Josey
member
I was considering a Ruger Bisley Vaquero. What I want is the Keith #5 44 Magnum pistol. Would the closer match be a Ruger Bisley grip SBH in 44 Magnum?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Keith #5 & Ruger Bisley?
- Thread starter Josey
- Start date
- Status
-
Not open for further replies.
Nalapombu
Member
I think the closer model would be the Bisley grip SBH in 44 mag with a 5 inch barrel. I think that is what the Improved #5 had on it.
The firt time I saw one of the Improved #5 revolvers I wanted one. It's too bad that no one makes such a fine gun anymore. There was a guy in Texas that was going to bring them back out, but his financing fell through. Hamilton Bowen and a few other premier pistolsmiths that he knows got together and made a copy of one and it is posted on Bowen's web site. It is gorgeous, but then again it ought to be for $15,000!
People that want an Improved #5 may be in luck yet though. I was browsing the Gary Reeder website and he had one pictured. I called and asked about it and he told me that they intend on making them sometime in the near future. He said that they already had researched them, had plans drawn up to be as close as possible to the original and they were in the process of figuring out what all needed to be tackled before they got into making them. This conversation happened in November, I think. So he may have them on his site now for all I know. He said he had no clue as to how much they would cost since they had not progressed to that point yet. I took that to mean, EXPENSIVE.
Anyway, you'd think that Ruger or another company would come out with a copy of that pistol. If they would make one like the Keith using their modern steel for strength and kept the price affordable, I think they would sell them as fast as they could make them.
Who knows though.
Nala
The firt time I saw one of the Improved #5 revolvers I wanted one. It's too bad that no one makes such a fine gun anymore. There was a guy in Texas that was going to bring them back out, but his financing fell through. Hamilton Bowen and a few other premier pistolsmiths that he knows got together and made a copy of one and it is posted on Bowen's web site. It is gorgeous, but then again it ought to be for $15,000!
People that want an Improved #5 may be in luck yet though. I was browsing the Gary Reeder website and he had one pictured. I called and asked about it and he told me that they intend on making them sometime in the near future. He said that they already had researched them, had plans drawn up to be as close as possible to the original and they were in the process of figuring out what all needed to be tackled before they got into making them. This conversation happened in November, I think. So he may have them on his site now for all I know. He said he had no clue as to how much they would cost since they had not progressed to that point yet. I took that to mean, EXPENSIVE.
Anyway, you'd think that Ruger or another company would come out with a copy of that pistol. If they would make one like the Keith using their modern steel for strength and kept the price affordable, I think they would sell them as fast as they could make them.
Who knows though.
Nala
Jim March
Member
The original #5 was NOT a 44Mag. 44Special, I *think*. The primary frame was basically a Colt SAA which is a bit smaller than a Ruger and not able to handle 44Mag pressures.
The Ruger "Bisley" grip frame is clearly influenced by the #5. The shape is dang near identical, but the Ruger version is a bit bigger, esp. longer.
By switching over to the thinner "Gunfighter" pattern grip frames by Eagle and others, you can probably make the Ruger Bisley feel a LOT like the #5. But at a price: the Ruger Bisley grip's recoil control will be compromized by thinner grips, to at least some degree (depending on your hand size).
Now let's take another look at this: when Elmer Keith was doing ballistics research in the 1920s and 1930s, 45LC brass was just crappy. It was the old "balloon head" pattern. That's why he switched to hot-rodding the 44Special and then took that out to Magnum size by influencing S&W.
But he *started* with the 45LC. Had the brass in that caliber been as good as the 44 brass, he'd have stuck with it and influenced S&W to "magnumize" THAT - we'd have had something akin to the 454Casull (at a bit less power) in the 1950s. That's the route Dick Casull eventually took once 45LC brass of modern construction became available.
Now throw in another factor: the Ruger Bisley is bigger and weighs more than the original #5. By switching to the 45 bore, you cut the weight of the Ruger just a hair, to try and duplicate the "muzzle point feel".
So that's what I'd do to "recreate the #5": Bisley Vaquero in 45LC, appropriate barrel length (5.5"? I can't recall offhand), #5-type base pin by Belt Mountain, Eagle Gunfighter grips (smooth, not checkered) and then start in on the sights. Keith used a gold bead front and small horizontal lines down the front of the sight as "elevation markers" for long-range shooting.
The Ruger "Bisley" grip frame is clearly influenced by the #5. The shape is dang near identical, but the Ruger version is a bit bigger, esp. longer.
By switching over to the thinner "Gunfighter" pattern grip frames by Eagle and others, you can probably make the Ruger Bisley feel a LOT like the #5. But at a price: the Ruger Bisley grip's recoil control will be compromized by thinner grips, to at least some degree (depending on your hand size).
Now let's take another look at this: when Elmer Keith was doing ballistics research in the 1920s and 1930s, 45LC brass was just crappy. It was the old "balloon head" pattern. That's why he switched to hot-rodding the 44Special and then took that out to Magnum size by influencing S&W.
But he *started* with the 45LC. Had the brass in that caliber been as good as the 44 brass, he'd have stuck with it and influenced S&W to "magnumize" THAT - we'd have had something akin to the 454Casull (at a bit less power) in the 1950s. That's the route Dick Casull eventually took once 45LC brass of modern construction became available.
Now throw in another factor: the Ruger Bisley is bigger and weighs more than the original #5. By switching to the 45 bore, you cut the weight of the Ruger just a hair, to try and duplicate the "muzzle point feel".
So that's what I'd do to "recreate the #5": Bisley Vaquero in 45LC, appropriate barrel length (5.5"? I can't recall offhand), #5-type base pin by Belt Mountain, Eagle Gunfighter grips (smooth, not checkered) and then start in on the sights. Keith used a gold bead front and small horizontal lines down the front of the sight as "elevation markers" for long-range shooting.
Meadhall
Member
David Clements (clemenstscustomguns.com) offers a #5 grip that he can fit to your Ruger single action. And yes the Bisley is very close. The manufacturer in Texas was Longhorn Arms, and they made about a 1000 of the 'Improved #5's' (in 44 and 45) before they went under. You occansionally see one for sale. Try the forum at Sixgunenr.com I've seen them there before.
Keith and friends ( seems like Croft) came up with the #5 grip by modifying pieces of the SAA and bisley Grip sections. It seems it was the fifth thing they tried accounting for the name. Bowen discusses it thoroughly in his book, Custom Revolvers.
When the Bisley first came out, it was compared to the #5 and Seifreid's 475 revolver - also done by Bowen - uses the Bisley grip frame. Seifreid remarked that the Bisley needs a bit more fullness in some part of the grip to make it ideal.
When the Bisley first came out, it was compared to the #5 and Seifreid's 475 revolver - also done by Bowen - uses the Bisley grip frame. Seifreid remarked that the Bisley needs a bit more fullness in some part of the grip to make it ideal.
- Status
-
Not open for further replies.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 13
- Views
- 3K
- Replies
- 12
- Views
- 973
- Replies
- 32
- Views
- 1K