S&W and Ruger ...

[rfd]

...what ???

"US Customs and Border Patrol experience in the early 1980s S&W .357s typically required returning to factory for new extractor every 1500 rounds of 357 Magnum loads, while Rugers went 10,000 utilizing Remington and Winchester full charge .357 rounds with no repairs or parts replacements required. The associated lockwork on a Ruger Service Six, Speed Six or Security Six are hard all the way through and I've never heard of one going out of time in service. An endurance test I am personally aware of conducted at FLETC in the early 1980s, conducted by a Aberdeen Proving Ground Certified Small Arms Test Director (who I have known for many years) for the US Border Patrol and US Customs where six Ruger Service & Security Sixes digested 60,000 (10,000 ea) of full house 357 Magnum duty ammo (125 gr and 158 gr) without going out of time."

 

[fdw]

this does not surprise me.

 

[hkcavalier]

Extractor stars wear out?

 

[Arquebus357]

Extractor problem sounds like a Semi-Auto issue rather than a revolver issue.

I like my Security Six very much but I would much rather work on my S&W Model 15. I really like the S&W lockwork.

 

[clang444]

sounds like a quote from another unreliable source...

 

[loeman]

...what???

 

[9mmsubgun-m11]

The ratchet knobs will wear and it can be severe as I have seen this on a couple guns.One knob was nearly one third the size of the other 5.

 

[Rock185]

Much as I like S&Ws, yes segments on the extractors can wear. Not all at once or equally, but occasional checking of the carry-up/timing will sometimes reveal one chamber that is a bit lazy, or doesn't time up at all before hammer fall. Hate to say it, but back in the '70s, I purchased more than one new S&W revolver that was out of time as received. I've owned a few of the later S&Ws with the MIM lockwork. Perhaps not as pretty as some earlier S&W revolvers, but all carried-up solidly.......ymmv

 

[rwsmith]

Rugers are tough guns....

To me, that's all that needs to be said.

 

[xray 99]

What is the source for this information?

 

[biku324]

I was issued a new Ruger Security Six in October 1980. It worked great with 38 wad cutters, but it locked so hard it couldn't be opened even with a hammer handle within 12 rounds with 125 grain Federal JHPs. The whole batch had problems and ruined Ruger's reputation with the NMSP. They were returned to the vendor.

On the other hand, I have a late '70s Security Six that fires anything you put in it perfectly. It is my horseback revolver, as it could put down a badly injured horse humanely, it's completely reliable, and If I find myself on my nose lying on the ground I won't worry about sidearm damage.

Our aging M19s shot out of time within a few years when we had to always qualify with that Federal load. We began their replacement with M686s when we began transition to semi-autos (S&W 5906 and 4506) in '89/'90.

 

[kbm6893]

The Six series guns were designed from the ground up to shoot .357, unlike the K frame Smith's that were designed for .38 and modified to shoot .357. S&W has a nicer trigger, but the Six guns are much tougher than a K frame .357. They even share some of the same holsters. And I can recall posters on here who were members of the Border Patrol back then saying the same thing. There's a reason the 686 came along. Why make a duty gun bigger and heavier that shoots the same caliber if the k frame .357 was really up to the task of shooting a regular diet of :357?

If you want a k frame sized .357 and actually plan to shoot .357 in it, to with a Six.

 

[S&WsRsweet]

I am a fan of the Rugers they ae durable but the lock work on the smith and Wesson when smoothed over by someone who knows how we'll you just can't beat it and if you are blessed to have a guy like that local you ate lucky.

 

[steelslaver]

I agree WHAT?

I can see how full blown magnum loads would cause some endshake, but I fail to see why they would cause more wear on the ratchet than 38 special loads or even dry firing. Turning the cylinder takes x amount of effort by the hand. A loaded cylinder being a bit heavier would take a little more, but the difference from a 38 and a 357 shooting the same weight bullets is very very small. Lots of S&W have fire way more than 1500 rounds with no ill effects or excess wear.

 

[Breakaway500]

I've got two "old" 19s (19-2 and -3) with easily +10k rounds through them..mostly hot to very hot .357s and never had an issue with either one. I like my Rugers,but stating an 80s .357 S&W can't handle a few thousands round without repair is simply wrong.

 

[rfd]

the source of the quote in the first post of this thread is contained within the content of this lengthy thread over at the CB forum ...

Revolver Inspection - The Right Way - aka Wheelgun 101

my first S&W was a used model 14-2 inn 38spl in pristine condition, a great shooter. my new S&W is a new model 60 357mag i bought last week ... then i saw that thread that mentioned the duration concern over the S&W running mag loads as compared to ruger. dang. maybe i shudda bought another ruger ..........

 

[BigBill]

Kind of knew this outcome before I been a ruger and colt guy ever since the beginning. About 45 years later I got into s&w. But my ruger's are tough handguns.

 

[gsn]

The only thing inordinately tough about Ruger handguns is finding parts and factory support for a surprising number of fairly recent production models; go to the Ruger site and look for the official s-o-l list, and the list needs to be updated to include even more models.

I believe Ruger still stands alone as the only arms maker with absolutely NO WARRANTY and they seem proud of this.

All things being equal with regard to quality of manufacture forged parts-Smith and Wesson are stronger than cast parts-Ruger and with regard to the strength of cast v forged:to be as strong the cast piece must be significantly larger than the forged piece.

Having said this I do only carry Ruger revolvers for cc/self protection but I suspect not for the reason many would guess.

We only have revolvers for handguns-I only carry a 9mm snub for protection (civilian) and I know that should I ever have to use (or sadly even produce/show the weapon) in all likelihood that gun will be seized for a very very long time and most probably will not be returned in the condition it was in-I don't care about the Rugers we own, I do value very much the older Smiths we have.

I am not saying that Ruger handguns are not good-my lcr 9mm will work when needed, jump crimp will NOT be a problem it is a 'good' gun its just that the Smiths are much much better guns in every way, shape and form.

Forgot to add; and yes I do believe that the new Smiths are vastly superior to the new Rugers-its that forged v cast thing again PLUS a real warranty, in writing.

 

[kbm6893]

The only thing inordinately tough about Ruger handguns is finding parts and factory support for a surprising number of fairly recent production models; go to the Ruger site and look for the official s-o-l list, and the list needs to be updated to include even more models.

I believe Ruger still stands alone as the only arms maker with absolutely NO WARRANTY and they seem proud of this.

All things being equal with regard to quality of manufacture forged parts-Smith and Wesson are stronger than cast parts-Ruger and with regard to the strength of cast v forged:to be as strong the cast piece must be significantly larger than the forged piece.

Having said this I do only carry Ruger revolvers for cc/self protection but I suspect not for the reason many would guess.

We only have revolvers for handguns-I only carry a 9mm snub for protection (civilian) and I know that should I ever have to use (or sadly even produce/show the weapon) in all likelihood that gun will be seized for a very very long time and most probably will not be returned in the condition it was in-I don't care about the Rugers we own, I do value very much the older Smiths we have.

I am not saying that Ruger handguns are not good-my lcr 9mm will work when needed, jump crimp will NOT be a problem it is a 'good' gun its just that the Smiths are much much better guns in every way, shape and form.

Forgot to add; and yes I do believe that the new Smiths are vastly superior to the new Rugers-its that forged v cast thing again PLUS a real warranty, in writing.

Ruger has no written warranty, true. But they have the best customer service in the industry. They fix whatever the problem is, regardless of if you are the original owner, no questions asked, and they pay for shipping both ways.

A friend of mine inherited his dad's Security Six .357, bought back in about 1982. At least 30,000 rounds through it, mostly magnums as he was a reloader. That was the first .357 I ever shot. It was a bit loose when he inherited it so he called Ruger. They said send it in. Rebuilt it to like new. Even reblued it. Totally free.

I know they no longer support the Six series since they've been out of production for over 30 years, but S&W doesn't support 3rd gen's either, and they've been discontinued for far less time.

 

[lhump1961]

I don't pay much attention to what others post about problems with guns...I really don't. I will go with my experiences gained through growing up with my Dad and my own rather long affair with the sport. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with what others say... but I'm certainly not giving gospel status to what I read from anonymous posters quoting anonymous "facts". When I see it I'll believe it. I have a bunch of K frames...no problems.

I had a guy the other day telling my that the 5.0 in my F-150 will be worn out at 101000 miles because he has read about it and it's junk. I guess I'd better sell now and run!!

As for Ruger vs. Smith? I own and like both.