I'm looking at purchasing one of these and reloading for it. Any negatives on this gun? I don't care for the plastic grips and wondered if I could find the wood grips on the older models to replace them or another aftermarket grip? Other than that just wanted feedback on those who own them and which caliber would be ideal. Mostly a plinking gun and probably some field use? Thanks.

Flip a coin. Either round can be loaded for mice to moose and anything in between. For field use I'd go with 240-250 gr cast over 10 gr unique for 1000 fps and call it a day. The one thing that would lean me towards the 45 is getting the convertable to shoot 45 acp out of.

If you're planning to load up the 300 gr bullets to 1200 fps then I'd highly recomend the bisley as it's grip is much better for dealing with heavy recoil.

I will take the plastic grips off your hands if you decide to buy.

I'd sure look to the .45 Colt vs. the .429 Magnum. In that revolver, it will take considerably more than in the SAA guns.

Have you given any thought as to what exact model and barrel length that would best fit your needs.... Besides plinking, what exactly do you consider "field work"....as in some small game hunting, big game hunting, just outdoor protection.... Is it going to be holster carried. How long a barrel can you tolerate carrying around.... Are you looking for blue or stainless? Is this your only handgun?

Personally I have owned both calibers:
New Model Blackhawk .45 Colt 4 5/8"
Old Model Blackhawk .44 Magnum 6.5"
Old Model Super Blackhawk .44 Magnum 5.0" (cut down from 7.5")
...and sold all of them and now only have .41 Magnums...

As to the new checked plastic grips...I don't care for them either and the one new gun that I bought that had them were replaced with a set of bonded ivory...much more pleasant to shoot.

Another caliber you may want to consider if you reload is the .44 Special. A friend has a blue Bisley Flat Top with I believe a 5.5" barrel and a stainless Flat Top with a 4 5/8" barrel. If you don't need the all the power of a .44 Magnum or .45 Colt +P this cartridge makes almost a perfect round for a Blackhawk with the original size .357 frame....

http://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/ross-seyfried-lipseys-ruger-flattop-44-special-bisley-revolvers/


Bob

You won't likely to too wrong with either.

The .44 mag is a bit simpler.

(1) The last 2 blued .45 colt Blackhawks had front sights that were too short to get 'em sighted in with 250 grain or heavier bullets. Cowboy loads were only a couple inches too high, everything else was just ridiculous. No issues of that sort with the SS .45s, they had much taller front sights.

(That's not to say .44s are problem free, I've had 2 that I couldn't sight in with 300 grain bullets, but I've never had one I couldn't sight in with normal 240-250 grain bullets and max loads.)

(2) Bullet availability ... in this small town, .45 colt JHPs are not to be found. Special order only. There are 3-4 different .44 mag bullets available over the counter.

That doesn't matter if you shoot lead and cast your own though.

I've carried both .44 mag and .45 colt over quite a few years and I'm perfectly happy with either caliber once the individual gun's kinks are sorted out so the bullets hit where the sights are.

Tom

Tom, I have a Blackhawk in .44 mag I bought a couple of years ago and have the same issue with the front site. It's too short, and of course on the blued models you can't replace them. I solved the problem by grinding down the rear site until there's barely a notch left to site through. I haven't tried anything heavier than a 240 grn bullet but there's no use.

Would it really be hard for Ruger to figure this out?

I don't believe the wood grips from the older pre-lock Rugers will fit the grip frames of the newer ones with the lock, so you'd have to go aftermarket for one of those.

In general, the Ruger .44 Magnums have been more consistently accurate than their .45 Colts. Not that a .45 can't be accurate, but I've never had a .44 SBH that wasn't accurate and have had a couple .45 Blackhawks that did not live up to my expectations without some throat work and firelapping. That situation could have changed recently as the last .45 Blackhawk I bought was probably 4 years ago.

In weight, the .44's are all steel while the regular Blackhawk .45's have an aluminum grip frame. With the big holes in the cylinder and barrel the 4 5/8" .45 BH is one of the lightest Blackhawks they make.

For a plinking gun, I would offer up the new Flattop .45 Colt/.45 Auto convertible or maybe a regular Blackhawk .45 convertible. You can use .45 Auto ammo in it for mild plinking and factory .45 Auto stuff is cheaper than .45 colt ammo. The Flattop is built on a smaller frame so it handles a little differently but the grip frame is steel so it is actually heavier than the larger Blackhawk with same/same barrel lengths. Also kind of hard to find in stocking dealers, unless you see one at a gun show it's generally mail order only.

For the .44 Magnum you can use .44 Specials but .44 Special ammo is a low demand item and so is priced higher. If you handload, .44 components are everywhere, .45 components are around in sufficient quantity but could be scarce in some places.

All in all, a .45 Convertible Blackhawk might be the best for what you want. For plinking especially the ability to find cheaper .45 Auto ammo in quantity might be the deciding factor. You can still find the older Blackhawk convertibles with wooden grips on gunbroker for very reasonable prices.

Thanks guys for the responses. I found a new Ruger 45LC/45acp convertible for $542.00 its stainless/steel with the higher front sight for different bullet weights it is 5.5 inch barrel and comes with false ivory grips. This may be the one I get.

If that's a 45 Flattop you're refering to, I really like mine, a 5.5" blued model:



The 4 5/8" stainless model is pretty sweet as well:



Both are very well fitted and finished, and have proved accurate with the 45 Colt cylinders. I haven't tried the ACP cylinders yet.

Note that these smaller framed 45's aren't suitable for the "Ruger only" 45 Colt loads listed in many manuals. Brian Pearce's article on the mid-frame 45's in Handloader from over the summer lists a wide selection of loads in the pressure ranges appropriate to the Flattop 45's. Also, the cylinder of the Flattop is shorter so some long nosed LBT type bullets may not be usable, or will have to be seated deeper thus cutting powder space. I don't find these restrictions to be significant, however, as the Flattop will easily handle loads in the 1000fps range with 280-300gr bullets which is plenty powerful.

Here's a comparison of cylinder length and thickness between the Flattop 45 and a standard Blackhawk, in this case a stainless 45 Bisley:

That sounds like a good one to get. I personally really like stainless.

Once upon a time, I had two sweeeeet Ruger Bisleys, on in .45 and the other in .44. I liked the .44 better because the cylinders were fluted and I just prefer that appearance. I had my .44 and a 3rd Gen. Colt SAA .45 in my Doskocil hard case and we were coming back home from a weekend at Mom and Dad's. There was rain, but I don't recall it being a frog-strangler. I just brought it in from the vehicle. A few days later I got them out and both had spots about the size of a penny or a nickel rusted on their barrels. I like stainless.

I have a Blackhawk Blued 7.5" in .45LC and I love it...it has factory wood grips and shoots smooth

If you end up looking for wood grips....Hogue actually makes really nice ones

It's a good choice. This is one of the Lipsey's special edition guns that Ruger makes from time to time. I've got my eye on that exact same gun, will probably pick one up in the next few weeks. They're selling on Gunbroker from $600 and up, so that's a pretty good price. Local shopping tends to be cheaper, I have found.

One thing to be careful of with that gun: it is NOT the fullsize BH, so you should NOT fire "magnum" or "Ruger-Only" loads in it. Brian Pearce did a good article on loads for this pistola in Handloader earlier this year, and I strongly recommend you pick up that article if you buy this gun so you can select/handload appropriately for it.

I've got an old model Vaquero Bisley in .45 LC. I've owned lots of .44 mags (still have one) including Ruger SAs, but I really like this .45 LC and it's light enough to carry as a backup. I think the 5.5" stainless Bisley Blackhawk in .45 would be a perfect primary hunting handgun. Good looking gun too...

Both are good rounds, I own Ruger SA's (BH, SBH and Vaquero's) in .44 Mag and .45 Colt. Shoot .44 Special mostly in the .44mag SBH, but carry hot and heavy 44 mag loads in it for hunting. The 45 colt is a classic. You can load it up just as hot as a 44 mag for hunting as well (in the large frame Rugers only). I don't own any of the smaller frame Ruger SA's, I prefer the larger frame models so I can stretch their legs so to speak. In fact two of my 45's are 5 shot conversions. Just my personal preference but I like the 45 colt best. Its good that you plan on reloading, makes the 45 colt more reasonable from a cost perspecitve as both loaded factory ammo and components are more expensive than 44 mag. Tough to chose btwn two such proven clalibers. You won't make a bad choice regardless which one you chose.

Will Ruger sell you just the .45acp cylinder ? I have a SS NM Vaquero I'd like to have one fitted for.

I believe so....I have also seen them for sale at gun shows

They are fairly common I believe....I plan on grabbing one for my .45LC soon

I have also seen them for sale on gunbroker.com

I dunno. Its pretty frustrating.

Every 4-5/8" barreled blued .45 blackhawk I've seen in the last 2 years has the wrong front sight on it. Ruger makes a taller sight that'd be better and puts it on the 5-1/2" barreled gun.

There's no excuse for not getting this right. I can even see one gun coming out wrong, but all of them?

I haven't had a .44 yet that wouldn't sight-in with 240s. Man, that sucks. I've had a couple (5-1/2" Super B, I think) that I couldn't go heavier than about 250, but they'd do that much at least.

I don't get it.

My two cents worth,

I have had both. I prefer the .45 colt.

The .45 is easier on the ears than the .44. An important feature when you leave the range and shoot something out it the sticks, where you will likely need it most.

In the same gun, like your Blackhawk, the .45 will be lighter to pack as there is less metal than the .44.

It can shoot bigger bullets out of it at like velocities and can be more powerful than the .44, in the right revolver.

I like the history of the cartridge and that it seens to have the right balance of shootability, penetration and wound channel for anything that I am likely to shoot with it. When you hit something with a big .45 cal bullet, things stop twitching very quickly. It just plain works.

Shot loads out of the .45 hold more pellets and are just plain nasty up close.

Having said all that, neither is a bad choice, they both will still be killing stuff well after we all are history.

I agree with you .. once the kinks are worked out.

However, I haven't seen a blued, 4-5/8" barreled .45 blackhawk with a tall enough front sight in about 2 years. If you go that route, expect some down time to send it back to the factory.

Both of mine have front sights tall enough to accomodate my loads with 280 and 300gr bullets at 1000fps, at 50 yards. The rear sights are in the mid-range of their travel when sighted in.

The 45 Colt will be lighter with it's aluminum grip frame, fluted cylinder, and more metal milled out of the chambers and bore.

I have a three screw SBH that was a .44 Rem Mag, is now a .45 Colt. It was line bored by Jim Stroh at Alpha Precision, had a Shilen 6" barrel fitted with a long steel ejector and custom front sight. I rigged a trigger stop and it's a shooter.

Target at 25 yds. over a bag with 255 gr. SWC and 18.5 gr. H4227.

IMHO, this is the highest and best use for a SBH .44 Mag...

Third photo, Penn Bullets 270 gr. Thunderheads. Check that meplat. Bad medicine for hogs. .44 Mag can't do that...

I think a stong, accurate .45 Colt will outperform a .44 Rem Mag. I know you can go with heavy .44 bullets, etc. Just saying...

DF

Wood grips off an older model will fit. I hate the plastic grips too. I've owned/owned a bunch of both and I prefer the .44 Magnum. You don't need a Bisley. Recoil is the same and they are hideous. You can see my New Model with older grips in the picture.

Beautiful guns there swampman.....is that bottom one a 7&1/2in????

If so, it looks identical to mine

Swampman700 - no, not right.

The newest blued Blackhawks (and Single Sixes) with the hammer lock have the "locating" pin in a slightly different location in the grip frame. The old Blackhawk/Single Six grips won't fit. Been there tried that.

So far as I can tell, the stainless guns and the Super Blackhawks haven't been changed ... yet.

Tom

What barrel length? When were they built? Blued or stainless?

Or send it out to a custom pistol smith and replace the factory front sight with a custom one with pinned blades so you can swap them out as you change loads. This is the way I am heading with my next 5 1/2 inch SS blackhawk. The above mentioned Jim Stroh would be high on the list of smiths for the work, as would John Gallagher and David Clements.

No need fysh, the stainless BHs come with a blued blade pinned into the base.


Pete

That's true if you want the heavier SS gun instead of a blued gun. The SS Blackhawks have a steel grip frame and weigh 6-8 ounces more than their blued counterparts.

Also, if you check Ruger's web site, the SS Blackhawk is no longer listed in .45 Colt.

An unfortunate oversite!!! Hopefully they get back to making them, the used SS blackhawk .45's are creeping up in price. I spend too much time in or near water and the salty coast to go blued. Thought about the Lipsey's flattop frame, but wanted to be able to load up a litte if needed. But that is a good compromise for the weight issue.

Both blued and stainless, both Flattops. Blued 5.5" and stainless 4 5/8". Both built in 2011.

Flat top is a different beast from a regular Blackhawk.

Interesting. What's the pressure limit on the flat top? Will they handle the 30,000 PSI loads for a std Blackhawk or old Vaquero? Are they limited to Colt SAA loads? Or somewhere in between?

How fast can you run that 280?

Tom

It is a 7 1/2". Ruger makes wood grips that will fit the newer models with the lock. I forgot about that stupid thing. An older pair of grips could be made to work but it will take a little tinkering.

Check out Brian Pearce's article in "Handloader" No. 275 on the pressure levels for the Flattop. I use Pearce's load of 10gr Alliant Power Pistol for 1050fps. The Flattops are not meant for the 30k psi loads of for the standard Blackhawk. I've got a 45 Colt Blackhawk as well, for that purpose. An Accusport stainless Bisley model I bought new in 2005. It's front sight is high enough to accomodate hot 300gr loads at 50 yards.

I hate to derail a thread a bit, but seems like an appropriate question based where the thread has ended up. I have a 50th Anniversary Ruger Blackhawk (Flat top) in 44M with 6.5� barrel. Is this limited in load? This is the only firearm related site I can get to while at work, so that�s why I ask here.

No prob shooting .44 mag ammo in the .44 mag flat-top. That's a different frame yet.

We're talking about shooting beyond-factory .44 special and .45 colt loads in the lighter framed flat-tops which are essentially .357 frames vs Blackhawks that are essentially .44 magnum frames. Its important not to confuse the two.

Tom

Thanks, I read flat top and went, hmmm. Didn't realize you guys meant the .357 frame.

Ruger isn't going to sell something incapable of handling the factory loads as marked on the frame. You've got nothing to worry about.

The SS .45 flat-top is pretty interesting to me listed at 36 ounces but I'm not sure I can get quite the velocity I want and stay within its pressure limits. Also not sure any of our clown gun dealers in the area will special order.

I've often wondered why the SBH was never offered from the factory in .45 Colt. It seems like it would be a perfect fit. Never thought about having one converted. It's a great idea. I presume it'll handle 30,000psi loads the same as the Blackhawk will.

The 36 oz ain't happenin'.
Have one in each length and they come in at 2.56 and 2.59 lbs respectively.
That's roughly 41 and 41.5 oz.

Pete

Yup, the Flattops would be great with alloy grips frames. Their steel grip frames add several ounces over the standard Blackhawks.

Thanks for that. Ruger's web site showed the SS flat top they're making for Lipseys at 36 oz.

Here's the link: http://www.ruger.com/products/newModelBlackhawkDE/specSheets/5243.html

What you're saying about weight and steel vs aluminum is right, I just assumed Ruger would provide accurate info about what they're shipping. I was thinking about trying to order one. I'm not interested at 41-42 ounces, not in the slightest. So .. thanks, reckon you just saved me some money and a lot of irritation.

Tom

Pressure handling capacity should be similar, .44 and .45. Theoretically, the .44 would have a slightly thicker cylinder wall than the .45. That's why the real high pressure .45's are built with a 5 shot cylinder so the bolt or hand notch is between and not right over a chamber. If a chamber gives way, that's where it usually splits.

Using H4227, it's hard to have dangerous cylinder pressure. Hank Williams Jr. is an avid Colt collector and shooter. I read where he likes 4227, even shooting 4227 loads in some of his vintage Colts. Its pressure curve, reportedly, allows max charges without dangerous pressure spikes. Pistol powders, like 2400, H110, etc. are the ones that could potentially create a pressure problem, especially if the shooter was pushing the envelope with heavy bullets.

IMHO,

DF

Ah, the one that got away. Once upon a time, I had a beautiful stainless Bisley convertible 45 Colt/45 ACP with the 5 point something inch barrel. It had Ruger factory grey laminate grips and was a very nice shooter. I bought it for several reasons - I've always loved Rugers, I wanted the convertible so I could use up a surplus of 45 ACP handloads with an odd bullet profile that wouldn't feed right in my 1911, and it could serve as a second option for bear protection (S&W 460V is first option).

I love the grip contour of the Bisley. It seems to be more recoil friendly when firing the heavy loads. I put quite a few 345 gr. cast boolits through it using "Ruger only" load data, and it was never painful to shoot.

A friend needed help though, so since the Ruger had less of a practical use (At least in my mind) than did the S&W 460, it was the one to go. I'll likely replace it someday. It had a much tighter, smoother action than the Smith and just seemed built better.

As to the original question - if ammo availability may influence your decision, 44 mag fodder seems much easier to find than does 45 Colt. If you hand - load though.... 6 of one, half a dozen of the other....

Got a .45 Colt Bisley,too.

Bought this one used. It was a full house custom by Jim Stroh at Alpha Precision. It won't quite group with the line bored/Shilen barreled SBH, but is no slouch. I like the way a Ruger Bisley grip feels and handles.

I fitted the Sambar Stag grips and installed the Ruger medallions.

DF

Agree about handloading.

.44 Mag would be the better choice for the non-hand loader. I just assume hand loading when I wrote my posts. Hard for me to think like a non-loader. Been doing it too long.

DF

You can send it to Ruger and have a new one fitted for a reasonable price. I'd worry about just picking one up somewhere

In times past, Ruger would not sell a second cylinder without the gun in-house to fit it to, too much risk in the legal arena. What you are seeing at the shows are orphaned cylinders, from conversions, rebuilds, and sell-offs. I haven't sent one to Ruger lately, or know of anyone that has, but it used to be a several week process. I looked at doing it many years back with a .45 LC, but was cheaper to wait and buy one local as a factory set-up. The second cylinder with any Ruger should have a "electro-pencil" serial number matching the original gun on the forward end of the cylinder. I had several used offered to me over the years that were a mis-match, but I haven't found that with a factory/dealer direct gun. Somebosy else may have a different experience.

Has anybody discussed the .45 Colt brass being potentially weaker than the the .44 mag brass? Older cartridges loaded to safe Colt SSA levels had less brass in the cartridge head/base, loading these cases to Ruger levels were a potential hazard, as same cases had a tendancy to split/seperate early in their case life. I haven't had the problem, but I have read in the reloading manuals and on-line where it happened. Most of my brass in .45 Colt is Starline, haven't had an issue with Ruger level loads from Georgia Arms.

Given that you are gonna load for it I would (and did) get a 45 Colt.

Given you are gonna get a 45 Colt, I would (and did) get a Standard Blackhawk or BH Bisley, these can take the +P loads.
(Not one of the new med. Frame BHs)

My wood grips came from Hogue and they are nice�

But�.

Wish I had bought some fancier grips from here http://www.clccustomgrips.com/

Snake

Brass has been discussed here and elsewhere many times over. The weak brass you are referring to are the old folded "balloonhead" cases and hasn't been made in years (like the 50s). All modern brass is manufactured the same with solid heads and modern .45 Colt brass is just as strong as .44 mag.

If you have Starline, you have the best top of the line pistol/revolver brass available. When you buy a box of premium +P .45 Colt thermonuclear ammo from Buffalo Bore, HSM, or Double Tap, you'll find their brass all have Starline headstamps. Winchester would be my second choice and is used by CorBon and Alaska Backpacker for their +P loads.

Another issue with brass failures or short brass life in .45 Colts has been with sloppy, inconsistent chamber demensions from one gun maker to the next, with some chambers being a bit generous. Not so much an issue today as it was a few years ago.

The +P .45 Colt loads running in the 28k to 30k psi range in the Hodgdon manual are specifically for the strength parameters built into the standard Blackhawk and Blackhawk Bisley.

And, it leaves a bigger hole too.

No, because it's not.

I have two old model Vaqueros both are stainless in 45 Colt. They were originally acquired for cowboy action shooting. The cylinder throats were verrrry tight so I sent them to the Cylinder Smith to be reamed. It seems that tight cylinder throats, at least in the past, were not uncommon on the old Vaquero and Blackhawk. I then had the barrel firelapped....the forcing cones were ok. One front sight had to be persuaded to lean a bit more to the left. The front sight on the other was filed down a bit. Though not match level paper punchers, even with the Vaqueros fixed sights they are accurate enough to be fun to shoot. Both pistols are now "carry to the woods" guns. I put a Hogue Monogrip on both guns....they are not as pretty as the wood grips but are much more manageable when shooting heavy loads. They are a handful with Buffalo Bore level loads and very pleasant to plink with using Cowboy loads.

Got this .45 Colt Bisley (5 1/2-inch barrel) recently and aside from the somewhat heavy trigger pull, it has proven accurate and a pleasure to tote in the field. I much prefer the .45 Colt to the .429 Magnum.