I have a Ruger Vaquero 44 Magnum-I also have an S&W 29-2(pre endurance package)so i avoid higher end loads with the latter revolver.I wonder if higher level loads would be a problem for the Vaquero seeing as it's on the original Blackhawk frame.I'm just referring to commercial loads-I don't roll my own.
Vaquero 44 magnum
- Thread starter sandbag
- Start date
Driftwood Johnson
New member
Howdy
Just what do you mean by 'higher end' loads? Either one of those revolvers is capable of digesting any SAAMI spec 44 Magnum loads. SAAMI spec Max 44 magnum loads are pretty strong stuff, no matter how you look at it. The Ruger is probably the stronger gun and should be able to take a bazillion Sammi spec 44 Magnum loads.
Just what do you mean by 'higher end' loads? Either one of those revolvers is capable of digesting any SAAMI spec 44 Magnum loads. SAAMI spec Max 44 magnum loads are pretty strong stuff, no matter how you look at it. The Ruger is probably the stronger gun and should be able to take a bazillion Sammi spec 44 Magnum loads.
44 Mag Vaquero is built like a tank. Same frame and cylinder as the Super Blackhawk, just without the adjustable sights.
They will handle handloads up through +P and all factory ammo, including +P and a few +P+ from Buffalo Bore, Grizzly and Garrett. The exceptions are those specifically labeled as "Super REDhawk ONLY!". They are just a bit too long for SBH cylinders.
They will handle handloads up through +P and all factory ammo, including +P and a few +P+ from Buffalo Bore, Grizzly and Garrett. The exceptions are those specifically labeled as "Super REDhawk ONLY!". They are just a bit too long for SBH cylinders.
The only 44Mag+P+ I am aware of ARE the ones loaded over-long for the Redhawk/SuperRedhawk cylinders.
Other than that one specific class of 44Mag ammo you're not going to hurt a 44Mag Vaquero.
John Linebaugh has been willing to convert the Old Vaquero (large frame type pre-2005 more or less) to wild five-shot chamberings like the 500Linebaugh, so clearly he thinks the frame is as strong as the Blackhawks and SuperBlackhawks that those conversions started with.
The NEW Vaquero is different - it's built on a smaller sized frame and can't cope with those power levels.
Other than that one specific class of 44Mag ammo you're not going to hurt a 44Mag Vaquero.
John Linebaugh has been willing to convert the Old Vaquero (large frame type pre-2005 more or less) to wild five-shot chamberings like the 500Linebaugh, so clearly he thinks the frame is as strong as the Blackhawks and SuperBlackhawks that those conversions started with.
The NEW Vaquero is different - it's built on a smaller sized frame and can't cope with those power levels.
These guys specialize in Hot heavy 44mag rounds http://www.garrettcartridges.com/
.It's NOT a matter of STRENGTH
Let me point out that the S&W M29 is NOT a weak revolver. The fact is that insane loads that would blow up a S&W will blow up a Ruger too. Perhaps, the Ruger has an edge when it comes to complete catastrophic failure level, but nobody shoots that, so its a moot point.
Where the Ruger (Blackhawk, Super, & Vaquero) have the advantage is in durability. Not strength. And by durability, I mean round count before a tune up/repair is required. And, while they are toughly built, the main source of their durability is the single action design. There is, simply, less to wear out or go wrong with an SA revolver.
Let me point out that the S&W M29 is NOT a weak revolver. The fact is that insane loads that would blow up a S&W will blow up a Ruger too. Perhaps, the Ruger has an edge when it comes to complete catastrophic failure level, but nobody shoots that, so its a moot point.
Where the Ruger (Blackhawk, Super, & Vaquero) have the advantage is in durability. Not strength. And by durability, I mean round count before a tune up/repair is required. And, while they are toughly built, the main source of their durability is the single action design. There is, simply, less to wear out or go wrong with an SA revolver.
NoSecondBest
New member
Even a SBH can require rework if given and steady diet of "high end loads" that do not exceed SAMMI specs. It takes a while but it can be done. I had one and Ruger repaired/reworked the gun at no cost after I sent it back. It was several years old and had thousands of rounds fired out of it (silhouette shooting and hunting). It can happen with any of them. I also owned two S&W 29s and they held up as well as the Ruger SBH did. Most people who think they've shot their gun a lot don't really have a true number of what went down the spout. I think most over estimate the actual number. It's hard to wear a gun out shooting it.
The round count doesn't have to be that high to wear a revolver out to the point of needing parts replacement and tuning, even shimming of the cylinder.
I have wore out 3 revolvers and it only took 3 or 4 years. I wore out a Ruger Single Single six 22 cal revolver in about 4 years and also managed to wear out a Smith and Wesson K-22 in about 4 years and the years overlapped by probably 2 years at least. I shot a lot back then, (late 70's).
I also wore out a Smith and Wesson 25-2 in about 4 years shooting IPSC loads mostly 230gr cast bullets that would make major in the revolver division.
Oh! and I almost forgot, I also wore out a 6 inch L-Frame shooting 38 special cases loaded with 175gr cast flat points at slightly over 1000ft/sec to make major. That was a pretty hot load with a fair amount of recoil, but the gun also digested a lot of 158gr semi-wadcutters with only 3.5grs of Bullseye.
All four of those guns only took about 4 or maybe 5 years total to wear out.
I don't know the round counts, but I shot several hundred rounds a week, usually during that time.
I will never shoot that much again. The guns took a lot of not only the hammering from the recoil, but also the fast shooting which they received, also. Pulling a trigger fast and often is hard a gun.
I have wore out 3 revolvers and it only took 3 or 4 years. I wore out a Ruger Single Single six 22 cal revolver in about 4 years and also managed to wear out a Smith and Wesson K-22 in about 4 years and the years overlapped by probably 2 years at least. I shot a lot back then, (late 70's).
I also wore out a Smith and Wesson 25-2 in about 4 years shooting IPSC loads mostly 230gr cast bullets that would make major in the revolver division.
Oh! and I almost forgot, I also wore out a 6 inch L-Frame shooting 38 special cases loaded with 175gr cast flat points at slightly over 1000ft/sec to make major. That was a pretty hot load with a fair amount of recoil, but the gun also digested a lot of 158gr semi-wadcutters with only 3.5grs of Bullseye.
All four of those guns only took about 4 or maybe 5 years total to wear out.
I don't know the round counts, but I shot several hundred rounds a week, usually during that time.
I will never shoot that much again. The guns took a lot of not only the hammering from the recoil, but also the fast shooting which they received, also. Pulling a trigger fast and often is hard a gun.
The round count must have been way out there. Jim Taylor has a OM Single Six with way north of 100,000 & the same for his father's 586. I think the Single Six came to them in the 60's. His father bored one cylinder for a 22 mag. round. I've shot the little sixgun & it is a work of art having the barrel replaced with a section of Winchester 52 barrel.
His father's L frame was used to win match after match. He was finally asked to let others in the state's prison system have a chance to win so he said he would shoot left handed. Wasn't long before he was back on top again. He used this 586 for all his aerial shooting at which he was a master. When I met him his mind was going so Jim gave him an air pistol which he was amazing with on targets including those thrown.
Jim finally had the little Ruger timed & the endshake corrected & it shot well as ever. Not sure what happened to the 586 but after a 100,000 of a 158 grain RN & 3 grains of Bullseye it was still accurate as one could hold.
Wish you had kept a round count. My interest is stirred. Things like that fascinate me. Another high count revolver is this one: http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?156622-75-000-Wadcutters-in-a-Model-27
Love this stuff.
Lets be clear about worn out...
While it is possible to "wear out" a revolver, I seriously doubt that, without abuse, it is possible to do so, particularly in four years, no matter how many rounds you shoot.
In order to wear out a revolver, you have to wear out the FRAME.
Shooting any gun until it is worn to the point it needs some work is NOT the same thing. The internal lockwork, the barrel, and even the cylinder are all replaceable parts. A gun that had endshake, or is out of time, etc., is NOT WORN OUT. It is just worn.
Shooting loose, and out of time are worn, but not worn out.
Personally, I don't use, and never will, the 300gr loads in the .44 Magnum. There's no point to them, in my life. If you like them, fine, but not for me.
For decades, the heaviest standard bullet in .44 cal was a 265gr, (designed for, and loaded in the .444 Marlin). Never heard much, if anything about the early S&W's durability until people began running loads through them that the gun was never designed to handle.
Kind of like running your car (designed for 87 octane gas) on 100+ octane aviation fuel. You'll get some good results, for a while, but it won't last nearly as long, before something needs work.
There is no law, or rule that says every gun has to last forever with all possible combinations of ammunition. And even guns worn to the point they are not safe to shoot can often be repaired. If the frame isn't damaged, they can be rebuilt, no matter what else is worn out.
While it is possible to "wear out" a revolver, I seriously doubt that, without abuse, it is possible to do so, particularly in four years, no matter how many rounds you shoot.
In order to wear out a revolver, you have to wear out the FRAME.
Shooting any gun until it is worn to the point it needs some work is NOT the same thing. The internal lockwork, the barrel, and even the cylinder are all replaceable parts. A gun that had endshake, or is out of time, etc., is NOT WORN OUT. It is just worn.
Shooting loose, and out of time are worn, but not worn out.
Personally, I don't use, and never will, the 300gr loads in the .44 Magnum. There's no point to them, in my life. If you like them, fine, but not for me.
For decades, the heaviest standard bullet in .44 cal was a 265gr, (designed for, and loaded in the .444 Marlin). Never heard much, if anything about the early S&W's durability until people began running loads through them that the gun was never designed to handle.
Kind of like running your car (designed for 87 octane gas) on 100+ octane aviation fuel. You'll get some good results, for a while, but it won't last nearly as long, before something needs work.
There is no law, or rule that says every gun has to last forever with all possible combinations of ammunition. And even guns worn to the point they are not safe to shoot can often be repaired. If the frame isn't damaged, they can be rebuilt, no matter what else is worn out.
My 44mag was made in the late '70s. It's seen many metallic silhouette matches and a bunch of deer . I no longer hand load but it will never see 300 gr loads or any I think is too hot . Factory loaded 225 Barnes all copper loads or Swift A-frame are fine but Speer Deep Curl are loaded significantly hotter - not for my gun !The factory loads I use are premium rounds ,excellent performers on deer to 250 lbs or more .
The newer M29s are stronger but remember I've seen both M29s [of any build time] and Rugers that have been beaten up by hot loads !!!
Now here's the point . Pistol bullets have low ballistic coefficient and low sectional density so you may push them faster but they slow quickly !! So the HOT loads do you no good ,are usually less accurate and beat up the gun ! My shots are usually one shot kills with iron sights ,no rest out to 50-60 yds ! Do you need more ?
The newer M29s are stronger but remember I've seen both M29s [of any build time] and Rugers that have been beaten up by hot loads !!!
Now here's the point . Pistol bullets have low ballistic coefficient and low sectional density so you may push them faster but they slow quickly !! So the HOT loads do you no good ,are usually less accurate and beat up the gun ! My shots are usually one shot kills with iron sights ,no rest out to 50-60 yds ! Do you need more ?
The guns I was talking about, may not have been "worn out" in the sense that some of you have indicated. When I say worn out, I mean, lock work is needing help, end shake, and fine accuracy diminished. All had excessive end shake, and they all needed lock work, timing was not good, even some skipping on some of them, and the cylinders were dragging on the barrels.
I think what hurt these guns, as much as anything was most of the shooting was speed shooting, with some slow fire thrown in, and some hunting use, especially with the .22's. I sold the K22 to a gunsmith and he rebuilt the lockwork and endshake, and I ended up buying it back, but the fine accuracy was gone, and I replaced it with a smith and Wesson 41 target pistol. I sold the k22 to friend and he still has it, but his needs are different then mine was at the time, and he doesn't shoot good enough know the difference, and only needs a plinker, plus the action was so smooth he could probably shoot it better then a new stock one, anyway.
I think what hurt these guns, as much as anything was most of the shooting was speed shooting, with some slow fire thrown in, and some hunting use, especially with the .22's. I sold the K22 to a gunsmith and he rebuilt the lockwork and endshake, and I ended up buying it back, but the fine accuracy was gone, and I replaced it with a smith and Wesson 41 target pistol. I sold the k22 to friend and he still has it, but his needs are different then mine was at the time, and he doesn't shoot good enough know the difference, and only needs a plinker, plus the action was so smooth he could probably shoot it better then a new stock one, anyway.