Speed Six

D

Don Mallard

New member
Ihave a short barreled stainless Speed Six-357.
I smoothed the action and it is sweet----
Here is the Question--Do any of you have one?
What ammo have you setted on?

Don Mallard
 
I do...... I have had it since the early 80's. It is the only revolver I own that I still carry from time to time. It has always been my favorite. It has been "rode hard, and put to bed wet", shows a lot of wear, but has never given me a minutes trouble.

I put a factory spurless hammer on it right after I got it, and replaced the grips.

Ammo for carry - Fed 125gr JHP

BT
 
thanks!!

Bloody Thumb,
Thanks for input. I suppose you know of the vast cost Bill Ruger spent in the R&D department designing the SIX line of 357's. Those are really rugged revolvers------got to admit I like the Federal 125 hp's in mine. Those are a money well spent I think. I see them on the web for sale with various FFL"s and I think the cost for them is a bargain right now. Victor Lewis-member here- got one and he knows they are a dang good gun.
Don Mallard
 
My primary defense piece is my 2.75'' Speed Six. I use the gun for IDPA and while I may not set the competetive world on fire the gun is minute of terrorist in it's accuracy and it fits my hand very well. I now have a Hogue nylon mono grip on it which caused the point of impact in my hand at any rate, to change when using my favored Win. 110gr. .357 hp ammo. Now I load up with Fed 158gr Hydra-Shoks which give me a chronographed velocity of 1220 fps and in my expansion tests just about ideal performance. Recoil while a bit stout is for me with those grips actually very controlable. Both my son-in-law with his ham hands and my good friend and shooting buddy who is IDPA expert qualified find it unbearable.This of course does nothing for my ego as I am extremely modest by nature:D All in all a most excellent revolver.
 
Count me in as a Speed-6 fan. While I'm happy with several different loads, if I had to pick one I'd choose the .357 Mag. Winchester 145 grain STHP.
 
I've got a 9mm 2" barrel blue version. It's pretty nifty to have a hefty revolver which shoots the 9mm bullet. No brass to pick up and if you don't want to use clips, use a brass rod to pop them out. The clips aren't so bad though but it does get tiring to pop out the empties.
 
choices......

You know most of us--oops don't know that MOST of us members have CCW------Humm that would be interesting to know the percentage of TFL Members who have CCW.
I can get on line and mouse around and click and that is the extent of my puter skills.
Suppose the administrators her could get us a little thing to vote on various specific topics? will be my luck that they already have it here and I will be red again--oh well I am accustomed to making mistakes...............sorry got off track there...........when I go CCW I use a Don Hume strong side open bottom pancake style holster with a thumb break. I also use a Don Hume trouser belt which is designed to support the weight of a heavy revovler.
If I am not supposed to be using brand names then tell me. I just was stating the facts of what 'I' use----------------the combination of gear works great. The same holster will fit my 6" K frame .22 since it is bottomless.
I have the same design holster for my 6" N frame. Even it rides super comfortable. It just takes good quality leather to get the job done when heavy revolvers being used.--------Whew.......I just have to say that I can buy any handgun I want but the Speed Six just fits the bill perfectly. By Golly I will never get into the specifics of guns fights and the end results on the site here but I have already learned that you better carry a handgun which will deliver accurate sustained fire...............and the gun better be a Mack Truck type too.................Oh you little devils! I can see those little wheels spinning when I mentioned 'sustained fire' and yes the semi-auto crowd is yelling 'use a 17 round gun'-------allow me to give a semi-disertation of real world gun fights. As a observer and participant I say most of them are pop-pop-pop and it is over.
I found myself shooting at a dang lunitic murderer who was in a old wood house shooting at us. Our Interceptors provided cover.
You make sure you are "real' 'real' close to the front tire. That allows the engine to be between you and 'him'------oh well we had plenty of ammo in our units and the number of shots before reload had no bearing. Just load and shoot six and do it again until a SWC 357 hit him dead center--end of gunfight. Need new Patrol Car!
When you leave your house you do not know if you will have to fight for your life or not. There are no set rules as to what the future holds.
I trust my life with a Speed-Six or the workhorse N frame.
I think the Six series of Ruger brand hit the nail on the head all the way around.
just my thoughts-------talke what you want and leave the rest

the beat goes on.............Don Mallard
 
Bought a used "Police" version (fixed sights, 4", has "Police" stamped on it) at gun show in Indy in fall of `97 on advice of Ayoob. Dead on with +P .38s, but a little off with Federal 125 grain .357 magnums.

Mas was right. Great gun (grudgingly admit Bill Ruger can build a good gun, but man do I despise his politics).
 
KSFreeman

I bet your iron sighted 4" Six shoots high with 125 357's
It is 'designed'(or that is what the factory informed us) for 158 grn 357 fodder-----point of impact wise
I know of shooters who----oh well---they file the front sight down until it hits POA ---that is with 125 grn fodder.
I just have to blow the horn for the Six series Rugers.
I don't agree with Bill's thoughts concerning limiting civilans to ten round magazines and if I never meet him that won't mean anything either concerning my utitlitarian attitude concerning every gun I have.
The vast amount of R&D with the Six series produced guns which are superior to the K frames where I am concerned. Bottom line: we are addicted to the guns 'we' like--that is OK Rave on


Don Mallard
 
Don, you're right. High with Fed 125 grs. Keeps a nice group though.

Bill Ruger does build a heck of a gun, but that "honest man" comment still sends me around the bend.
 
Mike

Ruger wanted desperately to fill America's Law Enforcement -desires for a lighter mid size frame 357.
It is just not us who discovered the Kframe 357's failures with hot ammo.
It is just a fact that our Armorer-in my presence- discussed what the K frame357's had done on our range and a whole host of DPS's said the same thing. The civilian firearms 'forums' reflect 'some' talk of failures with their md 19-13-and 66's.
Bill Ruger set out to build a strong K frame 'type' 357. Our Armorer was in phone contact with their tech dept.
They sent some 4" guns and the short barreled Speed Six to test fire.
I took a shine to the short gun.
I took it down and polished the lockworks and cut some rounds off the hammer spring. The stainless parts are hard to polish.
I have Industrial power polishing wheels.
They are shaped like a 'sewing thread spool' and are very very hard compressed fabric which is impregnated with very fine metal.
It will polish but not remove metal. I have already discovered that if you change the angle of operation by removing metal with -say a fine file' then you have messed up.
Anyway I got it smooth.
I shot it with 125 grn Federal hp 357 ammo.
We were informed by Ruger that the Six series were built to fire hot 357 ammo.
None of us had anything but a utilitarian attitude before the test began.
We had the md 27-28 as the bench mark.
The only thought I had was to make sure the gun was ready to fire. All the lockwork was intact and no physical defects were discovered.
I benched it at 25 yds and filed the front sight down until the 125's printed in the 2" center.
I emptied 1000 rounds into a large plastic bucket
I had the intentions to load six and fire while standing at the 25.
I put a Tyler Gripper on it.
It was ready for the test.
Load six and fire as fast as possible double action.
Fire the 1000 rounds as fast as possible.
Show the gun no mercy, make it get hot, make it smoke-see how many rounds it takes before some part of it fails-- and it fails.
Mine did not fail-neither did the 4" ones which I did not fire.
I never hung up like the 19's or 66's did with not only me but others.
It should be noted that until you attempt to fire as fast as you can for 1000 times that youhave not--for our 'standards' put it thru a torture test.
A 19 or 66 might not fail if you it was not subjected to that kind of abuse.
In the end our bosses 'politically' made a 'deal' with S&W for hundreds of 66's.
That did not sway me.
I bought a short Speed Six and put mono grips on it and it is my CCW.
If you really want to discover what your revolver-any model- will take then do the 1000 round thing.
Georgia State Patrol had K frame mess ups. They went with the 28's 4" with 125 SJHP 357 fodder.
I was friends with a Trooper who was on their PPC Team.
He said they really put the 19's and 66's thru the torture test and they had problems too.
It should be noted at then many DPS's choose the 66's. I had a list of each DPS service handgun at one time.
It is also noted that they decided to use 125gr hps in 357.
They also did not intend for it to ever be required to stand up to 1000 rounds fast fire.
The 4" 66 with 125's is a very good choice if you seek a light, quick handling handgun which Bill Jordan liked.
They serve the purpose for non-sustained fire with 357 ammo.
OH well---------our state went with the 4" 66
RP 125 gr hp 357 ammo.
It was used to kill by some Troopers but was never fired doing the torture test in the field of gun fight.
So the K frame Smith and Wesson 357 will indure non-heavy use.
The Speed-Six is just a strong beautiful design. The very hard work at Ruger with engineers, R&D, test range shooter-ect actually was a lobor of love which was never fully grasped and embraced by the masses of handgunners.
Oh there is no doubt that it has a personality which I understand.
There was just too much artistry of involment from the first thoughts to the drawing board then to R&D and Firearms Designers and Engineers then on to actual cast and millings.
Oh I have been to S&W Factory- a whole host of ammo factories and other firearms factories-including the top shelf Savage place.
It is to be noted that all this is a passion with some shooters like all of you and me and the actual factory persons. I have met some of them. They cannot stop their company's doings and agreements and so on but I assure you that they speak our language and they are not just in 'it' for the money but rather they have the addiction too.
A life's work for me---- literally.
I am glad I invested my vocation and advocation time in the same assiduous manner.
It has cost me 30+ years to settle on just five handguns.
The N frame 357 and a Speed Six are two of them.
Well designed equipment and a passion to shoot them.
It is a sin to own more guns than you have time to master.
I honestly believe it takes 100,000 rounds to fully become as one with a hand gun........
no spell checker-read the writting on the wall
Don Mallard
 
The only thing that bothers me about the 1,000-rd test is that if the cylinder gap is tight, around .002 or .003, you are NOT going to pass that test. Not unless the ammo and powder is of an unusally clean type.

My personal snubbie .38 with a gap at .002 is good for about 40 to 50 rounds tops before I have to give the front of the cylinder and the back of the barrel a quick wipe. It starts getting "sticky". I assume I could probably grit it out and deal with the ever-worsening trigger pull out to maybe 75 or 100 rounds but what non-cop such as myself is ever gonna shoot that out of a snubbie in combat?

I don't consider my tight gap or it's natural results a flaw! I don't think I'd ever CCW it with more than two speedloaders so that's 15 rds total...and I clean it GOOD after every range session.

The tight gap give me maximum velocity and I'm operating on the assumption that I need every fps I can get to make good .38 ammo work from a 2" tube.

The reason makers do big factory gaps of around .005 or worse is because some people don't clean their guns enough.
 
Now I read somewhere that Ruger discontinued the security six series of guns because they had problems digesting large amounts of 357 magnum, similar to the K frame Smiths. The result was the development of the GP series, comparable to the Smith L frame. Don, you appear to be very knowledgeable about firearms, but I cannot understand how anyone can say that a Ruger revolver is superior to a S&W by any standard of comparison. The rap on K frames 'shooting loose', is I think vastly overblown. Don't forget the 'combat magnum', was introduced in the mid 1950's, when the steels used in manufacture were not up to todays steels. I think you are right in that a K frame was not designed to digest large amounts of 'hot' magnum rounds, but it will certainly digest more than a box or two. By the way, wasn't the issue with the K frame a matter of forcing cone erosion with hot 125 grain loads? Thanks....Ron
 
I will give the discription Ruger gave our Armorer over the phone before the Six series arrived---but first
At that time in US a big sidearms change was going on in LE circles.
FBI had gone from a md 36 Cheif Special to a md 13 357(you know the iron sighted heavy barrelled gun the same configuraton with the heavy barreled md 10 38 special which had been around a long time)
Some departments were switching to 1911's
Illinois Troopers were carrying the md 39-9mm
they went to the md59
S&W was really pushing the md66.
Ruger did not have a double action 357 to throw in the frey.
So you should understand what was happening handgun wise with LE.
For many decades many LE carried a irion sighted md 10 or a 1911 or 27 or 28.
Just not a lot of different choices for LE
I do know that the 38 special 158 grn round nose lead bullet prompted many Depts to begin a search for a more powerful handgun for their Officers.
A person would be better armed with a hatchet as opposed to a 158 grn round nose 38.
Unless I am wrong the md 28 was introduced in 1956?
It was chosen by many depts with the 4" barrel.
I had a friend who had the 28 4" as a Borderpatrolman. Also the complaints of the heavy N frame was causing the LE DEpt bosses to start the search for a lighter gun and the stainless offering of the 66 automatically caught on just because of the good stainless steel.
Straight up facts that I can testify to is that the majority of Law Enforcement did not shoot except to qualify.
I was one of the few who shot on a daily basis just like brushing teeth when they itch!
I shot 50 357's minimum when I was assigned to highway duty. When at the range 1000 was the standard.
Anyway------------Our 27's were costing the state a bunch of money to be re-blued because I don't think it was possible to prevent rust on them. They were heavy-3lbs
Lots of men wanted a lighter gun.
A 4" md 19 with 125's will kill you graveyard dead for exacty sure.
So........Ruger engineers-whatever- produced a gun which had a goal in mind. To be stronger than a K frame- to be offered in blue or stainless, iron sights if you wanted, 2.75 "-4"-6" and for them to say
to Armorers.
"We know the switch from the big N frame -md 10's - are happening" "We have taken a good look at the K frame and have produced a stronger gun"---"What configuration do you want to test because we want to provide our Brands as opposed to the K frames."
WE got a 4" and the stainless 2.75 Speed--
I never intended to shoot anything but 125-357 in the short gun.
I shot 1000 rounds-no bent extracor no failures to fire the round.
*as a side note before I forget----the hot 125's will corrode the cone of a 66 or the Ruger. The N frame has a massive cone and is not effected by 125's.
All of us liked the Ruger.
The Dept decided to stick with S&W- they had been with them since 1937. The Colt 357 Trooper model was good but we had never purchased any Colt's at that time--we did use highly modified 70 series 45acp for insertion work but that is a different can of worms.............
All our Troopers got the 66
Arkansas State Police too......then the City and County Depts.
Ruger did not sell enough to warrant heavy production. He sold all he produced but lost money. That is straight from RUGER.
He came with large frame 357's which you know of today.
I bought the short Speed-Six.
Have shot it a whole bunch with no failures.
I haven't had any failures with my N frame so I have no need for a large frame Ruger in357.
I have my N frame Tefloned and see no end in sight with it.
Now for a strong statement for sure......
"You CANNOT make the action of the large frame Ruger as smooth as my old N frame"
I just have to state the facts that the K frame failed during our torture test the Six series did not.
I am new to the civilian firearms world.
All firearms LE comp shooter have shot the K frames and the Rugers. I have never had one man who said a K frame was stronger than the Ruger.
I am a S&W man-dyed in the heart and soul.
I just wanted a 357 mid size frame for CCW and in stainless.
I simply let the two guns and the test make the choice and I went with the winner even though I love the S&W.
In 44 mag I have the 7.5" SBH--Ruger. The md 29's are not in its league strength and durabilty wise.
All of you handgunners tell me if you have had both the Six series and the K frame 'OBJECTIVELY' which one is more durable.
That means the toughest
The one which can take more abuse and still fire.
Not the smothest action or any cosmetic effects.
Not shooting 357 ammo in a normal slow manner and then not many shots total---if you do that then the K frame will stand up.

I mean really put the b--ll- to the walls and see if it will fail in any manner. Then you have discovered the stronger of the two.
I have a single shot Daisy .22 rifle
It would probably fail if I shot Stinger Ammo in it as fast as I could load it---------The Cooper rifle will not fail
Just do the 1000 round test with the K and the Ruger.
Don Mallard
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top