Horrible Mistake! :(

[Model12Win]

Gentleman, I believe I've bought the wrong gun!

As some of you may know, my most recent revolver is a Ruger New Model Blackhawk .45 convertible. Well I am discovering this is not the Ruger single action I had in mind when I purchased it.

First, the action. When buying this gun, I was under the impression it was the type where chambers would line up with the loading port at each click when turning the cylinder. Guys this is not so! The clicks are between cylinders! This makes it tricky to reload since on the Ruger guns with this feature, you turn the cylinder till it clicks then back it up a bit till it stops, which holds it in the perfect position to eject the round and load a fresh one... I'm quite disappointed this isn't standard on all Ruger single actions. I got my signals crossed and assumed it was. It is standard on THIS gun, the one I fear I should have bought:

https://ruger.com/products/newModelB...eets/5240.html



This gun is built on the flat-top frame and has the excellent loading features I first mentioned. I have read many like it even better than free spin pawl. Not only that, it has an all-steel construction. On my New Model Blackhawk (standard frame), the grip frame is aluminum. Because of this it feels quite nose heavy, more so than I was anticipating at the guns weight. These two guns actually weigh exactly the same according to Ruger, but with the lighter frame and heavier grip frame of the flattop, it is sure to end up feeling better balanced in the hand.

Now the only thing (IMHO) that the standard large frame New Model Blackhawk has over the flattops is the ability to fire heavy .45 Colt +P loads, something I never intend to do anyway. For my purposes, I'd never need the power of such loads in my area. The largest predators are coyotes and for social work it's just too much. I also do not enjoy shooting heavy loads recreationally.

So guys this is a lesson to all to THOROUGHLY research a gun before you buy it. I thought I had done this, but got confused and am now invested in this one. I am strongly considering selling it and purchasing the flattop. I fear I won't be satisfied at all with this gun and will be thinking of the flattop.

Take care all!

[T. O'Heir]

"...chambers would line up with the loading port..." Needs to "line up" with the barrel, not the loading port.
"...frame is aluminum..." It being Al doesn't cause the balance to be forward. The weight is forward on the balance point anyway.
Difference in weight between a 4.6" and 5.5" is 1 ounce. 2 ounces between a 5.5" and 7.5".

[RC20]

Maybe a mistake but horrible?

One of the hardest things to do is ask the question you don't know you should have until its too late.

With all due respect, you have to pull the trigger at some point.

We bought a Diesel VW, I found out latter it has a god awful chain driven oil pump/ balance module (not fine German engineering if you will). It cost some bucks to correct that equivalent of engine roulette (it would let go at some point.) Good news was there was a solution.

Enough annoyance sell the gun, take the loss and move on.

[ThomasT]

Simple fix if you are up to it.

http://www.ktgunsmith.com/freespinpawl.htm

If you have the lighter weight aluminum frame that is the 45 Colt Ruger I have always wanted. I like the lighter weight. I have a super blackhawk 44 mag and its a brute to wear if you don't have a really sturdy belt. And it doesn't line up either.

The way I eject my empties is I push on the ejector rod and let it ride the front of the cylinder with the gun pointed up. Then when a charge hole comes up the rod drops in the hole and the empty is ejected. No big deal. I would certainly like it better if the holes lined up like a Colt but it is what it is.

[briandg]

I made a similar purchase. Now I have a top notch ruger blackhawk, the most beautiful gun i have bought since my K38. I love the thing, but it's a small frustration that I have to make two or three passes around the cylinder to either empty or fill the thing. I'm sure that eventually it will become simple.

if you decide that you absolutely can't live with it any longer, and you are absolutely compelled to throw it into the nearest lake, think about giving it away to a good cause. I'll send you an address for a worthy person.

[ThomasT]

briangd I will send you a PM with my mailing address.

[NoSecondBest]

Wow. I was waiting to hear of a real problem with the gun. Just sell it and move on. I'd assume your's is like all the other ones with that part number?

[cslinger]

I had no idea there was ever an alloy frame Ruger large revolver.

[UncleEd]

Sounds like a standard BH since, oh, about 1972.

Tens of thousands have been sold and tens of thousands
of shooters have handled the model with ease.

And those same shooters have had no problem loading
the BH or unloading it.

Guess some are just horribly slow learners.

[Bob Wright]

What you have is called a "project gun." Here are two examples, both .45 Colt:



Bob Wright

[Model12Win]

Originally Posted by Bob Wright

What you have is called a "project gun." Here are two examples, both .45 Colt:



Bob Wright

Bob what'd you do to them? They look gr8!

I'm kicking myself in the ass right now... sure thought these would line up like a Colt. Why doesn't Ruger make all their single actions do that?

[briandg]

I'm not really sure, but the same mechanism that indexes them to the barrel indexes them for the port. They don't match. I suppose that maybe a relief cut could be made to slide the case heads through the lock when it is opened, but that's not really an answer.

I don't have too much experience with sa revolvers. I would prefer that the thing not actually lock. The problem as I see it is that it takes just that tiny bit of overtravel, and dog gone it, you're screwed. Gotta wait until it comes around on the guitar again. If it could be slid back a bit?

This issue is sort of like the rem 700 not having the controlled feed. A controlled feed is nice, it's helpful, and in a very rare situation it might actually save a person from a failure or error. The push feed works, and unless you have the rifle in some crazy contortions or "limp wrist" feed it, you will never have problems related to the push feed.

With all of the complaints that I have heard over the years about a push feed rifle, I can only ask, if the push feed is so terrible, why in the world would so many swat and sniper units use then?

[BBarn]

The slightly smaller Blackhawk frame used on the flattop and New Vaquero utilize an additional small plunger in the frame behind the cylinder to provide cylinder alignment when the cylinder is reversed slightly. Not sure why the standard Blackhawks and Super Blackhawks still don't have the plunger. It's a nice feature.

A black anodized aluminum grip frame is used on the blued standard Blackhawks. The blued flattops and blued New Vaqueros use steel grip frames. The blued Super blackhawks also use a steel grip frame. And all stainless guns in the single action family use steel grip frames. All of the cylinder frames are steel on all single actions as well.

Perhaps it's also worth mentioning that the cylinders on the 5 shot Super Blackhawks (454 Casull and 480 Ruger) line up well for case extraction.

[tangolima]

You can back up the cylinder by half a hole after the hand clicks? You could be spinning the cylinder too fast. The click happens right at alignment and you just go pass it. If the cylinder stops right at the click, I don't think you can back up the cylinder. The hand won't allow it.

I suppose the revolver has a loading notch and you cock the hammer there to load.

-TL

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

[Model12Win]

Originally Posted by tangolima

You can back up the cylinder by half a hole after the hand clicks? You could be spinning the cylinder too fast. The click happens right at alignment and you just go pass it. If the cylinder stops right at the click, I don't think you can back up the cylinder. The hand won't allow it.

I suppose the revolver has a loading notch and you cock the hammer there to load.

-TL

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

Not sure what you mean??

[BBarn]

"I suppose the revolver has a loading notch and you cock the hammer there to load."

Nope. Old model (threw screw) Ruger SA revolvers pre '73 had a hammer loading position, but all of the post '72 SA revolvers with the transfer bar are loaded and extracted with the hammer down.

[Model12Win]

One role of the gun for me is defense so a quick load is important. Having nothing but trouble, seems the detent on the flattops would help x1,000,000.

[Bob Wright]

With the Single Action, there should be no need for a "quick reload." Eject your empties and reload at your leisure.

Bob Wright

[Model12Win]

Originally Posted by Bob Wright

With the Single Action, there should be no need for a "quick reload." Eject your empties and reload at your leisure.

Bob Wright

Thank you, Bob Wright.

It does seem that the medium-frame flattop model is what I should have gotten. I desire that action most greatly.

Gentleman, I have erred. This gun will be for sale shortly in the classifieds and is in perfect shape of course if anyone is interested.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by T. O'Heir

"...chambers would line up with the loading port..." Needs to "line up" with the barrel, not the loading port.

You're talking about for shooting, he's talking about for reloading. That loading gate issue has to be one of the dumbest things Ruger has ever done.

Originally Posted by Tangolima

I suppose the revolver has a loading notch and you cock the hammer there to load.

Sorry, but you suppose wrong. As has been noted, the Blackhawks with the transfer bar mechanism don't work the way you think they do -- or like a Colt SAA/

[Nathan]

The free spin pawl will fix you up

[rclark]

had no idea there was ever an alloy frame Ruger large revolver.

Grip Frame. Talking about the Grip Frame.... Not the cylinder frame which is and always will be steel. The medium frame flattop has a steel grip frame and steel ejector housing. The standard large frame does not ... unless it is a Bisley (or a Stainless Steel revolver) or Super Blackhawk. Always exceptions!

BTW, I wouldn't call it a 'mistake'... I'd call it an opportunity to start your Single Action collection . Mine have mysteriously multiplied over the years. Still shoot the large frames as well as the medium frames. However, the medium frames are my go to revolvers now in .357, .44 Special, and .45 Colt (all in 5 1/2" barrel lengths). Might say I found my perfect pack'n pistols.

[Model12Win]

Guys well it's decided (for me) that the flattops have the superior action for my purposes. I thank you all for contributing to this discussion and for helping me, and I present another question to get me on the right path:

Will the flattop with the same barrel length (5 1/2") and the same caliber (.45 Colt) have a less muzzle-heavy feel in the hand over the standard full size Blackhawk I now own?

On Ruger's website, both models are listed at an identical 40 oz. So naturally this is probably due to the steel grip frame on the flattop. Does this mean more weight in the grip, less towards the muzzle as a result of the slimmer frame? I can't imagine the ejector housing being a significant change.

[rclark]

The are NOT identical in weight (talking blued models here -- not SS). The large frame is several ounces lighter than the medium frame flattop. As stated on another forum, I have both (in 5 1/2" barrel length). As for muzzle heavy, that is a personal 'feeling'. The steel ejector housing is heavier than you might think, but the steel grip frame helps balance it out a bit. You'll just have to handle one! Note that the grip 'handle' is a little smaller (more like a standard Colt) than the normal large frame plow handle. Just so you aren't surprised by that.

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

There has been no half cock notch for loading on the hammer of a Ruger for over 40 years. When I bought my Blackhawk back in 1975, I did not even know a half cock notch existed on Colts because I had never handled a Colt at that point.

I was fat dumb and happy, using my Blackhawk for over 30 years. Yes, it can be a bit annoying when the cylinder clicks past the loading gate and you have to go around again to load that chamber, but it certainly is not the end of the world.

What happens is, if you carefully rotate the cylinder to line up a chamber with the loading gate, everything will be fine. But if you over rotate just a teeny amount, the pawl (hand) pops into the next ratchet tooth and there is no way to back up the cylinder to load or unload that chamber without going around again. I did it for over thirty years without pulling out too much hair.

There is no half cock notch on a New Vaquero hammer either, and I'll bet you a donut there is not one on that Flat Top you are interested in either.

Here is a photo of a New Vaquero hammer. Notice there is no 'safety cock' notch and no half cock notch. That small cutout near the hole for the pawl is the full cock notch. That's all you get.






What Ruger did to remedy this situation with the New Vaquero was they installed a spring plunger in the frame. The spring plunger is the round button looking thing near the cylinder pin hole. The plunger is positioned so that as you rotate the cylinder, the plunger will engage the ratchet teeth, keeping a chamber lined up with the loading gate. Got one in hand right now verifying this. With the loading gate open, the hand is completely withdrawn into the frame. What you hear clicking as you rotate the cylinder with the gate open is the spring plunger popping up between ratchet teeth. Nothing at all to do with the hand or any notches on the hammer.






I will bet you another donut that Ruger did the exact same thing with that Flat Top, since the frame is basically the same as a New Vaquero, with the addition of adjustable sights. No half cock hammer, just the spring plunger popping over the ratchet teeth as you rotate the cylinder. It does work very well, the plunger aligns each chamber perfectly with the loading gate.

Here's another rub. If you want to install a Free Spin Pawl, you have to remove that spring plunger from the frame, or it will prevent backing up the cylinder.

Why didn't Ruger update the frame of the full sized Blackhawk to include the spring plunger? Probably because they have sold bazillions of them, and it really isn't a big deal to rotate the cylinder carefully so you don't over rotate a little bit. Go around a few times, and you will learn to do that.


----------------------------------------


Here is another option you may or may not like, because it is expensive.

You can buy an after market hammer for your Blackhawk that has a half cock notch on it. I have installed one of these half cock hammers in three of my 'original model' Vaqueros, that had the exact same annoying habit of over rotating because their frames were the exact same as the Blackhawk. Except for the adjustable sights.

Here is a photo of one of my 'original model' Vaqueros with the its hammer at the half cock position. Notice the chamber is perfectly lined up with the loading gate. With the hammer in this position, the cylinder no longer over rotates that teeny amount, you simply put the hammer at half cock and load exactly like a Colt. No, there is no 'safety cock' notch, just the half cock and full cock notches. So you don't get four clicks like a Colt, only three. (The middle click is the bolt popping up.)




Here is a link to the Power Custom half cock hammers for Rugers. Click on the photo to expand it and you can see the half cock notch up near the spring plunger of the hammer.

http://powercustom.com/store/index.p...roducts_id=136


Note: the machining of these hammers is actually better than the original stock hammers. I can testify to that. The originals are castings. The Power Custom hammers are cut by Wire EDM, and are more precisely made than the OEM hammers. Also, if you buy the kit, and install one of the lower strength hammer springs, it will indeed reduce your trigger pull, because the heavier the hammer spring, the more friction the sear has to overcome sliding out of the full cock notch. I recommend the mid strength spring (18 pounds). That is what I put in all my Vaqueros. Also, don't cheap out and cut up your trigger like the instructions suggest. Spend a few more bucks and buy the Power Custom trigger that is already shaped properly for the half cock hammer.

This solution really does work, and you will get the half cock hammer that I'll bet you a donut you will not get with that Flat Top Ruger.

Or, you could try to find an original Three Screw Ruger like this Three Screw 44 Mag Flat Top that really does have a half cock hammer.

Happy Hunting.