Which one is better, or is there a difference? I know they are different calibers, but is the SBH made to tighter tolerances than the BH? I have a 7.5" SBH that is rock solid tight. I don't own a BH, but the ones I have seen seem to be a little on the "clunky" side if you know what I mean. The SBH operates at over twice the pressure of the BH so it would seem plausible that they build it with greater attention to deatail. Is this all in my head?
Blackhawk vs. Super Blackhawk
- Thread starter Brasso
- Start date
The SBH *used* to be tougher, but no longer.
Starting with the "New Models" (read: post-'73 that came with an original transfer bar safety versus that part being retrofit if present at all) the basic frame is the same between the SBH, BH and now the Vaquero, with the exception of sights.
The grip frames vary, and barrel options.
Ruger seems to be unaware that the Bisley grip frame has developed the reputation of being able to handle major recoil the best. They DID finally realize that the square-back trigger guard on some SBH's smashes the hell out of people's knuckles so for the Hunter model SBH, it's got a round-back trigger guard and the overall grip frame is identical to the Blackhawk/Vaquero.
What they really need is a "Bisley SuperBlackhawk" for their top-horsepower hunting option.
Ruger also hasn't realized that the .45LC has now overtaken the .44Mag for top factory hunting load options. They're still doing .45LC chambers that are more appropriate for older shell designs...that's one reason Linebaugh and others are making a mint in custom cylinders that are properly tight and don't let the shell stretch, so that contrary to what you'd think the shells drop out cleaner at high pressures than they do out of a slightly-oversize Ruger cylinder.
This fits into the "marketing rant" I did on General. Ruger is seeing this hunting handgun thing as "we sell guns, the ammo is somebody else's problem". Once you see the total package the user ends up with as being a "complete system", you can match the caliber to the ammo available and then do marketing on that basis. You think Buffalo Bore wouldn't love having their 325grain 1,300fps monster .45LC+P being described by Ruger as part of "the best single action hunting package we make", with Ruger ads describing what that bad boy will do and how well it will group in a SBH-Hunter 10" barrel?
Wouldn't cost Ruger more than a day or two's testing time...and they'd end up with Buffalo Bore paying part of their final ad costs.
If anybody's interested, the "marketing rant" is here:
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=748948&t=372
Starting with the "New Models" (read: post-'73 that came with an original transfer bar safety versus that part being retrofit if present at all) the basic frame is the same between the SBH, BH and now the Vaquero, with the exception of sights.
The grip frames vary, and barrel options.
Ruger seems to be unaware that the Bisley grip frame has developed the reputation of being able to handle major recoil the best. They DID finally realize that the square-back trigger guard on some SBH's smashes the hell out of people's knuckles so for the Hunter model SBH, it's got a round-back trigger guard and the overall grip frame is identical to the Blackhawk/Vaquero.
What they really need is a "Bisley SuperBlackhawk" for their top-horsepower hunting option.
Ruger also hasn't realized that the .45LC has now overtaken the .44Mag for top factory hunting load options. They're still doing .45LC chambers that are more appropriate for older shell designs...that's one reason Linebaugh and others are making a mint in custom cylinders that are properly tight and don't let the shell stretch, so that contrary to what you'd think the shells drop out cleaner at high pressures than they do out of a slightly-oversize Ruger cylinder.
This fits into the "marketing rant" I did on General. Ruger is seeing this hunting handgun thing as "we sell guns, the ammo is somebody else's problem". Once you see the total package the user ends up with as being a "complete system", you can match the caliber to the ammo available and then do marketing on that basis. You think Buffalo Bore wouldn't love having their 325grain 1,300fps monster .45LC+P being described by Ruger as part of "the best single action hunting package we make", with Ruger ads describing what that bad boy will do and how well it will group in a SBH-Hunter 10" barrel?
Wouldn't cost Ruger more than a day or two's testing time...and they'd end up with Buffalo Bore paying part of their final ad costs.
If anybody's interested, the "marketing rant" is here:
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=748948&t=372
The reason I'm asking is because I want another Ruger (5.5") to go along with my 7.5" SBH. I like the idea of a .45lc. I only want it to shoot mid range loads mostly, but just how capable is it compared to a .44mag? Most of the loads I've seen put it just below in power, perhaps even with some loads. The really hot loads I see seem to be more power than seems safe in a stock gun. What I'm trying to say is, I know that the custom 5 shooters can handle the magnum loaded .45's, but can a factory ruger handle them with more power than the .44? I'm already set up for .44 including casting my own, so is there any real advantage considering the money I would have to spend on all the reloading/bullet casting equipment?
Brasso, all indications are that a bone-stock .45LC Ruger has more raw power potential available, with heavier bullets, than the .44Mag.
What you really need to do is go to John Linebaugh's site at http://www.sixgunner.com/linebaugh/ and look at the articles he's written on the left-hand column.
The hottest factory .45LC I'm aware of is the Buffalo Bore, 325grain pulling 1,300fps from a 5.5" tube. That's past .44Mag specs, by a hair.
What Linebaugh explains is that the .45LC case volume is really "too big" for modern modest-power loads, but you can make it work OK. What you REALLY need to do is fill the case, or close to it, but that means slow-burning powder like H110. If the bullet starts down the barrel too soon, that slow-burn powder hasn't had a chance to fully "catch" and then performance suffers, velocity starts to vary, life isn't good. So you use a heavy bullet, something over 300grains, and it takes a fraction longer to "get it started"...which gives that H110 time to "catch".
The other result is that the blast happens over a greater time period than it otherwise would using a more conventional .44Mag recipe involving a 240grain at 1,450 or more. So the "felt recoil" is more reasonable in the .45.
That Buffalo Bore load is really towards the BOTTOM end of the scale that's within this Linebaugh-type load technique. Which is fine for the factory cylinder, which is tough but sometimes a hair oversize on the cylinder bore which doesn't seem to impress Mr. Linebaugh much. Linebaugh describes loads such as a 345-grain doing 1,500fps from a SIX shot oversize custom cylinder
.
See also the bottom/middle dead critter pic on this page:
http://www.sixgunner.com/linebaugh/game.htm - click the pic for the text.
Granted, today he'd prolly recommend that load with a 5-shot cylinder but still...damn! And that gun didn't even have the Bisley grip frame, it wasn't available then.
Sooo...given that Buffalo Bore recommends it too, I'd say their 325 at 1,300 in a bone-stock gun should work.
And that's past .44Mag spec.
You could run heavier bullets and back off the speed some and still get great results. Probably out to 400grain at 1,100 or so? That's handload experiment time...me personally, I can't see needing more than that 325 at 1,300.
What else...read THIS first:
http://www.sixgunner.com/linebaugh/penetration_test.htm
Look at what they got out of a modern-type (like Buffalo Bore's 325 versus Keith-type) hardcast 300grain doing 1,180fps. Ask yourself how much more you need. Also note in the text reports of loads going "too fast" and shattering before breaking the shoulders of a now-pissed buffalo .
What you really need to do is go to John Linebaugh's site at http://www.sixgunner.com/linebaugh/ and look at the articles he's written on the left-hand column.
The hottest factory .45LC I'm aware of is the Buffalo Bore, 325grain pulling 1,300fps from a 5.5" tube. That's past .44Mag specs, by a hair.
What Linebaugh explains is that the .45LC case volume is really "too big" for modern modest-power loads, but you can make it work OK. What you REALLY need to do is fill the case, or close to it, but that means slow-burning powder like H110. If the bullet starts down the barrel too soon, that slow-burn powder hasn't had a chance to fully "catch" and then performance suffers, velocity starts to vary, life isn't good. So you use a heavy bullet, something over 300grains, and it takes a fraction longer to "get it started"...which gives that H110 time to "catch".
The other result is that the blast happens over a greater time period than it otherwise would using a more conventional .44Mag recipe involving a 240grain at 1,450 or more. So the "felt recoil" is more reasonable in the .45.
That Buffalo Bore load is really towards the BOTTOM end of the scale that's within this Linebaugh-type load technique. Which is fine for the factory cylinder, which is tough but sometimes a hair oversize on the cylinder bore which doesn't seem to impress Mr. Linebaugh much. Linebaugh describes loads such as a 345-grain doing 1,500fps from a SIX shot oversize custom cylinder
.See also the bottom/middle dead critter pic on this page:
http://www.sixgunner.com/linebaugh/game.htm - click the pic for the text.
Granted, today he'd prolly recommend that load with a 5-shot cylinder but still...damn! And that gun didn't even have the Bisley grip frame, it wasn't available then.
Sooo...given that Buffalo Bore recommends it too, I'd say their 325 at 1,300 in a bone-stock gun should work
.And that's past .44Mag spec.
You could run heavier bullets and back off the speed some and still get great results. Probably out to 400grain at 1,100 or so? That's handload experiment time...me personally, I can't see needing more than that 325 at 1,300.
What else...read THIS first:
http://www.sixgunner.com/linebaugh/penetration_test.htm
Look at what they got out of a modern-type (like Buffalo Bore's 325 versus Keith-type) hardcast 300grain doing 1,180fps. Ask yourself how much more you need
. Also note in the text reports of loads going "too fast" and shattering before breaking the shoulders of a now-pissed buffalo .VictorLouis
New member
Jim, I'll bet you can help me with this one
If I were to find a used .45 BH, how much would a Bisley grip-frame and hammer cost me as accessories? Would I have to get aftermarket parts, or are the two available through Ruger? Lastly, would that Bisley frame also include the Bisley trigger? To me, it has a much better feel due to the more pronounced 'C'-shaped curve. If not, add that in to the final tally.
I'm wondering what this would cost vs. having to buy a new BBH 5.5" and have to put up with that silly engraved unfluted cylinder. Thanks, VL.
If I were to find a used .45 BH, how much would a Bisley grip-frame and hammer cost me as accessories? Would I have to get aftermarket parts, or are the two available through Ruger? Lastly, would that Bisley frame also include the Bisley trigger? To me, it has a much better feel due to the more pronounced 'C'-shaped curve. If not, add that in to the final tally.
I'm wondering what this would cost vs. having to buy a new BBH 5.5" and have to put up with that silly engraved unfluted cylinder.
Thanks, VL.You know, I do NOT yet know what the Bisley grip frame would go for. I'm also not aware of any aftermarket clone-part sources for it. You'd think Qualitas or somebody would clone it?
I don't know what the factory hammer, trigger and grip frame sell for, but I *do* know you can get a complete drop-in Power Custom Bisley hammer and trigger for...about $175 I think. Which is pricey, but it's the equivelent of a complete drop-in action job from a top gunsmith plus it gives you the "half cock loading". More info and links to it here:
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=80872
As to .45LC vs. .44Mag: if the critter trying to eat you is a Griz or similar, I agree that the .454 starts looking pretty good. But down in the lower 48, with cougar, boar and black bear the main critter threats, I could make a pretty good case that the .45LC wins out, AND the extra power might be appreciated. There are also .45LC+P JSPs from both Cor-Bon and Buffalo Bore that aren't as hot as that 325 and would do great on deer or small piggies.
And all that is ignoring that the .45LC is doing the job at lower peak chamber pressures over a greater "pulse" (time at peak blast is longer, blast peak isn't as high) so it'll feel better when you shoot it.
I think the .45LC+P in the Ruger or other strong gun is now at the place the .44Mag should have been all along.
I don't know what the factory hammer, trigger and grip frame sell for, but I *do* know you can get a complete drop-in Power Custom Bisley hammer and trigger for...about $175 I think. Which is pricey, but it's the equivelent of a complete drop-in action job from a top gunsmith plus it gives you the "half cock loading". More info and links to it here:
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=80872
As to .45LC vs. .44Mag: if the critter trying to eat you is a Griz or similar, I agree that the .454 starts looking pretty good
. But down in the lower 48, with cougar, boar and black bear the main critter threats, I could make a pretty good case that the .45LC wins out, AND the extra power might be appreciated. There are also .45LC+P JSPs from both Cor-Bon and Buffalo Bore that aren't as hot as that 325 and would do great on deer or small piggies. And all that is ignoring that the .45LC is doing the job at lower peak chamber pressures over a greater "pulse" (time at peak blast is longer, blast peak isn't as high) so it'll feel better when you shoot it.
I think the .45LC+P in the Ruger or other strong gun is now at the place the .44Mag should have been all along.
Jim: this arguments been going on for a long time. Most folks I know have long since concluded that with a well placed round from either caliber the critter is dead. With a poorly place round, despite whatever small differences exist between the 2 calibers, you've got a wounded animal, and a problem to resolve. Dennis
Dennisrugerfreak
New member
Nope---cylinders don't interchange------I own 2 SBH's and tried it----nothing doing-------all cylinders are custom fit to each individual frame.
Steve Smith
New member
Jim, amen to your posts.
To those who say that "the argument has been going on for a long time, but either is as good as the other to game." You'er missing something...the .45 Colt can do more than the .44 Mag with about HALF the barrel length!
READ LINEBAUGH's NOTES!
To those who say that "the argument has been going on for a long time, but either is as good as the other to game." You'er missing something...the .45 Colt can do more than the .44 Mag with about HALF the barrel length!
READ LINEBAUGH's NOTES!
Brownells sells the Bisley Conversion Kit. It contains all the factory Ruger metal parts, the grips you buy separately and are available from half a dozen different manufacturers. Dealer/FFL/C&R costs is approx. $110 blue, $135 stainless.
Brownells also has detail smithing instructions on how to do the conversion. It's not complicated but there are some tricks & tips that make it easier. I don't know if they include those instructions with the kit, and they're not online, but if you called and asked I'm sure they'd send you the Technical Bulliten. -- Kernel
In stating that the cylinders are somewhat oversized in the Ruger surely you're not referring to the cylinder throats. All that I've seen as of late have the exact opposite problem miking out at .449 to .450. In fact smiths have a pretty good business going of reaming them out to .453 so cast bullets will shoot better in them. regards, birdman