A
Anonymous
Deleted.
- Status
flatheadsal
Single-Sixer
Cute as a pup Ron, congrats!!
maxpress
Buckeye
Nice. been thinking of one of those for awhile.
Mind if i ask the price?
Mind if i ask the price?
Glupy
Blackhawk
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2010
- Messages
- 563
- City & State/Province
- Kuna, Idaho - a sparkling jewel in a park-like set
Is that the Lipsey's model?
http://www.lipseys.com/itemdetail.aspx?itemno=RUKNV44S&mfg=Ruger&family=Vaquero+Series&model=Vaquero
It sure looks nice.
Dave
http://www.lipseys.com/itemdetail.aspx?itemno=RUKNV44S&mfg=Ruger&family=Vaquero+Series&model=Vaquero
It sure looks nice.
Dave
JimMarch1
Blackhawk
Sigh.
Sorry, but please don't use the phrase "New Model Vaquero".
It's a "New Vaquero".
The previous one (large frame) is either just plain "Vaquero" or "Old Vaquero" is acceptable.
Every single Ruger SA made since 1973 is based on the "New Model" action. We have to keep the phrase "New Model" linked to the action type - it's a safety thing. The Old Model action lacked a transfer-bar safety and used different internal parts. Some are now converted (retrofitted by Ruger) to have a safety, but they still use the Old Model guts.
If everybody dilutes the hell out of that term, then we can't distinguish a critical safety-related feature.
Making things worse: Ruger can't keep their terminology straight either. Your gun is part of the "New Vaquero" series built on a mid-size frame, but it's marked "Ruger Vaquero", dropping the "New". GRRRRR.
Sorry, but please don't use the phrase "New Model Vaquero".
It's a "New Vaquero".
The previous one (large frame) is either just plain "Vaquero" or "Old Vaquero" is acceptable.
Every single Ruger SA made since 1973 is based on the "New Model" action. We have to keep the phrase "New Model" linked to the action type - it's a safety thing. The Old Model action lacked a transfer-bar safety and used different internal parts. Some are now converted (retrofitted by Ruger) to have a safety, but they still use the Old Model guts.
If everybody dilutes the hell out of that term, then we can't distinguish a critical safety-related feature.
Making things worse: Ruger can't keep their terminology straight either. Your gun is part of the "New Vaquero" series built on a mid-size frame, but it's marked "Ruger Vaquero", dropping the "New". GRRRRR.
The nice thing about a Montado hammer, if you can find one, is that it's highly polished--per the New Vaquero way--versus SBH's duller stainless, and so it's a perfect match for the 44 Sheriff. BUT, the SBH is the way I was headed had I not lucked out with my smith happening to have a Montado hammer in his box of goodies.
captainkirk
Blackhawk
gak said:
Maybe I missed it somewhere, but have you posted a photo of your gun post mods? I'd like to see it.
Kirk
captainkirk said:
Kirk, I haven't posted a pic before so a newbie at that (I realize there are probably plenty of tutorials about lhere on RF but I haven't dived in yet). While I'm researching that, drop me a pm with your email and I'll send one thataway. Just a blackberry camera, but it's not bad. I used to be big into SLRs back in the day but realize the world's moved on since (?) and I've got some catching up to do
CraigC
Hawkeye
Excellent post by Jim March, I don't know why this stuff is so hard.
Good lookin' sixguns gak! The lanyard ring, IMHO, is a huge touch of class for little cash. Mucho likey!!!
Good lookin' sixguns gak! The lanyard ring, IMHO, is a huge touch of class for little cash. Mucho likey!!!
CraigC said:
Thanks Craig. Btw, the lanyard install not for the faint of heart on these. Had my local Ruger-Coltsmith do--and to do it right inside, what with the internal frame and lock bits took some fine cutting,...then pinning the lanyard "rod" such that it spun freely. Love the results though.
OP
Anonymous
JimMarch and CraigC,
Sorry to have ruined your day with my "incorrect" use of terms. If this is such a big deal that you feel you must lecture someone, then you have more problems than whether a phrase doesn't meet your "requirements." And if my use of your terms "incorrectly" is deemed a "critical safety issue" then whoever deems it as such really should not be handling firearms of any type. But do not worry, I am deleting the photos and my comments, and will not post here again.
Regards,
Ron
Sorry to have ruined your day with my "incorrect" use of terms. If this is such a big deal that you feel you must lecture someone, then you have more problems than whether a phrase doesn't meet your "requirements." And if my use of your terms "incorrectly" is deemed a "critical safety issue" then whoever deems it as such really should not be handling firearms of any type. But do not worry, I am deleting the photos and my comments, and will not post here again.
Regards,
Ron
tek4260
Buckeye
Am I the only one who is tired of seeing fights and in this case, loss of a member due to the Vaquero/New Vaquero/New Model Vaquero debate. I can easily overlook incorrect terms if it means we have another member and are able to teach and learn from that person. It is getting pretty old along with the 45 Colt/Long Colt debate.
CraigC
Hawkeye
If somebody wants to get all bent outta shape and leave because their use of incorrect terminology was corrected, we can't do anything about that. Regardless of where you fall on the Old Model vs. New Model debate, a New Vaquero is a New Vaquero and that is it. To refer to one as a New Model Vaquero is patently incorrect and that is all that was pointed out. Nobody was snotty or belligerent about it. In fact, flatgate himself made a similar correction 10 months ago and nobody's panties got bunched up.
http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=728837
I'm sorry that Ron reacted the way he did and felt the need to leave as a result. That was obviously not mine or Jim's intent. However, Ruger has made it necessary to be VERY specific and to walk a fine line when differentiating these guns. Despite Ron's statements, it IS a critical safety issue when the strength difference between a Vaquero and a New Vaquero is 10,000psi.
http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=728837
I'm sorry that Ron reacted the way he did and felt the need to leave as a result. That was obviously not mine or Jim's intent. However, Ruger has made it necessary to be VERY specific and to walk a fine line when differentiating these guns. Despite Ron's statements, it IS a critical safety issue when the strength difference between a Vaquero and a New Vaquero is 10,000psi.
I'm tired of the constant nit picking when we all know what folks are talking about.
As was suggested by a nit picker, even using Ruger's terms doesn't work any more. Some folks are more prickly than others but no one likes to be talked down to.
Give it a rest!
Terry T
As was suggested by a nit picker, even using Ruger's terms doesn't work any more. Some folks are more prickly than others but no one likes to be talked down to.
Give it a rest!
Terry T
OP
Anonymous
Interesting, CraigC. JimMarch starting his comments with a "Sigh" seemed rather snotty to me, sir. And if you feel a need to make additional comments in the same ilk, then that speaks volumes to me as well, and feel free to do so, sir. Yours and JM comments seem rather snide and contrite to me. A PM to me with your comments would have been received in a much better fashion. But when attacked verbally, I will respond in like manner.
When someone starts talking about having an "AK-47", I do not jump on them and begin lecturing them about the fact that unless they have an original AK-47 from the early manufacturing of said rifles, then that's impossible, and they need to be corrected as if they were little children. No, I listen to what they have to say, as they are obviously proud of the fact they own one of Mr. Kalashnikov's designs. Then, as things progress, I will point out, in a civil and friendly manner, what the different variations are and how to identify them.
I've been safely handling firearms for over 50 years, spent 22 years in the military, over half that in Special Operation, and contimued to do much the same for another 15 years as a contractor, and am used to dealing with "experts" when it comes to firearms.
Now, please feel free to continue with whatever tack you so desire with regards to this.
Ron (who has owned and used many different Old and New Model Ruger revolvers over the years)
When someone starts talking about having an "AK-47", I do not jump on them and begin lecturing them about the fact that unless they have an original AK-47 from the early manufacturing of said rifles, then that's impossible, and they need to be corrected as if they were little children. No, I listen to what they have to say, as they are obviously proud of the fact they own one of Mr. Kalashnikov's designs. Then, as things progress, I will point out, in a civil and friendly manner, what the different variations are and how to identify them.
I've been safely handling firearms for over 50 years, spent 22 years in the military, over half that in Special Operation, and contimued to do much the same for another 15 years as a contractor, and am used to dealing with "experts" when it comes to firearms.
Now, please feel free to continue with whatever tack you so desire with regards to this.
Ron (who has owned and used many different Old and New Model Ruger revolvers over the years)
Regardless if we know what it being talked about, does it hurt to use proper terminology? Everyone gets all flustered if the media uses firearms terms incorrectly or if some politician uses a term incorrectly. Can't have it both ways folks. Seeing that the name is on the gun "Vaquero" - "New Vaquero" it doesn't get any easier. Sometimes it takes a bit of a *sigh* to get someone's attention and make them realize the error. If someone is that thin skinned that they cannot handle being corrected over such a simple issue :roll: or be able to have the correcting posts :roll: so be it. There are those that DO see a plus side to using correct terminology.
You'd think that someone with a military background would be used to and want to use proper terminology. Then again, such background would be moot in such a case yet it's mentioned.
You'd think that someone with a military background would be used to and want to use proper terminology. Then again, such background would be moot in such a case yet it's mentioned.
flatgate
Hawkeye
I'll have to say one thing. The rollmarks on the cylinder frames usually tell a lot about the gun. I've found that using the Factory's labels can certainly go a long ways toward easy to understand communication.
Ah, but if one says New Vaquero does one mean a brand spankin' New Ruger Vaquero or a New Ruger New Vaquero? One can easily make a distinction by using a term that Freedom Arms utilizes. Large Frame or Mid Frame?
I think we've hashed this topic to death and we need to find a better way to categorize Ruger's Fixed Sight Revolvers.
JMHO,
flatgate
Ah, but if one says New Vaquero does one mean a brand spankin' New Ruger Vaquero or a New Ruger New Vaquero? One can easily make a distinction by using a term that Freedom Arms utilizes. Large Frame or Mid Frame?
I think we've hashed this topic to death and we need to find a better way to categorize Ruger's Fixed Sight Revolvers.
JMHO,
flatgate
flatgate said:
Well said. I agree, but getting it to be a blanket use is the hard part. Those that "know" would again be the ones to understand and put it t use. Those that still use the incorrect terminology would likely fall into the same hole again.
I'm stating the obvious, and likely being redundant with others, that the use of a) the term "model," period is a distraction and it would simplify things if it is never used with regard to any "Vaquero." All Vaqueros of course are Ruger New Models so, just not needed and b) the use of the capial "N" in New, as in any capital, should just be reserved for specific gun names and not to describe their age relative to production date. Also a 30+ year Ruger owner/enjoyer, I have fallen into the terminology trap before, was corrected, and hope I call things properly now. If you just bought new a mid-frame fixed sight Ruger, you bought a new New Vaquero. If you bought a new (as in NIB etc) older, large frame then you got a new Vaquero, but I'd suggest instead a new "old" or "older" or "older model" Vaquero, no caps, or a "large" or "larger" Vaquero...the recently introduced .44s New Vaqueros labeled "just Vaquero" notwithstanding
All of the above said, for those new to this thread, if you were wondering, the OP's first--now deleted--introductory post was talking about having just gotten the new NV 44 (Sheriffs in particular), so most of the earlier posts relate to that. And a fine gun it is!
All of the above said, for those new to this thread, if you were wondering, the OP's first--now deleted--introductory post was talking about having just gotten the new NV 44 (Sheriffs in particular), so most of the earlier posts relate to that. And a fine gun it is!
batmann
Single-Sixer
Nice welcome for a new member. Despite the terminology we know what he meant. It's along the same lines as .45 Colt or someone saying .45 LC. Means the same, at least to me.
101VooDoo
Single-Sixer
Shame Ron was so thin skinned about it, hate to lose a new member over a non-issue. But, if that was enough to make him leave, he's going to have a difficult time posting on any on-line forum.
Personally I don't care a whole lot about exact terminology on Rugers; as long as you can figure out what gun they're talking about, that's close enough for me.
Jim
Personally I don't care a whole lot about exact terminology on Rugers; as long as you can figure out what gun they're talking about, that's close enough for me.
Jim
Bucks Owin
Hunter
Snake45 said:Yeah, kind of a shame. I hope he changes his mind and comes back.
Dittos.... :x
(And as someone who has had my own "run ins" with the "perps", I know where Ron's coming from... :roll: Come on back pard! :wink: )
- Status
Similar threads
