Talk me out of it Security Six

I can't help thinkin'...I kinda like the humble, understated looks of the SS series.

My Wife grew up a ways out in the woods here in Alaska. Her folks were purty much poor as church mice. She hardly remembers a time when that Ruger wasn't around. There were times they used it to deal with black bears going after the chickens and horses. There was a time she remembers there were a couple of pretty dangerous looking guys came to the door and mama got them turned around quite quickly with a smile and that .357 hidden under a dish towel in her hand. That gun accompanied them on picnics, walks, etc. Sure, a Model 629 would have been preferred, but that wasn't what they could afford.

I like the humble blue collar roots. The tales told by this one just wouldn't be the same coming from many other revolvers.

But...then again, I've always been a sucker for the waifs, strays, runts of the litter and various underdogs...
 
From RPG: ".....heavy and unnecessarily large for my purposes.....If you want to carry the gun, then Rugers are the sort of gun you'll regret carrying by noon".

The Ruger Six series were brought out to compete with the S&W K frames. That was the intent. My recollection is that the weights are very similar. Note: I am away from home so I can't get a Six series and K frame out of the safe to compare weights. I also carried on and off duty at various times a 2 1/2" bbl Model 66 and a 2 3/4" bbl Security Six. I used the same holster, stamped for a Model 19, for both. Fit both perfectly.

Both felt the same on my hip. Noon came and went unnoticed countless times with no regrets. With either I knew I was carrying a snub medium frame revolver, and that was it. A J frame would have been lighter/smaller, but I wanted something that would handle additional horsepower comfortably plus the additional round.

So if the Ruger Six series is unnecessarily large and heavy for your purposes, wouldn't the 19/66 be also?

I am looking for factual proof to rebut the impression I get of hyperbolic opinion.

For myself, and this is my opinion, I preferred the snub Ruger Six series over the snub Smith 66 because it was far stronger in closely the same weight. Both were comfortable enough to carry, and excellent shooters.
 
Last edited:
I have four of 'em. A low back Security Six along with a high back, plus a Service Six and a USPO contract Speed Six.
 
When I hold my security six next to my model 19 or model 66 there’s absolutely no doubt in my mind why Smith & Wesson sold a whole lot more of those guns than Ruger. To my eyes the Smith & Wesson‘s are works of art and the Ruger is just a tool. With that being said it’s a very good tool, very strong and sturdy and it’s the one that I take in the woods because I’m not afraid to get dinged or scratched.
 
When I hold my security six next to my model 19 or model 66 there’s absolutely no doubt in my mind why Smith & Wesson sold a whole lot more of those guns than Ruger. To my eyes the Smith & Wesson‘s are works of art and the Ruger is just a tool. With that being said it’s a very good tool, very strong and sturdy and it’s the one that I take in the woods because I’m not afraid to get dinged or scratched.

Not to mention that the Rugers didn't have nearly as high of an incidence rate of barrel cracks with hot magnum loads like the K-frames did.
 
Had my 6" stainless since 1976. Pachmayr grips, a Bullseye/Trapper spring set, a smooth shooter and accurate.
Security Sixes are like Dan Wessons, no cachet but how many used ones do you see for sale ?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top