medium frame 41 Mg.?

Help Support Ruger Forum:

Terry T

Buckeye
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
1,917
Location
NorCa.
"Smith1961",
$995, if I remember. Nice clean piece, no box. I think it's more of an $800 gun and a bit lower on my 'want' list than some other (Ruger) thingys. :shock:
(Kind of getting to that stage of life too, where whopping hard hitting magnums aren't as much fun. 8) )

It IS in Ca. and is one of those that can no longer be brought in from out of state. I've often seen a $100 premium for a desirable, in-state piece. :oops:
Terry T
 

gmartinnc

Blackhawk
Joined
Feb 1, 2013
Messages
508
I don't claim to know much about Rugers, but what I do know, was learned right here on this forum. I thought the "rule" everyone had decided on was, a 3 digit prefix meant a medium frame and a 2 digit meant a large frame. My gun was for sure a 3 digit prefix 44 magnum, and the photos prove it. BTW, it was a steel XR3
gripframe and it was built in 06. I thought perhaps I had something to ad to this thread, or I would not have posted. Guess I was wrong.
 

WMB30

Single-Sixer
Joined
Dec 16, 2004
Messages
441
Location
Reno,Nv
Get the ole mic out, hell a caliper or wood ruler will show one the difference not to mention the trained eye.

Bill
 

CraigC

Hawkeye
Joined
May 27, 2002
Messages
5,197
Location
West Tennessee
I don't know what has been said here about serial prefixes but regardless, all 50th anniversary .44 Blackhawks were built on the large frame. Absolutely, positively, without question.

From the Ruger site:

89-00501 and 870-00001...........2006
870-13259.............................2007
870-15247.............................2008
 

smith1961

Blackhawk
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
596
Location
Massachusetts
CraigC said:
I don't know what has been said here about serial prefixes but regardless, all 50th anniversary .44 Blackhawks were built on the large frame. Absolutely, positively, without question.

From the Ruger site:

89-00501 and 870-00001...........2006
870-13259.............................2007
870-15247.............................2008

I'll take that to the bank! :lol:
 

gmartinnc

Blackhawk
Joined
Feb 1, 2013
Messages
508
I bought the gun thinking something capable of that kind of pressure built on the medium frame was odd, but still believed the 3 digit thing. Never did compare any measurements against a SBH or my 44 flattop, just believed what I had read and never questioned it, until now. I shot the gun some and it really didn't do much for me, I'm not that crazy about a 6 1/2" barrel anyway. Another opportunity presented it's self and I needed to free up some cash, so I moved it on. I guess the real "rule" with Ruger is, there is no rule.
Sorry for the confusion. :?
 

gak

Buckeye
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
1,552
Location
Aridzona
gmartinnc said:
I bought the gun thinking something capable of that kind of pressure built on the medium frame was odd, but still believed the 3 digit thing. Never did compare any measurements against a SBH or my 44 flattop, just believed what I had read and never questioned it, until now. I shot the gun some and it really didn't do much for me, I'm not that crazy about a 6 1/2" barrel anyway. Another opportunity presented it's self and I needed to free up some cash, so I moved it on. I guess the real "rule" with Ruger is, there is no rule.
Sorry for the confusion. :?

Hey, it brought about worthwhile discussion regarding how much to (not) trust the supposed "rules"! While I do believe that all midframes can be "trusted"to follow the three digit rule--though it's obviously best to re-verify using other factors*--and it is interesting that this did not follow the two-digit "rule"...which I guess makes these not really rules at all, as suggested!

*The Vaquero line can certainly be "trusted" to say just "Vaquero" if it's the large frame, and conversely "New Vaquero" if it's the midframe...EXCEPT .44 Specials which just say "Vaquero." Like all .44 Mags being only large frames, all factory .44 Specials are only midframes, regardless of what it says on the frame...
...To date!
 

gmartinnc

Blackhawk
Joined
Feb 1, 2013
Messages
508
nmsu said:
Here you go. 3 screw flat tops medium frame. Top is a .41 mag, bottom .357

ruger41_zps34bf7582.jpg


41mag_zpsaec753ef.jpg

If I had these, they would be staying. Especially that 41. NICE!
 

5of7

Hunter
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Messages
2,296
Location
SW. LOWER MICHIGAN
Well it looks like we are pretty much agreed that the medium frame would be fine for the 41Mg., now for why I would like one.

I am drawn to guns in general because of my affinity for handloading and load development, and like some others here (and there), I am plagued by the old efficiency hangup.

The large frame Blackhawk, the Redhawk and the Smith N frame are all just a lot of gun for the .41 Mg. and it eats at me to carry and shoot a gun that is out of proportion to it's cartridge.

I agree that in terms of utility, the 44 Sp. is a better choice than the .41MG., and that the .44 Sp. medium frame Blackhawk is a perfect example of a gun sized to it's ammunition, but I tire of shooting the same gun all the time. It is nice to have choices and the Medium frame Blackhawk in .41 Mg. or 10MM Auto is a choice that I wish I had and could buy, rather than ship a .357 off to have it converted.

As to it's sales appeal, well I will leave that to Ruger's sales dept., but that doesn't stop me from wishing. 8)
 

gak

Buckeye
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
1,552
Location
Aridzona
5of7 said:
Well it looks like we are pretty much agreed that the medium frame would be fine for the 41Mg., now for why I would like one.

I am drawn to guns in general because of my affinity for handloading and load development, and like some others here (and there), I am plagued by the old efficiency hangup.

The large frame Blackhawk, the Redhawk and the Smith N frame are all just a lot of gun for the .41 Mg. and it eats at me to carry and shoot a gun that is out of proportion to it's cartridge.

I agree that in terms of utility, the 44 Sp. is a better choice than the .41MG., and that the .44 Sp. medium frame Blackhawk is a perfect example of a gun sized to it's ammunition, but I tire of shooting the same gun all the time. It is nice to have choices and the Medium frame Blackhawk in .41 Mg. or 10MM Auto is a choice that I wish I had and could buy, rather than ship a .357 off to have it converted.

As to it's sales appeal, well I will leave that to Ruger's sales dept., but that doesn't stop me from wishing. 8)

+1 Very well put. I've got both .44 platforms and they're great, with a particular fondness for the Special...like many here, I'd lobbied for it for years. They're truly "special, aptly named chambering, and likely what I'd end up with if I had to choose between 'em all. But now that Ruger's gone and done the right thing with its .44s, and that I've got I it (and plan another at least), I'd like my aforementioned .38-40/.40/10 or (preferably "and") .41M set up off a .357 NV I've got "just because" - what you ^ ^ said. I would have had my local smith do one of the above conversions long ago, as he's a very capable top tunesmith and will do basic conversions but doesn't do refinishing, embellishments, the custom barrel if needed, etc, and I want this one done up in full, preferably at once. Re "cch", reblue, restamp, the whole "Bowen, Harton, etc" deal. This stuff isn't given away as y'all know and the $$ haven't been there at the right time for that. But the day's a 'comin"!
 

Cholo

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Dec 30, 2008
Messages
8,207
Location
Georgia
gak said:
Hey, it brought about worthwhile discussion regarding how much to (not) trust the supposed "rules"!

gak, you've sure got that right and it's a worthy comment for gmartinnc! I don't have a NM Blackhawk .44, but after all this time even I thought the original old model Blackhawk .44's (and I guess the anniversary .44 BH's) had a slightly smaller frame than the SBH's. That flattop sure plays tricks on these old eyes! :lol:

I don't want to put a Black Irish Curse on this thread, but I'm impressed with how civil it's been. Interesting discussion! Carry on... :wink:
 

Hondo44

Hawkeye
Joined
Apr 3, 2009
Messages
8,040
Location
People's Republik of California
Just to recap lest some 'casual observers' get the wrong impression, and past wrong impressions having shown up in this thread, we have:

The rule of 2 digit prefix = large frame and 3 digit prefix = mid frame applies only o the Vaq and New Vaq.

All 44 mag Flat Top Blackhawks, new or old model, 2 or 3 digit prefix, are large frame.

All 41 Mag OM Blackhawks (no Flat Tops ever factory produced) and all 41 Mags, NM FT or NM Blackhawk are large frame.

The XR3 alloy alum grip frame (the original OM grip frame size) was the single six, medium frame and large frame, standard grip frame on all OMs up thru c.1962, after which it became obsolete. Not withstanding a few later issue guns that showed up with a few left over XR3 alloy grip frames on them.

All NM flat top Anniversary Model Blackhawks, standard model FT Blackhawks and New Vaqs have the new XR3 grip frame, reincarnated in alloy steel, no exceptions. They originally all had the internal lock but recently have also been produced and supplied w/o the lock. Look for an "L" at the end of current model #'s for guns that still have the lock.

Lastly, and most importantly, a NM mid frame 41 Mag should be produced!! But won't be for all the reasons already mentioned UNLESS, a distributor steps up to bat for a special run. After-all, that's the only reason why we ever got the 44 Spl mid frame in the 1st place, and even better, why they are standard production today.
 

gmartinnc

Blackhawk
Joined
Feb 1, 2013
Messages
508
"All 41 Mag OM Blackhawks (no Flat Tops ever factory produced) and all 41 Mags, NM FT or NM Blackhawk are large frame."

What is the 41 mag shown in this thread by nmsu?
He says:
"Here you go. 3 screw flat tops medium frame. Top is a .41 mag, bottom .357"
 
Joined
Sep 16, 2007
Messages
4,040
Location
Dallas, OR US
These three guns all started as old model 357 blackhawks or 357 flat top blackhawks and all have been converted to either 41 Special or 41 Mag. The only problem with converting an old model 357 into a 41 is that you can not use some of the long heavy cast bullets in the rechambered 357 cylinder. To get a REALLY handful of a 41 mag in a mid sized guns you need to have a custom cylinder made.


 

Hondo44

Hawkeye
Joined
Apr 3, 2009
Messages
8,040
Location
People's Republik of California
It's a custom conversion, although an extremely nice one because it looks all factory, no bells and whistles. The only exception is the pinned in front sight blade which is very well done.

Custom makers that do these conversions (maybe even Ruger employees) have new roll stamp dies for the frame markings and some etch them in. In the one pictured you just barely see what might be a 'double strike' which appears like a shadow above the top line. IIRC, the authentic frame marking reads: RUGER BLACKHAWK, top line and 41 Magnum Cal., bottom line. But please don't quote me on that, I don't have mine in front of me.

Also, the flat tops ceased in 1962 and the 41 Mag wasn't introduced until 1965. And the #2 ejector rod housing with the 'short' dog leg began a transition to be replaced by the next one with straight slot which was completed by 1962.

I did my 44 spl FT conversion of a 357 using an OM SBH 44 barrel the same way except for the pinned front blade and an XR3-RED old army polished stainless grip frame was used:

orig.jpg
 

nmsu

Bearcat
Joined
May 17, 2008
Messages
37
"Here you go. 3 screw flat tops medium frame. Top is a .41 mag, bottom .357"

Hamilton Bowen did the conversion to .41 mag on an old 3 screw flat top .357 I had. I've been wanting to convert my other one to .44 special but just haven't got to sending it in. And I have never shot full power .41 mag loads through it. Really enjoy shooting it with loads closer to .41 special.
 

dixie884

Blackhawk
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
661
Location
Avery, Tx.
Great customs, I'm really impressed. I will buy a mid frame in .327mag, .41mag, 41spl, 10mm, .401powermag, or .40S&W if Lipsey's will just make a run. SIGN ME UP!
 

DGW1949

Hunter
Joined
Apr 10, 2005
Messages
3,916
Location
Texas
As I recall the "story";
Someone found some empty brass marked "44 magnum" in a dumpster behind the Remington ammo plant, way before the (then new) round had been released to the public. Somehow, the cases found their way to Bill Ruger, who began work on a prototype BH to use in testing the new round....but...the gun(s) he was testing failed to handle the high pressure....so, a large-frame BH was developed instead.

Fast-forwarding to today;
These days, there's a large segment of reloaders who can't seem to help themselves from pushing things to the outer limits....and given that 41 Mag pressures are on par with 44 Mag pressures, and given that the cylinder size of a mid-frame BH was never meant to house a large bore magnum cartridge, and the fact that Ruger already knows that the bulk of 41 Mag buyers/shooters are handloaders.....plus the number of lawyers who openly advertize their successful law suits these days, plus a few other negative factors that could be mentioned.......I highly doubt that Ruger is exactly "chomping at the bit" to get a down-sized SA 41 Mag revolver to market.

But I could be wrong.

DGW
 

Latest posts

Top