Single-Action grip opinions wanted

[Shawnee]

Hi All...

Have seen some of the relatively newer Rugers - mostly "Vaqueros" I guess, with the "birdshead" style grip. They look sorta cool but I've never shot any gun with that style grip so am wondering what all you lads who have owned/used them think of the birdshead grip. Anybody?

I know it is a grip design that goes way, way back. Billy the Kid had that grip style on his guns if I recall my Old West History correctly. Does anyone know the original design intent of the birdshead style?

Many thanks, All !

 

[timothy75]

The birds head rugers are the old model vaquero, the new vaqueros arent offered in birds head configuration yet. I dont like them personally as they're fat and require regriping every shot. The birds head grip on the 77 colt thunderer is different than that of the ruger, but closer to those offered by cimarron. Good luck

 

[Thefabulousfink]

I didn't like them until I held a little .32 Ruger with a 3.75" barrel. I don't I would ever shoot a large caliber like .45 with birds-head grips, but they just feel right on a smaller gun.

The cowboy rig I'd like to set up would have a 5" .45colt on my right hip and that 3.75" .32 in a cross draw or shoulder rig as a BUG.

 

[Tom C.]

I don't have one of the Bird's Head Vaqueros, but I did shoot one for one stage in a CAS match. Didn't like it at all. Much prefer the standard XR-3RED grip of the New Model Blackhawk. This is, of course, merely a personal preference. Your mileage will vary.

 

[CMcDermott]

It's very personal

depending on your hand shape, size and the way you grip the revolver. For me, only the Bisley grip works; the XR3, XR3-RED and birdshead are all too short and make me curl up my pinkie finger under the grip, which to me is just uncomfortable. The SuperBlackhawk grips are even worse, as the grip is too long to curl up my pinkie under it, but not long enough to allow my pinkie to fit on the grip either. So my pinkie ends up on the edge of the grip, and gets hammered by the sharp bottom front angle with every shot. But the Bisley grips give me room for all my fingers to grab on, and the Bisley style hammer is much easier to work for one handed shooting.

 

[Stainz]

My first SA was a .45 convertible Blackhawk... it was fine, until I found one of the new 5.5" SS .45 Bisley Blackhawks. I never considered the BHG until three years ago, when I shot a 3.75" .45 BHG Vaquero. I really liked it! I have medium-large hands... and the ball-like BHG just fit me quite well, as did that Bisley.

I soon bought a 4.6" SS .45 BHG Vaquero, a closeout goodie. It started a trend... next came a .357M sibling... then a .44 Magnum. The latter wasn't a 'stock' item... I ordered a QPR BHG via Brownell's, and fitted it to a new 4.6" SS .44M Super Blackhawk. I did sell the .357M BHG Vaquero - it just wasn't 'fun' to me. Finally, earlier this year found me getting a similar 4.6" SS BHG SSM in .32M. My Bisley and regular Blackhawks are long gone - my only SA's are the .45, .44, and .32 - all SS 4.6" with black Micarta BHG's. I like the BHG...

As to function: The BHG pushes it's ball-like shape into your palm - and along your arm as it's line of action - under recoil. There will be some muzzle rise, of course, and it is not restrained by your fingers, as in a plow handle shape. It causes a 'roll' in the round handle in your grip, not bad in the .32 or .357, a bit more noticeable in the .45 with 'cowboy' loads, and downright 'interesting' with .44 Magnums. The hot UMC 180gr JHP's in .44 Magnum give your palm a decent thwack and will 'roll' the muzzle skyward, presenting the hammer's spur to your hand's backside. Admittedly, I converted the SBH mainly for .44 Specials and Russians.

A great first thing to change on a BHG Vaquero is the hammer. I put Bisley hammers in mine, but they require some grinding and polishing in non-functional area's to fit - the SBH hammer is generally a drop-in. With the lowered hammer spur, you can easily cock the hammer with your shooting hand's thumb. The .32M still has it's original hammer... for now.

I would compare the Ruger interpretation of a BHG carefully to the Colt clones' 'original' BHG's. Like the original Bisley grip, the Ruger 'interpretation' is quite different. I like both of them better than the originals. You really have to 'try' them first... they really are quite 'subjective'. As to caliber and barrel length... I have let numerous folks, male and female, young and old, shoot my .45 BHG Vaquero at the range with 'cowboy' loads... they have all enjoyed the experience... except for my 5'10" wife - she said the grip was too small - prefers shooting my 5.5" .45 Colt Redhawk. As to length, the 3.75" is cute... but has a shortened ejector that won't always get the cases out with you pulling them out by hand. It also has a flush-headed cylinder base pin, which, in my experience, only comes out when easily when you don't want it to - under recoil! I like the less than an inch longer 4.6" barrel - with it's standard ejector and base pin.

Whatever you do, try one in your hand before buying it... and remember, they aren't copies of the 'original' Colt design.

Stainz

PS The hammer change was 'illegal' in SASS events.

 

[Zman72]

Shawnee,

You might want to consider looking at the Cimarron thunderer or the lightning. I have a thunderer and the way their BHG is designed it comes out over the web of the thumb. This stops the pistol from shifting in your hand when firing. I mainly shoot 38sp rounds through it and it does not shift when shooting, and I don't have to re-adjust my grip. Take a look at their site and you will see what I mean. EMF's Great Western line has an identical model to the thunderer as another option.

 

[highlander 5]

+ 100 on the Bisley grip BHG look to small and in a 45 colt recoil will be a problem