Reason to reintroduce Speed & Security Six

[lfpiii]

Today I was at my local gun store when a Speed Six came in. Several of us started talking and came up with the idea that Ruger could make millions if they reintroduced the Speed and Security Six guns. How?

The biggest mistake S&W made was going to the lifetime warranty. K frame magnums were discontinued because repair and replacement cost became too much under the lifetime warranty plan. Smith continues to discontinue guns when they feel that they have lost too much money with warranty work.

A fellow LEO needed a new barrel for a 2-inch model 64 that he purchased in 1996. S&W told him that they no longer had barrels and could replace the gun with a 3 or 4-inch with the 2 piece barrel. It took a letter from the agency stating the gun was for on duty use before Smith "found" a barrel.

Ruger does not give lifetime warranties. If the gun wears out 5 or 10 years later the problem falls to the owner not the factory. Smith keeps discontinuing models to limit repair costs. Ruger could take a large share of the gun market from Smith.

Why would you purchase a mid size magnum? Practice, practice, practice. Most people shoot very little full power ammo in small frame revolvers, which means that they are not truly ready for a worst-case scenario. Full power loads in mid size guns are easier to handle.

 

[Kanook]

It's funny you mention that. I hunt with a Redhawk 357 and carry a Security Six as back up. I always seem to like the ones that are disc. for some reason.

If I had a nickel every time I heard "let me know when you want to sell that", I could get a 357 max.

 

[tguil]

I have a 2 3/4 stainless Speed Six and plan to keep it "forever". It is a good shooter, fairly compact and is a nice looking gun. I had three Security Sixes - two blued and one stainless. I traded my last Security Six for a stainless GP 100. Why? Because IMO the Security Six simply was not a very nice looking gun. When I had my Security Sixes, I always had a tinge of "K-Frame envy". The GP 100 took care of that.

Tom

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

I have a 2 3/4 stainless Speed Six and plan to keep it "forever". It is a good shooter, fairly compact and is a nice looking gun. I had three Security Sixes - two blued and one stainless. I traded my last Security Six for a stainless GP 100. Why? Because IMO the Security Six simply was not a very nice looking gun. When I had my Security Sixes, I always had a tinge of "K-Frame envy". The GP 100 took care of that.

Tom

Totally the opposite for me. I love the Six's and "K" frames. In my hands the "L" frames and the GP's have significantly more upward recoil. I have talked to other shooters who find Six's and "K's" more rearward recoil bothersome, but that's part of the fun isn't it. If we all had the same tastes there would be just 1 of each type of gun. :shock:

JMHO, but a 3" fixed sight Six in 41 Spl shooting 210 grn LSWHP (like the 158 grn 38 +p uses) at 975fps-ish would be a damn near perfect carry gun!

 

[Stoots]

Ruger could take a large share of the gun market from Smith.

I keep dreaming of a 4 inch full shroud Super Redhawk (think 'Alaskan' with a 4 inch barrel). I feel this would give Smith's 'Mountain Gun' a run for it's money.

I like to call it a "GP400"!

:wink:

 

[Blue Brick]

A special run might be nice....

 

[stare-decisis]

I had a security six for a little while but sold it off to get a P345 (which should arrive any day) They are well built, tough guns. Best 357 value out there.

 

[KWYJIBO]

I keep dreaming of a 4 inch full shroud Super Redhawk (think 'Alaskan' with a 4 inch barrel). I feel this would give Smith's 'Mountain Gun' a run for it's money.

That would be a cool gun, but not anything like the Mountain Guns, and therefore not direct competitors. The MGs are even lighter than standard Smiths. A Redhawk is heavier than a Smith of comparable size, and a full-shroud Super Redhawk would be heavier still.

I say, why should we have to choose? Own a Mountain Gun, a standard-contour K or L frame, a Dash-Six Ruger, a GP, and a Redhawk or two. This is my hope for someday in the future. The collection is getting off to a slow start, but I work at it continuously. 8)

 

[Three44s]

Quote by Stoots:

[/quote].......................

I feel this would give Smith's 'Mountain Gun' a run for it's money.......................

:wink:[/quote]



The only thing that can give a MG a run for it's money is the 329 PD (another Smith)

A Ruger is a Ruger ..........

......... a Smith is a Smith ...........

I happen to love'm ALL .......

Each is built for a given opperating regime ..........

Enjoy them for what they are!

(I bought a SRH for a barrel chop project but was determined to end up with a five or six inch barrel ........ mine has a factory 9.5" tube ..... but somewhere a light bulb went off in my head ........... "THIS THING is a pure huntin' machine!!!!!)

Three 44s

 

[Wild Bill '67]

The Speed, Security, Service Sixes are about the perfect packing pistol.
Due to frame design and engineering they are more durable than the K frame S&W with .357 loads.

I wish they would bring back the lineup but I think that the production costs became too much.

Ifpiii,

Do you recall what the general price was on that Speed Six?

 

[maxpress]

well smith seems to be selling there re'dos of the classics pretty well so i couldnt see where ruger could go wrong with a limited run. i know i would have to buy 2 speed six's

 

[MADDOG 521]

I only have one 4" SS Security-Six and I am still amazed every time I pick it up. I'm in for 2 of the new ones. One in 357 mag. and the other one in 44 special. Where do I send the funds?

 

[roaddog28]

Ruger claims that they never made any money on the Security Six series. :? All I know is the Security Six gave Smith and Wesson competition in the law enforcement and consumer industry because the Security Six was stronger and able to handle 357s better than the 19/66. In order to counter act the Security Six, Smith and Wesson came out with the L frame revolver. And Ruger then countered with the GP100.
Bottom line, I wish Ruger would bring the Security Six back because it had the right feel, balance and weight plus it was strong enough for 357s. The L frame and GP100 are great but they are Heavier and to me not as balanced as the Security Six.

Security Six, the sleeper of all the medium frame double action revolvers. :wink:

roaddog28

 

[Carry_Up]

Smith continues to discontinue guns when they feel that they have lost too much money with warranty work.

Could it be that they did not sell enough of a particular model to justify manufacturing it?

A fellow LEO needed a new barrel for a 2-inch model 64 that he purchased in 1996. S&W told him that they no longer had barrels and could replace the gun with a 3 or 4-inch with the 2 piece barrel. It took a letter from the agency stating the gun was for on duty use before Smith "found" a barrel.

Just out of curiosity, was this 2" barrel worn out from shooting, or abuse? Usually you don't find many people doing range practice with a snub nose, since its use is limited to hand-shaking distance.

The fact that Smith "found" a barrel does not mean that they actually had one in stock. Smith likely went to the trouble of finding a model 64 with a 2" barrel to maintain good relations with this PD.

Those of us who actually work on them know that a revolver does not just fail because of old age. Usually the failure is due to someone with clever fingers who has filed, stoned or replaced something incorrectly. And of course there are the blowups due to faulty reloads, etc. One good reason for a lifetime warranty is to maintain excellent customer relations and a reputation for product safety, even if the customer is at fault. But warranties aside, you have to put some pride into the manufacturing of your product in the first place, in my opinion, before expecting people to line up at your doorstep.

Carry_Up

 

[LubeckTech]

Ruger single action revolvers are IMO the BEST made bar none! I have owned 5 DA revilvers ( 2 Security Sixes, 1 GP100, 1 6"Redhawk and a LCR) and while they were all well built with the exception of the LCR the DA triggers were horrible. Even with lighter springs and after thousands of rounds plus polishing the DA triggers could not hold a candle to a S&W! If Ruger could produce a trigger like the LCR trigger in guns like the GP 100, or Speed sSx they could capture a great deal of the S&W revolver market.

 

[surveyor47]

I believe that much of what we are looking for could be accomplished if Ruger were to trim down the GP100. I also believe that the GP100 action is much superior to the Security Six action. The Security Six is an expensive gun to manufacture, so much so that Bill Ruger Sr. complained that he never made a nickle offthe Security Six.

1. Eliminated the dead weight lug under the barrel and shorten it to 3 inches or 2 3/4 inches.

2. Use the short grip that Ruger used on the 3" GP100.

3. Trim unnecessary weight where possible, but retain the strenght of the GP100.

 

[HAWKEYE#28]

Why not build "IT" in 22 rimfire?????

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

I believe that much of what we are looking for could be accomplished if Ruger were to trim down the GP100. I also believe that the GP100 action is much superior to the Security Six action. The Security Six is an expensive gun to manufacture, so much so that Bill Ruger Sr. complained that he never made a nickle offthe Security Six.

1. Eliminated the dead weight lug under the barrel and shorten it to 3 inches or 2 3/4 inches.

2. Use the short grip that Ruger used on the 3" GP100.

3. Trim unnecessary weight where possible, but retain the strenght of the GP100.

While all that might help, it would do nothing to change the overall size and more importantly (for me anyway) the height of the bore over the grip. Yes, I know, :roll: it's not that much different, but it's enough to make shooting them a totally different experience.

 

[Carry_Up]

The Security Six is an expensive gun to manufacture, so much so that Bill Ruger Sr. complained that he never made a nickle off the Security Six.

I'm not sure why the Security Six was any more difficult to manufacture than the GP100, since they are essentially the same design. The GP100's full underlug was meant to be an answer to Smith's 686, not a cost-cutting method to produce cheaper barrels.

Carry_Up

 

[surveyor47]

I recall several comments by Bill Ruger regading the cost of producing the Security Six, both in the book "Ruger and His Guns" and in other publications. It was his first double action revolver, after which he came out with the Redhawk with the single "push me-pull me" spring. The Super Redhawk was intended to rectify cracking (hence the extended frame}, which was eventually traced to the type of lubricant used in tightening barrels. The Super Redhawk also duplicated the GP100 action in a larger frame. They decided to keep the origninal Redhawk on once the cause of cracking was discovered.

All in all, the GP100 was meant to make money, which had not been made with the Security Six. Given that history, I doubt that they would ever bring back the Security Six, but stranger things have happened. All in all, I like the GP100 action much better and mine has not had the wear related issues that my old 151 series Secutity Six suffered from, including frame stretching. I think that that overweight barrel lug is the biggest problem with the GP100. If that were reduced, it would go a long way toward reducing the weight of the gun. I agree that the Security Six is a trim little piece. I get lust in my eye every time I see an old Speed Six 2 3/4" currently owned by a friend.....