My new Ruger Wranger is a winner, no doubt. I don't know much about the "zinc alloy" that is used for the grip frame. The cylinder frame is aluminum. Is this just a coast cutting move? The only reference I have to zinc framed guns are the cheap .25 autos that guys would carry around in my neighborhood when I was a kid. They would be considered junk by todays standards. How well will the zinc frame stand up to a drop on the sidewalk?
wrangler zinc grip frame
- Thread starter puppyface
- Start date
FrankenMauser
New member
Yes. That's why they're priced the way they are.
About as well as aluminum, maybe better.
Don't drop firearms - especially on concrete.
Ruger has had the excellent Single Six and the Bearcat for a long time. A few years ago, 5 or 6 I think, the Rough Rider was introduced by Heritage Manufacturing. This was and still is, a reliable 22 with a safety on it that sold for less than $200. in many places. It began to undercut Ruger's sales of single action 22's. Ruger responded with the Wrangler.
tipoc
tipoc
stinkeypete
New member
Ruger parts compatibility question- is the Wrangler grip frame drop-in compatible with any of the other Ruger grip frames?
Just curious.
As for materials, Ruger is expert at castings and with their warranty I would buy a Wrangler if I saw one and had cash in pocket. It’s on my list.
Just curious.
As for materials, Ruger is expert at castings and with their warranty I would buy a Wrangler if I saw one and had cash in pocket. It’s on my list.
Bill DeShivs
New member
ZAMAK and other zinc alloys are used because they can be easily cast. These alloys are fine for some pieces.
The problems with zinc alloys are: they have no "give" like most metals. They are relatively soft, but brittle. They don't bend-they break.
The other problem is they must be plated or painted. If left natural, they turn an ugly grey.
The problems with zinc alloys are: they have no "give" like most metals. They are relatively soft, but brittle. They don't bend-they break.
The other problem is they must be plated or painted. If left natural, they turn an ugly grey.
Cheapshooter
New member
Probably Zamak. Same thing used for Heritage Rough Rider frames, and Hi-Point slides. Works very well for the purpose while providing a cost savings to keep prices down. But it also draws the ire, disdain, and hate from gun snobs.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
For a .22 rimfire a Zamak grip frame is just fine.
In the early 1960s I laid down $25 for a German-made, .22 rimfire SAA clone that had a Zamak frame and grip frame. I had that gun for years and it never gave me any problems. Unfortunately, it went walkabout during a relocation move, but at that time it was 30+ years old and still looked and shot as good as new.
In the early 1960s I laid down $25 for a German-made, .22 rimfire SAA clone that had a Zamak frame and grip frame. I had that gun for years and it never gave me any problems. Unfortunately, it went walkabout during a relocation move, but at that time it was 30+ years old and still looked and shot as good as new.
The mention of zinc definitely carries a negative vibe with the uninformed (like myself). I had the same feelings about plastic frames in the 80’s. Regardless, the Wrangler is great gun It will share time with my Bearcat on my hikes, I can see it on a trapline or knocking down cans. I don’t agree with an article I read recently that called it a “range toy”. Mine hits point of aim at 20 yards, 3 to four inch groups. Not everyone is going like it, the finish may be a turn off for some. I handed a Heritage along side the Wrangler, and I thought that the Wrangler had a better feel overall, worth the extra cash.
Onward Allusion
New member
Funny that the Heritage Rough Rider is considered "junk" by some but once the Ruger name is slapped on a similar contraption, it's economical. 
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Not an RG66. The maker was named something a bit like Sauer, and not so very long ago I found a photo of one on the Internet that looked exactly like mine -- right down to the pattern on the fake stag grips.Hawg said:
Nope -- found it. Herburt Schmidt. Here's one -- the grips on mine looked exactly like this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwS99z8CPng
Bill DeShivs
New member
Yes- we called those "pieces of Schmidt."
They were OK guns.
They were OK guns.
Bob Wright
New member
From the very few I have observed, there is considerable difference between the Ruger and Heritage as far as mating parts fit. The Heritage seems to be more casually put together, not quite so neat as the Ruger. I have very little experience with either, nor do I intend to, but the Ruger does seem better finished. As to the difference in handling and shooting, makes no difference.
My preference is to all steel and wood (or bone or stag) for my revolvers.
(Yes, I know Rugers have aluminum alloy parts, but not on my guns. I have replaced aluminum parts with steel. )
Bob Wright
buck460XVR
New member
Funny that the Heritage Rough Rider is considered "junk" by some but once the Ruger name is slapped on a similar contraption, it's economical.
Kinda always found that funny myself. The Rugers seem at first to have a better finish, but on closer inspection, it seems their paint(Cerakote) covers a lot of imperfections that the Heritage finish can't. From reports on shooting, it seems accuracy is similar with both as is durability. Ruger's machinery and technology is probably newer, so it should produce a better gun. For the cost, they both are good choices if one wants a cheap .22 plinker.