Deal on a blackhawk.

[Tackleberry41]

Stopped at the LGS today, been avoiding the place so I wont buy anything. Had a new model blackhawk in the case, the shorter barreled one, same length as the 357 I have so no holster issues. Its in 45 colt, been in the market for one, and no worrying about pressure like I had to with the cap and ball conversion cyl I had. Slightly used by the looks of it, $399.

It comes with the 45 ACP cyl, doesnt look like thats ever been used. I know its a good deal as is, question is on the 45 ACP cyl. Theres alot of freebore vs the colt. How is the accuracy shooting ACP?

[DougGuy]

Freebore doesn't hurt it at all. Those BH most likely need cylinder throats reamed so they won't size down a .452" boolit, after that they are quite accurate as long as there is no appreciable thread choke. That is a REALLY GOOD price for a convertible too!

It goes like this.. If there is no detectable thread choke, you ream the cylinder throats to .4525" (or send the cylinders and have them done) take one leg of the trigger return spring off the pin and let it hang, OR swap in a Wolff 30oz. trigger return spring, and that gun will be 98% as accurate as the same gun you spent hundreds of $$ on sending it to a smith for a total going over.

[45 2.1]

It comes with the 45 ACP cyl, doesnt look like thats ever been used. I know its a good deal as is, question is on the 45 ACP cyl. Theres alot of freebore vs the colt. How is the accuracy shooting ACP?

Usually, the ACP is the more accurate of the two. In some cases I've found it to shoot along side a target 45 ACP semi-auto. The Colt case can be as accurate if you load the 200 gr. target SWC for the ACP in it and push it.

[Tackleberry41]

I want the gun, but deciding how I will pay for it in the end.

[M-Tecs]

I have several. I shoot the 45 acp the most. DougGuys and 45 2.1 are spot on.

[Snow ninja]

Great deal! Both cylinders in my convertible are as accurate as the other, and far more accurate than I am. You'll be pleased. I fire more .45LC in mine, but that's just cause I'm partial to the round.

[Tackleberry41]

Well I like the colt, but also the ACP. Have everything to load, cast or jacketed in either caliber. Dont see where one would be cheaper than the other when it comes to reloaded ammo. I like it being a blackhawk I can run the colts pretty hot. Same issue tho, paying for it. I can put it on layaway, but bought a glock first of this month, and 2 mosins. Had to sell something else along the way. Like most of us I have to many pots on the stove, need at least 2 scopes, those dont come cheap. Bought some reloading stuff for other guns just other day, never seems to end.

[rintinglen]

Good stuff comes in bunches, unlike the wherewithal to buy it. I had no sooner plunked my money down on a nice Colt Agent, than a mint Winchester 94 44 Mag wandered into the store. I know it will sit there until the day before my tax turn arrives.

[RJM52]

...for $399.00 can they do a lay-a-way?? That is a great price for that gun.

A friend has the same but he's had it since the early 1970s so it is a Old Model. He has always said it shoots well with both cylinders...

Bob

[pietro]

...for $399.00 can they do a lay-a-way?? That is a great price for that gun.

A friend has the same but he's had it since the early 1970s so it is a Old Model. He has always said it shoots well with both cylinders...

Bob

+1 - $300 for a Ruger .45ACP/.45LC convertible is highway robbery.

[dubber123]

A cheap 1911 mag makes a nice flat, handy speed loader for the ACP's..

[Outpost75]

The .45 ACP is the more accurate of the two cylinders on my Ruger Convertible. Velocity of 4-5/8" revolver is IDENTICAL to 1967 NM M1911A1 pistol. The Ruger ads which will digest take a 1911 apart. What's not t like?

[contender1]

You already know it's a good deal. I strongly suggest you buy it quickly or it will be gone. And you will enjoy the accuracy of the 45 ACP out of it. BTW; I own over a dozen of the Ruger 45 convertibles.

[Tackleberry41]

Its not lack of want in this case, and I know its a really good deal. I had asked about ordering a new one like it not long ago. They do lay away. I know in the end I will stop by this morning to give them some money on it. I asked them last time why they dont already know all my info for the form or have them preprinted for me.

Its a really good place to buy anything. They never did any gouging on ammo like so many others did. They might break up a bulk pack of 22 into 100rd bags, but not more than $5-6. I asked a friend who works at a gun store the price on something and even with his employee discount, I could walk in off the street and buy the particular pistol I wanted for less at this shop. I want something, 10% over cost, lets you look thru the big book they have there. Fair prices on trade in, pretty much out of stuff to trade in. One of those little places, been in the same spot forever, think it burned down and rebuilt in the 60s. People who run have lived here forever, tried to buy it at one time just couldn't come up with the cash.

[str8wal]

Theres alot of freebore vs the colt.

Freebore? Or, long throats? The shorter case does lead to a longer throat, but I wouldn't call it "freebore". Freebore would indicate an unsupported bullet like shooting 38's in a 357, but that is not the case with a 45 ACP cylinder. Like others have said, the ACP shoots as well as the Colt cylinder in my Bisley.

[Tackleberry41]

Freebore? Or, long throats? The shorter case does lead to a longer throat, but I wouldn't call it "freebore". Freebore would indicate an unsupported bullet like shooting 38's in a 357, but that is not the case with a 45 ACP cylinder. Like others have said, the ACP shoots as well as the Colt cylinder in my Bisley.

Its why I asked the question. I had terrible luck with a 45/410, been better off throwing the 45 colts at the target. I looked in the 45 acp cyl and said wow thats alot of unrifled metal in there. But seems wont be an issue. I almost got the 9mm/357 convertable blackhawk when I bought the one I have, but dont really need another 9. Especially something that only holds 6 and weighs so much, tho in hindsite could have probably reamed it out to take one of the much hotter 9mm out there. My friends as it now ask 'whats he got now?'

I swung by and put some money down on it. Sometimes I wish they didnt do layaway so it wasnt so easy to dig myself a hole. Most people they require 20% down, me now since I am a regular customer only needed $20 for them to put it away. But they know I have a habit of putting a gun on layaway, then going back the next day to pay for it, on the first when I get my VA check. Gun show this weekend, maybe try to sell some of my 'junk'. The cheap guns we all seem to end up with, not alot of trade in value. Rest of it I have whittled down to stuff I dont want to part with.

[Hickok]

I want the gun, but deciding how I will pay for it in the end.Dog gone it Tackleberry, can't you sell a kidney or something and get the money!:bigsmyl2:

I've been there and done that, seeing a gun I just have to have.:redneck:

[ReloaderFred]

One of my .45 Colt/.45acp combo Blackhawks will outshoot any of my 1911's at 35 yards (where the backstop is on our pistol range) shooting 200 gr. SWC's with the .45 acp cylinder. It's scary accurate, as long as I do my part. I fill the cylinder and shoot a clay bird on the bank with the first shot, and then use the rest to break up the pieces.

If you don't buy it, I will..........

I just bought another NM Blackhawk in .44 Special yesterday. It had less than 200 rounds through it, with only a very slight turn line on the cylinder to indicate it's a used gun. It was $375.00, out the door. That combo Blackhawk is underpriced, and needs a new home.

Hope this helps.

Fred

[Moonie]

I love the one I bought a couple of years ago. 7 1/2". At that price you should jump on it, mine was about $550 including transfer fee.

[DougGuy]

Freebore = a smooth section of bore just the size of the O.D. of the boolit (or maybe half thou larger) between the case mouth and the leade of the rifling. You could call it a throat as well. Weatherby calls it freebore. I don't use the term freebore to define unsupported space like a 38spl in a .357 cylinder or the .45/410 cylinder.

Maybe I am saying or using the word freebore wrong. Freebore, or throat, that's the size of the boolit, or slightly larger, .4525" generally in the case of the .45 caliber doesn't seem to hurt accuracy or velocity.

Freebore as in unsupported free space between the case mouth and the barrel or cylinder throat does terrible things for accuracy and velocity both.

Tackleberry, check the cylinder throats when you get it, I would be glad to help with those, the work is fast and affordable and very professionally done.

Contender1, I am looking for an early NM vaquero convertible in .45 caliber, hopefully a CC frame model, with some holster wear or turn lines. Got anything like that?

[jonp]

I want the gun, but deciding how I will pay for it in the end.

Good price for a convertable. I'd love to get it. I say buy it and worry about it later unless they will do a lay away for you.

Do the same thing I did when I bought my first and only S&W Model 17. Picked it up in one hand and pulled out the plastic with the other.

[contender1]

Doug, I have a few of the Vaqueros, and only one of them is a convertible 45. But, even if I had the one you seek, I'd not sell. I hate a thing called "seller remorse." I buy & don't sell any Ruger I like or want. That's why I have so many,,,,,!

Now, back to the OP. You will find yourself truly enjoying that new Blackhawk!

[Tackleberry41]

Going to say that a black hawk will take quite a bit more pressure than the ACP is rated for, so ruger only 45 acp loads. But weak link tends to be the case. 45 super is same dimensions, heavier brass. That a viable option in the ruger?

[45 2.1]

Going to say that a black hawk will take quite a bit more pressure than the ACP is rated for, so ruger only 45 acp loads. But weak link tends to be the case. 45 super is same dimensions, heavier brass. That a viable option in the ruger?

Several people have had that idea, some even had their ACP cylinder reamed to 45 Win Mag. Bad idea as some of those failed (thin cylinder walls if you've ever looked).... whether using energetic handloads or factory is unknown to me though.

[Tackleberry41]

No I wouldn't go to the effort of reaming to a longer chambering. Doing some reading the 45 super is right about the same pressures as the ruger only 45 colt loads. I have a rifle if I want some really nasty 45 colt loads, I chuck 300gr spitzers out of that. But sure seems medium 45 super loads would work in the blackhawk without any problems.

But I was reading that theres some confusion on the newer flat top models vs the older blackhawks, some said it was a lighter weaker gun where others said it wasn't.

[DougGuy]

The newer flattops are smaller in frame and cylinder. They are only rated for .45 ACP +P pressure of 23,000psi, where the older blackhawks and original Vaqueros are safe to 30,000psi.

The way to tell them apart, regardless of what someone TELLS you, if it has a TWO DIGIT prefix in the serial number, it is a large framed gun and is safe with Ruger Only loads, safe with pressures of 30,000psi. If it has a THREE DIGIT prefix in the serial number, it is a medium framed gun and is NOT SAFE with Ruger Only loads meant for the large framed guns. Three digit prefix guns are only safe to 23,000psi.

NONE of the Ruger single actions are safe with Win Mag pressures. That's 45,000psi, almost the same as .454 Casull.

[LAH]

A cheap 1911 mag makes a nice flat, handy speed loader for the ACP's..

Yes..

[Tackleberry41]

So pretty much Ruger changed the gun, so really isnt much better than the pile of other SAA clones out there? Guns that are often cheaper. Same gun store had a new in the box clone for $100 less.

Big part of why I would even buy a blackhawk was those pages in the reloading manual marked 'ruger only'.

[bob208]

the Blackhawk you are talking about is the strong one. I have read through posts of b.s. I was even getting confused. buy the gun and use the gun for what it was made for. the hot ruger loads were first used in the old model blackhawks.


but then I always say if you want a magnum buy a magnum.

[Tackleberry41]

I have seen plenty of conflicting information in different places, so I sent an email off to Ruger for their answer. Seems like it would be a really boneheaded move to make a slight cosmetic change that nobody cares about and take away one of the draws of the pistol in the process.

Not about buying a magnum, just getting the most out of what I have. I would like the option of running some hotter stuff in it. Like I said Im gonna be restricted to not much better than factory ammo, I would have bought a cheaper gun.

[FLHTC]

Just because it has a 45 ACP cylinder with it now, doesn't mean that it was shipped with it. Check to see if the last three digits of the gun's serial number are engraved in the cylinder face. I've come across many mismatched pseudo convertibles at gun shows, especially in the 357/9mm configuration. Check the fit of the 45 ACP cylinder before plunking down your cash. It's odd that the cylinder would look unused, unless of course it was paired with the gun much later.

[contender1]

Tackleberry, please re-read what DougGuy wrote. The 2 digit prefix Vaqueros are on the normal Blackhawk frame. The 3 digit prefix Vaqueros are on a smaller frame.

[Tackleberry41]

Its not a vaquero, but flat top black hawk. Stopped in today to put some money down on it, before I found something else to spend it on. It has a 2 digit prefix #. No idea on the cyl, it doesnt look like it was fired very much w the 45 colt cyl at all, ACP cyl still had the plastic thing on the back of it from the factory, no line on the cyl, no hint it had been used. If its not matched to gun Ill cross that bridge when I get to it.

Wouldn't be the first barely used gun I have bought from the same place. Bought a glock 31 not long ago, somebody had spent money on an aftermarket guide rod, then barely if at all fired it. Got a G23 there, took it apart, not a hint of carbon anywhere, dried up factory grease on the recoil spring, so may have never been fired either. Bought a Rossi single shot, one barrel was still in the plastic, owner said they guy traded stuff all the time, hardly ever used it, just wanted something new all the time.

Still trying to understand why Ruger would go and change something they have had so much success with for so long. Once they made that medium frame change, it really doesnt stand out from the rest of the SA guns out there anymore. And it probably doesnt help they didnt tell anybody, someone could go buy a new one and load it to 'ruger only' specs and have problems. Had to be a bean counter thing, a couple bucks could be shaved off each unit.

[ReloaderFred]

The smaller frame was in response to demand from customers. The Vaquero was heavier than the SAA Colt, and customers wanted something the same size and weight. The same is true with the Blackhawks. Some people complain about the weight of the Blackhawks ( I don't), so some are made on the medium frame. I have two of the .44 Special Blackhawks built on the medium frame, with the XR-3 grip frame. There is a difference. I also have about a dozen or so large frame Blackhawks in different calibers.

You buy what you want, and everyone doesn't want the same thing. That's why I drive an F-350 instead of a Prius.............

Hope this helps.

Fred

[Tackleberry41]

Oh they are not light guns, if I wanted lighter I would look for that. I buy blackhawks for their strength, something that only comes with the extra weight. They going to have 2 lines then, regular ones and lighter ones? I dont know that much about blackhawks, bought my first one last year, a 357, those are heavy. I noticed the difference just picking up the 45, less metal.

I see some changing the grip section, guess the newer ones are a little smaller than older ones. A bit to small for the caliber, I have no idea what fits and what doesnt. I bought some of the hogue grips, but a bit to big.

[Dale53]

Tackleberry41;
The Ruger .45 Colt/.45 ACP Flattop Convertible is a WONDERFUL single action handgun. If you will send me a Private Message with your email address I will forward to you a fine article by Brian Pearce on your new revolver. It gives the whole story, lots of tested loading data and you'll find that while your revolver won't handle "Ruger Only" loads it will handle loads considerably heavier than Single Action Army clones and last through several life times.

My .45 Colt is the SS Bisley Convertible built on the large frame and while it will handle heavier loads than yours, yours will feel much better in the hand. The Flattop was not yet available when I got mine or I would have probably opted for it. I DO have a pair of .44 Special Flattops and can tell you from first hand experience, that I prefer the handling qualities of the flattop over the old, large frame, Black Hawk.

FWIW
Dale53

[DougGuy]

Flattop with a two digit prefix? Would lead me to believe this is an old model gun. Not sure Ruger even made OMFT in .45 caliber.

Pics when you get it for sure Tackleberry, but look on the back of the cylinder. If the boss the ratchet star is machined into is round, it is NOT one of the NMFT guns on the medium frame. If it is scalloped between the teeth, it is NOT one of the OMFT guns, but a NMFT on the medium frame.

[MSD MIke]

I have one and both cylinders needed to be opened up. Once this was done the gun is accurate with both cylinders. A target level load in 45ACP with a 200 grain SWC is the most accurate load in mine.

Thanks
Mike

[Tackleberry41]

I will say I am a bit confused as to what is what. Like I said dont know a whole lot about the blackhawks. When I say 'flat top' the top of its flat, from the rear sight to the front of the receiver. The new new version has a dip in the top of the frame, this would be the new medium frame version? Thats what my 357 is the newer style.

One I bought is flat top whole length, with 2 digit serial prefix.

[MtGun44]

My experience agrees with 45 2.1 on the .45 ACP cylinder. Despite (or perhaps because of??)
the long throat, mine is noticeably more accurate than the .45 Colt cylinder.

Mine came way undersized, shot OK with jacketed but tended to throw a couple of fliers out
of a 5 shot group every time with boolits. Throats on .45 Colt were .450 and .45 ACP cyl
were .449. I opened both to .452 with a reamer and polished to .453 and they shoot
better now.

Bill

[FLHTC]

Pins or Screws????

[Tackleberry41]

I sent an email off to Ruger, for some clarification. Told me to contact Hornady for answers. I dont remember asking for loading data, just what sort of pressure levels a blackhawk could be loaded to. I guess there was a time in the past when a black hawk was a black hawk. Now they have made changes that changed all that, and Ruger wont say one way or another. Since I am not the expert required on blackhawks guess might not be so fast to put money on one in the future.

[Brett Ross]

Let me put it this way. I gave 600.00 for my Bisely stainless convertible 2 years ago, new. Pull the trigger, before someone else does.

[Tackleberry41]

Oh I already put money down on it, sold some stuff at the gun show, put that down, owe $128, might go get it today. But I wanted a BLACKHAWK, you know the legendary ones that went with the page in the book labelled 'ruger only'. Guess it worked with old ones, new ones you really have to know what your buying. Ill figure out what I have, decide what to do then. If it wont take those heavy loads, maybe keep it, maybe get rid of it look for one that will.

Just a case of if Im gonna pay for a gun that will really only take standard pressure loads or +P, then probably shouldnt pay extra because it says Ruger. They had a NIB SAA clone in the case for $100 less.

[bob208]

the pressure levels a ruger can be loaded to are stamped right on the frame. .45 colt .45colt levels. you think any manufacture is going to tell you to over load one of their products? true rugers are built bull strong it is to protect them from law suites

[LAH]

If you wanted a full size BH you should have purchased one as they are still the strong bull they've always been, nothing has changed in that department. You just made an uninformed purchase. Talk to the shop, maybe they will work something out for you and you can have what you really want.

[Tackleberry41]

131276

This is what I got. Trying to understand the some of the design. Lay this one next to my 357, and the frame on the 357 is actually a little longer, with more exposed forcing cone. Maybe I think to logically that simply using the same part for both would have been better. As is its, longer cyl in shorter frame, shorter cyl in longer frame. And the 45 has a ring or shoulder around the cyl pin, the 357 doesnt? And you wouldn't think the 45 would be lighter, yes less metal around the chambers, but an extra inch of barrel.

I take it this is the new 'improved' medium frame, so not really a blackhawk of old. Perhaps Ruger should differentiate these from the original ones, for those less informed about such things.

[Brett Ross]

Back when I bought my Bisely I had not really done my homework but knew I wanted something which I could shoot both the ACP and the 45 colt . I did not have the PT1911 I have now and ACP brass was all over the range for free. I felt a convertible would be the better buy in the long run. I held both the flat top and Bisley at the gun show (different tables other side of the room) and the flat top felt better. I could not lay my finger on why one felt better than the other but went with the Bisley as the flat top did not have a ACP cyl. Little did I know it’s not the same exact frame, sometimes lucky is OK. The main reason top by the Blackhawk was handgun hunting and the flattop I was looking at would not handle the Ruger only load data I was considering. That being said, the more I read, I think Blackhawk only loads are a bit of over kill, at least for whitetail.
Tony

[RKJ]

I'm not sure if this is the same gun or not, but I read an article in Handgunner about a Flat Top 45 that Lipsey's commissioned Ruger make for them. If I remember it was after Ruger made the .357 Flattop and the folks at Lipsey's were getting a lot of requests for one in 45 colt. I believe Pearce even said something to them about it. They (Lipsey's) did them one better by bringing it out with the ACP cylinder). I haven't seen any in person but they look good in the magazine, and I'd like to try one.

[rintinglen]

If your flattop shoots as well as my 44 Special does, you'll not be disappointed, even if you can't load it to knock out Soviet T-55's. My take on those over-loaded cartridges has changed as I slide closer to the great beyond. My fear now is that if I hot load a batch of 38 specials or 45 Colts and then I pass on, one of my grand kids or kids might put one in a weaker gun and be injured when things let loose. I load magnum pressures in magnum brass, so that if I'm not there to use it, it'll still end up in a gun where it'll be safe.

[DougGuy]

That's not a flattop, that's a full size Blackhawk, that will take all the Ruger Only loads you want to put through it. I would advise getting the throats done before you do a lot of magnum loads, as the throats are likely too tight for .452" boolits but I can fix that for you real quick sir...

Your Blackhawk, and the old original Blackhawk are on the same size frame and cylinder. As I said before, TWO digit prefix = Large Frame. The difference in the Old Model Blackhawk and the New Model Blackhawk, are in the hammer and transfer bar. The old ones have a hammer with half cock, that takes four clicks to full cock like an old Colt, but the hammers are made from cast steel, not from machined steel. This fact means the hammer hooks and half cock notches can be brittle and if the hammer falls from the full cock notch to the half cock notch, that half cock notch was prone to breaking off, allowing the hammer to fall the rest of the way, and if there was a live round in the chamber, the gun would fire.

Ruger fixed this in 1973 by designing a transfer bar safety that would not allow the gun to fire unless the trigger was pulled fully to the rear which raised the transfer bar and positioned it on the firing pin so when the hammer hit the bar, the gun would fire. They also agreed to convert all Old Model guns sent back to the factory, with the new safety transfer bar.

Again, you did DAMN GOOD on this deal @ $399.00!

Furthermore, some people call those grips "cheesegrater" grips because the checkering on them is quite noticeable. How well you will like them while touching off a full house load of 296 behind a 300gr boolit remains to be seen. They may be a little sharp for Ruger Only loads..

Can I say one more time how good of a deal you got on that sweet sixgun?

[Brett Ross]

I knew doug guy or 44 man would be along to set things right, grats on your great buy.

[Tackleberry41]

I am not fond of the grips, not sure who Ruger designed them for. Somebody will probably say those with small hands wanted them that way, so everybody else suffers. I just hate paying $60 or so for 2 wood panels. Be nice to have the time to maybe make some as I have been planning to, but school has called my son is out until next monday so puts an end to such ideas for a bit.

Yes the throats are a bit tight, bit of a mystery why Ruger would do that, but probably boils down to cheaper. A couple different jacketed bullets really wouldn't go in the throats of either cyl, a few chambers were close. Something I learned working on cars is if you need to borrow a tool twice you need to buy one. Have a 45 colt chamber reamer, but not much good for this. Midway has a PTG reamer, but .4545 seems a little big? The manson ones at Brownells are same price, will the single .4480 pilot that comes with it be enough? Or not work for the ACP and colt chambers? Do you ream smaller if your going to run jacketed more than cast?

Even tho it snowed all day did put a few rounds thru it, the colt cyl did pretty good with some basic winchester cast target stuff I had. The ACP wasnt as good, not bad, but some Lee 230gr cast that dont really get touched alot by the sizer. Everything else I have 45 colt is for a rifle using spitzers so wont be using those. Have some hot ACP I loaded up somewhere using XTP, but will have to find them.

Ruger really needs to be a little less confusing about what their selling. If its a medium frame say that. I had finally found a page that showed the various models, okay the hump on back for the sights is the full size. Not that I plan to throw fire breathing stuff thru it all the time, but I do want to be able to use them. Dont know if will even mess with any 45 super. Might trade my 357 off for something more modern, lighter, faster to load.

[NavyVet1959]

I recently came across a stainless Ruger Bisley Blackhawk with .45 Colt and .45 ACP cylinders for $600. It is in basically brand new condition and I'm going to be buying it this week. I could not find a better price online, so I decided to go for it. You made out *really good* at that price.

From what I've read, I can convert the .45 ACP cyclinder to .460 Rowland by just getting it rechambered / made 1/16" deeper. On the other hand other .460 Rowland-ish conversion was done with the .45 ACP chamber in a G21 and I just am careful to not load those rounds in an unconverted .45 ACP handgun, so I see no reason why I can't do the same thing with the Blackhawk. That might not be as much power as the Ruger-only .45LC can get, but it will give me around 1000 ft-lbs and I *don't* have to have a compensator on it (like is required for the G21 conversion).

[Whiterabbit]

Stopped at the LGS today, been avoiding the place so I wont buy anything. Had a new model blackhawk in the case, the shorter barreled one, same length as the 357 I have so no holster issues. Its in 45 colt, been in the market for one, and no worrying about pressure like I had to with the cap and ball conversion cyl I had. Slightly used by the looks of it, $399.

It comes with the 45 ACP cyl, doesnt look like thats ever been used. I know its a good deal as is, question is on the 45 ACP cyl. Theres alot of freebore vs the colt. How is the accuracy shooting ACP?

I cannot speak to the Ruger. However, I own a BFR with a 3" cylinder. my rounds, depending on brass length, go from 2.1" even up to maybe 2.8" down to factory cowboy 45 colts, whatever short length they are (1.5"?).

Whatever your jump is, it is less than my jump shooting a 45 colt round down a cylinder with a 1.8" chamber behind a 1.2" throat just to reach the forcing cone.

------------

Mine is a BFR and not a Ruger, so may be built to different tolerance and standard. However, the accuracy was not an issue with 45 colts. I did not verify their accuracy at 100 yards, I shoot the big stuff if I want to reach that far. However, for plinking at the indoor range, it was easy to use 45 colts and put holes into the chests of the facecards of playing cards.

I do not worry about boolit jump. I suggest you do not worry about it either.

[Whiterabbit]

Its why I asked the question. I had terrible luck with a 45/410, been better off throwing the 45 colts at the target. I looked in the 45 acp cyl and said wow thats alot of unrifled metal in there. But seems wont be an issue. I almost got the 9mm/357 convertable blackhawk when I bought the one I have, but dont really need another 9. Especially something that only holds 6 and weighs so much, tho in hindsite could have probably reamed it out to take one of the much hotter 9mm out there. My friends as it now ask 'whats he got now?'

I swung by and put some money down on it. Sometimes I wish they didnt do layaway so it wasnt so easy to dig myself a hole. Most people they require 20% down, me now since I am a regular customer only needed $20 for them to put it away. But they know I have a habit of putting a gun on layaway, then going back the next day to pay for it, on the first when I get my VA check. Gun show this weekend, maybe try to sell some of my 'junk'. The cheap guns we all seem to end up with, not alot of trade in value. Rest of it I have whittled down to stuff I dont want to part with.


I have seen plenty of conflicting information in different places, so I sent an email off to Ruger for their answer. Seems like it would be a really boneheaded move to make a slight cosmetic change that nobody cares about and take away one of the draws of the pistol in the process.

Not about buying a magnum, just getting the most out of what I have. I would like the option of running some hotter stuff in it. Like I said Im gonna be restricted to not much better than factory ammo, I would have bought a cheaper gun.

Getting the most out of what you have, and not caring about magnumizing the gun (specifically, anyways, beyond using the Ruger-only pages in your manual). I have a suggestion for the 45 acp cylinder of yours.

The old NRA load books have load data for a 300 grian cast lead boolit and bluedot in the 45 ACP. Use the 300 grain LEE boolit with it's 85% or better meplat and you have a recipe for a freight train 45 ACP that not only gets the max out of your Blackhawk via 45 acp cylinder, but does it at 45 ACP pressures in a package that would never fly in a 45 caliber semi-auto due to the meplat.

were I to get a 45 acp revolver, it's all I'd ever feed it :)

[Tackleberry41]

Already have that 300gr mold, using them thru a can w trailboss, in a 45 colt single shot pistol. A clunker rossi matched set, came w the 45/410 chamber, only way to salvage it was to do a stub on it and a new barrel. What was left of the blank I bought when I built my 45 colt rifle. Until I get the throats reamed those 300gr wouldn't fit. But would be interested in the data or any other heavy bullet data for the ACP. Other 45 molds are the 2 230gr TL Lee molds. Bought the round nose, then found out wont really work in the colt, need the trunicated cone one. Both need to be messed with to drop properly sized bullets.

I have found plenty of deals in the little shop near me. They never jacked up their prices during the panic. I want to order something, its 10% over their cost. Always fair when it comes to trading something in. I can buy glock factory mags for my G23 for $23. And their ethanol free mid grade gas is usually cheaper then everybody elses mixed mid grade, dont ask me for any paper work to buy offroad diesel. Dont know what will happen when they finally get to old to run the place.

[DougGuy]

Midway has a PTG reamer, but .4545 seems a little big? The manson ones at Brownells are same price, will the single .4480 pilot that comes with it be enough? Or not work for the ACP and colt chambers? Do you ream smaller if your going to run jacketed more than cast?

Just got done answering another thread about this same thing. The $55 reamer has a .448" nose, which will fall loosely right through even your tight throats. There is NO WAY to center this reamer on the existing throat, (which maintains cylinder to bore alignment btw) and the first 1/4 turn you make with it, the reamer will pick up a cut and you are then stuck with wherever it decides to grab. The only way to do this, and do it correctly, is buy the piloted reamer and the pilot kit, which will put you easily $50 or $60 over the cost of sending both cylinders here for work, including the shipping. Then, after you are done with the reamer, you need a precision hone to clean up the tool marks the reamer leaves behind.

One guy on the Ruger.net forum did both cylinders with the solid nose reamer, so sure he was going to save himself some money, LOL.. After he got done you could see an "eyebrow" of the old existing throat in 3 or 4 of the new throats, this is how far off center the reamer cut. Oh but he saved less than $20 by doing it himself over sending them out, and RUINED both cylinders while he was at it. Kid you not, the pics are there, in the gunsmithing section. I wonder if the guy ever looked at a pair of vise grips last time he had a toothache? Just sayin..

Oh yeah, .4545 is WAY too big. I send them back out where a .4525" pin gage slides in with a light drag, and that's the way they ought to be for .452" boolits.

[Whiterabbit]

Already have that 300gr mold, using them thru a can w trailboss, in a 45 colt single shot pistol............would be interested in the data or any other heavy bullet data for the ACP.

My favorite loading manual.

http://o.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/fss/2b4f4fa789be65eab98bda8416f25489

http://o.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/fss/38b1a13804bd8ac7cf3985d90c99079

7.1 grains of bluedot for 740 fps of speed with less pressure than standard ACP loading.

Of course you'll use ACP cases, not autorims.

then you can use your colt cylinder for the H110 and the 30ksi baby cassul loads.

[Tackleberry41]

A person could put themselves in the poor house trying to buy all the available reloading books out there, plus the old ones. Still have every one I bought, odd how different they can be for the same thing.

I ask about stuff like reamers never having need for them before. PTG chamber reamers seem pretty good, looked at renting for some of my projects. I did 2 45 colt projects, renting 2x was the same price as buying the tool. Been tempted to sell it, but soon as I do will wish I still had it. I would like to invest in a crowning tool, but they dont come cheap. Usually the lathe can do it, but not always. Got a mosin now I am going to need to crown, be hard to do in the lathe without taking out the barrel. Cut the barrel back to 17" so not enough left to come thru where the cutter can get at it, much less straight. Be nice if I could find a non gun tool, put gun in front of it the price doubles. I just like to do things myself if possible. But not one to try to use a wobbling undersized pilot to save a couple bucks. Seems like they are doing things backwards, using a pilot thru the existing undersized throat vs, having a pilot that fit the chamber to keep things straight.

[NavyVet1959]

Well, I met with the guy who had the stainless Ruger Bisley Blackhawk for sale that I was interested in and after looking it over, I bought it today. Not as good of a price as the OP's, but slightly better than what I could find one for online plus he threw in a bag (103 pieces) of brand new nickle plated .45LC brass.

http://images.spambob.net/navy-vet-1959/ruger-bisley-blackhawk-320.jpg
(full size) (http://images.spambob.net/navy-vet-1959/ruger-bisley-blackhawk.jpg)
Sorry, cell phone camera, so it's not that great of a photo.

Now I just need to order a set of dies for .45LC...

Probably need to send the .45ACP cylinder off to Doug to get the throat reamed so that I can get my .45 SUPER +P+ to fully chamber. I load these right at the SAAMI OAL, but with the truncated cone and SWC profiles, the shoulder of the bullet is hitting the chamber on most of my .45ACP chambered firearms, but it does work on my .45 SUPER +P+ mod on my G21.

[Tackleberry41]

I would like a stainless one, but really dont see alot of BH for sale. I used to get alot of brass from a friend who worked at a range, but never found more than 5 or 6 LC.

[DougGuy]

Dang y'all just can't hide money! LOL!! I would need to do a LOT more cylinders per week before I could afford another one. A buddy today sent me a pic of one of those Ubertis with the coin metal finish that looks like Jesse James rode with it back in the day, he wants to sell it and I am saddled with getting over what it cost me to get my lathe tooled up and running. Wouldn't you know...

That's a NICE Bisley!

[NavyVet1959]

I would like a stainless one, but really dont see alot of BH for sale. I used to get alot of brass from a friend who worked at a range, but never found more than 5 or 6 LC.

Just stumbled across it on Armslist and arranged to buy it after I got to Dallas in a week and then I saw this thread. Which kind of made me think that I didn't get the best price, but he wouldn't budge on the haggling (and I *like* to haggle). Got him to throw in all the .45LC brass that he had to sweeten the deal, but even if he hadn't, I would have still probably ended up with it. :) I couldn't find any scratches on it, so it's basically in mint condition as far as I can tell. I'm sure I'll end up putting some on it though. :) Of course, this was not particularly another gun that I was looking for, but since it had the .45ACP cylinder and since it is strong enough for a .460 Rowland conversion (which consists of just boring out the chambers 1/16"), I figured it would be good for testing my .45 SUPER +P+ loads and I won't have to chasing brass in my garage.

So, I guess you could say that I just bought it on a whim...

[DougGuy]

I don't want to steer this thread, but I am not sure about using the .45 ACP cylinder for a .460 Rowland conversion. First off, and most importantly, the Ruger Only loads for the .45 Colt top out at 30,000psi. The cylinder walls and thickness are the same for both the .45 Colt and .45 ACP cylinders, so in effect we can say the .45 ACP cylinder should be safe with the same 30,000psi that the .45 Colt is safe with, in the full size large frame Ruger single action revolver.

The .44 magnum by comparison tops out at 36,000psi most recently. This was a change brought on by S&W and SAAMI because so many of the revolvers that S&W made were shooting themselves to pieces with the initial pressure ceiling of 40,000psi that was originally designated to the then new .44 Remington Magnum cartridge.

The .460 Rowland operates at the same 40,000psi pressure ceiling as the old .44 Magnum. The .45 caliber Ruger cylinders are thinner than the .44 caliber cylinders both in the webs between the chambers, and the outside dimension of the cylinder.

There have been reports of people grenading the .45 ACP cylinder by boring it to .45 Winchester Magnum length, and using .45 Win Mag loads, which top out at 45,000psi according to SAAMI specs for the cartridge. To me, there is not nearly enough % of safety in the thickness of the .45 caliber cylinder walls to warrant such a conversion as the .460 Rowland unless it was done on a 5 shot cylinder which is much thicker and has the bolt cuppets cut between the chambers where the cylinder is the thickest, instead of right on the chamber itself, where the cylinder is thinnest.

If you look at the thickness of the .45 ACP barrel, it is a LOT thicker where the chamber is, there is a whole lot more metal surrounding the cartridge when the gun is in battery than there is surrounding the cartridge chambered in a Ruger single action revolver. For this reason alone, it is possible to utilize this kind of pressure in a 1911 format, provided one has done the conversion properly and followed Rowland's guidelines on springs, load data, etc..

[Tackleberry41]

45 super is about as much as I will go, 28k PSi so under the limit, and that would be max loads. No reaming needed, drop right in the ACP chamber. Just put a sticker on the box of ammo saying 'ruger only', or maybe a tad long to feed thru a semi auto.

[DougGuy]

45 super is about as much as I will go, 28k PSi so under the limit, and that would be max loads. No reaming needed, drop right in the ACP chamber. Just put a sticker on the box of ammo saying 'ruger only', or maybe a tad long to feed thru a semi auto.

Exactly. My reply was more for NavyVet1959 but yeah I agree with 30,000psi max for large frame .45 caliber Ruger SA revolver.

[NavyVet1959]

I read that Ruger used to make a .45 win mag conversion cylinder also.

[DougGuy]

I don't think they ever issued a convertible in .45 WM but there are convertibles that had the WM cylinder added after it left the factory, and they also admit that it is a conversion that they did offer at one time. I mistakenly quoted SAAMI for the WM as being 45kpsi, when in fact it is only 40kpsi, same as the 460 Rowland.

Still, this is 25% over what max Ruger Only loads are listed at.

Fwiw, I can't quote the exact source, but Ruger hired a firm to destructively test some of their guns, and they pretty much held together until it got to 60kpsi and then they were routinely KB'ing cylinders, but I don't know if this was a .44 or a .45 caliber or if both calibers showed the same results.

[Tackleberry41]

Guess I did get a good deal on the 45 convertible. Took my 357 BH in and got $400 trade toward a double action 357.

[NavyVet1959]

Guess I did get a good deal on the 45 convertible. Took my 357 BH in and got $400 trade toward a double action 357.

Depends upon which 357 Blackhawk you had. Just looking over at Bud's, I see quite a variance in prices for the different models. Stainless go for more than blued and Bisleys go for more than standard models. Of course, they also vary by barrel length and whether it is one that has a conversion barrel with it.

[Tackleberry41]

Just a basic blued short barreled blackhawk, no conversion cyl, or anything to make it worth more. Got something a little more useful to me in 357, black hawk really isnt a concealed carry kind of gun. The place has always treated me fair, never jacked up prices during the panic. Where else am I going to walk in off the street and pay 10% more than cost? Many times I could have ordered a part off the internet for a little cheaper, but rather give them the money. In some cases their cheaper than even Wal mart. G23 mags are generally $29, paid $23 at this place.

[NavyVet1959]

One thing that I would like to see Ruger do is create a truly modular Blackhawk (or Redhawk) revolver where you could have an assortment of cylinders and barrels in different calibers. Something that could compete with the Thompson Contender / Encore, but have 6 shots. To make it even better, if you had a 16" barrel on it, you could even add a shoulder stock. The ATF says that if it starts life as a handgun, you can convert it to a rifle and back as desired.

i doubt that it could ever be as flexible on calibers and wildcats as the Thompsons though since no matter what you choose, the cylinder length would limit how long of a round you could design. With the Thompson, your only hard limit on the length of your round would be the length of the barrel. :)

EDIT: Looking at the conversion cylinders for blackpowder revolvers that allow them to fire centerfire ammunition, I doubt that this idea would be that feasible economically. When you add up the price of a new cylinder and a new barrel, you've probably come close to the price of a new gun, so it's entirely possible that it would not be a marketable design.

[contender1]

Ok Tackleberry41, you did good. I haven't looked at this thread in several days, didn't see all your confusion over frame sizes etc. I do see that DougGuy has given you some great advice.
I'm going to see if I can clear up some the confusion about frame sizes etc.
1955 to 1963, the original frames for the Ruger 357's & 44 mags were on the same size as the Colt frames. They also had a "Flat top" to the frame to where the sights were recessed into the frame.
In 1959, the Super Blackhawk was introduced, and it has a larger main frame. It also has the "protected ears" for the rear sight. Or, some folks call it humps in the frame.
In 1963 approximately, Ruger dropped the Flat topped frame, and went to one main frame. All frames were the protected ears type. And the frame is used for the Blackhawk & the Super Blackhawk.
In 1973, Ruger dropped the Old Model type action, and introduced the New Model, with the safety transfer bar system. The frame size remained the same.
In 1993, Ruger introduced the Vaquero line of SA's. They are built on the Blackhawk & Super Blackhawk main frame. This was done to give the SASS (cowboy action) crowd a gun with traditional looks. These guns have a 2-digit prefix, 55-xxxxx to 58-xxxxx.
SASS folks complained about the weight, and wanted a smaller framed gun, and most of them shoot mouse fart loads. So, in 2005, Ruger gave them the New Vaquero, on the same frame size as the original guns from 1955-1963. They differentiate between the two with marking the frame "New Vaquero, AND by changing the serial number prefix to a 3-digit one, starting at 510-00001. THESE GUNS HAVE THE SMALLER FRAME & WILL NOT HANDLE THE "RUGER ONLY" LOADS.
Also in 2005, Ruger introduced the 50th anniversary 357 Flattop revolver. It too has the original sized main frame. It too has a 3-digit serial number starting at 520-00001. And just like the New Vaquero, it will NOT handle the "Ruger only" loads.
Now, the New Model Blackhawks, in 45 Colt & as well as the convertibles, began production in 1973, and are still currently being made. They are on the larger frame, that will handle the "Ruger only" loads. They will have the protected ears rear sight assy. Their serial numbers started in 1973 at 46-00001 & are still ongoing WITH A 2 DIGIT prefix.

Your gun is a Blackhawk, with the stronger main frame.

Enjoy it, and know you got a heck of a deal.

I hope this clears up some confusion. Do not think badly of the folks at Ruger, as they are just employees, and many do not know the history like I just described. As much as I collect, shoot, & enjoy Rugers, even I had to refer to my RENE Guide to get the dates & info straight.

Oh, a side note, on the chambers, I'd slug them, and then see if they need reaming. DougGuy can do it, or you can get the tools & do it yourself. I bought the tools & have done the ones I shoot when necessary.


NavyVet, I have the exact same gun you posted the pic of above. A real sweetheart. They were originally known as a Williams Distributor exclusive.

[Tackleberry41]

Im a bit confused that the cowboy action people would go complaining about the weight of black hawks, when there are so many other more true to the original clones out there that dont need all the bulk to shoot the light loads? A bit like complaining the big v8 powered chevy you bought isnt as light as the hondas.

But Ruger does need to do a better job, ok any job of explaining they now make 2 different black hawks. You go look at their site and it doesnt say anything about serial # prefixes or anything else. And if you do ask they blow you off to go ask one of the ammo companies. I never asked them for loading data, just to clarify if they do make a regular blackhawk, and a medium version of it, but both are still called 'blackhawk'. And which one I had bought. Pretty sad the company who makes the guns isnt up on the history of their own guns, gotta go asking in a forum.

[Piedmont]

Ok Tackleberry41,
I'm going to see if I can clear up some the confusion about frame sizes etc.
1955 to 1963, the original frames for the Ruger 357's & 44 mags were on the same size as the Colt frames. They also had a "Flat top" to the frame to where the sights were recessed into the frame.
In 1959, the Super Blackhawk was introduced, and it has a larger main frame.

You didn't clear anything up at all, because the original .44 Flattop is on the same size frame as the later Super Blackhawk. The .357 Old Models are on a smaller frame.

[DougGuy]

If it has a TWO digit prefix in the serial number, it is a LARGE FRAME.

If it has a THREE digit prefix, it is a MEDIUM FRAME.

Ruger did NOT MAKE any large frame single action revolvers with a THREE digit prefix.

Ruger did NOT MAKE any medium frame single action revolvers with a TWO digit prefix.

BTW, there arent any "Ruger Only" loads for a .357 no matter what frame it is, it will handle all of the .357 loadings that are published. Same with the .44 magnum. There is no Tier 2 loads for either of these calibers, the "Ruger/TC Only" load data only applies to the large frame .45 caliber revolvers.

Hopefully this will remove any lingering clouds about what is and what isn't what. Ruger can't even explain their naming convention in a sensible manner. They made the Vaquero (1993 - 2005) which is how many digit prefix? TWO!! (loud clapping) Then, they made the New Vaquero (2005 - ) and rollmarked such on the side of the frames, and in the trade magazine full page ads, etc, and it had a THREE digit prefix, wow things are clear now! But oh wait! There's more! Some numbskull at Ruger decided to call the New Vaquero, simply the Vaquero. Again. And so the full page ads in the gun rags were changed, as was the roll mark on the side of the frame.... sigh....

And if this isn't enough, my prediction for the near future is a separate, Ruger Flattop Only load data for the .44 Special cartridge in the New Model Flattop Blackhawk revolver. Simply because no +P .44 Special load data exists, and Ruger has once again used the medium frame format to give us yet another FINE AS HADES revolver that is more than capable with it's own .44 Tier 2 pressures (which haven't been designated yet) and not just the anemic factory loads the cartridge was originally designed with. There was a thread or two addressing this subject already, and it should be easy enough to figure out that if the medium framed .45 caliber new model flattop is safe to 23,000psi, and the .44 caliber version of the same gun has slightly thicker cylinder walls, then it should be good to 25,000 or 28,000psi am I right? I predict this coming and the NMFB .44 Special +P being the best suited thin skinned game cartridge that was ever invented. Eastern Bambi in their german shepherd sized bodies would be a perfect match for this cartridge, the reduced recoil over the .44 magnum or .45 Colt +P loads will win over a LOT of shooters. This is Elmer Keith totally re-invented and refined, and it will give the gun writers plenty of fodder for their glossy pages for a good while to come...

[Moonie]

Here is an article on loading 45acp to the pressure levels acceptable in this handgun, (30,000psi):

http://handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=41

No reamer needed. I don't do it as I load the 45Colt to levels this high and have no need to risk 30Kpsi loads making it into any of the 5 1911's in the family...

[Brett Ross]

Navy vet, it looks like you bought my bisleys twinn

[NavyVet1959]

Here is an article on loading 45acp to the pressure levels acceptable in this handgun, (30,000psi):

http://handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=41

No reamer needed. I don't do it as I load the 45Colt to levels this high and have no need to risk 30Kpsi loads making it into any of the 5 1911's in the family...

In that article, he is using the bottom .460 Rowland data as the top for his loads. According to the tables, he's using 34,300 cup for the 200 gr bullet and 32,200 cup for the 230 gr bullet. His decision to stop at that level seemed pretty arbitrary.

I've read various pages where they stated that the .460 Rowland is rated at 40,000 psi whereas others state that it is 40,000 cup.

According to this article, the Blackhawk in .45LC is good for 32,200 cup.

http://www.realguns.com/archives/119.htm

Whereas this article says 32,000 psi.

http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger_Bisley45.htm

The thing is, there is not a linear relationship between cup and psi and we don't know if the writers actually wrote the correct unit of pressure. I wish everyone would just go back and use psi. :(

[Tackleberry41]

So what everybody is saying is its hard to make an 'educated' decision when buying one. I went and dug around on the internet, and got a pile of the same often conflicting information. Again be really really nice to send an email off to Ruger and they, the company who designs and makes them, could answer the question. But they cant, so...flip a coin? Their site only lists the regular blackhawks, nothing about a medium frame gun. The place around the corner has 2 Vaqueros in the case, very obviously different than a black hawk, but now seems wasnt always true. I guess every corporate board room needs somebody who sits in the corner saying 'did you people think any of this thru at all' or 'well thats pretty stupid'.

I can understand why there is no alternative 357 or 44mag load data, never needed it, both modern ammo. It would be 45 colt and 44 spcl that needed it being so old.

Yes there does need to be some sort of universal system, but we all know the US would insist on shoving our version down everybody elses throat. That whatever Europe had worked out would have to be tossed so companies here wouldn't have to do anything different, that would be the only country refusing to use the metric system. I bought some S&B 7.62x54r so I had some to reload, well it seems S&B wanted to make up their own stuff, rifle primers wont fit in the cases. Yea I know you can ream out the pockets, but shouldn't have to, why make proprietary primer system, when they already make SAAMI spec primers for reloading? Also be nice if specs stayed that way, instead of the slow but steady decrease in load datas you will find in newer books vs old ones.

[LAH]

In a nut shell DougGuy said:

If it has a TWO digit prefix in the serial number, it is a LARGE FRAME.
They made the Vaquero (1993 - 2005) which is how many digit prefix? TWO


If it has a THREE digit prefix, it is a MEDIUM FRAME.
Then, they made the New Vaquero (2005 - ) and it had a THREE digit prefix.

If he is correct, which I believe he is, it's not hard to distinguish the two frame sizes. Or am I missing something?

[DougGuy]

You can also tell by the ratchet star on the back of the cylinder which gun it is, or at least which gun it came from if it is a lone cylinder.

The New Model Medium Frame cylinders have a "scalloped" star, as in the metal is scalloped out between the teeth to make room for the cartridge rims. Cylinder is smaller diameter, the cartridges are all jammed closer together in the cylinder, so they had to make room for the rims and they did this by scalloping out the back of the boss between the teeth.

The ratchet star on a large framed Ruger cylinder is ROUND, with no scalloping between the teeth.

I "borrowed" this photo from another forum, where it was "borrowed" from 1hillbilly3:

Left: .45 Colt cylinder from a full sized large frame Blackhawk. Right: .45 ACP cylinder from a medium frame New Model Flattop.

http://i1202.photobucket.com/albums/bb374/DougGuy/Cylinder%20Services/Cylinders-Lg-Med_zpsoaou4f6e.jpg (http://s1202.photobucket.com/user/DougGuy/media/Cylinder%20Services/Cylinders-Lg-Med_zpsoaou4f6e.jpg.html)

[LAH]

The picture on the left looks like all of mine.