S&W Model-13 vs. Ruger Speed Six


PDA






woodsltc
July 20, 2008, 05:17 PM
I would just like to get the opinions of those on the forum about which of these two revolvers would be the most desirable.

First, let me say that I think both are great revolvers that seem to fill the same niche. I "already" own a Model-13 with a 3 inch barrel now, and I've been looking for a comparable Speed Six with a 2 3/4 inch barrel to go with the S&W.

Does one have more appeal than the other or are they pretty equal?? :)

Don

If you enjoyed reading about "S&W Model-13 vs. Ruger Speed Six" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Shade00
July 20, 2008, 06:36 PM
Can't really tell you about the Model 13 or any S&W K-frame, as I do not own any. But you can see what I do own in my signature, and I just got back from shooting my new(to me) Ruger Speed Six, along with my Colt Diamondback, .357, and S&W 34 and 37. The Ruger is just a super gun - I've gotta say that I enjoyed the heck out of shooting it. I put as many rounds through it today as I put through my Colts. It's got a great weight and great action. Get one and you'll love it.

trane fan
July 20, 2008, 07:50 PM
I would go with the Mod. 13 if I were you. I previously owned a Security-Six with 2 3/4 " barrel and currently own (and will never part with) an S&W Mod. 65-2 (recessed and pinned). IMHO S&W 3 inchers are more balanced and lend themselves more readily to natural point shooting. In fact, I'm getting ready to put my Glock 36 on the market so that I can afford to purchase either an early Mod. 13 or 65 with a three inch barrel. Good luck and I hope you enjoy whatever you pick. tf

Ala Dan
July 20, 2008, 08:00 PM
A S&W model 13 with a 3" tube is the ideal CCW piece for a revolver, IMHO;
but they have become extremely scarce, as has its counterpart the 3" model
65~! :eek: :uhoh: ;)

JNewell
July 20, 2008, 08:02 PM
I agree with the post above. I've owned or currently own an M13PC, an M65 3" and a couple of Ruger Security (not Speed) Sixes. The Ruger is a great gun and is one of few revolvers that you can take almost completely apart with nothing more than a cartridge case, but the balance and handling of the K-frame 3" guns is superior. Although the Speed/Security Sixes are probably better suited to a steady diet of full-power .357 Mag loads, for most purposes (including human defense), the mid-range loads are excellent choices, possibly better overall than the full-house mag loads.

skoro
July 21, 2008, 03:16 PM
Nothing against the Ruger. They have a long record of good service. But the K-frame Smiths are "just right" in so many ways. There's a reason they were the standard sidearm for so many law enforcement agencies for so long.

gizamo
July 21, 2008, 04:57 PM
I have collected S&W's for a little more then 25 years....love them, eat them, breath them....they are a Swiss Clock !!!

But is your talking CCW...
Go with the Ruger, it is the better gun....:what:
Nobody ever shot anyone with a Swiss Clock....:evil:

Giz.....
getting my popcorn ready:D

OFT
July 21, 2008, 05:15 PM
I would opt for the Model 13. The Ruger is a fine gun but the S&W just seems a little smoother to me.

MCgunner
July 21, 2008, 05:37 PM
K frames have weaknesses the Ruger doesn't have, a stronger gun all over. I've had forcing cone issues with K frames, not real in love with 'em in .357 caliber. I still have my M10, won't part with it. I had a security six at one time, strong gun, great triggr after I worked it over. I traded it off for a Blackhawk I still have.

My choice after owning both, Ruger, hands down Ruger. It's just a better design, stronger, will last a LOT longer. Either gun will shoot just fine. The Ruger will last longer.

MCgunner
July 21, 2008, 05:40 PM
They have a long record of good service. But the K-frame Smiths are "just right" in so many ways. There's a reason they were the standard sidearm for so many law enforcement agencies for so long.

Yeah, like the K frame had a 70 year head start. :rolleyes: The design is, well, old, and adequate for the .38 special for which it was originally designed, but .357 pushes limits in it.

mbt2001
July 21, 2008, 06:14 PM
Speed 6 is one of the best guns ever made, one of the most underated as well. It points excellent and is strong and accurate. I wouldn't trade mine for all the tea in China. I might consider it for all the beer in Texas if someone can hook me up there.

woodsltc
July 21, 2008, 08:15 PM
Hey, I appreciate all the replys.

I think several of you missed the fact that I "already" have a 3 inch Model-13 (actually I have two).

But, I'm also interested in getting a 2 3/4 inch Speed Six --- I've been looking for a good one for several months now.

My post was to get an idea how others felt the Speed Six & the Model-13 compared.

Giz, if you've got any extra Speed Sixes for trade I have an extra "Swiss Clock" I can trade you. :D

Don

Virginian
July 21, 2008, 09:06 PM
I am a Ruger man 99%. Ah, but that other 1%... I think the 13/65 is about the best gun Smith ever made. A Speed Six is fine, but I do not think it will measure up to your 13 in feel and smoothness or accuracy.

Brian Williams
July 21, 2008, 09:18 PM
S&W 13 all the way.

Bearhands
July 21, 2008, 09:50 PM
you already own a mod 13 3"..... why not go for the Ruger unless you're thinking of a retirement income.

Shade00
July 21, 2008, 10:04 PM
If you are asking should you get a Speed Six in addition to your 13, then I say absolutely. Mine is a pleasure to shoot. I enjoy shooting it as much as I enjoy shooting my Colts.

woodsltc
July 21, 2008, 11:58 PM
Bearhands / Shade00 ---- I agree with you.

I really enjoy my M-13's and for carry that is what I use. (when I'm not carrying something else :D)

But why not get a Speed Six --- While I haven't shot one yet, I really think it would be a great revolver to have. If for no other reason --- heck, I want one. :D There's no better reason that!!!! ;)

Don

FEG
July 22, 2008, 01:10 AM
I'm more of a Model 15/Security Six guy. That said, I've never found a Ruger as accurate as my S&W K frames.

The Model 13/65 is superior to the Speed Six in every respect, IMHO. Along with the 15, the 13 is one of the better combat revolvers ever made.

Shade00
July 22, 2008, 03:00 AM
But variety is the spice of life... and recently my life got spicy with the addition of the Speed Six. The Colts were a little jealous of the time my buddy and I spent with the Speed Six at the range the other day.

CajunBass
July 22, 2008, 09:12 AM
Does one have more appeal than the other or are they pretty equal??

Well, I think the "k" frame Smith & Wesson is better looking but that's about it. I've owned both, although mine were a Model 19, and a Speed Six, and I liked them both.

Guns aren't like wives. They don't care if you bring home another, different one.

texagun
July 22, 2008, 10:09 AM
The Ruger is a Timex. The S&W is a Rolex. Both are excellent guns. The Ruger is more robust, but I would choose the S&W over the Ruger anytime. The S&W will just continue to appreciate in value at a greater rate than the Ruger. My vote goes to the Model 13. They are already fairly rare.

slick6
July 22, 2008, 11:58 AM
Although the model 13 is more collectible than a Ruger Speed-Six, it was never designed for the continuous shooting of .357 magnum's! The Speed-Six was designed to fire the .357's regularly, and will stand up to this punishment. Also, the flat in the 6 o'clock position of the barrel has a tendency to crack on the model 13. Although the model 13 is a great gun and a classic, for heavy duty usage, the Speed-Six is far superior. Although the trigger is better on the model 13, the Speed-Six trigger get's much better after being broken in! You just need to weigh the advantages of each of these revolvers and take your pick, as they are both excellent revolvers!

Guillermo
July 22, 2008, 01:05 PM
While I understand the desire to collect many different types of firearms, there is also the logic of having multiples of the same.

I have a few Smiths and plan on buying more. Not that I am anti Ruger but the chances of accessories and holsters being interchangeable is much greater since I stick with the same general flavor.

It is not my desire to start a firestorm but this thread begs the following statement concerning the alleged superior strength of the Ruger. While the Smith may not be as strong, it is strong enough for me. I shoot a few thousand rounds a year (10ish) and have never had a problem with any of my Smiths (or Colts for that matter) with one exception. (and it was a revolver that was broken when I got it)

To me, it is much like speaking of the superior strength of a body-on-frame construction of a pickup truck when the owner never tows or gets off road but rather commutes in it.

Maybe you guys are shooting 50,000 of the hottest to-the-limit hand loads every year. Maybe it is worth it to buy a new gun knowing that you have to do some gunsmithing on the trigger in order to get little extra strength. If that is the case, good luck to you and I am glad you found your brand.

As for me, it does not sadden me that my safe might one day contain a couple of dozen Smiths.

skoro
July 22, 2008, 01:12 PM
Yeah, like the K frame had a 70 year head start. The design is, well, old, and adequate for the .38 special for which it was originally designed, but .357 pushes limits in it.

Never had single issue using .357 full-house ammo in my Model 13.

Enjoy your Ruger. :)

Frizzman
July 22, 2008, 02:37 PM
I have had both revolvers and other short barreled L and K frames. I like the Rugers and S&W's. I agree that the S&W seems a bit more refined. I like the solid frame and ease of stripping of the Ruger. I remember when the Security Six came out and it was an innovative design. My first revolver was a stainless SS and I still have it. It has given me good service. Some like one better than another and I like and shoot and carry both. I would try to have both revolvers. Good, clean SS's seem to be almost as scarce around here as a 3' K-frame...

Sistema1927
July 22, 2008, 03:55 PM
I have a 2.5" S&W 19-4 (as well as a 64, 686, 642, 37, and 22-4, I like S&W) and a 2.75" Ruger Speed-Six.

While the 19-4 is a work of art, the Ruger is built like a tank. Both will do the job, but I feel more comfortable dragging the Speed-Six down the pot-holed road of real life.

woodsltc
July 22, 2008, 05:10 PM
While the 19-4 is a work of art, the Ruger is built like a tank. Both will do the job, but I feel more comfortable dragging the Speed-Six down the pot-holed road of real life.


Both of my M-13's are about 95% condition ---- while not safe queens they are not what I would (to quote Sistema1927) "feel more comfortable dragging down the pot-holed road "---- I'm hoping I can find a good Speed Six 2 3/4 inch barrel that I will feel OK with to throw it under the truck seat, shove into the back-pack ..etc... and still have a quality gun. I've missed out on a couple that I should have jumped on, but heck , thats part of the fun of accumulating guns ---- searching for that particular one!!!! :D

Don

csmkersh
July 22, 2008, 07:13 PM
The only problem I have with any Ruger firearm made since 1994 is the name on the barrel; Ruger.

Guillermo
July 22, 2008, 07:26 PM
The only problem I have with any Ruger firearm made since 1994 is the name on the barrel; Ruger.

What is your problem with Ruger?

Or are you just stirring the pot?

csmkersh
July 22, 2008, 07:28 PM
It has to do with William B. Ruger's fathering the hi-cap mag ban.

jaholder1971
July 22, 2008, 07:32 PM
I've got a Security Six and a Model 65 3".

I'm looking for a gunsmith who can put my Smith trigger in my Security Six. Then we would have the perfect combat revolver.

wnycollector
July 22, 2008, 07:42 PM
I have a Security Six snub. It gets carried more than any other gun I own. I will say that a 3" K frame is on my list of "must have's" for my collection!

golden
July 22, 2008, 11:12 PM
I used to carry a 3 inch barreled SMITH & WESSON model 13 on duty. It is an excellent carry gun, but like most K frames, it is a bit weak with .357 ammo.

The following is what I ACTUALLY EXPERIENCED OR SAW, not a rumor or a second hand story.

1. Of the 47 guns issued to my academy class, 12 had problems. Mine had the sideplate screws torqued, I carried it anyway.
At least 2 guns were not shootable. Several had to be traded in for replacement guns.

2. My agency issued a notice FORBIDDING THE USE OF 125 GRAIN HOLLOW POINTS, AS SEVERAL OF THE GUNS BURST AT THE FORCING CONE.

3. Recoil with the 125 grain load can be severe. My agency went to the 110 grain hollow point. It was a much milder load.

4. None of these problems were listed with the SECURITY SIX that my agency used.

From my own experience, I would carry a model 13 only loaded with 110 grain loads. This is fine by me for a carry gun.

If I intended to shoot the gun a lot, I would go with the RUGER.

Just my experience.

Jim

woodsltc
July 22, 2008, 11:36 PM
I used to carry a 3 inch barreled SMITH & WESSON model 13 on duty. It is an excellent carry gun, but like most K frames, it is a bit weak with .357 ammo.

The following is what I ACTUALLY EXPERIENCED OR SAW, not a rumor or a second hand story.

1. Of the 47 guns issued to my academy class, 12 had problems. Mine had the sideplate screws torqued, I carried it anyway.
At least 2 guns were not shootable. Several had to be traded in for replacement guns.

2. My agency issued a notice FORBIDDING THE USE OF 125 GRAIN HOLLOW POINTS, AS SEVERAL OF THE GUNS BURST AT THE FORCING CONE.

3. Recoil with the 125 grain load can be severe. My agency went to the 110 grain hollow point. It was a much milder load.

4. None of these problems were listed with the SECURITY SIX that my agency used.

From my own experience, I would carry a model 13 only loaded with 110 grain loads. This is fine by me for a carry gun.

If I intended to shoot the gun a lot, I would go with the RUGER.

Just my experience.

Jim

Jim, I believe the problems you described with the K-Frames and the "hot" 125 grain loads is what prompted S&W to develop the L-Frame revolvers. L-Frames being stouter in the areas needed to handle a steady diet of hot .357 mag loads.

Don

PzGren
July 23, 2008, 12:18 AM
Since you like your model 13, a Ruger 6 series revolver is a good choice. The 6 series is closest in handling and trigger characteristics to S&W.

The Security and Service Six revolvers are underrated and can still be found at better prices than a GP100. They have the simple and solid design that lacks just a little of the refined trigger pull and hammer fall that S&W can provide.

Only if you try one, will you be able to appreciate the Six series as I do.

golden
July 23, 2008, 11:29 AM
WOODSLTC,

From what I read, that is exactly what happened. The L frame guns are really great as far as strength, balance and can have an incredible trigger if the work is done right.

I switched to a model 681 from the model 13. I found it to be a great shooter. The only drawback was the extra half pound of weight. It got old at the end of a 12 hour shift.

I still have that 681 and a 686 that has one of the nicest triggers I have ever used on a revolver.

If SMITH had brought out the model 519 and 520 (L frame model) back in the 1980's, they might have held onto a larger part of the market.

Jim

Guillermo
July 23, 2008, 01:27 PM
csmkersh

Ruger has changed its ways.

The same cannot be said for Smith & Clinton

csmkersh
July 23, 2008, 01:48 PM
Going to PMs so thread won't be locked.

JNewell
July 23, 2008, 01:55 PM
Back on topic...I used to assume that the Security/Speed Six line was basically as rugged as the GP100, at least in practical use. There was a long thread on the Ruger forum a few months ago in which quite a few owners of high-mileage Sixes told about the repair and rebuild work their Sixes had needed over the years. So...while the Sixes are probably going to go longer on a diet of hot 125s than a K frame, they are not indestructible (and some parts are beginning to get scarce).

slick6
July 23, 2008, 08:26 PM
Well, in one 30,000 round durability test, a Security-Six shot three times as many rounds as an Smith & Wesson Model 19 did, shooting hot .357's. before shooting loose! The Model 19 was shot loose in shooting only 1/3 of those rounds! Neither gun was indestructible-but, the Security-Six proved itself to be considerably more durable than the Model 19!

Guillermo
July 24, 2008, 12:00 AM
csmkersh made his point via PM in a polite, well informed manner.

His PM has caused me to do some research. In the end I too might join his position.

Tom Servo
July 24, 2008, 12:29 AM
Since you've already got the K-Frames, I'd say get the Ruger to complement them. Over the last couple of years, I've really developed a fondness for the Rugers, and I've found that even their smaller guns handle Magnums nicely.

Ruger triggers (once they're broken in) remind me favorably of Colts.

The S&W certainly feels more natural to me, but as a fighting gun, I'd trust a Ruger.

Nobody ever shot anyone with a Swiss Clock....

Actually, I've got a funny story about that. It involves my work in mall security, when Triad gangsters tried to hold up the Strudel Haus and my carry weapon (given to me by the ghost of Dean Wesson) ran out of ammo...

His PM has caused me to do some research. In the end I too might join his position.

Bear in mind, neither company is what it was during the dark days of the 1990s. While I know some folks feel animosity for past sins, S&W is no longer under Tomkins, and they are running under a whole new Board of Directors. While I have a few (minor) niggles about what they choose and choose not to manufacture, I don't feel politically bound to avoid them or Ruger.

Guillermo
July 24, 2008, 12:53 AM
I don't feel politically bound to avoid them or Ruger

I understand your position and respectfully disagree.

Smith & Clinton are ignoring their customers and Ruger does not make anything that I particularly want.

Thank you Lord for all the old Colts and Smiths that are on the secondary market.

Trebor
July 24, 2008, 02:29 PM
My carry gun is a S&W M 65 3". I also have a M 13 3" I use as a spare.

I'm also thinking of picking up a a Ruger Speed or Security Six with a 2 3/4" barrel to try.

I say get the Ruger so you can compare them head to head. You can always sell it if you don't like it.

Shade00
July 24, 2008, 03:03 PM
The Ruger is going to feel a little different, but it's a good different. Don't hesitate to get the Ruger. I love mine.

http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/7900/rugercoltdq0.jpg

Evyl Robot
July 24, 2008, 06:35 PM
K frames have weaknesses the Ruger doesn't have, a stronger gun all over.

Bingo. This is why there is no current-production Magnum K-frame. Or to put it another way:

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 me, it is much like speaking of the superior strength of a body-on-frame construction of a pickup truck when the owner never tows or gets off road but rather commutes in it.


But is the question whether the M-13 is better than a Speed Six? The fact that S&W designed a NEW FRAME to replace the Magnum K's tells me that they believe that the Speed Six is BETTER than the M-13. I personally would love to have a 13, 19, 65, etc. in my collection one day, provided it has not seen too many magnum loads to knock the nickle off/crack the forcing cone/stretch the top strap, because that frame was not designed with any such forces in mind. But, that's not the question either.

You are asking for opinions, and here's mine: I would be proud to own the 13's, but if you are thinking of getting the Ruger as well, I say go for it! :cool:

woodsltc
July 24, 2008, 07:34 PM
You are asking for opinions, and here's mine: I would be proud to own the 13's, but if you are thinking of getting the Ruger as well, I say go for it!
__________________



Several have given virtually the same advise as quoted above.

I like both S&W's and Rugers and I've been looking for a good 2 3/4 inch Speed Six for several months now. As I stated previously I've missed out on a couple and have only myself to blame --- but I'm "still in the hunt" for one.

Additionally, I'm also looking to get another M-13..... I just think they are great guns!!

Don

Marshall
July 24, 2008, 09:16 PM
While it's not a 3" tube, the 4" Model 13 sure balances nicely. The 3" would be more desirable for IWB carry but for OWB I'm not sure it makes a difference. I sure like this HB version.



http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c274/bunnfuzz/dcp_0519.jpg

Confederate
July 24, 2008, 10:22 PM
If you have a Model 13, then I would think you'd be happier with a Ruger. Alas, "appeal" is in the eye of the beholder. I can say with absolute assuredly that the Ruger is the better gun of the two. It's a solid frame gun that can be disassembled and reassembled in the field, it has oversized parts, is about the same weight, but it's not a Model 13. The older 13s, with their pinned barrels and recessed cylinders, have a certain charm that people like in shooting. A stainless Speed-Six in a bugout bag would be mighty comforting, but you might enjoy the 13 more at the range. At any rate, having one of each makes more sense than having two of the same gun.

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh198/jriler/Speed-Six_6.jpg

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh198/jriler/Speed-Six_5.jpg

The Speed-Six is a good strong gun.

GaryM
July 25, 2008, 08:16 PM
Installing a Wolff spring kit in a speed/security six does wonders for the trigger and helps a lot with the accuracy.
My 4" security six is a whole 'nother gun with it installed.

PzGren
July 25, 2008, 11:49 PM
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
July 26, 2008, 08:35 AM
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
July 27, 2008, 01:25 AM
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!


http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh198/jriler/RugerSecurity-SixTrio_6.jpg

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh198/jriler/RugerSS_SolidFrameStrength_2.jpg

texagun
July 27, 2008, 09:30 AM
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
July 27, 2008, 11:09 AM
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
July 27, 2008, 11:31 AM
To use a car analogy ...

Smith:
http://www.automedia.com/NewCarBuyersGuide/photos/2005/Cadillac/CTS/Sedan/2005_Cadillac_CTS_ext_1.jpg

Ruger:
http://media.motortopia.com/files/8305/vehicle/478aa49c00a2f/PowerWagon_1.jpg

texagun
July 27, 2008, 03:42 PM
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
July 27, 2008, 04:55 PM
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
July 27, 2008, 05:29 PM
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
July 27, 2008, 10:42 PM
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
August 17, 2008, 12:39 PM
Finally, Finally, ------ I found a SS, 2 3/4inch, Speed Six to go with my 3inch, Model-13, S&W's. :D

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
August 17, 2008, 12:39 PM
speed six

MCgunner
August 17, 2008, 01:02 PM
I had a Smith forcing cone split once. It happens. I'd get the Ruger.

woodsltc
August 17, 2008, 01:40 PM
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. :D

Don

MCgunner
August 17, 2008, 03:28 PM
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
August 17, 2008, 04:59 PM
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. Itís all fun and I trust any of them as defense weapons.

If you enjoyed reading about "S&W Model-13 vs. Ruger Speed Six" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!