Ruger Blackhawk convertibles

I have the 45acp/45colt convertible with a 7.5" barrel...shoots both with same accuracy.The ruger is barreled in .452,so previous mentioned problem with 9mm does not apply to 45's.
That's how I shoot...the ruger most likely can do better. I had other SA revolvers before,the Blackhawks are the only ones I kept.
Rugershootingcontest_zps28fbaa4b.jpg


Btw, if anyone has a 45 blackhawk with 7.5 or longer barrel for sale,I'll take.
CG
 
Suther said:
Velocity is the only factor, actually. The only force that causes a bullet to drop is gravity, which is always -9.81m/s^2 (meters per second squared. Which is an acceleration, not velocity). Which means for every second its in the air, a bullet will accelerate downwards 9.81m. So at 2 seconds, its velocity is -19.62 m/s, ect.......
Click to expand...

Suther, read up about sighting in revolvers. Bullet weight does matter as it controls the amount of time the bullet is in the bore and at what point it leaves the muzzle during the rise from the recoil. A .357Mag revolver loaded with a mix of .38Spl and .357Mag even with the same bullet will print the Magnum rounds on target in a group that is lower than the slower .38Spl rounds despite reaching the target sooner due to the higher muzzle speed. This occurs because the Magnums leave earlier.

It's very noticeable as well. At around 15 yards the difference is about 2 to 2.5 inches.

The same thing occurs in semi autos as well. But not to the same extent because the slide and barrel start moving back in a straight line first. And by the time the recoil is felt to a significant degree in the lower frame through the recoil spring the the bullet is long gone. But there's still a small amount that shows up. If you get your 9mm sometime soon and shoot some 115gn, 124 and some 147gn ammo you'll find that the faster 115's tend to print a group that centers about 1 to 1.5 inches lower than the 147's at around 15 to 20 yards.

I know from your other posts that you're used to shooting rifles. And rifles, thanks to the much higher weight, longer mass moment arm lengths and better support, do not suffer from recoil related bullet rise issues. But handguns are a different zebra.
 
BCRider said:
Suther, read up about sighting in revolvers. Bullet weight does matter as it controls the amount of time the bullet is in the bore and at what point it leaves the muzzle during the rise from the recoil. A .357Mag revolver loaded with a mix of .38Spl and .357Mag even with the same bullet will print the Magnum rounds on target in a group that is lower than the slower .38Spl rounds despite reaching the target sooner due to the higher muzzle speed. This occurs because the Magnums leave earlier.

It's very noticeable as well. At around 15 yards the difference is about 2 to 2.5 inches.

The same thing occurs in semi autos as well. But not to the same extent because the slide and barrel start moving back in a straight line first. And by the time the recoil is felt to a significant degree in the lower frame through the recoil spring the the bullet is long gone. But there's still a small amount that shows up. If you get your 9mm sometime soon and shoot some 115gn, 124 and some 147gn ammo you'll find that the faster 115's tend to print a group that centers about 1 to 1.5 inches lower than the 147's at around 15 to 20 yards.

I know from your other posts that you're used to shooting rifles. And rifles, thanks to the much higher weight, longer mass moment arm lengths and better support, do not suffer from recoil related bullet rise issues. But handguns are a different zebra.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I have found as well when shooting handguns.

Graydog
 
I really don't want to pour water on anyone's success with dual caliber revolvers, but my experience with the Blackhawk convertible was poor. I ultimately replaced the factory barrel since 40% of the mid-range cast .358 SWC's tumbled. Loading an up sized 9mm bullet or a 38special bullet in a 9mm case for the 9mm cylinder didn't work either. The bigger bullets would not seat flush in the 9mm cylinder, and the few that did never hit the paper or were horribly inaccurate.
Just like the 22Mag works poorly in the Ruger single six, one of the reasons 22 LR works poorly in 223 AR's is the large difference in size.
My advice is to avoid most dual cylinder revolvers and stick with just the true-to-size Blackhawk.
 
Hatman, I tend to agree. Maybe not so much for the .45 version where the best bullets are the same size. But the .357/9mm is simply a bastard love child that should never have seen the light of day. There's enough difference that it could never be sized to do really well with either. And for someone that desires accuracy compromise is not a good place to start from.
 
I've been thinking about one of the 45 convertibles a lot lately. To those who own one: what is the recoil on the 45 ACP like? I'm girly and hate recoil most of the time, and spend most of my time shooting stuff like 38 S&W and light 38 Special loads. But I would like a new 45 handgun to experiment with the reloads, and this seems like a lovely and diverse option.

For reference on my recoil aversion, I used to own a 1917 Smith and Wesson, but I found the recoil made it unpleasant to shoot without Pachmayer grips on it at the standard 230 Gr 850 ft/s loads, and even then I rarely wanted to shoot more than fifty rounds. The Blackhawk has adjustable sights, so I can download it as needed as well, but I do like to play around with some warmer loads from time to time.
 
DSJ, why not get a single action in .357Mag then? If you're already reloading for .38Spl and don't particularly like hot ammo then this seems like a great fit. You'll hit your tolerance level even for occasional shooting before you reach the top end of the .357Mag loads by the sounds of things.

I've also got a 1917. I can tell you for sure that since the 1917 and a single action both weigh roughly the same that the recoil from a Ruger Convertible will be roughly the same as what you felt with the 1917. Recoil from the two guns shooting the same ammo is directly related to the weight of the guns after all. There would be some SLIGHT difference based on the shape of the grip but it's not a big deal.

On the other hand if you just simply WANT a big bore then far be it from me to say you shouldn't. But I'd suggest that it's worth considering just buying a Ruger Super Blackhawk and go with .44Mag. Then you can do it all from mild to wild.
 
dan belisle said:
A 7.5" Blackhawk in 45 ACP is a puss cat. I have numerous 45's from various makers, and the Ruger is very easy to shoot. - dan
Click to expand...

Someone with a recoil limit set by .38Spl is not going to feel the same way though. And keep in mind that it's going to feel pretty much the same as that big N frame 1917 that he has already shot and didn't like.
 
I have the 45ACP / 45 Colt and I am surprised how much I enjoy it. The ACP cyclinder is capable of a one, large hole group at 40 feet. Have yet to use the Colt cylinder. I'll keep you posted.
 
i'm on the other end of the scale - absolutely hated the 45c/acp- damned thing was low and right a good 3 feet- phoned ruger and they said it was my loads, yet those were Winchester factory and loaded to Winchester factory specs- which SHOULD have somewhere in the ballpark- then I compared it to my OLD ARMY which is also 452- sight height from top of barrel to top of sight- turned out the 45c/acp was a good 1/8th or better TALLER than the old army- so I took a file to it and gradually the groups began to rise- when it was the same height as the old army, it was SPOT ON
-and I used all the elevation in the rear sight
 
dan belisle said:
Ruger weighs more, felt recoil will be less. - dan
Click to expand...

I'm finding the 1917 at 36oz versus the Ruger at 39 or 40 depending on barrel length. That's not a whole lot of difference.

I'll bet it's a combo of the small amount heavier along with the "plowshare" grip shape rolling slightly in the grip that adds up to a gentler feel.

I know that once I re-gripped my Super Blackhawk that I found it easier to shoot full house .44Mag than the same loads from my similar weight DA Super Redhawk. So I guess we'd have to allow for the different grip shape as well.

Still, all in all I feel that if someone is going to invest in buying some proper revolver reloading supplies to allow themselves to load up custom loads that there's not a big advantage to buying a Convertible model where a major selling point is the ability to use whatever ammo is available.
 
BCRider said:
I'm finding the 1917 at 36oz versus the Ruger at 39 or 40 depending on barrel length. That's not a whole lot of difference.

I'll bet it's a combo of the small amount heavier along with the "plowshare" grip shape rolling slightly in the grip that adds up to a gentler feel.

I know that once I re-gripped my Super Blackhawk that I found it easier to shoot full house .44Mag than the same loads from my similar weight DA Super Redhawk. So I guess we'd have to allow for the different grip shape as well.
Still, all in all I feel that if someone is going to invest in buying some proper revolver reloading supplies to allow themselves to load up custom loads that there's not a big advantage to buying a Convertible model where a major selling point is the ability to use whatever ammo is available.
Click to expand...

:)Bingo. With that SA western style grip and the way it 'rolls up', the effects of recoil are modified considerably.
Again;), I agree. There are a few reasons why I decided to acquire my SS 4 5/8" convertable,






45ACP/45LC, the main being I came into a SIZEABLE quantity of factory 45ACP ammo. Next, at the gun show where I got it, it was reasonably priced and in like new condition with box etc. As such, it does have that versitility. That being said, in 45LC, my personal favorite is still my old model 5 1/2" Vaquero.



 
Last edited:
Thanks for the advice everyone.

I went ahead with the Super Blackhawk in 44. It sounds ridiculous for somebody discussion recoil aversion earlier, but I already know I very much like the 44 Special cartridge and didn't have a firearm chambered for it (I have been looking for a S&W Model 24 for some time but they are pretty scarce up here) and wanted to scratch the single action itch. It really came down to the convertible vs the Blackhawk largely on the basis of appearance, since I knew I was going to be making similar intensity loads with both and own the reloading supplies for all involved calibers already, that unfluted cylinder beckoned to me and I gave in.

Now the only issue is I have all this 45 ACP stuff lying around and nothing to use it in. Life is, truly, nothing but a waking nightmare.
 
Nice. I find I prefer the super loaded down to something a bit hotter than 44-40, when it comes to actually enjoying the thing. When I get up around 18-20gr of 2400 under a 240SWC either my knuckle gets whacked or my pinkie gets twisted unless I hold it in a very small sweet spot - a spot which is not entirely conducive to good aim.

Much as I hate to spoil the olde timey looks, I think a pachmyer decelerator is in my future with that one.
 
I had the 45 convertible years ago, and soon realized that the 45 acp cylinder stayed in the box after the initial charm wore off. A .357 or a 44 mag makes more sense since you don't need the extra cylinder.
 
t-star said:
i'm on the other end of the scale - absolutely hated the 45c/acp- damned thing was low and right a good 3 feet- phoned ruger and they said it was my loads, yet those were Winchester factory and loaded to Winchester factory specs- which SHOULD have somewhere in the ballpark- then I compared it to my OLD ARMY which is also 452- sight height from top of barrel to top of sight- turned out the 45c/acp was a good 1/8th or better TALLER than the old army- so I took a file to it and gradually the groups began to rise- when it was the same height as the old army, it was SPOT ON
-and I used all the elevation in the rear sight
Click to expand...

I have to say I'm 100% in agreement with your comments. I have had several issues with this one gun. The rear sight pin continues to come loose after a few shots, the front sight is way too tall, I have had issues (in the cold) with the cylinder almost falling out, the retaining pin and lock does not stay in place in the cold. This is the only Ruger I have had any issues with at all, most of my Rugers are bought new. I had a S&W 625 so I sold that and bought this gun, big mistake so I repurchased another 625 but still have this gun. This gun is the 4 5/8 inch bbl. All of my other Rugers are 6 inch or longer. I prefer the longer bbl.

I really like the .45 Long Colt round, even more than the .45ACP round. If necessary I will just fire .45Colt with this gun and be happy. The .45 Colt (and the .45ACP) round have a really nice kick and report. I find the .44 Mag's kick a little much for my taste. I was under the impression that you could up-load the .45 Colt to near the .44Mag. I don't believe this is a smart thing to do even if the gun will handle the load.
 
Barrel lengths, what about barrel lengths? Favorites? I'm thinking about balance vs esthetics.
I have a Single-Six with a 6-1/2" barrel and I wish it was shorter. Feels a little muzzle heavy to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom