Ruger "6" Series: Gone But Not Forgotten

Cold Steel · Dec 11, 2015

With S&W finally reissuing its fabulous Combat Masterpiece Model 66, Ruger continues to produce boat anchors (including its .357 Redhawk). Thankfully, many of us still have our old "6" Series guns -- Security-Sixes, Service-Sixes, Speed-Sixes in a variety of barrel lengths. Designed primarily for the police community, these guns were made for those who carried their guns more than shooting them.

Because the earlier Smiths could not take the sustained firing of magnum loads, especially the hot, lighter ones. (In one of the NRA magazines in the early 80s, tech writer C.E. (Ed) Harris did a roundup review of the popular 357s of the time. In that article, he said he'd worn out a S&W 19 by firing too many hot rounds. After 2,000 rounds or so, he said, the gun needed to be re-timed. After another 2,000 rounds, the frame had warped to such an extent that it had to be retired. His next 357 was a 4-inch Ruger Security-Six, the grip of which he ground off to fit Pachmayr Compac (rounded) grips. I don't know if he still has it, but if he does I suspect it's still going strong!)

So what do you think? Are you totally happy with the GP-100s, and if Ruger were to reissue any of the old "6" Series, which would you be in the market for, if any?

I decided to do what Harris did and round some of the grips of my pistols, but not the 6-incher. One of my favorite guns is a Speed-Six that was originally issued in .38 Special. I had it reamed to fire .357 rounds and it has one of the best actions in my collection. It also is one of my most accurate because the gunsmith who reamed it did an exacting job on it. The SB-101 is a good gun, but for camping or hiking I'd prefer one of the earlier guns.

Please feel free to post photos of your favorite Sixes!

Both of these guns have had their grips ground so as to take
Pachmayr Compac grips.

Boom Boom · Dec 11, 2015

Sixes are my favorite Rugers of any gun type. If Ruger re-issued them, I'd buy several flavors to go with my originals.

Cold Steel · Dec 11, 2015

So which would you buy and what would you use them for?

And would you prefer blued or stainless?

Boom Boom · Dec 11, 2015

I have blued and stainless ones. Buying re-issued, I'd get nothing but stainless, for SD/HD.

SRD · Dec 11, 2015

Have 1 Speed Six .357 (blued) and love it,would definitely buy another 1-2 (re-issued or used wouldn't matter)

Armati · Dec 11, 2015

Is there something wrong with the

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Armati · Dec 11, 2015

Is there something wrong with the GP-100? I just wish all revolver makers would loose the barrel lug. I think the heavy barrel on the S&W 66 is about perfect.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

J1911 · Dec 11, 2015

I'd love to have a 357 RedHawk.

Cold Steel · Dec 11, 2015

Armati said:
Is there something wrong with the GP-100? I just wish all revolver makers would [lose] the barrel lug. I think the heavy barrel on the S&W 66 is about perfect.

Recognizing that many people love the GP-100, what I don't like about it is that Ruger completely screwed up the balance of the gun by reducing the grip to a post housing the mainspring, then adding the underlug to the barrel. It throws all the weight forward. S&W, on the other hand, left their grip alone and simply added the underlug. The great balance remained, but it was far too heavy in my view. Clearly a gun to be shot rather than carried.

If one picks up a Security-Six, then picks up a GP-100, one can see how the balance of the latter is completely different. Not just heavier, but very front heavy. And though Ruger points out (rightfully) that this reduces recoil, the payoff only happens when the gun goes off. Tracking a moving target, or holding it steady, is far more difficult for me.

But if Ruger reissued the 6-series, the guns would come with new price tags. And Ruger most likely would keep the post-grip, single spring design; also the double locking design, which while not necessary, might be desirable.

So which of the GP features would you want, if any? Or would you prefer the original design?

J1911 said:
I'd love to have a 357 RedHawk.

Why? What would you use it for?

Boom Boom · Dec 11, 2015

Agreed that it boils down to weight. The GP100 is big, massively-reinforced, and forward-heavy. The Sixes are sleek, a lot lighter, and well-balanced. In the shooting hand, Sixes balance and feel much like the 1873 Colt SAA.

Art3 · Dec 11, 2015

Last time I was in Top Gun in Fallston, they had a Security Six. I think they wanted $549... not 100% sure on that. My gun money is already overspent, so I didn't look too closely at it. :/

A1Uni · Dec 11, 2015

I had a Ruger Security Six, stainless 2-3/4 back in that day that I loved, but stupidly sold to buy some stupid geegaw or crap for my last wife; yup, I was a moron.

Cold Steel · Dec 11, 2015

Every year more people enter the shooting community without ever shooting or hefting the older Rugers. If I didn't have a Security-Six, I would have no idea these guns ever existed. And when they become available as used guns, no one wants to spend much for them, even tho they may be in pristine condition. That may be because they're viewed as old technology guns or it may have to do with the ugly legal notice, but the advantages of these guns really shine when carried in the wild. Although not a perfect black bear gun, a good 357 round would give you the decided edge in a bear confrontation.

In the 70s and 80s, gun magazine hacks spent lots of
ink telling readers what great hunting and outdoor guns
the medium frame 357s were, especially the Ruger
Security-Sixes and S&W 19/66s. But those articles slowed
dramatically when the medium-plus frames appeared. The
S&W 686 (top) is much more of a handful than the smaller
Security-Six. With rubber grips, the Ruger is an ideal trail
and hunting pistol.

And for simple protection, I like the 3-inch
Speed-Six or the 2-3-inch SP-101.

jaredm1 · Dec 11, 2015

Cold Steel said:
Recognizing that many people love the GP-100, what I don't like about it is that Ruger completely screwed up the balance of the gun by reducing the grip to a post housing the mainspring, then adding the underlug to the barrel. It throws all the weight forward. S&W, on the other hand, left their grip alone and simply added the underlug. The great balance remained, but it was far too heavy in my view. Clearly a gun to be shot rather than carried.

If one picks up a Security-Six, then picks up a GP-100, one can see how the balance of the latter is completely different. Not just heavier, but very front heavy. And though Ruger points out (rightfully) that this reduces recoil, the payoff only happens when the gun goes off. Tracking a moving target, or holding it steady, is far more difficult for me.

But if Ruger reissued the 6-series, the guns would come with new price tags. And Ruger most likely would keep the post-grip, single spring design; also the double locking design, which while not necessary, might be desirable.

So which of the GP features would you want, if any? Or would you prefer the original design?

Why? What would you use it for?

I like my GP100, but the grip "peg" design is my least favorite feature. The design supposedly allows for virtually any grip size or style, and what's on the market? Hogues and a handful of boutique-shop wooden grips. All ugly.

I like the 4-inch Security Six for a standard duty-type revolver, and would think about purchasing if they re-issued them. As it stands now, the used market is not too bad (last time I looked).

As far as the Redhawk that was mentioned, I'd personally like to see one in .357mag, but with an 8-round cylinder.

aaron.foulk · Dec 11, 2015

Because I run revolvers mostly in competition, my indifference to the Six series starts and stops with the lack of Comp 3 or jetloader speedloaders for it. If you had a better way to feed it, I might be encouraged to try it. For defensive use, it seems to be an incredible value.
Have any of you 6 series fans tried the GP 100 Match Champion?

Uncle Duke · Dec 11, 2015

Rock solid revolvers! And I may have lucked out, but this particular Speed Six example has a double action pull that started out pretty darned good, and only got better. Not forgotten is right! Definitely a favorite of mine!

Cold Steel · Dec 12, 2015

jaredm1 said:
As far as the Redhawk that was mentioned, I'd personally like to see one in .357mag, but with an 8-round cylinder.

I still can't imagine why. What on earth could you shoot eight times that wouldn't stay shot in six? It's not like you can go and carry it in the woods. If you want to combine weight lifting with shooting, I give up -- you have me! But why not get two Security-Sixes and get 12 shots? You could even shoot both in each hand! The extra steel they put into those 357 Redhawks make them heavier than the 44 mag versions. I'd prefer to take steroids! :thumbsup:

aaron.foulk said:
Because I run revolvers mostly in competition, my indifference to the Six series starts and stops with the lack of Comp 3 or jetloader speedloaders for it.

The speedloaders for the Colt Python work well in my Sixes. I had one I was going to throw away, but found it worked. If not for you, try a speed-loader for another, similar revolver.

jaredm1 · Dec 12, 2015

Cold Steel said:
I still can't imagine why.

Cause it'd be flippin sweet! I've always wanted one of the 8-shot magnums that S&W offers and the Redhawk has plenty of room leftover in the cylinder when you look at their discontinued 6-shot model.

Biggfoot44 · Dec 12, 2015

The 6's are great ! Stronger than K Frames & near indestructible , yet fit in most K Frame leAther. I can shoot the 2.75 Speed Six as well as 4in K Frame, & often carried it in duty holster instead.

The RB on the Speed Sixes fit (me) better than the K Frame RB .

I prefer HKS speedloaders, so no issue there. Additional designs may well have been availible in the Revolver Era.

The tradional "gripe" was trigger not as good as S&W. But this mainly ment not as easy for kitchen table hacks to mess with the internals. When worked upon by knowledegible 'smith , or well used, they are within 95% of best 100% ignition S&W's .

Since I am sufficently equipped w/ 2.75 & 4in , a 6in would fill a gap.

Cold Steel · Dec 12, 2015

jaredm1 said:
Cause it'd be flippin sweet! I've always wanted one of the 8-shot magnums that S&W offers and the Redhawk has plenty of room leftover in the cylinder when you look at their discontinued 6-shot model.

Okay, I got that it takes eight shots...so what? That's a net gain of only two rounds. Which is why I ask, what's so flippin' sweet about it? What are you going to use those two shots on? In fact, where are you even going to shoot it? With all due respect, brother, there's only one thing a Redhawk 357 is good for -- they make great manhole covers. Other than that, why not a S&W 686 7-shot?

Regarding the Security-Six actions, all one need do is replace the mainspring, then dry fire it a few hundred times. The action on my 4-incher is incredible and my 3-inch Speed-Six also is superb.

Ruger "6" Series: Gone But Not Forgotten

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Active Member

Hold my beer. Watch this.

Active Member

Hold my beer. Watch this.

R.I.P.

Banned

Banned

Active Member

Active Member

Hold my beer. Watch this.

Eqinsu Ocha

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Attachments

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics