If the reason for the Navy grip's size is that people were smaller back then, why did the Walker, Dragoon and 1860 have such longer grips?
Since I won't be privy to Samuel Colts thoughts on why he designed what he did the way he did until/unless I meet him in the afterlife and we discuss it, I can't say for sure. I suspect that since the Walker, Dragoon, and 1860 are larger and heavier than the Navy, a larger grip frame was used to aid in using them.
What I'm getting at with all this is that the Navy grip was not designed for small hands. It was designed for the pinky to be curled under for better control.
I did not say the Navy grip was designed for small hands. I believe Colt designed it for the "average" user and remarked how, on average people were smaller back then.
The original SA grip shape and usual size comes down to us from the 1860s, and while there have always been larger men, back then most men were smaller than many today.
And, I respectfully disagree with your opinion that it was designed to use with the pinky under the butt. There is no question it can be used that way, but I don't think it was designed for that.
I spoke with a friend who is very knowledgeable about old west and Civil War history who is firmly convinced that the pinky under the butt method was popularized by one of the early top Cowboy Action shooters, and while I have no idea if he is right about that, or not, I know he is right about not being able to find any reference to that method in Colt manuals, Union or US Army instruction manuals, period photographs or woodcuts, and no mention of it in the writings of old west lawmen or gunfighters, or in anything I've read by Keith or Skelton. Not saying nobody did it, back then, but if people did, nobody seems to have written about it or gotten any pictures.
This leads me to doubt the guns were designed with pinky under the butt in mind.
It's unnecessary movement and in my opinion, not the way they were designed. These were all originally designed as fighting pistols.
I agree they were all originally designed as fighting pistols. What I disagree with is the idea that movement of the gun in the hand being unnecessary was something Colt considered. I think this is a case of applying 20th century "wisdom" to a 19th century design.
All due respect but you're having to shift your grip to cock the gun because you're using those atrocious rubber grips that lower your hand on the gun. It puts the hammer out of reach. It also increases muzzle rise.
With all due respect, I think you've got that flat wrong.
Those "atrocious rubber grips" are what I like and prefer, they make the gun more comfortable to hold and shoot, for me, and they have the exact opposite effect on muzzle rise, they help reduce it, not increase it.
Also, I'm shooting Ruger new Model Blackhawks and Super Blackhawk, not Colt SAA's or clones. most of them with 7.5" barrels, as I've let my shorter barrel Vaqueros go, recently.