Discussion in 'Handguns: Revolvers' started by <*(((><, May 2, 2019.
nice to see the triggers good. one video the guy used a trigger kit, think it was 2 1/2 pounds then.
I’m terrible at judging pull weight, it’s not lawyer heavy by any means but it’s not a mosquito fart either. I know that helps you all not in the least. I’ll have to get the pull gauge and check it.
I know many just take one leg off the spring To lower the weight but I don’t like doing that.
If you test any magnet against the cylinder, which is known to be solid steel, and the barrel, you should be able to tell. If it feels just like the cylinder, I think you can be sure it’s solid steel.
heavy does not bother me, so long the pull is smooth. i was raised on surplus guns, so bad trigger are not a big deal. the coverage is good, i would like to see how long the ceracoat last in front of the cylinder. i have seen may rifle where the bolt and locking lugs were coated and not worn off.
Magnets stick to the barrel and front sight post very hard to both. So it is sleeved or solid steel. The barrel also feels cooler to the touch than the ejector housing which is non magnetic. I think it’s solid steel.
I’m leaning towards solid steel
That looks like a new twist on an old favorite. A great value on a .22 revolver. Something to stock up on if you like single actions, or have kids or grandkids to teach some day.
Great review and photos!
Overall I would say the gun's finish has an industrial grade appearance to it. Not necessarily a negative thing just that it might take a little time to get use to it as opposed to the usual blued/stainless steel models. Just your basic, no-frills plinker that would be fun to have around. Kind of makes me think that if Iver Johnson or Harrington and Richardson were still making inexpensive revolvers this is what they would look like.
Definitely appears Ruger has a winner with this one and I hope we see maybe something in a .22 Magnum or .327 Magnum in the near future.
I don't know the characteristics of Cerakote, but I wonder if some time with a rag and some polishing compound would take off the rough finish and put a shine on it?
Has anyone ever tried this on other Cerakote coated guns?
Thanks, glad that I was able to get one and post some detailed pictures and information for others. I agree it would be nice to see like you said a .22 Mag, and 327 Mag version.
I don't have any experience with cerakote, this is my first cerakoted firearm; but I have had others with whom I know that have them and they really like the properties of cerakote (durability, hideability, weatherability, etc.). It would be nice for someone with some experience to give some insight into this. And I don't want to make it sound like it's that rough, it just has a very slight roughness about it, really only enough where you notice it because it'll pick up grime off one's hands, it may vary from Wrangler to Wrangler I do not know.
Here are some reviews that I've come across:
The Truth about Guns - https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2019/04/josh-wayner/gun-review-ruger-wrangler-single-action-22-revolver/
In your bottom video the reviewer stated the barrel is steel. I went to my local Academy to see if they had any in stock and they didn't. But I bet they get some pretty quick. I really need to stop reading threads on this gun. I don't need a new gun. What am I doing to myself?
Terrific photos. Nice and sharp and in focus.
You stop that right now. You need a new gun! I need a new gun! We all need a new gun!
Great review, Luke. Thank you very much.
I think it’s at the top of page two I put a magnet on the barrel and the attraction to it felt about the same as the attraction to the steel cylinder. If I had to make a guess it would be that the barrel is steel.
As soon as I can handle one I'll be buying one.
Okay -- I'm convinced!
I just bought a Marlin 1894 Cowboy in .45 Colt which I have not shot yet due to inclement weather.
But it needs a companion SAA revolver in .45 Colt.
And, that requires a .22 LR revolver to practice shooting economically.
So, a Wrangler is essential, necessary, and practical.
It's simply common sense.
Hmmmm...that .44 magnum 1894 looks pretty good too.
Yes I caught that. So I am certain the barrel is steel. An aluminum sleeve screwed into the frame wouldn't be very sturdy. It just makes sense to use a one piece unit. Using a sleeved barrel does do one thing. It allows the manufacturer to get the barrel lined up with the frame. A problem S&W has had for awhile.
I wonder if anyone who owns one of these has checked to see if the cylinders for single six will fit the Wrangler? If they do its easy to find 22 mag cylinders for the single six on ebay and gunbroker. If and when I get one of these that will be the first thing I check. I would love it if the mag cylinder will fit this gun.
Thanks for the great review and the superb photos. Ruger should hire you for something; you've certainly talked me into getting one.
Could be. But, they might be a bit longer to scotch that.
In one of the reviews at stated the frame window on both guns are the same. The single six cylinder was .022 bigger in diameter.
Looks like that's within tolerances of a Single Six with aluminum grip frame. Usually, only the stainless Single Sixes have the grip frame ground to match the cylinder frame.
I just get some needle nose pliers and bend both legs of the trigger spring to reduce pull. That way both legs are still on the spring studs.
See this for inspiration. http://cylindersmith.com/triggerspring.html
Separate names with a comma.