it is. The stock H&R cylinder on existing guns is too short (why you see so many .32 cylinders for sale on the market) and so a proper conversion requires a new cylinder which those smiths provide. The b/c gap does need to be "adjusted" to the new cylinder. And, a 5 shot is not required either--as it is for .38 conversions--as there is plenty of beef between the six shooter's .32 bores.
...So, there is no technical reason why Ruger could not produce new Single Sixes in .327 using the old tooling, just providing a new cylinder. I have heard, but maybe someone here can verify, that some overly long handloaded bullets can be problematic. If so, solution, avoid those Conversely, I think it's been mentioned that overly short .327 loadings can be made to work by just reaming the H&R cylinder to permit the .327 case. Again, I don't know how true. I wouldn't do it, but that's me. Someone will chime in here.

To me, a .327 Single Six is as much a no brainer as there is for Ruger. And a simple and not particularly costly project for them. IMO, IF Ruger produces another .32 SS, it'll be a .327 - a) it's a cartridge they helped into being b) it can also shoot the H&R's, longs, etc and c) they'd receive such flak for going to the trouble or at least hubbub to reproduce the .32 H&R but missing the opportunity to make the gun .327 capable - and rightfully so. I'd be first in line...I'm a big .32 H&R Mag fan and probably what I'd continue to shoot most anyway. But I'd sure like the option.

Also, to the comment of seeing no need between .22 and .38/.357--that's one heckuva gap in coverage, more than anywhere else in the caliber spectrum. And, the .32 H&R, even in often derided mild factory loadings, is no 22 - anything. Really decent popper, small game getter and with proper loads decent .38-level SD. More than anything, they're super fun to shoot. In fact, nothing I own (which spans .22s through .357 and .44s) is such a hoot to shoot! To me the .32s, especially the two "mags," plug that gap perfectly.

 

[timnc]

I'm all for it. Would especially like to see a 3.5 to 4" barrel with adj. sights in .327. The "perfect" woods walking pistol in my area.

 

[Lee Martin]

The 327 Federal operates way over 40,000 PSI. You can absolutely do it on a Single-Six as a 6-shot. Many custom smiths are offering the conversion. My point is I doubt it'll have the margin of safety Ruger is after. Just a guess though. Either way, I doubt we'll see one.

 

[22/45 Fan]

Not exactly what you are looking for but Ruger does make the SP-101 in .327 Federal as a 6-shot with a 3" bbl and sort-of adjustable sights. Now, if they would only offer it in the 4.2" barrel format with fully adjustable sights they should have the absolutely ideal "kit gun".

 

[JWhitmore44]

I'm all for it. Would especially like to see a 3.5 to 4" barrel with adj. sights in .327. The "perfect" woods walking pistol in my area.

Make it stainless to go with my blued 32 mag and I'd be in. Never had much use for a 357 :lol:

If I need something bigger than my 32, out comes something in a caliber that starts with 4.

To the Op, keep your money handy and an eye on the classifieds. I've seen a few 32's wander through there and no one seems to jump on them real fast.

 

[varminter22]

A couple of misperceptions here I'm surprised haven't been corrected yet. ...

I certainly agree!

The current Blackhawk .327 is simply TOO big.

I never miss a chance to praise the .32 H&R Mag. It has to be the most underappreciated cartridge in America!

Would I buy a new Single Six in .327? Maybe/Probably.

But am happy with my Single Sixes in .32 H&R Mag. Its a pleasure to shoot and perfectly fine for small game up to and including coyotes.

I haven't even owned a .38/.357 in many years. (However, I am interested in the S&W M627 for ICORE, in which I will likely use .38 Short Colt brass.)

 

[GasGuzzler]

I have the gap mentioned that needs filled. It just makes sense. I don't want the use of 32-20 as a rule since the last recent box of Cowboys I bought for and OLD Colt were $40 per 50 at Cabela's (and they're weird looking LOL) but any of the other .32 is very inviting to me.

 

[Mike Armstrong]

Gak and others, points well taken. I DIDN'T know that it was cylinder length, not frame opening length that was the issue with the .327 and the SS. Interesting.

I do like the .32 H&R ctg. but use the .32 S&W Long more. It is quiet and extremely accurate, even in a magnum cylinder (I have an S&W Model 16-4 w/6" barrel. Too heavy but very accurate.). I find that at the ranges I can still hit reliably with a revolver, the .32 wadcutters loaded up to the Olympic rapid fire velocity (a little hotter than our standard, to run automatic target pistols) will kill small game and varmints very well without much ruckus or meat/pelt damage or leading. QUIET is GOOD, especially in Southern California (it isn't just on the TV that noise attracts "the walking dead"). I sometimes use .38 Special wadcutters in my GP-100 for the same reasons; not much bark, lotta smack.

I would certainly buy an SS in .327, but I'd very likely shoot shorter .32s in it most of the time. Fixed sight .32s don't have any appeal for me--I mess with too many different .32 cartridges and loadings for that.

I had a .32 H&R SP101 with the 3" barrel and didn't like it much, although I generally like Ruger DAs (have .357 GP100 and a .38 Spl. Speed Six). The short barrel and "almost adjustable" sights didn't fit my needs well.

I DO like the .32-20 and have several--Win Lo-wall, Savage bolt action, 1906 Colt Bisley and 1940 Official Police. But I'd like a modern one to shoot the heck out of and can't afford a new SAA or USFA....

Will keep my eyes open for a .32 SS here and elsewhere, and keep savin' those pennies!

Thanks for all the info and views!

Mike Armstrong

 

[gak]

I would also like to see at least a special distributor run of midframe (fixed and adj) .32-20/.327 convertibles. I'm well aware of their previous Buckeye BH and large Vaqueros in that combo. A friend has the Vaq and it's a nice piece but oh so heavy. The midframe would be no lightweight either, but kept at 5.5" or shorter I would think would still make a dandy gun.

 

[sfrank]

I would definitely be interested in the 327 Single Six. You could reload it to any 32 cal power level which would make it very versatile. I currently own a 32 H&R "Vaquerito" with a birdshead grip and it is my favorite revolver to shoot as it has a very mild recoil when shooting cowboy loads in it. Hey Ruger, please make this revolver.

 

[Lee Martin]

A mid-frame 327 would be a neat little package. With a 5.5 - 6.0" barrel it would provide a lot of zap. I've been wanting to convert a 50th 357 to the Federal but too many other projects get in the way. Maybe in '13. In the meantime, we should lobby Ruger for a single-action 327.

 

[foilist]

I have both the 327 Fed mag in GP100 and Blackhawk. I really like my Blackhawk. Yeah, it's 48 oz with a 5.5 inch barrel but I really like 8 shots in my single action. I have seven shots in the GP. I love both guns. I sometimes think I'd like to get the SP101 in 327 but I'd have the hammer bobbed so it won't catch on clothing. For me it's a powerful cartridge and I hope Ruger keeps making the GP and the BH in 327. I hope they start production again on the SP101 in 327.

 

[dougader]

Ruger should have made this so I didn't have to spend so much money to make it the way I wanted it (mine is still 32 mag, not 327 Federal):

 

[Lee Martin]

Those look great Doug. S&W rear sights, corrrect? And who did the work?

 

[gak]

Those look great Doug. S&W rear sights, corrrect? And who did the work?

+1 to all that. Was going to say S&W. To me a more elegant solution than the bulkier regular/factory adjustable sight topstrap especially on these smaller frames.

 

[dougader]

Thanks guys. Alan Harton made those twins for me, and - yes - they are S&W j-frame adjustable rear sights.

I thought I'd like the little 32 mag best of the two, but that 45 Colt Montado balances perfectly. It has to be my favorite revolver.

 

[Lee Martin]

You're well covered with that set Doug. And I can see why that Montado would be one of your favorites.

 

[32magfan]

I talked the ear off the Lipsey's rep at the Outpost Armory here in TN a year or so ago about them doing a run of convertibles on the Mid-frames both in Flattop and New Vaquero versions. He said it sounded like a good idea to him. I have also communicated to our resident Lipsey's guy here on RF and was told something was coming I would like...

I guess we could all petition Lipsey's like crazy for it to happen. :roll: I'm so eat up with .32's and single actions, I might buy 4 or more if there are enough different versions. Don't even get me started on the consecutive numbered pairs business (maybe 8? :shock: - i'm spending like i'm in Congress now!!).

I'm in for several - maybe at the SHOT show... We can dream, can't we? :wink:

32Magfan