Vaquero vs SAA: compare and contrast
- Thread starter Chris_B
- Start date
.
There are Vaquero's, and then there are Vaquero's - as in "New Vaquero".
The "New Vaquero" is built on the same size frame as the Colt SAA, so it has the same strength/limitations - but finished vastly different than the Colt SAA.
OTOH, both Rugers have advanced features the Colt doesn't have, like coil springs ILO leaf springs throughout, and a one-piece gripframe ILO the Colt's two-piece gripframe.
The Ruger lockwork is hell-for-stout, as compared to a Colt SAA'a.
Both Rugers have a transfer bar lockwork, w/o a half-cock hammer notch; while the Colt does not - giving the old "C-O-L-T" four clicks sound/feel, while fully-cocking the hammer.
The original "Vaquero" was built on a larger/stronger frame - the same as the .44 Magnum Super Blackhawk, and can handle much more pressure (stronger loads) than a SA-sized frame.
All three are fixed sight models - the Ruger adj-sight models are the Blackhawks/etc; the Colt SAA adj-sight model is the "New Frontier".
.
There are Vaquero's, and then there are Vaquero's - as in "New Vaquero".
The "New Vaquero" is built on the same size frame as the Colt SAA, so it has the same strength/limitations - but finished vastly different than the Colt SAA.
OTOH, both Rugers have advanced features the Colt doesn't have, like coil springs ILO leaf springs throughout, and a one-piece gripframe ILO the Colt's two-piece gripframe.
The Ruger lockwork is hell-for-stout, as compared to a Colt SAA'a.
Both Rugers have a transfer bar lockwork, w/o a half-cock hammer notch; while the Colt does not - giving the old "C-O-L-T" four clicks sound/feel, while fully-cocking the hammer.
The original "Vaquero" was built on a larger/stronger frame - the same as the .44 Magnum Super Blackhawk, and can handle much more pressure (stronger loads) than a SA-sized frame.
All three are fixed sight models - the Ruger adj-sight models are the Blackhawks/etc; the Colt SAA adj-sight model is the "New Frontier".
.
Last edited:
Both the Vaquero and New Vaquero are modern built reproductions of the Colt. The original Vaquero and most of the Blackhawks are built on a beefier, thicker and heavier frame. Which is good if you want a gun to shoot hotter loads from.
The New Vaquero, while incorporating some newer more modern features, is much closer in size, balance, and feel to the Colt. The New Vaquero won't handle hotter loads and is not chambered in 44 or 41 magnum. Which can be found in Blackhawks or Old Vaquero's.
Both serve a purpose.
The New Vaquero, while incorporating some newer more modern features, is much closer in size, balance, and feel to the Colt. The New Vaquero won't handle hotter loads and is not chambered in 44 or 41 magnum. Which can be found in Blackhawks or Old Vaquero's.
Both serve a purpose.
towboat-er
New member
You will like the Vaquero.
Bob Wright
New member
Failed to mention that the Colt Single Action Army has a forged steel frame, whereas the ruger is an investment casting. And the Colt has more hand fitted parts as opposed to the Ruger's investment castings and less close fitting parts.
And the Colt has a case hardened frame with highly polished and blued parts, while the Ruger is less finely polished and is all blue.
Colt has the firing pin mounted in the hammer face, the Ruger has a frame mounted firing pin.
You're comparing a Ford to a Rolls Royce ~ both are reliable transportation, one utiliarian, the other luxury.
Bob Wright
And the Colt has a case hardened frame with highly polished and blued parts, while the Ruger is less finely polished and is all blue.
Colt has the firing pin mounted in the hammer face, the Ruger has a frame mounted firing pin.
You're comparing a Ford to a Rolls Royce ~ both are reliable transportation, one utiliarian, the other luxury.
Bob Wright
Hmmm. Well the big 'pro' for me is that I can buy a new vaquero in my state, but food for thought re: investment casting. I understand what it is, and I appreciate that forging is not necessary for everything (or indeed the best for everything) but all other things equal I'd like a forged frame. However methods and materials today are so superior I don't see this as an issue. But thanks for the heads' up Bob 
good point
good point
I have owned them all, and if you are going to compare the Colt with any of them, then the only one that comes close is the New Vaquero.
I like the New Vaquero, but those cheap black plastic grips on the New Vaquero wouldn't make a pimple on the butt of a real Colts grips. The NV makes a nice gun if you change the grips out, and I have Sandbar Stag and Elk grips on my Rugers but on the Colt 2nd gen .357, I have the original Black rubber grips.
My Colt was tuned before I got it, and it has a very light trigger and the action is so light and sweet, but it's better then stock.
My Rugers are great feeling and shooting guns, also, and the closest one as far a feel goes to the colt is a 4-5/8 NV with a set of small Elk Stag grips on it. I really like that gun but it still doesn't feel like my Colt. And it seams like to me that no matter what you do, the NV still feels bigger in my hand then the Colt, but dimensions are virtually the same.
I like the New Vaquero, but those cheap black plastic grips on the New Vaquero wouldn't make a pimple on the butt of a real Colts grips. The NV makes a nice gun if you change the grips out, and I have Sandbar Stag and Elk grips on my Rugers but on the Colt 2nd gen .357, I have the original Black rubber grips.
My Colt was tuned before I got it, and it has a very light trigger and the action is so light and sweet, but it's better then stock.
My Rugers are great feeling and shooting guns, also, and the closest one as far a feel goes to the colt is a 4-5/8 NV with a set of small Elk Stag grips on it. I really like that gun but it still doesn't feel like my Colt. And it seams like to me that no matter what you do, the NV still feels bigger in my hand then the Colt, but dimensions are virtually the same.
I've had a hankering for a revolver for awhile but never really pursued one. I love my autos. I was shopping for a new 1911 awhile ago when I came across this NV convertible. It's a two cylinder .45acp/.45 Colt. I just couldn't resist it.
Fist pic. is after I upgraded the grips.
Fist pic. is after I upgraded the grips.
Bob Wright
New member
Hal saith:
In theory, yes. But the Ruger frame is oversized somewhat to compensate for this. But on very close examination, by die-hard gunnies, there is a difference in the smoothness and crispness of forging vs. casting. This difference matters not a whit, but to the discerning eye, it is a mountain.
Bob Wright
In theory, yes. But the Ruger frame is oversized somewhat to compensate for this. But on very close examination, by die-hard gunnies, there is a difference in the smoothness and crispness of forging vs. casting. This difference matters not a whit, but to the discerning eye, it is a mountain.
Bob Wright
Driftwood Johnson
New member
Howdy
Bear in mind that the pressure vessel in any revolver is the cylinder, not the frame. It is the cylinder that must contain the pressure generated when the cartridge fires. Both Ruger and Colt still machine their cylinders from solid stock, and then heat treat the steel for extra strength. Both are plenty strong enough for SAAMI spec ammunition.
What the frame has to do in a revolver is put up with the battering of the cartridge slamming backwards in recoil. Ruger heat treats the steel of their investment cast frames completely all the way through, resulting in a very strong piece of steel. I am pretty sure that Colt is still Case Hardening the steel of their frames. True Case Hardening is a very old technique where the outer surface of relatively ductile, relatively low carbon steel is infused with extra carbon to make a very thin skin (case) of hardened steel. Just few thousandths thick. The actual purpose of this technique was to retain the ductility of the core material, allowing it to absorb punishment, while providing a hard surface on the exterior for wear resistance. So in theory, the frame of a Ruger is probably stronger, but it is probably overkill, at least as far as SAMMI spec ammo is concerned.
As far as Colt vs Ruger is concerned, I am a traditionalist and will take the Colt lockwork over the modern Ruger transfer bar lockwork every time.
However, I hasten to add that a few years ago I had two internal failures with the bottom gun in this photo, a 2nd Gen Colt SAA made in 1968. A broken bolt/trigger spring one time, a broken bolt the other time. The bolt/trigger spring failure is quite common, the broken bolt is not.
That is why Bill Ruger started using coil springs instead of flat springs way back in the early 1950s when he brought out the first Single Six. And that is why this pair of 'original model' Ruger Vaqueros comes along as spares to every cowboy match I go to. I was very glad I had them along on those two occasions.
Last edited:
The Ruger strong points.
1. The Ruger is less expensive to buy. A lot less.
2. It's sturdier.
3. If it gets stolen or blows up it doesn't bother you nearly as much (see #1).
4. You can use it hard with less concern about damaging it because depreciation isn't on your mind (see #1).
The Colt strong points.
1. The Colt has a more romantic name.
2. The Colt is iconic and traditional.
3. The Colt will be worth more in the future if not abused.
4. The Colt feels a little more ergonomic, better in the hand (my perception).
5. Most guys at the range will step on a Ruger trying to get a closer look at your Colt.
I have two single action revolvers. One is an Italian Colt clone in 45 Colt and the other is a genuine 3G in 44 Special wearing ivory. The genuine Colt oozes panache...if that's meaningful to you.
1. The Ruger is less expensive to buy. A lot less.
2. It's sturdier.
3. If it gets stolen or blows up it doesn't bother you nearly as much (see #1).
4. You can use it hard with less concern about damaging it because depreciation isn't on your mind (see #1).
The Colt strong points.
1. The Colt has a more romantic name.
2. The Colt is iconic and traditional.
3. The Colt will be worth more in the future if not abused.
4. The Colt feels a little more ergonomic, better in the hand (my perception).
5. Most guys at the range will step on a Ruger trying to get a closer look at your Colt.
I have two single action revolvers. One is an Italian Colt clone in 45 Colt and the other is a genuine 3G in 44 Special wearing ivory. The genuine Colt oozes panache...if that's meaningful to you.
Bob Wright
New member
I am not Colt-less, as evidenced by these .44 Specials, two New Frontiers, a Ruger and an Uberti:
//s73.photobucket.com/user/BobWright/media/Guns%20Miscl/100_0083_zpsc39ed25e.jpg.html]
The Ruger is an ex-.357 Magnum Three Screw.
Bob Wright
//s73.photobucket.com/user/BobWright/media/Guns%20Miscl/100_0083_zpsc39ed25e.jpg.html]
The Ruger is an ex-.357 Magnum Three Screw.
Bob Wright