MCgunner
Member
The Ruger has a transfer bar lock work and is safe to carry hammer down with 6.
opinions -- SAA hiking/camping gun...357 vs 45LC?
- Thread starter DouglasW
- Start date
- Status
Jim March
Member
Yup. ALL Rugers since 1973. Frame size doesn't matter, they have transfer bars, period, all are safe six-up. The New Vaq is part of a "new wave" of SAA-size-and-shape-and-heft guns with transfer bars and in my opinion is the best. (The others are the Taurus Gaucho and Beretta Stampede.)
The New Vaq and both "50th Anniversary" 357 and 44Mags have a "lock" under the grip panels that involves a key. It's a hidden-away version of what Taurus puts on the hammer and S&W puts on the frame. That's new, but I have yet to hear a report of it engaging accidentally in the Ruger and unless you drill a hole in the grip frame for the key, you'll never see it.
The New Vaq and both "50th Anniversary" 357 and 44Mags have a "lock" under the grip panels that involves a key. It's a hidden-away version of what Taurus puts on the hammer and S&W puts on the frame. That's new, but I have yet to hear a report of it engaging accidentally in the Ruger and unless you drill a hole in the grip frame for the key, you'll never see it.
My vote is for a Ruger Blackhawk in .45LC. Mine has the 5.5" barrel, but you can get it with a more compact 4 5/8" length. The Blackhawk can handle the hot DoubleTap or Buffalo Bore ammo, and mine it amazingly accurate. At 50 yards I can hit the lid of a coffee can with the factory sights. With hot 300+ grain hardcast loads, you can stop a dumptruck.
It ain't light, so for actual backpacking, I would stick with your compact .357, but it is actually lighter than most steel revolvers of a similar size.
It ain't light, so for actual backpacking, I would stick with your compact .357, but it is actually lighter than most steel revolvers of a similar size.
March- You have a habit of kicking over anthills and
finding things, other than ants, beneath. I was disappointed when you lost your job in Sacramento.
However, you managed to sniff out part of what may be an even bigger problem with voting fraud. How Lockyer managed to insure you getting a pittance for exposing Diebold when you should have gotten something like 10% is a mystery. Hope your new ventures are keeping you busy and pissing people off.
BTW- Your .357 magnum load will out penetrate my load, but I'm not sure I could manage the ferocious recoil associated with it. Although, the poster did say he carried Buffalo Bore in a SP-101. I guess he knows what he's in for.
finding things, other than ants, beneath. I was disappointed when you lost your job in Sacramento.
However, you managed to sniff out part of what may be an even bigger problem with voting fraud. How Lockyer managed to insure you getting a pittance for exposing Diebold when you should have gotten something like 10% is a mystery. Hope your new ventures are keeping you busy and pissing people off.
BTW- Your .357 magnum load will out penetrate my load, but I'm not sure I could manage the ferocious recoil associated with it. Although, the poster did say he carried Buffalo Bore in a SP-101. I guess he knows what he's in for.
Jim March
Member
Heh. The "vote wars" are another subject entirely. I hope to post some news there soon, over in legal.
As to recoil in a Ruger mid-frame gun: the hottest loads I've shot with mine to date are some Doubletap 125s, probably doing somewhere north of 1,500fps. They *stung* but that was mainly the checkered plastic grips.
As an experiment I re-shaped the bottom half of each panel, thinning and "rounding" the bottom and eliminating about half the checkering. Rounding the bottom is due to my being a "pinkie under" shooter with these sorts of guns, which is also a reason for running the lower-slung hammer. Anyways. It made a world of difference. As soon as I've got some cash together I'll have wood grips made to order in this style, with detailed drawing made up based on the altered plastic grips which are servicable but ugly
.
Edit: on the vote issue: the latest finding from Arizona where I'm at now is an apparant pattern of election officials making printouts of "how the vote totals are going" a week to ten days before the election, based on the pre-election of mail-in votes. They ain't supposed to be doing that but the audits logs say they do. IF that data is making it's way out of the office and into the hands of political operatives, it's a felony...and that data pre-election is worth big bucks. It would allow a campaign (or esp. an entire party) to fine-tune their strategy: candidates that are losing big, abandon support, winning big, throttle back, close races, pour all remaining resources in. Not fair and not legal.
In one case we're tracking a set of these printouts were made at 3:30pm on the Saturday before the primary election in Pima County AZ. At 8:30 that same evening a "robocall" slamming the hell out of a candidate in a nail-biter of a race, who ended up losing by a nose. Was the printout of election results used to determine whether or not a slanderous "robocall" was worth doing? Don't know...but it looks fishy as hell.
Similar printouts were made during the general election, which haven't been accounted for. There was a camera pointed right at the main console with timestamps, so we could tell who was doing what. (The logs can't tell you as the Diebold system is so screwy everybody has to log in as "admin".) Public records access to the available logs was delayed for weeks. By the time post-election we knew there was a problem by correlating the logs with the reports from observers on-site...but when we asked for the videotape showing the times in question: "Oh too bad, they were on a 20 day retention/rotation cycle, they've now been wiped"...
Grrr...
As to recoil in a Ruger mid-frame gun: the hottest loads I've shot with mine to date are some Doubletap 125s, probably doing somewhere north of 1,500fps. They *stung* but that was mainly the checkered plastic grips.
As an experiment I re-shaped the bottom half of each panel, thinning and "rounding" the bottom and eliminating about half the checkering. Rounding the bottom is due to my being a "pinkie under" shooter with these sorts of guns, which is also a reason for running the lower-slung hammer. Anyways. It made a world of difference. As soon as I've got some cash together I'll have wood grips made to order in this style, with detailed drawing made up based on the altered plastic grips which are servicable but ugly
.Edit: on the vote issue: the latest finding from Arizona where I'm at now is an apparant pattern of election officials making printouts of "how the vote totals are going" a week to ten days before the election, based on the pre-election of mail-in votes. They ain't supposed to be doing that but the audits logs say they do. IF that data is making it's way out of the office and into the hands of political operatives, it's a felony...and that data pre-election is worth big bucks. It would allow a campaign (or esp. an entire party) to fine-tune their strategy: candidates that are losing big, abandon support, winning big, throttle back, close races, pour all remaining resources in. Not fair and not legal.
In one case we're tracking a set of these printouts were made at 3:30pm on the Saturday before the primary election in Pima County AZ. At 8:30 that same evening a "robocall" slamming the hell out of a candidate in a nail-biter of a race, who ended up losing by a nose. Was the printout of election results used to determine whether or not a slanderous "robocall" was worth doing? Don't know...but it looks fishy as hell.
Similar printouts were made during the general election, which haven't been accounted for. There was a camera pointed right at the main console with timestamps, so we could tell who was doing what. (The logs can't tell you as the Diebold system is so screwy everybody has to log in as "admin".) Public records access to the available logs was delayed for weeks. By the time post-election we knew there was a problem by correlating the logs with the reports from observers on-site...but when we asked for the videotape showing the times in question: "Oh too bad, they were on a 20 day retention/rotation cycle, they've now been wiped"...
Grrr...
Jim March said:
Mr. March,
When you refer to a "Ruger mid-frame gun", is that the New Vaquero/50th Anniv class, or the New Blackhawk class, or both?
I'm guessing that, similar to a .357 DA revolver, the lighter bullet weights (e.g. your 125s) would feel more "snappy" in the recoil department than the heavier bullets (158, 180)...
Thanks!
Last edited:
Jim March
Member
DouglasW: by "mid-frame" I mean (SO FAR at least) the New Vaquero and 50th Anniversary 357 Blackhawk (the "new reproduction flattop" in 357Mag).
These guns are both built on the same size frame, actually a reproduction of the old three-screw Ruger 357 frame. This frame cannot take 44Magnum horsepower levels, and when chambered in 45LC (in the New Vaquero) should not be fed the "45LC+P Ruger ONLY" loads.
"Small-frame" refers to the Single Six in either 22 or 32.
"Large frame" refers to the SuperBlackHawk, "Old Vaquero" and all the other Blackhawks except for the 50th Anniversary 357. The new 50th Anniversary 44 flattop is a modification of that same large frame although oddly enough, it's marked "44Mag Blackhawk" without the word "super" - so far as I know, the ONLY 44Mag adjustable single action Ruger not marked "Super".
Ruger may end up producing more mid-frame guns. A 44Spl mid-frame Blackhawk would just ROCK. I would also except to see special runs of "authentic cowboy caliber" New Vaqs, in particular the 38-40 which can have a second cylinder in either 40S&W or 10mm.
These guns are both built on the same size frame, actually a reproduction of the old three-screw Ruger 357 frame. This frame cannot take 44Magnum horsepower levels, and when chambered in 45LC (in the New Vaquero) should not be fed the "45LC+P Ruger ONLY" loads.
"Small-frame" refers to the Single Six in either 22 or 32.
"Large frame" refers to the SuperBlackHawk, "Old Vaquero" and all the other Blackhawks except for the 50th Anniversary 357. The new 50th Anniversary 44 flattop is a modification of that same large frame although oddly enough, it's marked "44Mag Blackhawk" without the word "super" - so far as I know, the ONLY 44Mag adjustable single action Ruger not marked "Super".
Ruger may end up producing more mid-frame guns. A 44Spl mid-frame Blackhawk would just ROCK. I would also except to see special runs of "authentic cowboy caliber" New Vaqs, in particular the 38-40 which can have a second cylinder in either 40S&W or 10mm.
gogetumnow
Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2003
- Messages
- 48
You've noticed a big difference when you've hefted both revolvers. I've had a 357 New Model Blackhawk in stainless and it was a heavy beast. So much so that I sold it. Too heavy for the caliber IMO. It was a whopping 46 ounces with it's 4 5/8" barrel. Ruger has somewhat corrected this IMO by the release of the 50th Blackhawk and New Vaquero, but you're still sporting a revolver that's 44 ounces. If you take a look at the blued New Model Blackhawk (also available in 45Colt/ACP Convertable model) you're down to 36 ounces in a 4 5/8" barrel. Much easier to pack. You're right, some of that gets eaten up with heavier projectiles but not much. If you're comparing 6 250gn 45 Colt bullets to 6 180gn 357 bullets you find a difference of less than 1 ounce. (437grains = 1oz)
All this weight savings come from two factors. 1-Blued New Model Blackhawks have aluminum grip frames, Neq Vaq's, 50th Blackhawks, and Stainless Blackhawks, and Super Blackhawks all have Steel Grip Frames. 2- 357 holes are much smaller leaving more steel on the gun.
But overall I'd say it should boil down to if you're getting into handloading or not. If you have no interest in handloading get the 357 and be done with it. If there is some chance you will load someday, do the 45 Colt.
My 37 1/2oz 5 1/2" New Model Blackhawk in 45 Colt with Ajax Stocks. One of my faves:
Just my .02, which with inflation these days isn't much.
All this weight savings come from two factors. 1-Blued New Model Blackhawks have aluminum grip frames, Neq Vaq's, 50th Blackhawks, and Stainless Blackhawks, and Super Blackhawks all have Steel Grip Frames. 2- 357 holes are much smaller leaving more steel on the gun.
But overall I'd say it should boil down to if you're getting into handloading or not. If you have no interest in handloading get the 357 and be done with it. If there is some chance you will load someday, do the 45 Colt.
My 37 1/2oz 5 1/2" New Model Blackhawk in 45 Colt with Ajax Stocks. One of my faves:
Just my .02, which with inflation these days isn't much.
gogetumnow
Member
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2003
- Messages
- 48
paddling_man
Member
I went thru this same dilemma recently. See thread: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=235804
Since them I've purchased some original grips for the gun that give more of the classic SAA recoil action of upward swing vs. a rear punch. Make sense? Probably not...
Have fun and, whichever you choose, I would strongly recommend going stainless for easy care in the woods.
Since them I've purchased some original grips for the gun that give more of the classic SAA recoil action of upward swing vs. a rear punch. Make sense? Probably not...
Have fun and, whichever you choose, I would strongly recommend going stainless for easy care in the woods.
paddling man said:
Thanks for pointing out that thread, Paddling Man. I'd come across it before in my research, but it shined new light tonight based on all of the information and opinions I've received here.
Despite preferring the aesthetics/traditional look of the blued SAA revolvers, I am leaning towards stainless for this revolver -- your NM Blackhawk seems about perfect (perhaps without those hogue grips -- jeesh
). As tempting as I find the 45 Colt, I'll probably go with .357 yet again, figuring I should get comfortable with the new single-action platform in a familiar caliber, then consider adding 45LC when I start reloading -- hopefully within a few years.
So how do you plan to carry it while kayaking? Stowed or on your person? If on you, how? Chest harness, etc. or something else?
Have you tried out the Ghost Rings that Jim March mentioned? I have a set of XO rings on my Marlin 1894c and love 'em. Seems like they would be a good addition, if they weren't too fragile in a backcountry environment.
Stainz
Member
If you are hellbent on .45 Colt, and again, I love this cartridge, consider a S&W 625 Mountain Gun. It is a 4"-er that weighs just less than 40 oz - and will go boom whenever you squeeze the trigger. I like a DA 'woods' gun. You can also pair it up with a Rossi Puma M1892, like I did mine over four years ago. My 24" SS octagon barrel came pre-drilled/tapped for a tang sight. The pricey, but well made, Marbles Tang Sight comes with the two mounting screws - a big five minute installation. It makes the .45 M1892 into a 100yd shotgun clay popper with standard 'cowboy' ammo. I did chrono the GA Arms Speer 200gr GDHP loads at 1,424 fps from mine - that should be a great deer round. The only hiccup my M1892 has had occurred when I tried my .45 Schoffield reloads. Their larger rim OD wouldn't make it through the M1892's gate, although they worked fine in the 625MG.
If you stay with .357M, still consider a Puma M1892 - just get the carbine for better handling. I was with a friend Friday when he bought a new 16" .357M blued M1892 for $389. It included a Bowie knife and a padded case, some form of sales 'special'. They had a .45 Colt, as well, for the same price... check your dealers. We'll probably meet today for some range time. He is on a fixed income - and doesn't reload. The rifle states lead only, so he'll give it a life of inexpensive .38 Special reloads. It really shoulders well. They also had the .454 SS version for a bit more - it will, according to some, chamber the .45 Colts, too. I believe that only the 24" barrel guns come pre-drilled/tapped. I like spending other folks money...
Stainz
If you stay with .357M, still consider a Puma M1892 - just get the carbine for better handling. I was with a friend Friday when he bought a new 16" .357M blued M1892 for $389. It included a Bowie knife and a padded case, some form of sales 'special'. They had a .45 Colt, as well, for the same price... check your dealers. We'll probably meet today for some range time. He is on a fixed income - and doesn't reload. The rifle states lead only, so he'll give it a life of inexpensive .38 Special reloads. It really shoulders well. They also had the .454 SS version for a bit more - it will, according to some, chamber the .45 Colts, too. I believe that only the 24" barrel guns come pre-drilled/tapped. I like spending other folks money...
Stainz
Stainz...I was hellbent on 45 Colt for a day or two, but then rationality returned and I'm focusing on the .357 models now. 45LC will remain on my wishlist for the future...
So -- narrowing down the choices -- in the realm of stainless, 4 5/8", .357 single-action Rugers, what is everone's opinion of:
the New Vaquero (KNV 34) -- fixed sights, stainless, 43 oz empty versus
The New Model Blackhawk (KBN 34) -- adjustable sights, satin stainless, 46 oz
I think the New Model Blackhawk is a better looking revolver, but I'm wondering if the New Vaquero would be better as a "woods gun".
Also, am I right in understanding that, for .357, the concerns over the NV frame strength are moot? That the warnings about the smaller NV frame is only for 45LC and that the frame is strong enough for any factory or handload .357 levels. Can it handle "Ruger Only" .357 loads...or do those only exist in 45 Colt?
Thanks again!
So -- narrowing down the choices -- in the realm of stainless, 4 5/8", .357 single-action Rugers, what is everone's opinion of:
the New Vaquero (KNV 34) -- fixed sights, stainless, 43 oz empty versus
The New Model Blackhawk (KBN 34) -- adjustable sights, satin stainless, 46 oz
I think the New Model Blackhawk is a better looking revolver, but I'm wondering if the New Vaquero would be better as a "woods gun".
Also, am I right in understanding that, for .357, the concerns over the NV frame strength are moot? That the warnings about the smaller NV frame is only for 45LC and that the frame is strong enough for any factory or handload .357 levels. Can it handle "Ruger Only" .357 loads...or do those only exist in 45 Colt?
Thanks again!
DOUGLASw - "The New Model Blackhawk (KBN 34) -- adjustable sights, satin stainless, 46 oz."
Yep, if you want the versatility of the .357/38 SP., go with the Blackhawk.
The adjustable rear sight means you can shoot all kinds of .357/.38 ammo in it, accurately. By adjusting the sights to fit your ammo, you'll find it much, much more convenient than trying to "tweak" the front sight, or "tweak" the barrel, etc.
JMHO.
L.W.
Yep, if you want the versatility of the .357/38 SP., go with the Blackhawk.
The adjustable rear sight means you can shoot all kinds of .357/.38 ammo in it, accurately. By adjusting the sights to fit your ammo, you'll find it much, much more convenient than trying to "tweak" the front sight, or "tweak" the barrel, etc.
JMHO.
L.W.
Vern Humphrey
Member
And let's remember this tweaking business is pretty much a one time deal -- you can't file metal back on the front sight.
Jim March
Member
Vern Humphrey
Member
That's very interesting. Every so often I'm tempted to cut the barrel on my Colt New Service back to 5" and put on adjustable sights. I'll have to think about this.
NateCowlishaw
Member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2006
- Messages
- 23
Go for the Ruger Redhawk 454!!!
The 454 Casull Cartridge is bigger then a would-be 45 Magnum and this gun shoots standard 45 Colt and high pressured 45 Colt! Sorry, just had to complicate things further! 
The 454 Casull Cartridge is bigger then a would-be 45 Magnum and this gun shoots standard 45 Colt and high pressured 45 Colt!
Sorry, just had to complicate things further! paddling_man
Member
I actually just plan to keep it stowed in a small dry bag behind the cockpit. I have three hatches: two large ones bow and stern then one small one right behind the cockpit that one can access while in the boat.
I am only looking for the gun on short hikes and in camp.
I haven't tried the ghost sights yet but I see some in my future!
Good luck with your decision.
MrAcheson
Member
If you aren't reloading yet, go .357. Have you priced .45lc ammo lately? When last I checked it was over $20 for a box of 50 most places. And ammo prices have generally gone up since then. With a .357 you can shoot "cheap" .38 for fun and more expensive .357 for more fun. Have you checked the availability of ammo at your local shops? Again, if you're going commercial then .38/.357 is going to be the better choice.
In a standard SAA sized platform .357 is really the more versatile round. You can load it hot or load it not. Loading .45lc hot in a standard SAA is creating a hand grenade. If you go up a frame size to the guns also chambered in .44 mag, then .45lc can compete across the range.
Oh and there are disadvantages to the .45 acp/.45lc conversions. A lot of people report Colt and ACP shooting to different points of aim. Generally that's because they were shooting hot Colt and standard ACP, but keep it in mind anyway.
In a standard SAA sized platform .357 is really the more versatile round. You can load it hot or load it not. Loading .45lc hot in a standard SAA is creating a hand grenade. If you go up a frame size to the guns also chambered in .44 mag, then .45lc can compete across the range.
Oh and there are disadvantages to the .45 acp/.45lc conversions. A lot of people report Colt and ACP shooting to different points of aim. Generally that's because they were shooting hot Colt and standard ACP, but keep it in mind anyway.
MCgunner
Member
Hell, I'll post it again.....
Confederate
Member
Well, truthfully, either caliber will do. Just pick the best gun you can find.
I hate to sound like a broken record, but I like the 6-inch Ruger Security-Six in stainless.
Yesterday I took out my 6-inch Smith 686 and my 6-inch SS and there's no way I'd carry a heavy, full-lugged revolver around on the trail. I wish Ruger would re-issue that gun, at least in the 6-inch configuration. It's a great gun for packing around on hikes and while camping.
The 2.75-inch Security-Six also is a fantastic choice. You'd have to pick one up to know what I'm talking about!
I hate to sound like a broken record, but I like the 6-inch Ruger Security-Six in stainless.
Yesterday I took out my 6-inch Smith 686 and my 6-inch SS and there's no way I'd carry a heavy, full-lugged revolver around on the trail. I wish Ruger would re-issue that gun, at least in the 6-inch configuration. It's a great gun for packing around on hikes and while camping.
The 2.75-inch Security-Six also is a fantastic choice. You'd have to pick one up to know what I'm talking about!
Attachments
For PROTECTION against anything anywhere a double action is much better that single action for 2 reasons, speed of instictive shooting and quick reload.
I think your 4" GP100 is what I would carry out of all the guns you have mentioned. If bear protection enters the picture, then a hot loaded 45LC is hands down better than a 357 anything, but top end 45LC loads are a handloading or specialty ammo house proposition.
For your stated purpose, I would go with a 4" or 6" 44mag double action. MUCH bigger variety of ammo choices including light 44spl loads. Both high power and light loads will be readily available wherever ammo is sold.
Just my $.02
Roll Tide
I think your 4" GP100 is what I would carry out of all the guns you have mentioned. If bear protection enters the picture, then a hot loaded 45LC is hands down better than a 357 anything, but top end 45LC loads are a handloading or specialty ammo house proposition.
For your stated purpose, I would go with a 4" or 6" 44mag double action. MUCH bigger variety of ammo choices including light 44spl loads. Both high power and light loads will be readily available wherever ammo is sold.
Just my $.02
Roll Tide
- Status
