Ruger 44 mag flat top.

[Hardcast]

Actually, all the 44 Flattops were on the larger Ruger frame, same size as the Super, 30 Carbine, 45 Colts and 41 Mags. One of the main differences between it and the Super, besides the ears to improve sight protection, was the unfluted cylinder of the Super. This one change made the Super quite a bit stronger in the cylinder area. I took a 30 Carbine cylinder, had it rebored for 44 WCF for shooting black powder loads and it works great in my 44 Flattop.
McLintock

I strongly disagree with you. If a fluted and non-fluted cylinder are the same caliber and the same diameter, there is NO difference in strength. The weakest (thinnest) points of the cylinder are the bolt notches. Ask me how I know.....

[GOPHER SLAYER]

Me too. When Ruger brought out his first 44MAG pistol he only had one center fire frame size and it was originally designed for the .357 cartridge.

[Nueces]

Ruger's first 44 prototype was indeed made on their 357 frame. It blew up in factory testing, which led to the larger frame design. All commercial Ruger 44 Flat Tops were made on this larger frame.

[DougGuy]

Chamber wall thickness being the same, chamber web thickness being the same, strength of the cylinders is the same regardless of flutes. And it was correctly pointed out that the weak point is indeed the bolt cuppets being right on top of the chamber.

[McLintock]

Ok, I was just trying to make the point of what Nueces just said as it sounded to me like frame size was being blamed for the aforementioned blow ups after the guns got into the publics hands. I don't know if Ruger changed the location of bolt stops on the Super's or the other large frame guns as they brought them out, haven't checked that, but all the cylinders of the large frame guns are 1.72" in diameter on the cartridge head end of the cylinder, so any cylinder of the same caliber should have the same wall thickness within a few thousands. I would guess most, if not all of the blow ups mentioned by Gofher Slayer were due to human error, but I'm not putting any money on it one way the other.
McLintock

[GOPHER SLAYER]

Ok, I was just trying to make the point of what Nueces just said as it sounded to me like frame size was being blamed for the aforementioned blow ups after the guns got into the publics hands. I don't know if Ruger changed the location of bolt stops on the Super's or the other large frame guns as they brought them out, haven't checked that, but all the cylinders of the large frame guns are 1.72" in diameter on the cartridge head end of the cylinder, so any cylinder of the same caliber should have the same wall thickness within a few thousands. I would guess most, if not all of the blow ups mentioned by Gofher Slayer were due to human error, but I'm not putting any money on it one way the other.
McLintock

If the blow ups were caused by human error why did Ruger come out with a much bigger and stronger pistol? I have owned both. One with the smaller frame which was a pleasure to wear on your hip and the SBH which was a boat anchor. They are not the same size. Elmer Keith warned Bill Ruger that the first Ruger 44 pistol frame was too small. Guys, I was around when all this was happening and I remember Keith writing about it and I saw the blown up pistols as I mentioned.

[Dale53]

I would like to respectfully disagree with the statements above that allege “weakness” in the Original Ruger Flattop .44 Magnum. It simply isn’t true. Bill Ruger, against the advice of Elmer Keith had two or three prototypes built on the .357 Magnum Flattop frame. They failed in testing. None of these went on sale to the public. The .44 flattop’s as made were plenty strong. They were just too light and uncomfortable to shoot for many people. Here’s the REAL story:

https://gunblast.com/Hamm_44-Flattop.htm

FWIW,
Dale53

[smkummer]

https://images.app.goo.gl/n2sdB2UaZmRmJjbb9 This was the vintage ad I was looking for. The 44 frame was bigger.

[McLintock]

Before we leave the beautiful 44 Flattops, we should show a few of them, so here's mine. The top one is a first year one, shipped in December 1956, ser #5XX, while the bottom one is one of the last ones shipped, November 1962, Ser#297XX, and it has one of the just put out XR-3RED grip frames, which Ruger used from then on. Thiis made it a little easier to shoot but not as good as the Super. The middle one is a 10 Incher from somewhere in between, Ser#18XXX.

McLintock

[onelight]

Before we leave the beautiful 44 Flattops, we should show a few of them, so here's mine. The top one is a first year one, shipped in December 1956, ser #5XX, while the bottom one is one of the last ones shipped, November 1962, Ser#297XX, and it has one of the just put out XR-3RED grip frames, which Ruger used from then on. Thiis made it a little easier to shoot but not as good as the Super. The middle one is a 10 Incher from somewhere in between, Ser#18XXX.

McLintock

Very nice !

[contender1]

OOOOHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!! A transition FT44!!!!!!!!! NICE! In fact all 3 are desirable 44's!

This made me dig out a couple of pictures.
Here is a rare salesman give away,, a toy,, that was used to help introduce the Ruger Blackhawk 44 mag,, in 1956.

[dogrunner]

You fella's really hit the nostalgia button with this thread!!

I just wish I could locate my first FT .44........#22362 that I got screwed out of by a local dealer.........I'd left the gun with him w/instructions to send it to Ruger for a refinish when I entered the army..........I expected to get it back after basic and AIT but kept getting a run around from that man.....only reason I used him was that I'd bought the piece new from his shop & thought I could trust him......not so.....Finally, after griping to my Dad about the situation he took it on himself to rectify the situation.........visited that dealer and apparently promised a small claims suit from what I heard. Came home about an hour later and tossed me a spankin' NIB FT..............albeit with an inch shorter bbl...

Story later came out that the D had sent the piece to a local re blue facility and a friend wrote me saying the guy had it in his display case for sale.....I was too damn poor to redeem it then, but I'll always wish I had.

I liked that 7.5 tube on the original gun so much that when I could I sent it to Ruger for a re bbl.....also told them to stick an unfluted cylinder on it as well.....and that's the configuration it's in to this day.......friend of mine managed to lose the original fluted cylinder in a car wreck in Alaska.........talk about unobtainium, try finding one of those!

I truly could not guess just how much game has fallen to that old gun......snowshoe hare, black bear, porkers here in Fl. and innumerable reptiles........And I'd add that the full bore loads never did one damn thing for me except to add to my hearing loss and a sore wrist.............Specials are the answer for light hunting and a good cast around 1150 will do anything you need to do with a handgun.

Compared to today's version of that design......OK, but nothing special in my book........and I despise the transfer bar safety Rube Goldberg design in spades.

I'm 78 now, not planning to leave anytime soon, but that gun will be with me till it's over and with no sons I guess a favorite nephew can look forward to one hulluva gift!



Meant to mention one other aspect 'bout that crappy dealer. After I got out of the Army he got wind of it and billed me the difference between the gun he'd given my Dad and the old one...............I challenged him to legal battle if he really wanted to see some business damage!

[Hardcast]

dogrunner: A most excellent post. I enjoy reading about peoples experiences, both good and bad. Thanks for sharing with us.

[contender1]

dogrunner,, I checked the list of 7-1/2" 44 FT's on the Ruger Forum. That serial number isn't listed,, so it's not out there in collectors hands that share with us.

I'm assuming all this happened before 1968? I ask because a polite call to the ATF about that dealer would have potentially brought down his house.

[dogrunner]

Thanks for the kind comments 'bout my musing. We've all been thru the 'ones that never shoulda' got away', and that was one of mine. In terms of time and the ATF........not back then I'm afraid. That incident took place in the spring of 1963 and for better or worse (plus better in my book) that alphabet org. wasn't even a shadow of what it morphed into.

I only hope that old gun wound up with someone that appreciated it as much as I did tho. I'd nickle and dime saved up for that piece & bought it as an 18th BD present for myself.............hell, back then 96 bucks was a real fortune, y'know.

[contender1]

Understand all too well,,,,,,,,,,!