Heritage Rough Rider .22 LR/.22 WMR Bird's Head 4.75" First Lead

Status
Not open for further replies.
ccoyle

ccoyle

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2015
Messages
128
Location
Greer, SC
Got to the range today and put two new guns through their paces. I had been wanting a .22 revolver for cheap plinking, and I found a Heritage Rough Rider with the bird's head grip, which I really like the feel of. I love the look, feel, balance, and accuracy of the RR. It shot both bulk .22 LR and Winchester Super X .22 WMR well. With fixed iron sights, it will probably never be a tack-driver, but it hits around point-of-aim and is fun to shoot, which is all I expect of it. The only negative I have so far is that I have already noticed some finish wear after only one range session. Reviewers have pointed out finish problems with the RR elsewhere, so I am hoping that this isn't a harbinger of rapid wear to come.

Here's a pic of the revolver along with the obligatory target photo. These groups are about as good as I can achieve with cheap ammo and iron sights.

Heritage RR.jpg rr 22lr.jpg

Here's a close up of the .22 WMR group. I was pretty pleased with three of those shots.

rr wmr.jpg

A really fun gun -- hope it holds up!
 
I have a plow-handle in that barrel length, and a birdshead one with the shorter 3.5-inch barrel. I've shot the former a lot more than the latter, having owned it longer, and I like them both a lot. They're hard to put down once in hand (even when empty, I find.) Both of mine shoot where I expect them to, and the shorter one makes a nice knock-around piece for yard or trail.

Also, with the goofy safety nub engaged, they can be dry-fired once confirmed actually "dry."
 
I keep putting off a birdshead. I’m being stubborn though. I see zero reason that the gun I want is 30 bucks cheaper with ugly pink grips. Not just pink, not just ugly, the bastard combination of both ugly and pink. I want the 3-1/2” though. Something just looks right about the birdshead grip and the ejector housing ending together. Besides, my single six is my hunting gun, the HRR would be nothing more than a toy.
 
WestKentucky said:
I want the 3-1/2” though.
Click to expand...

I agree that the 3.5" barrel looks just right, but 4.75" was what was available. I have no experience with the shorter barrel, but at least for .22 LR, the extra 1.25" did not seem to adversely affect the balance or handling of the gun in any significant way.
 
ccoyle said:
I agree that the 3.5" barrel looks just right, but 4.75" was what was available. I have no experience with the shorter barrel, but at least for .22 LR, the extra 1.25" did not seem to adversely affect the balance or handling of the gun in any significant way.
Click to expand...
The heritage guns are super light, so realistically any barrel length will not be uncomfortable. I have had 4.5” and 6” plow handle guns and never felt the difference. I could see the difference in the sights though, and the shorter barrel (for me) provided a better sight picture. The 3.5 may actually be too short for the factory sights, but on a $140 gun I don’t mind taking a file to it and opening up the groove.
 
With that "cap gun" pot metal grip frame, the plastic parts, and the parts breakages that you see reported in You-Tube videos, I really don't want one. To my mind, they are just a throw-away .22. Shoot it until it breaks, or the barrel comes loose in the frame, and then toss it.
 
I've thought about getting one since they look to be fun, but I always find something else to spend money on. I also have higher priorities for planned gun purchases.

I currently own a S&W M63 which is my 22lr fun gun. It also gives me some cheap DA revolver practice
 
They work, and the internals are conventional leaf springs like a Colt 1873 clone or any Colt or Remington black powder revolver.
But their springs do break, fairly frequently on some, though replacements are easy to get, and it's simple to take apart and reassemble.
The internal parts (trigger, hand, and cylinder latch) are cast MIM parts, but they work.
The cylinder frame is aluminum, so you need to be careful not to overtighten the screws.
The grip frame is as-cast and painted Zamac zinc-aluminum alloy, basically pot metal, which is cheap to cast, but it works, even if it is ugly.
The barrel and cylinder and hammer are steel, but basically just inexpensive mild steel not used much in guns.
The safety, loading gate, and ejector are plastic. The ejector rod breaks easily if you let it snap back too often.
The barrel isn't screwed into the cylinder frame. It's micro-threaded, as is the receiver, and they are permanently epoxied together.
Accuracy might be good or bad, depending on your individual specimen.
Machining tolerances vary, and that can affect the accuracy and the overall functioning of your individual specimen.
All things considered, it makes you wonder how well one of these will stand up to a steady diet of .22 magnum?
They work I guess, but comparing one to a Ruger Single Six is like comparing a flea market hot dog to a steak dinner in a fine restaurant.
 
Last edited:
Old Stumpy writes:

They work I guess, but comparing one to a Ruger Single Six is like comparing a flea market hot dog to a steak dinner in a fine restaurant.
Click to expand...

Which is why we're not comparing them to the Ruger Single Six. In fact, no one in this thread did until you did.

(I posted above that I do own and enjoy two of the HRR revolvers. I didn't mention the RSS I also own because it isn't relevant to the thread.)
 
Choctaw said:
Three times in one thread you posted derogatory comments about this revolver and it is bordering on rude behavior. Evidently the OP likes his new pistola and you don't. We get it. Give it a rest.
Click to expand...

1) I don't agree that stating a negative review of a firearm is either "derogatory" or "rude behavior".
2) I have read much harsher comments about other guns in other threads.
3) I am entitled to my opinion about a given firearm, whether you like it or not. You have a right to disagree.
4) I have NOT posted anything derogatory about any person or any member here, and certainly had no intention of offending anyone.
5) Apart from my final personal opinion comment regarding a food analogy, the description of the Roughrider in my post #13 is accurate to the best of my knowledge. I took the time to research this firearm on-line, and even found the same information posted by another member of The High Road a couple of years ago.
6) I really don't think that anyone is going to be very upset by the information that I have supplied, or even my opinions, unless they have a vested interest in selling these guns. (I'm not suggesting that anyone here is such a person or has such an interest. I'm just saying.)

Finally, I'm done commenting. I was finished after post #13.
For the sake of peace in the house, I won't even respond to any further comments aimed at me.
Enjoy your Roughriders.
 
Old Stumpy writes:

Finally, I'm done commenting. I was finished after post #13.
Click to expand...

Actually, post 10 sufficed to cover your opinion. No one contested it, so you came back to offer it again. I think that's what ruffled some feathers, like you hadn't gotten a desired result or something.

I don't agree that your comments were "rude" or "derogatory". In fact, post 7 was actually complimentary (or so I thought; maybe it wasn't meant to be?) But the RSS comparison was irrelevant to the OP or any of the following posts, and post 13 appeared to be simply an attempt (and a successful one at that) to "stir up" the attention you didn't get with post 10.

For the sake of the topic as it now has become, I'll mention again that I do own two HRR revolvers and one RSS. I like them all, and they each have their place. However, for what I paid for the RSS used, I got two new HRRs, each with an additional WMR cylinder (the Ruger has none), and over a thousand rounds of ammo. I keep wanting to make the Ruger my "truck gun", but keep coming back to the idea that either of the Heritage guns would do the same job just as well, without me leaving a "nice" gun subject to those conditions.

Now, you're making me want to get them all out of lockup and handle them some. ;)
 
WestKentucky said:
I keep putting off a birdshead. I’m being stubborn though. I see zero reason that the gun I want is 30 bucks cheaper with ugly pink grips. Not just pink, not just ugly, the bastard combination of both ugly and pink. I want the 3-1/2” though. Something just looks right about the birdshead grip and the ejector housing ending together. Besides, my single six is my hunting gun, the HRR would be nothing more than a toy.
Click to expand...

Check Buds. The 3.5 inch Birdshead with wood grips is in stock now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Craig_AR
  • Locked
"Buntline" Rough Rider
Replies
7
Views
495
Barbaroja
Barbaroja
carbine85
  • Locked
Heritage rough rider sights
Replies
2
Views
1K
carbine85
carbine85
R
  • Locked
Who Can Tell Me About heritage "Rough Rider" .22
Replies
7
Views
935
RedneckCatholic
R
Reloadron
  • Locked
Heritage Arms Rough Rider 22 LR & 22 Mag
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Reloadron
Reloadron
Oninotaki
Fun Customizing Heritage Rough Riders
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Oninotaki
Oninotaki
Back
Top