I have two old model 44 Flattops which have come to me with the hard rubber grip panels. Both are type 2 revolvers, and one is a 2a. The books say walnut was standard on these, but why would these have been changed later to hard rubber grips?? What is other's experience with the 44 FT's grip panels - only mine that shows up 60 years later with hard rubber?
OM 44 Flattop Grip Panels
- Thread starter cellar701
- Start date
Help Support Ruger Forum:
Some folks just like the looks of the hard rubbers better than the walnuts.
Many folks find that the hard rubbers aren't as comfortable when firing relatively hot loads.
I have a .357 Flattop, and have both types of panels for it. I leave the hard rubbers on for looks, but put walnuts on for shooting.
My .44 Flattop wears a really nice pair of contoured walnuts all the time . . . just because.
JMHO
Many folks find that the hard rubbers aren't as comfortable when firing relatively hot loads.
I have a .357 Flattop, and have both types of panels for it. I leave the hard rubbers on for looks, but put walnuts on for shooting.
My .44 Flattop wears a really nice pair of contoured walnuts all the time . . . just because.
JMHO
flatgate
Hawkeye
I concur. I fired two shots with the black plastic grips on my shooter .44 Flattop. They were two shots with .44 special loads.
NEVER AGAIN!
flatgate
NEVER AGAIN!
flatgate
over the years MOST of the folks we talked to and asked that , all said they wanted it to look like or match their earlier 357 flattops with the black grips.
street
Hunter
I had a friend that replaced every 44 Flattop he came across with hard rubber grips. He said he liked the looks of the black ones better then the walnut. He even took a set of factory stags off and sold them to me so he could put the rubber ones on. Go figure :roll: :roll:
cherokee5425
Bearcat
How do you tell the difference between type 1, 2 3? Flattops?
Um, I like the hard rubber grips on my 2 OM Flattops better than the so so walnut one has. I'm sure it goes back to my shooting Colt SA's before I shot Ruger SA's. I can't say they look better than a good set of walnut, but nostalgia is a powerful thing. I have an older Colt NF with walnut grips. They're bland and horrible looking. I'd rather have a set of good fitting hard rubber grips, though I wouldn't get rid of the original walnuts.
I don't care for the looks of the Ruger NM hard rubber grips. Confused yet? :wink:
I don't care for the looks of the Ruger NM hard rubber grips. Confused yet? :wink:
street
Hunter
cherokee5425 said:
http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=30544
Walnut XR3 Grip Panels.
radicalrod
Hunter
Hey G Dog, that last pic makes me DROOL :lol: :lol: :lol: RR.
cherokee5425
Bearcat
I have a 10" FT 44 that has the hard rubber grips that are original to the gun. . It belonged to a friend of my dad's.
americal
Hunter
GOOD GRIEF :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: fine,finejussbad said:Walnut XR3 Grip Panels.
flatgate
Hawkeye
I strongly believe that the issue at hand is a "screwdriver" variation. Ruger's initial announcement regarding the .44 mag. Blackhawk appeared in the Aug. of 1956 American Rifleman's advertisement and the Fall of '56's special announcement/revised '56 Catalog. All of these listings specifically mentioned Walnut Grips would be included with the new .44 Magnum! IMHO, in their haste to get guns "in the field" many of the early .44 magnum cal. Ruger Blackhawks were fitted with the grips "at hand" making it a rather common occurrence to find "black" grips on the earliest .44 mag. Blackhawks and/or Stags and Ivories. Can I prove this theory?
Nope.
flatgate
Nope.
flatgate
Agreed.
Can The factory document such minor differences?
In the case of the .44's I don't think so.
Can The factory document such minor differences?
In the case of the .44's I don't think so.
AND as I have always felt that "time period" of the release of the 44 flattop, first one, type one, the Nov guns had the black hard rubber and the NEXT week, first week of Dec the type 2 had the wood ,walnut ones, and guess what the last week of November is Thanksgiving,soooooooo go figure what happened over the "holiday"
weekend or is someone gonna tell me they did NOT celebrate Thanksgiving back then...........duh
My conversation with Mr Howe way back, was the first one the grips were hard to handle with the 44 AND they '"broke"???? His quote..........good old Elmer,short guy with the BIG Hat, had a hard time hanging on??
Big hat, big hands, big feet ,big................. :shock:
also, the wood used in those early 44's as well as the RSSE, was a much NICER , select grain?? sculpted? ........another vendor? more costly? and the questions keep coming...we'll never know, all subjective
weekend or is someone gonna tell me they did NOT celebrate Thanksgiving back then...........duh
My conversation with Mr Howe way back, was the first one the grips were hard to handle with the 44 AND they '"broke"???? His quote..........good old Elmer,short guy with the BIG Hat, had a hard time hanging on??
Big hat, big hands, big feet ,big................. :shock:
also, the wood used in those early 44's as well as the RSSE, was a much NICER , select grain?? sculpted? ........another vendor? more costly? and the questions keep coming...we'll never know, all subjective
. . . big cigar.
And actually he had very small feet . . . like size five, I have read.
And actually he had very small feet . . . like size five, I have read.
oh, then that answers why my wife said he "needed a BIG cigar and a BIG gun"......... :roll: 8) :wink:
Jussbad-jussbad said:Walnut XR3 Grip Panels.
I am looking to buy a nice set of original walnuts for one of my 44 flattops...if you decide you want to sell a nice set...drop me a PM....
thanks
street
Hunter
Ale-8(1) said:
I big to differ. If the Factory still has the invoice for a particular .44 Flattop. You know, that is if the flood didn't wash it away!!! :roll: :roll: . Then the price on the invoice should be $4.00 less then the $96.00 that the Flattop cost. That would be the difference between the $5.00 for the walnut grips and the $1.00 price for the Hard Rubber Grips. The key would be to get someone at the factory to look at the invoice.
chet15
Hawkeye
Yeah, rugerguy is partially correct on those early .44 FT's.
With the dope bag report appearing in October 1956 with serial number 16 that was fitted with walnut panels and a large ejector button, the decision to standardize the .44 flattop with walnut apparently happened quite a while before that #16 made the dope bag report. And remember to make the October 1956 Rifleman, that dope bag report might have had to be submitted by at least August or even July 1956 to make the October issue. That means somebody came up with the idea to standardize walnut panels for the .44 Blackhawk at least three months before the first production guns were even shipped from the factory.
I too think there are a lot of .44 flattops out there that have probably had their walnut panels scarfed off of them in trade for checkered hard rubber. In fact, I thik there have probably been far more .44 flattops switched to hard rubber than ever left the factory that way. This would be especially desireable to a collector especially if they were the early type with the "flare" at the top or if they had tremendous grain.
But everybody is also correct with the thought that if Ruger ran out of walnut panels (remember this was an option "only" for all other SA's, except for the RSSE and Super Blackhawk, up to 1961), that they could have very easily slipped on a few hard rubber panels until more of the wood panels were received from SILE.
But....would Ruger have advertised these checkered hard rubber .44 flattop models at $1 less? Would Ruger have shipped any .44 flattops with hard rubber panels since their advertising stated all .44 flattops were standard with walnut??
We'll never know 'cause there's nothing in the records saying any were shipped with hard rubber.
And if the person writing the sn's in the day book as they are shipped only see "BKH46" for example on the shipping sleeve, without a separate stamp saying rubber grips or something to that effect, would a rubber gripped gun even make the records?
Chet15
With the dope bag report appearing in October 1956 with serial number 16 that was fitted with walnut panels and a large ejector button, the decision to standardize the .44 flattop with walnut apparently happened quite a while before that #16 made the dope bag report. And remember to make the October 1956 Rifleman, that dope bag report might have had to be submitted by at least August or even July 1956 to make the October issue. That means somebody came up with the idea to standardize walnut panels for the .44 Blackhawk at least three months before the first production guns were even shipped from the factory.
I too think there are a lot of .44 flattops out there that have probably had their walnut panels scarfed off of them in trade for checkered hard rubber. In fact, I thik there have probably been far more .44 flattops switched to hard rubber than ever left the factory that way. This would be especially desireable to a collector especially if they were the early type with the "flare" at the top or if they had tremendous grain.
But everybody is also correct with the thought that if Ruger ran out of walnut panels (remember this was an option "only" for all other SA's, except for the RSSE and Super Blackhawk, up to 1961), that they could have very easily slipped on a few hard rubber panels until more of the wood panels were received from SILE.
But....would Ruger have advertised these checkered hard rubber .44 flattop models at $1 less? Would Ruger have shipped any .44 flattops with hard rubber panels since their advertising stated all .44 flattops were standard with walnut??
We'll never know 'cause there's nothing in the records saying any were shipped with hard rubber.
And if the person writing the sn's in the day book as they are shipped only see "BKH46" for example on the shipping sleeve, without a separate stamp saying rubber grips or something to that effect, would a rubber gripped gun even make the records?
Chet15
