Ruger: Why no SA in 454?

[357 Terms]

I was admiring a friends Super Blackhawk Hunter recently and I have wondered since why Ruger never chambered a single action in 454 Casull.

They chambered the Super Redhawk in 480 and still do in 454, so why not a SA in 454?

 

[Old Fuff]

The Redhawk has a larger diameter cylinder, which means the chamber walls are thicker. None of Ruger's current single action frames has a window large enough to take a Redhawk size cylinder, and there isn't enough demand to justify making one.

Some custom makers offer .454 Super Blackhawk conversions with 5-shot cylinders, and at least two other companies do (or at least did) make a Blackhawk-style revolver chambered to use that cartridge.

 

[OregonJohnny]

I'd buy a Ruger Super "Duper" Blackhawk in a heartbeat! Even if it was a 5-shot. I love my standard 4-5/8" blued Super Blackhawk. But a 5.5" stainless .454 Super Blackhawk with unfluted cylinder would be sweet. Throw in a convertible .45 ACP cylinder, and it would be the ultimate survival kit pistol - .454 Casull, .45 Colt, and .45 ACP.

While we're on the subject, I'd also love to see Ruger make a Super Redhawk somewhere between the Alaskan 2.5" and the standard 7.5".

 

[Old Fuff]

I'd buy a Ruger Super "Duper" Blackhawk in a heartbeat! Even if it was a 5-shot. I love my standard 4-5/8" blued Super Blackhawk.

No problem... All it takes is money, or about twice the price of the base model, plus a revolver to convert. Also check out Freedom Arms and Magnum Research.

 

[OregonJohnny]

No problem... All it takes is money, or about twice the price of the base model, plus a revolver to convert. Also check out Freedom Arms and Magnum Research.

Yep, all those options are much more money than what I assume a Ruger SA .454 would cost.

 

[mackg]

Ruger reportedly answered such questions by saying that:
-They build sixguns
-The Blackhawk is not as strong as the Redhawk
-There is little market for such calibers past the initial stage of marketing

I haven't talked to them myself....

 

[Old Fuff]

Yep, all those options are much more money than what I assume a Ruger SA .454 would cost

.

Yup, you're right, and that's the whole point.

Ruger could tool up and build the revolver you want, but they won't do it unless they see a market demand large enough to pay for the development, tooling and manufacturing costs and still leave them with a profit. To do that they have to sell thousands, not hundred's of guns.

They are well aware that some potential customers want this-or-that, but when they crunch the numbers they find that cost vs. sales don't come out on their side.

Which is the reason we have custom gunshops.

 

[OregonJohnny]

Yup, you're right, and that's the whole point.

Ruger could tool up and build the revolver you want, but they won't do it unless they see a market demand large enough to pay for the development, tooling and manufacturing costs and still leave them with a profit. To do that they have to sell thousands, not hundred's of guns.

They are well aware that some potential customers want this-or-that, but when they crunch the numbers they find that cost vs. sales don't come out on their side.

Which is the reason we have custom gunshops.

I know, I know. But a guy can dream, right? In the meantime, the Freedom Arms model 83 6" .454 is on my "some day" list.

 

[whetrock]

I wish sometimes that Ruger would collaborate with Gary Reeder and try and produce a production version of his "stretched frame" Blackhawks. This is very wishful thinking at best IMO.

 

[Big Lew in NC]

454

You might be able to pick a used FA in a 454. Wouldn't save a ton but...

 

[Hammerdown77]

If you don't want to drop the money on a 454 Freedom Arms, the next best option is a 454 BFR from Magnum Research. 5-shot cylinder.

BFRs are pretty nice, they are very similar to a Ruger, with a grip frame like a Super Blackhawk. They have a free spin cylinder, SBH hammer, and the barrels are hand lapped and barrel to cylinder gaps are held very tight.

They are in the $800-$950 range. I recently picked up a new BFR in 500 JRH for $815.

You can have different grip panels fitted to the gun, instead of the rubber grips they come with. Gunsmith Jack Huntington also offers a grip extension and custom grips that morph the stock grip frame into something resembling more a cross between a Freedom Arms grip and a Bisley.

 

[Old Fuff]

I wish sometimes that Ruger would collaborate with Gary Reeder and try and produce a production version of his "stretched frame" Blackhawks. This is very wishful thinking at best IMO.

Tell ya' what...

Send them a pre-paid order for 10,000 revolvers and they just might consider it.

 

[Prosser]

"I wish sometimes that Ruger would collaborate with Gary Reeder and try and produce a production version of his "stretched frame" Blackhawks. This is very wishful thinking at best IMO."

Reeder doesn't have a source for those guns anymore. IIRC there was some issue as to the legality of his having them as well.

Why not just buy a new BFR? Magnum Research guns are rugers, made with better materials, and utilizing Ruger compatible parts.

FA 83's in .454 are the most common of the FA's, so they pop up more often then other models, and for better prices.

I wonder if the stretched frame gun, essentially a Ruger Maximum, is the same size whetrock is talking about

 

[Coal Dragger]

If Reeder and Ruger were to collaborate (unlikely as it is) I would at least hope that Ruger would insist that the guns not be covered in cheap, tacky looking laser engraving and other stupid nonsense.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I really don't see the problem here. Just because the SRH is double action capable doesn't mean you can't shoot it Single Action. Just shoot it SA, no?

 

[Prosser]

I believe Reeder's contribution to the company are the laser engraving, blueing, and finishing. Not sure about how much of the business end is his.

So without the stuff mentioned, why would Ruger need Reeder?

Reeder on the otherhand, needs something to engrave on, and blue.

 

[two_crows]

Years ago I read that the Magnum Research BFR was built from castings cast by Ruger.

I wish I could get a Magnum Research BFR with a Ruger Bisley grip.

 

[1911Tuner]

Give Linebaugh a call. He'll fix ya right up with one. It'll be expensive, but well worth it.

 

[whalerman]

One of us posted that the Blackhawk is not as strong as the Redhawk. Is that true? We had people jumping all over that in other threads. Hey, I don't know. I'm here to learn.

 

[shootniron]

If Reeder and Ruger were to collaborate (unlikely as it is) I would at least hope that Ruger would insist that the guns not be covered in cheap, tacky looking laser engraving and other stupid nonsense

What he said...

 

[Prosser]

There is no denying Reeder's 'art' polarizes gun folks. You either love it, or hate it.

I wonder who turns out more guns: Reeder or BFR?

 

[Old Fuff]

One of us posted that the Blackhawk is not as strong as the Redhawk. Is that true?

Sort of... It depends on how you define "strong."

The Redhawk and Super Redhawk have cylinders that are larger in diameter then the one in large-frame Blackhawks. Thus the chamber walls are thicker, and therefore stronger. Because of the larger cylinder, Redhawk frames are larger too, but there is slightly less metal in the breech area.

As a practical matter it doesn't matter, except that Ruger chambers Redhawks in cartridges it wouldn't use in Blackhawks, and points out that Blackhawks are lighter, less massive in size, and more then able to withstand pressures generated by .44 Magnums and downward. They do not approve of the use of so-called "Ruger only" .45 Colt handloads, or for that matter any reloaded ammunition over which they have no control.

For some time several custom gunsmiths have offered .454 Casull, Blackhawk conversions using special aftermarket 5-shot cylinders, and apparently these have not developed problems, large or small. So far Ruger hasn't shown any interest in doing the same - mostly because they don't see a large enough customer base to support the costs of doing so over the long haul.

Those who want a .454 version of the Blackhawk need to convince the Ruger Company that there is a viable market for it. Until the folks at the factory see it that way the rest is wishful thinking.

 

[OregonJohnny]

For some time several custom gunsmiths have offered .454 Casull, Blackhawk conversions using special aftermarket 5-shot cylinders, and apparently these have not developed problems, large or small.

So technically, the only thing needed to turn a .45 Colt Blackhawk into a .454 Casull Blackhawk is a different cylinder? Sounds like Ruger wouldn't have to tool up for anything other than the new cylinders. I suspect, though, that their reasoning for not offering it is that the Blackhawk frame may not be up to Ruger's standards of "overbuilt" for a caliber such as the .454, in addition to the lack of customer demand mentioned above.

 

[mackg]

Technically, the frame window of the Blackhawk is slightly enlarged (metal is removed), and the barrel shortened a bit as the new cylinders are larger. 5 shot cylinders were available at some point from Brownells.

About the BFR; the company retooled a while ago and the new guns are much bigger and heavier. It's actually a bit of a joke in 44 Mag...

 

[CraigC]

Blackhawks can be converted to .454 all day long. However, those guns are hand-fitted to precise tolerances to minimize wear and tear. Things that are not compatible with Ruger's manufacturing techniques. So for a single action .454 to be compatible with mass production, it would have to be a new design on a larger frame.

Also bear in mind that the handloader does not need the .454. A nice five-shot .45Colt does everything one needs a .45 to do. Given what can be done with six-shot .44's and .45's, I question the need for the .454 at all.