Horrible Mistake! :(

M

Model12Win

Moderator
Gentleman, I believe I've bought the wrong gun! :(

As some of you may know, my most recent revolver is a Ruger New Model Blackhawk .45 convertible. Well I am discovering this is not the Ruger single action I had in mind when I purchased it.

First, the action. When buying this gun, I was under the impression it was the type where chambers would line up with the loading port at each click when turning the cylinder. Guys this is not so! The clicks are between cylinders! This makes it tricky to reload since on the Ruger guns with this feature, you turn the cylinder till it clicks then back it up a bit till it stops, which holds it in the perfect position to eject the round and load a fresh one... I'm quite disappointed this isn't standard on all Ruger single actions. I got my signals crossed and assumed it was. It is standard on THIS gun, the one I fear I should have bought:

https://ruger.com/products/newModelBlackhawkConvertible/specSheets/5240.html

5240.jpg


This gun is built on the flat-top frame and has the excellent loading features I first mentioned. I have read many like it even better than free spin pawl. Not only that, it has an all-steel construction. On my New Model Blackhawk (standard frame), the grip frame is aluminum. Because of this it feels quite nose heavy, more so than I was anticipating at the guns weight. These two guns actually weigh exactly the same according to Ruger, but with the lighter frame and heavier grip frame of the flattop, it is sure to end up feeling better balanced in the hand.

Now the only thing (IMHO) that the standard large frame New Model Blackhawk has over the flattops is the ability to fire heavy .45 Colt +P loads, something I never intend to do anyway. For my purposes, I'd never need the power of such loads in my area. The largest predators are coyotes and for social work it's just too much. I also do not enjoy shooting heavy loads recreationally.

So guys this is a lesson to all to THOROUGHLY research a gun before you buy it. I thought I had done this, but got confused and am now invested in this one. I am strongly considering selling it and purchasing the flattop. I fear I won't be satisfied at all with this gun and will be thinking of the flattop.

Take care all!
 
"...chambers would line up with the loading port..." Needs to "line up" with the barrel, not the loading port.
"...frame is aluminum..." It being Al doesn't cause the balance to be forward. The weight is forward on the balance point anyway.
Difference in weight between a 4.6" and 5.5" is 1 ounce. 2 ounces between a 5.5" and 7.5".
 
Maybe a mistake but horrible?

One of the hardest things to do is ask the question you don't know you should have until its too late.

With all due respect, you have to pull the trigger at some point.

We bought a Diesel VW, I found out latter it has a god awful chain driven oil pump/ balance module (not fine German engineering if you will). It cost some bucks to correct that equivalent of engine roulette (it would let go at some point.) Good news was there was a solution.

Enough annoyance sell the gun, take the loss and move on.
 
Simple fix if you are up to it.

http://www.ktgunsmith.com/freespinpawl.htm

If you have the lighter weight aluminum frame that is the 45 Colt Ruger I have always wanted. I like the lighter weight. I have a super blackhawk 44 mag and its a brute to wear if you don't have a really sturdy belt. And it doesn't line up either.

The way I eject my empties is I push on the ejector rod and let it ride the front of the cylinder with the gun pointed up. Then when a charge hole comes up the rod drops in the hole and the empty is ejected. No big deal. I would certainly like it better if the holes lined up like a Colt but it is what it is.
 
I made a similar purchase. Now I have a top notch ruger blackhawk, the most beautiful gun i have bought since my K38. I love the thing, but it's a small frustration that I have to make two or three passes around the cylinder to either empty or fill the thing. I'm sure that eventually it will become simple.

if you decide that you absolutely can't live with it any longer, and you are absolutely compelled to throw it into the nearest lake, think about giving it away to a good cause. I'll send you an address for a worthy person.
 
Wow. I was waiting to hear of a real problem with the gun. Just sell it and move on. I'd assume your's is like all the other ones with that part number?
 
Sounds like a standard BH since, oh, about 1972. :)

Tens of thousands have been sold and tens of thousands
of shooters have handled the model with ease. :)

And those same shooters have had no problem loading
the BH or unloading it. :cool:

Guess some are just horribly slow learners. :D
 
Bob Wright said:
What you have is called a "project gun." Here are two examples, both .45 Colt:



Bob Wright
Click to expand...
Bob what'd you do to them? They look gr8!

I'm kicking myself in the ass right now... sure thought these would line up like a Colt. Why doesn't Ruger make all their single actions do that?
 
I'm not really sure, but the same mechanism that indexes them to the barrel indexes them for the port. They don't match. I suppose that maybe a relief cut could be made to slide the case heads through the lock when it is opened, but that's not really an answer.

I don't have too much experience with sa revolvers. I would prefer that the thing not actually lock. The problem as I see it is that it takes just that tiny bit of overtravel, and dog gone it, you're screwed. Gotta wait until it comes around on the guitar again. If it could be slid back a bit?

This issue is sort of like the rem 700 not having the controlled feed. A controlled feed is nice, it's helpful, and in a very rare situation it might actually save a person from a failure or error. The push feed works, and unless you have the rifle in some crazy contortions or "limp wrist" feed it, you will never have problems related to the push feed.

With all of the complaints that I have heard over the years about a push feed rifle, I can only ask, if the push feed is so terrible, why in the world would so many swat and sniper units use then?
 
The slightly smaller Blackhawk frame used on the flattop and New Vaquero utilize an additional small plunger in the frame behind the cylinder to provide cylinder alignment when the cylinder is reversed slightly. Not sure why the standard Blackhawks and Super Blackhawks still don't have the plunger. It's a nice feature.

A black anodized aluminum grip frame is used on the blued standard Blackhawks. The blued flattops and blued New Vaqueros use steel grip frames. The blued Super blackhawks also use a steel grip frame. And all stainless guns in the single action family use steel grip frames. All of the cylinder frames are steel on all single actions as well.

Perhaps it's also worth mentioning that the cylinders on the 5 shot Super Blackhawks (454 Casull and 480 Ruger) line up well for case extraction.
 
You can back up the cylinder by half a hole after the hand clicks? You could be spinning the cylinder too fast. The click happens right at alignment and you just go pass it. If the cylinder stops right at the click, I don't think you can back up the cylinder. The hand won't allow it.

I suppose the revolver has a loading notch and you cock the hammer there to load.

-TL

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
 
tangolima said:
You can back up the cylinder by half a hole after the hand clicks? You could be spinning the cylinder too fast. The click happens right at alignment and you just go pass it. If the cylinder stops right at the click, I don't think you can back up the cylinder. The hand won't allow it.

I suppose the revolver has a loading notch and you cock the hammer there to load.

-TL

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Not sure what you mean??
 
"I suppose the revolver has a loading notch and you cock the hammer there to load."

Nope. Old model (threw screw) Ruger SA revolvers pre '73 had a hammer loading position, but all of the post '72 SA revolvers with the transfer bar are loaded and extracted with the hammer down.
 
One role of the gun for me is defense so a quick load is important. Having nothing but trouble, seems the detent on the flattops would help x1,000,000.
 
With the Single Action, there should be no need for a "quick reload." Eject your empties and reload at your leisure.

Bob Wright
 
Bob Wright said:
With the Single Action, there should be no need for a "quick reload." Eject your empties and reload at your leisure.

Bob Wright
Click to expand...
Thank you, Bob Wright.

It does seem that the medium-frame flattop model is what I should have gotten. I desire that action most greatly.

Gentleman, I have erred. This gun will be for sale shortly in the classifieds and is in perfect shape of course if anyone is interested.
 
T. O'Heir said:
"...chambers would line up with the loading port..." Needs to "line up" with the barrel, not the loading port.
Click to expand...
You're talking about for shooting, he's talking about for reloading. That loading gate issue has to be one of the dumbest things Ruger has ever done.

Tangolima said:
I suppose the revolver has a loading notch and you cock the hammer there to load.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but you suppose wrong. As has been noted, the Blackhawks with the transfer bar mechanism don't work the way you think they do -- or like a Colt SAA/
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top