45 Colt, Blackhawk or SAA?

The main problem I have with the Ruger BH is the finish quality. It's terrible. The revolver is really bulky and crude. I will suggest you look at Colt, Uberti and Pietta. All three make a better product. Sure you need to follow the advice of loading manuals.
That's a bogus assessment. Yes, Ruger has always skimped on fit & finish to reduce costs but to characterize them as "really bulky and crude" is disingenuous. The Blackhawk is larger because its frame was designed for the .44Magnum cartridge, which is why we can run the .45's at 30,000psi.

IMG_7535b.jpg
 
I don't know, "hog wallow" sights do pretty good.
View attachment 1158743


View attachment 1158744

6 shots ea. 21ft off hand.

Mike

The adjustable sights on a Ruger make more of a difference at 20-25 yards then at 7 for most people. Compared to the normal Colt SAA or Ruger Vaquero. And of course more work to adjust them to point of aim if they aren't on from the factory.
 
To your point, I was using open sights, fixed sights ( my hammers are shimed) so whether or not there is a screw adjustment to them matters not to me, my Dragoons are fairly well regulated. I don't get to shoot as often as a lot of folks but when I do, my revolvers makes me and anyone that shoots them smile.

Mike
 
The main problem I have with the Ruger BH is the finish quality. It's terrible. The revolver is really bulky and crude. I will suggest you look at Colt, Uberti and Pietta. All three make a better product. Sure you need to follow the advice of loading manuals.
This is very disputable statement. I do not have any center fire revolver from Colt, Uberti and Pietta, but I have/had a number of Ruger revolvers; SA and DA. Non of them have "terrible finish", I would say that finish could be classified as VG. Fit on one is bit more loose than I like (but it could be fixed, waiting for shims), but on some is excellent.

For comparison side by side, I do have Ruger Old Army and 44 Uberti 1858 Target, stainless steel. Uberti 1858 is fine revolver, fit and finish on par, or even tad better than on Ruger, but I have no idea about steel quality on Uberti revolvers. Considering also strength and durability, and knowing quality of the steel on Ruger Old Army, this revolver wins hands down. In other words, there is no way that I will ever sell Ruger Old Army and keep just Uberti.
 
Regarding Ruger's fit and finish. Have two old three screws- single six and super black hawk, as well as two of the new model flattops. The best finish is on the 3 screw SBH. The best fit is on the new .45 flattop, the best combo of fit and finish is on the .357 anniversary flattop (but the finish is not as good as the SBH).

While the old SBH has a wonderful finish, the fit isn't all that.
 
If you did the difference would be obvious. View attachment 1159056
I have sixguns from not only Uberti and Pietta but Colt, USFA, Standard, Freedom Arms, along with numerous customs. The difference IS obvious. However, it is not as you stated. Rugers have a utilitarian finish and that is one reason they cost less than Colt and S&W.

IMG_2511b.jpg

Not to mention that my own New Frontier is the most over-polished blob that I own.

013b_2.jpg

What I take issue with the most is the "bulky and crude" component of your statement. They are no bulkier than they need to be and the fit & finish of this Super is superior to the Colt above.

IMG_9211b.jpg
 
If you did the difference would be obvious. View attachment 1159056
If the look, finish is your top priority, nothing against it, enjoy your revolvers. I had seen folks coming on shooting range just to line up their handguns, fire half dozen rounds from one particular "step child", and keep polishing others for the rest of the day. And I respect that! They are members, paying their club dues and, as long as they follow safety rules and respect others, I always welcome them.

Of course, I would like that Ruger revolvers have fit and finish like Old Model 3 screw SBH https://gunblast.com/Super_Blackhawk.htm , and I wouldn't mind paying more. However, these days this is not option. But again, there is no way I would say that "finish quality is terrible". As a matter of fact, the only revolver I had seen and could say it had terrible finish is one S&W M27 with 8-3/8" barrel. It had such rough finish on lower portion of the frame opening that it looked like somebody took the coarsest file to finish it.

Also, IMO overpolished gun, with rounded surfaces, edges and corners, just to have shiny appearance, cannot be called a "nice" finish. I would rather have less shiny gun, but with flat and straight surfaces and edges, that should be flat and straight.
 
Last edited:
As for Ruger revolvers being "bulky", let make it straight and clear how all that started. Old Bill Ruger was one of the greatest visionary leaders in firearm industry and he saw a need for a modern, strong SA revolver. So, he created a Blackhawk. First a Flattop, but after realizing that revolver should be beefier for 44 Magnum, Old Model know as a 3 screw was created. Next, after understanding shortcomings of classic SA revolver, New Model, with transfer bar safety was born. In addition, NM Blackhawk was chambered in 45 Colt, giving to grand, old cartridge a new life, surpassing even mighty 44 Magnum.

When talking about light 1873 in 45 Colt, this is revolver excels for lighter game, shooting on the range and self defense. And I respect shooters who purchase such revolver. They new what they need.

However, if somebody wants a strong revolver, that will take 44 Magnum round without getting loose after less than 2000 rounds, there is no way that such revolver could have 34 oz. Same applies for revolver in 45 Colt, capable of lunching 300 to 360 grains bullets 1200+ fps. Some folks want it, and need heavier caliber for larger game. I am in this group, and getting 1873, even if it looks nice, is wasting of money.

In a nutshell, when talking about a 34-35 oz 1873 in 45 Colt, and 45-48 oz NMBH in 45 Colt, we are talking about two totally different revolvers, for two totally different applications. In that respect I just don't understand why somebody, who is perfectly happy with nice and sleek small pickup, bashing much more robust 1 ton pickup for heavier loads on farm or construction site.
 
As for Ruger revolvers being "bulky",........bashing much more robust 1 ton pickup for heavier loads on farm or construction site.


Ruger SAA's are crude and have poor finish compared to most any other brand. Not crazy about their low quality finish work and overly heavy dimensions. I bought them when that was all I could afford 25 years ago. Now I have moved on to more quality and finer finish since I can afford better now. For sure the Ruger products have a place - just not in my safe.
 
Ruger SAA's are crude and have poor finish compared to most any other brand. Not crazy about their low quality finish work and overly heavy dimensions. I bought them when that was all I could afford 25 years ago. Now I have moved on to more quality and finer finish since I can afford better now. For sure the Ruger products have a place - just not in my safe.
Well, good for you.
 
I have been playing with Ruger single actions for a bit over 20 years. In that time, I have come to some conclusions.

As an engineer, I like the overbuilt frame of the NMBH. I don’t load up my .45 Colt’s or .44 Magnum’s to the max, but it is nice knowing I can, if I am crazy enough to want to.

I prefer the grip frame of the NMBH, the XR-3 RED. It is like the Colt SAA, but enlarged slightly. Some, including my wife, prefer the SAA sized XR-3, so I got her a pair of 50th Anniversary .357’s, which is more to her liking.

I have a 5 ½” stainless Bisley .45. I had to try several different brands of grips before I found grips that didn’t mash my second finger. I have large hands, and the hammer spur is a bit low for my tastes. I prefer the standard NMBH hammer to the Bisley hammer, or the Super Blackhawk hammer.

In firing identical loads in both the NMBH and Bisley, I don’t really notice any difference in recoil. I actually prefer the NMBH grip, but that may just be because I have more time on it.

For range use, I find the .45 ACP cylinder really nice for my needs. I had the cylinder trimmed to headspace .45 AR, which I load on my Dillion by interchanging the shellplates.

20 years ago, when I got into the Ruger game, .45 Colt cylinder throats tended to be very tight, and in several different shapes, but not round cylinders. A throating reamer corrected the problems, and significantly improved accuracy.
 
Ruger SAA's are crude and have poor finish compared to most any other brand. Not crazy about their low quality finish work and overly heavy dimensions. I bought them when that was all I could afford 25 years ago. Now I have moved on to more quality and finer finish since I can afford better now. For sure the Ruger products have a place - just not in my safe.
You're like a song with one note.

In fact the original Blackhawk was the same dimensions as your New Frontier. Then when Ruger went to a cartridge that would grenade any Colt SAA, they needed a larger frame. As I said, they are no larger and bulkier than they need to be. Even so, a .45Colt Blackhawk is lighter than a comparable SAA. So most of your rhetoric here is unfounded.

As a rule, most Rugers are less polished, that is a fact. A Ruger also doesn't cost $2000, like your over-polished Colt.
 
.45Colt Blackhawk is lighter than a comparable SAA
Really?
Looking at the 4.6 - 4.7" versions of both, the SAA appears to weigh 2.3lbs, while the BH weighs close to 2.5.
Actual feel in hands is a whole different matter.

FWIW: I have/like both (in many models/calibers) for different reasons/uses.
But the SAA always feels lighter/more graceful in the hands.
 
I had to try several different brands of grips before I found grips that didn’t mash my second finger...
Take a look on these grips:

SB01.jpg SB02.jpg SB04.jpg

GUOTE:

I also fitted a pair of Herrett's walnut grips to the gun that I had slimmed down and refinished to better fit my hand. When firing heavy magnum loads, these grips are the most comfortable that I have ever used. I have had them on other Super Blackhawks that I have owned, and they protect my knuckles from dislodging and flying through the air, while still allowing the sixgun to properly roll in my hand under recoil.

From Ruger Super Blackhawk by Jeff Quinn, https://gunblast.com/Super_Blackhawk.htm
 
As a rule, most Rugers are less polished, that is a fact. A Ruger also doesn't cost $2000, like your over-polished Colt.
For $2000 NM Blackhawk could be purchased, and a good gunsmith could slick it that will put any Colt to the shame. I am talking about finish. Functionality, strength, durability and dependability are on another, very high level, that Colt revolver cannot reach no mater how much money is poured in it.
 
In fact the original Blackhawk was the same dimensions as your New Frontier. Then when Ruger went to a cartridge that would grenade any Colt SAA, they needed a larger frame.

Some old guy name of Elmer said that Ruger showed a. .44 Magnum on the original .357 Blackhawk frame at the NRA convention. He said it was not stout enough for .44 Magnum but if they let him have it, he would shoot heavy .44 Specials in it; but that they sent it back to the factory and blew it up with a Magnum proof load.
 
Everyone has different wants, needs and likes, that's great.
For me, I have always liked single action revolvers and have had several different ones.
Now I do have double action and auto firearms also and very much like each one, I only buy and keep the very best, in my opinion.

Now I came across a Hartford, second generation copy of a 45 Colt, SAA and after very, very close examination I bought it and I have not been disappointed in the least. It shoots very tight groups to point of aim with a 6 o'clock hold at 25 yards and dead on at 50 yards, what could be better?

Then I came across a stainless, Ruger, Vaquero in 45 Colt caliber and it looked great. So I checked it over very, very carefully and then bought it.

After using both of them for some time I found that I very much liked the Hartford the best.
I did several modifications to the Ruger to try to like it better but to no avail so I sold it.

The Hartford goes great with my Rossi, carbine in 45 Colt and I am very pleased with the both of them. It's just nostalgia.
 
Back
Top