"Super" crack !
- Thread starter 41 Magnum
- Start date
yes, that picture has been around and from the details of it, I believe it was dropped or slammed against something as you can "see" the scuff marks ( scratches) adjacent to the crack itself....first time we tought those were file marks, but over a couple of cups of coffee?? ( or was it Sloe Gin , maybe even some Gentleman Jack), anyway, thats MY guess.........
besides, its already been buffed and polished quite a LOT from the picture and its in the 'white' still..................
besides, its already been buffed and polished quite a LOT from the picture and its in the 'white' still..................
WIL TERRY
Buckeye
41 Magnum said:I don't remember ever seeing this photo posted, but I personally think whoever fired this shot, is extremely lucky he was using a Super Blackhawk !!
It's probably good he didn't fire that round from a S&W. ??
DO NOT be so sure on that cylinder comparison. H.P.WHITE laboratories tested both the S&W M29 and a RUGER SUPERBLACKHAWK to destruction back in the late 1950's after the SBH was introduced. and the S&W cylinder outlasted the RUGER SBH. The SBH cylinder came unglued FIRST.
I have several Ruger Supers, the 7½", the 5½" & a couple 10", & the S&W 629, 8⅜". My Son also has the 629 in the 6".
My hunting load for the 44 magnum Rugers has always been 28 Gr. of WW 296, behind a Hornady 200 Gr. XTP, with a WW large pistol primer. I've used this load ror years in the Rugers, but will no longer use it in the S&W's. They fall from the Ruger cylinders, & were almost impossible to remove from the S&W cylinders. They had to be pounded out. That shows me first hand, something about the strength of the gun, that no one else has to tell me. A friend has an older "Astra" .44 that looks almost exactly like the 629, & it handles them as well as the Rugers do (tilt it up & a light touch on the ejector kicks em all out) easily. I've used them all down thru the last 60 years, & I know where the strength shows in regular use. I hate to dis-agree with whoever did those tests, but it is a joke. I think that is why "all" the reloading manuals agree with me, & list hotter loads separately for use in "T.C." & "Ruger" only!!
My hunting load for the 44 magnum Rugers has always been 28 Gr. of WW 296, behind a Hornady 200 Gr. XTP, with a WW large pistol primer. I've used this load ror years in the Rugers, but will no longer use it in the S&W's. They fall from the Ruger cylinders, & were almost impossible to remove from the S&W cylinders. They had to be pounded out. That shows me first hand, something about the strength of the gun, that no one else has to tell me. A friend has an older "Astra" .44 that looks almost exactly like the 629, & it handles them as well as the Rugers do (tilt it up & a light touch on the ejector kicks em all out) easily. I've used them all down thru the last 60 years, & I know where the strength shows in regular use. I hate to dis-agree with whoever did those tests, but it is a joke. I think that is why "all" the reloading manuals agree with me, & list hotter loads separately for use in "T.C." & "Ruger" only!!
Bucks Owin
Hunter
Yep, the S&W .44 mag cylinder is strong enough, it's the lockwork that didn't quite cut it with a steady diet of full tilt loads... :wink:
resident
Single-Sixer
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 412
41 Magnum said:
No it doesn't. It tells you about the roughness of the chamber...or the soft condition of the Ruger (which may have expanded due to pressures...thereby releasing the case.)
Both Ruger and S&W are capable of handling overpressures in the respective calibers. The ultimate failure of each is relatively unimportant.
The cylinder depicted above shows evidence of previous FIRE DAMAGE. Note the pitting.
flatgate
Hawkeye
The cylinder above exhibits "over machining", i.e. notice the "gap" between the lead-in notch and the "bolt cut". Methinks it's a Bisley cylinder that has had the "roll-marks" ground off..........
That cylinder sets on my bench!!!!
flatgate
That cylinder sets on my bench!!!!
flatgate
buffed, polished, ground, its ALL "washed out", and the pits can be from ANYTHING, abuse, lack of care, laid on a damp ,wet surface, or left in a lousy leather holster...........thats the kind of stuff folks send to us to 'try" and repair,that one is "scrap", a paper weight or pencil holder is ALL it is good for......................
here's one we did not that long ago.........
yes, this one was in a bad fire,and almost scrapped.............what you are seeing is the first "pass" after I stripped off the crude, surface rust, and what little bluing was left on it............
(gee I wonder if the 'owner', still remembers this one....) 8)
here's one we did not that long ago.........
yes, this one was in a bad fire,and almost scrapped.............what you are seeing is the first "pass" after I stripped off the crude, surface rust, and what little bluing was left on it............
(gee I wonder if the 'owner', still remembers this one....) 8)
bigbill
Single-Sixer
We had a talk in a gun shop once how we could go over on the reload on a super blackhawk and it probably wouldn't blow up. Of course we were nuts back then and went higher but i won't say how high we went. I only loaded a few rounds. The super blackhawk survived but we hardley did. People actually left the range that day. We had 12" of flame out the barrel and 8" of flame out both sides of the cylinder. The revolver did fine, but we could just about hang on to it. . So now after our test of 35+ years ago i'm going to say someone got there powders mixed up with a magnum primer. There is no other way you can hurt this revolver. We shot regular stout magnum loads all the time we hammered it and never hurt it once. Talk about a quality firearm.
Do not ever try this at home. The stupid things we did as kids. Bill
Do not ever try this at home. The stupid things we did as kids. Bill
Similar threads
