Early Model Ruger Blackhawk question

[2ndovc]

My custom early model Super Blackhawk was taken, along with about twenty other firearms, and sold while I was unconscious / uncommunicative in the hospital last winter also sold for less than half of what I had into it. The Ruger is the one that I'm the most upset about as it was my constant companion on the trail or on a hunt and for me it was the perfect Packin' Pistol. A lot of you guys have seen it pictured many times on this site.


I want to eventually replace it ( which isn't going to be cheap or easy) and came across a Ruger .44 Magnum flat top with a four digit serial number, almost no original finish and hadn't been back to Ruger for the safety modification.

My question is, although it would make a dandy replacement I've read that the early flat tops aren't up for a lot of .44 Magnum shooting. I don't shoot heavy loads often and my favorite is 10.5 grains of Unique with a 240 Gr. LSWC. I do shoot heavy bullet/ Win 296 loads on occasion and don't want to ruin a sixgun that will cost about $2000 by the time it's comparable to my lost SBH.

So am I worrying too much about it or should I keep looking for a three screw SBH?

jb

[Pete44ru]

.

That was surely a very nice custom Ruger - I'm sorry to hear you might have been taken advantage of, by whomever.

I can see that being done so a family member could pay your medical bills, though.

If it was accidental/innocent, this time around, you might consider keeping an inventory that shows exactly what each firearm IS (specs & model/year info), how much you paid for whatever, and keep updating the value (I update the values of mine monthly).



IIRC, the early .44 Blackhawk/Flat-Top's were the same size frame & fluted cylinder as the .357's, the .44 not moving to a stronger, larger frame & un-fluted cylinder until the 1959 intro of the Super Blackhawk.

I've seen early .44's with the outer cylinder wall of three chambers blasted out - the center blown chamber was the 1st to go, peeling/blowing away the outer wall of the chamber on each side if it.



Although YMMV, if I obtained an early .44 Flat-Top, I would restrict shooting to .44 Specials, or keep the .44 Mag loads @ cat-sneeze levels.

Given your obvious penchant for a nice custom Ruger, though - you might want to consider a New Model Flat-Top .44 Special as an option/basis for customizing.


.

[TDF]

.IIRC, the early .44 Blackhawk/Flat-Top's were the same size frame & fluted cylinder as the .357's, the .44 not moving to a stronger, larger frame & un-fluted cylinder until the 1959 intro of the Super Blackhawk..

Actually the 44 magnum Ruger's have always been large cylinder frames, whether flattop or not. The only three screw centerfire in a smaller cylinder frame than the 44 super blackhawk was the 357.

The fluted cylinder wasn't changed to unfluted on the super B-hawk for strength purposes, it was done to add weight. The weak spot is the bolt cut, and there isn't any more steel there on a super. The ears at the top of the frame around the sight weren't added for strength, they were added to support the sight when raised up. The gripframe in steel of the super wasn't added for strength but again for weight.

There may be a case for the metallurgy has improved over the years, but a three screw super, isn't really any stronger than a three screw flattop, it just is easier on the shootee, because of the increased weight.

A 44 flattop will hold up to your unique load for infinity, and will easily tolerate occasional heavy loads kept within reasonable specs, but it will punish you with recoil.

Beautiful old super you had by the way. Love case hardening. Who did the work to it?

TDF

[2ndovc]

Pete, you are right. I should have at least have made a list of what was important to me or nearly irreplaceable. It wasn't done maliciously, just in a panic. There's only a couple that I was upset about, my 1911s ( I still have the best one) and that Ruger. They knew enough not to get into my Winchesters and Marlins and I still have my military collection. The biggest hit was the EBRs, M1As, ARs, AKs etc. Those are easier to replace, at least until Hillary gets elected.

Your take on the early Blackhawk nicely condenses what I've been reading. I really
don't want one of the new ones and won't alter a collectible. It will take awhile to find the right donor pistol but I'm not in a rush. I'm hoping it speaks to me like the last one!

jb

[2ndovc]

TDF,

First, thank you for the info!

The SBH work was done by Hamilton Bowen around 2002. Mr. Bowen had the case hardening done by Turnbull Restorations. The photos don't do it justice, much prettier in person.


jb

[Malamute]

Any chance of tracking the ones sold and making an offer to buy some back?

[2ndovc]

Not really, most were sold at local shows. I do know the guy that bought my 1911s but I'm sure they're long gone by now.

jb

[blackhawk44]

Were I you, I would hold out for another Super. The larger grip frame has always been much more comfortable and controllable with magnum loads. I have both the flattop and the three screw Super (cut to 4 5/8" also) and the early aluminum Colt-sized grip is quite punishing with full loads for me. My flattops are used for lite to medium Special level loads simply for the difference in grip frames.

[2ndovc]

Kinda the way I'm leaning. I was at a show today and was able to handle both side by side. I don't have huge hands but the Super Blackhawk just fits better.
I may pick up a new SBH while I'm searching for the right project gun. Really liked the stainless one I was holding today and probably would have bought it if I wasn't saving my pennies to pay for a replacement for one of my missing rifles.

jb