Quality .45LC
- Thread starter BoogieMan
- Start date
Driftwood Johnson
New member
Howdy
Ruger brought out their first Blackhawk, chambered for the 357 Magnum cartridge, in 1955. The mechanism of these revolvers was very similar to a Colt, with the exception that all the springs were coil springs instead of leaf springs. These were later known as the Three Screw Blackhawks because similar to a Colt, the internal parts rotated on three screws. This one was made in 1962. Because of the lack of protective ears for the rear sight these were known as the Flat Tops.
After losing several expensive lawsuits Ruger completely redesigned their line of single action revolvers in the early 1970s. The main difference was the addition of the transfer bar, which makes these revolvers completely safe to carry with six rounds with the hammer down on a loaded chamber. I bought this 45 Colt/45 ACP convertible Blackhawk in 1975. Notice the three screws are gone, replaced by two pins.
In 1993 Ruger brought out the first Vaquero. The first Vaqueros were just Blackhawks with the frame rounded on top and the adjustable sight rear sight was replaced with a fixed sight groove down the top strap. The front sight was a simple blade similar to the front sight of a Colt.
Blackhawks had always been big guns, bigger than a Colt. So the 'original' Vaqueros were also big guns. In 2005 Ruger replaced the 'original' Vaquero with the New Vaquero. This revolver was about the same size as a Colt, about 10% smaller than the 'original' Vaquero.
In this photo, the revolver at the top is an 'original' Vaquero, the one at the bottom is a New Vaquero. Probably difficult to tell from this photo, but the New Vaquero is in fact smaller than the 'original' Vaquero at the top of the photo.
Ruger's Bisley Vaquero and Blackhawk are patterned after the Colt Bisley model. In 1894 Colt introduced a new revolver for the National Target Matches at the Bisley range outside of London, England. The Bisley model had a radically different shaped grip, much straighter up and down than the traditional 'plow handle' grip of the Single Action Army.
This Bisley Colt was made in 1909.
This is Ruger's version of the Bisley grip. Notice it does not sweep as far forward as the original Colt design. Notice too that the Ruger Bisley hammer and trigger mimic the shapes of the Colt Bisley hammer and trigger.
Some shooters prefer the Bisley grip on a Ruger because it is a little bit longer, allowing the shooter to fit his entire hand onto the grip more easily than with a traditional 'plow handle' grip.
I suspect the Vaquero that you examined today was a New Vaquero, since the 'original' Vaquero has not been made for about ten years now.
Pretty good summary, Driftwood.
I would add that despite the confusing names, there is a way to tell the guns apart, easily, IF you have them in hand.
ON the left side of the frame, below the cylinder, they say what they are.
Ruger new model BLACKHAWK
Ruger VAQUERO
Ruger NEW VAQUERO
I believe the new model lockwork was first made in 1973. Ruger did lose a lawsuit (perhaps more than one, I don't know), but it was a suit that from what I've heard, it was a suit Ruger should have won (a guy shot himself in the leg loading/unloading his Ruger in the cab of a moving pickup, so the story goes). Apparently the jury was unsympathetic to the "big gun maker", and Ruger lost.
Part of the settlement agreement was Ruger redesigned its guns, AND Ruger was, and still is REQUIRED to convert every "old model" (aka 3 screw) they get (for any reason) to the new model lockwork system.
There are other features of the new model besides the transfer bar that is different from the Colt system. There is no half cock position for the hammer. Simply opening the loading gate and that frees the cylinder for loading and unloading.
I have Blackhawks, a 5.5" Vaquero, a 5.5" Vaquero Bisley, a pair of 4 & 5/8" Vaqueros, and a 5,5" NEW Vaquero.
The New Vaquero with an inch longer barrel is virtually the same length overall as the 4 & 45/8" Vaquero.
Ok, I'm a Ruger fan. If they cost the same, I would choose a Ruger over a Colt. But they don't cost the same, not even close, and for what I want, and what I do, Ruger does it better, and cheaper.
ALSO, Ruger stands behind their guns, here in the USA. Colt CLONES made overseas (some of which are fine guns) are overseas, and even if they stand behind their guns, they are standing a long way off...
If you're looking for the exact old west look and operation, Colt is the one. Or a well made clone. The NEW VAQUERO is pretty close in size, and looks, but operated with the transfer bar system.
It all boils down to what you want, and what feels best in your hand, and out of your wallet.
Another thought you might consider is that there are a number of aftermarket parts & grips for Rugers, but if you put pachmayer grips on a Colt like I do my Rugers, being called a low down varmint for spoiling a Colt is getting off easy.
Of course there are lots of grips for the classic Colt SAA out there as well, as plain or as fancy as you might want.
I would add that despite the confusing names, there is a way to tell the guns apart, easily, IF you have them in hand.
ON the left side of the frame, below the cylinder, they say what they are.
Ruger new model BLACKHAWK
Ruger VAQUERO
Ruger NEW VAQUERO
I believe the new model lockwork was first made in 1973. Ruger did lose a lawsuit (perhaps more than one, I don't know), but it was a suit that from what I've heard, it was a suit Ruger should have won (a guy shot himself in the leg loading/unloading his Ruger in the cab of a moving pickup, so the story goes). Apparently the jury was unsympathetic to the "big gun maker", and Ruger lost.
Part of the settlement agreement was Ruger redesigned its guns, AND Ruger was, and still is REQUIRED to convert every "old model" (aka 3 screw) they get (for any reason) to the new model lockwork system.
There are other features of the new model besides the transfer bar that is different from the Colt system. There is no half cock position for the hammer. Simply opening the loading gate and that frees the cylinder for loading and unloading.
I have Blackhawks, a 5.5" Vaquero, a 5.5" Vaquero Bisley, a pair of 4 & 5/8" Vaqueros, and a 5,5" NEW Vaquero.
The New Vaquero with an inch longer barrel is virtually the same length overall as the 4 & 45/8" Vaquero.
Ok, I'm a Ruger fan. If they cost the same, I would choose a Ruger over a Colt. But they don't cost the same, not even close, and for what I want, and what I do, Ruger does it better, and cheaper.
ALSO, Ruger stands behind their guns, here in the USA. Colt CLONES made overseas (some of which are fine guns) are overseas, and even if they stand behind their guns, they are standing a long way off...
If you're looking for the exact old west look and operation, Colt is the one. Or a well made clone. The NEW VAQUERO is pretty close in size, and looks, but operated with the transfer bar system.
It all boils down to what you want, and what feels best in your hand, and out of your wallet.
Another thought you might consider is that there are a number of aftermarket parts & grips for Rugers, but if you put pachmayer grips on a Colt like I do my Rugers, being called a low down varmint for spoiling a Colt is getting off easy.
Of course there are lots of grips for the classic Colt SAA out there as well, as plain or as fancy as you might want.
I don't know what some of the makers do, but Colt always put on the grips, then sanded the grips and grip frame down together so the fit was perfect. If you buy replacement grips, they probably won't fit exactly and could be way off. With grips that are too small, you will be out of luck unless you can find a very patient supplier who will play "try another" with you indefinitely.
Jim
Jim
Driftwood Johnson
New member
Uberti does it the traditional way too, grinding and sanding the grips and grip frame down as a unit. Then they are returned and married up to their respective frames.
Swapping stocks is hard with a Colt. If that's important to you for some reason then look elsewhere.
As for cost value I already stated my position. When I held a Colt in one hand and a clone in the other there was no doubt in my mind as to which is clearly superior.
When the good clones were $300 and a Colt was $1200 I bought clones. Now it seems the clones are $700-$800 and the Colts are double that. At 4-1 the clones made sense as long as you were willing to sacrifice the quality to save money. At 2-1 the Colt becomes the better deal. That's my thinking anyway.
As for cost value I already stated my position. When I held a Colt in one hand and a clone in the other there was no doubt in my mind as to which is clearly superior.
When the good clones were $300 and a Colt was $1200 I bought clones. Now it seems the clones are $700-$800 and the Colts are double that. At 4-1 the clones made sense as long as you were willing to sacrifice the quality to save money. At 2-1 the Colt becomes the better deal. That's my thinking anyway.
jackmoser65
New member
Grips for virtually any Colt type single action should be fitted to the frame. Same goes for Rugers of all vintages, even though the later model flat tops and New Vaqueros are more consistent.
It is a myth that the Ruger New Model action was the result of the terms of a settlement. It was 100% voluntary on Ruger's part to introduce the New Models and retrofit the Old Models.
While Colt will always be considered by some to be the only "real thing", the reproductions by Uberti and Pietta are actually closer to the original Model P than anything with the rampant pony in nearly a century. Colts are better made out of better materials but the gap has closed considerably in recent years and as of late, Colt prices have shot through the roof ever since US Firearms stopped making SAA's.
It is a myth that the Ruger New Model action was the result of the terms of a settlement. It was 100% voluntary on Ruger's part to introduce the New Models and retrofit the Old Models.
While Colt will always be considered by some to be the only "real thing", the reproductions by Uberti and Pietta are actually closer to the original Model P than anything with the rampant pony in nearly a century. Colts are better made out of better materials but the gap has closed considerably in recent years and as of late, Colt prices have shot through the roof ever since US Firearms stopped making SAA's.
claydoctor
New member
Depends on your interpretation of "voluntary". I believe the change did occur as the result of several lawsuits.
jackmoser65
New member
It was the result of lawsuits but it was not mandated by any settlement. Ruger didn't have to do what it did, just as Colt and a plethora of replica makers never had to remove their guns from the market.
It's a funny thing how some of us old timer's are. We like the three clicks you hear when cocking a Colt SAA. I still have a 2nd Gen 44spl new frontier, but it is a safe queen. If I want to shoot a SA in 44 I do the Ruger Lipsey 44 spl that came out on the 357 frame. Got it off of GB at a reduced price NIB.
The coil springs are superior to the old Colt leaf springs, and I don't have to worry about wear and tear. Being the old timer that I am, I self installed the Power Custom trigger that has a half cock and the three lovely clicks, but doesn't do away with the transfer bar safety feature. Kinda cool
Even though it is on the 357 frame it is still a moose compared with the sleek Colt SAA, but it is also strong as can be.
The coil springs are superior to the old Colt leaf springs, and I don't have to worry about wear and tear. Being the old timer that I am, I self installed the Power Custom trigger that has a half cock and the three lovely clicks, but doesn't do away with the transfer bar safety feature. Kinda cool
Even though it is on the 357 frame it is still a moose compared with the sleek Colt SAA, but it is also strong as can be.Attachments
claydoctor
New member
Never have figured how to do a QUOTE on this forum'
I thought we get 4 clicks with a Colt , C-O-L-T, not three .
Getting back to the Ruger lawsuit. I'm sure they changed the system to protect themselves from future copycat lawsuits. Problem is by changing it, one can argue that you are admitting there was a problem with the original design. Colt on the 1911 went to a Series 80 design for similar reasons, to prevent lawsuits but now they are selling both the 70 Series and the 80 Series. Go figure ?
I thought we get 4 clicks with a Colt , C-O-L-T, not three .
Getting back to the Ruger lawsuit. I'm sure they changed the system to protect themselves from future copycat lawsuits. Problem is by changing it, one can argue that you are admitting there was a problem with the original design. Colt on the 1911 went to a Series 80 design for similar reasons, to prevent lawsuits but now they are selling both the 70 Series and the 80 Series. Go figure ?
I disagree. The problem is the acceptance of that as a valid argument, every time. Now, it may be that sometimes it is true, but the acceptance, in the legal system that it is (nearly) ALWAYS true has severely damaged American industry.
Decades ago, maybe even back in the dark ages of the 80s, (I forget, exactly) I saw an interview on a news show (might have been 60 Minutes, again, I forget).
The show was about plane crashes. One of the guys they interviewed owned a company that made magnetos for the engines used in light aircraft (Pipercub, etc). He said, EVERY TIME one of those planes crashes, he gets sued. Doesn't matter WHY the plane crashed, he still gets sued. One plane crash was the result of a drunk pilot, and they found the half full whiskey bottle in the wreck, and he still got sued.
He picked up an item off a shelf, and showed it, saying "this is the magneto we DON'T make. It's an improved version of the one we do make. We developed it some time ago. Our lawyers won't let us make it. They say it would be a de facto admission that our previous product was defective. We would get sued, and we would LOSE.
He tossed the magneto back on the shelf and looked disgusted. The interview cut to another person on another aircraft subject.
I mention this just for ONE example of how the belief that if you can make something better, then the old one was defective has hurt us industrially and economically.
The only people who profit from that concept are lawyers, and the people they use that tactic to win settlements for.
It is ENTIRELY possible, and even logical that one simply invents a better product without the original being in any way at fault, but no one seems to be able to convince juries of that these days.
Sign of our modern times I suppose....
claydoctor
New member
You disagree, then you re-state my point. Notice I said it "can" be argued as will undoubtedly be done by the lawyers. I didn't say it was a valid argument .
claydoctor
New member
No apology needed. No offense taken. Just trying to out nit-pick you Best regards
Best regardsWhy... yes they are!
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=582123&page=3
May I see yours?
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=582123&page=3
May I see yours?
Color case hardening is the controlling factor in your specs, so I would suggest a Uberti El Patron.
This is a Colt clone, so you will forgo any modern features of Rugers and their capacity to shoot 20k psi loads.
This is a Colt clone, so you will forgo any modern features of Rugers and their capacity to shoot 20k psi loads.
claydoctor
New member
The problem with the El Patron, Evil Roy, etc Ubertis is the checkered grips.
I don't believe Colts ever came with checkered grips, so who came up with this unauthentic variation ?
I don't believe Colts ever came with checkered grips, so who came up with this unauthentic variation ?