Ruger Vaquero vs Ruger New Vaquero

[Carl]

I've done some reading about the Vaqueros (I'm a big cowboy gun fan) and read up on the new Vaquero. Smaller in side due to skinnier grips and more compact cylinder as well as on the frame of the discontinued Ruger Blackhawk .357 Cal. "Flattop" and not the new model of Blackhawks like the original Vaquero. Overall a smaller size, but what do the people with hands on experience think? Do they recoil more than the original Vaqueros due to change in side and weight? (assuming it's even a significant change to begin with) Are they better for concealment? (if you're the type to CCW a single action pistol.) Share please.

 

[wrs840]

I have a New Vaquero 45LC 5-1/2. It feels wonderful to me, and I don't feel recoil as a problem at all IMO, but I'm a poor frame of reference, because I don't have any experience at all with the older ones. A friend of mine does, and owns several, new and old, that he uses in Cowboy action competitions. He prefers the 4 5/8" barrels, but other than that says the New Vaquero suits him at least as well as the old ones.

I wouldn't have thought of either version for CCW use though. It's kinda big for that... just a great Cowboy fun gun.

Les

 

[BlkHawk73]

Having both, I don't feel much difference in weight between the two; not enough to make it a big deal as far as carrying is concerned. The size is noticeable enough in that regard though. The proper holster would counter issues like this though.
The only real difference to me is the feel of the grip. Slightly smaller in all demensions in feel to me. Not bad, just different.

Someone will chime in about how these medium framed models can't use the "Ruger only" loads so before that starts... If one needs such levels of power, go with a more powerful chambering to begin with rather than hot-rodding a lesser cartridge.

 

[batmann]

The Ruger mid-size frame is very close in overall size to the Colt. My new .44 Spl uses the same size frame as the .357 Blackhawk 50TH.