POKEYJOE04
New member
I had a Rough Rider. Accuracy was fair. I sold it and bought a Ruger Bearcat. Accuracy of the Ruger was a good bit better.
. . .in my discussions with range friends one fella claimed that when he got it he was examining it and dry fired it a few times(probably alot of times) and it damage the cylinder and he had to have it repaired. . .
Not any more!Guys, this thread is over 2 years old.
Still some useful information, though.
Heritage may be crap but it is silly beyond words to use your negative experience with them, some of the cheapest guns on the market, to damn the whole American firearms industry.These people confirm to me why American made guns are crap....
Stupid is as stupid does.i enjoy these pistols greatly both for the old cowboy type look and very impressive shooting/plinking however in my discussions with range friends one fella claimed that when he got it he was examining it and dry fired it a few times(probably alot of times) and it damage the cylinder and he had to have it repaired but i personally have nothing but great opinions of these weapons
Wonder how the OP is doing since the last post he made 14 years ago!OP, remember that the real cost of shooting is the ammo. The cost of ammo will quickly dwarf the cost of the gun. The Ruger is worth the money; it is made of steel and will last, and be in your family, for generations. The Heritage is OK, but you will enjoy the Ruger more. Trust me. Looks like the state of MN maybe made your decision for you, at any rate.
Mine is in that timeline, 2009 or 10. Seems to have held up well. Haven't shot in a while, but shortly after Ammogeddon, when 22 ammo was plentiful again it got a lot of range time. It did have to share some of it with the second one I bought a couple years ago. Liked the 6 1/2" one so much I bought a shorter barreled birdshead grip model14 year old thread.....
Would be valuable to hear what many of the original posters - from back in 2006 to 2012 - have to report about how their RR has held up