Ruger revolvers are ugly

Some people say I am ugly, and too heavy. But I still get er done time after time and unlike a Timex I do keep on ticking. Or as some people say, ugly is as ugly does. LOL I like both my Rugers and my Smiths.
 
I have my favorite Smith's just as I have my favorite Ruger's. Both manufacture completely different revolvers in their lineup, so I don't even compare. Plus I like having options and different flavors in my collection. I bought this Police Service Six last year and it's quickly become one of my favorite daily conceal guns. Shoots well and fits in a few of my K frame holsters.

Also the 2.75" barrel is uniquely different and I've come to appreciate it. I don't think any S&W revolvers were offered with that same barrel length. Weight feels so close to a 3 inch K frame. It really is a beautiful and elegant gun.

 
Last edited:
Hum... Ruger. Had a couple of the revolvers. Never really warmed to 'em. Saw what my brother could do w/ his S&W M-29 and just decided he was right. Now years later, haven't had a Ruger revolver in I can't remember when. Open the drawer in the office... S&W's! Every one of the outstanding examples of the finest handguns made anywhere in the world. S&W is to revolvers what Glock is to pistols, they set the pace. Everyone else does what they can to try and keep up.
 
I told myself that I would never buy another Ruger after they started printing the hideous warning billboard all over the barrel. I was true to my word for about 30 years until the Lipsey's Flat Top Bisley .44 Special came out and the warning was moved to the bottom of the barrel alongside the ejector rod housing where it is almost invisible. That gun was built right and the Lipsey's models don't seemed to be plagued with reports of clocked barrels like a lot of Rugers do lately. I think both Skeeter and Elmer would like it.
 
They is Rugly.

If Rugers are so hot, why do folks have to crow about them here? Why not go over the the brand X site and wallow in the Ruger glory?

'Cause we're just showing and enjoying how much class we have over here, being able to show our admiration for non-S&W's, and confess that yes, some of us even covet them.

Whereas on the other sites... we'd be tarred, feathered, flamed and ran out of town.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to hop over to GLOCKTALK and beam about my recent acquisition of a M&P 45 :D:D:D
 
Single actions=beautiful
Sp101's=normal looking
GPs=Hunchback of Notre Dame!!!
LCRs=capguns (and thats dangerous IMO)

Just my $.02
 
Because of my rugers my s&w' s won't be all alone in the safe because they get along. .I have to keep my colt 22caliber guns seperate so they don't fight or cross breed. You wonder we're those canted barrels come from.
 
They are as ugly as sin but I've got used to them over the years and one of the few SAs I can afford. It helps too they come in .41 mag.
I do much prefer the look of my S&Ws but do like the ruggedness of the Rugers.
 
The Security Six, and especially Speed Six were decent looking guns.

I've never cared for the looks of the GP100, but then the ONLY two guns I EVER thought looked good with full length ejector shrouds were the Python and the Diamondback. Ruger's version of one just leaves me cold. It just seems like a "me too" gesture at early '90s trendiness. I suppose you could mill part of it off and have an ok looking gun.

The Redhawk is a decent looking gun, kind of like a somewhat simplified, strengthened Spanish copy of an N frame Smith. If I needed a NEW .44 Magnum or .45 Colt D/A revolver, I'd get a Redhawk.
 
I can't believe there was not a picture of a .22 with the .22 Magnum cylinder in the mess of pictures..............

A lot were sold back in the 60's and many of use cut our teeth on it.
 


:eek:

Oh my! That is just........well, it's just wrong, that's all.
 
Just a matter of taste I guess.

4c504c1e48ec823f1a67d819e1bba8a7.jpg

4a689d00553f557204a152565d9759cc.jpg
 
Back
Top