Early 1970's Blackhawk

[deerslayer303]

Hello Everyone, I just put a deposit down on a Beautiful early 70's Blackhawk (serial number dates it to 1973 I think) chambered in 45 Colt ( I have grown very fond of that round thanks to my Pietta). It hasn't ever been sent back to have the transfer bar installed either. I'm pretty excited to get it. Can these older blackhawks take the Ruger only published handloads? Not that I ever will load any, I was just curious. I'll post some pics when I get her home.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Jim Watson]

Yes, this is the gun that "Ruger Only Loads" are named after.

[deerslayer303]

Thank you Jim. I wasn't sure if the data meant for the Super Blackhawk. Thank you for the clarification.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Bob Wright]

There are no "Ruger Only" loads for the Super Blackhawk, being a .44 Magnum.

Bob Wright

[Bob Wright]

Deerslayer303:

I'm a little envious of your unconverted, Three Screw .45 Colt Blackhawk. That is the one that has eluded me. Not interested in the .30 Carbine nor the .41 Magnum, but a 4 5/8" .45 Colt would be a dandy addition to my battery.

Bob Wright

[deerslayer303]

Thanks Bob,
I have to say I wasn't in the market at all. I walked in to my local FFL ( the local Hardware store) and he had three old Rugers on consignment. The 45 Colt, a 44 Mag, and a Single Six. Seeing the one in 45 Colt with 7.5" barrel I couldn't resist. I gave him all the money I had in my wallet for a deposit (while thinking, SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY) lol. The price of it is 550 in case you're wondering. Now a few more meals of Kraft Mac n Cheese n hotdogs, a couple cases of Ramen and she can come home.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[44 AMP]

When Ruger introduced their .45 Colt Blackhawk on the .44 Mag frame, handloaders began experimenting with heavier than factory standard loads.

They found that the big frame Ruger .45 Colt would handle loads in the .44 Mag class. These loads were written about in handloading magazines, gun magazines, Gun Digest, etc. They became known as "Ruger Only" loads.

They were only in .45 Colt caliber, never any other. And, at the time, there was only ONE Ruger in .45 Colt.

Today they are still called "Ruger Only" loads, BUT Ruger today also makes .45 Colts that are NOT SUITED for the heavy Ruger Only loads. This is a subject that needs careful examination, and carefully matching the load to the gun. The large (44) frame Blackhawk & New Model Blackhawk will take heavier than factory standard loads. The VAQUERO will also (same frame size)

The NEW VAQUERO will not. Note the slight but IMPORTANT difference in the names Vaquero and New Vaquero. The guns are marked (left side, below the cylinder window). If your gun says New Vaquero, do NOT use Ruger Only loads!!!

I do not know about the "flattop" frames, I don't own any. Perhaps someone who does can comment on where they fall in the strength class.

Ruger has a confusing number of frame sizes and names that sound identical or very similar, and if you are going to go beyond factory load levels its rather important you use caution and do some research to avoid problems.

[Jim Watson]

I think the current Flat tops are on the NV frame size and are therefore not "Ruger Only" material.
They are however offered in .45-45 Convertible, so if they will take .45 ACP +P, they will take heavier than Frontier era .45 Colt loads. Data for such stuff can be found.

[Bob Wright]

My understanding is that only the .357 Magnum and .44 Special Flat Tops (New Model) are built on the mid frame. The .45 Colt and .44 Magnum (And .41 Magnum) are built on the .44 Magnum frame.

Bob Wright

[jackmoser65]

I do not know about the "flattop" frames, I don't own any. Perhaps someone who does can comment on where they fall in the strength class.

The flat top 45 guns are indeed on the medium frame. However, not all flat tops are as such. The 50th anniversary 44 magnum Blackhawk as well as a run of 41 magnums have been on a large flat top frame.

Ruger has a confusing number of frame sizes and names that sound identical or very similar, and if you are going to go beyond factory load levels its rather important you use caution and do some research to avoid problems.

Absolutely.

[ElVaquero]

Deerslayer,
What's the going rate on a .45 3-screw in good to mint cindition these days?

[deerslayer303]

I'm paying 550 for this one.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[tallball]

I got my three screw by accident. I decided I wanted a Super Blackhawk, but I only wanted to pay less than $400. It was a challenge, but after several months I found one with damaged finish for $399 that no one else bid on. When I picked it up at my FFL I couldn't understand why the cylinder wouldn't rotate properly when I opened the loading gate. I said something to that effect out loud, and my friend who owns the LGS said, "That's because it's a three-screw, you dummy." It has an extremely soft trigger. With 44 specials it is absurdly accurate. You will love your new gun.

[Jimbo-Indy]

I had one back then, 7 1/2" three screw Blackhawk, and so did a friend. We loaded 255 hard cast lead semi wadcutters to crazy levels with 2400 powder. Had to tivhten screws after each session. Massive recoil and muzzle flash.. Through it all, the Ruger performed flawlessly. Miss the revolver.

[45_auto]

Originally Posted by deerslayer303

It hasn't ever been sent back to have the transfer bar installed either.

Did you verify that with Ruger? Used to be able to give them the serial number and they would tell you.

It's very common for the guns to be sent back to Ruger, then have the original guts re-installed by the owner (Ruger sends them back) because the trigger pull with factory fix is atrocious.

All my 3-screws have been back for the fix, but they all have the original parts back in them and all the transfer bar guts are in envelopes somewhere.

[deerslayer303]

Did you verify that with Ruger? Used to be able to give them the serial number and they would tell you.

No, I did not verify with Ruger. Just going on looking at the gun and what the owner who has it on consignment there said. When I get it. I will contact Ruger and see what they can tell me

[mcb66]

They stamp an R under the grip when the do the reworked trigger. Should be easy to tell if it still has the conversion, as the hammer on those is different than the unconverted models.

[deerslayer303]

Hey Guys, I figured I would revive my thread and post an update. I finally got my OM 3 screw 45 Colt BH home. I've done a little research. Seems she was made in 1971 and towards the beginning of production (45-00xxx) not 1973 like I thought. She is definitely uncoverted and seems to have never been back to ruger for the update (I'll call Ruger back on the 10th when they reopen to verify) as there is no "R" stamped anywhere under the grip. She doesn't wear a turn line on the cylinder either. I don't really know if Rugers are prone to a turn line though either. I'll get some pics of it up this afternoon after I run some errands. Have a great day guys!

[75218ron]

You made a good purchase.

[jackmoser65]

You have a great and quite rare gun! They actually made fewer old model 45s than the original 44 flat tops. Only produced for two years. The old models shouldn't get a turn line if as long as you don't drop the hammer from the half cock position.

[Salmoneye]

Turn line depends on how you load and cock...

[deerslayer303]

Here it is. It needs a bath for sure.

[Kreyzhorse]

Great catch. That is a beatiful piece.

[SaxonPig]

I bought a 7.5" 45 BH back then. Had it cut to 4&5/8 and then sold it. Oh well.

Don't understand hot rod 45 loads.

[deerslayer303]

This one will never see any Hot 45 loads. I like the soft shooting regular 45 Colt loads. I think 255 grains of lead moving at 900fps is plenty to take the fight out of most things that breathe If I want to punish my hand I'll pull out the Interarms Dragoon and fire some 44 mag screamers to tickle my fancy.