Which is the more accurate handgun?

The ability toadd a 22Mag cylinder is a HUGE plus. But I am not sure of the accuracy with said cylinder.

I asked a few months ago of thoughs Buckmark vs Ruger Mark III. I think I have made the decision to stick with Ruger.

Now trying to make the pick between the two.

Would be a training tool, packing pistol for the kids and myself.

Almost leaning toward the revolver as it's more "intentional" than the autoloader. But accuracy is paramount.

I've got the Single-Six convertible AND the Ruger MK-II slab-side..

The latter is by far my most accurate. I've had quite a few folks tell me they're not all that enthralled by the MK-III.. Since I do not have one nor have I had one in the shop I cannot tell you why, nor can I remember why, they're not favored..

The biggest reason I remember for the unfavorable views of the Mark III is the magazine safety.

I have a Mark III 22/45 slab side and love it.

Guess I was wrong. Actually got results from the Search function for once. Seems the 22Mag cylinder is the more accurate of the two. I did recall a difference in the bullets diameters/specs for the two rimfires.

I do not have a Single Six but I do have a MkIII. The Mk has run flawlessly and the accuracy is excellent. Mine is the stainless 5 1/2" bull barrel.

Dave

The single six's are reasonably accurate, but the target barrel auto loaders are almost guranteed to win any and all accuracy matches.

Kid + 5 1/2" autoloading ruger = lotsa fun

I have a couple of each
The Mark II is much more consistant
and fun
do you want iron sights scope or red dot (busnelle trs25) They all lend themselves well to the Mark II

My opionion the single six is an iron sight gun

Hank

The Mk II or Mk III will be more accurate by far. There may be an exceptional Single Six in someone's possession that will match the average run of the mill Mk II/IIIbut you'd have to look far and wide to find it.

Having owned a bunch of Mk II's over the years I had a very strong prejudice against the Mk III until I bought one. The loaded chamber indicator is hokey and Ruger loves to make them oversize on all of their pistols that have one. The mag safety is superfluous IMO but the Browning Buckmark and Hi-Power both have them and that doesn't seem to stop people from buying those. It can always be disabled.

On the good side - I really like the magazine release by the trigger where it should be, it's much more instinctive when switching between the Ruger and my other semi-autos. I like the drilled and tapped receiver and Weaver base supplied with the pistol, that makes it easy to put a red dot or scope on it if you want to.

And despite the added "features", it's still the same basic pistol Bill Ruger first made over 60 years ago, and still just as reliable and accurate as ever.

I have a SingleSix with both cylinders, and a Mk I 5.5" bull barrel.
The revolver is a ball to shoot, and I love having the option for everything from .22 Short up to .22 Mag. It has fixed open sights, and is quite accurate, the magnum cylinder seems a little more accurate, probably because the bullets fit the barrel better. Yes, there is a slight difference in bullet diameter between LR and WMR bullets. I've killed many rabbits and squirrels with it.
The old MkI, on the other hand is LOTS more accurate than either of my 10/22s, and every bit as accurate as my old Remington bolt action .22. It's fun to shoot, but only functions with Long Rifle ammo. It's also a little complicated to take apart and reassemble for cleaning. It's accounted for it's share of rabbits and squirrels, sometimes at surprising ranges, out around 75-80 yards on jackrabbits.
Personally, I prefer revolvers, but own and shoot both in a variety of calibres. One's not better, just different, than the other.

I like 'em.....

+1

i love the single sixes, too... i do prefer a double action revolver with a swing out cylinder for it's easy loading qualities, and i do love the accuracy of the ruger auto pistols...

in the rugers, i like the single six for field use, as i can bring it into play with one hand... i do not trust most single action rimfire autos, carried with a loaded chamber...
i have a (true story) buddy named nick johnson... known to all our buddies as "nicked johnson", after an AD with a ruger .22 auto, while removing a coon from a trap...

accuracy in most of the single sixes i've used has been very good, even when using the .22 lr cylinders...

I like them all and agree the MK is more accurate. I got a Buckmark Camper in trade a short time ago and it is quite accurate and it has a nice trigger.

Semi-auto .22's such as the Ruger, S&W M41, High Standard, etc. have both the front and rear sight mounted to the barrel - the slide is independent. That avoids the slide/barrel fitting required on most center-fire semi-autos where the sights are mounted to the slide. Having the chamber integral with the barrel also shortcuts any alignment issues between the cylinder and barrel of a revolver.

I have the SS and the MKII 22/45, and my oldest boy has a Bearcat. The two boys, 6 and 10, put 3 times the rounds through the 22/45 than the SS, or the Bearcat. I've also put a bunch of miles on the atv and motorcycle while packing my 22/45 and never had a misfunction. Of all my handguns the 22/45 would be the first one I would replace if I had to start over.

I may be simple but thats livin

Have fun
Hank

My MkIII bull barrel is more accurate in my hands than any .22 rimfire revolver I've ever tried.

I had a Mark II Slab side that was unbelievably accurate. I mounted a 12X rifle scope on it and the groups I shot with it were quite impresive. I got rid of it and bought a S&W M41 and have never shot as good of group with the S&W as I did with the Ruger but I only have a red dot on the S&W.

Have owned several MKII's and several Single Six revolvers... for the most part the Mark II's were more accurate, probably a lot of that was trigger pull... but all my single six's shot well. If you want target accuracy, buy the auto... if you want a field carry gun..buy the revolver... 22mag is a big bonus IMHO. A Model 17 Smith & Wesson on the other hand.....fantastic revolver!

Both the loaded cartridge indicator & the magazine safety can be removed with a couple cheap aftermarket parts offer by members on RFC...the magazine disconnect can be removed by installing a modified hammer bushing & the plastic LCI replaced with a steel filler piece...the guy has both blued & stainless...both parts can be had for a total of about $25-$30...

Discovering Tactical Solutions didn't help anything

For me I'd get the Single Six if I wanted a gun to carry in the field or needed the .22mag.

Otherwise if I wanted a range gun, accuracy and a squirrel killer I'd get the MkIII.

I've only owned one Ruger auto and that was the standard, fix sighted gun that I paid $37.50 for..... I've owned an SS Convertible with adjustable sights since 1972. I've had the pleasure of shooting lots of the later Ruger autos as well.
A good, semi auto Ruger will often shoot like a rifle accuracy wise. Even with iron sights, groups running an inch at 25 yds. are common. I've seen groups on the order of 1-1.5 inches at 50 yds. on scope sighted Ruger autos.
My SS convertible, with ammo it likes, CCI's, puts all six .22 RF Magnums into two inches at 25 yds., iron sights. The other clynder does a bit worse than that.
I've shot lots of small game with both the .22 LR and the .22 RFM. I have a strong perference for the magnum round since I'm an iron sights, body shooter sort of small game hunter. That and I appreciate the much better penetrating ability of the 40 gr. HP magnum ammo for larger stuff.
On the other hand, if you want to scope it and try for head shots, etc, the auto would be my choice. E

Have done quite a bit of shooting with both a MKIII Hunter and A Single-Six Hunter...you really can't go wrong with either...



The following targets were all shot on the same day at 25 yards. One target with scope and one without.....

S-S Hunter with 4 power Leupold....



w/scope (Magnum)



w/o scope (Magnum)




w/scope (Long Rifle)



w/o scope (Long Rifle)







MKIII Hunter with 2 power Leupold....

[img]http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b77/RJM52/Handguns/Survival22s041.jpg[/img]

w/scope

[img]http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b77/RJM52/Handguns/DSCF5851.jpg[/img]

w/o scope...

[img]http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b77/RJM52/Handguns/DSCF5852.jpg[/img]



Both gun need better open sights. They both had V notch rear sights. The SS has a gold bead front and the MKIII a FO. I changed out the rear blade on the SS to a One Ragged Hole peep and that helped.... The MKIII is still being worked on.




I like them both....Bob

I have a Super Single Six that shoots very very well with ammo it likes, in particular Remington Ely (black box) but it is too pricey to shoot very often. Same thing with 22 mag.
My MKIII 22 45 shoots most ammo quite well and has been impressive with CCI mini mag HP.
Both are great guns.

Ernie

Like many here I have the Single Six with the extra mag. cylinder and a MK II. The Single Six is pretty accurate but only when I take my time and have a good rest. The MKII, on the other hand, seems to be just dead on accurate in a kind of casual way, if that makes sense? I shoot the MKII easily five times more than the Single Six and that may be why.

I also have both. But as a training tool, I would start with the single six.
But its NOT all that accurate. Trigger pull is too heavy.

Jesse Jaymes: I have owned a pair of Ruger Super Single Six revolvers for several years now - they are rather accurate when I shoot them off of sandbags with their iron sights. I don't shoot the 22 Magnum cylinders much at all.
One of my Single Six's is a 6 1/2" barrel model and the other is a 5 1/2" barrel model.
In comparison with my pair of Ruger MK III heavy barrel pistols we must consider the red dot type optical sights I have on them. One of my MK III's is a 5" model and the other is a 6 3/4" model - they both are more accurate than the Single Six's as they are presently configured!
But not by to much!
I am hosting a friend from the west coast next week for a Varmint Safari and he is bringing along his brand new (and expensive!) Ruger Super Single Six "Hunter" model complete with an optical scope - I am sure we will compare this longer barreled Single Six with optical sight to my heavy barreled MK III's.
I shoot my various Ruger pistols almost exclusively at Ground Squirrels and small game.
I am happy with my two Single Six's for this use - as I believe you would be BUT the accuracy edge does go to the MK III's.
Best of luck with whichever you choose.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy