About to buy my first revolver!

H

higgscharger

New member
After much reading and test firing a few options, I think I found what I want.

Ruger Security Six in .357

Found one for a little under $400 in my area, which isn't a steal, but not terrible, and it should last me forever.

I'll let everyone know how it turns out.
 
Pics or it didn't happen.... :p

That said, for revolvers, it's a great pick, I owned one for a while, and made the mistake of selling it (one I rectified recently by buying another one).

If you get a chance, look on eBay for some of the original factory grips. They are reasonably cheap (I got a set in VERY good condition for under $15 after shipping), and there are still plenty of aftermarket grips from Hogue, Pacmyr, etc.
 
That is a fine choice and in today's market, not that bad a price either. It is a fine hand fun that you will be able to pass on.
 
Great pistols. Had one in the 70's blue, replaced it this year with a stainless model. Couldn't be happier with it.
 
I still have my Ruger SS from the '80s. I'll take that over a Python when it comes to last ditch revolver. Ruger built them tough and they'll out last the smoother, prettier Python (or S&W).
 
I would jump on that. You can hardly find a quality 357 for under $500. You won't be dissappointed.
cwmoss
 
No, it is the standard DA/SA configuration. The Single Six (or Single Nine or Single Ten) is SAO. Maybe it was one of those of which you were thinking?

It looks like this:
5D09126A-B00D-4753-8573-324ABDA6EC9F-1252-0000019C607ECF99_zps110b0db2.jpg


This is not my picture, don't own a Security Six, but borrowed from IMFDB. Mods, if this is a violation of some sort, please feel free to delete. Not that you need my permission of course...:)
 
Last edited:
It happened!

JimmyR, I am going to check out some new grips. Not a huge fan of the grips it came with, they are a little loose and I like darker, but they worked today when I took it out and shot it.

Pretty happy with the buy. I am never going to be a huge collector, this may be one of very few revolvers I ever buy, but I think it will do me well for a long time.
 

Attachments

  • photo.jpg
    photo.jpg
    90.1 KB · Views: 46
I still have my Ruger SS from the '80s. I'll take that over a Python when it comes to last ditch revolver. Ruger built them tough and they'll out last the smoother, prettier Python (or S&W).
Click to expand...
I will agree that when used hard, it will outlast the fine lockwork of a Python, assuming you don't have an expert on hand to tend to the inner guts of the Colt.

How would you explain, back up, or otherwise convince intelligent folks that a Security Six will outlast a Smith & Wesson? (or, for anyone who thinks it's 180 degrees, what's your argument for the opposite?)

Have we ever seen anything that would convince us that a medium frame Ruger revolver, be it a S___ Six series or a GP-100 will outlast a Smith & Wesson L-frame? Or that an L-frame will outlast a GP-100 or a Security Six?

Actually, if anything, you could make a short argument that even Ruger must have thought the Smith & Wesson was better...since they shut down production of the Security Six for an improved design?! :p
 
well, according to this review:

http://www.chuckhawks.com/ruger_security_six.htm

The ruger sacrificed some smooth precision for heavy duty parts.


"They comprehensively looked at the sometimes fragile and hand fitted lockwork of these designs, and in usual Ruger fashion, over-engineered all the working parts. If one were to do a comparison detail strip of a Smith, Colt and the Ruger, one would see that pieces such as the cylinder locking bolt, the hand, the size of the double and single-action sears on the hammer, one would see that the Ruger pieces are quite a bit larger."


And that, as a result, the Ruger would be expected to last longer.
 
A similar argument has been made about the Ruger frame being large than the Smith & Wesson counterpart... however, the frame is a cast part and as such, is likely to need to be larger than a similar forged part.
 
I get so sick of hearing the cast frame vs forged frame argument.

I can build you a cast part that will outlast a similar forged part. I can also reverse that and forge a part that will be stronger than a similar cast part. If you're dealing with different grades of steel the results can be all over the board.

Ruger is a leader in the investment casting industry. You can take it to the bank that their cast frames will easily outlast the forged Smith frames. They knew exactly what kind of material they were going to use and how it was to be made. With that info in hand they designed the frame.

I have no doubt that the cast frame will hold up longer than the forged frame. There's little doubt in my mind that the GP100 can hang with or even outlast a model 28. Yes, it's likely tougher than the N frame. That heavy Smith is a wonderful machine to operate but the delicate guts don't strike me to be as solid as the mid size Ruger.

Keep in mind that it's common for cast parts to absorb vibration better than forged parts and weldments. That's one of the reasons my mill and lathe are made of heavy castings.
 
Do the test. Prove to the world that your results are as strong as your energetic post.

I'll be here in my real world, where I send around 10k down range each year, but do it across dozens of different handguns. It seems that my Ruger revolvers and my Smith & Wesson revolvers are simply -NOT- wearing out, which leads me to the conclusion that these hyperactive posts about which are stronger are nothing more than restless energy.

I enjoy my Ruger revolvers, especially my GP-100 in .327 Federal. However, I definitely enjoy the double action triggers of my Smith & Wesson revolvers more. I'm not worrying about which is stronger.
I get so sick of hearing
Click to expand...
There is a quality 9mm vs. .45 debate happening in another area of this site. It does seem to be that when you visit discussion forums, you'll bump in to things you "are sick of hearing." You might need a better game plan.
 
My 4 Rugers see most of my time at the range. However, the 25-2 is by far my favorite action, especially after I broke out the stones.
Sadly, the 15-2 has the worst action of the bunch and makes my 642 feel like a precision instrument. The guts were an absolute horror show of shoddy machining. I spent many hours in there trying to clean things up. It's now tolerable but still needs a little more attention.

After reading many of your posts I didn't expect you to step down to the cast vs forged thing. I expected you to know that when an engineer was designing something to hold X amount of pressure and knew the materials available he would be able to create a shape of sufficient strength using either method.

Except in the case of serious overpressure neither frame type is likely to fail. It's the guts that matter more. The internal bits of my N frame will likely wear before the beefier RH and SRH guts. Same goes for the GP over the K frame.
 
See, that's just it. It seems like you want to believe that I'm convinced that the S&W is stronger than the Ruger because it's forged, or that the Ruger must somehow be weaker than the Smith because[/b] it's cast.

It's just that I don't believe either.
My response was immediately after an assertion that a Ruger would last longer than a S&W because the parts inside are larger. (post#12)

I don't know if the internals are forged, cast, or MIM. Frankly, it just doesn't concern me. Because back in the real world, we don't wear these revolvers out.

Ruger revamped their entire revolver design for the GP series, and the big revolvers followed that pattern. Good on them! But even still... have folks been wearing out the Security Sixes? Not that I know of.

There's room in my safe for both. I also have a pair of Dan Wesson revolvers and I own a single Taurus revolver and I beat the tar out of that one and use it as my test platform. If I'm going to find the limits of a modern revolver, the math says it'll be my 7-shot Taurus 66 because that's the one I run my hardest handloads in.
Same goes for the GP over the K frame.
Click to expand...
C'mon, pit the GP against the L-frame, anyway. The next time I click a thread where someone has put the last possible round through a 686, I'll forward you the link. I'm sure it'll be as active a thread as all the worn out GP-100s. (which is to say, we'll have trouble finding either conversation)
 
Around here less than $400.00 for a Security/Speed-six would be pretty close to a steal.

Which one is stronger? I don't know. I wish I had the time and the money to shoot one enough to try to wear one out. And live long enough.
 
I've said this in other conversations, but the whole Security/Service/Speed Six must be a regional thing. I'm an OGCA member and I take in the show regularly and it's definitely the best bimonthly gun show (especially for revolvers) within at least a couple hundred miles and I'm telling ya, the S___ Six series are just NOT that prevalent. Lots of Colt, tons of Smith & Wesson.

One of the older solid Ruger DA .357's is on my short list, but I just don't see many to choose from.
 
Sevens said:
I don't know if the internals are forged, cast, or MIM. Frankly, it just doesn't concern me. Because back in the real world, we don't wear these revolvers out.
Click to expand...

I feel the same, at least about the frame and internals, and you'll likely put more relative wear on the barrel before the aforementioned: I've got 75k-ish through my S&W 686 (with MIM internals), and it's still tight, while the barrel's showing signs of wear. Even with this wear, it's still very shootable, and the barrel will likely last many more rounds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top