I have a Ruger 45LC SS Vaquero "Birdshead" with a 3 3/4" Barrel (all original that way)..Would this be a new or old style Vaquero as I know the old style can shoot the much hotter/heavier Buffalo Bore loads,which I would like! NEXT: Rugers New 5 Shot 480 Alaskan is out(was a 6 shot)..If I had smith drill cylinders a lil deeper,would 475 Linebaugh work?(as usual,to much free time!),but I would like to do this if possible

If your Vaqyero is the large frame (super Blackhawk size) then yes you can shoot the hott 45 Colt loads

The 5 shot 480 Alaskan can easily be re-chambered to 475 Linebaugh

Yup, Tom, Jack will ream the 5-shot cylinder out to .475 for a pitance!

This could be a good rig as they also beefed up the frames...Thanks!

The "new" Vacquero has "RUGER NEW VACQUERO" engraved on the left side of the frame under the cylinder.

You will not get a 5 shot 480 Ruger Alaskan or any 480 Ruger Super Redhawk. Ruger is no longer making them. I just got an e-mail telling me that.

Call Ruger and ask they why they discontinued the 480 Ruger. Rumor is, people doing the re-chamber are destroying the frame. But I would call them to confirm that.

And as George as said, the new Vaquero has "RUGER NEW VACQUERO" engraved on the left side of the frame under the cylinder, and is a smaller frame and should not use heavy loaded ammo.

How can a lower pressure round destroy the frame when here aren't problems with the Casull? This is the pressure champ!

I will call Ruger tomorrow and see what the reason is.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:
You will not get a 5 shot 480 Ruger Alaskan or any 480 Ruger Super Redhawk. Ruger is no longer making them. I just got an e-mail telling me that.

Call Ruger and ask they why they discontinued the 480 Ruger. Rumor is, people doing the re-chamber are destroying the frame. But I would call them to confirm that.

And as George as said, the new Vaquero has "RUGER NEW VACQUERO" engraved on the left side of the frame under the cylinder, and is a smaller frame and should not use heavy loaded ammo.

Thanks for the info..also,there are several 5 shot 480 Alaskans for sale now on Gunbroker,so they must have released them...?

Tom, Ruger did produce the 5-shot versions. It seems that they have just recently discontinued making them. I'll bet that poor sales have lilled it.......

Whitworth, I don't think poor sales was the issue. Only a few of the Alaskans were released none of the 7 1/2 or 9 1/2 barrel's hit the market. So sales was not the issue. How can someone judge sales, if they were not released to the distributors at all?

Until Ruger makes an official announcement, all we can do is speculate.

From what I understand, they did make production and were sold. I am speculating like you........

I already had Jack make me one in 50JRH and it was sweet!It pushed the 425 at 1248 on his chrony!thats from a 2 1/2" barrel,kicked real nice too!....Now I am thinking on passing with this project and having Jack recylinder a 3" Ruger Vaquero Sherrifs Birdshead to 50 JRH..Its 3 3/4" now,but will have him chop a inch and remove ejector ro assmbly

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
From what I understand, they did make production and were sold. I am speculating like you........

You are right, I am speculating also. But if the gun was intended to handle the pressures and back thrust of the 475 Linebaugh, Ruger would have chambered it that way. Ruger knows the gun's strength and weaknesses much better than you or I would.

I think where the problem is, it is in the back thrust and seating larger and longer bullets deeper than usual and compressing the powder in the case. Unless you are telling me, you can load heavy longer bullets at normal lengths in the Ruger cylinder.

I cannot accept that arguement as I will again point out that the SRH also comes in .454 Casull which prodices a whole hell-of-a-lot more pressure than a .480 or .475. There have been no problems with the .454s...... I am curious as to how they will explain this......

Redhawk, do you realize that the .475 Linebaugh was deveolped in a cylinder that was the same length as the SRH's? On top of the fact that the original case length spec was 1.40-inches and it has since bee reduced to 1.38-inches (and the rim turned down) to fit the Freedom Arms revolvers (and this specification change was performed by Jack Huntington). There are no bullet seating issue as it is plenty long. I seat my 420s at the normal depth. Ruger didn't choose the .475 because they wanted to put their name on a cartridge, plus it gave them exclusivity.

The round that features some of the most compressed charges is the Casull, and it does not present any problems whatsoever.

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
I cannot accept that arguement as I will again point out that the SRH also comes in .454 Casull which prodices a whole hell-of-a-lot more pressure than a .480 or .475. There have been no problems with the .454s...... I am curious as to how they will explain this......

Pressure and back thrust are two different things all together. The 454 Casull uses lighter bullets then the 480 and 475 Linebaugh.

Not an issue. The original loading for the .480 was only 325 grains at 1,350 fps. The frame of the SRH is a lot stronger than a Super Blackhawk which has been used extensively in .475 conversions. Not only is the SRH frame stronger out of the box, the SBH frame window has to be opened up to get the longer and wider cylinder in, and there have been no issues with them holding up to this caliber. Also keep in mind that the prefered DA gun to base big-bore conversions on by custom gunsmiths is the SRH and its weaker sibling the Redhawk........

I don't think you will find that it is a strength issue.......

Since the SRH & RH revolvers are so inherently weak I am willing to pay 100 dollars each. I will sacrifice 100 for each revolver in order to eliminate the grave safety risk these revolvers present to the general public.

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
Since the SRH & RH revolvers are so inherently weak I am willing to pay 100 dollars each. I will sacrifice 100 for each revolver in order to eliminate the grave safety risk these revolvers present to the general public.

There you go, over reacting to a good discussion Whitworth and I were having, you always have to be the smarta$$.

No one said the SRH & RH revolvers are so inherently weak. Why can't you ever get into a conversation without bring like a little kid tring to start shit. I wounder sometimes why I ever took you off ignore.

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
Not an issue. The original loading for the .480 was only 325 grains at 1,350 fps. The frame of the SRH is a lot stronger than a Super Blackhawk which has been used extensively in .475 conversions. Not only is the SRH frame stronger out of the box, the SBH frame window has to be opened up to get the longer and wider cylinder in, and there have been no issues with them holding up to this caliber. Also keep in mind that the prefered DA gun to base big-bore conversions on by custom gunsmiths is the SRH and its weaker sibling the Redhawk........

I don't think you will find that it is a strength issue.......

Like I said, tomorrow afternoon, I will be calling Ruger to hopefully get a answer to why they quit making the 480 Ruger.

Well shoot, I was going to show everyone what a humanitarian I am too by taking those inherently weak guns out of the hands of unsuspecting SRH owners -- I only do it because I fear for the wellbeing of mankind........

Now it is not even worth posting anymore.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:
Since the SRH & RH revolvers are so inherently weak I am willing to pay 100 dollars each. I will sacrifice 100 for each revolver in order to eliminate the grave safety risk these revolvers present to the general public.

There you go, over reacting to a good discussion Whitworth and I were having, you always have to be the smarta$$.

No one said the SRH & RH revolvers are so inherently weak. Why can't you ever get into a conversation without bring like a little kid tring to start shit. I wounder sometimes why I ever took you off ignore.

It's the humanitarian in me, I don't want you injured, so I am willing to take those safety hazards out of circulation before some one is injured

Just got off the phone with a customer service representative at Sturm Ruger and was told that the discontinuation of the .480 Ruger Super Redhawks was a marketing decision...... I asked whether or not it could be based on sales, and was told that it very well could be. The mystery continues........

That seems to lay it to rest. The availability of .475's and .500's killed sales.
Ruger is known to drop an item in a flash. They also create many collector items. The flat top, the original Bearcat, the Hawkeye, the original Hunter, the big Vaquaro. Then when time goes on, they re-introduce them. Expect the .480 to be back some day.

No company worth spit will discontinue a good seller.......

I do not think it was sales related at all, I know a few of the gun shop owners, and they had orders for the 5 480 Ruger's.

On the Ruger Forum, there were guys looking for them to buy, so I don't think it is sales related at all. It is Ruger being stupid.

I don't know how they would say it would be sales related, when they hardly released any to the distributors.

Actually it looks like it was sales related particularly in light of the fact that it was a marketing decision and not a warranty issue. I think that they thought the 5-shot cylinder would raise the hype level a bit and it didn't, so they cut their losses. It was a round that couldn't brag about the highest velocity or the most muzzle energy, so they lost the media battle. No company will discontinue a good seller and if it was a good seller and it had mechanical problems, they would have fixed it so they could keep selling them.

Well,interesting,but I went and ordered a 5 shot version to be converted as soon as I get it...to 50 JRH (regret selling my first one!)

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
No company worth spit will discontinue a good seller.......

You don't stay bussines long discontinuing a fast seller. When I approached Ruger at the 06 Shot Show in Las Vegas about chanbering the 500 JRH in the SRH the head of marketing and research told me that the problem for them in the big bore revolvers was that they didn't sell well overall. He said that they would sell well enough when first released and then the pipeline was full and they would not move well after that

quote:

Originally posted by SAFARIKID:
Well,interesting,but I went and ordered a 5 shot version to be converted as soon as I get it...to 50 JRH (regret selling my first one!)

An excellent choice

redhawk is right back thrust is what destroys frames not pressure. Pressure destroys cylinders. back thrust increases as casehead size increases at the same power levels. So if you load a 454 with a 350 at 1500 and do the same in a 475 the 475 will have more back thrust. after saying that id still have to say that the super redhawk frame is plent stout enough. Bowen and clement have built 475s on standard redhawks that arent even as strong.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:

quote:

Originally posted by Whitworth:
I cannot accept that arguement as I will again point out that the SRH also comes in .454 Casull which prodices a whole hell-of-a-lot more pressure than a .480 or .475. There have been no problems with the .454s...... I am curious as to how they will explain this......

Pressure and back thrust are two different things all together. The 454 Casull uses lighter bullets then the 480 and 475 Linebaugh.

I don't think you could increase back thrust enough in a Ruger, Freedom or BFR to ever harm a frame. You will blow the cylinder first.

Actually, if you look at the small-rim .475 Linebaugh (the commercial spec -- not the older version that was a cut down .45/70 case), the rim is not much larger than the Casull (my calipers indicate .51 versus .538). The case head size cannot create more rearward thrust, but pressure can. No pressure, no thrust. And then if you look at some of CorBon's .454 loads that exceed 70,000 psi, not to mention everyone else's loads over 60,000 psi, you will find that the .454 Casull still creates more back thrust than the .475 and the.480. So, this argument IMHO is dead in the water.

I am not trying to be a smartass here, but I don't think you guys understand back thrust enough to save your ass.

Whitworth, pressure is not related to back thrust what so ever, the weight of the projectile being pushed out of the case is what determines back thrust.

You guys seem to listen to Mr Linebaugh, why not give him a call and ask him about back thrust, or some of the other gun makers out there.

bfrshooter, are you qualified to make such a statement? I don't know many if any here that could say that.

quote:

I am not trying to be a smartass here, but I don't think you guys understand back thrust enough to save your ass.

You can't help it, so it's ok.


According to John Linebaugh the case head thrust for a 454 Casull at 60,000 PSI is 11,000 pounds. Again according to John Linebaugh the case head thrust for a 475 Linebaugh at 50,000 PSI is 10,200 PSI. The case head thrust of the 475 is lower than the case head thrust of the 454 Casull and yes PSI and case head thrust are intertwined.

Incidently the 500 Linebaugh at 27,000 PSI creates 9,320 pounds of case head thrust

I just took a very accurate reading of the back thrust in my 475 with 0 PSI and the back thrust interestingly enough was also 0 pounds. It does appear that without PSI there is no back thrust.

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

I am not trying to be a smartass here, but I don't think you guys understand back thrust enough to save your ass.

You can't help it, so it's ok.

Your one to talk, your an smartass 24/7.

quote:

Originally posted by Redhawk1:

quote:

Originally posted by jwp475:

quote:

I am not trying to be a smartass here, but I don't think you guys understand back thrust enough to save your ass.

You can't help it, so it's ok.

Your one to talk, your an smartass 24/7.

Do you have any numbers on case head thrust?