New Blackhawk - Frame Fit

[mrbumps]

I ordered a new Blackhawk in 45 Colt, which I picked up today. Ironically, I ordered it with the intention of fitting a brass grip frame to it. Good thing, because look at the fit of the factory frame! The ears on the back stick up about 1/8" on each side. Not sure if it's the grip frame that's off, or the gun frame. The rest of the frame mates nicely to the frame, although the backstrap is a good 1/8" proud of the grips. I don't expect perfection on a $500 gun, but I have never seen one this far off. Also, the chamber throats on this one are the tightest I have ever encountered. Largest pin gauge that would drop through the chambers was .449, the .450 was a no-go in all six.

 

[lfpiii]

It is the luck of the draw. I have had some that came perfect and some worst than yours.

 

[contender]

Swap the grip frame & sell the factory one. Less headaches, & you'll get what you want & somebody will enjoy a factory g/f.

 

[RSIno1]

That fit is PBJ post Bill junk. Is there any quality control left at Ruger?

 

[Hondo44]

Only steel GFs are fitted. Alloy GFs are not fitted to the guns and are completely finished before assembly. They are all a generic size.

The grip frame ‘ear’ height varies a bit as the frames get newer but there was one specific big increase. To simplify production in about 1998, Ruger began a 1/16” height increase of the standard cylinder frame-to-grip frame mating surfaces on both sides of the hammer to match the Bisley model cyl frames so any style grip frame could be assembled to any main frame. Therefore the 'ears' on the standard grip frame had to be made 1/16” taller as well. So there's basically two sizes: the earliest is short, .530” pre 1998 and the latest is the tall .590” after 1998; measured from the very top edge of the grip panel to the top of the ears. That's why it's important that any acquired grip frame be a similar vintage to the Ruger that you want to put it on.

 

[DGW1949]

Personaly....I wouldn't have accepted that gun unless the circumstances dictated that I had no choice, and if that was the case, I'd have been on the phone with Ruger at my first opertunity.
In other words, I don't particularly care WHY they have chozen to do some of the things that they do because the point is that they did it, and continue doing it, and then leave the buyers to deal with it.
Canted sights, poor or no fitting, poor machining, throats that need fixed, timing issues, sloppy bedding, sights that sheer off, scope rings that won't stay tight, and on and on. Some are old problems which never got addressed, others are more recent, and some may be model-specific...but....the point is that somebody at Ruger needs to wake up and get a clue.

There was a time that I could recomend buying a Ruger to anyone who might ask.
These days though, about all I can honestly say is that they better check it over very closely first, and that this or that model is known to have this or that problem(s)......and when ya think about it, that really aint saying much about a company, is it?

DGW

 

[deac45]

That fit is PBJ post Bill junk. Is there any quality control left at Ruger?

Sure. It's just being outsourced to the consumer. To quote a famous cartoon character..."We uns is it!"

Deac45

 

[SPBhawk]

Wow, that is fut bugly !

I have a 2014 Blackhawk .357 and it's pretty good. I have notice the aluminum on most are never as good as the steel grip frames. But that one is really bad, I'd call Ruger.

Or.....I'd be tempted to fit it myself, then it would need painting. Don't know what paint you'd use on it though..

 

[71shooter]

Wow, that is fut bugly !


Or.....I'd be tempted to fit it myself, then it would need painting. Don't know what paint you'd use on it though..

Cerokote would be the best option. That is what Bowen is using these days, anyway.