Can a Ruger Vaquero withstand heavy loads?

And to be clear, until you can sort through all the complexities
brought up in this thread just stick to factory loads that are NOT marked +P.
 
I have bunches of Single Action revolvers chambered for 45 Colt. Ruger, Colt, and Uberti. I do not happen to own a New Vaquero chambered for 45 Colt. If I did, I would not load anything more powerful than the SAAAMI Max of 14,000 psi for it.

Sounds simple to me you like a bigger boom buy a bigger gun .
Click to expand...

Those put off by the complexities of going beyond SAAMI specs should read the Brian Pearce article referenced in post #11.
 
Lots of confusion about the names, as borne out here.

All Vaqueros are "new model" single actions with transfer bar ignition.

There is no "old model" Vaquero. One might say instead that there is an [original] Vaquero and a New Vaquero.

I understand that the reason that the .44 Special revolvers (produced on the medium frame) were stamped "Vaquero" instead of "New Vaquero" is because the "original" Vaquero was never produced in .44 Special so there was no reason to differentiate it from a prior version.

Clear as mud, right?
 
Vaquero = 32kpsi or equal to a Blackhawk.

New Vaquero = ~21kpsi or anything equivalent to .45ACP.

Why? Because some people prefer the utility of fixed sights.
 
Personally, I think Ruger came out with the Vaquero to satisfy the CASS rules and let people shoot a mechanically superior gun.

If you can get past the fact that the Ruger Blackhawk is bigger than the Colt SAA, (and many cannot) its a superior gun.

BUT, that single action revolver, in a classic 1873 cartridge was not allowed in CASS (had to be run in "modern class") because it had adjustable sights.

Note that the NEW VAQUERO is even closer to the Colt in size, again, to satisfy the "it has to look right" crowd.

I don't blame them, they make more money that way. ;)
 
The Blackhawk has lots of good features but I disagree that it's necessarily superior to the Vaquero or New Vaquero. I always found the Blackhawk to be ill proportioned for the smaller calibers, but of course that is subjective.

Just to update some information, there is no more "modern" or "traditional" categories. Those were eliminated around 2009 as part of some rule changes.

Revolvers with adjustable sights may now be used in any of the "age based" SASS categories, and in the B-Western category.
 
Thanks, Realgun "Those put off by the complexities of going beyond SAAMI specs should read the Brian Pearce article referenced in post #11."

Correct. He also wrote an article in a later issue on his son going bear hunting with a New Model (medium frame) 45 Colt. Using an RCBS 285gr Colt SAA bullet at just over 1050 (about 20k), he put six rounds plumb through a treed bear at 40 yards. The bear was dead at the 4th shot and the guide said he'd never seen any round do that in decades of bear shooting. Also, in preparing this load for his son, several hundred rounds were shot and the cases fell out of the cylinder. At 20k, the old 45 is a beast with moderate recoil. As Bob Wright said earlier, if I need any more, I'll pick up my 41 or 44mag.
 
Last edited:
"The cylinder in the center of this photo is from a large frame 'original model' Vaquero. On the left is a cylinder from an Uberti Cattleman, on the right is a 2nd Generation Colt cylinder. All three are chambered for 45 Colt. Notice how much more metal there is surrounding the chambers in the Vaquero cylinder. A New Vaquero cylinder chambered for 45 colt will look very similar to the Uberti and Colt cylinders."


You can't go by that since all three probably use different alloys and different heat treats. Metallurgy and heat treat can make all the difference in the world. A very thin cylinder wall could be much stronger than a thicker one with the correct alloy and heat treat.
 
You can't go by that since all three probably use different alloys and different heat treats. Metallurgy and heat treat can make all the difference in the world. A very thin cylinder wall could be much stronger than a thicker one with the correct alloy and heat treat.
Click to expand...
In this case, it pretty much tells the whole story.
 
You can't go by that since all three probably use different alloys and different heat treats. Metallurgy and heat treat can make all the difference in the world. A very thin cylinder wall could be much stronger than a thicker one with the correct alloy and heat treat.
Click to expand...

I beg to disagree. Ruger uses modern heat treatable alloys and heat treats their cylinders according to industry standard practices. Ruger uses the same alloys and heat treating methods for the smaller dimensioned New Vaquero.

I cannot speak for the Uberti cylinder, but Colt has been using modern heat treatable alloys for a long time now, and has been heat treating them for a long time. It was back in the 1930s that Colt developed their heat treating techniques to a level that they could chamber the then new 357 Magnum round in the SAA.

Bottom line is, that Vaquero cylinder with those thick cylinder walls is going to be just as strong or stronger than anything else made. It is going to be stronger than the Colt cylinder. Period. That is why 'Ruger Only' loads were created in the first place. And a New Vaquero made with the same steel and heat treating methods as the older model cannot be as strong as the older Vaquero because all other things being the same, and they are, the thicker cylinder walls are simply stronger than the thinner ones.
 
Can a Ruger withstand heavy loads

Doesn't quite match the photo in the post. However the polished surface extends over the edge and makes it appear thinner.
I can't get to the dial caliper to measure the cylinder.
My cylinder looks like they used hardness tester on the rear of the cylinder there is a perfect little dimple 180% from the, what I take is a proof mark with the glasses.
Before I fired that heavy load I looked at several sites on the net. Ruger said it was safe in Vaqueros to a point.
They did lighten the construction at some point but I don't remember particulars.
I do remember the cylinder safe with these loads is 1.7something inches.
The newer and smaller one is 1.6 something.
Without measuring I took it upon myself that a 95 production gun was the larger diameter.
If wife ever gets her stuff out of her sewing room/my gun room I'll be able to unbox all the gun stuff and maybe get to my dial caliper.
 
5x-xxxxx serial number = large framed Vaquero

5xx-xxxxx serial number = smaller framed "new" Vaquero.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top