Ruger 101 or SS bearcat with adj. sights?

[rjohns94]

Thoughts on the merits of these two firearms in 22lr for field gun?

[vancelw]

My nod goes to the SP101...unless weight is an issue. The 8-shot 101 is heavy.

[Ysabel Kid]

I wasn't aware Ruger made a Bearcat with adjustable sights! One of those with a bird's head grip would be the cat's meow for a kit gun!

If you want to look at centerfires, I picked up the Lipsey's Ruger "Single Seven", 4&5/8" barrel, stainless, in .327 Federal Magnum. It will shoot that round, but also .32 H&R Magnum, .32 S&W Long, .32 S&W and even the .32 ACP - same cylinder, no moon clips or nothing! This is a great kit gun!

[wolfdog]

My Buddy Steve has an SP101 in 22 and it is a very sweet shooter. I have played with older bearcats and they shot very well also. I would have to go with the ss bearcat just because it is so durned purty,

[Chuck 100 yd]

The SP101 .22 is a sweet little kit gun. The Bearcat is cute but I could never warm up to them.
It boils down to personal choice and how they handle and shoot for you.

[rjohns94]

I wasn't aware Ruger made a Bearcat with adjustable sights! One of those with a bird's head grip would be the cat's meow for a kit gun!

If you want to look at centerfires, I picked up the Lipsey's Ruger "Single Seven", 4&5/8" barrel, stainless, in .327 Federal Magnum. It will shoot that round, but also .32 H&R Magnum, .32 S&W Long, .32 S&W and even the .32 ACP - same cylinder, no moon clips or nothing! This is a great kit gun!

Yep, they have them now. Only looking for rim fire

[Old Ironsights]

I wasn't aware Ruger made a Bearcat with adjustable sights! One of those with a bird's head grip would be the cat's meow for a kit gun!

If you want to look at centerfires, I picked up the Lipsey's Ruger "Single Seven", 4&5/8" barrel, stainless, in .327 Federal Magnum. It will shoot that round, but also .32 H&R Magnum, .32 S&W Long, .32 S&W and even the .32 ACP - same cylinder, no moon clips or nothing! This is a great kit gun!

Yep, they have them now. Only looking for rim fire

Everyone is looking for rimfire... which is why I prefer reloadable centerfire.

[Blaine]

My SP 101 has a horrendous trigger pull. And the grip is too small even for my smallish hands...Single action is really good except for the gritty pull back....If I keep this, it will need a spring kit at the very least. Bearcat with adjustable? I personally don't like the looks of it....Looks fragile....

[Grizz]

Thoughts on the merits of these two firearms in 22lr for field gun?

My thought is that adj. sights have no place on a field gun. my past experience they are more trouble than they are worth. once I get a field piece hitting where I point it, last thing in the world I want is for anything to move. it's a me-thing me thinks..

Grizz

[Shasta]

I really liked the SP-101, but the several I have handled all had extremely heavy, and I mean HEAVY springs that make cocking and firing difficult. I would prefer the double action, and perhaps a full set of Wolff springs would go a long way to make it usable.

SHASTA

[Rusty]

It's just me I know but I have never shot a SA as well as I could a DA.

[1894c]

my personal choice is the Ruger Bearcat without the adjustable sights and in stainless steel... :)

[yooper2]

The recent "kit gun" SP101s I've handled have all had excellent double action trigger pulls and good single action pulls, might want to try one out if you find one in a shop. That said, the stainless Bearcat would be my choice. I plan on getting one and reaming a spare cylinder to 22 mag.


Eric

[AJMD429]

I wasn't aware Ruger made a Bearcat with adjustable sights! One of those with a bird's head grip would be the cat's meow for a kit gun!

If you want to look at centerfires, I picked up the Lipsey's Ruger "Single Seven", 4&5/8" barrel, stainless, in .327 Federal Magnum. It will shoot that round, but also .32 H&R Magnum, .32 S&W Long, .32 S&W and even the .32 ACP - same cylinder, no moon clips or nothing! This is a great kit gun!

The extra weight of the larger bullet could come on handy plus a cat-sneeze handload might be more gentle on the ears than most 22LR fodder in a shorty pistol like that.

Boils down to weight and size mostly, for gun as well as projectile. As far as 'sturdiness' I doubt anything tops the SP-101 other than a Speed-Six, which I doubt was ever produced in 22LR...!

And I definitely agree with Grizz on the fixed sights being best.

[DPris]

Have both here, four-inch eight-shot SP & the four-inch adjustable Bearcat.

The SP is a great field gun & the problem with the heavy DA trigger pull is very easily solved by simply not using it.
The small grip is easily addressed with Hogue or Badger aftermarkets.

I've worked with both versions of the recent Lipsey's Bearcats, the three-inch bird's-head with fixed sights & the four-inch with adjustables.

Hands down winner there is the sighted version, if you want to HIT something.

The compact version is harder to mate with your chosen load or sight-in for distances beyond 15 yards. Yes- you can file & bend the front sight.
The adjustable sighted four-inch gun can easily adjust to anything, with a screwdriver.

The sighted gun can do at 25 yards what I could barely pull off at 15 with the shorter fixed sight version.
The full-length ejector rod is also a plus over the shorter rod on the three-incher, when you run into sticky extraction.

The sighted Bearcat is smaller & lighter than the SP.
It has greater versatility with sights than the fixed-sight Bearcat.

The three-incher's cuter'nhell, but not as practical, overall.

The adjustable four-inch Bearcat is a GREAT light & compact field gun, for instances where you want to be able to hit varmints or small game.
Denis

Additional: The rear sight used on the adjustable Bearcat is the same sight used on the 8-shot SP.

[Pete44ru]

.

Although YMMV, I've found that .22 cal SP-101's (I've had two 4-incher's, one a half lug) are just too heavy to carry as a trail/field gun, so (as the whim strikes me) I waffle back/forth between an Old Model BearCat (.22LR) and a .22mag Charter Pathfinder.

For targets of opportunity while woods-walking, though, I very much favor the .22WMR.

[DPris]

I have a Tanker chest rig for my SP.
Don't do much feet-on-the-ground anymore, so the SP rides on the ATV up high where it doesn't tangle up in the harness.
It never gets heavy there.

For sheer weight issues, the Bearcat's the way to go.
Denis

[BigSky56]

As Grizz said you dont need adj sights on a field gun as they are used as a point and shoot pistol. I run a 22 mag and a extra LR cylinder if I need to shoot a pest in the barn. danny

[DPris]

YOU may not need adjustable sights, but I like to hit what I point at & I DO need adjustable sights.

Go whichever way you want, I'm just laying out my experiences with the guns in question.

The adjustables not only allowed me to quickly & easily zero at 25 yards to a specific load, they also gave me an infinitely better actual sight PICTURE than the all-stainless notch & blade on the three-incher.
Stainless on stainless isn't very precise for my eyes.

I may rarely adjust once I get set up for a given load, but I find quite a variation between the different .22LR rounds & if I need the gun to hit & can't find the stuff I normally shoot, I can adjust to whatever I CAN find.

If all you do is point & plink, lesser standard.
If you want or need true accuracy, adjustables are just much easier to get there with.
Denis

[RustyJr]

I would go with the SP101 due to preferring a double action. I would also want adjustable sights for changing loadings.


RustyJr

[Malamute]

Thoughts on the merits of these two firearms in 22lr for field gun?

My thought is that adj. sights have no place on a field gun. my past experience they are more trouble than they are worth. once I get a field piece hitting where I point it, last thing in the world I want is for anything to move. it's a me-thing me thinks..

Grizz

What trouble have you had with adjustable sights in the past?

I've had two issues. One was a cheap, poorly designed holster that pushed the Ruger Blackhawk sight down and allowed its elevation screw to back out. The common method of using a sight block (piece of leather in the holster) to keep the movable part of the sight from being pushed on my the holster has worked well to alleviate that.

I dropped a Smith 29 out of my belt climbing out of the back of my truck and it bounced the rear blade off the bumper. The blade cracked. I replaced it and dont carry the gun stuck in the front of my belt any more.

So far so good otherwise. The adjustable generally give a better, cleaner sight picture for me. I keep thinking of having adjustables put on a Vaquero when I can afford it. The standard Vaquero sights just about disapear at dusk for me.

[Grizz]

What trouble have you had with adjustable sights in the past?

I hunted with a sbh 44 mag. I've had the windage screw do its own thing a couple of times. I wrote ruger and suggested that they make a flat top fixed sight version that could have a dovetailed rear sight, they wrote back and said they envied my lifestyle, but that the moving sights were so popular that they thought they would lose sales without them! Reinforcing my sense that for a field gun, the moving sights are a fad.

Once I get reliable windage, I don't ever want the sight to move. Welding isn't too extreme.

My ruger 77 338 had a flip down barrel sight which would when I was walking in the bear woods. disconcerting to say the least.

My Smith 66 never moved that I recall.

I think what people like about the moving sights is the sight picture with the rear peep or blade, as contrasted to the grooved top strap, which I admit is harder to use. Still, for a Bearcat? A little pocket pistol? If the windage is on, no squirrel is safe at any range he can be targeted. An least not if Blaine is after him.

I honestly cannot see a practical use, in the field, for an adjustable sight. Do people actually stick a moistened finger in the air and dial in two minutes of left before taking a shot with a pistol? I mean out in the woods making meat. I never even saw the sights, other than the bead on the spot. When I had 100% confidence in the reliability of the windage, I didn't sweat the elevation. If the first shot cleared under the animal the second drilled it.

Usually if the wind was blowing hard enough to move the bullet off target, the animals weren't out in it, I guess that's why I didn't need adjustable sights.

Folks complain about the williams peep that doesn't have knobs to move the sight picture around. I use the one that's "so hard to adjust". The one on my guide gun was adjusted from a skiff shooting seashells on the beach, hasn't moved since then and stays on target as long as I don't bend the barrel.

That's the kind of stuff that informed my opinion about adjustable sights. I don't shoot at event horizon targets where some inches of elevation are useful, but if I had a gun for 1000 yard shooting I'd probably have the same philosophy, nail the windage and do what I have to to walk the bullets up onto the steel.

Not a put-down of anyone who wants the adjustable ones, just a simple way for a simple guy to simplify the task.

Grizz

[AJMD429]

What trouble have you had with adjustable sights in the past?

I hunted with a sbh 44 mag. I've had the windage screw do its own thing a couple of times. I wrote ruger and suggested that they make a flat top fixed sight version that could have a dovetailed rear sight, they wrote back and said they envied my lifestyle, but that the moving sights were so popular that they thought they would lose sales without them! Reinforcing my sense that for a field gun, the moving sights are a fad.

Once I get reliable windage, I don't ever want the sight to move. Welding isn't too extreme.

My ruger 77 338 had a flip down barrel sight which would when I was walking in the bear woods. disconcerting to say the least.

My Smith 66 never moved that I recall.

I think what people like about the moving sights is the sight picture with the rear peep or blade, as contrasted to the grooved top strap, which I admit is harder to use. Still, for a Bearcat? A little pocket pistol? If the windage is on, no squirrel is safe at any range he can be targeted. An least not if Blaine is after him.

I honestly cannot see a practical use, in the field, for an adjustable sight. Do people actually stick a moistened finger in the air and dial in two minutes of left before taking a shot with a pistol? I mean out in the woods making meat. I never even saw the sights, other than the bead on the spot. When I had 100% confidence in the reliability of the windage, I didn't sweat the elevation. If the first shot cleared under the animal the second drilled it.

Usually if the wind was blowing hard enough to move the bullet off target, the animals weren't out in it, I guess that's why I didn't need adjustable sights.

Folks complain about the williams peep that doesn't have knobs to move the sight picture around. I use the one that's "so hard to adjust". The one on my guide gun was adjusted from a skiff shooting seashells on the beach, hasn't moved since then and stays on target as long as I don't bend the barrel.

That's the kind of stuff that informed my opinion about adjustable sights. I don't shoot at event horizon targets where some inches of elevation are useful, but if I had a gun for 1000 yard shooting I'd probably have the same philosophy, nail the windage and do what I have to to walk the bullets up onto the steel.

Not a put-down of anyone who wants the adjustable ones, just a simple way for a simple guy to simplify the task.

Kinda where I'm at.

If I'm sighting-in, or testing a reload, I MAY (or not) want an adjustable sight (more likely a scope - even on a handgun, if possible), but when 'afield' or 'CCW', I want a sturdy metal heavy thing that CANNOT move, even if it makes me shoot 1" left at 7 yards.

The adjustable sighted four-inch gun can easily adjust to anything, with a screwdriver.

One solution to all this would be get the 'adjustable' sight, and once adjusted, swab it with a bunch of EPOXY...

Although YMMV, I've found that .22 cal SP-101's (I've had two 4-incher's, one a half lug) are just too heavy to carry as a trail/field gun, so (as the whim strikes me) I waffle back/forth between an Old Model BearCat (.22LR) and a .22mag Charter Pathfinder.

Makes me wish My Pathfinder was a 22 WMR...

Still, I agree - but being fat or strong or lazy or something - probably my 'trail/field' stuff is all within a mile or two of my house - I don't mind carrying a Ruger Redhawk in 45 Colt as my 'trail/field/ gun...

[Blaine]

What trouble have you had with adjustable sights in the past?

I hunted with a sbh 44 mag. I've had the windage screw do its own thing a couple of times. I wrote ruger and suggested that they make a flat top fixed sight version that could have a dovetailed rear sight, they wrote back and said they envied my lifestyle, but that the moving sights were so popular that they thought they would lose sales without them! Reinforcing my sense that for a field gun, the moving sights are a fad.

Once I get reliable windage, I don't ever want the sight to move. Welding isn't too extreme.

My ruger 77 338 had a flip down barrel sight which would when I was walking in the bear woods. disconcerting to say the least.

My Smith 66 never moved that I recall.

I think what people like about the moving sights is the sight picture with the rear peep or blade, as contrasted to the grooved top strap, which I admit is harder to use. Still, for a Bearcat? A little pocket pistol? If the windage is on, no squirrel is safe at any range he can be targeted. An least not if Blaine is after him.

I honestly cannot see a practical use, in the field, for an adjustable sight. Do people actually stick a moistened finger in the air and dial in two minutes of left before taking a shot with a pistol? I mean out in the woods making meat. I never even saw the sights, other than the bead on the spot. When I had 100% confidence in the reliability of the windage, I didn't sweat the elevation. If the first shot cleared under the animal the second drilled it.

Usually if the wind was blowing hard enough to move the bullet off target, the animals weren't out in it, I guess that's why I didn't need adjustable sights.

Folks complain about the williams peep that doesn't have knobs to move the sight picture around. I use the one that's "so hard to adjust". The one on my guide gun was adjusted from a skiff shooting seashells on the beach, hasn't moved since then and stays on target as long as I don't bend the barrel.

That's the kind of stuff that informed my opinion about adjustable sights. I don't shoot at event horizon targets where some inches of elevation are useful, but if I had a gun for 1000 yard shooting I'd probably have the same philosophy, nail the windage and do what I have to to walk the bullets up onto the steel.

Not a put-down of anyone who wants the adjustable ones, just a simple way for a simple guy to simplify the task.

Kinda where I'm at.

If I'm sighting-in, or testing a reload, I MAY (or not) want an adjustable sight (more likely a scope - even on a handgun, if possible), but when 'afield' or 'CCW', I want a sturdy metal heavy thing that CANNOT move, even if it makes me shoot 1" left at 7 yards.

The adjustable sighted four-inch gun can easily adjust to anything, with a screwdriver.

One solution to all this would be get the 'adjustable' sight, and once adjusted, swab it with a bunch of EPOXY...

Although YMMV, I've found that .22 cal SP-101's (I've had two 4-incher's, one a half lug) are just too heavy to carry as a trail/field gun, so (as the whim strikes me) I waffle back/forth between an Old Model BearCat (.22LR) and a .22mag Charter Pathfinder.

Makes me wish My Pathfinder was a 22 WMR...

Still, I agree - but being fat or strong or lazy or something - probably my 'trail/field' stuff is all within a mile or two of my house - I don't mind carrying a Ruger Redhawk in 45 Colt as my 'trail/field/ gun...

Maybe my 9422 Mag....Not my Single Six with Mag cyl.....Personally, I've been having the Glock 30S (45) close to hand when in the woods/sticks....

[Pete44ru]

.


The new BearCat's just might be a bit better, with their new adj rear sight, than the older BC's - I bought/shot/sold several OM BC's, OM SBC's & NM BC's before I found my latest BC (pictured above), which shoots to the sights with every different type/brand ammo (about 5) I've tried in it so far.

Although YMMV, I actually prefer the smaller cylinder & frame of OM BC's, than the slightly larger New Model BC's.


.

[Old Ironsights]

...Still, I agree - but being fat or strong or lazy or something - probably my 'trail/field' stuff is all within a mile or two of my house - I don't mind carrying a Ruger Redhawk in 45 Colt as my 'trail/field/ gun...

I have 2 sidearms I take into the field:

A .357 SP101 and an 1858. either/both can be loaded down to puny for pot hunting. Both are reasonable for brown stain moments...

[RIHMFIRE]

I wasn't aware Ruger made a Bearcat with adjustable sights! One of those with a bird's head grip would be the cat's meow for a kit gun!

If you want to look at centerfires, I picked up the Lipsey's Ruger "Single Seven", 4&5/8" barrel, stainless, in .327 Federal Magnum. It will shoot that round, but also .32 H&R Magnum, .32 S&W Long, .32 S&W and even the .32 ACP - same cylinder, no moon clips or nothing! This is a great kit gun!

looky here
http://gunblast.com/Ruger-BearcatAS.htm

[rjohns94]

I wish I lived in a state where small game could be legally taken with centerfire ammo. I don't. Therefore, I see a need to have a rimfire handgun while woods walking, especially if I'm not carrying my rimfire rifle. Hence the OP question. I agree that there are other handguns which might fit the bill better if it was not for this constraint.

[Old Ironsights]

I wish I lived in a state where small game could be legally taken with centerfire ammo. I don't. Therefore, I see a need to have a rimfire handgun while woods walking, especially if I'm not carrying my rimfire rifle. Hence the OP question. I agree that there are other handguns which might fit the bill better if it was not for this constraint.

Why not go the C&B route? There are areas where I am "prohibited" from using a centerfire (or rimfire) ANYTHING... but my 1858 is totally legal. I carry a cylinder of WHOMP and a cylinder of PFFT and a possibles bag to reload both...

[rjohns94]

Not a bad idea, except for size. I carry a sig 227 always so I was looking for a small trail gun but I see the merit to your suggestion

[Ysabel Kid]

I wish I lived in a state where small game could be legally taken with centerfire ammo. I don't. Therefore, I see a need to have a rimfire handgun while woods walking, especially if I'm not carrying my rimfire rifle. Hence the OP question. I agree that there are other handguns which might fit the bill better if it was not for this constraint.

Why not go the C&B route? There are areas where I am "prohibited" from using a centerfire (or rimfire) ANYTHING... but my 1858 is totally legal. I carry a cylinder of WHOMP and a cylinder of PFFT and a possibles bag to reload both...

What a great idea!

[hfcable]

AJMD said "Makes me wish My Pathfinder was a 22 WMR.."

the factory used to offer a second fitted cylinder and yoke for 22 wmr for a total around 50 $ including shipping. i had my first one done that way long ago

you can sometimes find a complete 22 wmr cylinder with yoke etc on ebay or else where.... loosen one screw and then you can change over in under a minute.

i got a second pathfinder and found one of these on ebay for 75$ as i recall and it dropped right in and works great.

the little charter pathfinder is one of the most accurate small 22 revolvers i have ever owned.

[rodeo kid]

Just an off the wall comment. And contradiction I guess. I would really prefer a .22mag handgun for woods walking, but I always end up taking my U.S. Firearms 12-22. I have tried my Sig Sauer 1911-22 but really prefer the 12-22. Twelve rounds and it makes me feel like I'm back in time I guess. Anyways all this to lead up to yesterday, I was browsing in a firearms emporium and went over to the Charter Arms revolvers to see if they might have a Pathfinder in .22mag. No luck, but I ran into a Pink Lady in .22mag. I did not know , they even made one. My wife has a Chic Lady(for her purse, she will not body carry) because it is neat(her words). She also has a Ruger LCR in her night stand which she prefers at home because of the lazer. So I put the Pink Lady on layaway for her thinking she could carry it on our walks, and we would have a .22mag available if needed. She will of course have to do the background check as my favorite salesperson would never believe it was for me. Thanks for listening to my rambling. God Bless.

[mohavesam]

Hated the idea of adjustable rear on a Bearcat. Until I handled one.

Nod for the Bearcat. Not my first choice if there's a big cat in the area, but I have no 22LR ammo shortage and it'll make a great all-day carry SA for every other trail & pack gun.

Buying new Rugers keeps them in business. Do yer part.