weight diff. between stainless/blue

[neight]

can anyone explain why, on the ruger webpage, the blued blackhawk:

http://www.ruger.com/Firearms/FAProdSpecsView?model=306

is listed as 41 oz, while the stainless blackhawk:

http://www.ruger.com/Firearms/FAProdSpecsView?model=309

is listed as 46 oz :eek:. this is in the same caliber (.357) and same barrel length (4 5/8). i thought it was a fluke on the webpage, but the stainless models are listed as weighing more in ALL of the barrel lengths.

note that the blued super blackhawk:

http://www.ruger.com/Firearms/FAProdSpecsView?model=813

and the stainless super blackhawk:

http://www.ruger.com/Firearms/FAProdSpecsView?model=814

are both 44 oz ....

[JohnKSa]

Their stainless alloy must be a bit heavier than the alloy they use for their blued steel models.

I wouldn't have expected the difference to be that much--interesting...

I checked the GP100 and the blued is half an ounce lighter than the stainless. That's more what I would have expected...

[RevolverLover]

The overall length is different on the New Model Blackhawk too.

[The Real Wyatt]

Hmm, that's interesting.
I have two Taurus Tracker 970 .22LR revolvers, one in blue and the other in stainless. Both have 6.5" barrels.

The blue one tips the scales at exactly 2 oz. more than the stainless one, just the opposite from your experience with Rugers.

[Mal H]

Could be my imagination, but the stainless BH looks like it has a larger ejector rod housing than the blued model. That could account for some of the weight. Also, for some reason the SS model is 1/8" longer, but that wouldn't account for the 5 oz diff.

[Majic]

The blued model has an alloy gripframe and the stainless model has a steel gripframe.

[kcshooter]

the blued blackhawk is listed as 41 oz, while the stainless blackhawk is listed as 46 oz
I checked the GP100 and the blued is half an ounce lighter than the stainless
The blue one tips the scales at exactly 2 oz. more than the stainless one

Any metalurgists on this forum? This seems really odd and interesting to me, first time I've ever hear it or examined it at all. 5oz difference in the Blackhawk, .5oz difference in the GP, 2oz the OPPOSITE way in the Taurus, is there a difference in quality of stainless and blued steels? Is raw stainless supposed to be heavier or is the blued? Does Taurus use better steel vs stainless or does Ruger use better stainless vs steel? Does Ruger use better metals than Taurus? (no opinions on that last one, Taurus haters). Anyone want to earn an advanced degree in gunmetals?

The blued model has an alloy gripframe and the stainless model has a steel gripframe. Wonder what the weight difference is between the gripframes alone?

Hmmmmm......

[neight]

i think that majic might have it right ... that would explain why there is no diff. between the super blackhawks (both have steel gripframes)

[stinger]

What Majic said is correct, plus the ejector housing (?) on a blackhawk is steel on the stainless, and aluminum on the blued.

[358minus1]

I am a ferrous metallurgist and there is no significant difference in the density of stainless steels versus non-stainless steel. So any weight differences must be a function of the design (different shaped parts, other non-ferrous alloys in the design, etc...).

[629 shooter]

Wonder what the weight difference is between the gripframes alone?


Don't have exact figures but like mentioned above , the gripframe and ejector rod housings are where the weight differences occur between the stainless and blued BHs.

If you get the chance to break down a Ruger SA with an aluminum gripframe and one with a steel gripframe the aluminum feels almost "weightless" to me when compared to the steel.

Handled a stainless BH 357 at the shop and it was easy to tell it was a heavier gun than my blued BH 357.

[Dfariswheel]

One factor to consider: The person who wrote the information may have simply got it wrong.

This happens, and if you read manufacturer's information you'll often see discrepancies like this.
The people writing the info usually aren't "gun" people.

[RevolvingCylinder]

No. That information is correct and accurate. Pick up the two and you'll see that the weight difference is very noticeable. It lies in the material differences in gripframes. The blued is aluminum and the stainless is steel.

[Wildalaska]

I am a ferrous metallurgist and there is no significant difference in the density of stainless steels versus non-stainless steel. So any weight differences must be a function of the design (different shaped parts, other non-ferrous alloys in the design, etc...).

Well, Mr Metaalurgist, how come you arent taking into account the fact that blue guns are blue. Stainless guns dont have blue. So they must weigh less. Becasue the blue isnt there.

WildheyswmbodontbogartthatAlaska

[gak]

A good A-B would be a Vaquero to Vaquero comparison as both SS and blue (in both the OMV and NMV) are steel all the way through...and I believe they are the same oz's. (w/in the same model/era = OMV to OMV and NMV to NMV).