question about heritage 22lr/22mag 6.5in barrel 6 shot or 9 shot revolvers

[midland man]

I am looking at heritage 22 combo pistol with 6.5in barrel the standard model or the 9 shot model to shoot all the 22lr shells and the extra cylinder for 22 mag shells so noticing these are made in America and are reasonably priced are these good pistols? so guys can you give me your experiences with them and how you liked them and did they shoot and function good? thanks!

 

[bikerdoc]

I have had mine for years. A good trainer for newbies, a good plinker and inexpensive to boot.

 

[WestKentucky]

Nice enough but they are not built to last forever. For the money they are a good deal and I intend to pick one up in a short barreled Birdshead configuration...I had one a few years back and sold it when I got my long barreled single six. The actions are incomparably swayed towards the ruger which is twice the price, but the rough rider was a strong competitor for accuracy. I also like the safety on them which most people never notice.

 

[jcwit]

I have one and also a single six. I use and shoot them both.

The Heritage is made of cast non ferrous metal, but then it did not cost 3 to 4 hundred.

 

[CajunBass]

I had one, kept it a while, and like a lot of guns, sold it. Nothing wrong with it I just had other 22's and didn't really need it. I got it just say I'd had one. Good little plinker/knock around gun.

 

[22-rimfire]

You get reports that they function well and shoot reasonably accurately and you get reports stating the opposite. If I wanted one, I'd buy one. Have too many other 22 revolvers to be very interested in one when I know they aren't as good as a Ruger in terms of construction. They also aren't as expensive as Rugers either.

 

[frankiestoys]

The one I owned shot pretty good I really liked shooting the .22 mag out of it. The finish is crap , and almost like it was spray paint ...it rubs off quickly and is far from smooth. WTS there fun little little plinker's . If you can spend a little more i just picked up a Rossi Plinker for just over 300$ and its a much better pistol no mag cylinder though .

 

[Onward Allusion]

I've had both the Ruger Single Six and the Heritage RR. Honestly, they're both about the same in terms of functionality. Accuracy is probably better than me. The RR's are fun plinkers. They work. Finish is real thin. Metal is some kind of zinc alloy, although they do have a couple of models that have steel frames. I'd probably stick to the 22LR cylinder and use the 22 mag cylinder sparingly.

 

[ScratchnDent]

I have one. I love it. It is what it is, an inexpensive gun with a lousy finish, but it shoots fine and has a better trigger than it deserves. It has eaten many, many thousands of rounds and never hiccuped.

 

[aarondhgraham]

I bought one as a gift for a friend,,,

I have one. I love it. It is what it is, an inexpensive gun with a lousy finish, but it shoots fine and has a better trigger than it deserves. It has eaten many, many thousands of rounds and never hiccuped.

Possibly the best description of a Heritage that I've ever read.

The one I bought for Sarah is a hoot,,,
I chose the 4.5" barrel for her,,,
She hits very well with it.

It's total cost was only $174.01 out the door,,,
I don't think there is anything better near that price point.

Aarond

.

 

[Waveski]

My son has one , a single action .22. Surprisingly good shooter , but prone to mechanical issues.

 

[Schwing]

I have been eying these for a while for my little girls to plink with. The one thing I find interesting is that it is the only revolver I have ever seen with a safety on it.

 

[il.bill]

My wife and I had two in .22LR and sold one to my nephew. They are not a bad value for what they cost. It is hard for me to imagine passing a Heritage Rough Rider down to the next generation or two of family after years of good service (like a Ruger Single Six, for example) but then they sell for well under $200 new out the door. I consider them to be a decent 'bang for the buck'.

My range buddy ordered a .22 magnum cylinder for his from Heritage and it is a nice shooting handgun.

I have to admit that I actually kind of like the safety. It is a reassuring feature to have available when teaching a first time shooter how to load the single action revolver by moving the hammer to half cock.

 

[MedWheeler]

I have the 4.75-inch barrel six-shooter. Like others have pointed out, finish isn't stellar, but mine has a surprisingly-smooth action. Even at home, once I pick it up and fiddle with it, it's hard to put down.

At the range, it does pretty much what I ask of it, and does it slowly enought that I cannot burn through precious rimfire ammo too quickly. Fun to load and unload because of the, well, "Heritage" factor.

And, they're inexpensive enough that, if you get one and don't really like it, you're not out too much. I'd been kicking it around for a while and, since the urge wouldn't go away, I decided I'd better got ahead with it.

 

[dscampbell]

I have a ruger single six in .22LR and picked up a rough rider .22LR/.22 mag combo as I wanted the ability to use .22 magnum for pest control on the ranch mainly opossums, raccoons, and dogs. The RR is lite and carries easily. Accuracy is acceptable for my need.

 

[Yarddog]

As stated, Not great on lasting ability. Manual states, No Fanning .. As far a a plinker taking care of it is a must ; )
Y/D

 

[luxone]

I had one of these for a long time. Used it to introduce both of my daughters to shooting. Always worked flawlessly.

 

[Old Fuff]

Should you decide to buy one of these I strongly suggest that you stick with 6 shots.

In the 9-shot version the distance between chambers and carry-up (the amount of rotation between chambers) is shorter. This doesn't give the cylinder bolt (the part that locks the cylinder so the chamber can't move out of alignment with the bore) much time to drop down and unlock, and then pop up and lock the next chamber as it turns into place. A little wear and you may have problems. In this instance, the 6-shot is more forgiving.

Given the choice I'd rather buy a used Ruger Single Six over a new Heritage, but if you have decided to "buy new" they offer good value for a modest amount of money in the short term, but less so over a longer one.

The really important question is how much will you use it; a little, some or a whole lot.

 

[MedWheeler]

Regarding the "longevity" concerns of these revolvers, has anyone here actually had one long enough to say they just "plumb wear out" faster than most others?

I'm just wondering because I really don't know how long they've been around, and have never heard of one just having been so yet.

I have other "sub-par" guns I've had for going on thirty years with no discernible wear, but I don't run tens of thousands of rounds through any one of my my guns. If a $200 gun lasts me thirty years, it doesn't owe me anything.

The frame on the HRR does indeed seem a little thin for serious .22WMR pounding by the thousands, but should be plenty sturdy for .22LR and lighter.

But, as a generation-to-generation heirloom? I don't really seek that in any of my purchases. Won't be around to worry about it.

Olf Fuff advice about the six-shooter version that I have heard before, and it makes sense.

 

[Old Fuff]

Regarding the "longevity" concerns of these revolvers, has anyone here actually had one long enough to say they just "plumb wear out" faster than most others?

The design goes back to the Colt Frontier Scout, that was introduced in 1957 and intended (and priced) to compete with Ruger's Single Six.

At the time it represented the least expensive (dare I say "cheap") way to make a revolver. The frame and handle/trigger guard were cast from zinc alloy and some internal parts such as the hand and cylinder bolt were punch press stampings. The ejector tube was literally made from a piece of tubing. In terms of quality it didn't come close to the Ruger, but Colt's top brass believed that anything stamped with their pony would be a top seller. They also used it as a basis for many commemorative issues that were popular at the time, and for this purpose they were acceptable because they were seldom used as shooters.

From a shooting perspective the only thing they have to offer is lowest price, and given what they are vs. cost do represent a good value for those who will treat them gently and shoot relatively little. But trade-in value is very low, especially after they become finish worn. Internal springs (unlike Ruger's) are flat, not coil - and more prone to breakage.

As they say, "you get what you pay for," and that can be seen from both sides of the coin, (pardon the pun).

I will suggest again that any potential buyer check out the price on used Ruger's before they decide which way to jump. A little more money will hurt in the short term, but likely pay off in the long run.

 

[MedWheeler]

A little more money will hurt in the short term, but likely pay off in the long run.

I agree, to a point.

But, for some, how long a run a fellow needs is the deciding factor.

Were I an 80-year old man with no apparent heirs I cared about, I'd not be needing a three-generation gun..

But, at my current age (a bit over half that), I do appreciate the Ruger Police Service Six I inherited from my dad, and is on my hip at the moment.

But, for my needs (no, desires, as I have no need for one), my HRR will serve me well.)

 

[CraigC]

Were I an 80-year old man with no apparent heirs I cared about, I'd not be needing a three-generation gun..

As an 80yr old man, I would not want to be spending my last days with the cheapest revolver possible, if I could help it.

Regarding the "longevity" concerns of these revolvers, has anyone here actually had one long enough to say they just "plumb wear out" faster than most others?

They've been around plenty long enough but I've never heard of anyone shooting them much. Most just put several hundred to a couple thousand rounds through one. I've got probably 20,000-30,000rds through a 51yr old Single Six and you can't do that with a Heritage.

The frame on the HRR does indeed seem a little thin for serious .22WMR pounding by the thousands, but should be plenty sturdy for .22LR and lighter.

Makes no difference, both cartridges operate at the same pressure.

 

[Old Fuff]

I will suggest again that any potential buyer check out the price on used Ruger's before they decide which way to jump. A little more money will hurt in the short term, but likely pay off in the long run.

It may have gone unnoticed, but the comparison I suggested was between a used Ruger Single Six vs. a new Heritage Rough Rider. I have seen instances where this might be less then $100. I also wasn't thinking in terms of multi-generations, but rather service life and trade-in value between the two.

Both will last a long time if they are gently handled and not extensively used (both in terms of shooting and dry firing). When circumstances are different the Ruger's better construction offers advantages, and if the used Ruger is not abused it is quite possible to recover most if not the entire purchase price, even over a relatively short time. This may also happen with a Heritage revolver, but it is less likely.

Some folks will buy for the same amount of money, a used higher brand automobile rather a lower brand new one. They do this in the belief that what they get is better quality while the original buyers eats what can be substantial deprecation over what they paid. Others point to the (supposedly) better warrantee on the new one. Both can make good points.

What all of this comes to is a matter of perceptions.