Advice/Experience with Colt SAA/SAA Derivatives?

[VariableRecall]

That depends a bit on which .45 Colt. (?) Years ago the bore size for .45 Colt was .454". Today you'll have difficulty finding one not bored to .452". So, I'd say that if it's a recently manufactured Colt or clone .453" would work just fine. In an older revolver with a .454" bore it might be a little loose, but still might prove satisfactory. Like opinions, bores vary.

Thanks! I think that if I were to get one, My budget would be around $420-$600. Brand new would be nice, but a used Convertible Blackhawk seems to be the best option in terms of price.

From what I see from all of this, I can still get all the quirks of half-cock gate loading goodness without dealing with the imminent danger of ND's with Ruger's transfer bar system. Of course, my brother and I will likely use the same disciplined reloading as if it were the older models, just for safety's sake.

[leadeye]

A refurbished, but still shooting 38-40 from 1902.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

VariableRecall--I'm having just a bit of a problem following what you're saying-- but that's probably because I'm a relic. If I'm reading you correctly, you're claim or insinuation is that a newer Ruger with a transfer bar system is (I'm guessing that ND means Negligent Discharges) more dangerous that the older model with the half cock system? That's news to me. Ruger advertised it as being (and I believe) the transfer bar system to be much safer than the original model. That's also my opinion, although I've never had a ND with either version. True, it's less authentic, and less appealing to fans of the Old West, but if you're drawing back the hammer on the original version past the half cock position to full cock and your thumb slips off the hammer spur the gun may fire. On the other hand, the transfer bar isn't all the way up to transfer the hammer blow unless the hammer is at full cock, and the gun won't fire. So the story goes, Ruger lost a big legal settlement to a blockhead who was playing quick draw with the original version. The hammer slipped out from under his thumb before the revolver had cleared leather, and shot him in the leg. No one but the plaintiff's lawyers felt sorry for the guy, but it caused Ruger to redesign the Blackhawk. I've got a 7 1/2" Blackhawk, and confidently carry it with all chambers loaded. Of course, there are other old guy traditionalists that only load five chambers, but it's habit. You might have difficulty in finding an old model Blackhawk that hasn't been factory converted to the transfer bar system, as Ruger has offered this service for years and even returns your old replaced parts in a little baggie. If the old model is what your heart desires, then by all means follow the old formula of load one, skip one, load four, fully cock the hammer and lower it on an empty chamber. As for the Colt and the clones, that is a must follow system. For your price range you should be able to get a mighty nice revolver.

[VariableRecall]

VariableRecall--I'm having just a bit of a problem following what you're saying-- but that's probably because I'm a relic. If I'm reading you correctly, you're claim or insinuation is that a newer Ruger with a transfer bar system is (I'm guessing that ND means Negligent Discharges) more dangerous that the older model with the half cock system? That's news to me. Ruger advertised it as being (and I believe) the transfer bar system to be much safer than the original model. That's also my opinion, although I've never had a ND with either version. True, it's less authentic, and less appealing to fans of the Old West, but if you're drawing back the hammer on the original version past the half cock position to full cock and your thumb slips off the hammer spur the gun may fire. On the other hand, the transfer bar isn't all the way up to transfer the hammer blow unless the hammer is at full cock, and the gun won't fire. So the story goes, Ruger lost a big legal settlement to a blockhead who was playing quick draw with the original version. The hammer slipped out from under his thumb before the revolver had cleared leather, and shot him in the leg. No one but the plaintiff's lawyers felt sorry for the guy, but it caused Ruger to redesign the Blackhawk. I've got a 7 1/2" Blackhawk, and confidently carry it with all chambers loaded. Of course, there are other old guy traditionalists that only load five chambers, but it's habit. You might have difficulty in finding an old model Blackhawk that hasn't been factory converted to the transfer bar system, as Ruger has offered this service for years and even returns your old replaced parts in a little baggie. If the old model is what your heart desires, then by all means follow the old formula of load one, skip one, load four, fully cock the hammer and lower it on an empty chamber. As for the Colt and the clones, that is a must follow system. For your price range you should be able to get a mighty nice revolver.

I didn't mean to confuse you. I meant that the transfer bar system on modern reproductions is good, and would leave a modern margin for safety that I would prefer.

I was also meaning to say that I won't become LESS cautious with my handling if we did have a transfer bar. I didn't know about that lawsuit but that huge engraving on modern Rugers really tells a story.

Transfer bar or not, I'm planning on learning traditional safe handling procedures for the piece. It won't be the end of the world if I get one without a transfer bar either. I prefer to have piece of mind that there is a bit of metal to help protect me from something terrible happening. Not planning on "Fan Firing" either, that feels a little rude to do to the thing.

[Outpost75]

Cylinder throats on both my Pietta and Uberti .44-40 revolvers are .431" with barrels .428". My 1905 Colt Frontier Six Shooter .44-40 has .430 cylinder throats and .426 groove diameter, whereas the 1928 New Service has .431 throats and .428 groove. Both Italian makes of .45 Colt revolvers have .455" cylinder throats, with barrel groove .4535, same as my 1920 Colt New Service. I size all of my .44-40 bullets to .430 and .45 Colt bullets to .455" regardless of what gun I am shooting them in.

I standardized on 1 to 30 tin-lead from Roto Metals with LSStuff 45-45-10 and 6 grains of Bullseye or 6.5 of WST, 452AA or 231 in the .44-40 and 6.5 grains of Bullseye or 7.5 grains of WST, 452AA or 231 in the .45 Colts.

Most accurate bullet in .44-40 for standard pressure loads is Accurate 43-206H "stump nosed" semi-wadcutter which resembles a #452423 which shrunk in the washing machine. In the .45 Colt I use both 45-246H and 45-264H, depending upon which bullet weight is needed to shoot to the fixed sights of the particular gun.

Attachment 272656Attachment 272657Attachment 272658

[VariableRecall]

Cylinder throats on both my Pietta and Uberti .44-40 revolvers are .431" with barrels .428". My 1905 Colt Frontier Six Shooter .44-40 has .430 cylinder throats and .426 groove diameter, whereas the 1928 New Service has .431 throats and .428 groove. Both Italian makes of .45 Colt revolvers have .455" cylinder throats, with barrel groove .4535, same as my 1920 Colt New Service. I size all of my .44-40 bullets to .430 and .45 Colt bullets to .455" regardless of what gun I am shooting them in.

I standardized on 1 to 30 tin-lead from Roto Metals with LSStuff 45-45-10 and 6 grains of Bullseye or 6.5 of WST, 452AA or 231 in the .44-40 and 6.5 grains of Bullseye or 7.5 grains of WST, 452AA or 231 in the .45 Colts.

Most accurate bullet in .44-40 for standard pressure loads is Accurate 43-206H "stump nosed" semi-wadcutter which resembles a #452423 which shrunk in the washing machine. In the .45 Colt I use both 45-246H and 45-264H, depending upon which bullet weight is needed to shoot to the fixed sights of the particular gun.

Attachment 272656Attachment 272657Attachment 272658

Thank you very much for the detailed info!
From the Lyman manual that I had picked up, they recommend bullets sized to .452. They also have loads using the powder that I already have in stock: Winchester 231. Wow! That's a great deal of powder packed in there in those loads! Quite the Wallop!

[Outpost75]

Beware of the often repeated, ERRONEOUS mythology and folklore in Lyman-Ideal handbooks to size bullets to the groove diameter of the barrel. THIS IS PURE BS!!!!

MEASURE the cylinder throat diameters ahead of the revolver chambers either by using pin gages, or drive dead-soft, pure lead round balls through the chambers and out the front of the cylinder, removed from the gun, and then measure them. Size bullets to 0.001" LESS than cylinder throat diameters of the CYLINDER.

IGNORE the groove diameter of the barrel entirely unless the cylinder throats happen to be smaller than the barrel groove. In that case you want to hone the cylinder throats to be UNIFORM in diameter and 0.0010 to 0.0015" LARGER than the barrel groove diameter.

DougGuy is the Go-to fella to fix this for you. Heed his advice and you will be happy.

[DougGuy]

Thank you Ed.. I have always said that in a perfect world, a revolver's boolits are .001" to .002" larger than groove diameter, and throat diameter is .0005" to .001" larger than boolit diameter. This works in all centerfire calibers that I know of.

Basically, the revolver's dimensions need to read not unlike a common kitchen funnel. The larger dimensions in the back, and as the path of the boolit moves forward, dimensions need to be smaller and smaller until it exits the muzzle. This insures that the boolit is continually forced into a tighter space, which swages it down and forms a tight seal as it moves from case mouth to cylinder throat, to forcing cone, to the bore and out the end of the barrel. This doesn't give burning powder gases any avenue of escape, does not provide a gap where gases can escape along the side of the boolit which will cause leading and also cause groups to open.

There are two ways to keep the boolit sealed in the cylinder throats, which is where leading and the deterioration of the side of the boolit will begin. The first way is to size the boolit to a light drag fit in the throats with a mechanical sizing die of the right diameter, the second way is to use an alloy soft enough over a powder charge stout enough to obturate the boolit itself and cause it to expand outward where it is confined by the throat forming a good seal and a tight as a drum fit in the throats.

There is yet a third way to fit boolits tight in the throats, this is to size and lube boolits immediately after casting, and allow them to sit and age harden for some months, if there is much antimony in the alloy at all, the boolits will grow in diameter .0003" to .0006" for 44 and 45 caliber boolits, likely more if they are heavy for caliber and long like many of the 300+ gr WFN designs. For example, if you size a 45 caliber boolit cast with 50/50+2% alloy to .001" below cylinder throat diameters, let it sit on a shelf for 6mos, it may grow to the point that it needs some effort to push it through the throats.

[VariableRecall]

Beware of the often repeated, ERRONEOUS mythology and folklore in Lyman-Ideal handbooks to size bullets to the groove diameter of the barrel. THIS IS PURE BS!!!!

MEASURE the cylinder throat diameters ahead of the revolver chambers either by using pin gages, or drive dead-soft, pure lead round balls through the chambers and out the front of the cylinder, removed from the gun, and then measure them. Size bullets to 0.001" LESS than cylinder throat diameters of the CYLINDER.

IGNORE the groove diameter of the barrel entirely unless the cylinder throats happen to be smaller than the barrel groove. In that case you want to hone the cylinder throats to be UNIFORM in diameter and 0.0010 to 0.0015" LARGER than the barrel groove diameter.

DougGuy is the Go-to fella to fix this for you. Heed his advice and you will be happy.

Well, my .38 Special boolits were sized to .358 and they managed to shoot wonderfully. With their Hi-Tek Coating, they didn't lead at all. I have some boolits from another user sized to .357, so I have an opportunity in the future to try out a slightly narrower cartridge. He had told me that it works with his revolver in particular better, so perhaps it may not work as well with mine, but, we shall see.

Considering the varied sizes of cylinder throats out there, it's best to take some serious measurements before purchasing any boolits I suppose.

[smkummer]

I sized Lyman’s 454190 ( 250 gr.) to .454 and its wonderfully accurate in all my 45 colt chambered Colts( SAA/NF, New Service and Anaconda). My Lee 200 RN drops out of the mold at .453 and it is used as is. Works fine.

[Baltimoreed]

My first cas revolvers were ss .45 Vaqueros, other than clipping a coil or two from the hammer spring and checkered grips I didn’t do anything to them until this year where I replaced the old flat hammers with the wider Blackhawk hammers. Just for looks. They are larger than colt clones which depending on your hand size may or may not fit. Bought my daughter in-law a new model vaquero birdshead grip and can’t shoot it as it slams my knuckles too bad, fits her fine. The other issue with vaqueros are the .44s. There were a run of them with undersized cylinder throats and so they had accuracy issues. Don’t know much about colts or clones I’m afraid. Btw, I’m up to 6 .45 vaqueros and one ss .22 vaquero. Good luck.

[downzero]

Lots of good information and advice above. Nothing to really disagree with.

You mentioned not having checked out Cimarron. Their 1873 clones are Uberti.

Not all. I have the Frontier and they are made by Pietta.

The modern (post 1973) transfer-bar Rugers are unquestionably a safer gun for the uninitiated that want the Peacemaker look, but don't know how, aren't mechanically inclined, or aren't willing to deal with/accept the realities of a true S.A.A.'s hammer-mounted firing pin and multi-station cocking system.

It sounds like he already has a Smith & Wesson DA revolver with the same issue, so perhaps that ship has sailed.

OP, you probably should stick to a .38/.357 model since that's what you have already and you're just starting out. There is nothing wrong with the 45 Colt cartridge, but why add another caliber to the stable? There are plenty of great Cimarron/Uberti/Pietta .357 peacemakers out there that will do the job just nicely and use the same dies and brass you're shooting already.

[Bazoo]

Well, my .38 Special boolits were sized to .358 and they managed to shoot wonderfully. With their Hi-Tek Coating, they didn't lead at all. I have some boolits from another user sized to .357, so I have an opportunity in the future to try out a slightly narrower cartridge. He had told me that it works with his revolver in particular better, so perhaps it may not work as well with mine, but, we shall see.

Considering the varied sizes of cylinder throats out there, it's best to take some serious measurements before purchasing any boolits I suppose.

No disrespect to outpost meant here.

Plenty of folks have bought a revolver, and made ammo of standard size, and had good luck. No measuring required. It may be you get lucky. I always try standard sized bullets in each gun to see if it's acceptable, before I look for a solution to a problem. If leading is present, or if accuracy isn't satisfactory, then change things.

If you can get 4" at 25 yard groups out of easily assembled ammo, and those groups are acceptable for you, then be happy and do it the easy way. When you can shoot better, and need better, then do the extra work to make better ammo.

[Bazoo]

The theory of sticking with 38/357 is sound, but it also has a reverse theory. Perhaps you will encounter large pistol primers, then having a 45 colt revolver and or a 45c/45acp convertible would be a better option. Consider also, with the conversion cylinder, 45 acp is available with both large and small primer pockets. The main disadvantage of 45 colt is you will not find factory ammo or used brass the way you will 38special and 357 magnum. You will have to just buy brass when it's available.

Personally I like big bore revolvers. I like them all though.

[Outpost75]

Agree with Bazoo too, if you cannot tell the difference, don't spend the money or wrap yourself around the axle worrying about it. The fellows I hang with would be trading handguns guns if they couldn't do any better than 4-5" ten-shot groups at 50 yards.

"One inch per ten" (yards) has been the benchmark for acceptable accuracy of a service revolver for over 100 years.

[VariableRecall]

The theory of sticking with 38/357 is sound, but it also has a reverse theory. Perhaps you will encounter large pistol primers, then having a 45 colt revolver and or a 45c/45acp convertible would be a better option. Consider also, with the conversion cylinder, 45 acp is available with both large and small primer pockets. The main disadvantage of 45 colt is you will not find factory ammo or used brass the way you will 38special and 357 magnum. You will have to just buy brass when it's available.

Personally I like big bore revolvers. I like them all though.

That convertible Ruger Blackhawk looks more tempting every time I look at one.
Perhaps getting one used would be the most viable choice to get next in terms of .45 Colt compatible handgun, and then I can get a more period accurate Colt or Uberti in the much longer run.

I'm kind of terrified of mixing small pistol primed .45 ACP brass with the large ones, so I'm not really into having the potential of a mix up. It also ensures that my brother can use one type of primer, and I can use another.

Obviously the first order of business would be to try out a buddy's SAA or one from a store so that I can understand what I would get into before I pony up any cash.

[VariableRecall]

Agree with Bazoo too, if you cannot tell the difference, don't spend the money or wrap yourself around the axle worrying about it.

The fellows I hang with would be trading handguns guns if they couldn't do any better than 4-5" ten-shot groups at 50 yards.

Considering my current groups are hanging around 4-5" groups at about 10 yards, clearly I need some more practice. I know that comparable model 10's can drive lead into the bullseye at the same range, so I just need to get to my own firearm's standards first.

IF someone's going to leave an Uberti out in the cold because it can't hit a bullseye at 50 yards, I'd love to take such an "inferior" handgun in. A defensive situation is most likely going to occur within 25 yards or often much less. if it drives true at that range It would be in my hands in a jiffy!

[gwpercle]

If I had the money and/or if I were younger I would buy a "real" Colt SA . They never loose value and they are a real Colt .
Since I was never rich I purchased a Ruger Blackhawk in 1971 , I could afford it and I rather liked the adjustable sights .
Still have it , still shoot it ... no regrets .
When Ruger brought out the Wrangler , 22 LR , SA w/ 4 5/8" barrel ... I went to Cabela's and on my 71st birthday , bought one ... for $199 ...absolutely no regrets !
Always wanted a short barreled quick draw , gunfighter type SA ... bucket list SA !

Life's short ... get whatever you can afford and go shooting !
Gary

[Bazoo]

Don't worry about having 45 acp brass in both sizes. It's easy to tell the difference and they load the same. Blazer factory brass is SPP, some others is too. Just keep the SPP brass separate until you need it, then you'll be glad you have it.

[Silver Jack Hammer]

I own about 10 Colt’s SAA’s all 3rd gens. A Ruger New Model and 3 Ruger 3 screw SA’s, a couple of Italian copies.

I’ve thought about this a lot. Why do I like the Colt’s? When I take guns out of the safe to go to the range I grab my Colt’s first. When I get to the range I grab my Colt’s first. I shoot the Colt’s more by far. Why? I dunno. The Colt’s SAA simply is my favorite handgun.

I’ve got Colt’s I shoot off hand, unsupported, one hand at 100 yards, they are very accurate.

The 454190 is by far shot the most, and Unique is most frequently used.

Your mileage my vary. I’d buy the Colt’s. If you don’t like it you can always sell it.

We were told years ago the Colt’s SAA was fragile. I’ve tried to break mine with constant shooting and haven’t been able to yet.

If a 3rd gen blows up on me, history hasn’t been altered. No Colt’s has ever blown up on me yet and I’ve been shooting Colt’s since the early 1980’s,