Ruger Blackhawk question.
This is probably beating a dead horse... but I don’t know.
What size is the 3 screw 357 Blackhawk frame made after the flattop? The same as the earlier flattop, the same as the later new model, or something different altogether?
Thanks
Brant
HERE YOU GO
1955-1962 COLT-SIZED FLAT-TOP THREE SCREW
1962-1972 COLT SIZED OLD MODEL THREE SCREW
1972- SUPER BLACKHAWK SIZED FRAME NEW MODEL
2005- NEW MODEL FLAT-TOP COLT SIZED FRAME
THE THREE SCREW AFTER THE ORIGINAL FLAT-TOP IS THE SAME SIZE BUT REAR SIGHT AND GRIP FRAME ARE DIFFERENT
All that being said, is there any
Real advantage or disadvantage of one model over another?
PURELY SUBJECTIVE
- No text -
Weight is a big factor for me.
For the big caliber conversions I certainly want the larger chassis. However for say a .255 Banshee etc. the Colt sized FT would me a more agreeable chassis for the 8-shot conversions and such.
In standard calibers the Colt chassis size guns are notably more handy. But recoil is also notably more stiff with hefty loads. So it depends what you want to do with it, carry a bunch, overlooking recoil, or shoot a bunch and not mind a little more heft. A Colt size chassis with a "Ruger" Bisley grip would be wonderful!
I do like the new indexing detent feature for loading on the newer models. Do the larger BH have that? I also favor the free-spin pawl conversions on my customs. Sometimes I forget to specify the welcome feature.
There is more to it than frame size though
Take these 2, both with 3 3/4" barrels. First one is a 44 mag PPP on a regular frame.![[image]](images/uploaded/201811091748285be5c86cde1e1.jpg)
Second is a Flat top(mid frame) 44 special with a channeled and scalloped frame along with a fluted cylinder.
![[image]](images/uploaded/201811091750565be5c90058f62.jpg)
The 44 mag actually weighs .02 oz less! The flat top gains its weight in the barrel that is a bit thicker than the PPP.