Jump to content
Practically Shooting

New Ruger Blackhawk .357/38 9mm convertible


Pablo

Recommended Posts

I'd like to start this thread over again.

The Ruger is just one nice gun. I got my grips from Esmeralda.

One word: Stunning

One nice, very unique gun now. OK OK, only new grips - but they are serialized and signed by her. And they look luscious. The grips also feel really nice in the hand. Soon, I'll post photos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Useless thread without Esmeralda pics...I meant grip pics...

I hope they fit nice...I cain't wait to see this doll of a gun!

I'm wanting a .41 Blackhawk now so bad! I'm gonna put staghorn grips on it like the one my dad let get away.

One of my favorite series of books has the main character carrying a Colt double action in .44-40. They still make those?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of the SAA replicas are replicas of nothing. There are some that use the grip from the 1878 "Lightning" or "Thunderers" but no such gun was made in single action form. The Cimmaron Lightning comes to mind.

So you can have the look and feel if you want.

However, the 1878s don't bring as much as Colt SAAs, so you might be able to get an original one for not much more than one of the "replicas of nothing". Of course there are $2000 examples, but I have seen several $500 examples too. You sure don't see $500 SAAs unless they are complete junk.

I wouldn't know since I've never owned one, but I always heard the 1878 had some fragile/delicate parts in it. Between that, and there being no gun game it really fits into, that's probably why nobody makes a replica.

There is a picture of Billy the Kid with one, and he supposedly carried one. If so, it must have worked good enough for him to do his nasty work.

My nominee for a cool offbeat old west gun is the Merwin Hulbert. http://armchairgunshow.com/MH-info.html I want one of those just to watch it work. The cylinder and barrel pull forward off the cartridges to eject them, and it only dumps the fired ones. If the cartridges are fired, they fall free, but if unfired, the cylinder doesn't pull forward far enough for them to clear. They were made in both SA and DA form, I believe.

A company started up to make new M-Hs, but they have been around a while and I don't think any guns have appeared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of the SAA replicas are replicas of nothing. There are some that use the grip from the 1878 "Lightning" or "Thunderers" but no such gun was made in single action form.

Colt at that time would make almost anything to special order, so while these repros are somewhat anachronistic, it's not inconceivable that originals could have been made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are there documented (lettered) SAAs with that grip frame from the factory? I've never heard of such, though there could be 10,000 of them for all I know.

Probably not. I'm just saying that with the level of customization that was available from Colt, S&W, and others at that time, it's not out of the question that an 1873 was delivered with an 1877 grip frame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This gun is as sweet to shoot as it is to look at!

Shot a box+ of 38 special. Wow that is such a friendly round to fire.

Then I shot 24 rounds of 357 mag. The gun just had a good time with those. Sure a ton of flash and a super healthy kick but I wasn't flinching and seemed to be the same accuracy as the 38's.

After that I rolled the 9mm barrel in. Weird - more kick than the 38 special rounds, but the revolver just ate those up as well about the same accuracy - in other words - I'm more inaccurate than the gun.

The sights on this gun just agree with me. Don't let anyone kid you, 25 yards with a pistol indoors is no tame duck shoot. My eyes aren't near what they used to be and so many years of rifle shooting has taken a set.

I need to practice. But I did OK and I sure like my Ruger convertible. Thanks for the recommendation camu!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yah the Blackhawk coolness factor is hard to beat! I'm wanting a stainless version in .41 Magnum but I might have to settle for blued. Maybe a .45 Long Colt is what I need...

Did you post pics of yours Pabs with the Esmeralda grips? Let's see a rarer convertible with even rarer grips... I have shot 3 Blackhawks in my life and all were really fun and accurate! Buddy shoots the Vaquero model in cowboy action....and lemme tell you that is a shiny gorgeous gun. I kinda like the Satin Stainless on some of the Redhawks and I wish Ruger would carry it to the Blackhawks... cool

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No pics yet - I will also take pics of the targets as well. Someday!

I was just SO much more hugely accurate with the Ruger.

Don't tell anyone but I was pretty bad with the Sig. It's like the sights didn't make sense, but my eye was fighting to focus because the sand berm is very dark as well.....

Then I started firing with the Ruger....Bam, click, Bam Click, Bam Click. Maybe a just a hair low and to the right but a decent amount of 10 pointers (25 yd slow fire pistol targets). The sights made total sense to my eye, there is no other way to put it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think 25 yards is a long way to start...I would start with around 7 yards...that is about the range the 9mm was intended to be used for anyways. Once you get a feel for the gun then go to longer ranges. Heck I've shot a bowling pin at 100 yards just messing around but I sure didn't start shooting at distance...

Yes I figured the Blackhawk would be accurate. Everyone I have shot has been way more easy to get accurate with than the semi-autos I have recently been exposed too. In fact I think the perceived recoil of the .357 chambered in a Black is much tamer than the .40 in a Glock. The Blackhawk is just a better platform as far as accuracy at the range is concerned IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started at 20 yards, then backed down to 10. I found the 9mm semi to be a vicinity weapon........I kid, I kid!! But seriously a number of shots did not connect with paper with the Sig. I don't think any of Blackhawk shot missed completely.

C'mon now. The P225 is a sweet shooter. This was the first 8 round I fired through mine:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started at 20 yards, then backed down to 10. I found the 9mm semi to be a vicinity weapon........I kid, I kid!! But seriously a number of shots did not connect with paper with the Sig. I don't think any of Blackhawk shot missed completely.

That's how it was for me at first. I was shooting my buddies .357 Blackhawk and knocking down bowling pins at 50 yards no problem then I get out my Glock and the round is hitting the dirt 10 yards in front of the target. With a semi-auto if you wanna shoot for accuracy you really have to work on the smoothness of your trigger finger. IMO it takes more time and practice to get accurate with a semi-auto then it does with the crisp pull of the recoil absorbing heavy framed Blackhawk.

Stay with it Pabs!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally Posted By: CamuMahubah
One of my favorite series of books has the main character carrying a Colt double action in .44-40. They still make those?

If you're talking about the 1878, the answer is no. I don't think any of the Italian houses even make reproductions of the 78.

G-MAN, LOL! I'm sorry bro it's a Colt .44-40 Lighting! For some reason I remember it was double-action maybe converted to DA. So what do you know about the Lighting? And he carries a .44-40 Lever-Action and it's a Winchester but I cain't for the life of me remember the year...

I'll go see what I can find...you lemme know if you see any Lightings made in Italy! Thanks... cool

Whoops I think I was misled again by a website! It definitely wasn't a .38! Which I found out the Lighting revolver was...

Wow I've got some research to do! BBL And sorry Pablo I should prolly start a new thread when I get this all figured out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The early Colt DAs were the 1877 and 1878 (plus variants like the 1902).

The 1877 was nicknamed "Lightning" in .38 Colt and the .41 was called the "Thunderer".

The 1878 had a larger frame, and was made in several calibers like the SAA, including .44-40.

The 1878 was roughly SAA size (and I think Colt used the same cylinders at some point, and maybe barrels). People called them the "Double Action Army", or sometimes the "Frontier", which is confusing with the .44-40 SAAs being marked "Frontier Six-Shooter".

The 1877 was a little smaller, and sized to match it's cartridges.

They didn't sell an incredible number of either, but sold maybe three times as many more 1877s than 1878s. Both were gone by 1910, I think. I always heard the inner workings broke often, but I don't know if they meant the 1877, the 1878, or both...or if it was true at all.

I always heard they had terribly heavy DA trigger pulls, but don't know. I know my Colt New Service, which is a different animal but made not much later (1917), has a really heavy DA pull and I'm told it's because Colt wanted to ensure 100% reliable ignition by having a strong hammer fall. I wouldn't think they would operate under a different theory when the 1877/1878s were made.

The 1877/78s were made in a variety of barrel lengths, but when I see 1877s for sale they often have short ones. I don't know if that is how sales went or if it's just what survived or what.

G-MAN, LOL! I'm sorry bro it's a Colt .44-40 Lighting! For some reason I remember it was double-action maybe converted to DA. So what do you know about the Lighting? And he carries a .44-40 Lever-Action and it's a Winchester but I cain't for the life of me remember the year...

I'll go see what I can find...you lemme know if you see any Lightings made in Italy! Thanks... cool

Whoops I think I was misled again by a website! It definitely wasn't a .38! Which I found out the Lighting revolver was...

Wow I've got some research to do! BBL And sorry Pablo I should prolly start a new thread when I get this all figured out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally Posted By: Pablo
I started at 20 yards, then backed down to 10. I found the 9mm semi to be a vicinity weapon........I kid, I kid!! But seriously a number of shots did not connect with paper with the Sig. I don't think any of Blackhawk shot missed completely.

C'mon now. The P225 is a sweet shooter. This was the first 8 round I fired through mine:

I exaggerate a bit. The time I missed the target was at 20 yards. I think with my new sight markings and frankly - unlearning the way I've had to learn to see through progressive lenses - will be much better next go around. Last time I shot any gun - I did NOT have glasses, I can tell you that much. I see fine beyond 36". Close up and out to the end of the Sig are fuzzy with no correction.

Please google: How to Aim a gun With Eyeglasses

Maybe you can help me a bit!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The early Colt DAs were the 1877 and 1878 (plus variants like the 1902).

The 1877 was nicknamed "Lightning" in .38 Colt and the .41 was called the "Thunderer".

The 1878 had a larger frame, and was made in several calibers like the SAA, including .44-40.

The 1878 was roughly SAA size (and I think Colt used the same cylinders at some point, and maybe barrels). People called them the "Double Action Army", or sometimes the "Frontier", which is confusing with the .44-40 SAAs being marked "Frontier Six-Shooter".

The 1877 was a little smaller, and sized to match it's cartridges.

They didn't sell an incredible number of either, but sold maybe three times as many more 1877s than 1878s. Both were gone by 1910, I think. I always heard the inner workings broke often, but I don't know if they meant the 1877, the 1878, or both...or if it was true at all.

I always heard they had terribly heavy DA trigger pulls, but don't know. I know my Colt New Service, which is a different animal but made not much later (1917), has a really heavy DA pull and I'm told it's because Colt wanted to ensure 100% reliable ignition by having a strong hammer fall. I wouldn't think they would operate under a different theory when the 1877/1878s were made.

The 1877/78s were made in a variety of barrel lengths, but when I see 1877s for sale they often have short ones. I don't know if that is how sales went or if it's just what survived or what.

Thanks Barry and G. When I find out more I will make a new thread. I don't wanna steal Pabs thread. And Pabs...the pics? cool

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...