Early Ruger Blackhawk "Flat Top"

Help Support Ruger Forum:

Dantforth

Blackhawk
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
633
Location
Westport, Ontario, Canada
I am new here so that will explain why my user name is not familiar to you. I have been a Ruger fan for many years, buying my first in 1966 for $124.00, a 44 Mag. carbine. I have been looking for some time for a Blackhawk .357 in the early vintage design. This last week I found one, serial number 94**, which is in about great condition with about 75 - 80% bluing remaining. Yes, it has had the safety hammer bar added. I spent some time on Google looking at history and variations and now have some questions. How hard is it to find the returned parts package so I could put this revolver back in original condition? Ruger says it was manufactured in 1957 and elsewhere I read that the 6 1/2" barrel length wasn't available until 1958. Mine has a 6 1/2 inch barrel. Is that common? Grip frame is marked XR3, Alcoa and a "G". No major blemishes and the original grip panels are in A1 condition. Rear sight is marked with a script "Micro". The poop I read said it should have four distinct clicks when cocking the hammer but it only has three. It also doesn't have the first safety notch when drawing the hammer back. Is all of this because of the conversion? Long winded eh? Oh yes, I know someone will ask what I paid....$300.00 in Canadian funds. Thanks, Dave...and yes I can post photos if anyone wants to see it.
 
If you desire to find the parts necessary to return your gun to its orginal configuration, place a WTB (want to buy) ad in the classifieds. The parts show up there from time to time. And yes, the four clicks are no longer because of the transfer bar and lockwork change.
 
A gun in your serial number range was likely manufactured in 1957 with a 4-5/8" barrel. That said, with Ruger, "never say never". If you have contacted the records department for the ship date, thay can also tell you the "original shipped configuration" of the gun, at least w/respect to barrel length.

The lack of the "safety notch" is a result of the "conversion" as you suspected.

Pleeeease post your photos!!

And welcome to RugerForum!

:)
 
first, Welcome to the forum. Yes, I would like to see some pics of your Ruger. Early 6.5 inch Blackhawks are very good shooters. Enjoy.
 
Interesting that 6 1/2 inch barrels weren't available until then. It surely doesn't appear to be a replacement but then never say never. I am going to call Ruger to ask. Revolver looks to all be the same patina except for the loading gate which has turned somewhat purple. Photos coming. Dave
PS - I just got off of the phone with Ruger Records. They are in the process of moving and the lady I spoke with told me she'd call me back with the invoice information and also send me a factory letter. She did advise that it was amde in 1958 which is contrary to their web site information and that some 6 1/2" barrled models were made that year I was amazed at the courtesy of the person. Photos include one of the barrel address marking in case it shows the barrel was added later.
 
And yep, 3 clicks is what's normal for a "converted" OM.

Your lack of a "safety notch" is due to the fact that the "coverted guns" depend on the transfer bar's being help upward by the trigger before the hammer can move the firing pin. And being's how the transfer bar is mechanicaly linked to the trigger, the theory is that the gun will only fire when ya want it to fire because if the hammer is down, the transfer bar is also down.

That particular theory only works though, IF the trigger aint back during a time that the hammer inadvertanly slips/falls.
So be mindfull of that if you're prone to cocking the gun whilst your trigger finger is inside the trigger guard....or if for some reason the transfer bar is "pinched" by the hammer and ya drop the gun....or if for whatever reason, there's some defect that causes the trigger to hang rearward, or return forward at a rate that is slower than the hammer falls, should your thumb slip off during cocking.

What I'm saying here is that Ruger's "safety conversion" aint fool proof, so excersize due caution when handling your new gun.

Congrats on your find....and good luck on your parts search.

DGW
 
Based on unofficial records, the 6-1/2" guns didn't really start shipping 'til mid-1959. The comment about your gun being re-barreled is likely the case.

It's possible that your gun was shipped late for some reason, so the 1958 date isn't COMPLETELY impossible, but even then it would almost assuredly have been shipped with a 4-5/8" tube. I'd certainly ask the nice lady to be real sure about ship date and configuration.

:)
 
Dantforth":28sgew4g said:
Interesting that 6 1/2 inch barrels weren't available until then. It surely doesn't appear to be a replacement but then never say never. I am going to call Ruger to ask. Revolver looks to all be the same patina except for the loading gate which has turned somewhat purple. Photos coming. Dave
PS - I just got off of the phone with Ruger Records. They are in the process of moving and the lady I spoke with told me she'd call me back with the invoice information and also send me a factory letter. She did advise that it was amde in 1958 which is contrary to their web site information and that some 6 1/2" barrled models were made that year I was amazed at the courtesy of the person. Photos include one of the barrel address marking in case it shows the barrel was added later.
Blackhawk004.jpg

Blackhawk005.jpg


Blackhawk006.jpg

Blackhawk008.jpg

Blackhawk007.jpg
Well now the plot thickens.
I don't think there has ever been a 94XX shipped with a 6 1/2" barrel.
Also your sight doesn't have the indexer on it which was typical for the 57 guns.
I had 9912 and it was a 57 with the indexer. 57 S/N range 7318 to 11675
I do not believe yours is a 58 or 59 6 1/2" gun, but never say never with Ruger
Ya still have a nice ole Ruger fer sure.
Jim
 
Those same "unofficial records" I mentioned show 21876 as the earliest 6-1/2" gun, shipped in mid-1959. Everything before that, with a couple of strange -- possibly erroneous -- exceptions, were 4-5/8".

This could easily be off by a couple hundred either way, but not by an order of magnitude.

:)
 
I'm not nearly as offended by it having the wrong barrel length (if in fact it does) as by that abomination of a hammer and what it implies. What a sad fate for a fine old Flat-top.

2009_1113AD.jpg


I was lucky enough to find this one about a month ago, and fortunately no one sent it back to Ruger. It's from 1962 so the barrel is OK.

Dave
 
Wow, that '62 example is nice! :D

So's the 9XXX gun. Ruger did indeed make some changes
to the rolldies over the years. As a die wore out it was replaced
and sometimes the replacement die was made by a different vendor.
These markings can be then arranged and dated by the discerning
collector. The MOST discerning collector around here is Chet15! Perhaps
he'll chime in with an opinion.

See, years ago ol' Flatgate bought this 10 inch .357 Flattop from a very famous collector's family. The gun was the lowest s/n known of a 10 inch gun. Well, the doggone thing had barrel rollmarks that dated the barrel from '60/'61 but the gun lettered as a '58......... grrr!

So, from that story a rather extensive research project was begun and now it's possible to "date" a barrel via it's roll marks.

JMHO,

flatgate
 
Well, I bought it hoping that it was for real. I didn't understand that 6 1/2 inch barrels weren't available on this model when I bought it but I do now. I intend to use it regularly and it fits my purpose to a "T". I will follow through with Ruger and post the results here. I have learned much from this one post so thanks to all of you. Now when I'm looking and snooping for Ruger Blackhawks I'll be a bit more knowledgeable. Dave
PS - upon close inspection I have noticed that there is a very small gap between the ejector rod housing and the frame so a replacement barrel is probably the case. Question....what should the gap be between the cylinder and barrel? I just measured the gap...a .002 guage will go and a .003 guage will not. Is that OK?
 
You have an unusually "tight" B/C gap, IMHO, which may be a clue.....

Ruger's parts fitting isn't on par with Freedom Arms and the "top shelf" custom gunsmiths.

I'd look into the roll mark on the barrel and, if possible, post a "sharp" image here on the Forum....

flatgate
 
OK, sorry, was distracted by other events.......

Yes, good image. My records indicate that rollmark was in use during
the 1960 to 1963 era with the usual "overlap". In '63 the rollmarks were changed to include Sturm, Ruger & Co., Inc.

So, in my humble opinion, the gun has definitely been rebarreled, either at the Factory or by a skilled gunsmith.

flatgate
 
Would it not take much firing to wear a barrel out? Why else would it be changed from 4 5/8"? Surely someone wouldn't pay that much just to gain 1 7/8" in length? The other options are not pretty. What would it take to ruin a barrel? Double loaded? No matter really except to lower the value by some $$$$$. I love it and I always wanted one so I will enjoy. I am also liquidating a collection of Canadian and British military rifles so will soon have extra cash to look for others... including a Single Six with the flat loading gate.....did you hear that "Flatgate"?
 
Dantforth":2bv0rhwe said:
Would it not take much firing to wear a barrel out? Why else would it be changed from 4 5/8"? Surely someone wouldn't pay that much just to gain 1 7/8" in length? The other options are not pretty. What would it take to ruin a barrel? Double loaded? No matter really except to lower the value by some $$$$$. I love it and I always wanted one so I will enjoy. I am also liquidating a collection of Canadian and British military rifles so will soon have extra cash to look for others... including a Single Six with the flat loading gate.....did you hear that "Flatgate"?

Well, Think about it. At the time you could only buy one with a 4 5/8" barrel.
So the new 6 1/2" guns come out BECAUSE PEOPLE WANTED LONGER BARRELS. Must be why there are more LONG barreld guns out there than the short ones. In 1967 I bought a 61/2" 357 didn't want a short one. So you send off you gun to Ruger (probably 59-62 still has an early barrel on it) to have the new size installed. At the time the GCA of 1968 was not heard of so with about $10 Ruger would swap out a barrel. These WERE NOT COLLECTOR GUNS at the time just a cheap Ruger to hunt or do whatever with.
Happens all the time. Same reason I had a 7 1/2" 45 cut to 5 1/2" for $50 not to long ago.
Jim
Jim
 
Well, seems I have a 44 FT with a way too early serial number for the 7.5 inch barrel it wears.....on the 3RD call to the records ladies just before I sold the "rebarreled" shooter they happened to find the "2ND" ship date....the nice lady asked me if it had an S stamped on the frame in front of the trigger guard??? Nope no S I told her and she jokingly asked if I wanted her to include this info in my "letter".....HECK YES.....

Gosh Ale, 21876 is the FIRST 6.5 357 FT shipped.......so that make my 21877 the SECOND.....WOW....sure wish I knew where that 1st one is....oh ya it's right next to the 2nd one......both are next to 22070 and 22071....gosh I learn something everyday.....THANKS, see ya RR.
 
Top