Its funny, but over the last few years, they guys with small hands and those who really wanted a Colt but couldn't afford one went on and on and &%$#@@ on about how heavy the Vaquero was and why don't they bring it out with Colt sized grips. I had a 44Mag Vaquero and couldn't see what the problem was. Now we want the big grips all of a sudden.
If you think back, before the cowboy game dominated SAs, gunzines and users everywhere, decried the 38/357 in a Colt or clone. The 'heft' was wrong, you wouldn't be seen out with one, etc, etc. Now thay are the norm, we seem to have forgotten about heft, etc.
I have enjoyed my old Vaq and have tried unsuccessfully to buy a running mate for it.Mick.
Howdy, Pard,
I think the main complaint (I KNOW that's mine) about the OM Vaqueros, Blackhawks, etc., produced after the Flat Tops were discontinued was/is the GRIPFRAME. I for one would have preferred to see the original XR3 grip used on the Flat Top Blackhawks retained or at least offered as an option on the OM Vaqueros, Blackhawks, NM Single Sixes, etc. This COULD have been done with a slight redesign to the internals of the XR3 gripframe (to accomodate the transfer bar, trigger return spring, etc. of the New Model guns). Ruger chose, unwisely I believe, to drop all the older guns in favor of a NM Vaquero, which, while approximating the size and shape of a Colt's SAA, must also have the engineering margins of the OM guns. To do that, they had to decrease the diameter of the chambers' circle so the O.D. of the cylinder could be decreased to match the Colt's frame size. This essentially upge%u@&ed the possibility for .44-40 or .45 Schofield.
So far as this being "just a matter of money" is concerned...Yup! That's the name of the game for ANY business. If .44-40's aren't worth producing, then that's what is going to happen. Frankly, however, Ruger messed up on the original OM Vaqueros in .44-40 when they went for the rediculously tight chambers and throats, based on the JACKETED Winchester and Remington factory load bullets being produced at the time (.425"), and then compounded the "felony" by using .44 Mangle-em barrels. By the time they yielded to the complaints about the problems, both in the gunwriting press and from irrigated (sic) consumers, the bad rep had been established, and some folks who MIGHT otherwise have bought .44-40 Vaqueros, had moved on to other pastures! (And NO! my OM Vaqueros in .44-40 WITH the tight throats AIN'T for sale! I use them to drive tacks with!)
If you will pardon a rant from a former aerospace (or any other kind of) engineer, there has been a culture of bean-counting CEO's and other top level (not "quality") managers IGNORING recommendations from their engineering staff! Which is why we have Barretta Laramie's chambered for .45 LC but "not designed to accept the .45 Schofield cartridge", when the guns are made by the same outfit (Uberti) that is making the Schofields which
will accept both cartridges! And why things have fallen out of the sky in flaming pieces!
One question I was asked at a gunshow over the weekend was whether the Super Blackhawks were still being made. I haven't had a chance to check with Ruger, but if they are making Super BH's, and the Anniversary Flat Tops, they OUGHT to be able to make the OM Vaqueros...eventually...and presuming they haven't junked all their machinery or CNC programs! Take a look at the history of Ruger stock over the past five years. Maybe
somebody in that company ought to do some real
hard thinking!