[jaxrider14]

After my first outing, firing 350 rounds with my new Single Ten, upon cleaning it I noticed the pawl has worn as shown in this photo. The cylinder ratchet looks to be okay and there were no jams or problems. The gun still cycles flawlessly.

I'm wondering if this is normal "wearing in" of the surface as it contacts the angled face of the ratchet.
As the pawl is machined square and the ratchet angled, when new the top right corner of the pawl first contacts the ratchet face, so I can see why it would wear at this angle

Perhaps I'm paranoid but I have seen a couple ot threads about premature wear on the pawl face on Single Tens.

Anyone have a Single Ten they can compare this to?

 

[North country gal]

Just checked mine for you and, no such wear, at least not to that degree. To be honest, though, I don't know how critical this whole thing is. if the gun is functioning as it should, likely will never be an issue. You could always call Ruger CS, though, and get their opinion. Ruger, I'm sure, will stand behind it, should it ever need to be replaced.

 

[jaxrider14]

Just checked mine for you and, no such wear, at least not to that degree. To be honest, though, I don't know how critical this whole thing is. if the gun is functioning as it should, likely will never be an issue. You could always call Ruger CS, though, and get their opinion. Ruger, I'm sure, will stand behind it, should it ever need to be replaced.

Thanks for the comparison info. I'm going to shoot it more and see if it wears further. The rumor (unconfirmed by Ruger repair service) is that there was a production run of "soft" pawls that will wear out in as few as 1000 rounds fired. It has happened to several owners.

This is my first new Ruger in many years. The other two I own date back to 1976 and 1982. This gun's reliability will determine whether I buy more Rugers in the future.

 

[toolman]

Are you sure that edge which looks worn did not come with the gun? (As in perhaps it was a slip in the manufacture.)

 

[jaxrider14]

Are you sure that edge which looks worn did not come with the gun? (As in perhaps it was a slip in the manufacture.)

That is wear. I'm quite sure that the pawl was square when I got the gun. After the first trip to the range I cleaned the gun and saw that angle worn into the pawl.
It matches the angle cut into the ratchet face. I can see how a soft metal pawl could wear off to match the angle.
That square pawl would only contact the ratchet on the top corner and slide along the face at that angle.

A side note... this is my first single action revolver. I can't figure out why they angle-cut cut the ratchet notches on these removable cylinders.
On my trusty old 1982 Security Six the ratchet notches are straight-cut and there is no sign of wear.

 

[WvDave]

I just took some pictures of the pawl on my Single Ten. The angle looks like it should be there but I do see some shiny areas. It almost looks like normal wear. My ST has 491 rounds through it. Look at my pictures and see what you think. Some are a bit blurry.

 

[jaxrider14]

I just took some pictures of the pawl on my Single Ten. The angle looks like it should be there but I do see some shiny areas. It almost looks like normal wear. My ST has 491 rounds through it. Look at my pictures and see what you think. Some are a bit blurry.

Your pictures are fine and the pawl on your gun looks exactly like mine.
It sure makes me think it was machined that way or is normal wear.
Perhaps I just didn't notice it when the gun was new. After firing 350 rounds that surface was shiny and very obvious to my eye when I cleaned it.
You have been a great help in posting these.
Thanks!

 

[carl86]

Checked mine and the tip is square (a point) not like yours. I have about 400 rounds fired.
Gun was new this summer.

 

[David Bradshaw]

JaxRider14... If the little bevel on your Single-Ten is wear, I'll eat my hat. To displace that amount of metal without peening? The metal would have to go some where. If the pawl is "soft," the lack of pressure-displacement is even more puzzling.

That said, I have no experience with the Single-Ten. I have always lubed ratchet and pawl (Colt and Ruger lingo; called "hand" by S&W) with Anti-Seize Compound or a good chassis grease, especially stainless revolvers.

Fast draw artists really beat on guns----pawl/ratchet, bolt/bolt notch, bolt hole in frame window----and you don't indicate this abuse.

WvDave... Bevel on pawl of your Single-Ten looks to have been filed.

David Bradshaw

 

[jaxrider14]

JaxRider14... If the little bevel on your Single-Ten is wear, I'll eat my hat. To displace that amount of metal without peening? The metal would have to go somewhere. If the pawl is "soft," the lack of pressure-displacement is even more puzzling.

That said, I have no experience with the Single-Ten. I have always lubed ratchet and pawl ("hand" on an S&W) with Anti-Seize Compound or a good chassis grease, especially stainless revolvers.

Fast draw artists really beat on guns----pawl/ratchet, bolt/bolt notch, bolt hole in frame window----and you don't indicate this abuse.

WvDave... Bevel on pawl of your Single-Ten looks to have been filed.

David Bradshaw

If what my gun shows is wear, it occurred during easy use not abuse. No fast draw or fanning the gun.
I had put a small amount of lube on the ratchet, but not a lot.
The only thing I saw on the ratchet face was some polishing of the areas where the pawl makes contact. No soft metal left there.

I agree the pawl on WvDave's gun shows what appear to be file marks and then some polishing from use.

I'm guessing my next trip to the range will tell a lot.

Actually, firing the gun does nothing to the pawl, it's cocking it or turning the cylinder with the gate open.
I have done plenty of that while sitting, watching TV. Not much dry firing, but cocking and letting the hammer down to work those new parts.
On that basis, my gun has been cycled way more than the 350 rounds fired.

 

[jaxrider14]

Checked mine and the tip is square (a point) not like yours. I have about 400 rounds fired.
Gun was new this summer.

Thanks for the info. Sure makes me wonder because now we have guns with similar round counts and different results.

My gun has a May build date. Either they began filing the corner at the factory or they did indeed install a batch of softer metal pawls at some point in time.

 

[David Bradshaw]

Ruger may have found the bevel on the upper dog of the pawl to reduce bind. The bevel or more commonly a radius, is a feature of Peacemaker lockwork single actions.

Notice in photos, the lower dog of the pawl has a relief cut, or countersink. This probably is to accommodate the 10-shot ratchet.
David Bradshaw

 

[jaxrider14]

Ruger may have found the bevel on the upper dog of the pawl to reduce bind. The bevel or more commonly a radius, is a feature of Peacemaker lockwork single actions.

Notice in photos, the lower dog of the pawl has a relief cut, or countersink. This probably is to accommodate the 10-shot ratchet.
David Bradshaw

I'm starting to think Ruger may have started filing a bevel on the pawl as a change during later production runs. And you just provided a logical reason for doing so.

 

[WvDave]

My Single Ten has a test fire date of May 2012. The bevel looks to "precise" to be from wear. Also, no metal filings noted here, and I usually notice such things.

 

[jaxrider14]

My Single Ten has a test fire date of May 2012. The bevel looks to "precise" to be from wear. Also, no metal filings noted here, and I usually notice such things.

And my Single Ten, with a pawl that looks exactly like yours... has a test fire date of May 24, 2012.
I agree that the bevel looks very precise. In fact this morning, looking through a magnifier I detected some file marks similar to those seen in your photos. (I am 64 so my eyesight ain't what it used to be)

 

[jaxrider14]

My Single Ten has a test fire date of May 2012. The bevel looks to "precise" to be from wear. Also, no metal filings noted here, and I usually notice such things.

Follow up: I took my Single Ten back to the range today and fired an additional 410 rounds for a total of 760.

Nothing changed. The radius ground onto the corner of the pawl looks the same as before. No signs of wear, no metal filings, and the gun performed flawlessly using Federal bulk ammo.

I'm even more convinced that this bevel was done at the factory, not by wear from using the gun.

 

[Quiet 1]

I'm starting to think Ruger may have started filing a bevel on the pawl as a change during later production runs. And you just provided a logical reason for doing so.

I have an early release single Ten with 1050 rounds through it. (Yes, I'm one of those OCD types who record round counts through all my guns. )

I just checked and my pawl is perfectly "square". There is no "bevel" and no noticeable wear on it.

Thus, being in agreement with all who have stated that the bevel depicted in the photos is definitely "by design" and not "wear", I believe this was a design revision. Why? No clue. My ST has been faultless and functions as precisely as a swiss watch. It's very accurate too.

 

[jaxrider14]

I have an early release single Ten with 1050 rounds through it. (Yes, I'm one of those OCD types who record round counts through all my guns. )

I just checked and my pawl is perfectly "square". There is no "bevel" and no noticeable wear on it.

Thus, being in agreement with all who have stated that the bevel depicted in the photos is definitely "by design" and not "wear", I believe this was a design revision. Why? No clue. My ST has been faultless and functions as precisely as a swiss watch. It's very accurate too.

This has been a mystery to me. One explanation is that Ruger added the bevel for some reason.

The other explanation cites a batch of defective metal pawls... and some random stories about guns worn out prematurely and being sent back to Ruger.
But then I have photos of a couple of guns (mine being one of them) that appear to have file marks on the pawl bevel.

I'm thinking maybe I'll send an inquiry to Ruger and see what they say...

 

[jaxrider14]

After my first outing, firing 350 rounds with my new Single Ten, upon cleaning it I noticed the pawl has an angle at the top as shown in this photo.
The cylinder ratchet looks to be okay and there were no jams or problems. The gun still cycles flawlessly.

I'm wondering if this is normal "wearing in" of the surface as it contacts the angled face of the ratchet.
As the pawl is forged square and the ratchet angled, when new the top right corner of the pawl first contacts the ratchet face, so I can see why it would wear at this angle

I just received my copy of a Jerry Kuhnhausen's shop manual on Ruger Single Action Revolvers. I believe it answers the question of this "bevel clearancing" of the pawl.
It says a gunsmith fitting the pawl may grind a "relief" into this corner "to enable the pawl to move forward to obtain full bottom pawl/ratchet engagement".

 

[North country gal]

As I posted, earlier, my ST does not have the bevel. It has a date of Nov, 2011. I suspect the bevel was added to make cycling a bit less fussy. On my ST, the cylinder must be be rotated to the right position before the loading gate is closed or the hammer won't cock at all. Not that I mind, but I can see where it would freak out some users.