Ale-8(1)":36isnhw6 said:
" . . . before somebody got the wrong batch of barrels on the Super Blackhawk."
Are you saying that the barrels are rollmarked before they are installed into the frames? Or am I misunderstanding you?
:?
Never seen it done, and I've never had this question answered by the factory...(probably a proprietary operation anyway), but a few things must be considered. First off....every Super Blackhawk barrel I've ever seen has the characteristics of being a reblue, even though we know most are not. The rollmarks appear to have a blurry or smeared look on the high polish Super Blackhawk as opposed to the crisp clear markings on a flattop for example, or any other "standard" finish Ruger firearm. So if the barrels on the Super Blackhawk are rollmarked after they are seated to the frame, how is Ruger able to get a consistent high polish clear to the rear of the barrel where it butts with the cylinder frame? I.M.O., the only way to get that polish all the way back to the rear of the barrel is to have it polished before the barrel is seated...and this I am 99.9% sure the polishing is done after the rollmark has been applied....yes....I think the rollmarks are on the barrels before they are ever seated to the frame, and they've had the knowledge of putting threads on in this manner (pre-"clocked" to get the rollmark or other appurtenances, like the ejector housing screw hole on an SA, to line up) since 1949.
For those who think it can't be done....how to get the rollmark to line up top dead center every time before the barrel is seated to the frame, let me just say this has been possible since 1949....see page 46 of JD's P&R book. There you will see a .22 pistol barrel with threads already cut (pressed?) on it.....but the feedramp and front sight band are already machined onto those barrels. Those threads are the same "every" time.
If most machine gun barrels are threaded, how else would one get the appurtenances of the barrel to line up the same way every time after replacing with an overheated barrel, and "in the field" at that? Ruger built the processes for his machine gun years before he started building .22 pistols.
Something else to be considered. Since Ruger had the knowledge to "clock" the barrel threads on his .22 pistol barrels (thousands made before the Single-Six ever came out), would he have made the process of threading the barrels any different for his SA revolvers when they came out a few years later? Two different processes in the small confines of the Red Barn complex??? I'm not sure the shrewd and cost-conscious WBR would have had two different processes for this.
I also think it would be much easier to rollmark the barrels before they are seated to the frame since it wouldn't be as easy doing this while seated to the frame....different frame sizes...different barrel lengths, more jigs involved, more setup time, employee hours etc. etc.....whereas just a simple round SA barrel (with some different contours yes) would be much simpler to rollmark without the frame attached.
And....by having the barrel threads in the frame "clocked" as well, it would sure make barrel replacement a breeze if you have a gun returned for such work.
More examples....how is it that the three-digit and four digit Super Blackhawks get manufactured with the '65 era barrel without INC that was normally meant for the .41 Blackhawk at that time (numbers 698, 1391, 3487 and 5814). Ruger put new barrels on? Maybe. Or maybe those cylinder frames weren't barreled originally until 1965 anyway....problems with polishing the frame? Would it be easier for Ruger's expert workman to put a consistent high polish on a Super Blackhawk cylinder frame with or without the barrel already on it? And again, I'm positive the barrels weren't on when he polished those cylinder frames.
Can serial numbers 10 and 19 be explained the same way??? or even #220 I mentioned earlier? I really think they can....the cylinder frames held until they finally went through the mfg process.
JD says the Super Blackhawk barrel address with eagle logo was shiipped to Ruger on 9/28/59. The earliest inspect date I show for any of the Early Super Blackhawks in my notes is 11/24/59, about two months after the eagle logo rollmark was received, so it would certainly seem that there would have been no reason to use the flattop rollmark on a batch of those barrels, unless in error.
I know I'm probably opening a can of worms again....going against the grain, but I'm only reporting what I see (the hands on approach).
Chet15
