Shots Fired! Ruger takes on Heritage... discuss!

[Aguila Blanca]

I paid $350 for a Single Six convertible back in 2000. I'm sure the price has gone up quite a bit since then. I certainly applaud Ruger doing something to get the price down for a Single Six, although I don't understand why/how an aluminum alloy frame is significantly less expensive than a steel frame. In general, aluminum isn't a cheap material. Zamack would be cheaper, and is entirely adequate for a .22. Back in the 60s I had a German-made, .22 LR cowboy six shooter that had a Zamack frame. I put a lot of rounds through that little gun and it never gave me any problems.

Can anyone explain why the new Wrangler has two lines running around the rear of the cylinder? They detract from the appearance, IMHO, and I can't see that they serve any functional purpose.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

WHOA!

https://ruger.com/productImages/2002/detail/2.jpg

The front of the cylinder shows rings around the mouth of each chamber. Clicking on the spec sheet, I see that Ruger says the cylinder and frame are aluminum alloy. Does this mean that the cylinder is made of aluminum, and the chambers are steel sleeves pressed into the aluminum cylinder?

 

[TxFlyFish]

Hmm can’t tell exactly it does kinda look like it. I think heritage is steel cylinder. Well on the plus side ruger will finally have adjustable chamber throats yay!

 

[Chettt]

When Phoenix Arms, Hi Point and Taurus can make money on sub two hundred dollar hand guns, you have to wonder how much profit these larger companies with highly efficient manufacturing make on each sale. I am glad they are successful and profitable but I would bet Ruger could blister pack their LCP, sell it for less than 100 dollars and still make a sizable profit.

 

[TruthTellers]

WHOA!

https://ruger.com/productImages/2002/detail/2.jpg

The front of the cylinder shows rings around the mouth of each chamber. Clicking on the spec sheet, I see that Ruger says the cylinder and frame are aluminum alloy. Does this mean that the cylinder is made of aluminum, and the chambers are steel sleeves pressed into the aluminum cylinder?

It says cylinder frame material, which means the frame around the cylinder, not the cylinder itself. The grip frame is zamak.

The cylinder is not made of aluminum. If it was, this thing would weigh a lot less.

 

[TruthTellers]

Heritage has a 9 shot cylinder.
Heritage has 4, 6, 9, and 16 inch barrels.
Heritage has 22 mag.

A lot more options, yes and I think those options are what makes some of the Heritage's worth getting over the Ruger. The only option Ruger has is colors, but you're stuck with the 4 5/8" barrel, fixed sights, and 6 rounds and the price will probably be somewhere around $180 up to $200.

On Black Friday, you can get a Heritage with those same features for $99. For the same amount, you can get a 9 shot Heritage with adj. sights and a .22 Mag cylinder in either a 4 or 6 inch barrel. For the same price you can get a STEEL framed Heritage, which people apparently forget exists.

https://www.gunsmidwest.com/heritage-22lr-m-6-5-6rd-camo-grn.html

If the only reasons that people can't justify buying a Heritage are the safety, flat springs, and the barrel fixation to the frame, then by all means they should spend more money on the Wrangler.

I mean, the Heritage isn't perfect, they could do a lot better fitting the grips to the grip frame, in fact, they ought to offer a checkered plastic grip like Ruger is with the Wrangler because that would be a cost savings and be superior to the wood grips anyway. What I'm seeing from people is they're thinking for a little more money, they think with the Wrangler they're going to be getting a remarkably superior revolver over the Heritage and that's suspect.

Yes, springs will be better, stronger and the barrel will be threaded into the frame and the internals use Single Six parts, so the trigger should be better, but I have yet to see a Heritage shoot its barrel loose and break springs and the trigger is plenty decent for the price.

If the Heritage had an SP101 type trigger, then that would be a distinct knock on it, but that's not the case.

 

[stinkeypete]

Oooo! Good catch! That’s what it looks like!

I sort of like the double lines on the cylinder... a gold ring there is a traditional gold inlay bit of bling in custom revolvers.

A single six convertible is in the low $500 range and I bought myself a stainless Bearcat for about that price last Christmas. I have no doubt that Bearcat will be around for my unborn grandkids to pass on to their kids. Your question “where is the cost savings” is a really good one.

I expect the margins on the single six family are fairly good for Ruger. They are specialists in casting. The Single Six family shares parts and shares parts with the Blackhawk and Vaquero family, which is good industrial design. They don’t want to cut the prices there because consumers might think the quality was diminished. “Everyone knows” Ruger makes a quality firearm. Even the S&W guys concede it’s a quality gun, just less refined than their higher priced and more elegant revolvers.

I just acquired a 3” LCRx in .38 special. Really looking it over, I am even more pleased. I will get to the range Monday for the “retired guys get the place all to themselves” special. It uses new non-traditional adaptations to an idea from the 1800’s.

Clearly I am not the usual guy with a handgun because in my world these things would outsell Glock 19s. (I want a G19, by the way... but it’s about 4th on my wants list). This is a pistol to wear on my hip in the fall, out where everyone can see it. Springtime, stuffed in my jacket pocket so nice folks out hiking won’t feel concerned because it’s not hunting season. I like walking with the dog in the woods and plinking occasionally, especially if some low life litters a tin can for us to kill before packing it out.

I decided .357 was not required for the ethical hunting of tin cans. I have plenty of single action revolvers; I started in revolvers with my grandpa’s horrible old h&r double action .22. I didn’t know it was horrible back then, I loved it. Over time, it lost it’s timing and was let go... not worth the gunsmith’s time to fiddle the top-break design back to working. And since it’s been decided that there is no point to .38 Special, I had to have it when I found one at the store. It’s not for putting in a tackle box, it’s for walking six miles with.

Sorry, I got sidetracked there. In my mind, it made sense because I could have said more plainly:

I wonder if Ruger didn’t learn some things about aluminum alloys as they were developing the LCR family of revolvers? Maybe not sharing parts, but R&D testing on what works...

Clearly they saw Heritage eating in to their market share.

Competition can be good. I am really fond of .22s... it would be cool if we could draw more shooters in to plinking with .22 pistols. Maybe some kind of plinking league? Hmmm. Something to goof off with after winter bullseye league is over.

Final thought: I would love to hear from the designers of this new revolver. It’s not simply making a colt clone cheap- there is something going on. Cool.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

That .22 six gun I had back in the 1960s cost me $25 back then. I don't know what that translates to in today's dollars ...

Well, yes, I do know. I just ran it through an on-line inflation calculator. Using 1965 as the base year, that $25 then equates to $201.75 today. That was for a nicely-finished revolver with a Zamack frame, steel cylinder and barrel, and plastic grip. Frankly, it was a much nicer gun than the Heritage Rough Rider of today ... and it didn't have that stupid safety.

I wish that old six gun of mine were still available today.

 

[Dave T]

After reading so much about the Heritage Rough Rider on various gun forums I had a look at one in a shop. I confess I do not understand the question being asked in the OP.

I would spend anywhere from a little more to a lot more on a Ruger before spending anything on the Heritage I looked at. Good grief!

Dave

 

[libiglou]

I took my SS to the range this morning. Its just a fantastic gun. The finish is top notch, love those "clicks" when you rotate the cylinder. Trigger and accuracy are top notch. I saw a used Heritage for sale and it looked beat up. I'm sure its a fine gun for the money but it can't compare to the ruger. I bought mine brand new almost a year ago and have already put more than a 1000 rounds through it without a hiccup.

 

[Drm50]

If a Heritage makes you happy go for it. I have never come across one that shot well and I
don't know anyone that has. I've never bought a new one but have taken several on trades.
A lot of guys bought them because they were cheap then find out they aren't accurate enough to be practical. A Ruger Single-6 is like a target pistol compared to a zip gun. I'm not in the market for the new Ruger Wrangler but Ruger has never put out any junk, yet.
I've got two S-6s, one I got new in 1964 and a Flat Gate older yet. Both still tight and accurate.

* Ruger did make an alloy lightweight S-6 in the 60s.

 

[rep1954]

“Only the grip frames are aluminum on the blued Single Sixes with the exception of the Bisley. The stainless versions have all steel grip frames. The "main frame" surrounding the cylinder is steel on all current versions.”

On the blued models the ejector rod housing is also aluminum.

 

[TruthTellers]

If a Heritage makes you happy go for it. I have never come across one that shot well and I
don't know anyone that has. I've never bought a new one but have taken several on trades.
A lot of guys bought them because they were cheap then find out they aren't accurate enough to be practical. A Ruger Single-6 is like a target pistol compared to a zip gun. I'm not in the market for the new Ruger Wrangler but Ruger has never put out any junk, yet.
I've got two S-6s, one I got new in 1964 and a Flat Gate older yet. Both still tight and accurate.

* Ruger did make an alloy lightweight S-6 in the 60s.

What to you does it take to say a gun "shoots well?" What's the basis to say it's accurate?

This is the reason I bought a Heritage with adj. sights and a long barrel. I wanted to know if given every advantage adj. sights and the long sight radius give if the Heritage could shoot well.

I only shot it once so far, probably about 100 rds, and was pleased. I mean to shoot paper and check the groups.

 

[kenny53]

I'll look at the new Ruger that is something I never have done with the Heritage. I bought my New model Single Six in 1976. It was the first gun I ever bought. I gave $97 bucks for it at Montgomery Wards . Still have it and it still shoots very well.

 

[rclark]

If a Heritage makes you happy go for it. I have never come across one that shot well

Must have had a run of bad luck there with the RRs. Mine easily shoots minute of tin can, knocks down the steel targets at 25Y, and generally hits what I aim at. Went back and looked at a target I shot offhand (had a picture from 2010) and half of the 12 holes were in the 1" black center (distance was 15Y). The others were spread out around it. Reasonable accuracy for this gun I'd say. The pawl spring did break on the RR which I replaced. Not quite as robust as a Single Six. That said, I moved on to a Single Six which I had tuned to my liking. The Single Six is what I always have in my range bag now.

The Wrangler looks like it probably will be a good revolver ... if you can get past the finish! Jeff at Gunblast found the revolver to be quite accurate from a Ransom Rest.

 

[osbornk]

Very nice but I would really like to see a lower priced DA .22lr revolver option maybe based off a SP101 or GP100.

I agree. I have been shopping for an affordable 22 double action revolver and the only relatively affordable ones I could find are Taurus and Charter Arms. The Rugers and Smiths seem to run well over $600. I chose a Charter Arms Pathfinder with a 4.2" barrel with a stainless finish (the only way they make them). Even the "affordable" double actions run well over $300.

 

[osbornk]

If a Heritage makes you happy go for it. I have never come across one that shot well and I
don't know anyone that has. I've never bought a new one but have taken several on trades.
A lot of guys bought them because they were cheap then find out they aren't accurate enough to be practical. A Ruger Single-6 is like a target pistol compared to a zip gun. I'm not in the market for the new Ruger Wrangler but Ruger has never put out any junk, yet.
I've got two S-6s, one I got new in 1964 and a Flat Gate older yet. Both still tight and accurate.

* Ruger did make an alloy lightweight S-6 in the 60s.

Both my and my grandson's Rough Riders shoot well but I don't know anyone else that has one (they are not a bragging about gun that people mention like some of the "brand names" they are so proud of).

 

[stinkeypete]

+1 for RClark’s post no. 27 to Jeff Quinn’s review.

Ransom rest of one inch neighborhood at 25 yards is the only place my Single Six lets me down a bit. Folks say it’s due to compromises made for converting to .22 wmr.

Factory stock with a free-spin pawl is nice, although I haven’t bothered to convert any of my revolvers, hey why not!

There is a credible report the grip frame might be zamac... zinc alloy, the material some other manufacturers use extensively. That doesn’t bother me, the stuff is strong enough.

 

[ThomasT]

Ransom rest of one inch neighborhood at 25 yards is the only place my Single Six lets me down a bit. Folks say it’s due to compromises made for converting to .22 wmr.

There is no compromise in the bore size. The bore should be .224 the same as a 22 mag bullet. I have measured several 22LR bullets and haven't yet found one that measured .223. They all measure from .224 to .226. So in reality most are slightly oversized. But don't worry they will slug down to fit. And if there are any .223 LR bullets the lead is soft enough to slug up to fit. I don't think people realize just how small .001 really is. Most human hair will measure between .002 and .003. just to give you an idea.

I just measured a piece of yellow note pad paper. It came out .004. So you are talking one forth the thickness of a piece of paper. There is nothing to worry about.

If your single six is letting you down its either your shooting or your ammo choice. I have done this and it was an eye opener. Get around 10 different 22 loads and go shoot them at targets with a good rest. Clean between each group of different ammo and fire a couple of fouling shots then shoot several groups with each brand of bullets. It takes a while to do this but it will show you what ammo YOUR gun likes. And don't be surprised if its not the most expensive or target ammo. Twenty two's are picky as hell when it comes to ammo.

 

[osbornk]

They're a cheap .22 single action revolver most likely made to compete with Heritage.

https://ruger.com/products/wrangler/models.html

We'll see what price these sell for on Black Friday, the some of the Heritage's are $99 and I don't see Ruger competing with that price wise. Maybe the lowest would be 120-125, but that's paying a bit more for a Ruger and what comes along with that, i.e customer service.

I have my 9 shot Heritage .22/.22Mag combo with adjustable sights and got it for the same price as these new 6 shot Wranglers will sell for.

I'm not impressed, but it's nice to see another option besides just Heritage. Competition is good.

The MSRP between the Heritage and Ruger is $55. I think Ruger is correctly calculating that many people will select the known brand name over the brand they don't know. I think Ruger is doing it because the Heritage is impacting the sales of their single six and they want to counter it. I think it might backfire because people considering the single six will choose the much cheaper Ruger alternative.