Lowest Ser. No. for fixed sight 'Security Six' ???

Help Support Ruger Forum:

Terry T

Buckeye
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
1,920
Location
NorCa.
I have just acquired an SDA-34 with Ser. No. 150-01299 complete with its' white 'cut out' box. :D

This would seem to be one of the earliest fixed sight 'Six' series. Does anyone have a lower Ser. No., fixed sight ,'Security Six'? :shock:

Terry T
 

weaselmeatgravy

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 28, 2001
Messages
3,162
Location
Colorado native, Vermont transplant
SDA-82 #150-00783

SDA-82-150-00783.jpg


I'm sure there are lower ones out there as quite a few of the early guns reviewed in the shooting rags in 1971-72 were fixed sight.
 

Terry T

Buckeye
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
1,920
Location
NorCa.
'Weaselmeatgravy',
OK, that's lower! :D
Nice SDA-82!

How about the lowest SDA-34?
How low can we go? :shock:

Terry T
 

weaselmeatgravy

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 28, 2001
Messages
3,162
Location
Colorado native, Vermont transplant
RENE lists 150-01128 as a "S" factory second SDA-32.

I believe that one and my #783 are the lowest SDA guns mentioned in RENE.

150-00783 shipped in June, 1971.

The subscription guns 150-00001 through 150-00200 were made later and I suspect they were all RDA-34 models. Many of those went un-purchased by their subscribers and were recently liquidated through CDNN. The 3 digit CDNN guns were all RDA-34's. The two lowest guns I have are #30 and #138, both RDA-34's (those were not in the CDNN load) and have characteristics of later manufacture.

But the fixed sight model was no afterthought, Ruger had it planned all along. The 1970 dealer price sheet shows both fixed and adjustable sight models in both .38 and .357 in all 3 barrel lengths (some of those 12 models may have never been produced).

The March, 1971 Shooting Times has a Skeeter Skelton review of the Security Six. ST got two test guns, an RDA-34 and an SDA-32. To make the March edition (which was likely at the presses in January), those guns would have had to have left Ruger in 1970 so were among the very first production guns. Though not noted, I suspect they were numbered in the 150-002xx range.

The July, 1971 Guns magazine featured an SDA-34 but again, no SN was mentioned in the article. I suspect it was also a 3 digit gun shipped no later than about March, 1971. Probably no higher than 150-003xx.

But the lowest SDA-34 that I am aware of is the serial number X2 prototype gun pictured in the 1970 Gun Digest. I don't know the configuration of X1, so at the moment I think X2 would be the answer to "How low can we go?". :D
 

Terry T

Buckeye
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
1,920
Location
NorCa.
'Weaselmeatgravy',
You are a wealth of knowledge, as usual!
I will need to pull out my 1970 Gun Digest when I get home.
Thanks,
Terry T
 

chet15

Hawkeye
Joined
Jan 22, 2001
Messages
6,025
Location
Dawson, Iowa
Here's some other food for thought.
The trademarks Security-Six, Service-Six and Speed-Six were all filed for trademark status by Ruger on March 16, 1970. They received trademark status on the dates of 9/15/70 (SECURITY-SIX and SPEED-SIX) and 12/22/70 (SERVICE-SIX).

So....wonder why it took so long for Ruger to begin rollmarking their square butt/fixed sight guns with "SERVICE-SIX"?
Then again, maybe WBR had other plans for that trade name that didn't come to fruition??
Chet15
 

weaselmeatgravy

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 28, 2001
Messages
3,162
Location
Colorado native, Vermont transplant
chet15":1eja79lh said:
So....wonder why it took so long for Ruger to begin rollmarking their square butt/fixed sight guns with "SERVICE-SIX"?
Then again, maybe WBR had other plans for that trade name that didn't come to fruition??

Hmm... interesting to ponder. In Jeff Cooper's review of the Security Six in the September, 1971 issue of Guns & Ammo, he commented that, "In .41 caliber, and with a redesigned butt, it could have a great future". Those were the days when Keith and Remington were pushing the .41 Mag as a more potent police sidearm. Maybe Ruger had visions of a beefier "pre-Redhawk" .41 Mag DA for "Service" use? Something to compete with the S&W M58. But before the .41 could take hold in LE, Remington had pumped it up to near-.44 balistics giving it a reputation for being difficult to control, instead of pushing the lighter loads proposed by Keith. Maybe Ruger abandoned those plans when future LE sales of .41's looked slim? And then used his already-obtained SERVICE-SIX trademark for something else?
 
Top