Ruger Security-Six 6-inch: In Love Again

For the past few years I've been greatly favoring my shorter barrel Security-Sixes; however, a few days ago I packed the shorter 4-inch and 2.75-inchers away, deciding they might be distracting. I wanted to see just how attached I could get to the 6-inch model. (I also needed to work on the action as I had my 4-incher.)

I'd completely forgotten how nice these guns were and wondered how many of you here use them on a regular basis, carry them hunting or use them outdoors? I'd been thinking about them with all the GP-100 posts and threads I'd seen here and elsewhere. It's bough back many memories of the first 6-inch model I bought back in 1978, I think. The reason I got it was mostly out of ignorance. Many gun hacks back then were claiming that you weren't really getting magnum velocities out of barrels less than six inches! I therefore sold my 4-inch S&W 13 (which I've always regretted) and bought a stainless steel Ruger Security-Six 6-inch, which was a purchase I, at the time, did not fully appreciate, especially with those skinny wood grips!

Anyway, if you have any photos of yours, please post them.

Jim in S.A. said:

I only have the one in four-inch, and it's one of my favorites, if not my most favorite handgun. Would love to find one like yours. What kind of grips are on that, do you know? I rather like them.

Click to expand...

Those are the standard wood grips sold back in the late 80s. The great thing about the 6-inch model is that you can carry it camping, hiking, fishing and hunting. It's as accurate and light as the S&W 66, but is much stronger. The GP-100s are way too heavy for my taste and the balance is horrendous. If I wanted a heavy competition magnum, I'd go for a S&W 686. As for an outdoor .357, all you can do now is get a Security-Six or S&W 66 used, or perhaps Taurus has something, but everything has lugs on the barrel now.

Which one would would you rather take on the ol' trail? I love the S&W 686. It's a fine gun, especially the no-dash series. But I'm unhappy that S&W doesn't at least offer lighter models with no underlugs.



I wish S&W would reissue a reinforced 66 with a slightly larger cylinder and forcing cone.

For most people, the 4-inch model will always be ideal, but at least I'd carry a 6-inch on occasion.

bannockburn said:

Never had a 6" barreled Security Six; always preferred the handiness and balance of the 4" barrel. Your's look great! Thanks for sharing.

Click to expand...

DougW said:

I have never fired a 6" Security Six, but they seam to balance very well. I have a blue 1976 Security Six and a stainless 4" Service Six that I love. Always on the lookout for a 2.5" and a 6".

Click to expand...

Yes, I've neglected my 6-incher over the years and have generally just grabbed my 4-incher on my trips to the range. And I also enjoy my 2.75-inch, but I've just sort of neglected my 6-inch and have kept it tucked in the safe. But I put up all the others and am now snapping and polishing it, hoping to improve the action. In so doing, I'm coming to appreciate the size, weight and power of the gun.

Back in the 30s, when the 357 was developed, the Highway Patrol had been looking for a handgun caliber that packed more power than the anemic 38 Spc. The 38 caliber, back then, was centered on a large, lead round-nose bullet that frequently lacked the power to puncture tires or, from shorter barrels, to penetrate car bodies. So the 357 was just the ticket. But the gun that fired it was the large N-frames. Still, the HP was thrilled with it. The velocity of the bullets would blow out tires, penetrate the vehicles and back seats. Although I love those older revolvers, Bill Jordan, an old Louisiana Border Patrol officer, had the right idea by making them smaller and lighter, and this the Models 19/13/66/65 were rolled into production. Bill Ruger, it's said, designed the Security-Six from scratch using an extremely rugged solid-frame to beef it up for sustained use with full power loads.



That would have been a great ending to the story, but somewhere along the line corporate decisions were made, and when S&W beefed up its anemic 357 line, Ruger followed suit. And since Smith added underlugs (hoping to compete with the Colt Python), Ruger added underlugs to its line of revolvers. I don't remember if Bill Ruger was alive at the time, but I tend to doubt it. (I can't believe he would have approved of removing the steel grip from the frame.)

Anyway, although I'm not happy with the newer design, I'll always have my older 6-series guns. Everyone else is on their own. And if you don't have one, I recommend you get one. And if you have one, don't get rid of it.

I'd really have liked to have asked him why he did what he did. It's never made sense. It's like cars. They're all too low in the front and have painted bumpers. Most people I know don't like them that way, but no one has a choice. If you don't like it, tough...buy a ten year old car and have it fixed up. Fortunately, there are plenty of Security-Sixes on the market. I know a lot of folks like their GPs, but they probably don't carry them out on the trail, or camping. And they ought to give people the option of carrying lightweight magnums. The 357 is such a great caliber that people really need it out in the wilderness. The GPs seem to be mainly target pistols.