Ruger Forum banner

Single Seven Loading / Unloading Issues

15K views 76 replies 15 participants last post by  Patrickj 
#1 ·
I have been keeping up with the Single Seven on 4 different forums since their release back in September. It seems to me the biggest complaint so far has been loading/ unloading issues. I myself have two, a 4 5/8 and a 5 1/2. I really like this caliber and would like to see it around for a long time to come. I have several Ruger S/A revolvers and have not noticed any issues with loading or unloading with any of them. Tonight just to satisfy my curiosity I got them all out and had a load/unload session. Here are my findings.

Single seven 4 5/8 - does not line up at a "click"
Single Seven 5 1/2 - does not line up
Single Six - does not line up
Blackhawk in 327 Fed Mag - Does line up
Blackhawk in 357- Does not line up
Vaquero Large Frame in 45 Colt - Does not line up
Super Blackhawk Hunter in 41 mag - Does not line up
Super Blackhawk Hunter in 44 mag - Does not line up
Super Blackhawk Hunter in 45 Colt - Does not line up
BearCat Shop Keeper - Does line up

I have another Single Six that I did not physically try, but I figure it doesn't line up either.

My go to shooters are the Single Sevens, the Stainless Single Six and the Vaquero. I guess that is why I did not have a problem loading or unloading the Single Seven. None of these index to the loading gate for loading and unloading. Sooooooooooo.......... do we really have an issue? I understand there are a few other issues here and there but I don't think the loading/ unloading is a problem
 
See less See more
#2 ·
different models have slightly different timing

I don't believe that the click business has much to do with whether the cylinder is lined up with loading gate. In my opinion , and I own or have owned at one time, just about every model of Ruger single action, the single seven is just a bit on the persnickety side for loading due to the 7 round cylinder, especially with a cartridge of equal diameter, but greater length. I'm comparing my SSM's (6 shot H&R mag) to the Seven.. The degrees of rotation with a seven shot cylinder are less than a 6 shot. The single ten can be touchier than a 6 shot convertible.:)
 
#3 ·
I will add that my 44 Special NMBH Flat Top DOES line up. My 41 Magnum NMBH, like yours, does not line up. My Single Seven only required a fraction of machining to line up perfectly, but it's not something Ruger would do.

It seems to me that the free spin pawl should be all the rage. Frankly, I prefer to handle my SAA type guns that set the standard (expectation) and work the way they should.
 
#4 ·
"I don't believe that click business has much to do with whether the cylinder is lined up with the loading gate". This is my point exactly. But I have read a lot of posts, on this forum as well as others, where folks have sent their's back to Ruger to get this problem fixed. These same folks cain't believe the QC would let such junk go out.You have a small frame revolver with a small loading gate/trough, that you are trying to push a long, large cartridge (for the size of the revolver) into a cylinder that is stacked pretty close to six others. Everything has to be liner up just right for this to happen. It's not a design flaw, it's not poor QC, that's just the way it is. The masses asked for a 327 in a Single Six frame, Ruger tested the waters (or Lispeys did) and we now have Single Seven. If someone would just come up with a model 92 in 327 I could die a happy man.
 
#5 ·
lolbell - good post! I have a Ruger Single Seven 7.5in and a Single Six in 32 H&R. Neither revolver lines up with the click. And yes, they can be harder to load than guns with larger cylinders. One answer is to modify the pawl for free spin. Easy to do! I have had zero problems with mine after 300 rounds of rather hot hand loads. Thinking of getting a short barrel version as well.
 
#9 ·
Liberty, is this the medium framed Vaquero? Mine is an older heavy framed model. I know (I think) they are all new models but mine is an older New Model. I think it boils down to what you are used to, or maybe a first impression thing. My first S/A revolver was a Single Six, it doesn't line up. My first 1,000's of rounds in a single action was through it, so the Single Sevens was not an issue with me. Some how my oldest son wound up with it and I had to get another.
 
#7 ·
I sent my Single Seven back due to the loading and unloading issue. I should get it back tomorrow ... you can bet your sweet bippy I will be trying it out tomorrow night ...

Keeping my fingers crossed ...
 
#11 · (Edited)
All about chamber alignment with loading gate trough which is not a hit or miss' issue! There are three realities to be recognized:

1. All OM Rugers (and other traditional SAs) were designed to be loaded and unloaded with the hammer at 1/2 cock. This design automatically coincides with the pawl click and moves the pawl to position the cyl chambers in alignment after the click.

2. New Model Rugers can not be cocked when loading and unloading, therefore the pawl is not moved and can not correctly position the cyl chamber alignment to coincide with the click. Exceptions are those new models with more than 6 chambers. The different chamber spacing can allow proper alignment; like the 8 shot large frame Blackhawk in 327.

3. All New Vaqueros (the mid frame models) and all NM Flat Top Blackhawks (both large and mid-frames) have a new Ruger device called the "Indexing Pawl System" that specifically aligns the chambers properly after the click.

Note: 327 single sevens have a separate and distinct issue shared by some of the early single six 32 H&R Mags AND irrelevant to anything above, but can exacerbate #2. The loading gate chute designed for 22s is sometimes finished a bit tight for the larger case rims of the 32 size cartridge bases. This makes loading difficult even with exact chamber to loading gate alignment which is just lucky because of the 7 chambers.

Simple cure for 327 SSs is to enlarge the loading chute with a Dremel tool and re-polish (touch-up with cold blue if it's a blue finish gun). Just do not touch the upper edge where the loading contacts the loading chute when closed.

Jim
 
#12 ·
All about chamber alignment with loading gate chute which is not a hit or miss' issue! There are three realities to be recognized:

1. All OM Rugers (and other traditional SAs) were designed to be loaded and unloaded with the hammer at 1/2 cock. This design automatically coincides with the pawl click and moves the pawl to position the cyl chambers in alignment after the click.

2. New Model Rugers can not be cocked when loading and unloading, therefore the pawl is not moved and can not correctly position the cyl chamber alignment to coincide with the click. Exceptions are those new models with more than 6 chambers. The different chamber spacing can allow proper alignment; like the 8 shot large frame Blackhawk in 327.

3. All New Vaueros (the mid frame models) and all NM Flat Top Blackhawks (both large and mid-frames) have a new Ruger device called the "Indexing Pawl System" that specifically aligns the chambers properly after the click.

Note: 327 single sevens have a separate and distinct issue shared by some of the early single six 32 H&R Mags AND irrelevant to anything above, but can exacerbate #2. The loading gate chute designed for 22s is sometimes finished a bit tight for the larger case rims of the 32 size cartridge bases. This makes loading difficult even with exact chamber to loading gate alignment which is just lucky because of the 7 chambers.

Simple cure for 327 SSs is to enlarge the loading chute with a Dremel tool and re-polish (touch-up with cold blue if it's a blue finish gun). Just do not touch the upper edge where the loading contacts the loading chute when closed.

Jim
On your suggested fix for the Single Seven, I would agree. When I get mine back today from Ruger (via Fedex) I hope that the fix is just that and nothing more complicated or problematic.

I told myself if Ruger came back and said they couldn't fix the issue I would have to pull out my dremel and take care of it myself. Hopefully I won't have to.
 
#13 ·
Well I got my Single Seven back this afternoon from Ruger for the loading / unloading issue.

According to the cryptic packing slip all they did was replace the cylinder. No machining of the frame around the loading gate area was done.

I loaded it up with loaded 327 fed mags and all 7 loaded without a problem. I then loaded it with 7 empty 32 s&w long casings and all loaded and unloaded without a hitch. Then I tried it with 7 empty 327 fed mag casings and they all loaded and unloaded without a hick up. I did notice that once the cylinder "clicks" the cylinder chamber is right there pretty centered (at least to the naked eye) in the loading gate area.

Now I just need to get to the range and try shooting it and see what happens. All in all my guy feeling is they solved / fixed the issue.

Two thumbs up right now to Ruger and their customer service.
 
#15 · (Edited)
I've got Old Models, New Models, and New Models with indexing pawls. I like them all, whether the chambers index with the loading chute or not. Rarely do I give it any thought, understanding that's how they are designed to function.

My problem with the Single Seven is one of inconsistency. Some examples pass through the manufacturing process with just enough clearance to load rounds and eject empties "at the click", while others do not. It seems reasonable to me to expect that if some Single Sevens can be manufactured to load and eject without issue while indexed with the loading chute, then they can all be made in such a way. My particular example has been returned to Ruger three times for differing functional issues, including the loading alignment. The results have been mixed. On one of the return trips From Ruger, three rounds would load perfectly at the click but the remaining four would not because the case rims would drag on the chute. This got me looking more closely at the cylinder and the rotational distances between clicks. On mine this distance seems to vary noticeably on some chambers. Ruger did resolve the loading issue by removing material from the loading chute and replacing the pawl, but it still may need more work, or a new cylinder, because at least one chamber has poor barrel/cylinder alignment. It functions fine now but the accuracy is less than it could be. Accuracy actually decreased from new when it came back from Ruger the first time with a barrel/cylinder gap of .013 :eek:, but that's beyond the scope of the loading issues here.

The .327 is really one of my favorite cartridges, second I would say to the .44 Special. I like the idea of the Single Seven, but in my example the execution is lacking. And even though I have been a big fan of Ruger single actions over the years, my recent purchases have left me wondering if the quality has dropped off, or if it's my imagination, or if it was simply my turn to get a problem child. I would like to think I'm imagining it, but the truth is my last three prior to the S7 have needed to be returned for issues. Ruger resolved all the problems quickly and acceptably. That said, when these were first announced I went straight to my dealer and put one on a wish list. If I had to do it over, I would either send one of my SSM's in 32 H&R to be converted to .327 or order up a FA 97...which will probably happen anyway.
 
#16 ·
I prefer blue Ruger SAs and traditional looking cylinders with 6 flutes. I bought a 32 reamer from Brownells for $84 about three years ago and have reamed several 32 H&Rs to 327, mine and friends. And modified my pawls to free spin. Also reamed a 32 Buckeye Blackhawk and a S&W. There's no simpler conversion than reaming a 32 H&R to 327. The 32 single six cylinder is .003" too short for factory ammo. But the .004"-.007" cyl to barrel gap takes care of that w/o issue.

So I greeted the new 327 stainless single seven with a great big yawn.

Jim
 
#21 ·
If I can get the shells IN the cylinder, me personally, I could care less if the cylinder is EXACTLY at the click when this happens. If they drag, I polish.......no big deal. While I realize that everyone is NOT like me......I don't expect everything to be perfect. A minor issue that is in reality a non issue, or something I can fix myself, I don't send the gun back. I just fix it. While QC is important, I think it is unrealistic to expect 100% perfection in an assembly line revolver that costs 400 bucks. You want that......buy a hand built custom
 
#24 ·
First off if it aint broken then don't fix it ... well that doesn't fit the issue I was having. I was all prepared to fix it myself if Ruger came back and said it wasn't a warranty issue. Believe me on two of the seven chambers a really had to push extremely hard to get the spent casing out. Ruger fixed the issue and it didn't cost me a dime just the time it took to package the gun up.

Also, well maybe I'm in the minority on this if I spend $500 on something I expect it to work right.

Right now I have no problem buying another Ruger because Ruger treated me right on this issue.
 
#33 ·
Well I put 35 rounds of 327 federal mag rounds thru my single seven today and not one loading or unloading issue.

The final summation is that Ruger took ownership of the problem and corrected it by replacing the cylinder.

I am extremely happy with Rugers customer service.
 
#34 ·
Stuff happens



I was in the manufacturing business for over 35 years. Even with the best quality control systems and personnel, things get through. I would never assume that someone could never have a legitimate issue with quality, no matter how many perfect examples I have. The important thing I see from your whole experience is they made it all good and as fast as they could. I believe some people tend to loose sight of the fact that ,"when you buy a firearm from Ruger, you're also buying some of the best customer service in the world." This is remarkable when you consider that your not paying Browning, Weatherby, or even Colt prices for these guns.:)
 
#35 ·
I wouldn't mind having a 4 5/8 barrel Single Seven in addition to my 5.5". Then I would have what to me is concealed carry length...that is, if it loads and unloads the way I think it should and the way others say it does, but I don't think I can be sure of what I will get. Obviously these guns are not all the same, and Ruger's notion of how they should be has apparently evolved during production and distribution.

I won't likely find one in a LGS, so buying one from a distance presents real concerns.
 
#36 ·
I ordered a single seven 5.5, then saw all the nightmare posting on various forumns.

I thought I was in for a big disappointment.

The gun came and I tried to load it, .327 did not go in very easy and dragged on metal in the open loading gate. I knew then it was a big mistake.

Then saw the posts about the ejector hitting the cylinder then figured out the issue.
The click everyone was mentioning had no real significance.

The ammo just falls in and out if the gate is open and the cylinder is aligned proprerly.

Lucky, you tell me.

One good thing I found is the gun loves 85 gr bullets, either .327 or .32 H&R mag.
Past .327's with shorter barrels did not like 85 gr bullets.
 
#37 ·
Ned,

Glad to hear that! I don't think your lucky more than just a little. The only downside of the forums is that most all the problems experienced get reported, which isn't a bad thing. But it gives people an inaccurate perception of the numerical volume of guns that have problems.

If everyone also reported all the guns that worked as designed, it would put the problem guns in perspective with the whole, and be a much better consumer product indicator.

Sometimes ignorance is bliss and I'm glad you didn't shy away from ordering yours. You might have missed out on a great little Ruger .327. So thanks for reporting your satisfactory experience!

Jim
 
#40 ·
The loading gate problem is by design. Jason Cloessner of Lipsey's explained to me how this problem was discussed with Ruger engineers, who said that the gate was open to maximum spec. I proved that on my gun by having the loading gate milled slightly to align with the chamber bores and ending with a harmless break through of the frame on the hammer side of the gate. Thus I am baffled at reports from others that they have "no problems". My skepticism about what that really means should be understandable, rather than subject to fanboy bullying.
 
#38 ·
Very true..

I always take review statistics with a grain of salt. Human nature being what it is, folks are much more likely post a review if their purchase does not live up to their expectations.

The satisfied customer feels no need to post a review. The product performs at or better than expected.....what's to talk about ?
 
#39 ·
Very true..

I always take review statistics with a grain of salt. Human nature being what it is, folks are much more likely post a review if their purchase does not live up to their expectations.

The satisfied customer feels no need to post a review. The product performs at or better than expected.....what's to talk about ?
Uh, the cases in which it doesn't.
 
#46 ·
The ammo just falls in and out if the gate is open and the cylinder is aligned proprerly
Nutty Ned put it in simple terms what I was trying to say when I started this thread. If you line up the cylinder/chute, forget the "click", it works properly. Of the 10 S/A Rugers I own, only 2 will load/unload on a "click". It has never crossed my mind to send the other 8 back to Ruger to have this "problem" fixed. If the case rim is dragging on the loading chute, you - ain't - got - it - lined - up. :rolleyes:
 
#47 · (Edited)
Those accustomed to the SAA may feel differently, because that very old design set the standard for how a single action should work. Now that I am attuned to the "problem", my 41 Magnum NMBH is going to get fixed or sold, thank you. I already took care of the Single Seven. My 44 Special NMBH Flat Top works the way I expect it to, right from the box. My Vaquero too works right without modification.

If Ruger wants to make odd variations from an existing platform, it needs to be more than gerryrigging, Rube Goldberg stuff, and it should be consistent. I guess we have all gotten used to making excuses for them all around - as a way of affirming our own acquisition choices.

I could really go off on Ruger, considering how much I have spent in gunsmithing, but my Smiths are just as costly and just as much works in progress.

That said, I really recommend the 44 S&W Special NMBH, whether standard or Bisley. The gun just works and has a very practical range of loads it can shoot.
 
#48 ·
I'm not making excuses for Ruger. Their revlovers work as designed. They're not a SAA. For the money, IMHO, you can not beat a Ruger. Any Ruger revolver, if reasonabley taken care of will out last the original owner plus his kids, grandkids and great grand kids. My wife drives a car that will unlock all doors with the press of a button, the doors on my pick up truck will not unlock until you stick the key in the door and give it a twist no matter how many buttons you push. That's how it was designed it's not a flaw. Her car cost way more what my truck did. A Colt SAA will cost a good bit more than a Ruger revlover and is not near as rugged.
 
#54 ·
lolbell,

Very well said! One should know the product before they buy it or they have no room to complain.

For example if they want a Ruger 41 mag or 44 mag that aligns and loads/unloads like a Colt SAA, they should buy the Ruger flat top Blackhawk versions, which do. Or install Ruger's simple Alignment Pawl System. It's just common sense which is not all that common it seems.

Jim
 
#50 · (Edited)
One thing I have noticed. I appears most of the 7 inch barreled ones are coming out clean.
I think most of the loading issues are with the 5 inch guns. ( all anecdotal as I have no data just a feeling)
Makes sense since they were the 1st ones off the line.

I have one of the 1st ones off the line. Because I squealed like a pig till I got one.
And yes I have loading issues. I know what the cause is likely and its not a operation or a safety issue.
So I will enjoy my gun and send it back in at my leisure.

Still enjoying it though for now. Just put 500 more through it this last weekend.
Still loving it. Worts and all.
 
#51 ·
One thing I have noticed. I appears most of the 7 inch barreled ones are coming out clean.
I think most of the loading issues are with the 5 inch guns. ( all anecdotal as I have no data just a feeling)
Makes sense since they were the 1st ones off the line.

That's good news to me for I still want a 7.5. What info leads you to believe the 7.5's are clean / problems resolved ?
 
#69 ·
After reading this informative thread and focusing on the legitimate experiences and complaints, I evaluate the Single Seven (S7) as follows:

RUGER'S DESIGN:

1. The S7 was not designed specifically for the cylinder to click and align the chambers with the loading gate trough because of these Mechanical realities;

The S7 does not have Ruger's latest engineering development, the "INDEXING PAWL SYSTEM" which is only installed in the New Vaqueros and the New FT Blackhawks.
The S7 nor any New Models do not require the hammer to be on the 1/2 cock notch like the old models which does properly position the pawl and therefore cylinder chambers to align with the loading trough like the traditional SA design.

2. However, the 7 chamber spacing instead of 6, in the S7l, due to happenstance, WILL click and align IF the loading trough is correctly machined.

3. Due to the size of the cartridge vs. the small frame size, machining tolerance of the loading trough is much more critical for proper cartridge alignment/loading.


CONCLUSIONS:

Mine are that Ruger's S7, especially with early S7 production, can have two separate and distinct Loading/unloading problems:

1. The loading trough machining inaccuracy on many S7s can lack in both depth and/or width of the proper side of the trough causing the following:

cartridges can be loaded but chambers do not click and align with the trough as they could, not should, but could.
loading of cartridges is too snug to be user friendly,
and cartridges can not be loaded at all thru the trough.

2. And the separate problem, Cylinder chambers can be so undersized to the point that cartridges will not fit in them at all, even if they will align thru the loading trough.

Assessment of the situation: all of the above can be and has been fixed as experienced by those owners that have sent the S7s back.

Should owners have to do that? No, of course not.
Is the issue exasperated by Ruger's decision due to market demand, to supply a revised product not originally intended in the initial design of the single six? I would say so.
Can Ruger overcome the issue? I believe they have as later S7 production and free repairs exhibit.

Just my POV, YMMD,
Jim
 
#70 ·
I believe Hondo is right on the money about the S7 problems. They seem to be among early production units. It's partly due to the narrow design parameters. ETC, ETC, ETC. My advice to anyone with one of these faulty models, "Send it back to Ruger immediately, don't wait for any consensus on the forum. They obviously know about , and we all know that they will remedy the situation ASAP. This way you will get you wheel gun back and be able to enjoy the design as you should be. :)
 
#71 ·
I have sent mine back and I have received it back. Works like it should now. They replaced my cylinder. I am wondering out loud if anyone who has sent theirs back and have gotten it back if Ruger replaced their cylinder or is it more job specific ...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top