ruger blackhawk, 44 special
- Thread starter Newton24b
- Start date
Well Ruger will tell you it will handle the SAMMI loads only. However, it will easily handle the skeeter and Keith load. If you read Brian Pearce's articles he agrees.... And I shoot the Skeeter load exclusively in mine. I've shot the Keith load too (17g of 2400 under 240g bullet). Also read Ross Seyfried's article on the .44 Spec. He agrees.
OK,please understand this is not a recomendation,and you are on your own.I just bought a Lipsey Special,44 spl on a Bisley in a 357 flat top frame.
If you do a search on "44 spl Lipsey Special",you will find a Ross Seifred article,read it.
Those loads correspond to some older heavy 44spl loads found in a Handloader magazine.
As I said,you are on your own,but I will explore 25,000 to 30,000 psi.
The data published ballparks 1100 fps with 240 gr +plus bullets.
Sorry,I do not feel comfortable being more specific.The article gives some good loads.
If you do a search on "44 spl Lipsey Special",you will find a Ross Seifred article,read it.
Those loads correspond to some older heavy 44spl loads found in a Handloader magazine.
As I said,you are on your own,but I will explore 25,000 to 30,000 psi.
The data published ballparks 1100 fps with 240 gr +plus bullets.
Sorry,I do not feel comfortable being more specific.The article gives some good loads.
The .44 Magnum Super Blackhawk uses the exact same frame and base pin as the Blackhawks...
The original .44 Magnum Blackhawks were exactly the same as the other chamberings of the Blackhawk, except for the bore and chamber depth...
People were getting slammed by recoil in short light models, so Ruger developed the 7.5" SBH with a steel dragoon style grip frame, thus adding sight radius and weight to absorb some recoil...
A .44 Special Blackhawk today is exactly the same as the original .44 Magnum Blackhawk (except for being 'New Model' of course) other than the chamber depths...
Short answer should have been:
Yes....44 Special Blackhawk can fire Keith loads...
The original .44 Magnum Blackhawks were exactly the same as the other chamberings of the Blackhawk, except for the bore and chamber depth...
People were getting slammed by recoil in short light models, so Ruger developed the 7.5" SBH with a steel dragoon style grip frame, thus adding sight radius and weight to absorb some recoil...
A .44 Special Blackhawk today is exactly the same as the original .44 Magnum Blackhawk (except for being 'New Model' of course) other than the chamber depths...
Short answer should have been:
Yes....44 Special Blackhawk can fire Keith loads...
I loaded mine up to 1000 fps with 7.5 grains Unique behind a 240 L. That is as much recoil as I wanted to handle, really not bad, but if I wanted more, I would drag out the Super Blackhawk in 44 Mag.
A 240 L bullet going 1000 fps is a very potent load.
For a light framed pistol, such as a Charter Arms Bulldog, I would not use more than 6.5 grains Unique.
I find the 6.25 grains load accurate and easy recoiling.
A 240 L bullet going 1000 fps is a very potent load.
For a light framed pistol, such as a Charter Arms Bulldog, I would not use more than 6.5 grains Unique.
I find the 6.25 grains load accurate and easy recoiling.
Code:
[SIZE="3"]44 Spl Ruger Blackhawk 5.5"
240 LSWC 6.25 grs Unique thrown, lot 6/21/-98/92 Midway cases, Brass WLP
T ≈ 60-65 ° F 19-Apr-09
Ave Vel = 835.4
Std Dev = 26.83
ES = 74.52
High = 877.5
Low= 803
N = 24
240 LSWC 6.6 grs Unique thrown, lot UN364 3/9/92 Midway cases, Brass WLP
T ≈ 60-65 ° F 19-Apr-09
Ave Vel = 875.4
Std Dev = 25.94
ES = 109.6
High = 914.8
Low= 805.2
N = 25
240 LSWC 7.5 grs Unique thrown, lot UN364 3/9/92 Midway cases, Brass WLP
T ≈ 60-65 ° F 19-Apr-09
Ave Vel = 1001
Std Dev = 17.32
ES = 64.32
High = 1027
Low= 963
N = 27
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Pistols%20various/DSCN9337Rightside44Spl.jpg[/IMG][/SIZE]NO IT IS NOT!!!!! NOPE NOTTA. The .44Spec flattop BH is built on the medium frame which is the same size as the first .357 in '55. Up to 1200 is 'ok' (you are on your own), but not 1300-1500fps loads.... It CAN NOT handle 'true' .44Mag loads.
ALL .44MAG revolvers are on the large frame ... even the first one introduced in '56'.
More info on the .44Spec flattop (Lipsey and standard Ruger catalog flattop)
Gun Blast .44Spec review
Here is data on the New Vaquero which is also on the medium frame. Table here shows cylinder and frame window size differences :
Gun Blast New Vaquero
Last edited:
g.willikers
New member
dahermit asks why soup up a .44 when there's plenty of .44 magnums available.
A smaller framed version, more like the Peacemaker in weight and size, but in near .44 Mag capability, is attractive.
Pity the new Vaquero isn't made in .44, though.
Even better.
A smaller framed version, more like the Peacemaker in weight and size, but in near .44 Mag capability, is attractive.
Pity the new Vaquero isn't made in .44, though.
Even better.
I have one of the first new .44 Special Flattops.
It is the only .44 Special I own and the only one I've ever had the slightest interest in.
I didn't buy it strictly because it's a .44 Special, for me it's a combination of elements that united for a specific purpose.
The size and the ballistics it's CAPABLE of are near ideal as a relatively compact big-bore reliable single-action handgun for use on the two-seater ATV in large animal backcountry territory.
I have .44 Magnums, one or two of which do travel on occasion (including a .44 Mag Flattop), and I'm not overly sensitive to recoil. But, I've never personally bought into the "buy a caliber & then download it" idea. Others like building plinking loads for their .30-06, shooting .38 plinking loads through their .357 Mags & .44 Specials through their .44 Mags, but I don't.
I buy a particular gun for what it was meant to do with its full-power caliber, and if I want to plink I do it with a "plinking-calibered" gun.
Just me.
The .44 Special is "special" to me only in this gun.
I have a full-sized Blackhawk in .45 Colt that'd be the primary outdoor carry gun, IF the smaller .44 Flattop had not come along.
Both have the same 4 5/8-inch barrels, but the .44 just feels trimmer.
The barrel length on both allows the gun to travel in a holster that rides high enough on the belt for instant access if needed. Longer barrels don't ride as well.
All of which, to make a short story long, leads up to me carrying the .44 Special flattop with a handload using a 250-grain lead Keith semi-wad with a charge of 2400 chronographing at 1060 FPS.
In discussions with Taffin, he's found the gun will handle even more velocity with the same bullet & powder, but this load gave me good accuracy in working up to it, better ballistics than most standard factory .45 Colt loads, and a shade less recoil than a fullbore .44 Mag.
You know when it lights up, but it's not unpleasant to shoot, and the energy figures should be sufficient for its intended use.
The gun's been lightly altered with a red front sight blade insert & white outline rear blade, and a Belt Mtn base pin.
Purpose-driven, accurate & reasonably powerful.
The overall package is why I bought that .44 Special.
Otherwise, no interest in the caliber at all.
But- it certainly CAN be used with something other than 1910 loads.
Denis
It is the only .44 Special I own and the only one I've ever had the slightest interest in.
I didn't buy it strictly because it's a .44 Special, for me it's a combination of elements that united for a specific purpose.
The size and the ballistics it's CAPABLE of are near ideal as a relatively compact big-bore reliable single-action handgun for use on the two-seater ATV in large animal backcountry territory.
I have .44 Magnums, one or two of which do travel on occasion (including a .44 Mag Flattop), and I'm not overly sensitive to recoil. But, I've never personally bought into the "buy a caliber & then download it" idea. Others like building plinking loads for their .30-06, shooting .38 plinking loads through their .357 Mags & .44 Specials through their .44 Mags, but I don't.
I buy a particular gun for what it was meant to do with its full-power caliber, and if I want to plink I do it with a "plinking-calibered" gun.
Just me.
The .44 Special is "special" to me only in this gun.
I have a full-sized Blackhawk in .45 Colt that'd be the primary outdoor carry gun, IF the smaller .44 Flattop had not come along.
Both have the same 4 5/8-inch barrels, but the .44 just feels trimmer.
The barrel length on both allows the gun to travel in a holster that rides high enough on the belt for instant access if needed. Longer barrels don't ride as well.
All of which, to make a short story long, leads up to me carrying the .44 Special flattop with a handload using a 250-grain lead Keith semi-wad with a charge of 2400 chronographing at 1060 FPS.
In discussions with Taffin, he's found the gun will handle even more velocity with the same bullet & powder, but this load gave me good accuracy in working up to it, better ballistics than most standard factory .45 Colt loads, and a shade less recoil than a fullbore .44 Mag.
You know when it lights up, but it's not unpleasant to shoot, and the energy figures should be sufficient for its intended use.
The gun's been lightly altered with a red front sight blade insert & white outline rear blade, and a Belt Mtn base pin.
Purpose-driven, accurate & reasonably powerful.
The overall package is why I bought that .44 Special.
Otherwise, no interest in the caliber at all.
But- it certainly CAN be used with something other than 1910 loads.
Denis
newfrontier45
Moderator
As stated, this is patently incorrect. The original .44 Blackhawks were built on a large frame. This, after Ruger chambered their mid-frame .357 in .44Mag and it blew with proof loads. So a larger frame was designed. The frame and cylinder of the original .44 flat-tops is the same as the modern Super. The big difference with the Super in 1959 is that it had a longer, steel grip frame. Cylinders were unfluted for a little extra weight and the standard barrel length was 7½", rather than 6½". It also introduced the "eared" receiver that protected the rear sight.
It is.
Which begs the question, "if the .44Spl will do everything you need it to, why pack a larger, heavier sixgun capable of launching 355gr bullets at 1250fps?" Sorry but a 250gr at 900-1200fps is not .44Mag territory. A 250gr at 1450fps or a 330gr at 1350 or a 355gr at 1250fps is .44Mag territory.
Edward429451
Moderator
A 250 at 1200 is. 
newfrontier45
Moderator
...a heavy .44Spl load for strong sixguns. Add 250fps to that and you have a .44Mag load. I tire of this need some people have to to pigeonhole cartridges within imagined parameters.
Sorry but the .44Spl is capable of a lot more than factory-level mousefart loads and there are lots of guns on the market capable of utilizing its potential. This is well-proven over 80yrs of actual, practical use and cannot be argued with a single supporting fact. Just unsubstantiated fear, bias and Chicken Little thinking.
The New Vaquero in 44Spl is out there, but is incorrectly marked "Vaquero" (lacking "new"). It's still a mid-frame same as the 44Spl Blackhawk.
The 44Spl Blackhawk is the same gun as the 50th Anniversary Blackhawk Flattop 357 but bored out to .44. Strength should be in the same ballpark as a post-WW2 Colt SAA in 44Spl, or the Colt New Frontier in that caliber. The Ruger *may* be a bit stronger but not by much.
Discussion of a 30k load in the Ruger mid-frame 44Spls (adjustable sight or fixed) scares me. If it holds, it's way edgy. 25k I can see - you have more chamber wall thickness than in 45LC and that's known to be good to 22k in these guns.
In 357, the mid-frames can live all day long at 43.5k.
The 44Spl Blackhawk is the same gun as the 50th Anniversary Blackhawk Flattop 357 but bored out to .44. Strength should be in the same ballpark as a post-WW2 Colt SAA in 44Spl, or the Colt New Frontier in that caliber. The Ruger *may* be a bit stronger but not by much.
Discussion of a 30k load in the Ruger mid-frame 44Spls (adjustable sight or fixed) scares me. If it holds, it's way edgy. 25k I can see - you have more chamber wall thickness than in 45LC and that's known to be good to 22k in these guns.
In 357, the mid-frames can live all day long at 43.5k.
newfrontier45
Moderator
I would like to see the guns tested to destruction to know for sure but I would strongly wager that the new Rugers, new Colt's and new USFA's are stronger than their post-war Colt counterparts. Both have larger diameter cylinders. Brian Pearce wrote of having a new USFA .44Spl rechambered to .44Mag and USFA's Shooting Master was going to be nothing but an adjustable sighted SAA replica.
Edward429451
Moderator
Isn't that you're doing?
Paper figures are ok to toss around I suppose but performance wise, is there anything a 250 @ 1450 will do that can't be done with a 250 @ 1200?
what ive seen and heard is that ruger does the same steel and heat treat on all black hawk cylinders, and since the 44 special has a bit more steel in it then the 45 colt version which is proven to hit 80% of 44 mag chamber pressure and survive..
i just figured that the 44 special version should do just as well.
especially when alot of the "heavy" 44 special loads from the 50s and 60s are low end 44 magnum now..
i just figured that the 44 special version should do just as well.
especially when alot of the "heavy" 44 special loads from the 50s and 60s are low end 44 magnum now..