Ruger Single Action .44 Magnum - what's the point?

[ACP230]

I don't have a Super Blackhawk but I have two "Old Model" Blackhawks in .357 Magnum and a "New Model" in .41 Magnum. One of the .357s has been around since the 1970s. I used it for everything for a few years then, including home defense, NRA Hunter's Pistol Silhouette, and hunting. It is still one of the easiest carrying woods guns I have ever hauled around on a trout stream, or in the deer woods. I didn't have much in the way of good leather for it either, it rode in a beat up "throw in" Hunter holster.

I shoot mostly double action Smiths now so it takes me a little while to get used to the Rugers again. They still shoot well for me after refamiliarization and are very tough guns.

If you shoot them more, with lighter loads you might find yourself appreciating them more.

 

[GatorFarmer]

Some (many?) feel that the recoil of some of the heavier hitting handgun cartridges is more manageable in a SA revolver owing to grip shape and other ergonomic factors. In the case of the Ruger, this is combined with an ability to handle heavier loads than a S&W DA and a relatively approachable price point to make for an attractive blue collar handgun hunting proposition. One can probably get into one of the SA Rugers for about half of what a S&W X frame will cost, and N frames have gone up quite a bit in price as well. They seem a bit more refined than some of the tank like DA Ruger offerings.

Garrett cartridge company is one of several niche makers turning out "big game" .44 mag ammo. Combined with a Ruger SA, it might be reassuring to have where big bears, man eating mega hogs or Sasquatch roams.

The .44 mag isn't particularly expensive to shoot depending on what one feeds it. Walmart sells basic "practice" 240 gr JSP ammo for 30 some bucks a box - the price seems to vary a bit regionally. That's only just over what I pay per box for "practice" Rem/UMC .357 Sig JHP and only perhapse 7 dollars more than what .357 mag ammo goes for these days. One can of course also use .44 specials or simply reload from mild to hot.

While one wouldn't be my first choice for a defensive gun, I'm sure that they'd work in a pinch if that was what someone was used to using for their working gun. Some people do use .44 mags as carry guns, albeit usually DA revolvers - Flopshank is carrying a 5" 629 at times if I remember right, and I sometimes carry a 4" 629 as a "Chuck Taylor BUG". There's ammunition to be had from Corbon and Speer (Gold Dot) designed (or at least eminently suitable for) personal defense. The presumed advantage - aside from a potential dual use against dangerous animals - is that in gelatin the better .44 mag offerings are doing damage more severe than some 5.56mm offerings. Against game, the hard and flat pointed bullets offered by Garrett and others deliver deep penetration to drop big furry things.

 

[PALADIN85020]

Barb,

My first .44 Magnum was an old model Ruger Super Blackhawk. I handloaded REALLY stiff loads, and the gun digested them no sweat. The gun is built like bank vault. With respect to recoil, the single action grip is designed to rotate in your hand when fired, taking the bite out of recoil. I really liked the .44 Mag, and my next one in that caliber was a 4" Model 29. WHOA, Nellie! That gun transferred the recoil directly into my hand, through my wrist, forearm, and even up to my shoulder. I had difficulty even opening a door with that hand for a week. I fired a boxfull through the 29, and then promptly sold it. Now I know to tone down .44 Mag reloads for the 29, especially with shorter barrel lengths. But I still happily shoot full loads in the Ruger, and consider it ideal for hunting or long-range iron targets. If you've ever seen a master like Thell Reed handle a SA, you wouldn't say it was all that slow to reload, either. SAs are beautiful, traditional, strong and practical. Always were, always will be.

 

[beach elvis]

I only bring it up on this thread because it may help to give Barb some more insight re: the plowhandle grip frame:

I've been told by a couple of extremely knowledgeable collectors that the reason for the SAA's shape goes all the way back to the days of the original Pattersons. That shape was decided upon because Colt's designers were aware that their revolvers were going to be fired while on horseback quite a lot.

The issue arose about how to manage recoil while firing one-handed, as the shooter would still have to hold onto the horse's reins in their off-hand while the pistol was being fired.
The grip design was supposed to facilitate the pistol to roll upward in the hand during recoil, thus making it more manageable to keep control of the pistol with only one hand available to do so. This design concept, obviously, continued through the evolution of the single action revolver.

Barb, I do agree about the egonomics in relation to the DA revolver.
At one time, I had both a Super Redhawk and a Vaquero simultaneously, both in .44 mag.
In recoil, the Super Redhawk wasn't beastly at all but with the same ammo, the Vaquero comparatively felt like a bomb going off in one's hand.

As to the above history, it was told to me by a couple of very savvy fellas but please feel free to call BS if something from another, more definitive source should contradict its validity.

 

[Andy Griffith]

Personal touch needed!

Barb...

I must say, that in this case you may have been a bit...let us say jaded, for lack of a better word.

Clearly, the firearm that was tried didn't fit your hand very well and was definitely not what you were used to handling and shooting.

However, a touch of "Barb-ism" applied somewhat sparingly to such a firearm would equal a much different experience than what you experienced.

First of all, Herrett Stocks has some limited offerings for the Ruger and Colt such the Single Action Trooper and the Roper- both extend below the grip frame of the gun, and also fill in the part between the back of the triggerguard and the grip frame. This would make for much more comfortable shooting and make the grip wider and easier recoiling. Just draw a tracing and send it in with the order of your grips!

Another thing that has got to go is that little tiny ejector rod- give it a bull's eye ejector! Much faster reloading that way. I personally can't use factory Ruger sights- replace them with anything such as a bead, fiber optic, red ramp etc.!

The grips, I'd say was probably the stickiest point of your experience.

Another option is the Bisley model grip frame, which is my personal favorite. Or get a gunsmith to fit an "Army" grip frame, which is longer and contoured differently than that of an Colt SAA, Ruger or Spaghetti clone.

Find yourself a Ruger Bisley in .22LR (if you can find one) and have the throat cut correctly, and you'd have a great introduction to the single action field and a great plinker.

Herrett Stocks:
Gun stocks available

Ruger Bisleys (rimfires now discontinued though):
http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/FAProdView?model=447&return=Y

 

[Bat Guano]

I'm not sure that guns, particularly handguns, HAVE to make sense. SAs became "obsolete" around 1898 and definitely so in 1911. But an old 1st gen. SAA was my first centerfire gun back when I had to lie about my age, and I still have it.

Even after being debunked the SA is still a pretty good tool and a damn sight more esthetic than a Glock--or an X frame. Many years ago I shortened a Flattop to 4 5/8" for the griz I expected to run into some day. We never met, and I haven't fired a full .44 load in it in 20 years. Don't want to, either.

In round numbers I probably have more SAs than anything else these days, with a .45 Convertible being one of my best shooters. On days when I'm feeling really retro the percussion Old Army comes out.

Logic ain't got nuthing to do with it.

 

[S/W - Lifer]

I agree with you.

The first handgun I purchased was a Ruger Superblackhawk. That was some 44 years ago. Handsome as it was, it was not for me, for the reasons you describe. A S&W Model 58 better met my needs.

Later in life I fell into another Superblackhawk. Thinking I might have misjudged my first one due to inexperience, I gave the second one a fair shake before getting rid of it.

I know there are those that love single actions and enjoy them. More power to them. They are just not everyones cup of tea.

 

[gizamo]

Yeah, on my short list of firearms I should have kept is a Old Model Ruger in 45 Colt with a factory brass trigger guard. It came with box, papers and original receipt. I honestly bought it for the reloading supplies that came with it. Found out after I sold the pistol the brass trigger guard was only offered for about a years and a half. I did get what for then was a premium price for it, $200 in the early 80's was a lot when you could find Standard Model Blackhawks for < $140 easily.

Look like this? This one is a .45LC with a .45ACP cylinder....

giz

 

[G-Mac]

My first .44 Magnum was a 7-1/2" Stainless Super Blackhawk. I used it mainly for hunting. The extra time it took to load (vs. a double-action revolver) didn't bother me. I could shoot it accurately enough with the factory sights. But, it just never felt as good in my hand as the other revolver I had cut my teeth on...a GP-100.

I still have the GP-100. The SBH is long gone. They are a great gun, no doubt, just wasn't for me.

 

[RonS]

No accounting for taste. I'd rather have a .44 Blackhawk than any other .44 Magnum. I don't need to shoot any revolver fast, I have a 1911 for that. If I am shooting a revolver I want to enjoy each shot and I want an accurate gun, the Ruger does all that.

 

[Texas Star]

I found the Super Blackhawk to point astonishingly well in attempts to shoot man silhouette targets by just aiming casually at the vital zones at reasonable combat ranges.

It also handles recoil well.

However, I'd normally choose a more modern design for defense.

Skeeter Skelton made the good point that a M-29, etc. can't be used effectively in DA fire, anyway. (With full loads.) He saw the .44 Magnum as being just a hunting gun. Went back to the .44 Special for general use, or the .357.

T-Star

 

[Joni_Lynn]

I have a few revolvers in 44 mag and some in 44 special, both sngle and double action. They each have their good points and I enjoy them whenever they go to the range with me. The few times I hunted with them they've worked quite well.

 

[BarbC]

the plowhandle grip frame

The grips, I'd say was probably the stickiest point of your experience.

That might have been the issue. The large grips and long barrel did not balance the gun well for me. The recoil wasn't bad; I just didn't feel like I had good post-shot control and fast target re-acquisition.

It must be one of those things that takes some practice because it's totally different from the "regular" designs and ergonomics I tend to stick to.

I'd hate to become a convert. Those bullets are expensive.