I have read (on this board) that the "new" Vaquero is not as strong as the old one, but my question is: how strong are the older (pre 2005)large frame Vaqueros? are they as strong as the same vintage Blackhawk? I want to load up some hotter 45lc rounds for mine, not real hot, just out of the section in my reloading manual that says "45Colt; Thomson & Ruger only" But the book ( Speer # 11) was published in 1988 before the Vaqueros came on the market. I was thinking a 260g hollowpoint with 18g of 2400.
How strong in the Vaquero?
- Thread starter oldcars
- Start date
I have shot some hot out of an older Vaquero
I have used Herco at 11 Gr which equates to about 1100 FPS with a 240 GR bullet. It’s still well under max for a Ruger.
It lets you know its there.
Just use newer cases and watch for pressure signs.
The Ruger will just soak it up. It’s an extremely strong gun and it will take the same loads as a Blackhawk. One thing, it’s not that comfortable to shoot and don’t try to push lead that fast. I did with a gas check on the bullet and it wasn’t too bad about leaving lead in the barrel but with out one it probably would have left a mess of lead.
I have used Herco at 11 Gr which equates to about 1100 FPS with a 240 GR bullet. It’s still well under max for a Ruger.
It lets you know its there.
Just use newer cases and watch for pressure signs.
The Ruger will just soak it up. It’s an extremely strong gun and it will take the same loads as a Blackhawk. One thing, it’s not that comfortable to shoot and don’t try to push lead that fast. I did with a gas check on the bullet and it wasn’t too bad about leaving lead in the barrel but with out one it probably would have left a mess of lead.
Their lawyers are weak willed. NV is stronger than its contemperaries.
We know the lawyers rule at Ruger, you can read that right on the side of the barrel. I have watched others beat their imported SAA clones into sloppiness with what I considered moderate loads. I am convinced that they are softer steel. Now, mine is stainless and that may also make it harder. Take your S&W 44 mag. and mic it against the NV. You will respect it more.
Now as to the heavy Vaquero vs BH, the only thing lighter about it is the top strap. Linbaugh has said that he has never had the BH top strap fail or stretch in all the crazy things they have done to it, so we know there is a lot of surplus strength there. The stock revolver is going to fail on the cylinder where the locking T notch is. Then the topstrap blows away on weaker revolvers. But with repeated heavy loads you usually just slowly pound the gun into a loose piece of junk. That is what I see hapening to the clones. My NVs are holding up fine with a load that makes your moderator nervous. Decide for yourself.
We know the lawyers rule at Ruger, you can read that right on the side of the barrel. I have watched others beat their imported SAA clones into sloppiness with what I considered moderate loads. I am convinced that they are softer steel. Now, mine is stainless and that may also make it harder. Take your S&W 44 mag. and mic it against the NV. You will respect it more.
Now as to the heavy Vaquero vs BH, the only thing lighter about it is the top strap. Linbaugh has said that he has never had the BH top strap fail or stretch in all the crazy things they have done to it, so we know there is a lot of surplus strength there. The stock revolver is going to fail on the cylinder where the locking T notch is. Then the topstrap blows away on weaker revolvers. But with repeated heavy loads you usually just slowly pound the gun into a loose piece of junk. That is what I see hapening to the clones. My NVs are holding up fine with a load that makes your moderator nervous. Decide for yourself.
I don't think Ruger has ever advocated heavy loads in BH either. Ruger Only loads were created by people who discovered there was a lot of extra strength there. Now the data is disappearing as though it never existed, due to a liability campaign. So again. Decide for yourself.
Yeah... go ahead and load it up real hot. What do Ruger and the ammo makers know anyway.... all they care about is your safety. I don't know why the gunmakers bother making larger more powerful guns and calibers when all you gotta do is just keep loading your current gun hotter and hotter. As long as it don't blow up it must be safe....
Jim
Jim
What they care about MOST is their liability. The way to CYA is to rate about 60% of capability. The Monitor could have punched holes in the Merrimac like a loaf of rainbow bread had their superiors given them a light maximim load. Two years later, the identical guns were firing twice the charge. Linbaugh has tested many guns to destruction and probably knows more than Ruger what the capabilities of their guns are. I don't load to the max. If it isn't fun to shoot, you will not be accurate. However, I have found myself above the new, make the legal dept. comfortable, levels. I have shot enough already to know that my loads are safe for my guns.
The trouble is, in the interests of safety, or maybe whiteknuckle liability, we have begun to lie. Then we lose credibility, and everyone is in the dark, without trustworthy information.
Also, how do you sell a $600.00 .454 or .480 when their .45 BH can be loaded hot enough for anyone to hang onto. You have to convince everyone that what they have is no good. Make the loads lighter and lighter until they are sick of them. Get an older book, use the pre-lawsuit era info. Start a little light and work up. NV is not a heavy Ruger, but it is a cut above the other clones and the sloppy era Colts. Probably as tough as FA, but I don't have the money to test that. I think SS is harder, but might shatter from workhardening. Can anyone provide evidence on that? Ace
The trouble is, in the interests of safety, or maybe whiteknuckle liability, we have begun to lie. Then we lose credibility, and everyone is in the dark, without trustworthy information.
Also, how do you sell a $600.00 .454 or .480 when their .45 BH can be loaded hot enough for anyone to hang onto. You have to convince everyone that what they have is no good. Make the loads lighter and lighter until they are sick of them. Get an older book, use the pre-lawsuit era info. Start a little light and work up. NV is not a heavy Ruger, but it is a cut above the other clones and the sloppy era Colts. Probably as tough as FA, but I don't have the money to test that. I think SS is harder, but might shatter from workhardening. Can anyone provide evidence on that? Ace
I have loaded both my BH and my old Vaquero to pretty hot levels of H110/W296. I guess I can't post the loads any more, but the old sixgunner loads have not been a problem for me in either pistol. I've seen a few hard to extract cases, but nothing serious. It was not always the hottest loads that were hard to extract.
I don't do this much anymore - not because of safety concerns, but because I bought myself a Freedom Arms .454 Casull. Thats an order of magnitude jump from even the hot .45 Colt loads. I would not want to push a Ruger that hard.
I don't do this much anymore - not because of safety concerns, but because I bought myself a Freedom Arms .454 Casull. Thats an order of magnitude jump from even the hot .45 Colt loads. I would not want to push a Ruger that hard.
I'm at ace@nckcn.com love to get your data. Ace
An acquaintance of mine blew up a stainless Ruger revolver with a handload. He contacted the factory, admitted his mistake and was told that he could purchase a replacement from Ruger at the factory's cost. The attendant suggested a blued model as a replacement, commenting that the steel alloy used in the blued steel revolvers was stronger than the stainless.
That's been many years ago and I don't recall which Ruger revolver was involved. Since that time Ruger has introduced at least one new stronger stainless alloy--it's possible they've changed other formulas as well.
The Ruger Only loadings aren't disappearing. They are just qualified to include the difference in strength between the old & new Vaqueros.
There are people who do, but it sounds to me as if they're being dismissed.
Ruger strength
Compared to the Colt SAA and clones, the new Model Blackhawk, Super Blackhawk, and the (now called old model) Vaquero are tanks. The frames anre bigger and tougher, and so are the cylinders.
I have a couple of .45colt/.45acp Blackhwaks, and a .44 Mag Vaquero. No sane loading stresses these guns, and some insane loads can be handled as well.
I have been shooting one of my .45s since 1983, and after a period of seeing just how much of a magnum it could be, I decided I would rather have fun shooting without being beat to death when I pulled the trigger, and settled on a load that clocks about 1070fps, a 250gr hardcast SWC, pushed by Unique.
The load is on the top end of what used to be allowed for the Colt gun in the old manuals, and stresses my Ruger not a bit. Accurate too. Fun to shoot, delivering a fair bit of "thwop", without a punishing recoil.
You can hotrod a big frame .45 Rugers quite a bit, but if you want a lot more, you really should get a bigger caliber, now that they are available as factory items. remember that the folks who developed the hot loads did it mostly because bigger hotter rounds weren't available in those days.
Compared to the Colt SAA and clones, the new Model Blackhawk, Super Blackhawk, and the (now called old model) Vaquero are tanks. The frames anre bigger and tougher, and so are the cylinders.
I have a couple of .45colt/.45acp Blackhwaks, and a .44 Mag Vaquero. No sane loading stresses these guns, and some insane loads can be handled as well.
I have been shooting one of my .45s since 1983, and after a period of seeing just how much of a magnum it could be, I decided I would rather have fun shooting without being beat to death when I pulled the trigger, and settled on a load that clocks about 1070fps, a 250gr hardcast SWC, pushed by Unique.
The load is on the top end of what used to be allowed for the Colt gun in the old manuals, and stresses my Ruger not a bit. Accurate too. Fun to shoot, delivering a fair bit of "thwop", without a punishing recoil.
You can hotrod a big frame .45 Rugers quite a bit, but if you want a lot more, you really should get a bigger caliber, now that they are available as factory items. remember that the folks who developed the hot loads did it mostly because bigger hotter rounds weren't available in those days.
Attachments
The one "legitimate" concern about the New Vaqueros with .45s is that there is precious little metal between the cylinder bores (chambers)....not good for repeated hot loads, and it's possible though maybe unlikely just one hot one might do damage. One reason us .44 fans would love to see Ruger "do the right thing" and bring the NV out in a .44 Special - the gun just looks, feels and acts made for it. 357s' generally not a concern.
Quoting:
>>It was not always the hottest loads that were hard to extract.<<
That's because wear/damage to the gun is a factor of a load's peak pressure while a load's energy level is a function of the TOTAL pressure.
In other words, a powder charge properly set up will produce a strong steady power surge over a period of time - milliseconds of course but still a duration. A poorly-designed load will quickly spike in power yet might spike for such a short period that net bullet energy sucks.
Felt recoil is largely about how much energy was put into the bullet. But not entirely. A well-developed long-power-surge load will feel like a big push versus a short harsh "crack" feeling. The difference is subtle but definitely there.
Long-duration loads are easier to get with big case capacities and slower-burn powder.
The whole industry collided with this problem head-on during the conversion from black powder (very slow burn, very low pressure spike) to smokeless. The issue has never gone away.
If you're getting sticky case extraction yet mediocre bullet performance, you're not doing it right and you're putting stress on the gun that doesn't need to be there.
>>It was not always the hottest loads that were hard to extract.<<
That's because wear/damage to the gun is a factor of a load's peak pressure while a load's energy level is a function of the TOTAL pressure.
In other words, a powder charge properly set up will produce a strong steady power surge over a period of time - milliseconds of course but still a duration. A poorly-designed load will quickly spike in power yet might spike for such a short period that net bullet energy sucks.
Felt recoil is largely about how much energy was put into the bullet. But not entirely. A well-developed long-power-surge load will feel like a big push versus a short harsh "crack" feeling. The difference is subtle but definitely there.
Long-duration loads are easier to get with big case capacities and slower-burn powder.
The whole industry collided with this problem head-on during the conversion from black powder (very slow burn, very low pressure spike) to smokeless. The issue has never gone away.
If you're getting sticky case extraction yet mediocre bullet performance, you're not doing it right
and you're putting stress on the gun that doesn't need to be there.From what I have read and understand, that got to be a problem in the US. Then Vihtavuori started having their powder imported to the US. They published realistic loading data and as a result, other powder makes had to "fess up" that they were lowballing the loads. Of course they didn't say that. They just "retested" their data on "updated" equipment and viola, higher performance.