Post-2010 45LC Blackhawks and +P Loads

What in the blue blazes, Ruger? Here I was thinking "Blackhawk. Strong frame. Legendary. Certainly can handle modern +P loads." And a bit of superficial research seemed to confirm that. Good. But, then, a friend, obviously more knowledgeable than I, said "Not so fast." We both set to finding out, and he found this...

Likewise, around 2010, Ruger started making small frame flat top configuration Blackhawks chambered in 45 colt. Folks that had heard the large framed Vaqueros or Blackhawks were suitable for use with +P ammo, buy these new small framed revolvers named Blackhawks, thinking they have the old standby large frame revolver capable of firing the +P ammo they want to fire. To make matters worse, Ruger still makes one or two iterations of the large frame 45 colt under the same name of "Blackhawk", greatly confusing the shooting public.

Click to expand...

Full article: Ruger Revolvers and 45 Colt +P Ammunition

Measured my 45 Colt cylinder. Sure enough: 1.674" So here I am, having paid a premium price for what I thought to be a premium Blackhawk single-action revolver and, come to find out, it's not what I thought it was

Why? Why in the world, Ruger, would you even consider doing something like that?!?!

Bad, Ruger. Very, very bad. And more than a touch irresponsible, IMO.

I'm more than a little disappointed

ETA: Based on follow-up comments: Changed the Subject to be less inflammatory and to reflect the education I received in the thread. Bottom line:

• Yes, it's confusing, but, better research would've saved me the surprise
• Ruger wasn't/isn't "pulling anything." The change was made based on customer demand, and
• While post-2010 Blackhawk Flattops in 45 Colt can't handle so-called "Blackhawk load" pressures, the belief is they can probably handle (most?) common factory +P loads. (That is not a recommendation.)

Read the entire thread for details.

Give me a break! Yeah, it's all Ruger's fault. Why not ask them if they recommend "Ruger Only Loads" in any of their revolvers. Stop whining and sell it :roll:

This post takes the cake for lameness...

A Bingo for Cholo !!!
Thanks for saving me the trouble, Ol' pard.

And so it goes....

You blame Ruger because you didn't properly educate yourself prior to purchase? You've been a member here for 7½yrs. If you had asked here first, you would've saved yourself some trouble.....and money. Irresponsible on Ruger's part??? Gimme a break.

Firstly, Ruger has NEVER condoned the use of anything but standard pressure SAAMI spec factory loads in their guns. The world of any .45Colt load over 14,000psi is not even on their radar. So from their perspective, the mid-frame New Vaquero and flat-top Blackhawk, large frame Blackhawk & Vaquero and Redhawk are all the same with regards to diet and strength. If you use anything over 14,000psi, you do so at your own risk.

Secondly, Ruger introduced the mid-frame flat-top Blackhawk .44Spl and .45Colt/ACP because that's what customers asked for.

Thirdly, it's your own fault you bought the wrong gun. Own up to it.

CraigC said:

You blame Ruger because you didn't properly educate yourself prior to purchase? You've been a member here for 7½yrs. If you had asked here first, you would've saved yourself some trouble.....and money. Irresponsible on Ruger's part??? Gimme a break.

Firstly, Ruger has NEVER condoned the use of anything but standard pressure SAAMI spec factory loads in their guns. The world of any .45Colt load over 14,000psi is not even on their radar. So from their perspective, the mid-frame New Vaquero and flat-top Blackhawk, large frame Blackhawk & Vaquero and Redhawk are all the same with regards to diet and strength. If you use anything over 14,000psi, you do so at your own risk.

Secondly, Ruger introduced the mid-frame flat-top Blackhawk .44Spl and .45Colt/ACP because that's what customers asked for.

Thirdly, it's your own fault you bought the wrong gun. Own up to it.

Click to expand...

Well said.^^^ I would only add that if you (brotherin arms) want to buy a Blackhawk with a larger frame, I am willing to take the one you currently own off your hands......contingent on the price and condition, of course. 8)

CraigC said:

Secondly, Ruger introduced the mid-frame flat-top Blackhawk .44Spl and .45Colt/ACP because that's what customers asked for.

Click to expand...

Thank you. I ain't always the sharpest tack in the box, but I bought my .357/.38/9mm flattop convertible specifically because it IS a flattop, and is a little smaller than a standard Blackhawk. I did my research before buying.

CraigC said:

You blame Ruger because you didn't properly educate yourself prior to purchase?

Click to expand...

No, I blame Ruger for having made an essentially "invisible" change.

CraigC said:

Thirdly, it's your own fault you bought the wrong gun. Own up to it.

Click to expand...

You are correct: It is my fault. I did research. I specifically searched on "Ruger," "Blackhawk," "Flattop," "45 Colt" and "+P." What the search turned up appeared to indicate Ruger Blackhawk flattops in 45LC could safely handle +P loads. Obviously, even with that, my research was insufficient.

I actually had planned to ask, here. But, with that research, I had thought I'd had my answer. That was a mistake you can be assured I will not repeat.

I stand suitably chastised. Still: I remain disappointed Ruger made such a change essentially "invisibly."

Sorry to disappoint, 5of7, but, I've no plans to sell the revolver. From a purely practical perspective this makes little difference to me, being as I'll be using the revolver for neither hunting nor self defence. So blazingly hot loads are not necessary.

A Camero is still a Camero, do they still look alike? Kinda sorta.
I won't bust your stones, but Ruger damn shore ain't the first to do this.
Look at the model 70 WW, same name different bird.
If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck, it must be a duck. What breed though.
Jeff

You don't need "hot loads" for self defense in .45 Colt or .44 Special.
A 200 to 250 gr. bullet at 800-900 FPS took care of business before Magnum loads were around!

Now the Bisley Blackhawk was built on the larger frame with the 1.730 cylinder.

It is worthy of note here that not all New Model "flat-tops" are mid-frame. The .41 and .44Mag flat-tops are large framed guns.

BrotherInArms said:

CraigC said:

You blame Ruger because you didn't properly educate yourself prior to purchase?

Click to expand...

No, I blame Ruger for having made an essentially "invisible" change.

Click to expand...

It wasn't a "change", it was an addition. Ruger's large frame .45Colt Blackhawk has been in constant production since 1971 and is still catalogued. The distributor special mid-frame flat-top is a recent addition to the line-up. Perhaps it was only invisible to you? Sounds like you wanted this one:

http://www.galleryofguns.com/genie/Default.aspx?item=0445

Or this one:

http://www.galleryofguns.com/genie/Default.aspx?item=0465

BrotherInArms said:

I did research. I specifically searched on "Ruger," "Blackhawk," "Flattop," "45 Colt" and "+P." What the search turned up appeared to indicate Ruger Blackhawk flattops in 45LC could safely handle +P loads. Obviously, even with that, my research was insufficient.

Click to expand...

Anything suggesting that the .45 flat-top could handle 32,000psi "Ruger only" loads is wrong.

BrotherInArms said:

From a purely practical perspective this makes little difference to me, being as I'll be using the revolver for neither hunting nor self defence. So blazingly hot loads are not necessary.

Click to expand...

Then what is the problem? If you are not planning on using "Ruger only" loads, you have the better tool for the job and a nicer sixgun to boot. :roll:

jsh said:

A Camero is still a Camero, do they still look alike? Kinda sorta.
I won't bust your stones, but Ruger damn shore ain't the first to do this.

Click to expand...

No, they're not. Still...

Mus408 said:

You don't need "hot loads" for self defense in .45 Colt or .44 Special.
A 200 to 250 gr. bullet at 800-900 FPS took care of business before Magnum loads were around!

Click to expand...

No, of course not.

I'm looking to snag a lever-action carbine in 45 Colt as a companion for the revolver. I was researching the performance of the 45 Colt in such rifles and ran across: Marlin 1894

When loaded to Ruger Blackhawk pressures (25,000-30,000 psi), the .45 Colt Marlin mirrors the performance of the .44 Magnum.
...
However, the bottom line is that the .45 Colt Marlin 1894 is a more versatile gun than is the .44 Magnum carbine; the .45 seems to smoothly feed almost any bullet you can stuff into a .45 Colt case, and the 1 in 16" twist stabilized every bullet weight tested, from 240 grains to 368 grains. Bullets lighter than about 310 grains all shot to pretty much the same point of impact at 50 yards, and the 330-350 grain bullets dropped down about 3" below that, and the 368s were about halfway in between. The .45 Colt Marlin is a remarkably egalitarian little carbine. Yup, the Marlin 1894 is a keeper, which might explain why Marlin reintroduced this Model in 1969 and has made so many since then.

Click to expand...

Emphasis mine.

"So," I'm thinking, "that means I can work up one load for both." Then it turns out I can't. Well, I can, but, I'll have to load it down to be safe in the revolver.

Not really an end-of-the-world deal, but, as I wrote: Disappointing.

CraigC said:

Then what is the problem? If you are not planning on using "Ruger only" loads, you have the better tool for the job and a nicer sixgun to boot. :roll:

Click to expand...

Asked and answered.

Thanks for the add'l info, CraigC.

BrotherInArms said:

However, the bottom line is that the .45 Colt Marlin 1894 is a more versatile gun than is the .44 Magnum carbine; the .45 seems to smoothly feed almost any bullet you can stuff into a .45 Colt case, and the 1 in 16" twist stabilized every bullet weight tested, from 240 grains to 368 grains. Bullets lighter than about 310 grains all shot to pretty much the same point of impact at 50 yards, and the 330-350 grain bullets dropped down about 3" below that, and the 368s were about halfway in between. The .45 Colt Marlin is a remarkably egalitarian little carbine. Yup, the Marlin 1894 is a keeper, which might explain why Marlin reintroduced this Model in 1969 and has made so many since then.

Click to expand...

Actually, Marlin never made a .45Colt 1894 with the 1-16" twist. They were always 1-38". For a few years, they had an error on their website listing it as 1-16". Folks believed it and tried heavy bullets in their rifles with success.

CraigC said:

Actually, Marlin never made a .45Colt 1894 with the 1-16" twist. They were always 1-38". For a few years, they had an error on their website listing it as 1-16". Folks believed it and tried heavy bullets in their rifles with success.

Click to expand...

Now I'm reminded, not only twice in one day, but, twice in one thread, that you cannot always believe everything you read on the 'net, even if the sources appear to be knowledgeable.

Thanks, CraigC

Forgive me, but...

Since when won't the Flat Top Blackhawk in .45 Colt not handle +P?

While it will NOT handle the Ruger Only 32,000CUP loads, it is my understanding that it will readily handle the 'Tier Two' 20,000CUP load data available...

Bottom page 14:

https://www.riflemagazine.com/magazine/PDF/HL%20246partial.pdf

Is this not true?

"Invisible change"? I don't think so. I well remember when Ruger brought out the medium frames, and EVERY source of information about them, Ruger included, and before and since their introduction, has made it absolutely clear that they are NOT intended for "Ruger-only" loads.

"SAAMI has never recognized the use of 45 Colt+P ammo"

From the Buffalo Bore article.

Salmoneye said:

Bottom page 14:

https://www.riflemagazine.com/magazine/PDF/HL%20246partial.pdf

Is this not true?

Click to expand...

Even if true: For a mere 7% muzzle velocity increase you're raising pressure by nearly half again (using the TiteGroup powder numbers for comparison, picked at random). Or am I off in the weeds? And that achieved with a 2% lighter bullet. So, while muzzle energy would be increased a bit, and it might shoot a bit flatter: Is it worth it?

But, I'm a rank newbie at the whole reloading thing, so maybe I'm speaking out of turn.

pisgah said:

"Invisible change"? I don't think so. I well remember when Ruger brought out the medium frames, and EVERY source of information about them, Ruger included, and before and since their introduction, has made it absolutely clear that they are NOT intended for "Ruger-only" loads.

Click to expand...

It's still called a "Blackhawk," and the pre-2010 versions could handle the pressures.

I've been where you guys are, before. Somebody not steeped in the culture of a thing makes what those who are feel to be unwarranted assumptions, that somebody gets upset when things are not what he/she assumed them to be or don't turn out the way they expected, they land somewhere to pitch a Rosie O'Donnell (hahaha! Good one!) about it and get roundly thumped by the local cognoscenti.

Long ago I learned that just because I know all about a thing doesn't mean everybody else necessarily does. Particularly when it's in my area of most expertise. I try to keep that in mind when cluebies make mistakes. Even when the mistakes/assumptions/what-have-you seem really, really st00pid to me.

Look: I'm over it. I was surprised and briefly disappointed. So I vented. Perhaps if I'd known what I know now I might have gone in a different direction. Perhaps I'd have gone 44 SPL/44 Mag. Or .357 Mag/9mm, like I'd originally thought to. Perhaps not. And, after all: This is a damn nice, well-balanced revolver!

"Plain old 45 Colt" served the guys who won the west just fine. I'm sure it'll serve me fine, too. Especially since I'm not out to win anything with it--just have fun.

I apologize for ruffling feathers.

While I think many of the first responses to the OP were a bit strongly worded,, I can agree on their content. Ruger responded to customers ideas (AND complaints) about the heavy weight of their Blackhawk revolvers. And the often complaint of wishing for Flattop mid-framed guns. So they did build an additional model. And yes,,, their calling it a Blackhawk may seem a bit confusing UNLESS you understand that they only recommend factory SAAMI spec ammo in their firearms.
Want more confusion? Try Vaquero, New Vaquero & then Vaquero again. BUT,,, again,, all of them will accept & be safe with SAAMI spec ammo.

To the OP,,, you tried to educate yourself,,, yet you failed to ask the serious Ruger folks by inquiring here. If your research had been done on this site,,, you may have uncovered the often discussed frame size discussions. MANY people want a lighter to carry,, big bore handgun. MANY want the power of a 45 Colt in a package the size & weight of the Single-Six. Look into custom guns. Often,,, some folks will have a Single-Six converted to a larger centerfire handgun. Yes,, they often have to accept a 5 shot cylinder,, but they do so willingly. Over the years,,, many have lamented the loss of the mid-framed SA revolver. One of the most common caliber conversions was to take an OM Flattop, & have it converted to 44 Spl.
Customer demands,,, caused Ruger to build what was being asked for. You have chosen to call it an "invisible" change,,, when actually there was nothing done in any form to hide the changes.

So,,, you got a mid-framed gun. Fine. It'll handle standard SAAMI spec ammo. And as noted above,,, by Salmoneye,,, even a level of loads above that.
"Ruger & T/C loads Only" were developed by handloaders & published in reloading manuals. NOT the Ruger factory.

All too often,,, words are mis-used by people. But in Rugers case,,, they didn't,,, technically & legally. Once again,,, they adhere to SAAMI specs,, not reloading manuals.

As our esteemed Flatgate is so often fond of saying; "Read the ****ing manual." And if you didn't have a manual to read,, a polite call to Ruger would have gotten you a free manual.

EDIT; I was trying to post a reply & see you have added more.
Ok,, you vented,, got chastised a bit,, and apparently understand it was more your fault. And you acknowledge you are newer to reloading & such.
No problems,,, we've all made mistakes.

BrotherInArms.... A nice rifle to go along with your Blackhawk could be a Uberti/Winchester 1873 or 1892
1873 has the smooth toggle action though has it's limits with standard Colt loads so you can safely use same ammo for both.

Here's my 1873 along with .45 Colt New Vaquero!

Nice, Mus408!