New vs Old mdl Vaquaro

[bobsleatherworks]

Bottom line: All Rugers are build like tanks, BUT interestingly and inversely...the original model Vaqueros are like the new Abrams battle tanks with their heavier armor and bigger main gun, and the new model Vaqueros are like the WWII Shermans which the German Panzers sometimes tore up. I have an original 4 5/8" .45LC and its decidedly a heavier gun to handle but so solid I just had to have one...reliablity and low felt recoil with hot factory loads is just what Bill Ruger had in mind.

I've made rigs for both the New Models and the original models for SASS shooters and I always make sure the holsters for the original models are at least 1/4 inch thick not only for the scale, but for the strength to hold the gun well. 3/16" thick is just fine for a New Model.

 

[RonEgg]

Bob, nice website!! You make some great stuff, good luck.

 

[bobsleatherworks]

Thanks, Ron....

 

[flatgate]

Call them by their "given" names, which are rollmarked on the sides of the Cylinder frames. Easy, no confusion.

You guys must please remember that the term Old Model means pre 1973 vintage Ruger revolvers.

signed,

The Nomenclature Kid........

 

[bobsleatherworks]

Okay Flatgate...point taken

From now on...just "Ruger Vaquero" Vs. "New Model Ruger Vaquero"

Okay?

 

[pvtschultz]

Okay Flatgate...point taken

From now on...just "Ruger Vaquero" Vs. "New Model Ruger Vaquero"

Okay?

No, Vaquero vs. New Vaquero. 8)

 

[Dale53]

The original .45 Colt load was spec'd by the U.S. Army to "shoot through a horse" at 100 yards (original black powder load). The New Vaquero will handle the smokeless equivalent of that load for the "next three generations" (it is within SAAMI specs).

That should handle any "normal" day to day requirements of a belt holstered piece.

If you are planning to hunt big game, now, or in the future, then the original Vaquero is better suited.

BOTH are reliable, several lifetime, revolvers used appropriately, within their respective parameters.

FWIW
Dale53

 

[gak]

+ to Dale53, and he doesn't even mention (but alludes to re "several lifetimes") the much better metallurgy of the New Vaquero (and all Rugers, and all its competitors) vs the good old days.

 

[CraigC]

Okay Flatgate...point taken

From now on...just "Ruger Vaquero" Vs. "New Model Ruger Vaquero"

Okay?

No, Vaquero vs. New Vaquero. 8)

It baffles me that this is so difficult.

 

[pvtschultz]

Ruger could have done us all a favor and named it something else, like Montado, instead of recycling a name for a new product that shares very little with the old. The NM Blackhawk is very much like the Blackhawks of old, including strength wise. The New Vaquero on the other hand is more like a mule when compared to a horse; they really aren't the same.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Ruger could have done us all a favor and named it something else, like Montado, instead of recycling a name for a new product that shares very little with the old. The NM Blackhawk is very much like the Blackhawks of old, including strength wise. The New Vaquero on the other hand is more like a mule when compared to a horse; they really aren't the same.

Howdy Again

I've been saying that for years now. How about something like, oh I dunno Vaquero Mark II? Names like Mark II and Mark III have served Ruger very well with their 22 pistols. What will the next version of the Vaquero be called? Newer Vaquero? New and Improved Vaquero? Calling something New is a marketing term, but from an engineering standpoint it is worse than useless.