Ruger Old Army

Status
Not open for further replies.
On the .44 mag thing, well, the figures I've seen for a Walker Colt are about 550 ft lbs. That's a weak .357 load, a hot .40 S&W load. It's no .44 mag load, not even a weak one. LOL! The ROA has less capacity than the Walker. Yes, it can be bored for a little more, but it's still less. I get something around 430 ft lbs from my 220 grain conicals and that's over a chronograph, not conjecture. That's 9mm +P range all-be-it with a .457" bullet. And, that's with Pyrodex since I cannot buy black powder in Texas. I think the state must have banned sales of it, because no one has it.
 
I use a .32 acp caseful of 4F BP under a caseful (7.62X39 - SK, AK case) of 3F and a conical in my ROA. has more recoil than a sraight 3F load. I don't own a chrono so no velocity figures. I shot a slug through a jack pine that a .357 mag 125 soft-point did not penetrate.
 
Mr. Pohill, I have no idea. I know, just like you, that with blackpowder pieces, some of them handle better with different loads. I highly suspect that you could take 2 identical Walkers (or 2 of any other kind) and feed them the same powder charge and the same ball and there would be a little difference between them although it may not be enough for an older man like me to ever notice.
I have never shot 45 grains in a Walker. The best I can remember (and I'vd got a pretty good memory. I'm not that damn old) all I'vd ever shot was 38 grs., 42 grs., 48 grs., and I shot 50 grs. a couple of times. My lever never fell although that dosen't mean it won't the very next time I shoot it. The reason I settled on 48 to shoot a deer with was because I was carrying a flask with a spout for 24 grs. at the time and I just got in the habit of making a double throw.
I know the Ruger is a fine revolver. I reckon anything Mr. Ruger put's his name (or his dead partner Mr. Sturm's name on) is good. I have owned a Ruger single shot (Ibelieve it was called a falling block although that isn't cast in stone) chambered for .338 WinMag, a couple of his 10/22 carbines (.22) and several of his revolvers in years gone by, the MK22, both regular and the target model, 2- 5 & 5/8 inch barreled (regulation six) .357 Blackhawks, 1- 7 & 1/2 inch barreled .357 Blackhawk, and 1 .44 Mag. double action Redhawk. I have also owned one of his .41 Mags. single action.
I don't own a single one of them today, don't want one of them. I don't have any modern firearms at all. Have no desire for one.
I don't know, Mr. Pohill. Someone like you could probably figure that out better than me. To be perfectly honest with you, nowadays I am far more interested in fishing (catfishing at night) and sitting around drinking coffee and smoking cigarettes and just talking about different stuff with my lady friend than I am about running test's on blackpowder revolvers.
There's 2 guys on here I bet could help you. Mr. Roswell and Mr. MyKeal...Okay...
 
The ROA is unquestionably well made and durable, but in my opinion is uglier than sin and also clunky in the hand, especially when compared to 19th Century revolvers. The gun is overbuilt for black powder pressures and could have been made smaller and more attractive.

(I admit that I don't like anything made by Ruger.)
 
Mr. Riot Earp, I understand that perfectly. Like me..I like what's commonly referred to as 'blackpowder shooting' although I'vd never fired any real honest to God blackpowder in my life. I just like the idea of building my own shot. Just something about it...Since I posted that awhile ago I stepped out back and got 2 squirrels with the Cattleman's Carbine so my brother could make him and his wife a pot of squirrel dumplings. I just got through cleaning and wiping it down a couple of minutes ago.
In my life I'vd heard a lot of people talk about the Ruger Old Army and on the bottom line they all said about the same thing you just said. Well built and dependable but with no sense of balance whatsoever. I know his 7&1/2 inch barrel blackhawk was the hardest thing to swing and settle on a target with that I have EVER seen, and that icludes the .357 and the .41. (I think I remember the .41 having a 7&1/2 inch barrel. Damn sure longer than a regulation six, I remember that)
Maybe it's just me. I'm sure some people can just pick one of them up and bang bang bang spot on every time. I'm a fair to middling shot (I come out of the Marine Corps, you know damn well I can shoot. Used to could anyway) but I don't like them either.
I think I'm starting to like this little Cattleman's Carbine about as well as anything I'vd ever carried with the exception of my Walker. It's taken me a little while to get used to the so-called 'quasi pistol hold' but I'm starting to come around with it. Well, that's off the subject.
No sir, I wouldn't buy an ROA. I'm not going to say I hate them or anything like that but to me that's too much money for a revolver that is so ill suited for me. I don't need one of them anyway I don't reckon. I don't know what the hell I'vd do with it. As far as having it for an 'inbetween power gun' so to speak, well, hell, my little carbine will do everything it will do and probably has a better range to. BUT, I am NOT downing Rugers at all. I myself just don't want one...Okay...
 
I own 7 Rugers, the ROA, a .45 Colt blackhawk, a .357 Magnum Blackhawk, an SP101, A P90 .45ACP autoloader, a P85 9mm high cap, and a neat little stainless 10/22. I love 'em all! Every one of 'em is "overbuilt" which means STRONG. Old style BPs are fun, but not really useful for much i a modern day. I could hunt with my Hawken, but always seem to pick up my .308 when I head for the stand. Of course, I ain't shootin' no cap lock on ducks in the marsh. I'll take my Mossberg 12, thanks. BP is great fun, but I do more than have fun SHOOTING guns. I'm basically a hunter that shoots. I've used that .357 Blackhawk to kill a couple of deer and eventually, I'll use that Hawken. It's just such a pain to clean up, LOL!

My ROA shoots about 2" groups at 25 yards, VERY modern like accuracy and, for me, accuracy is inportant. Here's my .45 Colt. It ain't THAT traditional, but you ain't gonna find a Uberti that can push a 300 grain pill to 1300 fps, either. This thing will put six rounds into 1" at 25 yards every time you try it if you can do your part. Pretty is as pretty does. :D

attachment.php
 
MrGunner, Sir, I don't understand. What does the 1300 fps got to do with anything I was talking about? Nothing as far as I can see. I have owned a lot of Rugers. I don't have them anymore because I am into blackpowder shooting. (well, Triple Seven fffg) I don't want a ROA because I don't like the way they're built and they don't have enough power to suit me. If I liked them I'd buy me one tomorrow. I don't want one. I am getting good service out of my Uberti's. And I mean GOOD service. I do NOT shoot for fun, Never have. My guns are tools, not playtoys. I only have 5 guns, and each one of them is for a certain category. They cover the spectrum from a field rat down here in Alabama to an elk or antelope or buffalo back home in Wyoming. (and I can assure you sir that none of them have yet failed to work) Try to look at it from my point of view. I do not like so called modern firearms. Now, why would I want to buy an ROA (which is what me and the other guy were talking about) when I already have a Walker that work's flawlessly (and it is very accurate I can assure you) and a .44 Cattleman's carbine that also work's flawlessly and is also very accurate. Now where would the ROA fit in? What need would I have of it? Buy it just because it's a Ruger? Ha ha, I don't think so. Plus the ROA does not have good balance as far as swinging on target. That does not mean that one cannot point it at a target and hit the target, but it does not have that natural 'feel' to it like just swinging your finger and pointing at something. Well, anyway...Okay...
 
Last edited:
I bought the ROA because I might want it to fulfill a few needs. The first need was a want. I just plain always wanted a cap-n-baller. Wanted one since I was in my teens. And God knows I can't figure out why. BTW, I'm in my late forties now. The second reason is because I know I can fit a conversion cylinder with a slightly more substantial load than cowboy loads in it. The reason behind this that now ( or at least when I can afford it ), I can leave my .357 in camp with my wife when I go hiking because I'll have my Ruger. And lately I'm thinking that BP loads will be enough for me with conicals. But I might be in touch with classicalballistics when I can afford it. After all, in Pa we only have brown/black bear. More than likely it'll run from the dog before I need to do some shooting. More than likely the most danger will be if I get between a mother and cub. But I'm good at paying attention to my surroundings and the dog will pick up my slack. In the event of a prob, I want the most I can get.
 
Kevin, I do not believe the Ruger will disappoint you. If your Ruger comes with adjustable sights, it should prove very accurate. In fact, my old Ruger was the most accurate caplock revolver I have fired. If your experience is similar to mine, you will be satisfied.

Please let us know how the conversion cylinder shoots. I have not fired an Old Army fitted with one of these, so I am eager to hear about your results. Good luck.

MCgunner, I share your sentiments about accuracy. This is why I favor the Ruger over other caplocks. To be fair to all parties, I have seen some amazing shots with other blackpowder firearms, but I think this is a testimony to the individual shooter more than their weapon. The ROA with adjustable sights seems to fill the bill for me. Let me leave it at that.


Timthinker
 
My reference to 1300 fps with a 300 grain bullet is a testament to the strength of the Ruger design, nothing more. The guns are the strongest on the market in a single action short of a Freedom Arms and the ROA is built on a super blackhawk sized frame. You will NEVER wear it out and, yes, it's super accurate, cartridge revolver accurate. It is only the most accurate, most well built cap and ball on the market. No, it doesn't look traditional. I never cared about the 1911, either. Some prefer tradition, some are stuck in 1860, some are stuck in a 1911 time warp. Me, I just like to shoot....and hunt. Shoot what you like, for your own reasons, I don't care. I do the same. It's a free country...so far anyway....less and less by the moment, but that's another thread for another forum. But, badmouth the ROA all you want, it'll still outshoot anything else out there that's patterned after a 19th century firearm.

I like BP revolvers because they're fun, cheap to shoot, and some even have hunting uses. However, if I can't hit what I'm aimin' at, I ain't got a lot of use for it. Just as soon have a club or a knife. I have a Remington pocket .31, was cheap. I also owned a '51 Navy copy. Neither could/can shoot anywhere NEAR as accurate as my ROA. The original guns, Remington and Colt, HAD to be better if guys like Hickock could do what they did with 'em. LOL! The '51 Navy I had was pathetic. Went boom and made a nice cloud of smoke, though.

I never had a Walker so I couldn't comment on it or any of its Italian copies. The old colt hammer notch and bead just don't do much for me, though.

Kevin, I like those conversions, but since I already have a .45 Blackhawk, never really thought I needed one for the ROA. :D It would make the gun much more versatile, though, for outdoor uses, especially in wet weather. Cap and ball needs to be emptied every day, cleaned, reloaded, royal PITA when you're in a tent camp.
 
mcGunner. I'm not badmouthing or insulting the ROA. and that is a damn fine looking gun in that picture. Did it come like that or did you have it done?
Yeah, Walker sights leave something to be desired. It took me over a year but I finally learned to hit with it. The Walker is VERY accurate AFTER one learn's how to shoot with it. Anyone can pick it up and shoot two feet over the target and start screaming: "This gun ain't worth a damn"!! Believe me, I had a lot of trouble with it, and even as much as I love it I would NOT reccomend to anyone that they buy one. You don't just pick the Walker up and shoot it. You'vd got to LEARN how to shoot it. It's got too much rifle built into it is the best way I can say it.
All those 1860's this and 1851's that and all that other stuff out there, I'vd never had my hands on any of it. You may not believe me but I would not give $200.00 right now for ten .36 caliber revolvers unless I knew where I could sell them right quick and make some money.
I'vd got a Colt 1849 Pocket .31 with a four inch barrel. It's very accurate also, but it took a while to learn how to hit with it to.
I just pick my guns very, very carefully. I researched and agonized for weeks (actually lost sleep) before buying each one of the five guns I own. Each one of them had to be able to fill a certain niche, a certain need, if that need ever arose. All of them have exceeded my wishes and hopes except MAYBE for that little 5 shot blackpowder .22 Mag. mini revolver made out of stainless steel that I bought from North American Arms. I guess it's alright for what it is. I killed 2 rats and one 'possum with it.
I got lot's of spare parts for each one of them, even down to the barrels and grip frames but so far I'vd never even had to change a nipple.
The only thing that still bothers me is that the Walker and the little .22 use #11's and the Cattleman's Carbine and the .31 use #10's. I MIGHT could get one to fit the other, I'vd never tried.
Well, anyway, I wasn't badmouthing the ROA. But between the carbine and the Walker there's no place for it. If Ruger made a Walker tomorrow, I'vd buy it day after tomorrow. I'd drive to Lacey Place and pick it up right at the plant. (MAYBE, I can't say for sure. This damn Uberti would be hard to beat. Maybe he CAN'T beat it. Maybe that's why he's never built one) Yeah, Lacey Place if they haven't moved. (I told you I know a lot about Ruger) Well, anyway, you'vd sure got a nice looking piece there McGunner. I'll be the first one to admit my Walker is ugly as a damn pig! (But it'll damn sure carry the mail)...Okay...
 
Last edited:
Interesting info here
http://books.google.com/books?id=LQ...ts=XyDSosx73R&sig=vXy8YWyK2Ec1cf49QrmBZvOWv6s

It confirms something I'd always figured about the killing power of B&P revolvers being out of proportion to their velocity and energy figures.
The deformations of the round ball during the loading process and initial slugging effect of the blast and forcing cone, produces a wide short slug which dumps energy into the target much faster than conventional conical bullets.

Other sources confirm that powders available in the sixties and 70's often gave better performance than most brands of BP available today.
Old records indicate that 18th and 19th century highest quality BP gave much better performance than commercial and military grades.
The best back then was the French glazed powder.

According to 16th century records Cannoneers of those days mixed their own powder, which called for red wine as a solvent. When the wine dried it left a bio chemical glaze on the powder grains which made them moisture resistant, and the grains burned more evenly.
The cannoneers soon learned than instead of using the wine as a solvent they could drink the wine then urinate into the mixing pot. The bio chemicals came out in their urine and had the same effect.

The type of wood used when making the charcol was also a factor, Dogwood was the best.

I figure modern BP is made using less esoteric materials. Probably more chemically pure, but often contaminants are the key to getting the best performance.

My own experiances with the Walker indicate that its performance appears to be greater than the .357 on the targets I've used.
The Walker we used held a lot more than 60 grains of FFFG. closer to 75 under a round ball.
I often drill the bottom of the chambers deeper and closer to flat bottomed on BP revolvers I've owned and the Walker I'd worked on.
I'd noticed most BP cylinders don't appear to be as deep as patent drawings indicate, and theres almost always nearly twice the depth of the nipple holes unused.
I grind a suitable sized drill bit to a flat point and chase the chamber down to remove what I consider excess metal. Best to be sure the locking notches aren't cut too deeply first.

This Walker dropped it lever on a regular basis even before the modifications, so I installed a lever latch and its mating fixture from an old Navy barrel stub.
I also installed safety pins to the rear of the cylinder.


PS
Nice Colt McGunner.
 
.44walkersabot, thanks for the honest story about how difficult it is to master a Walker and other Colt repos. The sights on those guns certainly seem lacking to me. I guess sights were the main reason I purchased a ROA years ago.

Learning to master a Walker or other caplock Colts is an exercise in patience as much as shooting. But if you succeed, then you have earned bragging rights in my book. Keep us informed about your target sessions with the Walker.


Timthinker
 
Roswell, I make my own BP. The ideal charcoals for fast and clean BP are Alder, Willow, Dogwood and Balsa. I think the salicylic acids in these woods make the difference in performance somehow. Even my homemade powder outperforms GOEX in every aspect. I've heard many times and would agree that powders in the 19th century were faster, hotter and cleaner than todays common powders.
As far as the topic here...ROA... They look well made, great design and engineering like all Rugers. They just don't excite me. There's something about shooting a historically accurate gun that's more fun, maybe it's the history...My Dragoon works just fine, loads easy and is accurate. I'd take that over the ROA myself, although they're very different. I think history is why everyone here is even drawn to BP shooting. Otherwise, you'd all have laser sighted, polymer frame autos.
In any case, I'd never turn down a ROA, it's certainly a great gun in it's own category, but to me it's a modern gun that shoots BP.
If I were to go with a historically accurate but very functional and easy to clean gun, I'd buy an Uberti 1858 Rem in Stainless. It's probably lighter than the ROA, works well and has plenty of power.
I especially can't understand why someone would buy the ROA and then another $200 to $300 for a conversion! What's the point? Just grab a ruger Vaquero or Blackhawk!
Every gun I currently own is a replica ( Colt Lightning rifle, 1849 Pocket .31, 1848 Dragoon, 1873 SAA )
I think the one modern gun I'd like is a S&W 460V. I like the fact that it can chamber .45lc, .454 Casull and 460 Magnum.
Other than that, the guns I plan to collect in the future are replicas.
 
Mr Pohill, I"M suprised at your question about squirrels. Tasty little buggers. I only eat them when I'm alone or with somebody. I'm a believer in squirrel, rabbit, young woodchuck, racoon, muskrat and deer consumption. I.ve got neighbors that eat 'possum and armadillos. Cant be too bad, they are all healthy.
 
JCT

I can buy a conversion cylinder cheaper than a new Vaquero or Blackhawk in .45 Colt. I'm not a man of means, I'm trying to deal with what I have. You might be of more substance than I, so maybe you don't understand. But some of us try to make what we have as versatile as possible for our needs. This is something you may want to keep in mind.
 
I saw a nice fresh squirrel on the road today, but all the winter sand and salt woulda made it taste bad.

Seriously though, I wanna try some squirrel stew. Gotta be better for ya than the stuff they call meat in the supermarkets.

Back to topic : Did they ever make a 5 1/2" barrel, stainless, with adjustable sights, ROA?
 
I think I am finally ready to take the plunge and buy two ROA for Cas shooting. I will definetly buy the conversion cylinders for them to be able to shoot in multiple catagories if desired. Plus, blackpowder pistols and rifles are cash and carry here in California, no information or ID required.
 
I also love my ROA. I have thee of them now! One of them has a scope mounted and is shot mostly with a conversion cylinder. The other two with BP or substitute. Can't get much more versatile than that. I bought all of them used for under $350.

I bought the conversion cylinder of ebay a few years ago when they were still allowing gun parts ( don't use ebay anymore now!) for about 150. It was not new but serviceable.
 
Sunday Go To Meetin' grips for ROA

These pics were on the Voy forum but I thought ROA owners here might like them, too.
These grips belonged to my father. Apparently he had a Ruger Blackhawk. Now they found a home on my ROA. They're at least 45 yrs old and made of what appears to be Mother of Pearl.

S4020008-3.gif

S4020004-3.gif
 
ROA Years of Production

STAINLESS
Beginning Serial Number: & Years of Production:
145-00001 1976
145-01204 1977
145-07934 1978
145-15890 1979
145-20194 1980
145-24880 1981
145-33428 1982
145-46522 1983
145-50008 1984
145-51681 1985
145-52645 1986
145-55577 1987
145-57569 1988
145-60386 1989
145-63537 1990
145-65870 1991
145-66177 1992
145-66292 1993
145-70614 and 148-00504 1994
145-74645 and 148-01310 1995
145-80534 and 148-03084 1996
145-87525 and 148-04467 1997
145-88998 and 148-06385 1998
145-90793 and 148-06823 1999
145-92200 and 148-07285 2000
145-92762 and 148-07895 2001
145-93406 and 148-08025 2002
145-94109 and 148-08404 2003
145-94812 and 148-09305 2004
145-95380 and 148-10546 2005
145-95673 and 148-11409 2006
145-96199 and 148-11785 2007



BLUED:
Beginning Serial Number: & Years of Production:
140-00001 1972
140-04259 1973
140-13723 1974
140-20404 1975
140-26251 1976
140-30204 1977
140-34506 1978
140-39651 1979
140-44201 1980
140-46573 1981
*145-33428 1982
*145-46522 1983
*145-50008 1984
*145-51681 1985
*145-52645 1986
*145-55577 1987
*145-57569 1988
*145-60386 1989
*145-63537 1990
*145-65870 1991
*145-66177 1992
*145-66292 1993
*145-70614 and 148-00504 1994
*145-74645 and 148-01310 1995
*145-80534 and 148-03084 1996
*145-87525 and 148-04467 1997
*145-88998 and 148-06385 1998
*145-90793 and 148-06823 1999
*145-92200 and 148-07285 2000
*145-92762 and 148-07895 2001
*145-93406 and 148-08025 2002
*145-94109 and 148-08404 2003
*145-94812 and 148-09305 2004
*145-95380 and 148-10546 2005
*145-95673 and 148-11409 2006
*145-96199 and 148-11785 2007

*Blued Old Army Serial Numbers roll marked with Stainless Old Army Revolvers beginning in 1982
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top