Ruger Old Army

[B P Arn]

Colts open frame design is and was perfectly adequate for black powder stress levels but became inadequate when the pressure and velocity levels of semi smokeless and smokeless powder was invented and became widely used.
The design also flexes more than does solid frame construction and is another reason for the design evolution to more rigid platforms..

What evidence can you cite to support you assertion?

 

[TFoley]

I guess I wouldn’t know, it’s the single time I’ve had to use them. My father has several Ruger’s but I’ve never heard him mention having to use their services either. Is it really that bad?

I'd say that given the gun was new in 1986, and it's now 2024 your question is pretty much redundant.

 

[M. De Land]

When someone loads up .45LC loads using a 250 grain Hornady over 26 grains of H110 (My standard hunting load) in an open top and fires off 500 rounds I will become a believer.

A Ruger Blackhawk can and does.

Exactly and me to !

 

[SPQR70AD]

surprised nobody brought this up but when cartridges came out colt submitted an open top for a 44 henry rd. army tested it and said we want a stronger frame design so they answered with the colt SAA. I am sure the army had vast experience with pistol designs

 

[45D]

surprised nobody brought this up but when cartridges came out colt submitted an open top for a 44 henry rd. army tested it and said we want a stronger frame design so they answered with the colt SAA. I am sure the army had vast experience with pistol designs

Yes, it's been in at least one or two of these "discussions". The Army's request was for a top strap design, don't believe it said anything about "strength" or "stronger". Can you produce your evidence for the "stronger" request other than "you think"? The Military isn't in the business of "production", just a list of " here's what we want" . . . Same as today . . .

 

[M. De Land]

What evidence can you cite to support you assertion?

I already have several times if you go back and read all the posts. Let's see, no magnum revolvers are made in open frame guns, the cartridge conversion cylinder makers will not chamber them in magnums, bolt action rifles with single lugs are know to be weaker and do not exceed about 40 k. The big one is none of these folks that make the claim of equal strength are willing to prove it. All they need do is run their 45 Colt conversions to 30 K just as my Ruger does and show the world their contention is correct ! Plus P loads are pushing it but a steady diet of 30 K psi will sort it out real quick !

 

[M. De Land]

Not necessarily Mike, in my mind the most obvious reason open tops have never made the leap to magnum calibers is that lack of a handy dandy spot for the rear sight. I would love to own a magnum chambered 1860 and it may well be possible to build one but we’ll probably never see it because there’s really no market for it other than a few oddball gun cranks.

There would be a market for convertible magnum cylinders so chambered though if it were safe and there are none ! Not even in the massive Walkers or Dragoons let alone the rebated cylinder 60.
As was earlier pointed out the conversion cylinder makers using heat treated 4140 alloy are not afraid of their cylinders ability to handle the pressure, they know the weaker platform won't take a steady diet of it.
Good discussion !