Ruger .45LC VS. Taylor & Co.


PDA






ohio58
July 8, 2010, 04:24 PM
I have been lookin at 2 guns. The first is a Ruger Bisley Blackhawk .45LC Blued 7.5 Barrel and the second one is a Taylor & Company new "Runnin Iron" .45LC Blued 5.5 Barrel. I own mostly Rugers & Smiths, but this new Taylor revolver looks pretty nice. All i know is Taylor gets the guns from Uberti in Italy and then slicks them up for another $125.00.
This Taylor SA slicked up is $615 and the ruger outta-the-box is $525.
I know i cant go wrong with the Ruger and have herd good things about the Taylor "Runnin Iron",
I herd that the Taylor is used in Sass competition shooting ??
What do you guys think on these 2 different reolvers?

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger .45LC VS. Taylor & Co." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Jim Watson
July 8, 2010, 04:33 PM
The Taylor is an Italian copy of a Colt. My only application for a single action is SASS, so one of them would serve me well at standard load levels. At least my Cimarron and Colt have done so.

If you want to hunt or enjoy manly levels of recoil and noise, the Ruger is a stronger gun.

rcmodel
July 8, 2010, 04:37 PM
Depends on what you want to do with it.

The Ruger is bullet-proof, and will handle +P+ pressure heavy hunting loads.
It is safe to carry fully loaded with six rounds.

The Uberti / Tayler is a Colt SAA clone, and is limited to standard pressure .45 Colt ammo.
You must leave an empty chamber under the hammer for safe carry, so it is a five-shooter.

The 3 1/2" barrel version Runnin Iron is too short for the ejector rod to fully knock out .45 Colt cases, so it would be much slower to reload.

rc

jon_in_wv
July 8, 2010, 05:07 PM
The OP said it was a 5.5" barrel on the Runnin Iron, not 3.5.

Other than that you are correct, the Ruger is a stronger revolver more suited to hunting or heavier loads. For lighter loads or CAS the Runnin Iron sounds like the hot ticket.

Arkansas Paul
July 8, 2010, 05:58 PM
As far as single actions go, if I have the choice of a Ruger or just about anything else, I'm getting the Ruger.

rcmodel
July 8, 2010, 06:13 PM
Make mine real Colts, thank you.

rc

jon_in_wv
July 8, 2010, 06:34 PM
Make mine copies. I won't pay much more money just for a brand name. The Rugers are high quality and made in America. The Italians are good enough for, and quite popular in, SASS.

MCgunner
July 8, 2010, 09:27 PM
I prefer Blackhawks, but then, i don't shoot games, I shoot game. It really depends on the application and need for authenticity.

Meeteetse
July 9, 2010, 12:50 AM
I'm not very familiar with the Taylor gun but I know the Blackhawk has adjustable sights and for me that would make a difference. I have SA guns with fixed sights and they can be a real headache to find a load what shoots to POA. No problem with adjustable sights. I have more handguns than I need so I some of both types, but Ruger dominates my gun collection because I know I can shoot them all I want and not have to worry about wearing them out. Don't think I would have the same faith in a clone.

CraigC
July 9, 2010, 01:05 AM
Really depends on what you plan to do with it and what you want it to do for you. The guns in question are both single action revolvers but the similarities end there.

zxcvbob
July 9, 2010, 01:17 AM
I have a 7.5" Ruger Bisley (Blackhawk with a different grip frame) and I love it, but a 5.5" New Vaquero would be a whole lot handier even though it can't handle the zombie-stomper loads that a Blackhawk can -- I don't shoot those that often.

jon_in_wv
July 9, 2010, 08:52 PM
After looking around the Taylor & Co website I would say the Taylor Vaquero is one neat pistol. It is definitely going to be one of my next purchases.

Rexster
July 10, 2010, 11:27 AM
Of the two, Ruger. The only copy of the traditional SAA for which I would pay money is USFA. (To go off-topic a bit, I would only buy a Colt if I could REALLY examine it closely, which includes working the action.) The Ruger is a single-action sixgun, with a general resemblance to 19th-Century technology, but it is a total late-20th-Century weapon, much stronger than the SAA and its copies, but also far more durable in the lockwork.

jon_in_wv
July 10, 2010, 01:22 PM
Is it more durable than the USFA??

Rexster
July 10, 2010, 01:38 PM
Quote: "Is it more durable than the USFA??"

Yes. The large framed Rugers are able to handle the +P .45 Colt ammo. Most (but not all) Bisley Blackhawks are on the larger frame.

The medium-framed Rugers, such as the New Vaqueros and 50-th Anniversary-sized Blackhawks, are stronger than SAAs and traditional-sized copies, but are not safe to load with +P ammo. Keep in mind that the factory does not actually rate any Rugers for +P and magnumaized ammo; it is handloaders and a few intrepid ammo makers who have discovered that the large-framed Rugers can be loaded hotter.

jon_in_wv
July 10, 2010, 05:42 PM
I should have been more specific, how does the USFA stack up against the Vaquero? I assume they would be very similar as far as strength and durability.

BCCL
July 10, 2010, 05:44 PM
USFA's are great, and probably as close to an original Colt SAA as you can get, but they are not a physically strong as Ruger.

stiletto raggio
July 11, 2010, 03:05 PM
Ruger is a massive, publicly-traded and perennially successful company. I own nine Rugers and have another one coming. They stand behind their guns 100% and are known for reliability and safety. I vote Ruger.

CraigC
July 11, 2010, 04:23 PM
I think there's a little bit of confusion with regards to relative strengths. The large frame Bisley and original Vaquero .45Colt sixguns are fully capable of withstanding a constant diet of "Ruger only" loads that approach 30,000psi. However, the New Vaquero .45Colt is on par with the Colt SAA and its replicas for strength. Despite folks parroting Ruger's marketing claims of strength, there is absolutely no factual data indicating that the mid-frame New Vaquero is any stronger than the similarly sized Colt or USFA. The large frame Blackhawk .45 has been tested to destruction by John Linebaugh and H.P. White labs but to date no such testing has been done on the New Vaquero. If anything, the USFA would hold a strength advantage over both Colt and Ruger because its cylinder is slightly larger than the Colt but its frame is forged vs. Ruger's casting. The Ruger New Vaquero, Colt SAA and USFA replicas all fall into the 21,000psi strength range.

Lar1911
July 11, 2010, 10:31 PM
I own an old vaquero in 45 and a Uberti cattleman in 45.

I like the feel of the Uberti over the Ruger, but it is the older bigger Vaquero

The Ruger can handle hot loads, but I do not see shooting them. The Uberti is stamped "Patent 1873" that adds to the cool factor.

The cowboy competitions shoot the Ubertis, I dont compete but that speaks of their capability to handle a lot of shooting.

I think the Uberti is cooler

http://api.ning.com/files/PUDbVrQ778xgANjZXHTZUtFqxQh7VtFyPJgl8sq8G7hF9zxungWT6yYf7azbS0EaCPi*e0EHN23iIbsSHQYxuhSKbRwC1aZZ/RunninIroncatalogpage.jpg

akadave
July 11, 2010, 11:18 PM
Ruger is likely way stronger. The Taylor probably is built on the old Colt dimensions. The Ruger is a different, and stronger animal. You can shoot some hot loads in the Ruger...dont in the Taylor.

dagger dog
July 12, 2010, 05:43 PM
Never had the want to buy a Colt SAA when they were priced within my pocket book.

After owning 2 Ruger Blackhawks I can say they are darn near indestructable, but some people can wear out an anvil with a wooden mallet!

I have 2 Colts in my locker, an Officers Model Target revolver, and a Woodsman, If the SAA is anywhere near the quality of either of those ,that puts it into a whole different class than the Rugers.

Really there is no comparison between the 2 revolvers ,SAA , Blackhawk you are trying to compare apples to oranges, yes they are both round and thats about as far as you can go.

The Italian copys are quality reproductions in my opinion they come 3rd with the USA Firearms a second with the Rodeo line.

The Colt SAA has no peers period, and the 137 yr. old reputation shows, feels and shoots that statement!

physhphude
July 12, 2010, 06:04 PM
Depends on what you are going to use it for.

CAS the ruger or USFA would be better.

Hunting probably the blackhawk

General target shooting and range work, I would pick the Italian or USFA.

I went with the Ruger New Vaquero for general range work, and I wish I had gotten a Uberti (taylor) instead.

I see the "stronger" ruger touted a lot, but none of the guns are going to blow up on you with regular loads.

The New Vaquero is nearly half a pound heavier than the Italian clones.

Lar1911
July 12, 2010, 08:48 PM
I went with the Ruger New Vaquero for general range work, and I wish I had gotten a Uberti (taylor) instead.

I see the "stronger" ruger touted a lot, but none of the guns are going to blow up on you with regular loads.

The New Vaquero is nearly half a pound heavier than the Italian clones.

This

You will not blow up with regular loads. And again this gun was designed for competition.

I own 25 guns, the one thing I learned is to buy what you want not what ev eryone tells you what you want. if you do then you have a bunch of guns that you dont shoot because you go back and buy what you wanted in the first place. (I am OK with haveing a bunch of guns, I know guys with 300 guns)

CraigC
July 12, 2010, 09:27 PM
The Colt SAA has no peers period
Colt has the famous name and they are banking on it. USFA produces a better gun for less money, $400 less to be exact.

akadave
July 13, 2010, 02:31 AM
Dagger Dog I used to think the Colt SAA's were the epitome of the craft...however it doesnt take much research to find that after the gen 1 revolvers, quality and consistency went down. Mike Venturino writes a lot about the Colt SAA and dearly loves them and he says that one thing is very consistent about Gen II and III Colt SAA's, and thats that they are inconsistent. Namely the wild variation in the cylinder throats dimensions. Many so oversized that they keyhole and have terrible accuracy. Undersized cylinder throats abound also. Bottom line is that consistency is off.

USAF actually executes a bit better for the Cowboy Action stuff. But I have heard issues.

If you really want a revolver that is built like a Swiss Watch then get a Freedom Arms Model 83. Nothing locks up tigther or is more precisely finished...the exception would be a custom gun.

Its true the Rugers are in a different class. They can handle much hotter loads than the Colts or Colt clones and are perfectly acceptable in accuracy. I have had several that would place everything in a paper pie plate at 100 yds.

CraigC
July 13, 2010, 01:35 PM
Not even a custom gun can be built as precisely as an FA. Bowen writes about this in his book. However, I do find that a USFA runs a close second. Their beauty is not only skin deep.

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger .45LC VS. Taylor & Co." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!