Rough rider

Status
Not open for further replies.
I carry a Heritage 3inch birds head grip in my tackle box ...

I picked up the same, 3” barrel & birds head grip, a couple of years ago too. I like the little range gun as a plinker but mine’s one of those that shoots a little left & right & high & low, at least w .22lr.

I’ve heard some say that if one of these (or a NAA revolver) has both .22lr and .22mag cylinders, it’s more likely set up for & more accurate with the .22mag. I’m not sure I’ve ever used the .22mag cylinder since I got it for cheap range fun. But it’s tin can accurate (not quarter accurate like a Ruger Mark anything), which is good enough.
 
With the the Ruger Wrangler being more available now, I think that the Heritage Rough Rider offers less than it once did.
The Wrangler uses similar materials (aluminum cylinder frame and zinc alloy grip frame) but it is better made and looks like it. Side by side the Wrangler has better fitting and a more quality appearance.
The price difference isn't really that significant either.
The Wrangler also uses unbreakable all coil springs like the Single Six and copies its' internal transfer bar design. In effect, it is an economy version of the Single Six.
The HRR uses traditional flat springs that have been known to break, but getting parts is easy and often free.
I also prefer the Cerakote finish to the paint finish on the HRR. Again it looks better.
Also, while much has been made of the availability of the .22 Magnum cylinder, I would question it's usefulness in a budget priced .22 revolver when 50 rounds costs over $13.00.
If you can afford to shoot this stuff on a regular basis then you can afford a Single Six.
Since its' mainly hunting ammo, as opposed to plinking ammo, how much is it used by rimfire revolver shooters? I owned a couple of Single Sixes and only ended up firing one or two boxes of .22 magnum.
Then there is the fact that the HRR barrel is held in place largely by a permanent thread locker cement.
Certainly it works and users have shot thousands of rounds with no problems. But some have experienced barrels loosening up sooner.
And HRR accuracy is sometimes reportedly very good on many guns and reportedly sometimes not.
The one advantage that that the HRR offers is options in sights and barrel length and grips, which is a factor.
But, I think that if the stock Wrangler suits your needs in barrel length and with fixed sights it is a better buy.
But for the price you can't really go wrong with an HRR I suppose.
It's a bargain-priced .22 and if it wears out sooner than a Single Six, who cares?
You got your moneys' worth out of it.
But, given a choice I would buy the Wrangler.
 
But for the price you can't really go wrong with an HRR I suppose.
It's a bargain-priced .22 and if it wears out sooner than a Single Six, who cares?
You got your moneys' worth out of it.
But, given a choice I would buy the Wrangler.

If they were the same price I might agree but I picked up 2 NIB HRRs for $112.00 each about a year ago. And around the same time bought my Wrangler and paid $189.00 which was the lowest price I've seen on them locally. I realize the cost difference isn't huge but for a lot of people it is still significant enough to save that money by going with the HRR.
They are both good guns for their respective price point. Neither of them are a Single Six even if one of them has some parts in common with the SS.
My guess is that if Ruger put out an exact copy of the HRR using the exact same methods and materials there would still be people running off at the mouth about how much better it was than the Heritage.
 
With the the Ruger Wrangler being more available now, I think that the Heritage Rough Rider offers less than it once did.
The Wrangler uses similar materials (aluminum cylinder frame and zinc alloy grip frame) but it is better made and looks like it. Side by side the Wrangler has better fitting and a more quality appearance.
The price difference isn't really that significant either.
The Wrangler also uses unbreakable all coil springs like the Single Six and copies its' internal transfer bar design. In effect, it is an economy version of the Single Six.
The HRR uses traditional flat springs that have been known to break, but getting parts is easy and often free.
I also prefer the Cerakote finish to the paint finish on the HRR. Again it looks better.
Also, while much has been made of the availability of the .22 Magnum cylinder, I would question it's usefulness in a budget priced .22 revolver when 50 rounds costs over $13.00.
If you can afford to shoot this stuff on a regular basis then you can afford a Single Six.
Since its' mainly hunting ammo, as opposed to plinking ammo, how much is it used by rimfire revolver shooters? I owned a couple of Single Sixes and only ended up firing one or two boxes of .22 magnum.
Then there is the fact that the HRR barrel is held in place largely by a permanent thread locker cement.
Certainly it works and users have shot thousands of rounds with no problems. But some have experienced barrels loosening up sooner.
And HRR accuracy is sometimes reportedly very good on many guns and reportedly sometimes not.
The one advantage that that the HRR offers is options in sights and barrel length and grips, which is a factor.
But, I think that if the stock Wrangler suits your needs in barrel length and with fixed sights it is a better buy.
But for the price you can't really go wrong with an HRR I suppose.
It's a bargain-priced .22 and if it wears out sooner than a Single Six, who cares?
You got your moneys' worth out of it.
But, given a choice I would buy the Wrangler.
With the the Ruger Wrangler being more available now, I think that the Heritage Rough Rider offers less than it once did.
The Wrangler uses similar materials (aluminum cylinder frame and zinc alloy grip frame) but it is better made and looks like it. Side by side the Wrangler has better fitting and a more quality appearance.
The price difference isn't really that significant either.
The Wrangler also uses unbreakable all coil springs like the Single Six and copies its' internal transfer bar design. In effect, it is an economy version of the Single Six.
The HRR uses traditional flat springs that have been known to break, but getting parts is easy and often free.
I also prefer the Cerakote finish to the paint finish on the HRR. Again it looks better.
Also, while much has been made of the availability of the .22 Magnum cylinder, I would question it's usefulness in a budget priced .22 revolver when 50 rounds costs over $13.00.
If you can afford to shoot this stuff on a regular basis then you can afford a Single Six.
Since its' mainly hunting ammo, as opposed to plinking ammo, how much is it used by rimfire revolver shooters? I owned a couple of Single Sixes and only ended up firing one or two boxes of .22 magnum.
Then there is the fact that the HRR barrel is held in place largely by a permanent thread locker cement.
Certainly it works and users have shot thousands of rounds with no problems. But some have experienced barrels loosening up sooner.
And HRR accuracy is sometimes reportedly very good on many guns and reportedly sometimes not.
The one advantage that that the HRR offers is options in sights and barrel length and grips, which is a factor.
But, I think that if the stock Wrangler suits your needs in barrel length and with fixed sights it is a better buy.
But for the price you can't really go wrong with an HRR I suppose.
It's a bargain-priced .22 and if it wears out sooner than a Single Six, who cares?
You got your moneys' worth out of it.
But, given a choice I would buy the Wrangler.
Old Stumpy, you have to realize that if Ruger made Wrangler 22LR/22WMR convertible model the Rough Rider's convertible model would either end up going the way of the Dodo or be a actual sub-$100 gun, however currently the RR has the 'edge' price wise and with the 22 WMR cylinder option even if folks have no interest in shooting 22 WMR in the RR.
 
Last edited:
I find it so amusing that Wrangler owners will bash the Magnum cylinder. All kinds of reasons that they are not necessary and blah blah blah. But I would bet a dollar to a doughnut that if Ruger did offer a magnum cylinder they would JUMP on it. And even if they did offer it, they would not be competitive in price to the Rough Rider.

Rough Rider with Ruger 357

npvCwyu.jpg
 
I find it so amusing that Wrangler owners will bash the Magnum cylinder. All kinds of reasons that they are not necessary and blah blah blah. But I would bet a dollar to a doughnut that if Ruger did offer a magnum cylinder they would JUMP on it. And even if they did offer it, they would not be competitive in price to the Rough Rider.

Rough Rider with Ruger 357

View attachment 933733
Nice there Ernie, heck I may have to buy a HRR 22LR/22WMR(unless I can find a Single Six 22 convertable) when the next COVID19 stimulus money comes.:thumbup:;)
 
Orange Cat: "The housing assembly for the ejector rod has worked a little loose...." Post #12

I had the ejector housing screw work loose on my HRR yesterday. This was after taking the HRR out again and shooting it and my Ruger MkII from sand bags on the bench for sight check at a 25yd bulleyes target, ten tounds each Rem HVHP. The Ruger group was a little tighter but both shot better than I can aim standing off hand.

Once home I took the ejector housing apart, cleaned, degreased the screw and screwhole, applied blue locktight and reassembled it. I'll eventually see if that fixed the problem. Bought the gun in 2018. It is easy to drop into the range bag as a take along, so it's been out often and shot with everything from .22 CB Short to CCI Stinger and shotshells.

I paid $124.95 for my HRR Jan 2018. It came with a Free NRA Membership card. 2019 I read the fine print out of boredom when returning the gun to its box and discovered the card was good for extending existing membership. So I am actualy out $84.99.
 
Last edited:
The Ruger Single-Six is a gun for many generations and costs a lot more for that reason. The Rough Rider is an inexpensive plinker that does its job. ...
This.

I think that snobbishness is a fundamental driver for most of the folks that deride less expensive items like the HRR.

I bought one (6½" .22RF/.22WMR) a few years ago as a plinker. I quickly decided that the word "Rough" in the name represented a dual reference, the second having to do with the fit & finish & design-quality. ;) Hooooeee ... this pup is a bit rough & cheaply made ... BUT ... I only paid, like, $150 NIB.

Even compared to the .22RF Herters/H.Schmidt Mod21 revolver that my dad bought for ~$28 in 1968, this HRR is a step down on the quality ladder ...

... but it does what it needs to do and does it more than acceptably well. :)

I think that Combloc firearms may have, to some degree, inured me to roughly-made firearms.
 
Last edited:
We've owned several and here's what I got to say.
First the negatives, it's low quality is very apparent if you've handled and own much higher end guns. Rugers especially (the Wrangler) really show you how cheaply made the Rough Rider is. Soft metal, mimed parts and a plastic ejector rod. It's only good for shooting .22. We've had both of ours break and no longer function properly. Bought them for $100 a piece but now they're only display guns. Because of this I really do not trust the Rough Rider. I'd much much rather get the Wrangler. I felt a Wrangler in a gun shop and was instantly amazed by it's superior quality.
The good. It's a cheap plinker that's perfect for a young teen, or for cheap quiet cowboying in your backyard. It has a traditional look to it (based on the SAA) and will go with anyones Henry H001 .22 (Granted, I'd still take the Wrangler over this). The safety is useful for teaching a young kid good safety discipline. The .22 Mag cylinder is a nice accessory to go with it.

Overall you are getting what you pay for in a newly manufactured gun. It's not gonna last you years though. Both of ours didn't last long at all.
 
Heir Kommt Die Sonne writes:

It's not gonna last you years though.

I bought my first one in November of 2012. Assuming it doesn't biodegrade away before November of this year, that's eight years. Pretty good start for what I paid.

So, it might be more about how they're used. I certainly don't shoot ten thousand rounds a year out of it, as I own far too many rimfire guns to shoot that many out of just one. I envy anyone who actually has the time and opportunity to get that many rounds through any single-action revolver each year. If, by some cataclysmic change in my universe I become able to do so, I'll break out the RSS when the HRR fails (maybe before; it is a nicer gun.)
 
I remember (and it was not too long ago) when they were $79.99 at Uncle Lees in Greenville KY. For an extra $10 you got one that came with the mag cylinder, and at $119.99 you got the mag cylinder and I think a cheap western style gun belt. This was around 1998 or so and at the time I was back and forth on whether I wanted the HRR or the Phoenix HP22 and ended up with the Phoenix. Those are still the cheapest guns on the market for their niche and honestly I can’t find any real fault with them at their price point. Sure some things could be better or nicer, but it would raise the price and what is cheap is functional so why bother. This was also about when Colt got out of the DA revolver game and I remember close outs on those, and when any bolt action deer rifle you wanted was $300 or less if you waited for a sale. Those were the days...
 
Interesting that you mention the Phoenix HPA. I have two of them and love em. Both mine shoot much better than the New LCPll I bought for a trainer for my short barrel guns. And not to mention I paid double for the gun. It was a coincidence that just the other day, I got a email from Buds saying they were back in stock. That did not last long, they sold out quick.
One thing nice about the Heritage is that they come in all different configurations, barrel lengths etc. I still want a Birds Head at some point. Heritage vs Wrangler war has been going on for some time. Both are nice guns and the Heritage for me has proven itself to be a very well built gun for the money. I really am not into the Cherry Coat on a Single Action gun. Others like it, and that is fine. Both of these guns are low cost plinkers. Really do not see why all the nonsense about this need to prove one is Better. Should be simple enough to just buy what you want. If I really was into the sport of shooting a Single action , then I would not even be talking about the Wrangle and get the Single 6 family. And I would get the convertible and be done with it.
 
HRR lovers are very thin-skinned, I think.
Even if you write a reasonably impartial comparison of the two guns, some still call it bashing and call you a snob.
But, I stand by my review.
I don't think that there is enough difference in price to warrant choosing the HRR over the Wrangler and I think that the Wrangler is a better gun.
You are free to disagree.
 
As soon as
HRR lovers are very thin-skinned, I think.
Even if you write a reasonably impartial comparison of the two guns, some still call it bashing and call you a snob.
But, I stand by my review.
I don't think that there is enough difference in price to warrant choosing the HRR over the Wrangler and I think that the Wrangler is a better gun.
You are free to disagree.
I find a used wrangler I will scoop it and find out
 
Here's the facts, as I see em:

I bought an HRR 6.5" in the early 2000's. It was a decent gun, or so I thought. Kept it a while, then sold it on when I wanted something else. Mine had a mag cylinder, and I think I used it twice to shoot up some free ammo. Later I bought another one, but sold it on later. I just can't abide the safety, but otherwise they're ok guns. Fine for traplines and tackleboxes, but they aren't target guns by any stretch.

Enter the Wrangler. Bought mine a year ago this month. Did some tweaking to it, and I like it well enough. No, I don't want a mag cylinder for it. WMR ammo is high enough with out squandering it in a hand gun. Only change I wish Ruger would make, is to come out with a 6.5" one. I think that'd sell well. Having said that, I just bought a used New Model Single Six today for $285. That's only $80 more than I gave for my Wrangler, and its got a 5.5" barrel and adjustable sights.

Is one better than the other? You be the judge.

Mac
 
Only change I wish Ruger would make, is to come out with a 6.5" one

Everyone has their own favorite single action barrel length.

They could offer a 6 1/2" barrel length for the Wrangler if enough people want it.
I can't see that increasing the price.
 
The first handgun that I ever owned was a J.P. Sauer & Sohn .22 single action .22 revolver, that I bought second or third hand when I was 17.
It came with a very well fitted one-piece walnut grip and was a full size well made copy of a SAA.
It was decently accurate and worked well.
I learned bullseye shooting in a basement High School range with it.
The only part that I replaced was the flat trigger/bolt spring that breaks eventually in all traditional single actions.
Interestingly, the entire revolver was made of a better zinc-aluminum alloy including the cylinder and barrel.
It used a steel barrel liner and steel chamber liners.
The cylinder notches were pretty worn after many, many rounds being fired, and probably due to previous users fanning it.
But, it still locked up well enough and the timing was good.
It's interesting that this 1960s alloy revolver preceded the HRR and Wrangler by so many years.
The point in all this is that the quality of manufacture was what made this revolver such a good one despite being made of an alloy.
 
With the the Ruger Wrangler being more available now, I think that the Heritage Rough Rider offers less than it once did.
The Wrangler uses similar materials (aluminum cylinder frame and zinc alloy grip frame) but it is better made and looks like it. Side by side the Wrangler has better fitting and a more quality appearance.
The price difference isn't really that significant either.
The Wrangler also uses unbreakable all coil springs like the Single Six and copies its' internal transfer bar design. In effect, it is an economy version of the Single Six.
The HRR uses traditional flat springs that have been known to break, but getting parts is easy and often free.
I also prefer the Cerakote finish to the paint finish on the HRR. Again it looks better.
Also, while much has been made of the availability of the .22 Magnum cylinder, I would question it's usefulness in a budget priced .22 revolver when 50 rounds costs over $13.00.
If you can afford to shoot this stuff on a regular basis then you can afford a Single Six.
Since its' mainly hunting ammo, as opposed to plinking ammo, how much is it used by rimfire revolver shooters? I owned a couple of Single Sixes and only ended up firing one or two boxes of .22 magnum.
Then there is the fact that the HRR barrel is held in place largely by a permanent thread locker cement.
Certainly it works and users have shot thousands of rounds with no problems. But some have experienced barrels loosening up sooner.
And HRR accuracy is sometimes reportedly very good on many guns and reportedly sometimes not.
The one advantage that that the HRR offers is options in sights and barrel length and grips, which is a factor.
But, I think that if the stock Wrangler suits your needs in barrel length and with fixed sights it is a better buy.
But for the price you can't really go wrong with an HRR I suppose.
It's a bargain-priced .22 and if it wears out sooner than a Single Six, who cares?
You got your moneys' worth out of it.
But, given a choice I would buy the Wrangler.
Well Stumpy, I'm glad to see that you've come around some on the Heritage and the options that they offer in terms of .22 Mag cylinders, adj fiber optic sights, 9 round cylinders, and barrel lengths were all factors as to why I bought mine. I agree tho that if someone is looking for a .22 LR single action, with 6 rd cylinder, fixed sights, and no preference on barrel lengths or grip styles to get the Wrangler.

I too can't say that I shoot .22 Mag in the single actions I have that also came with a .22 LR cylinder, but that was never the intention. The intention was when carrying I would use the .22 Mag and in the case of the two NAA's I've got, the .22 LR cylinders would also be carried, loaded, and basically act as speed loaders.

I don't really care if Ruger makes a .22 Mag cylinder for the Wranglers, they'd obviously have to stretch the frame to accommodate the length of of .22 Mag, but what I would like to see is Ruger take the Wrangler, make it a 5 shot if necessary, and chamber it for .32 H&R Mag and/or .38 Special.

At one point Heritage was making a .32 Mag on the same frame as the .22's, so I see no reason why Ruger can't do the same.
 
Well Stumpy, I'm glad to see that you've come around some on the Heritage and the options that they offer in terms of .22 Mag cylinders, adj fiber optic sights, 9 round cylinders, and barrel lengths were all factors as to why I bought mine.

If you really need these things it is an incentive to buy an HRR.
On a plinker though, I don't need rapid reloading, 9 round capacity, or fibre optic sights.
In fact I don't need or want these things on any single action revolver.

Barrel length options are nice, and I like 5 1/2", but I would be perfectly happy with the Wrangler 4 5/8" barrel, just as I am perfectly happy with the 4.2" barrel on my Ruger Bearcat.
And maybe Ruger will offer the 6 1/2" barrel since people seem to keep mentioning it.
I still think that the magnum cylinder is one of those things that people think that they want, but never actually use in most cases.
Spending $13.00+ a box on ammo just makes no sense for a .22 plinker.
It does kind of make sense with a Ruger Single Six with adjustable sights since some users might actually use it for handgun hunting and that $13.00+ price would not be as much of a deterrant if the price of the gun doesn't deter you.

In the end, perhaps HRR and Ruger are selling two different revolvers.

HRR is selling a very low priced .22 plinker that offers the options of a Ruger Single Six, but lacks the Ruger quality of manufacture or coil spring design superiority of a Single Six.

Ruger is offering a nearly equally low priced .22 revolver, without those options, but DOES retain the same Ruger quality of manufacture and the identical and superior coil spring design of the Single Six.
It's a Ruger for those who always wanted a Single Six but just can't afford one.

Since I don't need those bells and whistles in a .22 plinker, I would choose the quality and design of the Wrangler any day.
 
Last edited:
The disdain for cheap guns on internet forums and among certain people who believe that their money should only be spent on the absolute best because it will last 150 years is largely based on ego and hubris.

Sorry, but my experience has been very negative.
I've had four Taurus 9MM revolvers.
I bought 1, the other 3 were warranty replacements.
They finally offered me a 380 revolver.
The 380 I've had since April 2017, only because I don't shoot it.
I also have a Taurus PT22. It jams usually once every other mag or so.

I also have a Phoenix 22 it runs perfectly.

I feel this has nothing to do with hubris or ego.

Just my experience & 2¢ worth YMMV
 
Howdy

When they first came out I handled one.

I was not impressed, I thought they were pretty shoddily made.

I have three Single Sixes. All of them are Three Screws. They are all at least 50 years old.

poxqXYBKj.jpg




Call me a snob if you want, but with three Single Sixes I have no interest in the Rough Rider.

I got a chance to shoot a Wrangler the other day. It was a nice enough little gun, but frankly with my Single Sixes I doubt I will be buying one.

Regarding a Magnum cylinder, I have mag cylinders for two of my Single Sixes and never use them. 22 Mags are too loud and too expensive for my tastes.

If I want more power than 22 Long Rifle in a Ruger Single Action I will shoot one of my centerfire Three Screws.

44 Mag/44 Special on the left, the other two are 357 Mag/38 Special.

pmX5NsPaj.jpg
 
Sorry, but my experience has been very negative.
I've had four Taurus 9MM revolvers.
I bought 1, the other 3 were warranty replacements.
They finally offered me a 380 revolver.
The 380 I've had since April 2017, only because I don't shoot it.
I also have a Taurus PT22. It jams usually once every other mag or so.

I also have a Phoenix 22 it runs perfectly.

I feel this has nothing to do with hubris or ego.

Just my experience & 2¢ worth YMMV
You got some bad Taurus guns, that happens, but those 9mm Taurus revolvers don't represent every inexpensive gun in the world.

I too have a PT22 and it has jam issues, however I think it's the mag springs being weak. I also have the Phoenix and it's a great gun, but it's designed around shooting standard velocity 40 grain .22 LR, so it's not difficult to make it a good gun when you've limited the ammo recommended to shoot in it.

I'm not suggesting for you it's related to ego or hubris, but for many they feel that the most something costs the better it must be and that is not always the case.
 
Howdy

When they first came out I handled one.

I was not impressed, I thought they were pretty shoddily made.

I have three Single Sixes. All of them are Three Screws. They are all at least 50 years old.

View attachment 934232




Call me a snob if you want, but with three Single Sixes I have no interest in the Rough Rider.

I got a chance to shoot a Wrangler the other day. It was a nice enough little gun, but frankly with my Single Sixes I doubt I will be buying one.

Regarding a Magnum cylinder, I have mag cylinders for two of my Single Sixes and never use them. 22 Mags are too loud and too expensive for my tastes.

If I want more power than 22 Long Rifle in a Ruger Single Action I will shoot one of my centerfire Three Screws.

44 Mag/44 Special on the left, the other two are 357 Mag/38 Special.

View attachment 934233
I am a former SS6 owner and will have one again. Prolly wrangler too. I love the lil 22s but I got luck and got theses super cheap. So these will be beaters and trainers till I got more coin for guns.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top