Can the current Blackhawks handle 45 +P

KarateHottie93 said:

I made a similar thread the other day but I can't figure out which version is the one suitable for +P.

Is it the old flat top version or the current? I only ask because I bought these rounds today (yes, I know) and I don't wanna buy a cowboy gun just to blow it up.

View attachment 925250

Click to expand...

Any non flat top blackhawk can handle loads that run up into lower 454 territory.

I believe the info from snake shot is not correct do some looking

No flat top version, I think. Old Vaquero, Old and new model Blackhawk.

You won't have any problems if it's the flattop or standard Blackhawk. It doesn't take much to push a 145 grain bullet to 1250 fps out of a Colt .45 and you notice on the packaging that there's less recoil. Keep in mind Ruger has made some changes in their Vaquero single actions with the newer Vaquero being less robust that the previous model. However, if you're talking Blackhawks you're fine!

My NM Blackhawk has fired a lot of rounds in the 25k - 30k CUP range with no ill effects (other than to my hands and wrists).

Milt1 said:

You won't have any problems if it's the flattop or standard Blackhawk. It doesn't take much to push a 145 grain bullet to 1250 fps out of a Colt .45 and you notice on the packaging that there's less recoil. Keep in mind Ruger has made some changes in their Vaquero single actions with the newer Vaquero being less robust that the previous model. However, if you're talking Blackhawks you're fine!

Click to expand...

^^^^
Agree 100%

Howdy

Take a look at this photo.

On the left is the cylinder from a Stainless 'original model' Vaquero chambered for 45 Colt. In the middle is a cylinder from a New Vaquero chambered for 45 Colt. On the right is a 2nd Gen Colt Single Action Army cylinder, also chambered for 45 Colt. Notice how much more metal there is between chambers with the stainless 'original model' Vaquero cylinder than the other two. The stainless cylinder can take much more powerful ammunition than the other two.






Do you have a caliper?

If so, take out your cylinder and make some measurements. The cylinder will tell you what ammunition it is capable of firing.

This question gets asked so often that I took some measurements and wrote down the results.

Ruger Blackhawk----------------------- Length 1.700, Diameter 1.726, Distance Between Chambers: .060
Ruger 'original model' Vaquero-------Length 1.701, Diameter 1.728, Distance Between Chambers: .060
Ruger New Vaquero-------------------- Length 1.610, Diameter 1.673, Distance Between Chambers: .042
Colt Single Action Army 2nd Gen----Length 1.608, Diameter 1.652, Distance Between Chambers: .045
Uberti Cattleman------------------------- Length 1.618, Diameter 1.672, Distance Between Chambers: .043


The Blackhawk and 'original model' Vaquero cylinders are so similar in size, easily within manufacturing tolerances, that they can be considered the same size.

The bottom line is, if there is .060 between chambers at their narrowest point, you can shoot +P 45 Colt ammunition in it.

If there is only around .042 or so between chambers, you cannot do so safely.

The only .45Colt Blackhawks NOT safe for "Ruger only" loads are New Model flat-tops. There were no Old Model flat-top .45's.

That said, a 145gr at 1200fps probably wouldn't be a problem for any smokeless-era .45Colt. Even post WWII Colt SAA's can push a 260gr at 1100fps but I would err on the side of caution.

Driftwood Johnson said:

Howdy

Take a look at this photo.

On the left is the cylinder from a Stainless 'original model' Vaquero chambered for 45 Colt. In the middle is a cylinder from a New Vaquero chambered for 45 Colt. On the right is a 2nd Gen Colt Single Action Army cylinder, also chambered for 45 Colt. Notice how much more metal there is between chambers with the stainless 'original model' Vaquero cylinder than the other two. The stainless cylinder can take much more powerful ammunition than the other two.

Click to expand...

More important, look at the bolt stop notches. Those on the Rugers are offset. On the Colt, they are dead center, cut into the thinnest part of the chamber wall. If you blow up a Colt SAA, it's going to let go at the bolt stop notch. The Rugers are engineered to prevent that weakness.

+1 to what Vern said above. It doesn't take a whole lot above standard SAAMI 45 Colt pressures to distort those notches on the thin SAA cylinder chambers.

The offset notches on the Rugers help, but the smaller Flattop and New Vaquero cylinders in 45 Colt aren't as strong as the earlier (larger) cylinders. Therefore use of "Ruger Only" 45 Colt loads aren't recommended for those smaller cylinder models.

Aside from the interesting/odd styling (which I actually like) of this NM BlackHawk CarryHawk, I purchased this for not only the .45 ACP conversion cyl, but also the ability to shoot full house .45 colt loads. The cylinder measurements are 1.730" OD, and .060" between chambers. I have a couple Italian SAA clones for the standard .45 colt loads.

Wait - they still make Glasers? I thought those went out with disco music........ IMO you're not going to hurt a Ruger SA with anything Glaser ever made regardless of how they "marketed" it. Glasers are WAY overrated for a defense load.

Drail said:

Wait - they still make Glasers? I thought those went out with disco music........ IMO you're not going to hurt a Ruger SA with anything Glaser ever made regardless of how they "marketed" it. Glasers are WAY overrated for a defense load.

Click to expand...

You betcha! Nowadays, there are plenty of jacketed expanding .45 bullets and loaded cartridges on the market -- no need to go with gimmicks.