New Ruger Wrangler.... I'm confused

[Old Stumpy]

A few weeks ago, Cabelas had the Pietta 1873 SAA .22 LR for about $200 I forget the exact amount. I'm sure this is a better deal than the RR might be better than the Ruger but who can say because the Ruger is still in boxes.

Pietta quality is actually very good, and that price sounds excellent. All-steel as well.
Flat springs again, but the nature of the Colt SAA design.

 

[ThomasT]

Pietta 22. I never knew they made them. Shows $299 for the gun.

https://www.cabelas.com/browse.cmd?categoryId=734095080&CQ_search=pietta+22&CQ_zstype=REG

I just noticed its a 10 shot gun with a cylinder that looks like a 6 shot cylinder. Thats strange.

 

[CraigC]

This is the problem and it's one that fanboys are going to be slow to realize, if they ever do. Ruger today is not the Ruger of the 50s, 60s, 70s, or 80s, the revolvers are not made as well as they once were and these Wranglers are going to be the cheapest revolvers Ruger has ever made. Also, sometimes it's not just the materials that make up the quality, but the workmanship of the workers and the production workers of today aren't as skilled as those 50 years ago.

Careful, in spewing your diatribe about "fanboys", you might get labeled a blind hater.

How many Rugers have you owned and from what eras? I've bought and sold, traded or gifted 66 Rugers from every decade they've been in business. Including several current production models. Out of all those guns, I've only ever sent one back. A New Bearcat that Ruger replaced with a new one. I am well aware of the differences from era to era and they are minute. The only obvious difference is the level of polish, it has degraded over time but so it has with every other maker as well. The guns of the `50's are better polished than those of the `60's but again, the difference is minor. This continued into New Model production of the `70's and `80's with a further degradation over the last 20yrs. Otherwise, they are pretty much the same. In the last 10-15yrs Ruger has also made improvements. They no longer gang-ream all the chambers at once but use a single reamer for all chambers, which results in greater consistency. The "flat-top" Blackhawks and New Vaqueros have seen an uptick in fit & finish. Guns are now shipping with steel ejector housings and grip frames and the standard rear sight is now steel as well.

The older guns like this `58 Blackhawk had a slightly better polish....



.....but the late model flat-tops are also very well built sixguns.



As are their double actions.



Yes, a very poorly made example here.



This 3yr old Super Redhawk is one of the most accurate guns I've ever fired.





Will a Wrangler still be going strong after 56yrs and over 30,000rds, like this Single Six? Who knows.

 

[thomas15]

Pietta 22. I never knew they made them. Shows $299 for the gun.

It was a couple of weeks ago and it was on sale. I think it was a mailer. Right at the time there was another thread here on the THR about the RR it was about that time.

 

[thomas15]

CraigC

Can you tell us more about those cigars?

 

[cogun4hire]

Regardless of the questionable quality of Ruger revolvers recently (I personally have not seen any faults in my personal collection), I don't see how you can go wrong by realistically paying 250.00 OTD for a plinker revolver.

 

[Speedo66]

It's seems obvious that the most ardent Rough Rider fanboys here are in full panic mode, trying to protect what is now an inferior product from Wrangler competition.

Do they have some financial stake in slagging what practically everyone else recognizes as a better revolver?

Yes, the introduction of the Wrangler will pull the rug out from under the resale value of Heritages.

 

[CraigC]

CraigC

Can you tell us more about those cigars?

Looks like a Montecristo Platinum on the left and a Gran Habano VL on the right. The latter must've been limited production because I don't see them online any more. I have another box put away. They're both very good. Smoked one of the Platinums last week.

https://www.cigarsinternational.com/p/montecristo-platinum-cigars/1410539

 

[BSA1]

Just a few thoughts.

Much ado is being made about the Zinc Alloy grip frame. This is a non-stressed part that the only wear will be from the shooters hands unless you plan on using it as a hammer to pound nails when putting Wanted Posters up on the sides of buildings and on telephone poles.

What if the market changes, and people want to go back to tough quality guns at a affordable price. Will the new Image stick, will they be able to recover? Just asking.

Your argument is flawed because you are making the unproven assumption that the Wrangler is not going to be high quality enough to satisfy the consumer.

Rugers image does not appeared to suffered any with their line of lower priced semi-auto pistols.

I hate to break it to ya but Ruger WAS the budget leader for many years. Their whole focus was/is to build it better and less expensive. Starting with the Ruger Standard to the Maverick.

If a company doesn't adapt to the market they go out of business. If the consumer wants "budget" guns someone is going to build them.

Yep. Colt, Marlin, Remington all come to mind. Now it seems Ruger has decided it wants a piece of the pie that Heritage has had a monopoly on for so long.

I mean, how much quality can you put into a gun that will retail for around $200.00? The More quality put into the gun, the less profit. Is Ruger really going to make all the parts and invest in all kinds of machinery?

Actually quite a bit from what little I remember from sleeping through my economics classes in college. It is called ”economy of scale” which is a fancy way of saying the more of the same product you make the lower the unit cost.

How much new machinery do you think Ruger needs?

According to the comments I have read Ruger is using the same internal parts as the Single-Six series uses. They have being making these parts for how many decades now? So the machinery, production capacity, design, quality and skill to manufacture the parts is there. Actually the cost of making the parts will be lower if their manufacturing capacity was being underutilized.

Consider the cylinder. It is the same size as used on the Single-Six with the main difference being they have eliminated the flutes between the chambers thus lower production costs. Most likely the exact cylinder that comes down the line. Some get the flutes for the higher priced Single-Six and the others get used for the Wrangler. Same high quality parts. Just a less production steps.

The mold size for the grip frame is the same. Just different material being used. Again the production cost may be lower due to the alloy use and if there is unused production capacity.

Then there is the barrel which is the same only with different front sight,

This is the problem and it's one that fanboys are going to be slow to realize, if they ever do. Ruger today is not the Ruger of the 50s, 60s, 70s, or 80s, the revolvers are not made as well as they once were and these Wranglers are going to be the cheapest revolvers Ruger has ever made. Also, sometimes it's not just the materials that make up the quality, but the workmanship of the workers and the production workers of today aren't as skilled as those 50 years ago.

So are Smith & Wesson revolvers the same as the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s or 80’s? You must have been sleeping longer than Rip Van Wrinkle to miss the changes that has occurred.

What is wrong with Ruger entering the budget price revolver marker or to use your words the “cheapest revolvers Ruger has ever made”? You have been bashing Ruger very loudly. Is the Wrangler upsetting your retirement plan by investing in a lot of Heritage revolvers?

As for today's Ruger being different from the past, thank goodness for that. They could have followed Colt's model, and never changed or introduced new products.

Yep. Colt has done well sticking with making with Python haven’t they? They do still make the Python don’t they?

I agree. $200 isn't the end of the world if it turns out to be a stinker but why the big hurry to buy something that no one has seen, heard or felt?

If everyone sits on the sideline waiting to see how good of the gun it is before buying one there isn’t any reason for Ruger to make them is there?

And no one really knows the real reason why this item is being introduced to the market. Some here infer that it is because the Big R senses the opportunity to exterminate a competitor. Not really a competitor though because the Big R isn't already in that market.

Seems like you answered your own question.

But on the other hand why the big rush?

Because life is too short not to have fun and I have too many guns to shoot before I die.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

Lol, there are about a cazy 350 post to this thread on two cheap 22.cal budget guns. And who must be the most worried about the competition? Two posters stand out like a sore thumb. They seem to be shooting for a record with the most post made. Obviously they are the ones that feel the greatest threat and insecurity . I bet you do not even have to count post to see who the top two are?

BSA you make some very good points on the scaling down of existing parts of the Security 6 and using the same machinery. However, I think that would actually be a great thread in itself with out all the other nonsense posted here.
It leads to a question about the way Ruger is going. Cheaper guns. Will they start to make cheaper other products in the Revolver line? A budget Blackhawk, a budget SP101 etc?
They discontinued the SR series, the Ruger LC9S went down to the EC9 and then the Security9.

The direction Ruger is going is a interesting subject. They also have learned that they can make a cheap product, use a ton of money on advertising and sell millions, like the Ruger LCP.

 

[kcofohio]

This thread is sorta like British comedy, I don't always get the punch line.

That said...

Count me as curious of the Wrangler. I don't need one, but when has not needing stopped me. I will wait until I see and handle one in the store.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

This thread is sorta like British comedy, I don't always get the punch line.

That said...

Count me as curious of the Wrangler. I don't need one, but when has not needing stopped me. I will wait until I see and handle one in the store.

It is not a British comedy, it is a American comedy. And you are correct. Not needing something never stopped me as well. Have too many Pocket guns already. I doubt I will buy a Heritage or Wrangler. Just not big into shooting them on a regular basis.
Actually more interested in the TX200. I will put my money I would put into a Wrangler or Heritage into that Pistol.

 

[Mosin Bubba]

Ruger has been owning the game with their entry level guns recently. They said there was no more room for budget ARs - Ruger is now one of the go-to budget ARs. They said there was no more room for budget 1911s - Ruger is now one of the go-tos for budget 1911s. Their American rifles sell, their LCPs sell like crazy, their new PCC looks like a hit. They haven't found a budget 9mm pistol that's stuck, and it isn't for lack of trying, but everything else they have touched has turned to gold.

If they want to try their hand at making more cheap low-end guns, I say let them. It's been working lately.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

As far as Ruger 22.cal revolvers, I will stick with my LCR. Now that, I know something about. And for myself it does not get more fun than that sweet shooting, solid built gun. And not a cheap cost. If Ruger makes a cheaper budget LCR22, count me out.

 

[CraigC]

Lol, there are about a cazy 350 post to this thread on two cheap 22.cal budget guns. And who must be the most worried about the competition? Two posters stand out like a sore thumb. They seem to be shooting for a record with the most post made. Obviously they are the ones that feel the greatest threat and insecurity . I bet you do not even have to count post to see who the top two are?

BSA you make some very good points on the scaling down of existing parts of the Security 6 and using the same machinery. However, I think that would actually be a great thread in itself with out all the other nonsense posted here.
It leads to a question about the way Ruger is going. Cheaper guns. Will they start to make cheaper other products in the Revolver line? A budget Blackhawk, a budget SP101 etc?
They discontinued the SR series, the Ruger LC9S went down to the EC9 and then the Security9.

The direction Ruger is going is a interesting subject. They also have learned that they can make a cheap product, use a ton of money on advertising and sell millions, like the Ruger LCP.

Why do you insist on trying to make this personal? Is it because you have no other argument? Because your characterization of Ruger as going down the chute towards cheaper and cheaper guns is completely unfounded. It's a straw argument with no basis in reality. As I've already said, they have ADDED entry level guns to their existing lineup. They have not discontinued higher priced guns in favor of cheap guns.

If you have no Heritage and no plans to buy one or a Wrangler, why the hate? Because you don't come off as a simple contrarian. You come off as an unabashed Ruger hater.

 

[TTv2]

I am really trying to uphold the standards of THR, but this one just cracks me up. The most stanch supporter of a gun that is poorly made, assembled, and finished is now bashing Ruger's materials and quality of workmanship. I agree things change, but to suggest that Rough Rider is some how providing equal if not better fit, finish, and workmanship compared to a Ruger is pretty crazy to me.

I am not trying to sound pompous in any way, but two hundred bucks is not a deal breaker in my life right now. I am fortunate for that and always thankful. Having said that, I am going to enjoy the experience of shooting and examining this new Ruger to discover its merits and faults. If it is a total flop, then I will use it to make a display for my office and to serve as a constant reminder of the risk of folly (not always a bad thing) and if it is a shooter then I will enjoy it equally for this quality.

I can't take my kids to Disneyland for this price and we only get a single day's experience. With the Wrangle I will get the experience of knowledge, the enjoyment of shooting, and either a pretty cool western display or a solid shooter.

I think this thread should be redirected to discussing the Wrangler and a second thread should open to discuss all of the wonderful attributes of the Rough Rider.

That way we can keep our dogs in their own pens....and hopefully reduce the barking.

I never said the RR is better than the Wrangler, but people thinking it's a POS for $100 when on sale is not accurate. I never supported the methods of how the RR is made, I just said they've worked for a long time and can't be crap like others say it is. Everyone here is talking up the Wrangler like it's going to be a Single Six for half the price and I'm pulling off the rose colored glasses.

For $200, that's not a bad price compared to the base Rough Riders, but I think when you throw in adj. sights, .22LR/Mag combo, and 9 rd cylinders, it makes the Rough Rider a better choice for the money vs the current Wranglers.

If the Wranglers get 9 rd cylinders, adj. sights, and the price creeps up to $250, that would be worth getting, but I don't see Ruger ever doing that.

 

[sabbfan]

Off topic to the Wrangler discussion but pertaining to the Ruger going towards only budget offering, don’t forget they recently introduced their custom shop 1911 which is far from budget priced. You can buy a cheap Ruger or an expensive one, the choice is yours and it’s a nice choice to have.

 

[TTv2]

Ruger revolvers are made of the same materials and with the same quality parts that they were up to the 1980s. I own a 1978 Blackhawk and there is very little, if any difference between it and the current offerings, which I also own. Today's Blackhawk is just as strong and well-finished and accurate as it always was. I also owned an SR1911 which was excellent.
Ruger and many others rely on CNC machines and automation to produce their guns, and final inspection and sometimes quality control is not always perfect. This sometimes results in a handgun which may be 99% perfect, with a small defect or fault.
Problems are usually minor though, and certainly not confined to Ruger.

What you should ask yourself is this. If a major manufacturer sometimes produces a few guns that aren't perfect, what kind of quality can you expect from a small company like Heritage, whose only output is the cheapest .22 revolver made to date? Their work force certainly isn't all that skilled or dedicated or well-paid I'm sure.

Probably not, but I know for a fact the people at Ruger aren't either. I was told by a fmr. employee back in the post Sandy Hook panic that, at that time demand was so high, the supervisors told the workers that they needed to ship X amount of guns the next day and to let everything go, no matter if it met QC specs or not.

So, all the talk about how Ruger doesn't do 100% QC or has bad QC isn't the whole story, it's that they will knowingly ship guns with parts that are not good.

From their plant tour video on You-Tube they look more like a workshop than a production facility.

I work in manufacturing, they're a production facility. Each machine is dedicated to one or two parts.

 

[<*(((><]

Off topic to the Wrangler discussion but pertaining to the Ruger going towards only budget offering, don’t forget they recently introduced their custom shop 1911 which is far from budget priced. You can buy a cheap Ruger or an expensive one, the choice is yours and it’s a nice choice to have.

I for one appreciate Ruger's approach of not diluting the quality of their older lines but introducing budget lines with a quality mindset. I would hate if all manufacturers abandoned quality for sales, and that is not what Ruger is doing if one looks at their full product line at least at this point in time.

 

[TTv2]

BSA you make some very good points on the scaling down of existing parts of the Security 6 and using the same machinery. However, I think that would actually be a great thread in itself with out all the other nonsense posted here.
It leads to a question about the way Ruger is going. Cheaper guns. Will they start to make cheaper other products in the Revolver line? A budget Blackhawk, a budget SP101 etc?
They discontinued the SR series, the Ruger LC9S went down to the EC9 and then the Security9.

The direction Ruger is going is a interesting subject. They also have learned that they can make a cheap product, use a ton of money on advertising and sell millions, like the Ruger LCP.

Replacing semi autos with cheaper models is a different subject, a cheap semi auto is often adequate, but a revolver is different. I personally wouldn't be interested in a budget Blackhawk, GP100, etc. used ones are a plenty for a decent price.

 

[CraigC]

I never said the RR is better than the Wrangler, but people thinking it's a POS for $100 when on sale is not accurate. I never supported the methods of how the RR is made, I just said they've worked for a long time and can't be crap like others say it is. Everyone here is talking up the Wrangler like it's going to be a Single Six for half the price and I'm pulling off the rose colored glasses.

For $200, that's not a bad price compared to the base Rough Riders, but I think when you throw in adj. sights, .22LR/Mag combo, and 9 rd cylinders, it makes the Rough Rider a better choice for the money vs the current Wranglers.

If the Wranglers get 9 rd cylinders, adj. sights, and the price creeps up to $250, that would be worth getting, but I don't see Ruger ever doing that.

Rose colored glasses? So you assume that everyone who is excited about the Wrangler is starry-eyed and blind to the truth but you, you see??? Gimme a break. I think I've bought enough guns to trust my own judgement, thank you very much.

It "appears" to me to be a Single Six with fixed sights, aluminum frame, zinc grip frame, MIM lockwork and loading gate at half the price.

You apparently haven't been paying much attention. Fixed sights do not save you money at Ruger. Vaqueros have always been higher than Blackhawks.

IMHO, unless there are some unforeseen gremlins, the Wrangler "appears" to be a much better value than any Heritage. If you place more value on additional cylinders or higher capacity than overall quality, then I'm sure you would rather have a Heritage. Rimfire convertibles are highly overrated anyway. Most people never shoot .22Mag and any time the subject comes up, there's no shortage of whining about the cost of ammo. The two cartridges always print differently and I have long dedicated guns to one or the other. Never both.

 

[Dewey 68]

I don't have any SA revolvers and have been thinking hard about adding a Ruger SA revolver to the collection, but wasn't thinking about one in 22 LR but this has me reconsidering. Not a fan of the cerakote however. I'll wait to see one in person before I cast judgement either way.

 

[ThomasT]

I don't have any SA revolvers and have been thinking hard about adding a Ruger SA revolver to the collection, but wasn't thinking about one in 22 LR but this has me reconsidering. Not a fan of the cerakote however. I'll wait to see one in person before I cast judgement either way.

If in doubt just buy the classic single six with two cylinders. Yes they are expensive if you buy new but used ones are found all over for $250-400 dollars in great shape for the blued models. And you only have to buy once. They will last your whole life. You will get tired of shooting it before you ever start to wear it out.

And if you really want to go all out find a single six in 32 mag. I have two and they are at the top of my list for favorite guns never to sell.

 

[Choctaw]

I don't have any SA revolvers and have been thinking hard about adding a Ruger SA revolver to the collection, but wasn't thinking about one in 22 LR but this has me reconsidering. Not a fan of the cerakote however. I'll wait to see one in person before I cast judgement either way.

Ah, then you definitely need to go the Vaquero or Blackhawk route. You will not be sorry.

 

[Old Stumpy]

I never said the RR is better than the Wrangler, but people thinking it's a POS for $100 when on sale is not accurate. I never supported the methods of how the RR is made, I just said they've worked for a long time and can't be crap like others say it is. Everyone here is talking up the Wrangler like it's going to be a Single Six for half the price and I'm pulling off the rose colored glasses.

For $200, that's not a bad price compared to the base Rough Riders, but I think when you throw in adj. sights, .22LR/Mag combo, and 9 rd cylinders, it makes the Rough Rider a better choice for the money vs the current Wranglers.

If the Wranglers get 9 rd cylinders, adj. sights, and the price creeps up to $250, that would be worth getting, but I don't see Ruger ever doing that.

The Wrangler is clearly a huge step up in every way from the Rough Rider. In appearance, quality, coil springs, and fit and finish. The Rough Rider simply does not compare to the Wrangler. If you could buy a Rough Rider one for half the price ($100.00) then it might be appealing to some. But, you do have to wonder though just what you are getting if Heritage can sell their guns for next to nothing.

I looked at the Ruger Single 10 when it came out and said: "Ho Hum." If I wanted 10 rounds then I would buy a semi-auto.
Some might care about a 9 round capacity enough to buy the Rough Rider revolver, but many will not.
A spare cylinder in .22 magnum is nice, except that it tends to batter an aluminum frame. Not a great idea.
And while adjustable sights are nice, I don't think that for most buyers that it will be a deal breaker when they compare the two guns close up.

As for the question of whether the Wrangler is worth getting, that has already been decided. People are already lining up to order them.
They no longer have to wish that they could afford a Ruger and then have to settle for a decidedly inferior Rough Rider.