Ruger Security-Six Barrel Blast Problem

Status
Not open for further replies.

Confederate

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
3,402
Location
Arlington, VA
Broken%20Security-Six.jpg

I've heard stories about the Ruger Security-Six blasting barrels as a result of improper lubrication. Does anyone know the details about this, how widespread it was and how long it took before the barrels failed? I wrote Ruger and asked about it and they told me to send in my Rugers and they'd check them out. The problem is, I've got too many to send (I got a number of them in all barrel lengths while I had my FFL).

My question is, how prevalent is the problem and how many rounds does it take to blast the barrels? Did Ruger ever publicize the issue?

..
 
I'm not aware a lubrication problem causing barrels to fail on the Security Six. And since Ruger no longer offers support/parts for the Security Six, I wouldn't send any back to them.

People have told me Ruger won't return Security Sixes if they need to be fixed, offering some form of a voucher toward the purchase of a new gun instead. But I have no first hand knowledge of that.
 
I sent in a Security Six about 2 years ago and was told they no longer had parts for repairs and was given a voucher towards another Ruger product. I purchased a GP 100 but it didn't compare to my Security Six in quality.
 
I've had a Service Six 38spl since 1976 with no issues. I can't say how many rounds I've put thru it, and I've never heard of the issue you mention.
 
Thank you for your replies. No, the Security-Six pictured isn't mine, but is one reputed to have had the problem. The Ruger employee that caused the problem used a lubricant that was not intended to be used when the barrel was crush-fit into the frame. The lubricant dried in such a way that shooting magnum rounds caused catastrophic failure in the barrel, causing it to separate.

When I contacted Ruger, they acknowledged the problem and said there was no way to identify, via serial number, which guns were likely to have the problem. It is very rare, but apparently they can remove the barrel, re-lube it, then replace it. But if one has many of these guns, it would be impractical.

I tried finding the photo again, but was unable to.

These guns are so good that, when I had my FFL, I bought them up whenever I found a good price. I'll probably start getting rid of them as I get up in years. I envy those who will get them as they're completely unfired and in their boxes. I hope I don't live to see the generation of kids who will sell their rights to own guns down the tubes. The schools, I think, are sowing the seeds now and expect to reap the results in one or two generations.

For now, I'm glad I don't have to buy and use the present line of Ruger GPs. I'm sure many people like them, but many have never had the great fortune of owning and using the old "6-series" revolvers.

RugerSecurity-SixTrio_3.jpg
Ruger Security-Six_1B.jpg
 
Wow. I have owned several of these revolvers, some for more than 20 years and have never had a problem nor heard of this problem. Most folks say the "six" line are some of the toughest service revolvers and most stand by them wholeheartedly.

This is very interesting.
 
I have ran some stiff loads through my Security Six with a 2.75" barrel. The gun is still solid.
 
Once in awhile you hear of an L frame smith with an improperly torqued barrel crush ring as well, resulting in a canted front sight and poor accuracy.....never seen one fail though. The good news is even if the barrel failed at this point, I would think it would be unlikely to cause injury- far less so than a failed chamber on an auto.
The interweb is full of pictures of exploded Glocks, yet nobody seems to consider them unsafe.
I say your odds are no better or worse than with any other mass produced gun, so......fuggettabouit!
 
Last edited:
I've been a member of the Ruger forum at least as long as I've been here, I don't recall ever hearing anyone mention a problem with the barrels on Security Sixes or any of the Sixes. I have two, a 2-3/4" and a 4", the 4" has been well put thru its paces, no issues with either.
 
IIRC, the problem was that the wrong lube somehow interfered with proper torquing of the barrel. When the barrel didn't torque up properly, the installer used greater force and cracked the barrel at the weak point behind the shoulder. Failure was not always evident to inspectors but showed up after some use. I had not heard which guns were involved, but would assume that it could be any Ruger made at that time.

Jim
 
It was a sad day when Ruger discontinued the Six series for the overweight, bloated and ugly GP series.

I agree the quality is nowhere near as good these days, and the so called "benefits" of the GP series never panned out in the real world. In truth, Bill Ruger stopped making them due to cost. The GP was a cheaper gun to build. In no way shape or form is it better than the old Six series.
 
S&W had a bunch of M64's (and some scattered in other Models) that sent the barrel down stream . This is all due to over torqueing the barrels and stress cracking them in front of the threads.
 
I have had many Security Six/Service Six/Speed Six series guns. This is the first I have heard of this problem

The pictured Gun looks like a good candidate for a Python barrel modification. Ruger/Colt "Couger"
Or the S&W with the Python barrel. "Smython"
 
As mentioned the problem was reported in Redhawks and was attributed to "stress corrosion cracking" following the use of lubricants with chlorinated solvents on stainless steel barrel threads.
 
In the 80s I ran over a thousand US Treasury +P+ rounds through my Service Six with zero problem. One could almost say the gun liked those rounds, more than my alternative S&W M 19 or M64 did anyway. I still have it and it still performs quite well. This would have been an industry wide shocker if someone had written about it in the 1980s. LoL IMO the stainless Service/Security Six series was probably the best of the medium frame ..38 or .357 service weapons made in the 20th century.
 
IIRC, the problem was that the wrong lube somehow interfered with proper torquing of the barrel. When the barrel didn't torque up properly, the installer used greater force and cracked the barrel at the weak point behind the shoulder. Failure was not always evident to inspectors but showed up after some use.
That's exactly what I heard. Is there a way to spot it on new guns to your knowledge?

Thanks to everyone else. Doesn't sound like I've got too much to worry about!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top