Single Action Revolvers

[Driftwood Johnson]

I am well aware of that, however, in the parlance of modern handgunning, the Bisley name is pretty much owned by Ruger, particularly in the custom revolver world. It is Ruger's interpretation of the Bisley and frankly it was a better execution IMHO with regards to controlling recoil. I have shot the Number 5 and it is not nearly as good as the Bisley when real recoil is on the table -- again, IMHO.

I hope you realize I was just funnin' you when I said that was not a Bisley.

However, I will quibble with you about who 'owns' the name Bisley.

As far as I know, it is not trademarked by anybody. As such, I consider Ruger's interpretation of the Bisley grip shape to be exactly that, an interpretation.

Of course, the original Bisley grip was not meant to contend with massive recoil, it was meant to be a target grip, hence the name. It was introduced at the National Target Matches at the Bisley range near London, UK in 1894

 

[Speedo66]

Interesting. Bisley range near London, original Creedmoor matches held in what is now Queens, NYC.
NYS donated the funds to build the Creedmoor range at the request of the NRA.

How times have changed.

The Creedmoor property is now the site of a state psychiatric hospital, also called Creedmoor.

 

[MaxP]

I hope you realize I was just funnin' you when I said that was not a Bisley.

However, I will quibble with you about who 'owns' the name Bisley.

As far as I know, it is not trademarked by anybody. As such, I consider Ruger's interpretation of the Bisley grip shape to be exactly that, an interpretation.

Of course, the original Bisley grip was not meant to contend with massive recoil, it was meant to be a target grip, hence the name. It was introduced at the National Target Matches at the Bisley range near London, UK in 1894

I didn't interpret your post as being critical. I wasn't talking about the legal rights to the name, only about word association. Yes, its original intent was target shooting, but Ruger's iteration/interpretation is the industry standard for handling heavy recoil.

 

[45 Dragoon]

I've been a fan of S.A.s since I was 5 yrs old!!
My carry is an Uberti El Patron Comp. It's been "spiffed up" a bit, and I added a .45acp cyl. to it so it's a convertible.
The latest thing done was to swap out the flat springs for coils. The only flat spring it has is the mainspring which has been lightened for a barely 3 lb. hammer draw. They are installed pretty much like a Ruger 3 screw.


Mike

 

[RealGun]

I've been a fan of S.A.s since I was 5 yrs old!!
My carry is an Uberti El Patron Comp. It's been "spiffed up" a bit, and I added a .45acp cyl. to it so it's a convertible.
The latest thing done was to swap out the flat springs for coils. The only flat spring it has is the mainspring which has been lightened for a barely 3 lb. hammer draw. They are installed pretty much like a Ruger 3 screw.
View attachment 231232

Mike

How were you able to determine it's suitability for 45 ACP pressure levels?

 

[45 Dragoon]

Hey Realgun,
Well, the Cattleman comes chambered for .44 mag. Also, the cylinder is what contains the pressure, the rest of the revolver is just a support system. It's plenty strong enough. It also happens to be quite accurate with the .45acp and you can order one from VTI Gun Parts.


Mike

 

[RealGun]

Hey Realgun,
Well, the Cattleman comes chambered for .44 mag. Also, the cylinder is what contains the pressure, the rest of the revolver is just a support system. It's plenty strong enough. It also happens to be quite accurate with the .45acp and you can order one from VTI Gun Parts.


Mike

I see that the Cimarron Model P Pre-War is offered as a convertible. Probably the same gun, I expect. I just wonder how that all translates to not being able to shoot 45 Colt loads in the 20k pressure range in my stainless El Patron. I do note that Uberti makes a marked distinction between forged and cast frames, and that the only comment I found for 44 magnum was use of the larger military grip on a forged frame. It is, however, listed as a distinct model rather than a caliber option, perhaps more to it than the grip frame change.

 

[45 Dragoon]

RealGun,
Well, I don't expect to shoot high pressure rounds in a .45C marked cyl. in my El Patron. I stick to the reloading tables (upper end though!). I don't know what they proof them to nor does it bother me. All my revolvers shoot .45 C and they all have the same diet (call me a lazy or careful reloader). If I were to go down that road, I would have a cylinder made and heat treated for it along with off center locking notches (narrow) like Ruger uses. After that, you do get into support systems and that's when the top strap thickness becomes important. Then again, you can pick up a used Ruger for fairly cheap.

What I do understand is a cyl marked .45C is safe in my El Patron as is a cyl marked .45 acp. made for the same gun.

Mike

 

[RealGun]

RealGun,
Well, I don't expect to shoot high pressure rounds in a .45C marked cyl. in my El Patron. I stick to the reloading tables (upper end though!). I don't know what they proof them to nor does it bother me. All my revolvers shoot .45 C and they all have the same diet (call me a lazy or careful reloader). If I were to go down that road, I would have a cylinder made and heat treated for it along with off center locking notches (narrow) like Ruger uses. After that, you do get into support systems and that's when the top strap thickness becomes important. Then again, you can pick up a used Ruger for fairly cheap.

What I do understand is a cyl marked .45C is safe in my El Patron as is a cyl marked .45 acp. made for the same gun.

Mike

That seems to assume that a 45 ACP cylinder was more than just chambered for the cartridge head-spacing on the case mouth. I don't see any accommodation for pressure levels in the cylinders other than how much material is left in the chamber walls, a matter only of caliber.

 

[45 Dragoon]

Maybe. The heat treating may be different (it's not always "seen"). Like I said, it doesn't bother me and I don't know what the particular cyls are proofed to.

I'm sure some of the more "into the science" folks will chime in. I'm a tuner and tuning is what I do. I'm a good middle of the road reloader, biggest point being SAFE. I try not to over think things as much as possible. I've got more than enough to think about just as a tuner so that's where I choose to stay.

Mike

 

[CraigC]

How were you able to determine it's suitability for 45 ACP pressure levels?

Uh, he BOUGHT a .45ACP cylinder. If you can BUY a factory .45ACP cylinder, then it is obviously safe for a .45Colt. Not to mention that Uberti has offered convertibles for decades.

I'm curious to know which frames you think are cast?

The .44Mag's are built on a larger frame. Not quite as beefy as a Ruger but larger than the Cattleman.

 

[RealGun]

Maybe. The heat treating may be different (it's not always "seen"). Like I said, it doesn't bother me and I don't know what the particular cyls are proofed to.

I'm sure some of the more "into the science" folks will chime in. I'm a tuner and tuning is what I do. I'm a good middle of the road reloader, biggest point being SAFE. I try not to over think things as much as possible. I've got more than enough to think about just as a tuner so that's where I choose to stay.

Mike

I didn't need you to defend what you were doing as much as I wanted to understand what was truly possible and certifiably so in my El Patron 45 Colt. I now know or am reminded that these guns are offered as convertibles and magnums, appearing outwardly the same and lacking real differences in their published specifications. Yet one will be summarily cuffed about the head in any discussion concerning an assumption about using 45 Colt loads above SAAMI spec and in the >20k<30k range, equivalent to 45 ACP pressure levels. It ain't a Ruger. I can use my Vaquero for such loads and can demonstrate how that is justified. I would be interested though in the extent to which the El Patron and Vaquero can share ammo.

 

[CraigC]

People wrongly assume that the Ruger New Vaquero is stronger than an SAA or replica. IMHO, this is due more to marketing, myth and legend than any supportive data. There is no factual evidence to support the claim.

I don't hesitate to use Dave Scovill's 1100fps load in Colt's, USFA's or Uberti's.

PS, Uberti has also offered the Remington 1875/1890 models as .45 convertibles.

 

[RealGun]

People wrongly assume that the Ruger New Vaquero is stronger than an SAA or replica. IMHO, this is due more to marketing, myth and legend than any supportive data. There is no factual evidence to support the claim.

I don't hesitate to use Dave Scovill's 1100fps load in Colt's, USFA's or Uberti's.

PS, Uberti has also offered the Remington 1875/1890 models as .45 convertibles.

I think the main argument for the New Vaquero, perhaps applicable to other similar guns, is the fact that it is offered in 45 ACP and the attendant pressure levels. The 45 ACP has comparable chamber size and cylinder wall thickness to the 45 Colt, at least to the rear of the cylinder. I would look at top straps and other structural features that might distinguish the New Vaquero from SAA-based designs.

 

[CraigC]

They're all available as convertibles. However, some folks like to ass-u-me that for some unknown reason, mostly wishful thinking, the Ruger is stronger than the rest. I'm not saying it is or isn't, only that there's no proof either way.

 

[RealGun]

They're all available as convertibles. However, some folks like to ass-u-me that for some unknown reason, mostly wishful thinking, the Ruger is stronger than the rest. I'm not saying it is or isn't, only that there's no proof either way.

I think the ass-umption would be to shoot heavier loads without some assurance, at least by a weight of reporting no problems, that a gun is fine (safe) with it. I have encountered sufficient testimony regarding the New Vaquero but not any of the others.

 

[CraigC]

The evidence is the same for all of them. The mere fact that they are offered as .45ACP convertibles. Which puts them all on an equal playing field, as far as we know. There still exists no data to support the theory that the New Vaquero is stronger than a Colt SAA but the reverse could be more easily argued.

 

[RealGun]

The evidence is the same for all of them. The mere fact that they are offered as .45ACP convertibles. Which puts them all on an equal playing field, as far as we know. There still exists no data to support the theory that the New Vaquero is stronger than a Colt SAA but the reverse could be more easily argued.

But there is at least one Brian Pearce article (Handloader Apil/May 2007, first para., p. 15) to support using loads above SAAMI spec, up to 45 ACP pressure levels (23k psi), in a New Vaquero, while by omission not endorsing doing so in other SAA style guns that are imported or are older than the year 2000. There are other things we accept based upon internet lore or magazine articles, but I think Pearce has gained credibility.

What concerns me about extrapolation is that, when a gun model is offered in 45 ACP, does that really mean it is entirely the same gun as a 45 Colt-only version except for the cylinder? What about changes in alloys, hardening, forged versus cast frame, etc. that are not apparent in superficial specs we normally see?

 

[Speedo66]

Does anybody make a 9mm cylinder for the .357 Uberti Cattleman?

 

[CraigC]

But there is at least one Brian Pearce article (Handloader Apil/May 2007, first para., p. 15) to support using loads above SAAMI spec, up to 45 ACP pressure levels (23k psi), in a New Vaquero, while by omission not endorsing doing so in other SAA style guns that are imported or are older than the year 2000. There are other things we accept based upon internet lore or magazine articles, but I think Pearce has gained credibility.

What concerns me about extrapolation is that, when a gun model is offered in 45 ACP, does that really mean it is entirely the same gun as a 45 Colt-only version except for the cylinder? What about changes in alloys, hardening, forged versus cast frame, etc. that are not apparent in superficial specs we normally see?

We also have articles in the same magazine by Dave Scovill discussing his 1100fps loads he developed specifically for the Colt SAA.

There is no structural difference between a .45Colt and its convertible counterpart. No reason to be and to do so would be counter-productive.

 

[RealGun]

We also have articles in the same magazine by Dave Scovill discussing his 1100fps loads he developed specifically for the Colt SAA.

There is no structural difference between a .45Colt and its convertible counterpart. No reason to be and to do so would be counter-productive.

Perhaps it is a matter of trusting Ruger's testing more than Uberti's or Colt's. It is a bit academic, since the New Vaquero is the one that allows me to carry loading all six chambers, sort of a no-worries package all around.

My search lead me here for some interesting discussion. I will continue with some confidence loading my NV to the 20k range of loads and keeping the El Patron at the high end of 14k SAAMI spec. In any case, I have to shoot 200 gr bullets in the EL Patron, because it shoots quite high with heavier bullets. That bullet is probably giving me very respectable velocity levels with 9 grains of Unique.

 

[CraigC]

One can argue that since forgings tend to be stronger than castings and the New Vaquero is dimensionally similar to the Colt SAA and Uberti replicas, that they are actually stronger than the Ruger. In most cases, the reason Rugers are stronger guns, as is the case with the large frame Blackhawk and Redhawk, is because of the extra material, either in the frame, the cylinder or both. This does not apply to the New Vaquero.

I'm unsure what point you were making with the RugerForum link.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

One can argue that since forgings tend to be stronger than castings and the New Vaquero is dimensionally similar to the Colt SAA and Uberti replicas, that they are actually stronger than the Ruger. In most cases, the reason Rugers are stronger guns, as is the case with the large frame Blackhawk and Redhawk, is because of the extra material, either in the frame, the cylinder or both.

Howdy

Just so we understand, when you mention forgings being stronger than castings, are you referring to Ruger cylinders or frames? Although Ruger frames and many other parts are Investment Castings, their cylinders and barrels are still machined from solid stock the old fashioned way. No matter how strong the frame is, it is the cylinder which must withstand the pressure of a cartridge firing. The frame can be battered by the forces of recoil, but it is the cylinder strength that is most important.

I am not going to get into the argument of exactly how strong each one is. I know a lot of folks feel the New Vaquero can take more pressure than the standard SAAMI pressure for 45 Colt. I also know that Uberti proofs their revolvers according to European proofing standards, which are slightly heavier than SAAMI standards.

 

[lagerratrobe]

"I also know that Uberti proofs their revolvers according to European proofing standards, which are slightly heavier than SAAMI standards." Right, they test to the CIP spec which can be viewed here - http://www.cip-bobp.org/homologation/en/tdcc_public?page=4&cartridge_type_id=4. They rate the 45 Colt to 15954 PSI for max average pressure. Good luck finding reload tables that cover this pressure region though. I see them all stop at 12,000 and then pick up at 20k for Ruger-only loads.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

They rate the 45 Colt to 15954 PSI for max average pressure. Good luck finding reload tables that cover this pressure region though. I see them all stop at 12,000 and then pick up at 20k for Ruger-only loads.

Although I know others are concerned with this, I am not. I usually load 45 Colt with Black Powder, and the pressure levels are much lower. Personally, I am quite happy to remain down at the 14,000 PSI Max with 45 Colt loaded with Smokeless, as a matter of fact, I don't even try to get close to max loads. Mild Smokeless loads are plenty for me.