Single Six or the popular Auto's

[inthebeech]

I strictly adhear to Mr. Whelen's philisophy here so I am less concerned about price or other non-performance issues.  I think I'd be best served if I didn't have to give up "too much" in accuracy with the Single Six; if I did then I think the positive comments from folks on this forum who all generally praise the accuracy of the Mk II and Buckmark, clearly point the way for me.

However, I already own a fantastic Ruger Flat Top in a big bore, both grip styles are acceptable as are all of the quirks that they each have regarding cleaning requirements, maintenance, reliability, spare parts...,  and I do have a healthy choice of very nice Single Sixes, all of them pre-transfer bar types, at my local gun shop.

So aside for the higher quality of sights on the autos, what kind of real difference are we talking between these autos and the SS?- 25-40 paces off a rest with comparable ammo let's say.

If for some reason I decide to stay with a revolver and you folks are telling me that the SS is just too far off in accuracy from the autos, I am also keeping my eye (at the same gun shop) on a K-22 (though it's a six inch and I'd prefer a four for the back pack).
Thanks.

[Ladobe]

Accuracy is what a shooter makes it.   For me the SA's get the job done just fine because with constant use they pretty much shoot where I point them whether they have modern sights or not.   I'm a hunter, not a paper puncher though.   Don't think I've even shot a SA off a bench, I simply learn where they shoot at various ranges by shooting them a lot.   My favorites since the mid 60's for a pack or kit gun was my early Bearcats and Super Bearcat.    Tried a S&W Model 63 for a few years, it was OK but I went back to the Super Bearcat I've had since the early 70's that simply shot more accurately for me.   With countless rounds fried through it over the years it has taken all I ever wanted for the cook pot and endless varmints without missing a beat.   So the Super Bearcat will remain on top as long as I do.   

Just some rambling that probably doesn't help you a bit.   

[Sensai]

I have a Super Single Six and a Mark II, they both have their places.  Your last sentence is what got me to reply.  If you're backpacking, I think the Single Six would serve you better.  The autos can get a little finicky about ammo, but my Single Six has never failed to go bang when I pulled the trigger.  The revolver can use shorts and CBs too, if you want to plink quietly.  If you're keeping the world safe from rampageing paper, either is going to serve you well.  By the way, I hit better with the Mark II, but not much.  Squirrels are not safe from either.

[Brett]

The autoloaders may have a slight edge over the wheelguns but as Ladobe said shooting them often is the key to wringing the most accuracy out of not ony for the SAs but the autos as well.

Now that K22 you mentioned would probably outperform any of the garden variety autos (Ruger MKs, Buck Marks, etc.) or SAs. 

[SHOOTALL]

The most accurate Ruger 22 I have shot was a first run MK 2 govt model. The second most accurate was a Single Six hunter and you had to look close to tell them apart. The worst was a MK-2 with a 3 inch bbl.
You can get good and bad with any action. If you only want accuracy in a 22 RF then see if a non convertable gun is aval in the Single Six

[pastorp]

For a woods gun I believe a revolver is superior. I like & own several k-22s. They are wonderful shooters but nothing matches the versatility of the early single six convertibles with the fixed sights. I've owned a few that were very accurate. But to be honest all k-22s are not created equal. Some of either variety will outshoot the others. 

Regards,

[dks7895]

I agree with the others... a revolver is most reliable and safe for a pack gun.  Ruger's single-six is a great choice.  The Bearcat is smaller framed with fixed sights and only comes in .22LR.... but a great pack gun.