3.5" vs. 4.xx" .45 Colt replicas

[YosemiteSam357]

Is there much difference between the 3.5" Sheriff models and the standard 4.5-4.75" barreled cowboy guns?

I'm aware of the differences between transfer bar guns and the rest, I'm just wondering about recoil, balance, and basic "feel" of the gun.

Is the 4.5" format "it" as far as reaching .45 Colt nirvana, or does the Sheriff do "it", too? I just like the looks of the shorter barrel...

-- Sam

 

[mavracer]

the ejecter is shorter (or missing on some)and the base pin can be tricky to get out. but they balance well. I love my birds heads.4" uberti and 3 3/4" vaq

 

[alucard0822]

Ive always had the best luck with the 5.5" "artillery model" at least to me it combines the best as far as sight radius, balance, recoil recovery, velocity and ease to reload. The shorter ones seem too "twitchy" and roll back too far on recoil, the longer ones point too slowly and are a little to cumbersome. IMO

 

[YosemiteSam357]

I've already got a 5.5" Bisley Blackhawk. I'm looking for something lighter as a companion piece. I was thinking of a 4.5", but now that Sheriff model has caught my eye.

I think I'd stick with the regular grip instead of the birdshead though; I like those, but have always wanted a "traditional" sixgun. And yes, I realize the birdshead is traditional in its own right.

-- Sam

 

[Father Knows Best]

The standard barrel lengths for Colt SAA's are 7-1/2, 5-1/2, 4-3/4 and 3-1/2.

Personally, I like the long tubes the best. They're the original length, I think they're the best looking, and the long sight radius makes them the most accurate. The extra weight out front also helps to dampen recoil a little. Unfortunately, the long barrel makes it somewhat unwieldy. It certainly isn't quick to draw, for example.

Many find the 5-1/2" or 4-3/4" (barrel cut right at end of ejector housing) provides the best combination of velocity, sight radius and quick handling. The U.S. Army settled on 5-1/2" when it moved from black powder to smokeless. The civilian market seemed to prefer the shortest possible barrel without removal or shortening of the ejector housing, which led to the 4-3/4" barrel. I've shot both many times, and can't really tell much difference between them. I prefer the look of a barrel that extends past the ejector housing, though, so I own a 5-1/2" SAA (nickel-plated 2nd gen Colt), and no 4-3/4" models.

Personally, I really dislike the so-called "Sheriff's" model with the stubby 3-1/2" barrel. I shoot 44's and 45's, and the tiny barrel results in a badly balanced gun that wants to twist out of your hand with every shot. I imagine they feel o.k. with light .38 special loads, though. Also, the sight radius is getting awful short with a 3-1/2" barrel. Since I like to be able to hit things at greater than spitting distance, I prefer longer barrels with decent sight radius.

 

[Jim March]

At some point you need to sort out whether you personally shoot best with "light muzzle" guns or "heavy muzzle". Some people (myself included) like the "light muzzle" approach. I suspect wrist and grip strength has a bit to do with it...I've piloted motorcycles long enough to build 'em up halfway decent and I'm a big guy to start with. So I can stabilize a light muzzle well enough pre-firing and get the "easy swinging" advantages that come with a light nose.

This stability PRE-firing is in my mind a bigger issue than recoil control, esp. when you're dealing with modest power levels...in an SAA-size gun let's say, warm 357Mag, standard-to-medium 45LC. Get into warm 44Mag territory and you start thinking a lot about what happens AFTER you pull the trigger as much if not more than your thinking about control pre-firing.

Pre-firing control affects accuracy. If you have the ability to just not worry about pain to come, you could shoot a 50bmg snubbie that you have NO HOPE of controlling post-firing, accurately. Sure, things will go all to hell once it's gone off, but accuracy will be surprisingly unaffected...the bullet will clear the muzzle nanoseconds before things go completely rodeo on the other end (gun embeds itself into your forehead, etc.) and by then the bullet doesn't care that you bit off WAY more than you can chew.

So. What I'm trying to say here is that the "light muzzle versus heavy" conundrum has two distinct aspects: pre-fire muzzle control ("stability") matters just as much in 22LR as it does cannon-class rounds.

Recoil soak-up is a separate issue.

Pay attention to both issues and sort out what you need from there.

My answer in an SAA-class gun (Ruger New Vaq) is a 4.68" 357Maggie. No regrets on that purchase on my part .

 

[YosemiteSam357]

Personally, I really dislike the so-called "Sheriff's" model with the stubby 3-1/2" barrel. I shoot 44's and 45's, and the tiny barrel results in a badly balanced gun that wants to twist out of your hand with every shot.

Thanks FKB, that's exactly the kind of info I was looking for. Whatever I get needs to be a pleasant and accurate shooter. The more I think about it the more I realize I want the "cowboy feel", so I might as well get a more appropriate length. I'm glad to hear there's not much appreciable difference between the 5.5" and the 4.75".

Jim March, thank you, too for your words of wisdom. I've been reading most of the threads on SA guns over the last month or so, and you've provided a lot of help to me and others. On several boards.

I almost hate to say it, being as I have 6 Rugers, 4 of which are SA revos, but I may just end up with a Cimarron this time around. Got to handle one today and liked the way the traditional action worked. We'll see. Just thinking at this point. Really...

Thanks again for all your help!

-- Sam

 

[Father Knows Best]

Jim, I think it's more a matter of personal preference and what you're used to than it is one of grip and wrist strength. I'm plenty strong enough to fire some pretty hot handguns, including my S&W 329PD (AirLite 44 mag -- Wow!). I just prefer the longer barrels and, like most shooters I know, find that heavier handguns are more comfortable to shoot with heavy loads. So when I'm touching off large numbers of medium to heavy 44 and 45 rounds from a revolver, the extra weight out front from a longer barrel does make things a bit more pleasant. While I really like my 329PD, I wouldn't want to put 60 rounds through it in a day, as you do in a cowboy action match, or the 200+ that I do in a practice session.

Conversely, my wife prefers the Sheriff's model. She doesn't have the strength to hold a big, front-heavy revolver steady enough to get a good sight picture, and finds them difficult to maneuver and manipulate. The Sheriff's model, with its lighter weight and more neutral balance, works much better for her. She has a hard time hitting anything with my 7-1/2" 44's, but is deadly at 7 yards with her Sheriff's models. Hers are 38's, however, and she shoots quite light loads out of them.

 

[Walkalong]

I have come to like the shorter barreled revolvers better than the 6" or longer ones. I always gotten the long ones in the past because they looked cool. No other reason.

I like shooting my 4" 686 much better than my 6" 586, even though the 586 is a beautiful gun. The only reason I don't sell it. (yet)

I really like my 5.5" Redhawk in .44 Mag, but I would not mind if the barrel was 4.0, 4.5 or 5 inches long instead. I have not even shot the 6" Model 29 I bought. Don't know why I did actually.

I have a custom length 3.5" single action in .45 Colt coming that I am really looking forward to. It is a revolver I always wanted, but could not afford. I am treating myself this year.

I hold the shorter guns steadier I think and like Jim said, if you hold it still untill it fires, it will be accurate.

I believe some of this is age and my hands, elbows & shoulders not being as strong or as steady as they once were. I give up some recoil control with the shorter barrel, but not all that much and I can download for range work where a lot of shots will be fired.

 

[YosemiteSam357]

I think there is a trade off at some point, though. I don't shoot my 2" model 60 as well as the 4" or 6" K frames. I'm very accurate with the 5.5" and 7.75" Bisleys, and even the 8-3/8" model 27, though the longer barrels do tend to wear me down after a while.

-- Sam

 

[Sistema1927]

My 3.75" Vaquero in .45 feels heavier in my hand than my 5.5" Gauchos. The artillery model is just about perfect in the balance department. I keep the Vaquero as a back-up for CAS in case one of the Taurus pistols needs work as well as for those times when I want to pack hot .45 loads for a woods walk.

 

[Jim March]

>>My 3.75" Vaquero in .45 feels heavier in my hand than my 5.5" Gauchos.<<

Not surprising; your "Old Vaquero" is built on a 44Magnum-capable frame while the Gaucho isn't...the Gaucho is close in dimensions to a Colt SAA.

 

[ArmedBear]

4.xx for trail carry, 5.5" for balance, 7.5" if you're taking your time

3.5"? Not for me.

I work on my forearm strength as part of my training regimen, though. My elbows/wrists get screwed up by computer work, and weight training is the only solution. As a result, I like a little weight out front. Shorter than 4.xx and it feels butt-heavy. .45LC leaves the barrel relatively thin, too. My .357 SAA clone is more barrel heavy at 4 5/8" than a .45 would be.

And I learned to shoot revolvers using an 1858 Remington replica. That's got some weight out front.

 

[shu]

Nice thread.

For some reason I have developed a wild lust for the 3.5 inch Cimarron Thunderer with petit grip and dual (45colt, 45acp) cylinders. There is absolutely no rational excuse to go out and buy this gun.

Perhaps this thread will help quench that.

 

[Walkalong]

There is absolutely no rational excuse to go out and buy this gun

One of the best reasons to get it.

Seriously, it should be a blast. No pun intended. I intend to get a .45 ACP cylinder for mine (.45 Colt) when I can.

 

[Stainz]

I had the good fortune of working as a part-time public range RO - it intro-ed me to some interesting firearms. I shot two of the 3.75" Bird's Head Grip Vaquero in .45 Colt; both exhibiting a tendency to 'lose' their base pin and have somewhat ineffectual ejectors. I elected to get a standard length base pin & ejector - and bought a closeout 4.625" version. It is a keeper - in fact, my BH and SS Bisley BH in .45 are long gone now. Ultimately, I bought a .32 H&RM, .357M, and converted a new 4.6" SBH to a BHG - all having black Micarta grips. Neat common grips - rolls with recoil - especially that .44!

I did try a Thunderer and another shortie with a 'true' BHG - I prefer the rounder Ruger interpretation. The 'real' BHG would seem to be held more rigidly - and probably not rotate under recoil. Still, I kinda like that one in .45 Colt & 3.5" barrel...

My 6" h-l 629 replaced my 6.5" 24's as a modern easily cleaned .44 Special, although it sports X-frame Hogues for recoil, just in case I want some poop. If that 6" 29 is a RB, you might consider the grips I tried - only available from S&W Accessories now - the .500/.460 Magnum X-frame Hogues (They fit the RB K,L, & N-frames, too.) - $35. When I carry the 6"-er, I find myself popping rifle plates at 100 yd, the 4" or so revolvers generally finding the 12-15yd plates.

Odd how we hurt ourselves! My CTS problems arose after retiring from teaching math and math-utilizing courses - lots of chalk on the blackboards. My years of model-building, woodcarving, and wood turning, my last vocation, made my retired enjoyment of my .454 SRH short-lived. Now, .44 Specials, mild .45 Colts, .45 ACP/AR's, etc, are my maximum loads - I really seem to enjoy my .32 H&RM/S&WL and .38's. The absolute worst recoil to me has been a DE in .50AE - not the straight recoil, but the twisting moment when the rotating bolt stops and transfers it's rotational inertia to twisting my wrists - a big ouch. Uncanningly, the vertical rotation of the Ruger BHG in my hand, accentuated with .44M's in that SBH/BHG, is far more comfortable for ME to shoot. It is very individualistic, of course.

Oh yeah, I found my favorite .45 Colt revolver - after going through .454 SRH, .45 RH, and an assortment of SA .45's - the S&W 625 Mountain Gun - I have two of them - that 4" tapered tube makes for a great 'pointer'.

Stainz

 

[Jim March]

I shot two of the 3.75" Bird's Head Grip Vaquero in .45 Colt; both exhibiting a tendency to 'lose' their base pin and have somewhat ineffectual ejectors.

OK, this is a well-known problem and increases as a gun's recoil increases. It has nothing *directly* to do with barrel length. For example, if you lighten any Ruger SA you increase the odds of this happening.

There are two cures: a base pin with a locking hex bolt, or a stronger cross-spring on the base pin latch. Belt Mountain has a base pin with a short knurled head for the 3.5" barrel models that still has a locking hex bolt. And it's pretty cheap, less than $30 with shipping.

This is the only "really common" flaw with the Rugers and it's a product of their being able to handle big power. The SA design in general going all the way back to the SAA is known to jump the base pin now and again.

It's fixable and shouldn't dissuade somebody from buying a heavy-hitter Ruger UNLESS some moron has let it jump crimp too often and distorted the frame holes.