[Windy Hill Mules]

Just thinking on getting a black powder revoler and was wondering about the Ruger Old Army ,, what can a guy expect to pay for one and any good bad or ugly stories about them?
I have owned alot of rifles and shot alot of deer with muzzel loaders and just been getting the itch for a pistol.

Thanks

Windy Hill Mules

[Shawnee]

Hi W.H.M....

I bought a Great-condition, 200th Anniversary .44 caliber Stainless Steel ROA last year for $400. Would definitely recommend stainless steel. Take the grips off, put it in the dishwasher and you're good-to-go. Good idea to remove the cylindar and put it in the silverware basket. Great gun !!!!

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y159/FiveO/44calRugerOldArmy.jpg

:cool:

[mykeal]

The Ruger Old Army is without a doubt the consensus best black powder percussion revolver ever made by anyone at any price. Hands down. It is a superb handgun. Just my humble opinion.

$400 for a stainless steel version is an excellent price.

[pohill]

I recently bought an old (blued) Ruger for under $300, holster included. They are so well made, even the older ones are great. I used it today in cold weather - high 20s. They are good to use in the cold - the balls and cylinders are bigger and the nipple recess area is bigger, making them easy to cap.

[BullRunBear]

The Ruger Old Army is an excellent revolver and gets you into cap and ball shooting at the top. Mine is a pristine, stainless, 7 1/2 incher, adjustable sights from the mid-70's and got it from an estate sale for $325. with the original Bianchi holster. I got really lucky and haven't seen one at that price since. It is accurate and comfortable to shoot even with the heaviest loads. I find it easier to load the longer barrel length because the extra inches give the rammer more leverage. There is something about the configuration that keeps the spent caps from falling into the innards, at least it hasn't happened to me after several hundred rounds. The stainless version also cleans up easily. Highly recommended.

Regards, Jeff

PS: All of the above doesn't keep me from enjoying my new Uberti 1860 Army. Don't be surprised if you end up with more than one C&B pistol.;)

[stalkingbear]

The ruger old army is the best cap n ball revolver in existence! With a special short conical bullet and 40 gr of jim shockey select FFF it has power approching the .44 mag.

[Timthinker]

I discussed this topic during the summer with some of our members. Basically, the ROA is the finest mass produced caplock revolver on the market. Are more accurate "smokers" made? Yes, but they are customized pieces that will cost twice the price of the Ruger. So, if we confine ourselves to affordable percussion cap revolvers, then the ROA is the one to beat. I once owned a blued Old Army years ago and found it quite accurate. Believe me when I say it is a very wise choice. In fact, the ROA is the only caplock revolver I really want. I hope this helps.


Timthinker

[revolverman357]

I have to agree with all, the Old Army is the way to go.
I have an early 7 1/2" adjustable sight model (1973), it shoots
great and I love it.

[Norton]

I got one used that looked like it was NIB.....$200 :evil:

I love it.....

[KevininPa]

Got mine off Gunbroker for $300 + $25 for shipping. Excellent condition. One of these days I want to e-mail Ruger with the serial # and find out date of manufacture because I don't see too many like it. It's a 7 1/2 inch, high gloss polished stainless version with a red ramp, adjustable sites. I know it's not too old because it has the ugly warning on the barrel :cuss:. It would be gorgeous without that. I got the ROA because I'm pretty much a noob so I wanted something as forgiving as possible to make up for my lack of expertise.

[BigBlock]

Old Army's are beautiful guns, but you might want to think about a Blackhawk in .45 Colt instead. It's the same gun, basically, for cartridges. You can still buy and/or reload black powder cartridges for it, plus, you can shoot high power modern loads as well if you feel like it. If you want it for the old timey feel, .45 colts have been around since the 1870s. You can even get it with the unfluted cylinder like the old army.

A lot of people buy ROAs and then a conversion cylinder - I don't quite understand that when you can just buy a blackhawk for a lot less. :confused:

[mykeal]

One of these days I want to e-mail Ruger with the serial # and find out date of manufacture because I don't see too many like it. It's a 7 1/2 inch, high gloss polished stainless version with a red ramp, adjustable sites. I know it's not too old because it has the ugly warning on the barrel .

KevininPA - go to www.ruger.com. Put the cursor on Product Service and scroll down to Serial Number History. Click on that option. In the next window click on Revolver (ignore the message about downloading a manual). Next, scroll down to Old Army Cap & Ball - Stainless and click on that. A window will open and tell you what serial number range was produced in each year of production. Alternatively, you can call Ruger Product Services at 1-603-865-2442 Mon-Fri 8-5 EST, ask for the Records Department and they will send you a letter telling you what the original configuration of your gun was and when it shipped from the factory.

[MCgunner]

I found one for $97.50 at a friggin' gun shop, about passed out! I'd gotten my stainless one ripped off and was looking around at pawn shops in the off chance I might run across it. The guy said he was getting out of black powder and just wanted to get rid of it. I couldn't get my wallet out fast enough. :D

This one's blued, my old one was stainless and had a Pachmayr Signature grip on it so I didn't even have to take the grips off, just pull the cylinder and stick it in the dish washer. :D The blued one shoots just as well, though (called very accurate) and I cast 220 grain conicals for it from Lee molds, one's a hollow point mold, but it ain't much of a hollow point. It's accurate and powerful enough to hunt with and can be made more powerful by boring the cylinders a tad larger, something I never got around to.

My one gripe is both my guns shoot high and I have to take a weird sight picture to shoot 'em. I've got the sights all the way down low as it'll go. I need a taller front sight.

[KevininPa]

Thanks mykeal! I appreciate that info.

[zxcvbob]

Do the new ones not have adjustable sights?

(I paid $245 for my stainless ROA about 22 years ago)

[Shawnee]

Anyone know when they changed the ROA from .44 caliber to .45 caliber ???

[Zeke/PA]

I have posted several times extoling the virtues of the Old Army.
I have owned mine for over 20 years.
I have 11 other modern handguns in my arsenal and the ROA is by far the most accurateof all.
I often use it for squirrel hunting and I once used it to harvest a large whitetail doe.
You can't go wrong with an Old Army.
Zeke

[mike101]

"Do the new ones not have adjustable sights?"

The 71/2" comes with or without, the 51/2" without sights.

[robert garner]

The ruger old army is the best cap n ball revolver in existence! With a special short conical bullet and 40 gr of jim shockey select FFF it has power approching the .44 mag.
Please elucidate? thanks
robert

[dwave]

he ruger old army is the best cap n ball revolver in existence! With a special short conical bullet and 40 gr of jim shockey select FFF it has power approching the .44 mag.

Do you have data for that statement? That cannot be true because a Colt Walker holds 60 grs. and according to the experts. it equals a .357 mag, not a .44 mag. So 40 grs. cannot be greater than 60.

[mykeal]

Key words: "special conical bullet" and "approaching". Also unspecified: what bullet the .44 mag used and what gun it was shot from.

I could claim the following statement is true: "With special tires a Volkswagen Beetle can reach speeds approaching a NASCAR team car." In fact, it is true. And I'm sure you can see why.

[MCgunner]

The first ROAs had adjustable sights and ALL ROAs until recently had adjustable sights. The fixed sight guns are a result of CAS and demand for them. I don't play games, like adjustables. I have Blackhawks and no Vaqueros for the same reason.

The ROA, from day one, had a .457" bore, yet most called it the "ROA .44" for some reason. To me, it's a .45, but whatever.

[.44walkersabot]

Well, I can't let this pass and realizing while I type this that I really know nothing compared to ya'll and I mean that..However, I DO know a little bit about some things and there is simply no way this side of hell anyone is going to make me believe that 40 grains of powder out of a Ruger Old Army is anywhere in the same neighborhood as a .44 Magnum. I'm sorry, I'm just not going for it. I don't give a damn if the powder was soaked with pure 100% undiluted nitroglycerin. I ain't going for it, probably not tomorrow and certainly not today. I have owned and carried a .44 Walker for years, and I (now and then, not much anymore) sometimes knock down a nice deer or hog with it. When I'm using it for that I load it with 48 grains of Triple Seven fffg behind a .457 soft lead ball. (swaged round lead ball, .457 diameter) When that Walker is loaded with 48 grains it will shoot circles around the Ruger Old Army every day and twice on Sunday. It may not be as pretty (actually it's as ugly as a pig) and it may not have good sights 'til you get used to them, and it may not have coiled steel springs made out of piano wire, but by God it's a good one if it's made by Uberti. Even so,
you could cram it full of powder and you STILL would NOT have a .44 Magnum, although I PERSONALLY believe that you would have more KNOCK DOWN power than you would with that damn .38 Magnum. (.357)..Anyway, I can certainly understand someone being very exhuberant and overjoyed about something they like a lot, and I can certainly understand the word loyalty (just ask me about me and my Walker) but damn! Let's keep this s*** on the rails. Well, anyway...Okay...

[KevininPa]

And here I thought I could pierce tank armor with my ROA.;) :rolleyes:

[pohill]

I have shot my Walker and my Ruger in the past few weeks. Either gun is as accurate as the shooter (me) is and no more. If the Walker shoots to the left, I aim to the right. If the Ruger shoots to the left, I adjust the sights.
The Ruger is trouble free, the Walker is Da Balls.
One interesting thing I noticed is that the Ruger actually handles 45 grs of BP better than the Walker; the Walker is louder and gives more of a kick. I wonder if the bigger ball and chamber size in the Ruger is the reason.
Any ideas?
Today my favorite gun is the 1860 .44 Army because that is what I shot today (I wonder if this is how the Mormon with 12 wives feels on any given day...)

[MCgunner]

On the .44 mag thing, well, the figures I've seen for a Walker Colt are about 550 ft lbs. That's a weak .357 load, a hot .40 S&W load. It's no .44 mag load, not even a weak one. LOL! The ROA has less capacity than the Walker. Yes, it can be bored for a little more, but it's still less. I get something around 430 ft lbs from my 220 grain conicals and that's over a chronograph, not conjecture. That's 9mm +P range all-be-it with a .457" bullet. And, that's with Pyrodex since I cannot buy black powder in Texas. I think the state must have banned sales of it, because no one has it.

[Marlin 45 carbine]

I use a .32 acp caseful of 4F BP under a caseful (7.62X39 - SK, AK case) of 3F and a conical in my ROA. has more recoil than a sraight 3F load. I don't own a chrono so no velocity figures. I shot a slug through a jack pine that a .357 mag 125 soft-point did not penetrate.

[.44walkersabot]

Mr. Pohill, I have no idea. I know, just like you, that with blackpowder pieces, some of them handle better with different loads. I highly suspect that you could take 2 identical Walkers (or 2 of any other kind) and feed them the same powder charge and the same ball and there would be a little difference between them although it may not be enough for an older man like me to ever notice.
I have never shot 45 grains in a Walker. The best I can remember (and I'vd got a pretty good memory. I'm not that damn old) all I'vd ever shot was 38 grs., 42 grs., 48 grs., and I shot 50 grs. a couple of times. My lever never fell although that dosen't mean it won't the very next time I shoot it. The reason I settled on 48 to shoot a deer with was because I was carrying a flask with a spout for 24 grs. at the time and I just got in the habit of making a double throw.
I know the Ruger is a fine revolver. I reckon anything Mr. Ruger put's his name (or his dead partner Mr. Sturm's name on) is good. I have owned a Ruger single shot (Ibelieve it was called a falling block although that isn't cast in stone) chambered for .338 WinMag, a couple of his 10/22 carbines (.22) and several of his revolvers in years gone by, the MK22, both regular and the target model, 2- 5 & 5/8 inch barreled (regulation six) .357 Blackhawks, 1- 7 & 1/2 inch barreled .357 Blackhawk, and 1 .44 Mag. double action Redhawk. I have also owned one of his .41 Mags. single action.
I don't own a single one of them today, don't want one of them. I don't have any modern firearms at all. Have no desire for one.
I don't know, Mr. Pohill. Someone like you could probably figure that out better than me. To be perfectly honest with you, nowadays I am far more interested in fishing (catfishing at night) and sitting around drinking coffee and smoking cigarettes and just talking about different stuff with my lady friend than I am about running test's on blackpowder revolvers.
There's 2 guys on here I bet could help you. Mr. Roswell and Mr. MyKeal...Okay...

[Riot Earp]

The ROA is unquestionably well made and durable, but in my opinion is uglier than sin and also clunky in the hand, especially when compared to 19th Century revolvers. The gun is overbuilt for black powder pressures and could have been made smaller and more attractive.

(I admit that I don't like anything made by Ruger.)

[.44walkersabot]

Mr. Riot Earp, I understand that perfectly. Like me..I like what's commonly referred to as 'blackpowder shooting' although I'vd never fired any real honest to God blackpowder in my life. I just like the idea of building my own shot. Just something about it...Since I posted that awhile ago I stepped out back and got 2 squirrels with the Cattleman's Carbine so my brother could make him and his wife a pot of squirrel dumplings. I just got through cleaning and wiping it down a couple of minutes ago.
In my life I'vd heard a lot of people talk about the Ruger Old Army and on the bottom line they all said about the same thing you just said. Well built and dependable but with no sense of balance whatsoever. I know his 7&1/2 inch barrel blackhawk was the hardest thing to swing and settle on a target with that I have EVER seen, and that icludes the .357 and the .41. (I think I remember the .41 having a 7&1/2 inch barrel. Damn sure longer than a regulation six, I remember that)
Maybe it's just me. I'm sure some people can just pick one of them up and bang bang bang spot on every time. I'm a fair to middling shot (I come out of the Marine Corps, you know damn well I can shoot. Used to could anyway) but I don't like them either.
I think I'm starting to like this little Cattleman's Carbine about as well as anything I'vd ever carried with the exception of my Walker. It's taken me a little while to get used to the so-called 'quasi pistol hold' but I'm starting to come around with it. Well, that's off the subject.
No sir, I wouldn't buy an ROA. I'm not going to say I hate them or anything like that but to me that's too much money for a revolver that is so ill suited for me. I don't need one of them anyway I don't reckon. I don't know what the hell I'vd do with it. As far as having it for an 'inbetween power gun' so to speak, well, hell, my little carbine will do everything it will do and probably has a better range to. BUT, I am NOT downing Rugers at all. I myself just don't want one...Okay...

[MCgunner]

I own 7 Rugers, the ROA, a .45 Colt blackhawk, a .357 Magnum Blackhawk, an SP101, A P90 .45ACP autoloader, a P85 9mm high cap, and a neat little stainless 10/22. I love 'em all! Every one of 'em is "overbuilt" which means STRONG. Old style BPs are fun, but not really useful for much i a modern day. I could hunt with my Hawken, but always seem to pick up my .308 when I head for the stand. Of course, I ain't shootin' no cap lock on ducks in the marsh. I'll take my Mossberg 12, thanks. BP is great fun, but I do more than have fun SHOOTING guns. I'm basically a hunter that shoots. I've used that .357 Blackhawk to kill a couple of deer and eventually, I'll use that Hawken. It's just such a pain to clean up, LOL!

My ROA shoots about 2" groups at 25 yards, VERY modern like accuracy and, for me, accuracy is inportant. Here's my .45 Colt. It ain't THAT traditional, but you ain't gonna find a Uberti that can push a 300 grain pill to 1300 fps, either. This thing will put six rounds into 1" at 25 yards every time you try it if you can do your part. Pretty is as pretty does. :D

http://thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=46085&d=1160350205

[.44walkersabot]

MrGunner, Sir, I don't understand. What does the 1300 fps got to do with anything I was talking about? Nothing as far as I can see. I have owned a lot of Rugers. I don't have them anymore because I am into blackpowder shooting. (well, Triple Seven fffg) I don't want a ROA because I don't like the way they're built and they don't have enough power to suit me. If I liked them I'd buy me one tomorrow. I don't want one. I am getting good service out of my Uberti's. And I mean GOOD service. I do NOT shoot for fun, Never have. My guns are tools, not playtoys. I only have 5 guns, and each one of them is for a certain category. They cover the spectrum from a field rat down here in Alabama to an elk or antelope or buffalo back home in Wyoming. (and I can assure you sir that none of them have yet failed to work) Try to look at it from my point of view. I do not like so called modern firearms. Now, why would I want to buy an ROA (which is what me and the other guy were talking about) when I already have a Walker that work's flawlessly (and it is very accurate I can assure you) and a .44 Cattleman's carbine that also work's flawlessly and is also very accurate. Now where would the ROA fit in? What need would I have of it? Buy it just because it's a Ruger? Ha ha, I don't think so. Plus the ROA does not have good balance as far as swinging on target. That does not mean that one cannot point it at a target and hit the target, but it does not have that natural 'feel' to it like just swinging your finger and pointing at something. Well, anyway...Okay...

[KevininPa]

I bought the ROA because I might want it to fulfill a few needs. The first need was a want. I just plain always wanted a cap-n-baller. Wanted one since I was in my teens. And God knows I can't figure out why. BTW, I'm in my late forties now. The second reason is because I know I can fit a conversion cylinder with a slightly more substantial load than cowboy loads in it. The reason behind this that now ( or at least when I can afford it ), I can leave my .357 in camp with my wife when I go hiking because I'll have my Ruger. And lately I'm thinking that BP loads will be enough for me with conicals. But I might be in touch with classicalballistics when I can afford it. After all, in Pa we only have brown/black bear. More than likely it'll run from the dog before I need to do some shooting. More than likely the most danger will be if I get between a mother and cub. But I'm good at paying attention to my surroundings and the dog will pick up my slack. In the event of a prob, I want the most I can get.

[Timthinker]

Kevin, I do not believe the Ruger will disappoint you. If your Ruger comes with adjustable sights, it should prove very accurate. In fact, my old Ruger was the most accurate caplock revolver I have fired. If your experience is similar to mine, you will be satisfied.

Please let us know how the conversion cylinder shoots. I have not fired an Old Army fitted with one of these, so I am eager to hear about your results. Good luck.

MCgunner, I share your sentiments about accuracy. This is why I favor the Ruger over other caplocks. To be fair to all parties, I have seen some amazing shots with other blackpowder firearms, but I think this is a testimony to the individual shooter more than their weapon. The ROA with adjustable sights seems to fill the bill for me. Let me leave it at that.


Timthinker

[MCgunner]

My reference to 1300 fps with a 300 grain bullet is a testament to the strength of the Ruger design, nothing more. The guns are the strongest on the market in a single action short of a Freedom Arms and the ROA is built on a super blackhawk sized frame. You will NEVER wear it out and, yes, it's super accurate, cartridge revolver accurate. It is only the most accurate, most well built cap and ball on the market. No, it doesn't look traditional. I never cared about the 1911, either. Some prefer tradition, some are stuck in 1860, some are stuck in a 1911 time warp. Me, I just like to shoot....and hunt. Shoot what you like, for your own reasons, I don't care. I do the same. It's a free country...so far anyway....less and less by the moment, but that's another thread for another forum. But, badmouth the ROA all you want, it'll still outshoot anything else out there that's patterned after a 19th century firearm.

I like BP revolvers because they're fun, cheap to shoot, and some even have hunting uses. However, if I can't hit what I'm aimin' at, I ain't got a lot of use for it. Just as soon have a club or a knife. I have a Remington pocket .31, was cheap. I also owned a '51 Navy copy. Neither could/can shoot anywhere NEAR as accurate as my ROA. The original guns, Remington and Colt, HAD to be better if guys like Hickock could do what they did with 'em. LOL! The '51 Navy I had was pathetic. Went boom and made a nice cloud of smoke, though.

I never had a Walker so I couldn't comment on it or any of its Italian copies. The old colt hammer notch and bead just don't do much for me, though.

Kevin, I like those conversions, but since I already have a .45 Blackhawk, never really thought I needed one for the ROA. :D It would make the gun much more versatile, though, for outdoor uses, especially in wet weather. Cap and ball needs to be emptied every day, cleaned, reloaded, royal PITA when you're in a tent camp.

[MCgunner]

Got mine off Gunbroker for $300 + $25 for shipping. Excellent condition. One of these days I want to e-mail Ruger with the serial # and find out date of manufacture because I don't see too many like it.

Get on Ruger's web site. They have a link. They list serial numbers and year of manufacture. My ROA was 1982 IIRC.

[.44walkersabot]

mcGunner. I'm not badmouthing or insulting the ROA. and that is a damn fine looking gun in that picture. Did it come like that or did you have it done?
Yeah, Walker sights leave something to be desired. It took me over a year but I finally learned to hit with it. The Walker is VERY accurate AFTER one learn's how to shoot with it. Anyone can pick it up and shoot two feet over the target and start screaming: "This gun ain't worth a damn"!! Believe me, I had a lot of trouble with it, and even as much as I love it I would NOT reccomend to anyone that they buy one. You don't just pick the Walker up and shoot it. You'vd got to LEARN how to shoot it. It's got too much rifle built into it is the best way I can say it.
All those 1860's this and 1851's that and all that other stuff out there, I'vd never had my hands on any of it. You may not believe me but I would not give $200.00 right now for ten .36 caliber revolvers unless I knew where I could sell them right quick and make some money.
I'vd got a Colt 1849 Pocket .31 with a four inch barrel. It's very accurate also, but it took a while to learn how to hit with it to.
I just pick my guns very, very carefully. I researched and agonized for weeks (actually lost sleep) before buying each one of the five guns I own. Each one of them had to be able to fill a certain niche, a certain need, if that need ever arose. All of them have exceeded my wishes and hopes except MAYBE for that little 5 shot blackpowder .22 Mag. mini revolver made out of stainless steel that I bought from North American Arms. I guess it's alright for what it is. I killed 2 rats and one 'possum with it.
I got lot's of spare parts for each one of them, even down to the barrels and grip frames but so far I'vd never even had to change a nipple.
The only thing that still bothers me is that the Walker and the little .22 use #11's and the Cattleman's Carbine and the .31 use #10's. I MIGHT could get one to fit the other, I'vd never tried.
Well, anyway, I wasn't badmouthing the ROA. But between the carbine and the Walker there's no place for it. If Ruger made a Walker tomorrow, I'vd buy it day after tomorrow. I'd drive to Lacey Place and pick it up right at the plant. (MAYBE, I can't say for sure. This damn Uberti would be hard to beat. Maybe he CAN'T beat it. Maybe that's why he's never built one) Yeah, Lacey Place if they haven't moved. (I told you I know a lot about Ruger) Well, anyway, you'vd sure got a nice looking piece there McGunner. I'll be the first one to admit my Walker is ugly as a damn pig! (But it'll damn sure carry the mail)...Okay...

[Roswell 1847]

Interesting info here
http://books.google.com/books?id=LQausfRgWvYC&pg=PA22&lpg=PA22&dq=most+powerful+44+colt+walker+load&source=web&ots=XyDSosx73R&sig=vXy8YWyK2Ec1cf49QrmBZvOWv6s

It confirms something I'd always figured about the killing power of B&P revolvers being out of proportion to their velocity and energy figures.
The deformations of the round ball during the loading process and initial slugging effect of the blast and forcing cone, produces a wide short slug which dumps energy into the target much faster than conventional conical bullets.

Other sources confirm that powders available in the sixties and 70's often gave better performance than most brands of BP available today.
Old records indicate that 18th and 19th century highest quality BP gave much better performance than commercial and military grades.
The best back then was the French glazed powder.

According to 16th century records Cannoneers of those days mixed their own powder, which called for red wine as a solvent. When the wine dried it left a bio chemical glaze on the powder grains which made them moisture resistant, and the grains burned more evenly.
The cannoneers soon learned than instead of using the wine as a solvent they could drink the wine then urinate into the mixing pot. The bio chemicals came out in their urine and had the same effect.

The type of wood used when making the charcol was also a factor, Dogwood was the best.

I figure modern BP is made using less esoteric materials. Probably more chemically pure, but often contaminants are the key to getting the best performance.

My own experiances with the Walker indicate that its performance appears to be greater than the .357 on the targets I've used.
The Walker we used held a lot more than 60 grains of FFFG. closer to 75 under a round ball.
I often drill the bottom of the chambers deeper and closer to flat bottomed on BP revolvers I've owned and the Walker I'd worked on.
I'd noticed most BP cylinders don't appear to be as deep as patent drawings indicate, and theres almost always nearly twice the depth of the nipple holes unused.
I grind a suitable sized drill bit to a flat point and chase the chamber down to remove what I consider excess metal. Best to be sure the locking notches aren't cut too deeply first.

This Walker dropped it lever on a regular basis even before the modifications, so I installed a lever latch and its mating fixture from an old Navy barrel stub.
I also installed safety pins to the rear of the cylinder.


PS
Nice Colt McGunner.

[Timthinker]

.44walkersabot, thanks for the honest story about how difficult it is to master a Walker and other Colt repos. The sights on those guns certainly seem lacking to me. I guess sights were the main reason I purchased a ROA years ago.

Learning to master a Walker or other caplock Colts is an exercise in patience as much as shooting. But if you succeed, then you have earned bragging rights in my book. Keep us informed about your target sessions with the Walker.


Timthinker

[JCT]

Roswell, I make my own BP. The ideal charcoals for fast and clean BP are Alder, Willow, Dogwood and Balsa. I think the salicylic acids in these woods make the difference in performance somehow. Even my homemade powder outperforms GOEX in every aspect. I've heard many times and would agree that powders in the 19th century were faster, hotter and cleaner than todays common powders.
As far as the topic here...ROA... They look well made, great design and engineering like all Rugers. They just don't excite me. There's something about shooting a historically accurate gun that's more fun, maybe it's the history...My Dragoon works just fine, loads easy and is accurate. I'd take that over the ROA myself, although they're very different. I think history is why everyone here is even drawn to BP shooting. Otherwise, you'd all have laser sighted, polymer frame autos.
In any case, I'd never turn down a ROA, it's certainly a great gun in it's own category, but to me it's a modern gun that shoots BP.
If I were to go with a historically accurate but very functional and easy to clean gun, I'd buy an Uberti 1858 Rem in Stainless. It's probably lighter than the ROA, works well and has plenty of power.
I especially can't understand why someone would buy the ROA and then another $200 to $300 for a conversion! What's the point? Just grab a ruger Vaquero or Blackhawk!
Every gun I currently own is a replica ( Colt Lightning rifle, 1849 Pocket .31, 1848 Dragoon, 1873 SAA )
I think the one modern gun I'd like is a S&W 460V. I like the fact that it can chamber .45lc, .454 Casull and 460 Magnum.
Other than that, the guns I plan to collect in the future are replicas.

[pohill]

People really eat squirrels?

[Duncaninfrance]

Yeh?! :uhoh: Suppose they taste like chicken :rolleyes:

[Snaggletooth]

Mr Pohill, I"M suprised at your question about squirrels. Tasty little buggers. I only eat them when I'm alone or with somebody. I'm a believer in squirrel, rabbit, young woodchuck, racoon, muskrat and deer consumption. I.ve got neighbors that eat 'possum and armadillos. Cant be too bad, they are all healthy.

[mykeal]

It's a matter of good taste...

[KevininPa]

I can buy a conversion cylinder cheaper than a new Vaquero or Blackhawk in .45 Colt. I'm not a man of means, I'm trying to deal with what I have. You might be of more substance than I, so maybe you don't understand. But some of us try to make what we have as versatile as possible for our needs. This is something you may want to keep in mind.

[Vermonter]

I saw a nice fresh squirrel on the road today, but all the winter sand and salt woulda made it taste bad.

Seriously though, I wanna try some squirrel stew. Gotta be better for ya than the stuff they call meat in the supermarkets.

Back to topic : Did they ever make a 5 1/2" barrel, stainless, with adjustable sights, ROA?

[adrumm]

I think I am finally ready to take the plunge and buy two ROA for Cas shooting. I will definetly buy the conversion cylinders for them to be able to shoot in multiple catagories if desired. Plus, blackpowder pistols and rifles are cash and carry here in California, no information or ID required.

[drdirk]

I also love my ROA. I have thee of them now! One of them has a scope mounted and is shot mostly with a conversion cylinder. The other two with BP or substitute. Can't get much more versatile than that. I bought all of them used for under $350.

I bought the conversion cylinder of ebay a few years ago when they were still allowing gun parts ( don't use ebay anymore now!) for about 150. It was not new but serviceable.

[pohill]

These pics were on the Voy forum but I thought ROA owners here might like them, too.
These grips belonged to my father. Apparently he had a Ruger Blackhawk. Now they found a home on my ROA. They're at least 45 yrs old and made of what appears to be Mother of Pearl.

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m217/pohill/S4020008-3.jpg

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m217/pohill/S4020004-3.jpg

[OldWolf]

STAINLESS
Beginning Serial Number: & Years of Production:
145-00001 1976
145-01204 1977
145-07934 1978
145-15890 1979
145-20194 1980
145-24880 1981
145-33428 1982
145-46522 1983
145-50008 1984
145-51681 1985
145-52645 1986
145-55577 1987
145-57569 1988
145-60386 1989
145-63537 1990
145-65870 1991
145-66177 1992
145-66292 1993
145-70614 and 148-00504 1994
145-74645 and 148-01310 1995
145-80534 and 148-03084 1996
145-87525 and 148-04467 1997
145-88998 and 148-06385 1998
145-90793 and 148-06823 1999
145-92200 and 148-07285 2000
145-92762 and 148-07895 2001
145-93406 and 148-08025 2002
145-94109 and 148-08404 2003
145-94812 and 148-09305 2004
145-95380 and 148-10546 2005
145-95673 and 148-11409 2006
145-96199 and 148-11785 2007



BLUED:
Beginning Serial Number: & Years of Production:
140-00001 1972
140-04259 1973
140-13723 1974
140-20404 1975
140-26251 1976
140-30204 1977
140-34506 1978
140-39651 1979
140-44201 1980
140-46573 1981
*145-33428 1982
*145-46522 1983
*145-50008 1984
*145-51681 1985
*145-52645 1986
*145-55577 1987
*145-57569 1988
*145-60386 1989
*145-63537 1990
*145-65870 1991
*145-66177 1992
*145-66292 1993
*145-70614 and 148-00504 1994
*145-74645 and 148-01310 1995
*145-80534 and 148-03084 1996
*145-87525 and 148-04467 1997
*145-88998 and 148-06385 1998
*145-90793 and 148-06823 1999
*145-92200 and 148-07285 2000
*145-92762 and 148-07895 2001
*145-93406 and 148-08025 2002
*145-94109 and 148-08404 2003
*145-94812 and 148-09305 2004
*145-95380 and 148-10546 2005
*145-95673 and 148-11409 2006
*145-96199 and 148-11785 2007

*Blued Old Army Serial Numbers roll marked with Stainless Old Army Revolvers beginning in 1982

[OldWolf]

I have two ROA's, love them.

I have one 1847 Whitneyville Dragoon, love it.

I don't understand why you need to compare a new design to old design.

They are not competitors after all.

So, I bought both.

[DMZ]

OldWolf,

I have a ROA that was made, I think in 1972, #140-000xxx. I was one of the first ones made. It is blued.

[MutinousDoug]

MCgunner,

Rather than wait for Ruger to make a taller front sight available to you, consider filing /grinding off the bottom or your rear sight. .060" can easily be removed without exposing the innards and if you leave a little flange on either side that overhangs the top of the frame it will still look almost like a normal rear sight.
Replacement parts for the sight are available from Ruger and inexpensive.
This won't completely correct your sight picture for shooting Lee conicals but it helps considerable.

[.44walkersabot]

Old Wolf, I just read your post. I agree with you. Let each man shoot the gun that suit's him. The one he like's and is comfortable with...Okay...