FLUndertaker
Bearcat
Flat Tops and SBK overlapped but why didn't Ruger make a standard BKH after the flat tops in .44? They did in .45, .41, & .357 but to get a .44 you had to get a SBK. Why?
Why no .44 OM BKH after the Flat Tops?
- Thread starter FLUndertaker
- Start date
Help Support Ruger Forum:
My opinion was that the Super BH was designed to better contain and control the 44 mag cartridge. Once developed, there wasn't much "need" for a standard BH in 44 mag.
FLUndertaker
Bearcat
Mobuck said:
This probably makes the most sense and what I figured. It's just curious that there was a 4 year overlap, that seems kind of extended.
Not sure why the four year overlap. Maybe that long to finally exhaust all the large BH flattop frames... Also could still have had a small market for the flattop during that time... Probably never know for sure. Looked through books that I have, and couldn't find 'overlap' reason. I know I prefer (for example) my 50th Anniversary .44 Magnum flattop over my SBH... So it goes.
Thing to know about the '.44 Magnum' is the OM and NM are both on the large frame. Basically there is no difference between a large frame BH and SBH. Grip frames, hammers, triggers, Ejector housings are interchangeable. I know guys that prefer the dragoon style grip and will place them on their BHs for example. The name 'Super Blackhawk' is really just a 'marketing' thing. I own a SUPER Blackhawk.... Rather than (rubbing toe in dirt and mumbling) 'I own a Blackhawk'.... Sounds better doesn't it?
With the .357 it was a different story. The OM BH in .357 was on the 'medium frame' (flattop and later the one with ears around rear sight). .357 was on the medium frame until the introduction of the NM when it went onto the large frame joining all the other BHs and SBHs. Then, not that long ago, we got the .357 back on the 'right' medium frame with the 50th Anniversary flattop, and of course the Lipseys flattops followed.... So it has come full circle. Note that the .357 BH large frame is still in production as far as I know.
Thing to know about the '.44 Magnum' is the OM and NM are both on the large frame. Basically there is no difference between a large frame BH and SBH. Grip frames, hammers, triggers, Ejector housings are interchangeable. I know guys that prefer the dragoon style grip and will place them on their BHs for example. The name 'Super Blackhawk' is really just a 'marketing' thing. I own a SUPER Blackhawk.... Rather than (rubbing toe in dirt and mumbling) 'I own a Blackhawk'.... Sounds better doesn't it?
With the .357 it was a different story. The OM BH in .357 was on the 'medium frame' (flattop and later the one with ears around rear sight). .357 was on the medium frame until the introduction of the NM when it went onto the large frame joining all the other BHs and SBHs. Then, not that long ago, we got the .357 back on the 'right' medium frame with the 50th Anniversary flattop, and of course the Lipseys flattops followed.... So it has come full circle. Note that the .357 BH large frame is still in production as far as I know.
Hondo44
Hawkeye
I'm sure Ruger saw no need for two 44 Mag models and the SBH was their new flagship. I and many others think they should have kept the .44 flat top, but in .44 Spl on the medium frame. Finally almost 50 years later when the 44 FT med frame was introduced at the behest of Lipsey's and as a distributor exclusive, the wisdom of making that model became apparent. Currently still available in a Bisley model.
I agree, likely Ruger wanted to introduce the SBH as soon as it was manufactured and not wait till inventory of the .44 mag flattops was cleared out. They were an up and coming company at the time.
I agree, likely Ruger wanted to introduce the SBH as soon as it was manufactured and not wait till inventory of the .44 mag flattops was cleared out. They were an up and coming company at the time.
FLUndertaker said:
The Super Blackhawk incorporated things suggested to Ruger by Elmer Keith, built on the larger frame that was used on the guns you mention except the .357.
Similar threads
