New Ruger Wrangler.... I'm confused

Status
Not open for further replies.
It appears to
bannockburn said:
When I looked at the Wrangler again on Ruger's website it kind of reminds me of the old Colt Frontier Scout, especially the one with the silver Cerakote finish.
Click to expand...

It looks exactly like the Frontier Scout to me. Maybe the Colt was a little better finished, but the aluminum frame on the Colt was finished with some kind of paint, as best I can remember, and I've owned a couple of them over the years. Frankly I was never too impressed with the Frontier Scout...Now the 22 Peacemaker with a steel frame was a different animal. :)

I'm happy to see Ruger moving into that price point market. A lot of people can't afford a Single-Six, new or used. And Ruger doesn't make a dime off the used ones. That doesn't bother me, but I'll bet it does Ruger.

I do have one Single-Six. It's a 50th anniversary model with fixed "hog trough" sights, a 4 5/8" barrel, a steel frame, and cost a lot more, even back in the day, than a Wrangler, but it show's this isn't even a new idea for Ruger.

100_0546_zps8871f981.jpg

I've never fired it for groups, but cans, pine cones, dirt clods...etc, are fair game. I even scared a couple of squirrels pretty badly with it.
 
I have good memories of the Single Six from when I was growing up. A friend of my father had one and I got to shoot it on several occasions. I remember working a trap line with him. We were trying for fox, but ended up catching a skunk. He was a great shot and managed to dispatch it with his Single Six w/o releasing the "stink". (Meanwhile I was high-tailing it towards the next county!)

I'm not a big single-action revolver kind of guy and could never really justify buying a new Single Six. For $200 this new Wrangler has me thinking "Why not?" It looks well enough made. It should last forever given the round it fires. It will make a great plinker for new shooters. I'm not usually a fan of colored firearms, but that bronze color is kinda working for me. So yea. Ruger can take my money.
 
TTv2 said:
Just because you have to have coil springs and non Loctited barrels doesn't mean everyone else wants that and thus wants to pay more for it. You're projecting your qualities of quality onto others believing that they all see the same thing you do.
Click to expand...
Non-Loctited barrels? Are you seriously defending the ribbed, press-fit, glued-in barrel of the Heritage over the threaded/screw-in barrel of the Ruger? Everyone is entitled to their opinion but not their own facts. Or even their own version of the facts. It is undeniable fact that Ruger's method of screwing a threaded barrel into a threaded aluminum frame is superior to Heritage's method of pressing a ribbed barrel into a hole in a zinc frame and hoping the glue holds it in place.
 
CraigC said:
Non-Loctited barrels? Are you seriously defending the ribbed, press-fit, glued-in barrel of the Heritage over the threaded/screw-in barrel of the Ruger? Everyone is entitled to their opinion but not their own facts. Or even their own version of the facts. It is undeniable fact that Ruger's method of screwing a threaded barrel into a threaded aluminum frame is superior to Heritage's method of pressing a ribbed barrel into a hole in a zinc frame and hoping the glue holds it in place.
Click to expand...
The design has worked well for a long time and the only people who seem to complain about it are armchair engineers. I'm not saying that it's better, I'm just saying it works and is part of the reason why the Heritage's cost less.
 
I criticize (not complain, a distinction) about it not because I am an armchair engineer but because I am a sixgun enthusiast. A sixgun enthusiast that has educated himself on how a revolver is built, or should be built. Because once in a while, I have one built. Sometimes it matters how a barrel is installed or the material a frame is made of.

The point is that you implied that it was better than Ruger's actual threads (to which Ruger does apply thread adhesive, so not even that was accurate). It seems to work reasonably well for what people use them for, which is mostly stashing somewhere or letting the kids shoot it once in a while. Except when it doesn't. Except that you have to bend the friggin' front sight to adjust windage, because you can't turn the barrel in the frame. Because it will break loose and fall out. "The lady doth protest too much, methinks", which is typical of Heritage Rough Rider discussions. You don't have to buy one but at some point you 'may' have to accept that Ruger builds a better cheap gun and that people will occasionally point that out. Time and actual rounds downrange will tell. Not years sitting in a tackle box. Contrary to the opinion of many a Heritage owner, years sitting unused in a tackle box or 50rds a year dispatching trapped critters does not constitute a test of longevity.
 
TTv2 said:
The design has worked well for a long time and the only people who seem to complain about it are armchair engineers. I'm not saying that it's better, I'm just saying it works and is part of the reason why the Heritage's cost less.
Click to expand...
We all know that the Rough Rider sells for less. And we also know that some people like them, but many are willing to spend a little more for something build a little better.
All you have to do is look at close up photos of both and you can see a big difference in the metal finish.

I have a question for you. How big is that check you get from Heritage? Because you are defending them way to much for someone that not getting paid.
I don’t think half the comments about the Rough Rider would have been made if you hadn’t been defending the so hard.
This topic is about the new Wrangler, but you’ve turned it into a Wrangler vs The Rough Rider, and it’s getting a bit boring. Please give it a rest.
 
I have limited experience with the Heritage. The one I shot functioned fine and was accurate enough for causal plinking. I was particularly impressed that it had a lot of rounds fired through it that day by different shooters without any malfunctions or need for cleaning / oiling. I did not bench it to test it's true accuracy potential.

I have looked hard at the Heritage but this overall exterior appearance to me says cheap. The frame cylinder window casting is rounded and the gap between the grip frame and receiver is noticeably large. My overall impression is it is assembled from parts pulled out the bin at random with the fit on non-critical parts being "close enough." It is commonly ran on sale in my parts for $99.99 to $109.99. The $99.99 price is often seen at Christmas as "early bird specials" but it is not good enough quality to get me up and in line in the cold at 5:00 am. Still for $99.99 and I would not have to stand in line outside the store at 5:00 am I thought I would get one.

I think Ruger is targeting a buyer like me. Frankly I do not have a lot of interest in the .22. The Lady brought herself a Ruger SR22 last Fall though that has wetted my interest a lot. So I am very interested in a inexpensive revolver that shows a higher level of manufacturing quality and fit.

I expect a lot from Ruger in this little gun. I am not going to cut them any slack when it comes to reliable function, fit and finish. Ceracoat is a mature and refined paint process so I expect it to be smooth and evenly coated. I expect the cylinder frame window to have sharp, defined edges and free of casting marks. In other words if it looks like the ones in the pictures that Ruger has advertised I am all in. As previously commented I can foresee one for the house and one kept in the "barn" for outdoor and "truck" use. I can easily foresee it being a "big" kids and "little" kids fun gun to shoot that will contribute to a local shortage of 22 ammo.

There will always be a market for the Heritage mainly for the person who will not shoot it very often and has low general interest in handguns.

Oh and for TTv2 who is protesting much too loudly.:D
 
Last edited:
GunnyUSMC said:
I thought we were talking about the frame? I didn’t see anything at Ruger that said what the grip frame was made of, but that article stated it was zinc alloy.
Click to expand...
My original point was that it was not available in two states and had me thinking it might be zinc alloy because some states ban guns made with it. If the grip frame is indeed zinc alloy, it's possible that might be enough for a ban, but who knows?

I don't think a writer would say it's zinc without proof since it's not a sterling endorsement, but I guess we can't confirm or deny that until it's tested. Regardless, I know Ruger wouldn't manufacture a grip frame of any alloy without sufficient testing to prove its strength for the application.
 
Last edited:
Just found this info re: prohibited guns in MN:

MINNESOTA STATE RESTRICTIONS
HANDGUNS

Prohibited:

Handguns (other than antique firearms) where the frame, barrel, cylinder, slide or breech-lock is composed of any material with a melting point of less than 1,000 degrees F, or an ultimate tensile strength of less than 55,000 psi, or comprised of any powdered metal having a density of less than 7.5 grams/cubic centimeter.

In MA, handguns sold there have to be on a state approved list.
 
Doesn't Illinois and several other states have the same law? I don't see them listed. The grip frame may very well be a zinc alloy but I'll be skeptical until it's verified.
 
GunnyUSMC said:
We all know that the Rough Rider sells for less. And we also know that some people like them, but many are willing to spend a little more for something build a little better.
All you have to do is look at close up photos of both and you can see a big difference in the metal finish.

I have a question for you. How big is that check you get from Heritage? Because you are defending them way to much for someone that not getting paid.
I don’t think half the comments about the Rough Rider would have been made if you hadn’t been defending the so hard.
This topic is about the new Wrangler, but you’ve turned it into a Wrangler vs The Rough Rider, and it’s getting a bit boring. Please give it a rest.
Click to expand...
Well, when the comments about the Rough Rider are the same ones over and over about a safety and appearences and design and yet there are a ton of them out there that many enjoy, I feel I need to check the internet elitism with a does of reality.

But, I forgot how stronk the elitism is, so I'll leave it here. Enjoy your Wrangler's fella's.
 
I do have one Single-Six. It's a 50th anniversary model with fixed "hog trough" sights, a 4 5/8" barrel, a steel frame, and cost a lot more, even back in the day, than a Wrangler, but it show's this isn't even a new idea for Ruger.
Click to expand...

Ruger still shows two single six convertibles with fixed Hog Trough sights. If they make them its because someone is buying them. And the fixed sights don't bother me at all. I have several handguns with fixed sights and shoot them just fine. And the gun will likely shoot low out of the box because the front blade will be sent tall so the buyer can shorten it for the ammo they plan to use and their own shooting style. They do the same thing on the Standard Model 22. I have had to file a little on everyone of those I have bought. So no big deal.

The one real complaint with hog trough sights for me is that they are normally too narrow and need to be wider. I can make wider with a file and at the same time adjust for windage if needed. I have done it before.

On another forum someone brought up that maybe Ruger isn't making these guns but buying them with the Ruger brand stamped on them. Here is what he is going by.

"Built in the USA to Ruger's quality manufacturing standards" I haven't found that statement on any of the other Ruger guns. That statement is found under the spec sheet on the Wrangler page. https://ruger.com/products/wrangler/models.html

That right there makes it sound like these are not made by Ruger. So... dare I say it? Maybe these are made by Heritage for Ruger.:D:p:cool: If they are even TTv2 can enjoy the new Wrangler.:rofl:

OK. Flame suit on. Flame away!!!:neener:
 
Last edited:
A couple of people have mentioned that the barrels on Heritage models are glued in. A couple of sale sites, PSA and others, say the barrels are "micro threaded". From what I've gathered doing a little research, there is a barrel shroud around the actual steel barrel, and that is glued to the barrel. They have been known to separate.

Just curious whether the people here are referring to the actual barrel being glued in or the shroud?
 
Elitism??? We're talking about a sub-$200 gun.

The barrel is ribbed (micro-threaded) and covered in glue, then pressed into the frame. Not a two piece barrel, as far as I know.
 
Ratshooter said:
"Built in the USA to Ruger's quality manufacturing standards" I haven't found that statement on any of the other Ruger guns. That statement is found under the spec sheet on the Wrangler page. https://ruger.com/products/wrangler/models.html

That right there makes it sound like these are not made by Ruger. So... dare I say it? Maybe these are made by Heritage for Ruger.
Click to expand...

Nah, I think that's reading too much into it, they probably put that statement about being built in the USA to Ruger quality standards to head off any questions about importation or quality driven by the extremely low price. It looks like a lot of this pistol is cast and that's Ruger's forte, doesn't make sense to farm out something they are probably best in the industry at.

Also, the Wrangler product photo gallery has a big "Proudly made in Newport NH" stamp:

Screenshot_20190420-160747~01.png

Hmm, who is it that has a big firearms manufacturing facility in Newport? Not Heritage Manufacturing ;)
 
Ratshooter said:
The one real complaint with hog trough sights for me is that they are normally too narrow and need to be wider. I can make wider with a file and at the same time adjust for windage if needed. I have done it before.
Click to expand...

I take exception to the phrase "hog trough sights". That description might be true of a Colt Single Action Army or a faithful clone, antique DA revolvers, or a Remington Black powder revolver, but it certainly is not a correct description of a Ruger Vaquero, Bearcat, or Wrangler.
The Ruger guns DO have a hog trough in the top strap, but that is not the rear sight. The rear sight is a proper flat-faced square notch that is milled into the rear of the frame. The hog trough groove is made wider such that it is not a part of the sight picture at all.
Also, while the front blade is rounded to a degree, it isn't tapered or thin as older revolver front blades were.
It is instead parallel-sided with a flat top profile and is wide enough to provide to form a proper square post image in the square notch rear sight.
I think that these sights will be regulated well enough to provide minute-of-soup-can point of impact at 20 yards, which is all that you really need in a plinker.
 
Last edited:
Gtscotty said:
Nah, I think that's reading too much into it, they probably put that statement about being built in the USA to Ruger quality standards to head off any questions about importation or quality driven by the extremely low price. It looks like a lot of this pistol is cast and that's Ruger's forte, doesn't make sense to farm out something they are probably best in the industry at.

Also, the Wrangler product photo gallery has a big "Proudly made in Newport NH" stamp:

View attachment 837531

Hmm, who is it that has a big firearms manufacturing facility in Newport? Not Heritage Manufacturing ;)
Click to expand...
i like the bronze one.
 
ECVMatt said:
Pretty good review from By gunblast.

https://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-Wrangler.htm

I have played with my friends RR and this seems like a completely different type of gun. This appears to be several steps above the RR.
Click to expand...
nice find, and yet TTv2 will still say them fixed sights are inaccurate. did you see them 25 yard groups, even the rem did better them most 22 rifles. the finish in the video looks great to.
 
Old Stumpy said:
All Single Action Army clones load and unload much the same way, regardless of the maker.
So, your comment is quite meaningless. (Yawn)
Click to expand...
My comment has meaning, you just missed it. The point is that single action 22’s are excessively slow to load and unload. Therefore they are more boring to shoot than autoloaders or revolvers with swing-out cylinders. The only 22 handgun more tedious to shoot than a SA revolver is a single shot or a derringer.

Of course you are welcome to disagree if individually punching out those skinny little empties is your idea of fun.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Old Stumpy
  • Locked
.38 Special Wrangler?
2 3
Replies
53
Views
3K
leo96150
L
Solomonson
  • Locked
Ruger Wrangler ($176.00) vs. Ruger 5435 LCRx ($470.00)
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
7K
Boarhunter
B
P
  • Locked
Wrangler, first impressions
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
1911junkee
1911junkee
S
  • Locked
Ruger Bearcat Advice?
Replies
13
Views
1K
foghornl
F
Howland937
  • Locked
Ruger, 20 years later.
Replies
13
Views
853
barnfrog
barnfrog
Back
Top