Ruger Super Blackhawk grip choice and barrel length

[theliberalgunowner]

Dear The Firing Line Friends,

It has been a while since I have been on here, but I would like to ask you guys about barrel lengths and grips of Ruger Super Blackhawk revolvers. I live in Washington state near the Cascade mountain range (<10 miles away on West side) and am very interested in starting to backpack again. My one concern is although I will be carrying bear spray (black bear and brown bear/grizzly in cascade range), I know there have been instances where bear spray has been deployed and the person spraying has still gotten munched on. This leads me to my next firearm purchase, a bear revolver for backpacking/hiking.

Now as many of you know mobility is important backpacking, and I don't want to have to deal with the bulkiness of a rifle and people's glares when they see it, hence why I am getting a revolver. The main issue I am running into is that barrel length in a .44 magnum is extra bulk, but also having a shorter barrel is less accurate (usually) in a pistol. I have debated getting a Bisley grip Lipsey's Exclusive Ruger Super Blackhawk with a 3.75" barrel, 9.63" overall, or a Ruger Super Blackhawk with a 4.62" barrel (standard cowboy grip), with a overall length of 10.5". Does the extra inch of barrel from the Standard Super Blackhawk Model justify the extra bulk with the added accuracy, and does a Bisley grip really help that much when shooting heavy Buffalo Bore bear loads? I am a strong dude, 180ish pounds, but don't want to hate shooting the pistol due to wrist damaging recoil. Thank you so much, I really appreciate it, and know there is a lot of experience here with many people who have actually shot brown/grizzly/black bears with revolvers. Hope to hear your opinions soon.

Sincerely,

theliberalgunowner

[Pathfinder45]

I also backpack, mostly in Oregon wilderness areas. My choice for a wilderness trail-gun is the stainless original Vaquero in 45 Colt. Except for its fixed sights, and the caliber, it is essential the same thing as a Super Blackhawk. It has the 4-5/8" barrel and I wear it in a leather crossdraw holster on my regular belt. Since I shoot it a lot and have worn it over many trail miles for almost two decades, it obviously works for me. I would not want a shorter barrel. A longer barrel would likely improve the ease of making good hits and thus extend the useful range. But the arrangement I have rides well in the pickup and well on the trail. At 25 yards I outshoot any handgun my buddy shoots. At 50 yards I feel that a 7-1/2" barrel would be a lot better to have. Perhaps the 5-1/2" barrel would be the best compromise. I have had several face-to-face trail encounters with Blackbears over the years, but I was never forced to shoot them. So I will refrain from addressing that aspect of your questions regarding the actual shooting of bears. I have also packed with a 7-1/2" Blackhawk 45 for ten years, but that was 30 and 40 years ago. I doubt if you would really notice the difference in weight all that much. But in back-packing, all ounces add up, and there are trade-offs and compromises to be made. Still, when you pull the trigger on a full-powered 44 Magnum, if your gun is light, it will be unpleasant, perhaps even painful. I never shoot targets in the wilderness areas. The gun is only there just in case..... However, my fishing rod gets some good action.

[44 AMP]

It would help to know what experience you already have, if any with heavy caliber handguns. Jumping straight to a short barrel .44 Magnum is a steep learning curve, but is possible with some dedication.

Longer barrels are often "more accurate" in shooters hands, but only partly because the greater distance between the sights allow for more precise aiming. This is a more important point in rifle barrel lengths and open sights that it is in handguns. HOWEVER, longer barrels handguns are often shot better than shorter ones, not just because of the sights, but because of the way they balance in the hand.

For a long time, Ruger only made the Super Blackhawk with the 7.5" barrel. Then they did some with a 10" for target work. Some time back, someone at Ruger finally wised up, and today they offer the Super Blackhawk in several barrel lengths, either the dragoon trigger guard or the standard round one, and I think a choice of fluted or nonfluted cylinders. AND, it can be stainless steel if you want.

There are a lot of fine points to discuss, pros and cons of everything. In general, shorter, lighter guns are more difficult to shoot as accurately, and are more punishing in heavy calibers.

One fellow I know got a Vaquero in .44Mag, 4 & 5/8" barrel it had been fitted with a "birds head" grip, and he had a Bisley hammer put in. He has small hands, and loved the feel of the gun, and the Bisley hammer was within reach of his short thumb. He was NOT an experienced .44 mag shooter.

I warned him the gun would be ...unpleasant to shoot with full house (heavy) loads. He asked me for some ammo, to get started with. I gave him a box of 240gr SWC loaded at about 1100fps. This is far below full max .44 mag power. He later told me the gun was very painful to shoot, and he no longer had any interest in any heavier loads. Last I heard, he was pondering putting a regular grip on the gun.

I have a Bisley gripped Vaquero in .45 Colt. It rolls in the hand less than the regular "plow handle" grip. Whether or not that is a good things is a point of view. I put the oversize Pachmayr grips on my Blackhawks and Super Blackhawk (my "working guns"), gives them a whole different feel, one that agrees with me. On my Vaqueros I keep the stock grips, for the traditional look, and tolerate their drawbacks for shooting.

As big a fan of the single action Rugers that I am, if you are looking for a short barrel .44mag for backpacking, you might want to consider a DA gun, like a S&W.

There is, however, no free lunch. A 3" .44mag with "bear loads" is brutal to shoot. If you aren't a skilled shooter, its a great way to develop a serious flinch, and that alone will negate the value of EVERY gun you shoot for bear, or any other defense.

Its not about how strong you are, or aren't its about learning and using the right technique to handle the .44 and be accurate, and avoid being punished by the gun.

[Sarge]

As big a fan of the single action Rugers that I am, if you are looking for a short barrel .44mag for backpacking, you might want to consider a DA gun, like a S&W.

I'll second that and suggest you also look hard at the 4" Redhawk in 45 ACP/45 Colt.

[Pathfinder45]

I actually like the standard single-action grip frames like my Vaquero has. I have run some very powerful loads through it, but honestly, 255 grain cast bullets at 1,100 fps is about as high as I care to go anymore. At 1,400+ fps it stings the hands. After 2 cylinders full, groups open up as subtle flinching creeps in. And that's about the same thing as 44 Magnum power. If I have to shoot that kind of stuff on a regular basis, I want the gun to be heavy. The 44 Magnum is simply too much gun for the average person to shoot well. In the right gun, in the right hands, with dedicated practice, OK, it's viable. It's a great cartridge for the handloader, who can make ammo as they like it. Stuck with typical factory ammo, I would want it in a 7-1/2" Super-Blackhawk and nothing lighter.

[44 AMP]

[QUOTE]suggest you also look hard at the 4" Redhawk in 45 ACP/45 Colt. [/QUOTE

Go ahead and take a look, but I think the Redhawk is not the best choice for the backpacker. They are fine guns, but Ruger "tanks" come with a "tank"'s weight as well as strength.

If the object of going to a short barrel is to save weight (as well as length) then choosing a larger, heavier framed gun, even with a short barrel, ADDs weight. Might only be 2-3 oz, but as pointed out, they add up.

The easiest .44 Mag to carry will be the most difficult one to shoot well, and shoot well, rapidly. There is no getting around that. I'm assuming that you are looking for a gun that will be carried a lot, and shot very little. Or shot very little with full house ammo.

I understand S&W now makes a 5 shot .44 mag on the L frame (don't know the model number, sorry) this might be just the ticket, a balance between size, weight and power.

Bottom line, it boils down to personal choice, and what best suits your requirements, AND your desires. SA style guns grip shapes are less punishing at .44 mag levels than DA revolver grip shapes. Less punishing, not punishment free.

If you don't have any experience shooting .44mags, it is very difficult to make an informed choice on what will suit you best. IF at all possible, get some experience, so you can tell what is, and isn't workable for you, personally.

[smee78]

I also would suggest you look at a DA revolver like the Redhawk or Super Redhawk verses a single action. There are some great options and the 45C/45Acp 4" gun would be a good option, I enjoy the push rather than the snap of the 45C VS the 44mag. I would not want to have to worry cocking the hammer back during an emergency.

[Pathfinder45]

People that are accustomed to single action revolvers never worry about cocking the hammer. It seems to happen automatically on the way from holster to presentation. A novice has to think about it as they train themselves. People that shoot too many other guns and only occasionally let their single-action revolver be fired may also be that way.

[Targa]

I would certainly like to try a Bisley .44 mag. I have a SBH .44mag with the standard wood plow handle grips and with some stout magnum rounds the trigger guard smacks the knuckle on my middle finger to the point of bleeding if I fire enough rounds through it. Just a negative side effect of having freakishly large hands I guess.

[Sarge]

I hear you Pathfinder. If I reach back and feel a plow handle, my thumb is headed for the hammer as soon as it clears leather. I just figure a DA would be better if you wake up to a bear trying to get in your sleeping bag with you.

I have taken to fitting lightened, recontoured a Bisley hammer to my New Models & I can sure pound the steel faster with the revolver so altered.

As to the standard Super Blackhawk grip, I have also suffered a bloody knuckle when shooting in a hurry with a less than perfect grip. The Hunter grip frame combines the length of the SBH frame with a rounded trigger guard. I would be real tempted to fit one to any SBH that was destined to see really heavy loads.

[theliberalgunowner]

The Firing Line Friends,

Thank you so much for your input, as it has proved very helpful to me.

I am not that experienced of a large revolver shooter, I am very comfortable with a .357, but am concerned about the possibility of running into a grizzly or brown bear. Would a .357 be enough against a grizzly? I know the .44 magnum has been very good for a lot of people when it comes to brown bear beat downs, and some of you also recommended 45LC as a option. Would any of you trust semi automatic pistols against bears, especially 10mm? I know the Glock 20/21 in 10mm has a reputation for being used as a bear sidearm, but would like to know if that is just complete hype or actually a viable option. The reason I am bringing it up is that lots of you have mentioned flinching and hand/wrist damage due to heavy and violent recoil of the .44, and I do not want to get a gun that I do not use. Although if I didn't use it it would be one gorgeous paperweight.

Thanks again for the replies as it really has helped me get more insight into the SA .44 magnums.


Sincerely,

theliberalgunowner

[Targa]

For a handgun in Grizz country? Now this is just me but I wouldn't carry anything less than a .44mag with bear loads. Is a shotgun an option for you? That would be my idea bear defense. Maybe even a carbine lever action rifle?

Also don't forget that for range days .44specials are absolute kittens to shoot out of full size revolvers.

[Pathfinder45]

That bloody knuckle thing: I'm wondering if you guys that have that happen, if it's from the Dragoon trigger guard that is fairly common on Super-Blackhawk revolvers? If I ever get a Super-Blackhawk, it would be a model with the round trigger-guard. Being a dedicated 45 Colt guy, I have shot, but never owned 44 magnums. I figure that 2 out of 3 shooters would be better served by a 44 magnum than a 45 Colt, so that's what I usually recommend. To the handloader, they are both excellent. The 44 could stand to be loaded down a little and the 45 loaded up a little for most purposes. I consider them near-equals. What the back-packer should consider, is that ammo for a 357 magnum weighs about half as much as ammo for the 44 and 45. You can either save weight or carry twice as many rounds. But I will stick with my 45.

[Tin Can]

S/A...... Bisley grips hands down , 44 Mag is the starting point , 454 Casull or the 460 is where it ends . I refuse to be under gunned its not about reloading its about grabbing another gun................A BIGGER GUN....

[44 AMP]

I am very comfortable with a .357, but am concerned about the possibility of running into a grizzly or brown bear. Would a .357 be enough against a grizzly?

The answer to this question is a qualified "yes, if YOU are". A fellow named Wesson killed a lot of big critters, including some big bear if I remember right, back in the later 1930s with the original .357 Mangum loadings.

There are some loadings today that come close to those original loads (158gr SWC at 1500-1550fps from the 8 3/8" barrels) but you will have to look to find them. "Regular" .357 isn't that hot anymore, and the widely common 125gr JHP isn't well built for big game, it is optimized for humans.

SO, on the abstract level, the power needed is there, but it is up to you the shooter to deliver it in the right place. One plus for the .357 in this case is, statistically the most dangerous thing you might meet in the woods is human, and a speedloader of bear loads and one of manstoppers don't take up much room or weigh much.

Now, as to the triggerguard of the SA smacking one's middle finger, it is a matter of recoil, and stock shape more than anything else. I will admit I was always leery about the Dragoon triggerguard, always felt that square back would hurt. And I was right, it can. But, it doesn't have to.

I personally learned about the issue when I began shooting heavier loads from my 7.5" Blackhawk .45 Colt. When I got to pushing 250gr slugs up at 1200fps, I found that for some reason, after about a cylinder full, my middle finger hurt. (no bleeding, the Blackhawk trigger guard is rounded). What was happening was the back of the triggerguard was smacking my finger as the gun rolled up in recoil. hard enough to make it hurt. This didn't happen with lighter loads, 1100fps was no issue, but soon after that it showed up.

My solution was Pachmayr grips that fill in behind the triggerguard. Problem solved, for me. I wear a size 9 work glove, so I don't consider my hands "freakishly" large.

When I got my Super Blackhawk, I didn't bother to shoot it until I got the pachmayrs on it. (and FYI, the ones for the Super Blackhawk and the Blackhawk are NOT the same. The Super has a slightly longer grip frame and Blackhawk grips will not fit it)

No, they don't look traditional, and the gun handles a little differently but with the rubber grips, I can shoot them well, at any velocity level and not be hurt by the triggerguard rapping my fingers.

[Paladin7]

Hi Liberalgunowner, I have the Ruger Lipsey's Limited Edition Bisley Super Blackhawk in 44 Magnum with the 3.75" Barrel and think it is a great choice for your needs.

Shorter barrel revolvers are not less accurate than longer barrel revolvers...there is just a shorter sight radius so they are harder to shoot accurately vs the longer barrel. Given the fact that you are hiking the shorter barrel is the way to go.

The 44 Magnum in this platform will take down a bear, and loaded appropriately, will be very effective against 2 legged predators.

The Bisley grip makes firing full house Magnums in this platform a lot easier. This is why all the custom gun makers use the Bisley grip on their large caliber guns. Shooting a hardcast SWC at over 1000 fps is no problem with this grip. It will surprise you if you are experienced with 44 Magnum recoil. You can also shoot 44 specials and work your way up to the hard kicking stuff...that is the preferred approach.

I would suggest a Simply Rugged Pancake Holster. I have one and it is excellent for your purposes. The gun rides high and tight and with the right belt, it makes carrying very comfortable. Note though, that any revolver in this class is going to be heavy if you are hiking long distances.

With my Ruger, I can easily smack a man sized plate at 75 yards with every shot. That takes practice, and if you go with this gun, you will need to practice with it.

The other option is a Glock in 10MM. The Glock should be lighter and will definitely give you more rounds. The 10MM is no where near as powerful as the 44 Magnum though, but it will work with the right ammunition.

Hope this helps...

[FrankenMauser]

My thoughts/preferences:

1. When my Super Blackhawk (SBH) was the only justifiable 'bear gun' that I owned, I carried it without much worry. I knew that having to operate it quickly could potentially be a problem when in close proximity to a charging bear; but it was far better than a big muddy stick (or maybe not ... but that's another story).

Today, however, I rarely carry a single action (SA) for defense against predators or humans. I almost universally opt for a double action (DA) design. I want to be able to just yank that trigger, if necessary, without compromising my grip on the revolver by reaching for the hammer.



2. Grip shape/style should be more about what fits your hand and feels good to you. Some people like the Bisley grip, while others find it awkward. Some people like a traditional grip, while others find it painful. Some people like Packmyr or Hogue grips, while traditionalists find them bulky, ugly, and cumbersome.
-Personally, I prefer the "plow"-style, traditional single action grip. When I bought my SBH, I learned to let it roll in my hand, and it's been second nature ever since. And, yes, mine has the 'dragoon'/'square' (knuckle-buster) trigger guard. Except... I've never had a problem with it. People that primarily shoot DA revolvers are constantly ripping their knuckles open on my SBH; but SA shooters (and myself) rarely even feel it.
For DAs, a different grip technique is used, and I can get along with just about anything (ranging from Pachmyr wood grips to Hogue finger grooves, to factory Ruger grips).


3. Barrel length is a very contentious subject.
- Short barrels are great to carry around; but lighter revolvers are more difficult to shoot well -- and, as mentioned previously, much harder to shoot well quickly.
For predator defense, my shortest barrels are 4.2" long. All other options have 5.5", 6.5", or 7.5" barrels.

Longer barrels are arguably slower to swing and point, and they can be more irritating to carry. But they also have a better sight radius (if actually aiming is possible in an encounter), and the added weight helps tame recoil and reduce muzzle flip.



Later today, I'll be heading out to try filling a deer tag in an area that's new to me, and known to have bears and big cats running around. Always wanting to be prepared, I usually carry a sidearm.
I'd love to have the 7.5" .480 Ruger Super Redhawk on my side.
But the 4.2" SP101 is so much nicer to carry.
I may split the difference and opt for the S&W M29 (.44 Mag, 6.5"). ...Or forget about a rifle altogether and just take the .480 Ruger.


It's all about compromise.
A person just has to decide which factors are most important to them, which factors can be compromised, and what firearms might fit those requirements.

[Nathan]

Im thinking the 6.5" Bisley grip in 480 Ruger would be awsome! 480 Ruger has the power. 6.5" is good to make hits with to 50 yds. The Bisley grip soaks up recoil better in my opinion.

[Sequins]

I think the three and a quarter Lipsey model will serve you well. I have a 7.5" Dragoon with the hog leg and it's a hoot to shoot and IMO quite comfortable with a loose grip, but the Bisley is regarded by many to be more comfortable and the shorter length is going to undoubtedly make it easier to handle.

I suspect 300gr barn burner loads will be brutal out of it, but hopefully you never have to fire such loads.

[KMAX]

I just bought a Super Blackhawk with a 5 1/2" barrel. It had wood grips on it and kicked very hard. I put a Hogue Monogrip it and it is much easier to shoot. The Hogue I had to put on it is the same for the Blackhawk. This applies to the 4.62" barrel as well. I am thinking the frame is the same as the Blackhawk and it is called a Super Blackhawk simply because it is a 44mag. It also has the fluted cylinder like a Blackhawk. I highly recommend the Hogue (model 83000).

[Pathfinder45]

As far as the advice of those fellows that have recommended short 3-3/4" barrels goes,..... that may work OK for them,..... but, respectfully, I could not disagree more. As I mentioned previously, I am accustomed to a 4-5/8" barrel. If I were getting another for the trail, I would NOT go shorter. I have to recommend a revolver that you would practice with a lot, and one that's fun to shoot. It's more fun to hit than miss. Keeping in mind that I have perhaps 10,000 or more rounds I've shot through my revolver, and my buddy thinks I'm good with it, I will offer these observations: I can fairly reliably hit a tennis-ball size object at 15 yards, perhaps even smaller. At 25 yards, I can occasionally miss a grapefruit size object, but usually hit it. And this is all standing, unsupported mind you. At 50 yards, honestly, a soccerball size object is going to get lucky at about half the time. I'm actually a better shot than my revolver is. But it's good for what it's good for, and I'm happy with it to 25 yards. If there is a next one some day, it will have a longer barrel.

[44 AMP]

I am thinking the frame is the same as the Blackhawk and it is called a Super Blackhawk simply because it is a 44mag. It also has the fluted cylinder like a Blackhawk.

For many years after its introduction the Ruger Super Blackhawk only came one way. 7.5" barrel, unfluted cylinder, dragoon style triggerguard. Other differences from the Blackhawk were the grip frame, and the ejector rod housing were steel, not aluminum as they are on the Blackhawk. Also the Super had a grooved trigger (Blackhawk trigger is smooth) and a lower hammer spur with a larger checkered thumb pad. The unfluted cylinder and the use of steel over aluminum was to add a bit of weight to make the recoil of the .44 Mag a little easier.

The Square back Dragoon grip frame IS longer than the one on the Blackhawk. Blawkhawk grips will not fit.

Today (and for the past few years) Ruger offers the Super Blackhawk with different barrel lengths, fluted or non fluted cylinder and round or square back trigger guards. It may be that the round trigger uses the same grip frame as the Blackhawk, I do not know. IF it is, then Blackahwk grips would, obviously fit.

It may also be that the Hogue grip, which uses a slightly different mounting system than other types, might fit both grip frames. Again, I don't know, for certain. I've only had one Hogue grip, the hard plastic gray one, and it used an curious stirrup and screw mechanism for attachment, which looed to me like it would fit several different models of similar guns.

[CPE 68]

There's a couple of great articles on bear protection in the current September/October "Sports Afield" that are well worth reading.

I have a Super Blackhawk 7.5" barrel with the Pachmayer grips. I have shot two deer and one black beer with it and had no issues when I was in college. However, I find as I get older my enjoyment of putting a couple of boxes of full power loads through it has declined somewhat. I personally would not be comfortable hunting with my 44 now until I practiced a lot more with it. I believe that for self defense a certain level of proficiency is also required so practice is also involved especially with a SA revolver.

At the point in which a revolver may be used against a bear, I believe a DA revolver may be more appropriate. However, familiarity/proficiency with whatever you choose is critical.

[theliberalgunowner]

The Firing Line Friends,

Thanks so much for your comments! I started out this post not knowing what to expect, but now I feel I have enough information to make a solid decision. Not going to lie this has me pretty excited, thanks again guys for your help!

Sincerely,

theliberalgunowner

[GeauxTide]

I just converted my 5.5" Bisley 45Colt to the SBH frame. I like the size of the Bisley, but it POUNDS my second finger with my preferred load of 285gr RCBS SAA at 1050fps. I've always liked the old "dragoon" grip frame of the SBH. I can shoot a box of full loads of 44 mag with Bear Paw Grips on my SBH. I'm trying the Altamont full finger grips on the Colt. On a regular 45 Colt BH that I gave to my son, I used Hogue Walnut grips. They are both very comfortable.