I just bought a Ruger New Blackhawk Flattop Convertible that shoots both 45LC and 45ACP. It comes with the extra cylinder for the other caliber. My question is, is this revolver beefy enough for the "Ruger Only" hand loads in the loading manuals or should I stick with the conventional 45LC loads? I know that the older Blackhawk revolvers handled hot reloads ok, just not sure if the new ones are up to that standard anymore.

Me too! The Flat Top models are built on the .357 Magnum frame and are not suitable for top level "Ruger only" loads from my understanding.

I sure hope so...

I got the .45 Colt "only" version a couple years ago, and have fired maybe 100 "Ruger only" loads though it.  Much fun.

Looks fine.  And probably will, right up to the time it blows...

I thought the new Blackhawk is fine with Ruger Only loads, but the Vaquero is not...

Might ask this question in the Ruger forum.

Maybe, the way it used to be was, but don't quote me, I haven't dealt with this in a while, a couple ways to check is using a micrometer to measure the cylinder. Large frame for "Ruger only loads" should be 1.732 in diameter and 1.703 in length. Medium cylinders (not for Roger only) are 1.675 X 1.610. Also, again don't go by me only, was by the serial numbers. A two prefix then - followed by the remaining digits was large. A three prefix then - followed by the rest of the digits was medium or some such.

The short answer is NO. The Flat Top is the intermediate frame, not the large NMBH frame size that is used for the SBH. Before the SBH Ruger built 6 intermediate frame prototypes in .44 mag and blew up 3 of them, or so the story goes. That was what pushed them into the larger frame.

I have always had trouble understanding the desire to hot rod everything people seem to do these days. Enjoy the colt loads as developed and designed and leave it at that
Well placed 45's at moderate velocity will do everything this gun would need to do.

I'm in the same boat as you. I've never had the need to push for max limits on a caliber. If I needed more "power" I guess is the best way to describe it, I just jump up to the next caliber. As in the case of the 45 colt R.O.L. I'd just prefer to go with a 454 or the S&W 460 which is pretty versatile. Unfortunately, this isn't the question posed. I gave what I could above as it's been years. Hopefully someone may either say yeah or nay to it just to make sure what the OP wants is safe to use. On a personal level, I never cared for the Blackhawk or the original Vaquero. The lines are just meh. The new Vaquero I really like and is one of my favorites to fire and has the old styling I like. I also went with 357's in that case though I do have a colt SAA, I didn't want to deal with all the old/new R.O.L. and stuff with the 45 colt.

Taipan01 is correct. The Flat Top models (and New Vaqueros, for that matter) are built on a smaller frame and cylinder, and are not suitable for full-power "Ruger only" loads.

Hi, sorry, I didn't say that. I'm not sure of Blackhawk models as I don't really care for them. I thought perhaps then at the time it would be nice to get a bunch of of Blackhawk convertibles for the versatility but it ended as a no go. I just didn't dig the styling, heft, ergos and in the end, went with the new Vaquero. Nicely streamlined, a very good revolver and have no complaints. I had looked into them (Blackhawks) years before as I do like single actions and hence my findings on the use of R.O.L. What I stated was that my writings may be out of date and I don't want the OP or anyone else being put in harms way because of it. Fact is, and I'll probably get a major hammering, is I dislike the Redhawk more so. As was stated once in a posting, it looks like someone took a snub nose and put a pipe on the end.


JETA: Just editing a bit. Sorry I should have mentioned. By way of the new Vaquero, only in 45 colt do you have to be cautious. In 357, the new model can handle any 357 load offered by factory or within parameters set in you're reloading manuals. Again, it's why I went 357 over 45 though, well maybe someday, a pair of 45' Vaqueros. A nice pair of bond derringers first with pearl grips to go with the .357 Vaqueros. I have to get out of here for that though as I can't get them in this hellhole. Hey, Georgia, want a cool Yankee? Too bad if you don't. Thinking around Savannah. Not sure of the good spots yet. outside of your "islands".

Hi guys thanks for the info. I suspected that the medium frame New Blackhawk wouldn't stand up to the Ruger Only loads, just wanted to get some confirmation. I wasn't planning on hot rodding my handloads but knowledge is a good thing when handloading!!!

Hmmm I thought as long as you had the "ears" it was a large frame and could use the Ruger only loads my new blackhawk bisley conversion in the middle same frame as the 44's? I have not yet but was planning to try some Ruger only loads in the 45 Colt. Ruger makes it confusing to me with all the different New Blackhawk models.

One of the ones I wish I had not traded.  Traded it for an old 1100 which I just traded for a S&W model 19.  I will pick another one sometime.

The Flat Top Blackhawks are the same frame as the New Vaquero. You can read about it here. In short, they're really not designed to handle the "Ruger Only" 45 Colt loads, but all is not lost. In the article Mr. Pearce states they are "absolutely safe with loads that generate 22,000 to 24,000 psi." What that essentially means is you can run a a 280~ gr. cast bullet up to 1100 fps. That data is here.
 I have one of the New Vaquero's in 45 Colt and have a run a 285 gr. cast SWC up to 1065 fps. Pretty brisk recoil out of a 39 oz. revolver. Necessary? Maybe, maybe not.