revolvers

There is a difference most definitely. Put a "old vaquero only" load in a new vaquero 45 Colt and it will become obvious in a few shots.

I get picky about the names we use conversationally for Ruger SA revolvers. Because people get sloppy with names, and because Ruger has a generational penchant for using VERY similar names for guns with much different designs, it can be difficult to tell from casual conversation just what specific gun is under discussion.

TO me, there are no "old Vaqueros". There are Vaqueros and New Vaqueros, and the guns are marked that way. I don't mind if you want to say "original" Vaquero, but saying "old Vaquero" can confuse people, some of whom associate "old XXXX" with the original Blackhawk vs, New Model Blackhawk.

Some folks think Rugers names are wonderful, there are so many different models and variations they give collectors a very diverse field to enjoy.

Some people think the close similarity of names between different gun models is a pain in the butt, and then on top of that are the made up names people use.

People who know a big about Ruger's SA names and their history generally get what is meant from context, but people who don't get lost, easily. And, further complicating the issue is that, despite how much I want it to, time doesn't stand still, and new terms get made up and used.

"old Vaquero only load " is a prime example. Pretty sure I know what you mean, but the term just sounds wrong to me. Probably because I grew up living the history that younger folks today only read about.

Ruger introduced the New Model Blackhawk about 1973 or so, a new design SA revolver different from their previous Blackhawks and using a different operating system. They were made on a large frame and one model was the .45 Convertable.

At the time, and for many years afterward, it was the only .45 caliber revolver Ruger made. In the early 70s, handloaders experimented with heavier than standard .45 Colt loadings, which the New Model Ruger .45 would handle, and those loads became (informally) known as "Ruger Only" loads.

About 20 years later, Ruger introduced the Vaquero (1993) and since it was made using the same large frame size as the new Model Blackhawk .45, it will handle the "Ruger Only" loads from the 70s. However, the Vaquero did not exist when those loads were developed, so I feel it incorrect to call them "old Vaquero Only" loads.

Ruger dropped production of the Vaquero about 2008, and replaced the gun with the "New Vaquero", a different, smaller gun, and not suitable for the heavy "Ruger Only" loads.

I've had/have all of them, New Model Blackhawks, Vaqueros, and New Vaquero and while some people don't think the details are important, because "everyone knows what you're talking about", they do matter to me, and so, I whine about it. :rolleyes:

Nothing personal, just one of my many quirks. :D
 
You'll never see me put anything but holy black in my 1877. Cast iron cvlinder! And I should have noted that they were known as the gunsmith's favorite back in the day. Don't shoot smokeless in a Colt's 1877!
 
"Cast iron cvlinder!"

I don't think they were cast iron, I believe they were ductile iron, as was the frame.

I believe early Walker, and perhaps some other, percussion revolvers did have cast iron cylinders, but it was not suitable as it tended to fracture under sudden loads. IIRC by about 1860 Colt had switched to ductile iron for its revolver cylinders.

Ductile, or maleable, iron stretches but tends not to fracture like cast iron.

Ductile iron or cast iron, neither will hold up to smokeless loads, even light smokeless loads.
 
Have a few, but my favorite is my Dan Wesson 445 Super Mag that came with 3 barrels. Second is my D.W. 357 mag that came with 4 barrels. Those pistols are in every way superior to anything S.W. ever built. (IMO)
 
I get picky about the names we use conversationally for Ruger SA revolvers. Because people get sloppy with names, and because Ruger has a generational penchant for using VERY similar names for guns with much different designs, it can be difficult to tell from casual conversation just what specific gun is under discussion.

TO me, there are no "old Vaqueros". There are Vaqueros and New Vaqueros, and the guns are marked that way. I don't mind if you want to say "original" Vaquero, but saying "old Vaquero" can confuse people, some of whom associate "old XXXX" with the original Blackhawk vs, New Model Blackhawk.

Some folks think Rugers names are wonderful, there are so many different models and variations they give collectors a very diverse field to enjoy.

Some people think the close similarity of names between different gun models is a pain in the butt, and then on top of that are the made up names people use.

People who know a big about Ruger's SA names and their history generally get what is meant from context, but people who don't get lost, easily. And, further complicating the issue is that, despite how much I want it to, time doesn't stand still, and new terms get made up and used.

"old Vaquero only load " is a prime example. Pretty sure I know what you mean, but the term just sounds wrong to me. Probably because I grew up living the history that younger folks today only read about.

Ruger introduced the New Model Blackhawk about 1973 or so, a new design SA revolver different from their previous Blackhawks and using a different operating system. They were made on a large frame and one model was the .45 Convertable.

At the time, and for many years afterward, it was the only .45 caliber revolver Ruger made. In the early 70s, handloaders experimented with heavier than standard .45 Colt loadings, which the New Model Ruger .45 would handle, and those loads became (informally) known as "Ruger Only" loads.

About 20 years later, Ruger introduced the Vaquero (1993) and since it was made using the same large frame size as the new Model Blackhawk .45, it will handle the "Ruger Only" loads from the 70s. However, the Vaquero did not exist when those loads were developed, so I feel it incorrect to call them "old Vaquero Only" loads.

Ruger dropped production of the Vaquero about 2008, and replaced the gun with the "New Vaquero", a different, smaller gun, and not suitable for the heavy "Ruger Only" loads.

I've had/have all of them, New Model Blackhawks, Vaqueros, and New Vaquero and while some people don't think the details are important, because "everyone knows what you're talking about", they do matter to me, and so, I whine about it. :rolleyes:

Nothing personal, just one of my many quirks. :D
I don't disagree with your facts. To avoid confusion, Ruger shooters use old and new in front of Vaquero. Some of the most knowledgeable Ruger people on earth are on Ruger forums. The term "old Vaquero" is common usage there.
Hodgdons Website is now scary. Their 45 "long" Colt data says for "Ruger, T.C. and freedom arms only".
 
Ah….please indulge me here…..I’ve been shooting Colt single-actions since about 1960, and although I may have, at some time, used black powder (it’s dirty, corrosive and smells like rotten eggs) I’ve shot thousands of rounds through SAA’s with smokeless powder. Now, by the 1890’s Winchester and Marlin were making rifles and shotguns out of steel and their guns were marked for smokeless powder. So, you’re saying that even though Winchester and Marlin were making their guns out of steel, Colt wasn’t?
 
Ah….please indulge me here…..I’ve been shooting Colt single-actions since about 1960, and although I may have, at some time, used black powder (it’s dirty, corrosive and smells like rotten eggs) I’ve shot thousands of rounds through SAA’s with smokeless powder. Now, by the 1890’s Winchester and Marlin were making rifles and shotguns out of steel and their guns were marked for smokeless powder. So, you’re saying that even though Winchester and Marlin were making their guns out of steel, Colt wasn’t?
I seriously doubt Colt was making any pressure bearing part out of cast Iron. Probably no part, but some oddball part may have been.
 
"Now, by the 1890’s Winchester and Marlin were making rifles and shotguns out of steel and their guns were marked for smokeless powder. So, you’re saying that even though Winchester and Marlin were making their guns out of steel, Colt wasn’t? "

Different manufacturers changed different firearms to different components at different times.

For example, Winchester changed to nickel steel for its Winchester Model 1894 in 1895...

But ONLY for the guns chambered in .30-30 and .25-35.

They didn't change to nickel steel for those chambered in .32-40 and .38-55 for some years afterwards as they used up old stock barrel material.

Nickel steel barrels could be specially ordered in either of those chamberings, but it would cost extra, and apparently rifles so chambered are fairly uncommon in the lower serial number ranges.

As far as I know, Colt NEVER switched the Model 1877 over to the early crucible steel alloys that replaced ductile iron simply because it wasn't that good of a seller.

After the Colt 1892 -- which was chambered in the same cartridges as the 1877 but was a FAR superior revolver -- came out sales of the 1877 slowed to a crawl.

From what I understand actual production of the Model 1877 stopped around 1895, but it was still cataloged until 1909 in an effort to get rid of ones that had been made but which were just gathering dust.

I'd never depend on a M1877 or M1878 being suitable for use with smokeless powder without a lot of data from the company's records or from a metallurgy report.
 
Thank you Mike! This is a Ballard #5 Pacific that was converted to a schuetzen rifle sometime in the 1890's, it has a tapered round #3 Winchester barrel in 32-40, marked "Nickel Steel." Apparently, Winchester's custom shop would make-up barrels for various makes of rifles, finished and threaded, so that gunsmiths could then fit and chamber them.
 

Attachments

  • 2019-04-21 Winchester - Ballard 007.JPG
    2019-04-21 Winchester - Ballard 007.JPG
    971.5 KB · Views: 13
Last edited:
Harry Pope developed something of a following by fitting Winchester barrels to schuetzen rifles. He apparently would purchase the blanks and would rifle them himself using a special rifling style he developed.

Some years ago a member posted about a Schuetzen rifle he saw at the Denver gunshow.

https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=562876&highlight=pope

Never heard back whether he saw the rifle again, and he's not been on in years, but I really suspect that, given the $5 grand price tag, that was a Harry Pope rifle.
 
Just for fun, a gunzine writer got USFA to build him a modernized .41 LC.
It had a .386" barrel for use with inside lubricated flat base bullets of that diameter.

I wonder how close that is to the developmental.41 Colt Special of the 1930s.
 
Oddly enough, even though ammo companies started changing the .41 Colt heeled bullet to a single diameter bullet in the 1890s, Colt was still putting oversized barrels on its .41 LC revolvers for quite a few years.

I guess they didn't want to switch the machinery out.
 
Back
Top