S&W Model-13 vs. Ruger Speed Six

[PzGren]

Although the model 13 is a great gun and a classic, for heavy duty usage, the Speed-Six is far superior.

That's why they came out with the L-frame, right? I don't usually feel like putting my opinion in a S&W vs Ruger thread. I love my Smiths. If the question is which is stronger, S&W or Ruger, then the answer might be:

To continue that logic: the Six series were replaced with the GP100 because of the same reasons that the K frame got replaced with the L frame.

 

[golden]

Not Quite

PzGREN,

While the problems with the K frames were widely reported, I do not remember seeing anything similar reported on the RUGER Six revolvers.

SMITH & WESSON had brought out the L frame guns and the similarity is too great to be overlooked. They even went head to head in advertising about which was stronger, the L frame or GP 100. In the end, I think it had more to do with marketing than reliability.

Along with the full lugged heavy guns, RUGER also produced a slim barrel version, which was lighter.
I think they were trying to accomplish the same thing SMITH & WESSON is doing by replacing the model 13 and 19 with L framed models.

Jim

 

[Confederate]

To continue that logic: the Six series were replaced with the GP100 because of the same reasons that the K-frame got replaced with the L frame.

ZZZZZZZTTTTTTZZZZZZZZZ...wrong!

The primary reason the "Six" series was replaced is because the Smith K-frame magnums were failing, and the Rugers were about the same size. Many people, even some seasoned gun hacks who should have known better, warned people from using full magnum loads in the Ruger. It was bad advice, which Bill Ruger tried to overcome. Another reason they went to the new design was to cut costs. Even though the new Rugers were a bit larger, they sold for more than the Security-Sixes and went to a single spring trigger, which most Ruger fans believed was not an improvement. Besides that, Ruger knocked almost the entire grip off its new revolver. You just had a stump coming out of the gun.

Smith not only wanted to strengthen their revolvers, they wanted to win shooters over to its full underlug barrel, and Ruger simply followed suit—another decision I wasn't keen on, BTW.

Bill Ruger knew that pitting its Security-Six (which was underpriced and underrated) against Smith's new L-frame was a no-win situation. He admitted in in an interview that Ruger had never made a dime off the Security-Six because of its high production cost and low selling cost. He realized that if people compared the L-frame Smiths to the SS on a dealer's counter, that many would go for the slightly larger gun, assuming it would be tougher. It was a war he couldn't win. He had to produce a larger gun, add an underlug, cut production costs and raise the retail price. To this day I greatly prefer the Ruger Security-Six to the new line of revolvers.

Also interesting is a point many people don't ponder. Why did Smith continue making its K-frame magnums? It was because many people still wanted a medium frame gun that had quick pointing characteristics that an underlug gun just didn't have. On the Ruger front, however, buyers didn't have the option of buying the Security-Six. The gun never recovered from its low sticker price and continues today to be an incredible bargain if it can be found. In other words, you'll always have to pay more for a S&W in the same condition.

For those who have a few safely tucked away, they're still a great camping and trail gun. They can shoot full powered loads, plus, as I said earlier, they can be disassembled and reassembled in the field with only the rim of a spent cartridge.

Can't hardly beat that!

 

[texagun]

I have to agree with Confederate on this one. The Security Sixes were some of the finest revolvers ever built. For heavy loads and rough use, they can't be beat.

 

[woodsltc]

Confederate Said: They can shoot full powered loads, plus, as I said earlier, they can be disassembled and reassembled in the field with only the rim of a spent cartridge.

While I love my S&W's --- the above statement is what attracts me to the Speed Six -------- hopefully, I will find the one I want soon, and I can do my own comparison!!

There is something about a gun that is simple & strong --- great combination.

My one concern would be the feel and quality of the trigger ??

Don

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

To use a car analogy ...

Smith:

Ruger:

 

[texagun]

My one concern would be the feel and quality of the trigger ??

The Ruger triggers on the Security Sixes/Speed Sixes are very easy to work on and improve. With an Arkansas Stone and some emory cloth to polish up the mating surfaces, it's very easy to get an excellent trigger on them. A Wolff Spring Kit will also improve them.

 

[Confederate]

The car analogy isn't exactly right. The Smith and Ruger both look, at first glance, to be the same. They weigh about the same, use the same holsters and are the same caliber. The primary difference is that the Ruger was designed to be a .357 magnum revolver, while the Smith & Wesson 19/66 was designed to be .38 Spc.

Once you put in new springs, dry snapping the pistol will smooth the trigger up nicely.

 

[wnycollector]

I have snubbie SS Security Six that has the best trigger on ANY of my revolvers...even better than BOTH of my P&R N frames (Models 27 and 28). The trigger is so smooth that at some point a previous owner must have done some work one it!

 

[jcord]

I have owned and carried snubs since I was 18. I like the
K-frame guns but I love my speed six. It shoots better for me and the weight helps with the recoil. I carry my Speed six as back up to my timberwolf when hunting using full power handloads.

The trigger is excellent as is the accuracy.

My experience with the the K frame is with model 19s in 4 inch and 2 1/2. Although they are excellent guns the blast is fierce from the 2 1/2. The slightly longer barrel and weight of the speed six seems to tame it down just a bit. I never owned a model 13 always wanted one just never got around to buying one.

I believe both the Smith and Ruger are fine guns. I own both and shoot both. My primary carry is the speed six backed up with an old smith model 49.

My k-frame guns just hang out in the safe except on range day.

 

[woodsltc]

Finally, Finally, ------ I found a SS, 2 3/4inch, Speed Six to go with my 3inch, Model-13, S&W's.

I picked it up yesterday. Made in 1981, about 95% condition and well maintained. I won't be able to try it out till next weekend. Looking forward to comparing it with the M-13's !!!!!

Don

 

[tblt]

speed six

 

[MCgunner]

I had a Smith forcing cone split once. It happens. I'd get the Ruger.

 

[woodsltc]

tblt said:speed six

MCgunner said: I had a Smith forcing cone split once. It happens. I'd get the Ruger.

I am "not" trying to choose which to get ---- I already have 2 Model-13's and I just found a Speed Six. I like the 13's and the forcing cone is "not" an issue if you don't shoot low-weight, high pressure rounds.

I'm wanting to compare the S&W / Ruger on an accuracy and feel basis. Hopefully, I will be able to do a comparison next week-end.

Don

 

[MCgunner]

I already have 2 Model-13's and I just found a Speed Six. I like the 13's and the forcing cone is "not" an issue if you don't shoot low-weight, high pressure rounds.

I was shooting wadcutters out of a Model 10 at the time. It's a very tight gun with no hint of a timing problem at all. I suspect it just had some lead build up at the forcing cone, which is very week on the K frames. I scrub the crap out of that thing, now, after shooting. Shooting jacketed bullets would avoid that, but I cast my own and won't own a gun that doesn't like lead.

I had a M19. It was more accurate than my security six for sure with .38 special. The Security Six shot wadcutters about 4" at 25 off a rest, the 19 about an inch and a half. My current Taurus 4" M66 will put 'em into 1". These guns all shot well with magnums. Some .357s just don't seem to like .38s for some reason and the Security Six is one of 'em. I traded it for a Blackhawk and haven't been unhappy about that. My blackhawk has taken a couple of deer since. I hunt with it. It has a 6.5" barrel, strong to the max, great outdoor gun. I sold the 19, but kept the M10, just rebarreled it.

For my uses, outdoor carry, the Taurus I own now is the most accurate 4" medium frame .357 magnum revolver with both magnum and .38 loads that I've ever owned. It's just awesome, great trigger, strong gun, ROUND forcing cone with no flats on the bottom. It doesn't have the strength of the Security Six, but it'll shoot rings around that gun. I've been easy on it with the hot loads and it's held up well, still tight as a drum.

As for feel, I preferred the Smith even though I had Hogues on both. The Smith was easy to shoot, the Security Six kicked like a mule, lots of muzzle climb, with magnum loads of any flavor that were even close to hot. The Smith was easy to control. I think that Security Six rode to high in the hand, lots of muzzle flip on recoil and hard to shoot fast with. Hell, my SP101 was easier with hot loads, believe it or not. So, advantage Smith and Wesson in handling. But, that's a very subjective thing that can vary from shooter to shooter. Just giving my opinion. I just sorta lost faith in K frames after that forcing cone incident. It was a better shooting gun, though, than the Security Six all around. I had a sweet trigger on that Security Six, though, after working it over. Really liked its simplicity and ease of working on. I won't do my own trigger work on a K frame. I'd rather pay someone that knows more what they're doing. LOL

 

[dispatch]

What appeals to you is what matters. I have Smiths and Ruger- all good revolvers. Some days I want to shoot a S&W and some days I want to shot a Ruger. It’s all fun and I trust any of them as defense weapons.