Ruger Vaquero vs Super Blackhawk in .45 Colt

[Swede44mag]

Is the Ruger Vaquero as strong as the Blackhawk in .45 Colt?

I have been looking in the New Hornady reloading manual they list a load for the .45Colt and the TC/Blackhawk. They list the load for the TC & Blackhawk as being stronger and hotter load (more fps)

I have read the Colt and Clones were not strong enough to handle a hotter/faster load. I dont want to blow up my pistol doing anything dangerous. At this time I only want to be able to shoot a RCBS 255-KT boolit at 850-900fps.

The Ruger Vaquero I have on Layaway came in a paper box not the newer plastic box I am not sure when it was manufactured.

[S.R.Custom]

They made a Super Blackhawk in .45 Colt?

[Swede44mag]

They made a Super Blackhawk in .45 Colt?

I know they made a Bisley Hunter in .45Colt I believe it is built on a Blackhawk frame.

[Lloyd Smale]

super black hawk and the standard blackhawks have the same frame. Only differnce in a super is some have the draggon grip frame but that has nothing to do with strenght. Vaqueros share the same frame too but in fixed sighted rather then ajustable but its just as strong. Im talking the older large framed guns. If your comparing a old blackhawks to the new small framed vaqueros and blackhawks theres a differnce. The newer ones arent near as strong. But the poster was correct in saying the 45s arent called supers.

[thegatman]

Ruger makes a Blackhawk in 45 Colt. The new Vaquero is on a smaller frame so it acts more like the Colts. The old Vaquero is on a larger frame and can handle hotter loads.
The new Vaqueros I believe cannot handle Blackhawk loads.
A fun cartridge to load is about 5.5 grains of Trailboss with about a 255g Keith cast bullet. I believe the new Vaqueros can handle that load.

[RayinNH]

I have read the Colt and Clones were not strong enough to handle a hotter/faster load. I dont want to blow up my pistol doing anything dangerous. At this time I only want to be able to shoot a RCBS 255-KT boolit at 850-900fps.

The Ruger Vaquero I have on Layaway came in a paper box not the newer plastic box I am not sure when it was manufactured.


Swede if 850-900 fps with a 250 KT boolit is your limit, all of the revolvers will handle that including the Colt and clones. If you want to go hotter then stick with the Rugers.

Seems to me the Ruger in the paper box would be an older model, but a quick call to Ruger would ascertain it's date of manufacture...Ray

[felix]

If they are using the steel designed and used for the 6 shot 454 cylinders, you can bet you can use hot loads. Ask Ruger about the steel used for that gun. Anyhow, the whole gun might be shaken up too much. Keep it as a cowboy gun. ... felix

[Char-Gar]

The question of the relative strength between the Vaquero and the Blackhawk has been on the table since the Vaquero came out.

the Vaquero is on a smaller frame and has a smaller cylinder for the Cowboy shooters, so it will have the same size as the Colt SA.

While without doubt, the Vaquero is stronger than the Colt due to better steel, etc.. However, the red line loads that folks like to shoot in the Blackhawk might be too much for the smaller frame pistol. I don't know of anyone who has tried it because, everybody I know has more sense than to try.

The standard Blackhawk and the Super Blackhawk use the same frame and cylinder. The hammer, trigger and grip shapes are the difference. I am talking the New Model Blackhawks here. The Old Model Blackhawks used a frame the same size as the New Vaquero. The Old Blackhawk was discontinued in favor of the newer and stronger New Model Blackhawks because folks tried to hot rod the older ones, with the results they were shot loose.

Folks can hot rod the New Model Blackhawks and their tolerance for recoil will be reached before the tolerance of the gun. Now folks want to go back in time and hot rod the New Vaquero. Seems like a very long learning curve to me.

[btroj]

I gave up on really hot loads in my Blackhawk. With a 4 5/8 inch barrel it is light enough to be snappy in recoil. I find it to be rather hard on my wrists. I have settled on a 285 gr or so bullet at about 900 fps. Recoil is not brutal and I can shoot 50 or more in a day with no trouble. Same load is great in my Marlin CB so it is a winner all around.
I have decided that the 45 Colt, like the 45-70, does not need to be hot rodded to be extremely effective. this makes it much more fun to shoot also.

Bad

[Lloyd Smale]

felix i believe that is steel just used in the super redhawk 454 and 480.
If they are using the steel designed and used for the 6 shot 454 cylinders, you can bet you can use hot loads. Ask Ruger about the steel used for that gun. Anyhow, the whole gun might be shaken up too much. Keep it as a cowboy gun. ... felix

[9.3X62AL]

Lotta GOOD INFO above.

Tell ya what--a 255 grain boolit running 850-900 FPS is no slouch in the downrange energy department. 90% of my shooting in the BisHawk x 45 uses 9.0 grains of Unique, which is close to duplicating 1873 blackpowder load intensities. I've run this load in Uberti Colt repros extensively, and now in the Ruger. I would hunt deer with it, mindful of my own limitations with open iron sights. The load will make venison, if I can hold my end up.

I wonder just how necessary the MONDO STRONG loads in the Ruger 45s really are. I understand the attraction for powerful revolvers--but don't feel the need to run them very often.

[tek4260]

The question of the relative strength between the Vaquero and the Blackhawk has been on the table since the Vaquero came out.

the Vaquero is on a smaller frame and has a smaller cylinder for the Cowboy shooters, so it will have the same size as the Colt SA.

While without doubt, the Vaquero is stronger than the Colt due to better steel, etc.. However, the red line loads that folks like to shoot in the Blackhawk might be too much for the smaller frame pistol. I don't know of anyone who has tried it because, everybody I know has more sense than to try.

The standard Blackhawk and the Super Blackhawk use the same frame and cylinder. The hammer, trigger and grip shapes are the difference. I am talking the New Model Blackhawks here. The Old Model Blackhawks used a frame the same size as the New Vaquero. The Old Blackhawk was discontinued in favor of the newer and stronger New Model Blackhawks because folks tried to hot rod the older ones, with the results they were shot loose.

Folks can hot rod the New Model Blackhawks and their tolerance for recoil will be reached before the tolerance of the gun. Now folks want to go back in time and hot rod the New Vaquero. Seems like a very long learning curve to me.


Not to muddy the waters here, but the Vaquero is as strong as a Blackhawk, old or new model. The "New Vaquero" is sized close to a Colt and the replicas and therefore should be loaded to "Colt safe" levels. It is easy to tell which Vaquero you have. A 45 Vaquero is marked "Vaquero" on the side of the frame. The New Vaquero is marked "New Vaquero" on the side of the frame. There is no frame size difference between old and new model Blackhawks. The New Model Blackhawks utilize a transfer bar action, but are no stronger.

The Old Model 357 was built on the mid-frame(close in size to the New Vaquero). In 73, when Ruger came out with the New Model Blackhawk, they scrapped the mid frame to simplify production (small frame Single-Six and large frame Blackhawk).

Ruger reintroduced the mid frame with the New Vaquero, 50th anv 357, and 44 Special Blackhawks.

[MtGun44]

454 cyl steel was a very special and very expensive Carpenter stainless alloy. I seriously doubt it
is used anywhere else by Ruger, possibly the .480 cyl.

Bill

[EDK]

Is the Ruger Vaquero as strong as the Super Blackhawk in .45 Colt?
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ......

The Ruger Vaquero I have on Layaway came in a paper box not the newer plastic box I am not sure when it was manufactured.


If your layaway VAQUERO has a two digit prefix and is marked VAQUERO, as opposed to a three digit prefix and marked NEW VAQUERO, it is on the same frame as the 45 Colt and 44 Magnum. That said, it is also a bit lighter weight and recoil will increase because of that lighter weight. Also the fixed sights complicate the issues of changing boolit weight and powder charge. While I've got moulds in various weights, the 240-to-260 weight range shoots close to point of aim with most powder charges that I've used. You can get good accuracy with varied boolit weights, but they might not hit where you want them to.

:cbpour::redneck::Fire:

[Heavy lead]

I've got two Vaquero's, not New Vaquero's, the real ones, both with Bisley grips, they have the longer cylinder, these will safely handle any Blackhawk load you can handle. The fixed sights are regulated very well for heavy boolits with hot loads. Mine both came in plastic boxes, I believe I bought them new in 05, before IMO they ruined the Vaquero by making the frame small.
I believe your paper box Vaquero is an old model, however like another poster above said, if it says Vaquero it is, if you can load a .440 crimp to meplat boolit in 45 Colt brass it is in fact an "old" Vaquero.

[Snyd]

I know they made a Bisley Hunter in .45Colt I believe it is built on a Blackhawk frame.

Super Blackhawk Bisley Hunter. Got one right here. Commissioned by Lipseys. They made 279 of them around 2005 and a recent run of 40ish with leftover parts.

http://web.mac.com/perryschneider/pics/bisHntr_02.jpg

http://web.mac.com/perryschneider/pics/bisHntr_06.jpg

[Swede44mag]

Snyd:
Good looking pistol I have wanted one of those for years but havent been able to find one at the gunshow.
What bullet mold you got there?
Looks like it a has a nice and big meplat.

[Char-Gar]

The original Vaquero is nothing but a fix sighted Blackhawk with a Bisley grip, hammer and trigger.

The New Vaquero is a smaller Colt sized pistol.

[Von Dingo]

What Tek and EDK said. Here's some good information to wrap your head around http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-NewVaquero.htm .

[Swede44mag]

Thanks I went to the web site it is an old Vaquero for sure. The paperbox says April 1991 in the aera where the patents are listed. Not sure of the age of this gun I plan on emailing Ruger and ask them.

Thanks for your help.

[Von Dingo]

Ruger has a S/N research history search (year manufactured) on their website.

[NHlever]

If they are using the steel designed and used for the 6 shot 454 cylinders, you can bet you can use hot loads. Ask Ruger about the steel used for that gun. Anyhow, the whole gun might be shaken up too much. Keep it as a cowboy gun. ... felix

The stainless steel used in the .454 /480 guns is different from the stainless used in regular production Blackhawks, Redhawks, and Super Blackhawks. I'm pretty sure that the .454 /480 cylinders are the only parts made from the special stainless steel. I'm not sure what grade of stainless is used in those other guns. The blued guns are all 4140 I believe. If it says "New Vaquero" on the cylinder frame below the cylinder, it to be used with standard 45 Colt loads, and NOT the "Ruger / TC" loads.

[Snyd]

454 Cylinders and barrel are a custom 465 steel. Others are 410.

http://www.cartech.com/techarticles.aspx?id=1608

[Snyd]

Here's another article. I don't know the web URL so I'll past it here:

Design News 10/16/2000

Big guns need strong steel
By Joseph Ogando, Materials and Fastening Editor
Gunmaker zeroes in on aerospace alloys
to toughen its latest product
Newport, NH—Anyone who decides to shoot a bear with a handgun has two overwhelming concerns. Not missing is really, really important. And so is having a gun with some stopping power since angry bears are unlikely to be gracious about a flesh wound.

The Super Redhawk .454 from Sturm Ruger has nothing if not stopping power. One of the most powerful six-shooters in the world, this revolver shoots a .454 Casull cartridge that packs about 50% more power than a 44 magnum. It's a cartridge that straddles a fine line between bullet and bomb. For the shooter, all this extra muscle translates to a gun that, in the right hands, can drop a bear, elk or other large animal at a distance up to 200 yards. For the engineers who worked on the Super Redhawk, the added power forced them to expand their arsenal of gun steels.

Ruger Chief Engineer Steven Perniciaro points out that the .454 Casull goes off with the highest chamber pressures (62,000 psi) of any handgun on the market. Those pressures—and the resulting stresses—triggered a tightening of strength and fracture-toughness requirements that ruled out the 410 stainless that Ruger successfully uses for smaller guns. "Type 410 stainless just wasn't as strong as we would have liked," Perniciaro says.

Looking for a material that could stand up to the .454, Ruger's engineers decided to give specialty alloys a shot. They constructed the Super Redhawk's cylinder and barrel from alloys that Carpenter Technology Corp. (Reading, PA) first developed for aerospace applications.

Six-shot cylinder. The Super Redhawk's pressure-driven strength requirements are most apparent in its cylinder, which is based on a Ruger 44 magnum. "We decided to scale up and 'ruggedize' our 44 platform rather than reinvent the wheel," Perniciaro says. The scale-up lets shooters move up to a larger caliber with only minimal gain in gun size and weight, and it sets the six-shot Super Red Hawk apart from every other gun in its class. "All the other .454's on the market only have five shots," Perniciaro says. But expanding an existing 44 magnum cylinder also presented a design challenge that intensified the strength requirements for the gun steel. Because the new cylinder has the same OD and bolt center of its 44 magnum forerunner, the wall sections between chambers thinned in proportion to the increase in caliber—or about 25%. As Perniciaro sums up, "The cylinder material had to withstand higher pressures with thinner walls."

Making matters worse, industry practice requires that new gun designs be tested with "proof loads" that generate more than 140% of the chamber pressure experienced in real-world firing conditions. According to Perniciaro, this safety factor means that the Super Redhawk's cylinder actually needed to withstand pressures up to 93,500 psi—greater than the 65,000 psi the gun will see in service and dramatically higher than the 36,000 psi typical with a 44 magnum.

Proof-load tests on a prototype Super Redhawk made from 410 stainless revealed that its first choice would get the cylinder into the safety zone. "410 was strong enough for actual firing conditions but not for the tests," Perniciaro reports. So Ruger produced a cylinder from Carpenter's Custom 465, a martensitic alloy with an ultimate tensile strength of 260 ksi at peak aging. "It passed the tests with no problems," he says, adding that the gun has been out in the field for about a year with no problems.

Looking down the barrel. The 454's extra power also translated to new requirements not just for added strength in the barrel but also for wear and corrosion resistance. Perniciaro explains that impact force and high-velocity gases tend to erode the barrel at the bullet's entry point. This "throat slamming effect" intensifies with cartridge size and velocity.

Doubly concerned about strength and throat slamming, Ruger engineers quickly ruled out 410 stainless steel despite its strong track record on Ruger's smaller revolvers. "After thousands of rounds, we thought we'd see some throat erosion with the 410," Perniciaro notes. The designers next considered conventional 15Cr-5Ni stainless steel (15-5), which met all the design requirements but one. "It was a bear to machine," says Perniciaro. Gun drilling a 0.480 in. diam. hole in a 1.25 inch OD, 19-in.-long bar took 28 minutes in 15-5—a huge productivity tradeoff compared to the 17.27 minutes it takes to machine a comparable barrel from 410. Ruger ultimately met its design and productivity goals with Project 7000, a 15Cr-5N stainless designed specifically for machinability. "Project 7000 let us match the cycle time of 410," Perniciaro says.

Based on this first use of aerospace alloys, Perniciaro predicts a growing role for a host of non-traditional metals whose strength-to-weight ratios will let Ruger's engineers do an even better job at balancing the power, size, and heft of smaller firearms. "New materials will help us to push the limits of handgun design," he says.

Design News 10/16/2000

[Black Prince]

I don't mean to butt in on this discussion, but I've read this entire thread and still have the same question in my mind that I got after reading the very first post. Swede44man started this thread by asking if a Ruger Vaquero chambered for the 45 Colt would stand certain heavy loads. Obviously, he has some reason to question that. Reading the replies here, some people seem to think that it will handle the heavy loads and some people don't think it will. There seems to be no definate answer to the question, at least, as I understand what you guys have said, and you have said a LOT of very good stuff.

My question is if you want a 454, why not get a 454? Why would you want to take a 45 Colt, in any frame, and attempt to make a 454 out of it? If you question any frame's ability to handle a load, why not go to the next more powerful cartridge instead of trying to hotrod the lower powered one? That is how people blow cylinders and top straps. If you think or suspect a Vaquero will not stand a hot 45 Colt load, then get a 454. It will stand hot loads. There is no guessing whether it will or not. You can load the 454 down to 45 Colt loads with complete safety if you choose, but you may not be able to load that Vaquero 45 Colt up and still be safe, and even if you can, it probably is not going to be very plesant to shoot. Now which of those options would a reasonable and prudent man choose? DUH

[Swede44mag]

Mister DUH I have a Taurus Raging Bull in .454 to shoot magnum loads in.
I have Magnum guns for Magnum loads.

The Hornady 8th edition page 1010 max out at 850fps except two at 900fps with a 255gr #12458 FP Cowboy.
The data for the Ruger/TC #45200 HP-XTP starts at 1150fps which is over the velocity I would consider shooting in a Colt .45 revolver.

After looking at the website one of the forum members sent me to I know I have an older Vaquero with the longer thicker cylinder and larger frame than the New Vaquero.

I do not like to shoot any load that is listed in the red/max in a reloading book unless my revolver is capable of shooting it safely. If the this pistol is capable of shooting the Ruger/TC loads then I can assume that it would be capable of shooting a Max .45 Colt load not listed for the Ruger/TC.

Your opinions and feedback are welcome but...

[Snyd]

BlackPrince----Did I miss something? I thought several did answer the question in various posts and that is what led us down the road of cylinders and the metal Ruger uses. The "New Vaquero" is a NO GO for Ruger Only loads published by Hogdgon. Others are fine. Same cylinder and frame as the Blackhawk but with fixed sights.

[Von Dingo]

Swede44mag,

Brian Pierce in Handloader made a very good point about .45 Colt revolvers, concerning wether the manufacturer has chambered the same pistol in .45 ACP. The .45 ACP is rated at 21,000 psi, Vs 14,000 psi for the .45 Colt, in Ruger SA's, that is just a cylinder change, and the New Vaquero has been issued in .45 ACP. FWIW, the SAAMI .45 Colt loads for Ruger are 25,000 psi, and for Rugers other than the NEW VAQUERO.

To answer your question, the hotter standard .45 Colt loads, are safe in any Ruger.

[Black Prince]

Swede44mag

I did not offer any opinion or give any feed back. I asked a question.

This thread has a lot of interesting information in it because you also asked a question. I had no way of knowing what revolvers you have or your experience in loading them. It is apparent now, after your response, that you have the requsite knowledge to load to the red line limit. Many people do not. I have a neighbor who is blind in one eye because he tried to make a 300 magnum out of a 30-06. As you fully understand, that isn't a good idea and I questioned why anyone would want to even take a chance on doing something like that given the seriousness of the consequences. As a result of all of the excellent information that was provided here, now we know you are not doing something like that, that your Revolver will hold the red line loads, and that is good to know.

All the best.