Ruger New Model Super Blackhawk vs. Vaquero - What's the difference??!!

sights

MM is right. The main difference is the Super Blackhawk (SBH) has the adjustable rear sights. Designed mainly for hunting, it comes in 4 different barrel lengths, 4.63, 5.5, 7.5 and 10". However, most folk use it as a back up to their hunting rifle and carry it for self defense from snakes, animals etc

The Vaquero, has no rear sights and is a clone of the original Colt SAA.

Both pistols have the transfer bar system which enable you to load 6 rounds instead of five.

Hope this helps

"new Vaquero is a lighter frame then the original Vaquero....... also changed the hammer spur and ....... indexing pawl. Also a locking device and hard rubber checkered stocks and a redesigned thumb piece on the ejector"........quote from Jim Wilson in the new catalog

popular for "cowboy shooting"

The Super Blackhawk is chambered in .44 magnum, and is built accordingly. It's a Blackhawk, and one with an unfluted cylinder, a steel grip-frame, and a steel ejector-housing; likewise, it's strong enough to shoot .44 magnum like crazy, and heavy enough to take the edge off of doing so. The Vaquero is a good deal smaller, since it is built not around the .44 magnum cartridge, but rather the dimensions of the Colt SAA; accordingly, it is handy enough for dem old west shoot-'em-up competitions, but not strong enough for .44 magnum or "Ruger only" .45 LC.

They are both single-action revolvers, so they look pretty similar in pictures, but if you saw them together in person, and hefted them both, it'd be more clear why one pistol can't fill both roles.

Edit: wait, it looks like some of the Super Blackhawks have fluted cylinders. My bad/innnnnteresting....

Blackhawk excellent gun but it won't do for cowboy shooting because back in the day there were no nice sights like that one has thats the main difference.

The probable reason why Pop's2 is the only other person mentioning the smaller frame is that they used the make a version of the Vaquero, the "Old Model," that was nothing but a Blackhawk with Colt-style cowboy sights. These were chambered in .44 magnum, as well--the New Vaquero was for a little while, too, I think, but it might have still been the bigger Blackhawk frame size, or might have been just for cowboy loads. (Never really looked into it.)

A little conflictinging information here and there in some of the previous posts..

1. The blackhawks of all types can be used in SASS cowboy competition. There are some categories in which they are not permitted, but they are okay for most.

2. There are two models of the Vaquero. The old and the new. The old model Vaquero can handle any sane .44 magnum round easily. The differences between it and the Super Blackhawk are in both front and rear sight. The SBH has a ramp front and an adjustable rear. The old Vaquero has a groove milled in the top strap and a blade front sight. The SBH has a larger grip frame. The SBH usually has a "Dragoon" square back trigger guard. The SBH normally has an unfluted cylinder. The SBH is chambered in .44 magnum. The old Vaquero was available in .45 Colt, .44 Magnum, ,.44-40, and .357 magnum.

The New Vaquaro is indeed a lighter, smaller gun and I have seen them chambered only in .45 Colt and .357 Magnum. As noted .45 Colt loaded to magnum velocities should not be used in these guns.

Owlhoot is correct. The New Vaquero and ONE Blackhawk so far (the 50th Anniversary 357 Flattop of 2005) are the only post-1973 Ruger single actions built on a "mid size frame" similar in size and heft to the Colt SAA. This "mid-size frame" puts out it's strongest raw power when set up as a 357Mag (800ft/lbs energy in the hotter rounds) and when these guns are chambered in 45LC, cannot safely exceed about 550ft/lbs energy at MOST.

When the large-frame Ruger SAs (Old Vaquero, Blackhawk, SuperBlackhawk) are chambered in 45LC they can take "+P" loads exceeding 1,000ft/lbs energy. When chambered in 357 they're damn near indestructible although you CAN blow them up if you really work at it with stupid handloading.

Another way to look at it: the mid-frames are a "357Mag class frame", the large are a "44Mag class frame".

Pre-1973, the standard "Blackhawk" was built on a mid-size frame, the SuperBlackhawk on the large. In 1973 they dropped the mid-frame, building everything on the large, until the mid-frame made a revival with the New Vaquero and 50th 357 Blackhawk. The NewVaq was mainly for the cowboy action shooting market as those guys don't need big horsepower and therefore wanted smaller, handier guns closer to a Colt SAA. And they got 'em, in spades.

I own a Ruger New Vaquero 357 and love it. The gun is NOT "weak", in fact the cylinder is actually beefier than a GP100's cylinder (fatter and with more metal around the bores). However, an "Old Vaquero" in 357 can be safely converted to 44Magnum (or beyond!) while my gun cannot be safely set up as a 44Magnum. (44special, sure, and some are reporting you can safely configure a NewVaq 357 as a 41Magnum...that's kinda "edgy" though...)

Fun fact: average accuracy and quality are higher on the mid-frames than on the large. When they tooled up for the mid-frames circa 2004 or so, they re-thunked how they made the guns, and the new process just works better by a smidge.

What's the difference between the Super Blackhawk and the "New Model" SB?

Well in Ruger-speak, "New Model" always means "1973 or later", which in turn means "it shipped from the factory with a transfer-bar safety system.

"Old model" Ruger SAs didn't have transfer bar safeties. They had frame-mounted firing pins and coil springs instead of flat, but they otherwise worked the same as an 1873 Colt SAA. You had to half-cock them before opening the loading gate to unload/reload, and the gun was only safe to carry "five up", with the hammer resting on the sixth empty chamber.

These "old models" had three cross-pins in the frame, so you'll see them referred to as "three screw" models.

There's an update program to add a transfer bar safety to the old models, but the way you unload and reload on the half-cock doesn't change.

In the "new model" action (beginning in 1973) there are only two cross-pins, so these are "two screw" guns. To unload/reload, you just open the loading gate with the hammer fully down. Opening the loading gate freezes the hammer and trigger while unlocking the cylinder's rotation. This is a faster system and esp. when combined with the transfer bar, a safer one.

The SuperBlackHawk built on a large 44Mag-class frame can be either an old model (three screw) or new (two screw). Otherwise it's basically the same gun.

New Model

Not to confuse the issue but the NEW, NEW model SBH comes in 4 barrel lengths vice the 2 before. 4 &5/8, 5.5, 7.5 and 10. The 5.5" barreled SBH has the fluted cylinder while the other 3 do not. Go figure.

Like Jim March sez, go to the guns shop and play with both.

I sold my 7.5" because I hated the Dragoon style trigger guard and unfluted cylinder. I bought a 5.5" with the standard Blackhawk trigger guard. I am sooo much happier

Everybody focuses on the square backed trigger guard. The reason they went to the dragoon style grip frame in the first place was because in addition to the the square back guard, there's also more room between the guard and the front strap. This actually works to PREVENT barking the middle finger on the guard, not exacerbate it. Go shoot an old 3-screw Flattop .44 with full house loads, then a Super, and compare the two. Bill and Elmer weren't quite as dumb as the Dragoon grip haters like to think.

~~~Mat

It sure would be cool if Ruger put out a NewVaq-sized .357 with a 6.5" barrel. Having to choose between perfect handling and fully-adjustable sights is an unhappy choice.

BTW, I've heard that even outside of the NewVaq series, there has been a general increase in the quality of some Ruger revolvers. (The GP100 is the one I hear talked up the most.) Can anyone comment as to whether that trend holds true in .357 Blackhawks (the ones on the .44 magnum frame) as well?

BTW, I've heard that even outside of the NewVaq series, there has been a general increase in the quality of some Ruger revolvers. (The GP100 is the one I hear talked up the most.) Can anyone comment as to whether that trend holds true in .357 Blackhawks (the ones on the .44 magnum frame) as well?

Click to expand...

Man, good question. To me, the way to really answer it would be to find out from Ruger if they're doing the cylinders on the large-frame SAs one cylinder bore at a time in the process that started with the NewVaq, or are they still done six-at-once as the large frame SA cylinders have been since '73 at least?

The one-drill-in-sequence method works better as it eliminates variances between bores. And since that one cylinder drill/reamer is easier to check on, the bores we do get are not just uniform, but very good. The six-at-once method resulted in too many variances between bores and while you can clean that up, you do still end up with them all the same as the largest...

But Ruger barely pointed out this issue at all when the NewVaq came out, likely to try and keep sales of the large-frame series up. I have no idea if they updated the process on the large-frame models (or for that matter the small-frame Single Six).

Man, good question.

Click to expand...

Who's that guy who claims to work for Ruger? TOGGLELOCK? Maybe he could answer this for us.

Anyway, what do you figure was behind the supposed improvement in quality among GP100s? The people cited good stock triggers, among other things. Come to think of it, this might warrant some use of the search function on my part, followed by a new thread based on the findings. (I'll jump right on that....)

I'd also be interested to know if they are still drilling their .45 Colt throats to be small and misshapen.

some are reporting you can safely configure a NewVaq 357 as a 41Magnum...that's kinda "edgy" though....

Click to expand...

I'd been wondering about that! Maybe they could engineer a wider safety margin into it by making the conversion a five-shot, like with the .454 Blackhawk conversions. (Don't know how safe those ended up being, though.)

Anyway, what do you figure was behind the supposed improvement in quality among GP100s? The people cited good stock triggers, among other things.

Click to expand...

Right now Ruger quality control across the board is considered to be in an "up period". They do at times "slump" but they've done well of late.

I'd also be interested to know if they are still drilling their .45 Colt throats to be small and misshapen.

Click to expand...

From the reports I've seen, in the New Vaquero, NO, they're damned good. It seems it's easier to make sure one drill bit/reamer set per cylinder station is good than it was to maintain six at once in the old process. So the NewVaq 45LCs are getting good reviews. My own is a 357, and it came out quite nice: windage was dead on with the stock sight, 2" groups off a bag at 25yds with factory ammo achievable. Understand, that's bone-stock before I started modding it (spring kit, better sights, SBH hammer, etc.) none of which made anything worse .

I bought mine in 2005. I had three to pick from at the shop (in Sacramento CA). You KNOW I ran "the checkout" on all three . All three passed nicely; I picked my specimen purely based on the fake case color pattern (a "smoky gray" all over, doesn't look at all traditional but hey, it's fake and we all know it...). No regrets on THAT purchase...

I'd been wondering about that! Maybe they could engineer a wider safety margin into it by making the conversion a five-shot, like with the .454 Blackhawk conversions. (Don't know how safe those ended up being, though.)

Click to expand...

The conversions that used quality custom steel cylinders that were barely small enough to fit in the frame have held up well in all sorts of radical calibers, 454 included. Do the same in a NewVaq and I'm sure it'd be fine. The "edgy" part would be to ream a factory 357 cylinder into a six-shot 41Mag...that would make me nervous but I'm told it works. Remember, the cylinder here is actually beefier than a GP100 (I compared the two side by side using my NewVaq 357 cylinder) so...it's not impossible.

It's just "edgy".

the cylinder is actually beefier than a GP100's cylinder

Click to expand...

The GP100 was designed to be a .357. The Colt SAA and subsequent clones were designed to be .45s. Actually, N-Frame speedloaders fit Colt SAA/clone cylinders.

The GP100 was designed to be a .357. The Colt SAA and subsequent clones were designed to be .45s.

Click to expand...

Yup. Except that the SAA is a 45-class frame by 19th century standards, not 20th. The cylinder wall thicknesses are marginal by modern standards. Black powder didn't do as much peak pressure as smokeless; the only reason lawyers for Ruger and the like didn't freak out when they saw the NewVaq 45 cylinder is that it's a "traditional" setup and most people understand it's limitations.

When the SAA-class cylinder is set up in 357, that's when you can really see the extra "beef" . You can also make use of that "beef" in terms of raw bullet energy - 800ft/lbs or more in 357, while you'll barely cross 500 in 45LC in this platform.

...like with the .454 Blackhawk conversions...

Click to expand...

First time I've heard this expression was in the movie "Harley Davidson & the Marlboro Man". I'm a great fan of this film, you too? I'll have seen it thousand times
By the way, someone of you guys has a picture of that "SBH .454 Conversion" used by Mickey Rourke?

First time I've heard this expression was in the movie "Harley Davidson & the Marlboro Man". I'm a great fan of this film, you too? I'll have seen it thousand times

Click to expand...

Are you SURE you're not American?!

But yes, I first heard of this in reference to this film as well. Haven't seen it, but you're making me think maybe I ought to.

The New Vaquero is made for competitive Cowboy Action Shooting, Cowboy Fastdraw, etc.

The Blackhawk and Super Blackhawk have heavier frames and larger grips, as well as adjustable sights. This makes them eminently suitable to high-power hunting loads, etc. They're durable, somewhat heavy "working guns."

The original Vaquero was based on the BH/SBH, shaped somewhat like a SAA, with fixed sights. The New Vaquero was scaled down, so it feels like an old Colt. The smaller frame is not as strong, but Cowboy competitors don't care; they shoot light loads that will never wear out even a trimmed-down Ruger.

However, for practical real-world use like hunting and hiking, the Blackhawks are IMO the revolvers of choice.

If you want a gun with a modern action, but Colt SAA feel, the New Vaquero will give you that. It's also legal and approved for Cowboy competition of various sorts, since it's close enough to an 1870s gun. It won't safely handle the really hot loads worked up for the Blackhawk, at least not over time.

If you want a bulletproof gun that will shoot "Ruger-only" hot loads, with modern sights, get a BH/SBH.

First time I've heard this expression was in the movie "Harley Davidson & the Marlboro Man". I'm a great fan of this film, you too? I'll have seen it thousand times

Click to expand...

Are you SURE you're not American?!

But yes, I first heard of this in reference to this film as well. Haven't seen it, but you're making me think maybe I ought to.

I have a 2003-vintage Vaquero, and a 50th Year Blackhawk, both in .357.

It takes some close looking, but yeah, the cylinder is shorter on the 50th Year .357 Blackhawk than the earlier-year Vaquero. Grips are smaller on the 50th Year Blackhawk, too. Not sure how the "New Vaquero" would compare, although I suspect it is more like the 50th Year Blackhawk in cylinder/grip size.