M.R. BFR 44 vs a Ruger SBH
- Thread starter SHOOTER
- Start date
Help Support Ruger Forum:
trapperon
Blackhawk
shooter
I believe the frame size is about the same. The difference is that the BFR is a 5 shooter vs the super being a 6. this adds weight to the bfr. Also the ejector housing is longer on the bfr--so the shorty barrel is 5 inches.
In comparing a 4 5/8 super to the 5 inch bfr--the super is lighter weight and more compact. It can take any load or beating you can give it. the bfr is drilled for a scope on the top strap and also has a free spin pawl if those features are important to you.
Personally for half the price, I would go with a 4 5/8 Super Blackhawk over the 5 inch bfr. It is just a better value. The bfr however in its own right is a finely crafted and indestructible revolver as well!
Ron
I believe the frame size is about the same. The difference is that the BFR is a 5 shooter vs the super being a 6. this adds weight to the bfr. Also the ejector housing is longer on the bfr--so the shorty barrel is 5 inches.
In comparing a 4 5/8 super to the 5 inch bfr--the super is lighter weight and more compact. It can take any load or beating you can give it. the bfr is drilled for a scope on the top strap and also has a free spin pawl if those features are important to you.
Personally for half the price, I would go with a 4 5/8 Super Blackhawk over the 5 inch bfr. It is just a better value. The bfr however in its own right is a finely crafted and indestructible revolver as well!
Ron
SHOOTER said:
Haven't had a chance to take the picture yet, but until I do, here is a picture of a Bisley Hunter, and below it is a picture of a BFR. Note the thickness of the top strap in particular. I'll take the photo tonight and post it. It will be more evident when you see them next to each other. Standby.
SHOOTER said:
Shooter, pm me your email and I'll send you a pic. Not good at posting here. My BFR is 4-5/8" from the front of the cylinder not 5". They have a heavy top strap. I plan on sending mine to Jack Huntington at some point to have the grip changed. They aren't a light gun but stout as they come.
22/45 Fan
Hunter
IIRC, Ruger investment casts the frames for the BFR revolvers.
Bob Wright
Hawkeye
Has nobody picked up on the fact that the Ruger is available in blue finish?
Bob Wright
Bob Wright
whichwatch
Blackhawk
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2012
- Messages
- 678
Bob Wright said:
Yeah, so. This has what to do with the OP's question?
Bucks Owin
Hunter
MaxP said:
You mean the extra "fat"...The Blackhawk frame needs no extra "beef"! Witness the Linebaugh Long calibers...
Bucks Owin said:
I have a .500 Maximum (and a .475 Maximum being built as we speak), and 50,000 psi is considered a pretty hot for that gun. In fact I wouldn't feed it a steady diet of 50,000 psi loads. The key to longevity with the Maximums is loading them moderately (35 - 38,000 psi range). It's also the key to the shooter's longevity, truth be told. While the cylinder strength is most important, putting many customs on par with a BFR, the BFR frame is hell-for-strong and you will not hurt one. And they don't weigh that much more than a Blackhawk anyhow. Nothing wrong with a BFR. They're also among the most accurate out of the box guns I have had the pleasure of shooting.
Bucks Owin
Hunter
John Linebaugh:
" FRAME STRENGTH
Here at Linebaugh Custom Sixguns we build some of the most powerful handguns in the world. All of our guns at this time are built exclusively on the Ruger Blackhawk frames. (Ruger Super Blackhawk, Blackhawk and Bisley models are all identical. All frames in the new model that was introduced in 1973 are the same.) In all of my findings the first part to let go in a revolver is the cylinder. I have tested cylinders from purposely bulging them to total destruction. In all cases the frames were not damaged until the cylinder totally failed. When a firearm is fired there is pressure on the base of the bullet to propel it out the barrel. There is an equal rearward thrust against the case head and thus transferred onto the action of the firearm. This is known as CASE HEAD THRUST. Case head thrust is CHAMBER PRESSURE x THE SURFACE AREA OF THE DIAMETER OF THE REAR OF THE CHAMBER. I won't go into great detail but a 45 Colt at 32,000 CUP chamber pressure exerts just under 3 tons of pressure on the back of the frame. A .44 magnum at 40,000 CUP chamber pressure exerts just over 3 tons of pressure on the back of the frame. Basically the same.
When we fire one of our .475 or .500 caliber revolvers we hit the Ruger frame with approximately 5 tons of pressure, (thrust). This duplicates the thrust of a .458 Win Mag. In testing and building over 200 major caliber revolvers on Ruger frames we have never yet had a frame move,stretch or bend. They are very tough. The cylinder is the first part to let go".
Never had a frame move, stretch or bend... :shock:
As I said, the BFR may have more fat, but if a BH frame can handle the equivalent case thrust of a .458 WIN MAG, how much more strength is needed?!?
I think BFR are exactly as advertised, BIG fine revolvers. I'd like to have one myself one of these days. But as was mentioned, the big fat frame costs big fat extra! "Frame strength" is not a selling point that even bears mention IMO...
" FRAME STRENGTH
Here at Linebaugh Custom Sixguns we build some of the most powerful handguns in the world. All of our guns at this time are built exclusively on the Ruger Blackhawk frames. (Ruger Super Blackhawk, Blackhawk and Bisley models are all identical. All frames in the new model that was introduced in 1973 are the same.) In all of my findings the first part to let go in a revolver is the cylinder. I have tested cylinders from purposely bulging them to total destruction. In all cases the frames were not damaged until the cylinder totally failed. When a firearm is fired there is pressure on the base of the bullet to propel it out the barrel. There is an equal rearward thrust against the case head and thus transferred onto the action of the firearm. This is known as CASE HEAD THRUST. Case head thrust is CHAMBER PRESSURE x THE SURFACE AREA OF THE DIAMETER OF THE REAR OF THE CHAMBER. I won't go into great detail but a 45 Colt at 32,000 CUP chamber pressure exerts just under 3 tons of pressure on the back of the frame. A .44 magnum at 40,000 CUP chamber pressure exerts just over 3 tons of pressure on the back of the frame. Basically the same.
When we fire one of our .475 or .500 caliber revolvers we hit the Ruger frame with approximately 5 tons of pressure, (thrust). This duplicates the thrust of a .458 Win Mag. In testing and building over 200 major caliber revolvers on Ruger frames we have never yet had a frame move,stretch or bend. They are very tough. The cylinder is the first part to let go".
Never had a frame move, stretch or bend... :shock:
As I said, the BFR may have more fat, but if a BH frame can handle the equivalent case thrust of a .458 WIN MAG, how much more strength is needed?!?
I think BFR are exactly as advertised, BIG fine revolvers. I'd like to have one myself one of these days. But as was mentioned, the big fat frame costs big fat extra! "Frame strength" is not a selling point that even bears mention IMO...
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=488565661
I'm not going to argue for the sake of arguing. I have BFRs now, have had them in the past, and will own them in the future. They are not as heavy as they are characterized. Usually the criticisms come from those who don't have one and/or have never shot one. That's okay. Also, I know quite a few folks who have .500 Maximums (it's a small group of masochists :mrgreen: ), and none of them are really willing to test the upper limits of the cartridge and how it will affect the revolver that is tasked with containing it.
TimM
Bearcat
I have a few BFR's and I really Like them.... but I find it funny when strength is questioned the BFR is mentioned as tops because of its extra beefy frame, but when size and weight is talked about they seem to shrink down to basically the same size and weight as a Ruger.
This hasn't been my experience, I find them heavier and larger then a stock/custom Ruger and or a freedom arms gun and the size and the weight is noticed when carrying them I find even maximum sized guns carry easier than the short framed BFRs.
Max is right on the the owners not wanting to push the Maximums top-end loads... if pushed they will stretch but so will the standard lenght Linebaugh's when loaded with high pressure, being we are talking about 44mags I don't think there's any worry's here.
Most of my BFR's are in the top photo, bottom photo is my 500S&W maximum (Which has never seen a load hotter than 1600FPS with a 440GR HC).
This hasn't been my experience, I find them heavier and larger then a stock/custom Ruger and or a freedom arms gun and the size and the weight is noticed when carrying them I find even maximum sized guns carry easier than the short framed BFRs.
Max is right on the the owners not wanting to push the Maximums top-end loads... if pushed they will stretch but so will the standard lenght Linebaugh's when loaded with high pressure, being we are talking about 44mags I don't think there's any worry's here.
Most of my BFR's are in the top photo, bottom photo is my 500S&W maximum (Which has never seen a load hotter than 1600FPS with a 440GR HC).
Similar threads
