The Heritage is a cheapie to be sure; hence the very low price. It was advertised as "stainless steel" by the retailer, I'm pretty sure - now was this false advertising? I'm not sure - perhaps it's just a grayish-colored finish or coating over basic carbon steel - it looks like that is a real possibility just by eyeballing it, but I wouldn't know unless I tried to scrape some off (not going to do), or got more info from research. The hammer appears to be an alloy. Not sure about the receiver and cylinder, though I would think the cylinder, like the barrel, would have to be steel. Lemme get the box and get back with ya. In any event, it seems like it will serve my purposes, which admittedly, are not too demanding. Should one save up for something better? Probably yes, in most cases. But I wanted a .22 revo to play with now, and this one made sense due to the price, the good classic SA looks, and since I boycott Ruger, there weren't a whole lot of choices out there, and no others under $200. It also satisfied my desire to make an impulse purchase, being available locally.
And a rimfire doesn't need to be made from thick hardened steel anyhow. And with a revolver, reliability is not going to be an issue - not likely anyhow. The Heritage is also interesting in that it has a manual safety, which both makes it safer and allows for dry-firing, something not normally allowed with rimfires without snap caps.
Edit...Update: Hmmm, the manual describes the finish in their general manual as "Blue or Satin" finish, so whatever 'satin' means, so now I really doubt it's stainless steel. The warranty is a limited ONE year, so it may turn out to be total junk and break on me - we'll see. Gun tests gave a thumbs up to the .17 version, for what that is worth - that's in my link above.