New Vaquero Durability

[DanJast]

In 2005 Ruger downsized the Vaquero so it's no longer a beast like the Blackhawk or GP100. Can it still handle a steady diet of the 125g .357 magnum screamers? This round has a fast-burning nasty charge and tends to erode the top straps on smaller revolvers. Thoughts?

[jackmoser65]

It will handle all the 357 you can throw at it. It only become a question when the caliber is 45 Colt.

[RoyceP]

I am trying to understand what you are asking. Would you intentionally try to damage a 357 revolver with imaginary hot rounds regardless of how the question was answered? Is the internet capable of generating such damage?

I think if you like one, you should buy it. Disregard what you read on the internet - do what you want to do.

[CCCLVII]

Any gun if used a lot will eventually wear out, some faster than others.

The new Vaquero is a not as tough as the old Vaquero but still can handle factory loads just fine. Now if you are handloading hotter than spec ammo (I don't recommend this) I would recommend a stronger pistol.

[44 AMP]

Can it still handle a steady diet of the 125g .357 magnum screamers? This round has a fast-burning nasty charge and tends to erode the top straps on smaller revolvers. Thoughts?

Don't see why it wouldn't. Though you may find the fixed sights not perfectly regulated for the 125gr load.

Since you are aware of the "flame cutting" erosion, are you aware that it is both self limiting (meaning after making the mark, it stops) and that it is entirely cosmetic regarding the functional strength of the gun??

If you get one, keep an eye on it, and see if it even shows up, and if so, how many rounds does it take to make it?? I'll bet you'll spend several times the cost of the gun in ammo expense before wearing it out, if you even can.

Damage it? yes, possible, idiots can blow up even Rugers, but wear it out? unlikely. And Ruger stands behind their guns. If you get a problem, call them.

[Jim Watson]

This round has a fast-burning nasty charge and tends to erode the top straps on smaller revolvers. Thoughts?

Why do you think it is only on "smaller revolvers?"

An old article said that after 20000 rounds of .44 Magnum, about half jacketed, the forcing cone of the barrel was eroded out to a knife edge. The barrel was set back and rethroated, shooting resumed.

A friend hammered a Blackhawk .45 with "Ruger only" loads until he cracked the forcing cone. Ruger replaced the barrel and overhauled the action for a reasonable fee.

[rclark]

The frame size is the same as when the .357 was introduced in 1955, except for the fixed sight top strap of course. So the New Vaquero will take any SAAMI load you put in it. The only reason the .357 was put on the large frame when the New Models came out in 1973 is to put all the calibers on the same platform from .357 to .45 Colt (save some tooling costs I suppose?). That of course was overkill for the .357 cartridge. I am glad to see that there some revolvers back on the original medium frame where it belongs.... Which is why I picked up a medium frame flattop .357 when Lipseys had them and my large frame .357 is now gathering dust. Point is you'll have no problem with 'durability' with your New Model New Vaquero . Nor for that matter. with the .45 Colt New Vaquero either.

I personally will never wear mine out in my life time as I don't have deep enough pockets for reloading supplies, nor do I shoot hot loads as a rule, nor the time to spend to actually send that many lead rounds down range over quite a few revolvers. My kids will have good shooters if they wish to keep 'em down the road.

[44 AMP]

An old article said that after 20000 rounds of .44 Magnum,...

20,000 rounds @ $5 a box (50) is $2000
at $10 a box, its $4000

That's more than the cost of a new revolver, even at today's prices.

[DanJast]

I just heard some talk about larger guns dealing with top strap erosion and forcing cone cracking better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWS_BRPE9ac
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.ph...-cones.654611/

[44 AMP]

Larger guns handle everything better!

But, let's be clear about something, top strap erosion / flame cutting, and forcing cone cracking are two separate things. While they are frequently both found together, it is possible to have either without the other. And, while flame cutting the topstrap is of no concern other than for looks, cracking the forcing cone is a serious matter.

[DanJast]

Got it!

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

But, let's be clear about something, top strap erosion / flame cutting, and forcing cone cracking are two separate things. While they are frequently both found together, it is possible to have either without the other. And, while flame cutting the topstrap is of no concern other than for looks, cracking the forcing cone is a serious matter.

I'm more of a 1911 guy than a revolver guy, but I do own a Ruger Blackhawk in .45 Colt/.45 ACP.

Top strap cutting and forcing cone cracking are different animals, but ... is either affected by the frame size? The barrel diameter of a .45 revolver is the same, whether it's in the large frame or the medium frame, and the barrel diameter of a .357 Magnum is the same whether it's in a large frame or a medium frame.

And I don't think the top strap in the large-frame guns is all that much beefier than in the medium frame models. The larger frame models can handle stouter loads because the bigger frame allows a larger cylinder diameter, which results in more metal surrounding the cartridge.

Here's a link to a blown-up Ruger .44 Magnum. Yes, the top strap is bent -- but look at the cylinder (or what's left of it). A kaboom has to explode the cylinder before the frame strength comes into play.

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/87/53/14/8...959cd619a0.jpg

[44 AMP]

Top strap cutting and forcing cone cracking are different animals, but ... is either affected by the frame size?

this is a "No" and "Yes" kind of thing.

Both are more affected by the specifics of the ammunition being fired more than any other single factor.

Top Strap flame cutting.....

PERHAPS you might make the case frame size matters, but only if the distance from the upper edge of the cylinder throat (not the barrel) to the topstrap at the cylinder gap is different (larger) due to a larger frame. The distance gas has to travel from where it escapes confinement (upper edge of the bore/cylinder throat to reach the topstrap.

Remember that the gas is confined until the bullet base exits the front of the cylinder. At that point, most of the bullet is in the forcing cone (sealing it), and when the base of the bullet exits the cylinder the gas vents (radially) with a portion of it striking the underside of the topstrap of the frame.

This jet of very hot, very high pressure gas can, over time (number of rounds) erode the steel it strikes, to a point. Now, here's the kicker, how many rounds and how deeply the gas will, over time, cut, depends entirely on the ammunition being fired.

Perhaps the most famous example is the S&W Model 19 in police use. Lots of people have heard the stories about how the hot 125gr JHP ammo caused "excessive" flame cutting and forcing cone cracking. What usually doesn't get told is that those same revolvers gave quite a few years of entirely satisfactory service without undue wear with the then standard 158gr .357 Magnum ammunition, and that the problems only showed up after the standard ammo was changed to the 125gr stuff.

Additionally, its not like every model 19 failed. It was, literally very few guns, however the failure RATE was above expected and normal, so it was an issue. (for illustration, if your expected failure rate is 3 out of 1,000 and now you've got 6 out of 1,000 failing, its only a tiny number of guns, but the change in rate (double in this example) is a serious issue.)

Topstrap flame cutting is self limiting, even with the hottest most "cutting" ammo. Eventually it stops, when the metal being eroded away becomes too far away from the gas for the gas to be able to continue cutting. It is a noticeable groove, but not enough to affect the practical strength of the topstrap.

Forcing cones, on the other hand get the full brunt of the gas, and in the case of the S&W M19 the barrel forcing cone has a flat spot on it, making it thinner at that point than the rest of the barrel. This MIGHT account for the issue they had, but so would a leaded barrel forcing cone.

The barrel, including the forcing cone is a "wearing part". Meaning it gets worn with use, and eventually will wear out and fail. Many factors will affect the rate of wear, and its service life.

A kaboom has to explode the cylinder before the frame strength comes into play.

yes, a kaboom, does that in a revolver. However, frame strength is in constant play with every round fired. Think in terms of stretching and of holding the cylinder in proper alignment. Look at top break revolvers. NONE are made in magnum calibers. Modern steel will handle the pressure, right?

Yes, the steel will handle it, kind of, but the design won't. Cost and hand fitting (more cost) aside, there is simply no way to make the hinged frame and its latch mechanism able to take magnum pressures and provide acceptable service life in a normal size handgun. Absolutely adequate and safe for black powder pressure levels, but when you double or triple that things stretch that shouldn't stretch, which leads to battering with leads rapidly to unserviceable and unsafe.

EVERY frame of every size is built with more than enough "strength" to maintain proper dimensions during normal use. If you start running pressures above that, the larger frame (and cylinder) with more metal in place have a greater "reserve" than smaller ones.

So, its a yes and no thing. With certain loads, larger frame guns are able to "soak up" excessive force better than smaller ones. With most ammo smaller guns are more than sufficiently strong.

With all the different factors that are involved, looking at frame size alone isn't looking at things correctly.

clear as mud, yet?

[oldbear1950]

It is my understanding when RUGER downsized the vaquero, is now on the same frame size as the COLT SAA, and has the same problems, in 357 will handle all factory ammo, and so will the 45 colt. But like all the 45 colts now , will not handle the same power loads the old blackhawks would handle, or the Freedom arms. But if you stay with factory loads or the equal, is no problems. I have an Uberti EL PATRON, which is a copy of the COLT SAA. Same lock work and same problems

[44 AMP]

But like all the 45 colts now , will not handle the same power loads the old blackhawks would handle, or the Freedom arms.

I have to correct a couple points here, most importantly the term "old Blackhawks".

Since the gun first appeard in the 50s, Ruger has built several different frames and sizes all named "Blackhawk". And also, since 73 there has been the "New Model Blackhawk" which adds to the confusion since conversationally, most people just call it "the Blackhawk".

The New Model Blackhawk uses a large (.44 mag size) frame, and the "New Model" lockwork with its transfer bar system.

Previous guns all used the Colt style system lockwork, and today are referred to as "old models" or "3 Screw" guns. They can be on a larger frame (Ruger was actually the first gunmaker to produce a .44 Magnum) or a slightly smaller (but not exactly Colt dimensions) frame. They may be "Flat top" models, or not. Makes for a lot of collector variations, but gets confusing as hell for people who have not studied the gun's history.

Ruger did sort of the same thing with the Vaquero and New Vaquero. The Vaqueros were all built on the same frame size as the New Model Blackhawk. The strength is the same. The only difference is the Vaquero's rounded top strap and fixed sights to mimic the Colt appearance.

When Ruger introduced the NEW VAQUERO they made it on a new frame size, one the same size as the Colt SAA.

While Ruger discontinued the Vaquero in favor of the New Vaquero some time ago there are still lots of them on the market and the New Model Blackhawk in .45 Colt is still in production, so the " But like all the 45 colts now," is not accurate. You can get a Vaquero or a New Model Blackhawk in .45 Colt, "now".

Another point, the heavy loads made up by handloaders for the New Model Blackhawk.45 Colt have NEVER been approved by Ruger or SAAMI or any other group. They have proven safe in Ruger New Model Blackhawk .45 and in Ruger Vaquero .45 Colt, and are not considered safe in any other guns, including the New Vaquero.

[rclark]

Just to add.... The .45 Colt/.45 ACP revolvers are the only ones that you have to distinguish for loading non SAAMI loads. 44 AMP covers that above. We like to say there is Tier 1 (SAAMI), Tier 2 (23K psi), and Tier 3 (30K psi or Ruger Only loads). For Rugers, Tier 1, 2 can be safely fired in large or medium frame single action revolver. Tier 3 is reserved only for the large frames only. You won't find Tier 2 in you reloading manuals though. Brian Pearce in a handloader magazine had some loading data for this power level. I forget which ones now. My woods load is a Tier 2 load (which rarely get shot). General loads I use are Tier 1.

All .357 revolvers will handle ANY SAAMI loads you can stuff in them. The New Vaquero, Vaquero, large frame BH, medium frame flattop Blackhawk. There is 'no' catergory for non-standard loads period. Only SAAMI. That said, there is one caveat, the bullet length. The medium frame cylinders are a bit shorter. If you stick with standard bullets, you'll have no problem.

[mehavey]

Brian Pearce in a handloader magazine had some [45 Colt New/Old Vaquro] loading data for this power level. I forget which ones now.

See https://www.thehighroad.org/index.ph...#post-12503680

[44 AMP]

To shift back to the OP's gun and question, Ruger New Vaquero .357 Magnum, can it handle a steady diet of "125 screamers"??

Keeping in mind that everything that gets used gets wear, I'd say, mechanically, yes.

But I wonder if that's really the best choice. How do they shoot in your gun? The New Vaquero has fixed sights, and would be factory regulated for one load (bullet weight & velocity) to be "right on" at a specific distance.

Traditionally the distance was 25yds and in .38cal the bullet was 158gr at the usual average factory load velocity. Shooting a different weight bullet at a different speed usually means the impact is somewhere off from where you aim. Usually in handguns, lighter, faster bullets print lower on the target. In some cases not enough to be an issue, but in other cases, it can be a significant amount, and individual guns can be very individually different.

Point here is, ok, the gun is plenty strong and well made to handle those 125 screamers, but are you going to be happy if they all go 4" low and 2" left???
(numbers just for example)

With a fixed sight gun, you only have two options, shoot ammo that hits where the sights aim, or alter the sights.

I much prefer the former option, because altering the sights is generally a permanent thing. Once you take metal off, its tough to put it back.

So do a little testing, see where your gun puts those 125 screamers. Once you know that, you can learn to hold off and still land them on the target where you want them to go.

This is the advantage to adjustable sights. Being able to easily sight the gun to be able to hold dead on with one load, and then go back and be on with a different one.

The smooth top and fixed sights of the Colt SAA make for some smooth handling, but remember that they came from a time when there was essentially only one bullet and speed in each caliber. If you're into using more than one load adjustable sights are the way to go.

If you're into the old West look, accept the fact that only one load will be "on target" and that everything else will either require holding off, or more work than just turning a couple screws.

Check it out, see where your gun puts 125s, compared to 158s. And where it puts .38 Specials. Things might be close enough not to matter. Or they might each wind up in different places. Once you know that, you can decided what, if anything, you want to do about it.

Enjoy your New Vaquero!

[rclark]

With a fixed sight gun, you only have two options, shoot ammo that hits where the sights aim, or alter the sights.

I much prefer the former option, because altering the sights is generally a permanent thing. Once you take metal off, its tough to put it back.

I would agree IF you "don't" know what you want to shoot out of it. Otherwise go ahead and modify the sights. Personally I've settled on a 'non-screamer' load for each caliber I shoot. Been at this awhile. Now for .357, that's a 158gr SWC bullet moving between 1000-1100fps. So, I adjust the sights and done. That way when I pick up any of my revolvers it is going to shoot to POA. No Kentucky windage for me or cue cards needed!

[oldbear1950]

Ya'll are correct about the various sized frames used in RUGER GUNS, but the new Vaquero guns with the same size frame as the COLT SAA, have to remember COLT also put that out in 357. It was also safe with all factory loads, and in my opinion, if you want a 45 mag, go to the 454 Casull, or some of the single shot Thompson or similar pistols. I used to have a new model Blackhawk 45 colt/45 acp and was a hoot to shoot, but I never tried to hot load it. And now some of the Italian gun makers are putting out 45 colt/45 acp guns out. I think they would be a hoot to shoot.

[Jim Watson]

Weren't there some Old Model .45s, just as suitable for overloads as the New Model?

Trivia:
Great Western offered SAA copies and ammo in .357 Atomic, just magnum brass with a 158 gr bullet and 16 gr of no 2400.

[44 AMP]

Weren't there some Old Model .45s, just as suitable for overloads as the New Model?

A quick internet search says Ruger introduced the .45 Colt Blackhawk in 1970, but after that it gets vague and links me to a page no longer there....

You might have better luck, my search skills are rather poor....

SO it is apparently possible there are .45 Colt Blackhawks that are NOT "New Model Blackhawks", as the new model guns came out about 1973. I don't have any information on them, regarding which frame size Ruger used for them.. I'd have to see one, and compare it to a New Model .45 to determine if it was suitable for the heavy "Ruger only" loads, or not.

There are "old model" .44 Mag Blackhawks, and there are "old model" Super Blackhawks, so it is possible there are old model .45 Blackhawks strong enough for the heavy handloads, but I don't know that, for sure, at this time.

As the New Vaquero shows, Ruger can put the .45 Colt in a frame size that is NOT suitable for the heavy handloads, I just don't have any information if that is what they did with the old model Blackhawk .45, or not. Sorry.

[rclark]

Factory Ruger Old Model .45 Colt revolvers are on the large frame so suitable for ROLs if so inclined. Only the .357 Old Model was ever on the medium frame (other than custom work like to .44 Special back then) . So to date, only the .45 Colt New Model New Vaquero (fixed sights) and New Model .45 Colt Flattops are on the medium frame, not suitable for ROLs.

[44 AMP]

Thank you for that information.

I had several Vaqueros, a New Vaquero, and New Model Blackhawks in .45 Colt. Had my years of pushing the .45 Colt in the Blackhawk, decided not to bother with it after a while. I shoot the .45 Colt for fun (mostly) and a 250gr at 1100fps or just under (depending on barrel length) does everything I want and need from the round, and is safe in Colt class guns, as well. When I want more, I go to the .44 Mag or some other round in that class,

Ruger only level loads, while safe in the Vaquero (and NOT the NEW Vaquero) run into the problem of the fixed sights. With great power comes great responsibility, but without great accuracy, (meaning bullet hits where sights aim) its not a good thing.

I had a .44 Magnum Vaquero but traded it for a Super Blackhawk, to get "essentially" the same gun, with adjustable sights, which I felt was much better suited to shooting various .44 Magnum loads.

[rclark]

I hear ya. I think the same way. .454s and other cartridges are 'available' if you need more punch than the o' .45 Colt .