Which Blackhawk???

What to buy...

  • Total voters
    62
Status
Not open for further replies.
WestKentucky said:
I’m looking to buy a Blackhawk soon...as in a couple days after I get to the bank to deposit some cash that I got for selling a boat motor today. I WILL be buying a ruger Blackhawk. And it will be one of 3 options on caliber... all the same setup, look, and price. The three options...

.30 Carbine
.357 Mag
.41 Mag
Added .45 Colt because they have a convertible to 45acp for $50 more.

Each has its own merits and I’m somewhat equally drawn to all three.

I already reload .30 Carbine and .357. I’m better supplied for .357, but that’s not really here nor there because I have been meaning to buy more components for my 30carbine anyway. I have no reservations whatsoever of adding another caliber to the bench as I’m already loading or tooled to load about 40 calibers.

I already have a couple 357s including a buntline single action, and a contender pistol barrel. I do not, have not ever had a .41 mag but I have been on the lookout for one for a while and was pleasantly surprised to see the Blackhawk .41 available.

I already have a Marlin model 62 .30 carbine and want to put a .30m1c handgun with it, but being the odd rifle it is I always figured I would put a contender barrel in the mix for it.

So... price, barrel length, configuration are all identical. Which one do I order once the money gets to the bank account?
Click to expand...
 
I voted for the .45 myself, but honestly what I'd like for you to have is whichever one you really want your own self.

Tough choice, I know, but you can always go get the next one later, maybe next year when the economy is rockin' again.
 
I voted for the .41. I've had zero issues finding bullets, cases and loading info for the .41, and it's a lot of fun to load and shoot from my 7.5" Redhawk.

Stay safe.
 
I have a regular, non flat-top 45 convertible Blackhawk. I bought it NiB about five years ago.

It is on the regular Blackhawk frame, not the medium frame.

I have had zero issues with accuracy using either caliber.
 
I once loaded like 13 gr blue dot and 158 gr jsp when blue dot was becoming popular around 1980. Speer no.9 manual with that load in it. Glad I shot them in a Blackhawk with all that metal in 357 cyl. Had to pound out empties with a dowel and hammer. Cases split a good inch lenghwise. Young and dumb. 10 gr. Is what I use now. The next speer manual data was reduced downward quite a bit
I think it would have been a bad ending in a different gun.
 
I believe my (most recent purchased) NM BlackHawk CarryHawk .45LC/ACP convertible is based on the standard (larger) BH frame. So then my stainless flattop is not rated for Ruger only loads, but this CarryHawk is.(?) At least that's what I'm gathering from the other posts. Sorry for the OT.



BH_CH_Ivry5171.jpg
 
Viper1357 said:
I believe my (most recent purchased) NM BlackHawk CarryHawk .45LC/ACP convertible is based on the standard (larger) BH frame. So then my stainless flattop is not rated for Ruger only loads, but this CarryHawk is.(?) At least that's what I'm gathering from the other posts. Sorry for the OT.



View attachment 906116
Click to expand...
And I LOVE your gun, but I’m not dumping money into that grip frame... they think highly of that piece of metal.
 
If you like the Birdshead Grip I highly recommend you try to get your hands on one and shoot a gun with that grip. I thought I wanted one years ago and the Ruger Birdsheads were pretty hard to come across. I bought one from a guy in Texas and had it shipped to me.
It looked really cool but I didn’t care for how it felt in the hand or how much the gun rolled when firing.
 
Same here with the birdshead grip with me. Tried it out at a gun show where the dealer had just about every Ruger imaginable. Picked up a Blackhawk with the birdshead grip and put it right back down. Felt like I was I was trying to get a grip on a softball with a gun attached to it. Way too wide and rounded for my small hand.
 
Pat Riot said:
If you like the Birdshead Grip I highly recommend you try to get your hands on one and shoot a gun with that grip. I thought I wanted one years ago and the Ruger Birdsheads were pretty hard to come across. I bought one from a guy in Texas and had it shipped to me.
It looked really cool but I didn’t care for how it felt in the hand or how much the gun rolled when firing.
Click to expand...
I have fired a vaquero birdshead 45. I liked the gun and I liked the grip but didn’t think it appropriate for a powerhouse round. Honestly, I don’t like plow handles either but finding an affordable Bisley is like finding an affordable Rolex.... at least to find a standard Blackhawk Bisley. You can find vaqueros and SBH all day but a regular reasonably priced Bisley BH is elusive. The cost of the grip frames all by themselves are enough to make me have a slight bad taste for ruger single actions. I already dislike Ruger DA revolvers plenty.
 
GarrettJ said:
Ruger has done both. I have owned a large-frame .45 Convertible since 1995. I'm not sure what year they switched, or if they still offer the .45 on both frame sizes. But there are bound to be a lot of them out there still.
Click to expand...
yes, as driftwood johnson indicates, the 45 cal. blackhawk large frame was offered back in the seventies. the way to tell the difference is by cylinder diameter.

the small frame blackhawk has been offered for sale for about five years now, so used small frames should be much more available than the large frame.

murf
 
gotboostvr said:
They have recently made convertibles on both frames. Correct, that the flat tops can't eat the hot stuff, but the large frame will.
Click to expand...
i just went to the ruger website and noticed they have been busy with creating new blackhawks. thanks for the correction. i might put that 45 cal. convertible on my want list. i like 45 super!

murf
 
murf said:
yes, as driftwood johnson indicates, the 45 cal. blackhawk large frame was offered back in the seventies. the way to tell the difference is by cylinder diameter.
Click to expand...
They were made not only in the '70s. As noted, I bought my New Model .45 Convertible new in '95. According to Ruger's website it would have left the factory in '91 (s/n 47-40XXX).
https://ruger.com/service/productHistory/RE-NMBhawk45.html

And yes, as further validation my .45 Convertible has a cylinder measuring 1.729" OD, as compared to my "mid frame" .357, which has a cylinder measurement of 1.669" OD.
 
Last edited:
GarrettJ said:
They were made not only in the '70s. As noted, I bought my New Model .45 Convertible new in '95. According to Ruger's website it would have left the factory in '91 (s/n 47-40XXX).
https://ruger.com/service/productHistory/RE-NMBhawk45.html

And yes, as further validation my .45 Convertible has a cylinder measuring .729" OD, as compared to my "mid frame" .357, which has a cylinder measurement of .669" OD.
Click to expand...
i'm learning about ruger offering the convertible in the large frame (with the ears on the top strap) again. so, the flat top frame is the "mid frame" and the old-style frame with the ears on the top strap is the "large frame". got it.

thx,

murf
 
Driftwood Johnson said:
OK, that was an error.



This is an old Three Screw Flat Top Blackhawk chambered for 44 Magnum.

Pay particular attention to the the profile of the top strap and the rear sight. Forget that this is a Three Screw and forget that it is a 44 Mag. Just study the top strap and rear sight.

View attachment 906037




This is my old 45 Colt/45 ACP Blackhawk. Notice the configuration of the top strap and rear sight. This frame has what are sometimes referred to as the 'ears' on the top strap that protect the rear sight from damage.

View attachment 906038

Thanks , I had one of those old Flat Top .44 magnum Black Hawks many years and it was a swell pistol and never gave me any trouble BUT I see your point about the top strap ! The milling cut on it for the Micro sight certainy reduces the thickness ! I never thought about that before ! I'm glad my Colt New Frontier is in .44 special now !!! seriously !
Click to expand...
 
murf said:
i'm learning about ruger offering the convertible in the large frame (with the ears on the top strap) again. so, the flat top frame is the "mid frame" and the old-style frame with the ears on the top strap is the "large frame". got it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it doesn’t help that Ruger makes physical changes, but does not always change the name designation of the various models.

Also, not all mid-frame models are flat tops. I’ve got an OM .357 Blackhawk with “ears” which is on the mid-frame.

And I’m not sure, but I think that’s the case with some of the NM guns as well.

And the differences in size are subtle. Some people might be better at it, but I really have to look to tell the difference.

9B3071D5-3696-4F85-A5D8-15377A525E67.jpeg
 
GarrettJ said:
Also, not all mid-frame models are flat tops. I’ve got an OM .357 Blackhawk with “ears” which is on the mid-frame.
Click to expand...
i forgot about the three-screw 357 magnum blackhawks (i have a three-screw flattop 357 magnum on the mid-frame). now i'm more certain that the best way to tell the frame differences is by cylinder diameter.

murf
 
I had a .41 magnum for a while and it was high on coolness factor. Thought about a .30 Carbine for a while, but after research, decided I didn't fancy the muzzle blast that comes with it. I have standardized my revolvers on .357 mag, .44 mag, and .45 Colt, so I voted for the .45 ... although I'd probably never use the ACP cylinder.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J-Bar
  • Locked
Ruger Vaquero 7 1/2” .357?
Replies
14
Views
2K
CraigC
CraigC
K
  • Locked
Value of Ruger 3 screw blackhawk in 30 carbine?
Replies
21
Views
10K
41 Rem Mag
4
C
  • Locked
My First Blackhawk
Replies
8
Views
598
Roland of Gilead
R
K
  • Locked
Blackhawk Pondering
Replies
7
Views
577
dbmjr1
dbmjr1
Dustbowl
  • Locked
Whole Lotta Wheelgun
Replies
4
Views
813
Riomouse911
Riomouse911
Back
Top