Blackhawk Frame

[Gelder]

This may have been asked before. If so please point me to the correct thread.

Has Ruger changed the size of the .357 Blackhawk frame, and are the grip frames and ejector rod housings aluminum alloy or steel.

Thanks

 

[seeemmiss]

Yes. There was the old or original model 357 that was a medium frame gun. Then there was the "new model" 357 built on the large frame or the 44 mag size frame. Both of those had aluminum frames. The old model has either the flattop top strap or the "three screw" style top strap. They also had the XR3 or XR3-RED frame. Now they changed the 357 back to the flattop style and size frame with a new model lock work and a XR3 size frame. I have no idea what comes after that as I am so confused by this time. Check out Bill Hamm's articles on gunblast.com for additional info on grip frames and frames sizes. Lots of great info in those articles.

 

[Gelder]

seeemmiss

Thanks for the response, I find myself needing another .357. And tend to push that round a bit. Probably the most durable production gun in that caliber is the Blackhawk, since Ruger discontinued the Redhawk in .357.

I also wondered if the new guns have steel grip frames and ejector rod housings, I found an article that indicated that they were. The stainless guns are all steel and if you look at the specks on the Ruger page it indicates that the stainless BH and the blue BH are the same weight for a given barrel length.

 

[w5lx]

http://www.gunblast.com/Hamm_Ruger-SA-GripFrames.htm

 

[contender]

Welcome to the Forum.
Basically,, if you are going to "hot rod" a 357 then get a Blackhawk. Not one of the NM Flattop types.

 

[Gelder]

contender

Thanks for the welcome, I have had a Ruger of one sort or the other since 1963. I got my first Blackhawk back in 1965. Shot a lot of 15.5 gr. 2400 / 158gr. SWC loads through that gun and it was just like a Timex.."Kept on Tickin".

I went off to Alaska and felt the need for a larger diameter. Now I am retired and living in the mountains of Oregon, I have time to fiddle around with the .357 again. There is a certain elegance in that caliber, that has always appealed to me. For big game work my .44s & .45s are probably a better choice, but a Blackhawk .357 loaded with the old Keith 358429 bullet at 1500 fps+ is really more than adequate.

I killed a number of moose in Alaska with the .357 so I do have a bit of data to base my assumptions on.

 

[Old_School]

This may have been asked before. If so please point me to the correct thread.

Has Ruger changed the size of the .357 Blackhawk frame, and are the grip frames and ejector rod housings aluminum alloy or steel.

Thanks

When the New Model Blackhawk came out in 1973, Ruger went to the larger Blackhawk frame (aluminum grip strap & ejector rod housing). When they introduced the 50th Anniversary edition .357 a couple of years ago, they produced it with the older, midsize frame (along with returning to the older, XR3 grip strap and smoothing the action). The Anniversary edition has a steel grip strap and steel ejector rod housing (I think). The New Vaquero is also built on the midsize frame & has a steel XR3 grip strap (not sure about the ERH).

I believe the regular production .357 is still built on the larger BH frame, with aluminum GS & ERH.

I shoot an older, 3-screw .357 BH on the mid-size frame. Tough as nails. IMO, the larger frame is not needed for the .357. In fact, my Lipsey .44 Spl is built on the midsize frame, but you can feel the increased weight because of the steel GS & ERH.

 

[Silent Sam]

Is there any difference in cylinders between the large frame and mid frame 357s?

 

[Rclark]

Yes. The mid size cylinder is smaller. No matter power wise. The medium frame will still handle any .357Mag load you can throw at it. Ie.... It still is a .357 magnum!

See the following link. There is a cylinder size table in the writeup that applies (Vaquero (large frame) New Vaquero (medium frame) ) : http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-NewVaquero.htm