REALLY liking the Ruger BH

I have a couple .45 Colt Rugers. Very nice guns. Reloading brings my cost down to .45ACP reload prices. I'm shooting 200 gr swc for about $11 per hundred, 230 gr lrnfp for $12.50 and 255 gr swc for $12.75 per hundred, cost of cases not included since they seem to last a very long time.

Stainless seems to hold up for a long range session, the 4 5/8 aluminum frame is nicer for packing.

I handload to 1120 fps with a 300 grain XTP in my 4 5/8" Ruger and it'll do anything a .44 would do for me IMHO, at least in Texas were there are no grizzly bears. I doubt that BB load puts a 325 out of a short barrel to anywhere close to 1300 fps, but I've not chronographed it. It IS hotter than I shoot, though, regardless. I don't push things too much.

Here's my gun. I liked it so much, I had some work done to it and put a set of sanbar stags on it.

And what was Ruger thinking when they discontinued the .45 Colt in stainless?

Click to expand...

I suspect they were tired of getting back revolvers that had one or more expanded chambers because the owner had gone just a bit too far with "Ruger only" handloads - and expected to company to fix things for free.

I suspect they were tired of getting back revolvers that had one or more expanded chambers because the owner had gone just a bit too far with "Ruger only" handloads - and expected to company to fix things for free.

Click to expand...

Got any evidence of that??? I don't know if Ruger discontinued the stainless .45 or not but it was not the only large frame .45 in production and several variations are still catalogued. Including Bisley and convertible models.

According to the internet armchair legal counsel, there was to be a plethora of lawsuits from folks grenading New Vaquero .45's with "Ruger only" loads. But alas, I have yet to see a report of such happenings.

This is how silly rumors get started.

According to the internet armchair legal counsel, there was to be a plethora of lawsuits from folks grenading New Vaquero .45's with "Ruger only" loads.

Click to expand...

"Grenading" wasn't the issue so much as overloads expanding chambers. My observation was based on a discussion I had with Bill Ruger Sr. some years back. As the .44 frame-based Blackhawk was always a good seller my observation would seem to explain a possible motive to discontinue it. Can you offer a better explanation?

Lack of sales of that particular variation??? Or perhaps it will return once they begin production of the stainless XR3-RED grip frame with the internal lock.

Lack of sales of that particular variation??? Or perhaps it will return once they begin production of the stainless XR3-RED grip frame with the internal lock.

Click to expand...

Lack of sales? You must be kidding... The stainless version of the N.M Blackhawk in .45 Colt was toward the top-of-the-line. I'm sure it will be back, but on the new/smaller frame, where "Ruger only" loads are specifically not recommended.

My next gun purchase will have to wait a bit, but will likely be a BH convertible. With both 45 Colt and 45 ACP, I could either fire Long Colt loads that rival 44 magnums, or buy 45 acp ammo at much lower prices and have a fine SD weapon. I don't own a BH, but it is one of those guns that no one should do without...

...where "Ruger only" loads are specifically not recommended.

Click to expand...

Let's get one thing straight right now, Ruger has never condoned or supported use of handloads of ANY kind in their guns. Let alone those that exceed industry standard pressures. They have always recommended (in writing) only factory ammunition loaded to industry standard pressures to be used in their guns. They do not recognize "Ruger only" anything. Period. So to Ruger, all .45's are created equal. Anything beyond that is strictly the responsibilty of handloaders.

Lack of sales? You must be kidding.

Click to expand...

Do you have Ruger's sales figures on this particular model?

Ruger is in this business to make money and there is absolutely, positively, no reason to believe that this model was dropped for any other reason. The New Vaquero .45Colt is a prime reason NOT to believe this nonsense you put forward. It is silly. The large frame .45Colt has been in production since 1971. Do you really think that they're gonna phase out a successful seller "now" because of alleged bulged chambers by over anxious handloaders? So you really think their solution is to bring it out in a smaller, weaker platform??? Please.

My guess is sales. Ruger has stopped production on some variations for a while until demand for new guns in that variation builds again. If the sales argument is correct, it is smart business.

My biggest beef with Ruger is stopping production on the SRH in 480 Ruger. I feel sure it was sales that caused this and I keep hoping that Ruger periodically bring out this revolver in 480 Ruger to satisfy demand. There were also pressure issues in the 6 shot cylinder (they say) and they only thing I can see there is the 454 Casull is a smaller caliber (45 caliber versus 47 caliber) which makes for a tad bit less metal left after the cylinder holes are bored.

Ruger seriously dropped the ball on the .480. It's a wonderful cartridge with tons of potential but was marketed very poorly, if at all. A much more usable cartridge and platform than the big X-frames. My 7½" is actually two ounces lighter than a .44Mag Bisley Hunter model and extremely accurate.

The Blackhawk really is one of the best revolvers out there. They are amazingly accurate for the price and fun to shoot besides. I'm not really fond of the smaller frame blackhawks (I have large hands) as they just don't sit right in my hand, but I will never sell my NM Blackhawk and will in all likeliness buy another one. I just wish they'd change the current plastic grip on them back to wood. I really don't like the newer grips.

As a real novice compared to many of you, but also as one whose enthusiasm for these guns rivals any of you, my favorite Blackhawk is the 4 5/8 inch blued .45 Convertible. I have a couple of them along with a 5 1/2 inch model. I like them better than the stainless steel 5 1/2 inch Bisleys although I would like a convertible with the shorter barrel in stainless steel. Heresy though it may be, I'm not all that fond of the Bisley grip or hammer configuration.

I do shoot .45 acp much more than .45 Colt out of mine which is part of their appeal. I also find, however, that the aluminum alloy grip frame gives the gun a weight and balance that is simply perfect for the power level I use.

The .45 convertible Blackhawk is as good a general-purpose revolver as I own or could wish to own. YMMV.

Edited to add: I represent the converse of Action_Can_Do in that I do not have large hands and find the new, slimmer grips to be an improvement for me over the older Rosewood grips, at least in everything but looks.

Well, I'd err on the safe side, and do, with the handloads. I see no reason to push a 325 grain bullet, say, past 1200 fps and don't think the BB stuff would go past that in a 4 5/8" barrel. Personally, I err on a safer side than that with my handloads. I mostly shoot a 255 cast bullet (Lee flat point mold) in front of 8.3 grains of Unique. It is a pleasure to shoot, knocks over steel with authority, and is economical and easy on the gun. I've fired maybe 3 or 4 boxes of the hot stuff in my Blackhawk in the near 20 years i've owned it. It'll shoot those 255 grain loads under an inch from sandbags at 25 yards. Friggin' laser.

The New Vaquero .45 Colt is a prime reason NOT to believe this nonsense you put forward. It is silly. The large frame .45Colt has been in production since 1971. Do you really think that they're gonna phase out a successful seller "now" because of alleged bulged chambers by over anxious handloaders? So you really think their solution is to bring it out in a smaller, weaker platform??? Please.

Click to expand...

The new (and current) New Vaquero revolvers in .327 Magnum .357 Magnum and .45 Colt calibers are based on a smaller frame and shorter cylinder platform then the (original) Vaqueros that were made on a .44 Magnum platform.

While it is true that Ruger does not approve of the use of any handloaded ammunition in their revolvers; gun-media reports, articles and evaluations have usually made the point that "Ruger only" loads should not be used in the New Vaquero. Where does one think that observation came from - if not the Ruger Company?

I think in a matter of time they will switch all Blackhawk production to the new sized platform, with the probable exception of the .30 M1 carbine and .41 and .44 Magnum revolvers which require the larger frame. At the present time they have made Blackhawk short-frame guns in .357 Magnum, and .44 Special - the latter only for certain distributors. Since they chamber New Vaquero's in .45 Colt there is no reason they couldn't make a similar "next generation" Blackhawk. All the required tooling is in place. In the meantime I believe they are using up exsisting stockpiles of parts.

Of couse I could be wrong - we shall see.

Action_Can_Do said:

The Blackhawk really is one of the best revolvers out there. They are amazingly accurate for the price and fun to shoot besides. I'm not really fond of the smaller frame blackhawks (I have large hands) as they just don't sit right in my hand, but I will never sell my NM Blackhawk and will in all likeliness buy another one. I just wish they'd change the current plastic grip on them back to wood. I really don't like the newer grips.

Click to expand...

I put a box of acp's through my BH yesterday and was amazed at the accuracy. Couldn't believe the gun actually made me look like a good shot. It's been awhile since I've had so much fun with a pistol. I have the Newmodel convertable 5 1/2 " bbl. Didn't try the .45 LC cylinder. No ammo at the gun shop. Really looking forward to that. I was going to take the Hogues off last night and try the stock grips today but I couldn't get them off. Think I'll just let it be.

Jonah71
I have the exact same BH as you. I've gotten stunning accuracy (one hole groups at 25 yards) firing 45 acp through it. The 45 colt accuracy hasn't been as good but still isn't shabby. I got rid of the stock grips that came on mine because they had a point on them that actually made the lightest loads painful to shoot. Replaced them with Hogue wooden grips and couldn't be happier.

I like the "Ruger Only" loads in my Rossi 20" Puma '92.

I think I'll put the large rubber Hogue grips back on even though they are a bit large and uncomfortable for me. The smaller plastic stock grips didn't seem so bad, but they really took a toll on my accuracy.

With regard to the stainless versions failing under high-pressure loads, are the stainless versions weaker than the blued versions, or am I interpreting the posts incorrectly?