Ruger shouldn't be left out

If1HitU said:

I agree,Ruger shouldn't take a back seat to no name brand revolver or semi auto.
View attachment 769166

Click to expand...

Add a nice single action, and you would have a fine core collection.

Charlie98 said:

I'll have to be the voice of dissent... I've owned a good number of Ruger single-action revolvers and I could never get one to shoot worth a darn. That includes a single-six, about 6 .45 Colt variations, and a beautiful .41 Bisley that I had very, very high hopes for. Even earlier this year, I gave it... One More Try with a .44 Flattop... and, again, was disappointed.

Pic of the Bisley .41 (top) and my old .45 Vaquero. The .41 is gone, sadly, but the Vaquero remains as my camp and workhorse pistol... The jury is still out on the .44.

View attachment 769139

Click to expand...

I was wondering if you were a good enough shooter to really evaluate the guns...maybe shot from a rest to help eliminate you as the variable...and what comparative success you might have had with a different brand. I can relate to what you are saying, but cannot state negative things without being abused by those who would discredit the experience.

chicharrones

Thanks for the info! Will check out the various auction sites to see if I can find a pair like it.

bannockburn said:

chicharrones

Thanks for the info! Will check out the various auction sites to see if I can find a pair like it.

Click to expand...

PM me. I have a set I am not using, but I have to check which frame generation they fit.

Ok, they fit the standard NM Blackhawk (not Flat Top)

I was wondering if you were a good enough shooter to really evaluate the guns...

Wow... really? You don't think I went through the motions with each pistol? Trying different bullets and weights?

What I have learned recently is the problem Ruger has with their cylinder throats, I had sold the .41 Bisley before I heard about having the cylinder reamed. I did have the throats reamed on the .44 Flattop, the machinist said they were all over the map, but it still had no effect on POI (high and left.)

Charlie98 said:

I was wondering if you were a good enough shooter to really evaluate the guns...

Wow... really? You don't think I went through the motions with each pistol? Trying different bullets and weights?

What I have learned recently is the problem Ruger has with their cylinder throats, I had sold the .41 Bisley before I heard about having the cylinder reamed. I did have the throats reamed on the .44 Flattop, the machinist said they were all over the map, but it still had no effect on POI (high and left.)

Click to expand...

But the gun has adjustable sights. Group size would be more telling, I think.

My "grail gun"- a 6 shot .357 Redhawk from the first two years of production. Check out those cylinder walls!
If Ruger hangs a 7" barrel on the new 8 shot model, though, I'll have to grab one.....

NIGHTLORD40K

Now that's one solid looking cylinder! Sort of reminds me of all that metal in a bank vault door!

NIGHTLORD40K said:

View attachment 769217 My "grail gun"- a 6 shot .357 Redhawk from the first two years of production. Check out those cylinder walls!
If Ruger hangs a 7" barrel on the new 8 shot model, though, I'll have to grab one.....

Click to expand...

Have any idea what that thing weighs? That barrel isn't any slurpy-straw either!

I gotta think that Ruger built the .357 Redhawk for one of these reasons:

1. They lost a bet with S&W or Colt.

2. The DoD ordered some to see if they could "speed up" a .357 round for anti-aircraft use and someone mistook that to mean "speed into production" and they started boxing 'em up.

3. The stainless scrap market temporarily tanked so Ruger figured that if they couldn't make money on the shavings, then they might as well send it in a box and charge the customers!

Either way, it's a segment of Ruger's history and as some have said, you won't wear it out and likely won't ever kaboom it, even if you tried. NOT that we're condoning that sort of thing!

C5rider said:

Have any idea what that thing weighs? That barrel isn't any slurpy-straw either!

I gotta think that Ruger built the .357 Redhawk for one of these reasons:

1. They lost a bet with S&W or Colt.

2. The DoD ordered some to see if they could "speed up" a .357 round for anti-aircraft use and someone mistook that to mean "speed into production" and they started boxing 'em up.

3. The stainless scrap market temporarily tanked so Ruger figured that if they couldn't make money on the shavings, then they might as well send it in a box and charge the customers!

Either way, it's a segment of Ruger's history and as some have said, you won't wear it out and likely won't ever kaboom it, even if you tried. NOT that we're condoning that sort of thing!

Click to expand...

Obviously, the new .357 Redhawk benefits from the latest advances in metallurgy, as its walls are quite thin by comparison. Notice how the barrel extension is much thinner too- though the frame is thicker.
I'm not crazy about the thinner forcing cone, or MIM hammer/trigger, but I do really like the moon clip capability.
As my chances of finding someone to part with a vintage one are slim, I may have to "settle" for this one, haha!

RealGun said:

But the gun has adjustable sights. Group size would be more telling, I think.

Click to expand...

Not all of them had adjustable sights, and in the case of the .44, I can't adjust the sights far enough to get to POI, as was the same with my Single-six.

Charlie98 said:

Not all of them had adjustable sights, and in the case of the .44, I can't adjust the sights far enough to get to POI, as was the same with my Single-six.

Click to expand...

I was responding re your 41 Bisley, with adjustable sights and shooting "high and left". You could effect the windage quite a lot, while the elevation is more a matter of where to hold, if sights are bottomed out for elevation..

My Ruger single actions and Old Armies. My long barrel 45 has both Colt and ACP cylinders too.

robhof said:

View attachment 769252 My Ruger single actions and Old Armies. My long barrel 45 has both Colt and ACP cylinders too.

Click to expand...

Old Armys! Thread stealer!

When I first got into handguns in the mid 70's I was told that the Ruger was a poor mans firearm. Good thing I never listened to anyone that spouted that off. I am presently poor by about 75 Ruger products---Most of them hand guns BTW. I never expected them to be a snake gun for what I paid for them but for the price I am more than pleased with the quality. I have found if you are trying to get max accuracy out of a revolver you need lead bullets and also the throats to be the correct size for the barrel. A good number of my Ruger Revolvers had at least one throat that was too small and had to be reamed for accuracy. Using jacketed bullets will give good accuracy even with throats that are small however. Another problem was the choking of the barrel where it went through the frame. On those two I just use jacketed bullets in them and they are plenty accurate. None of mine shot so far off that they needed to be rebarreled or such. I even invested in reamers because it was cheaper than sending all the cylinders off.

Yeah let's not forget about Ruger, though that would be hard today as they seem to be the most innovative of the Big Three Colt, S&W, Ruger.
Their new products are awesome


And the old is very evocative -- *Six Series*

I am in love with this single action. I have wanted one for a long time. Ruger made one called the Buckeye a couple of decades ago in 10MM/38-40. There were some reports of not so great accuracy out of some of the early ones as the throats were to small. In later runs they got it right but discontinued them until now. With the New Blackhawk you can carry 6 rounds safely with the hammer down on a loaded round due to the transfer bar.

I did police firearms training for a couple of decades. System called Simunition. Basically paintballs out of a standard handgun. I played the bad guy. Shot every kind of revolver from taurus to colt.
Hands down, the best factory revolvers were the Rugers. Especially the six series.

I have shot Blackhawks, Redhawks, Six series, Old Armies and SP101s. In calibers from 22 to 454 and 45C&B. I have never found a Ruger that was not well made accurate.

IronHand

If I had to part with all my guns but one, the toss up would be between the Single-Six Convertible or the 5.5" Stainless Vaquero. 357 (Old New Model).

As an aside, I would fire the guy that named the Newest Vaquero the "New Vaquero" when we already had a New Vaquero. They should have called it something else. I guess it was the same guy that named Hot Pockets "Hot Pockets".