Ruger Blackhawk 4 5/8" , 45 ACP
- Thread starter Ben
- Start date
Tony;
Both my 625's have .452" throats. They shot well right out of the box (well, I have to amend that - I bought the 625-8 new but the 625-6 (5") was bought from an estate sale but looked "as new" and I don't think anything had been done to it as it looked like a "safe queen". The only thing I did to either of them, is I replaced the firing pins with Apex pins, and replaced the springs with a Jerry Miculek set. I set the double action at 9.0 lbs. and the single action at 3.0 lbs. which is my preference.
I have also measured three other 625-8's and they all have .452" cylinder throats. I have found that they are among the best revolvers that Smith has built (and I have a "few").
I DID have to ream the cylinder throats on my Ruger SS Bisley .45 ACP/Convertible, two friends' convertibles, and my Bisley Vaquero to .4525" before they would shoot up to their potential. Now, all four single actions shoot like NRA Bullseye pistols.
Dale53
Both my 625's have .452" throats. They shot well right out of the box (well, I have to amend that - I bought the 625-8 new but the 625-6 (5") was bought from an estate sale but looked "as new" and I don't think anything had been done to it as it looked like a "safe queen". The only thing I did to either of them, is I replaced the firing pins with Apex pins, and replaced the springs with a Jerry Miculek set. I set the double action at 9.0 lbs. and the single action at 3.0 lbs. which is my preference.
I have also measured three other 625-8's and they all have .452" cylinder throats. I have found that they are among the best revolvers that Smith has built (and I have a "few").
I DID have to ream the cylinder throats on my Ruger SS Bisley .45 ACP/Convertible, two friends' convertibles, and my Bisley Vaquero to .4525" before they would shoot up to their potential. Now, all four single actions shoot like NRA Bullseye pistols.
Dale53
>>>Perhaps that was more of a problem with the .45 Colt guns.<<<
Actually, large throats were a problem with the original 1917's AND the early 25's in .45 ACP. In the sixties, a friend had a Model 25 and it wouldn't shoot for beans with cast bullets. I believe the later units were corrected but I do NOT know when that occurred (or what model number). However, my 625-6 (5" barrel) and mine as well as several other 625-8's (JM Specials) with 4" barrels have perfect dimensions for a .452" cast bullet. I prefer plain base cast bullets and my bullet of choice for general use is the Mihec mold for the H&G #68 (actually, H&G labeled the flat base model the #69 but common use has blurred those lines). If you want to hunt deer or hogs, the Lyman 454424 is the bullet (250 gr. Keith) - my choice is the NOE mould for that bullet. My state of Ohio requires a minimum of a 5" barrel for big game. I would not hesitate to take a deer or hog with the 250 gr. Keith at 900+ fps. Using 7.0 grs. of Unique gives me that using the Auto Rim case.
FWIW
Dale
Actually, large throats were a problem with the original 1917's AND the early 25's in .45 ACP. In the sixties, a friend had a Model 25 and it wouldn't shoot for beans with cast bullets. I believe the later units were corrected but I do NOT know when that occurred (or what model number). However, my 625-6 (5" barrel) and mine as well as several other 625-8's (JM Specials) with 4" barrels have perfect dimensions for a .452" cast bullet. I prefer plain base cast bullets and my bullet of choice for general use is the Mihec mold for the H&G #68 (actually, H&G labeled the flat base model the #69 but common use has blurred those lines). If you want to hunt deer or hogs, the Lyman 454424 is the bullet (250 gr. Keith) - my choice is the NOE mould for that bullet. My state of Ohio requires a minimum of a 5" barrel for big game. I would not hesitate to take a deer or hog with the 250 gr. Keith at 900+ fps. Using 7.0 grs. of Unique gives me that using the Auto Rim case.
FWIW
Dale
Last edited:
I was wondering if any of you guys that are shooting these good groups have had your eyes worked on. I know when you hit sixty a lot of us have cataracts or other problems. I know it makes a difference. I have a harder time getting the good groups. I had cataract surgery on both eyes and had the prescription set to infinity on both eyes. No glasses needed for hunting and driving. Just need them for close up stuff. Pistol sights are not perfectly clear. I put on my reading glasses and the sights are perfect but the target isn't.
I feel your pain. I also had cataract surgery on both eyes with the prescription for distance and it was a life saver for me, literally. Not so much for shooting though, I now can see the target fairly well but practically no sights at all. I can wear corrective lenses to bring in the sights but then there is practically no target. Makes shooting pretty tough and I've been putting red dots on my revolvers, they get me on target but groups are pretty much out of the question for me without a scope.
I am older than dirt! I have had both lens replaced due to cataracts. Then, I lost most of the vision in my right eye (shooting eye). I quit with my rifles, but put red dots on many of my handguns. I shoot right handed and left eyed. I am still shooting a fair number of 100x100 on the timed fire target, standing at 25 yards. It may end tomorrow but I am certainly enjoying it while it lasts. Red Dot sights have been a life saver for me.
FWIW,I
Dale53
FWIW,I
Dale53
I would like to add a comment or two for those of you who have aging eyes (and maybe had them worked on). As we get older, the eyes ability to "accommodate" (that is, to rapidly change the focus from the sights to the target) goes away. We get to the point that we can correct our vision with glasses but only for ONE area of focus. It can be quite frustrating, to say the least. However, there is some help available.
Champion's Choice has clip on magnifying lenses (available in three sizes: +1, +1.5, and +2.0. When you are trying to correct your lenses to focus at front sight range, it can even be a difference between "one hand holding "or two handed holding". It other words, you will need two different sets of clip on lenses. Understand, these are just general suggestions for MOST of us. YMMV. At any rate, I talked to the people at CC and told them that most of my shooting is two handed. I took their recommendation, and am pleased with the results. Another method is to go to a drug store that has a glasses display that allows you to try various sets of reading glasses. DO NOT take your handgun with you. These days that'll, at best, cause a riot and worst, someone getting hurt or worse. I suggest a printed card with small type that you experiment (AT HOME) with to see that what you are looking at is EXACTLY the same distance as your front sight in shooting position. Then take that card (you may have to get a bit creative in bending it, etc, so you are at the proper distance when holding it. At any rate, when you do that, try various sets of "reading glasses" from 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 powers. Pick the one that seems to be "proper" then call Champions Choice and order:
http://www.champchoice.com/store/Main.aspx?p=ItemDetailOptions&item=CCSCL20
Now, here is the downside: the lens, if you made the proper choice, will focus on the FRONT sight. You'll be able to see the front sight quite clearly as well as the rear. Aligning the sights will be little problem. However, the target will be VERY blurred. The GOOD thing is that it doesn't matter very much if you hold center. Yeah, the CENTER of the bull even VERY blurred can be held consistently. If you could shoot small groups before, you'll be able to do it again. You just will not be able to do it quite like before, but your shooting shouldn't suffer after you learn how to do it the "new" way. At least, that is what I discovered.
Make no mistake, the Red Dot is world's easier to accommodate to. It took me about two range sessions. However, there are those of us that prefer using iron sights even if it is much harder. The flip up lenses at the correct power will allow you to do this using the "hold center of the blur" method.
Those flip up lenses are considerably more practical than trying to look through the lenses of your bifocals and shoot. Just clip them on your glasses and flip down for shooting, and flip up for walking around, changing targets, etc.
This was shot, from a makeshift rest, not too long ago, with my flip up lenses, indoors at fifty feet (first group after reaming the cylinders on my Ruger SS .45 ACP/.45 Colt convertible). I hadn't even had a chance to zero it before shooting this target with the .45 ACP cylinder:
Good luck and let me know how this works for you. $20.00 in cost shouldn't hurt anyone too much...
YMMV
Dale53
Champion's Choice has clip on magnifying lenses (available in three sizes: +1, +1.5, and +2.0. When you are trying to correct your lenses to focus at front sight range, it can even be a difference between "one hand holding "or two handed holding". It other words, you will need two different sets of clip on lenses. Understand, these are just general suggestions for MOST of us. YMMV. At any rate, I talked to the people at CC and told them that most of my shooting is two handed. I took their recommendation, and am pleased with the results. Another method is to go to a drug store that has a glasses display that allows you to try various sets of reading glasses. DO NOT take your handgun with you. These days that'll, at best, cause a riot and worst, someone getting hurt or worse. I suggest a printed card with small type that you experiment (AT HOME) with to see that what you are looking at is EXACTLY the same distance as your front sight in shooting position. Then take that card (you may have to get a bit creative in bending it, etc, so you are at the proper distance when holding it. At any rate, when you do that, try various sets of "reading glasses" from 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 powers. Pick the one that seems to be "proper" then call Champions Choice and order:
http://www.champchoice.com/store/Main.aspx?p=ItemDetailOptions&item=CCSCL20
Now, here is the downside: the lens, if you made the proper choice, will focus on the FRONT sight. You'll be able to see the front sight quite clearly as well as the rear. Aligning the sights will be little problem. However, the target will be VERY blurred. The GOOD thing is that it doesn't matter very much if you hold center. Yeah, the CENTER of the bull even VERY blurred can be held consistently. If you could shoot small groups before, you'll be able to do it again. You just will not be able to do it quite like before, but your shooting shouldn't suffer after you learn how to do it the "new" way. At least, that is what I discovered.
Make no mistake, the Red Dot is world's easier to accommodate to. It took me about two range sessions. However, there are those of us that prefer using iron sights even if it is much harder. The flip up lenses at the correct power will allow you to do this using the "hold center of the blur" method.
Those flip up lenses are considerably more practical than trying to look through the lenses of your bifocals and shoot. Just clip them on your glasses and flip down for shooting, and flip up for walking around, changing targets, etc.
This was shot, from a makeshift rest, not too long ago, with my flip up lenses, indoors at fifty feet (first group after reaming the cylinders on my Ruger SS .45 ACP/.45 Colt convertible). I hadn't even had a chance to zero it before shooting this target with the .45 ACP cylinder:
Good luck and let me know how this works for you. $20.00 in cost shouldn't hurt anyone too much...
YMMV
Dale53
Last edited:
I was using this from Champion for several years before I just couldn't shoot any more. These frames hold two lenses in front of the shooting eye. One is your distance prescription, the second is diopter lenses ranging from .25 - .50 - .75 - 1.0 - 1.25 - 1.50 - 1.75 - 2.0. Also includes a Merritt device. You choose the diopter by taking just enough away from the target to see the sights clearly. That can change from day to day and sun, clouds etc.
http://www.champchoice.com/store/Main.aspx?p=CategoryBody&c=OPEYCH
System works extremely well for long range shooting right up until the time you have no choice but to take away so much from the target to make out the sights the target just isn't there anymore. It leaves you with the compromise of very poor target definition and very poor sight definition or simply one or the other. Finally had to give it up, just cannot shoot long range that way, I know, I tried for several years.
Besides cataracts and age ganging up on me I also am fighting the eyesight consequences of 30+ years with diabetes. Was sure great fun while it lasted and I have a lifetime of great shooting memories but everything comes to an end eventually.
http://www.champchoice.com/store/Main.aspx?p=CategoryBody&c=OPEYCH
System works extremely well for long range shooting right up until the time you have no choice but to take away so much from the target to make out the sights the target just isn't there anymore. It leaves you with the compromise of very poor target definition and very poor sight definition or simply one or the other. Finally had to give it up, just cannot shoot long range that way, I know, I tried for several years.
Besides cataracts and age ganging up on me I also am fighting the eyesight consequences of 30+ years with diabetes. Was sure great fun while it lasted and I have a lifetime of great shooting memories but everything comes to an end eventually.
I have tried my computer glasses and they helped a lot with seeing the sights. The target was blurry. My groups did improve. I am going to have to set up a bench of some kind. If I shoot very long I shake a little for some reason. It's not a big deal but I have been shooting off my crossed leg while sitting in a chair and it just isn't stable enough. I shoot in the back yard. I have shot that way out to about 150 yards at milk jugs full of water. That was fun.
As I get older I come up with ideas for inventions like baja (off road) tires for a walker with a holster.(Sarcasm) My mom always told me that getting older is not for sissies.
As I get older I come up with ideas for inventions like baja (off road) tires for a walker with a holster.(Sarcasm) My mom always told me that getting older is not for sissies.
williamwaco
Active Member
Ian,
You just may be right. For several years, I have been shooting my .45 acp rounds from revolvers. When using .45 acp cases, I load them so they'll work well in my 1911's also.
At any rate, a couple of years ago, I went on a mission to use up a bunch of partial cans of powder of various types (Bullseye, Red Dot, 5066, Unique, and two or three others).
There wasn't a nickel's difference in any of them in spite of their quite different burning rates.
Illuminating, to say the least...
Dale53
You just may be right. For several years, I have been shooting my .45 acp rounds from revolvers. When using .45 acp cases, I load them so they'll work well in my 1911's also.
At any rate, a couple of years ago, I went on a mission to use up a bunch of partial cans of powder of various types (Bullseye, Red Dot, 5066, Unique, and two or three others).
There wasn't a nickel's difference in any of them in spite of their quite different burning rates.
Illuminating, to say the least...
Dale53
Last edited:
williamwaco
Active Member
I have always said "There is no magic powder" They are all good. ( At least all I have tried. ) You can select a powder that is inappropriate for your cartridge and get bad results but that is "Operator error" not the fault of the powder.
Rick;
Several of my Simmons Red Dot sights have quick change reticules (with the turn of a knob). Those, in addition to small and large reticles, also have a crosshair). The crosshair helps a good bit when shooting groups. Frankly, I can shoot good groups with a dot but the crosshair definitely makes it easier.
The downside is that Simmons apparently no longer offers these particular Red Dot Sights (probably why I was able to buy a half dozen of them for small change on a couple of different close-outs). I have looked a good bit online and cannot find those. However, surely other manufacturers may have something similar to offer. Ultra Dot is the reliability champion of "affordable" dot sights (around $200.00 or so) and has a model that offers different reticle sizes and types:
http://www.ultradotusa.com/ultradotdist2010_008.htm
I have a couple of Ultra Red Dot sights that I use on the "heavy hitters" (.44 Magnum and .454 Casull). The Simmons techs told me in no uncertain terms that their Red Dot sights were fine up to and including .44 Magnum but would NOT survive the recoil of a .454 Casull. I have had no trouble with mine on ten to fifteen thousand rounds of .45 ACP in my 625's plus lesser calibers.
Just a thought or two...
Dale53
Several of my Simmons Red Dot sights have quick change reticules (with the turn of a knob). Those, in addition to small and large reticles, also have a crosshair). The crosshair helps a good bit when shooting groups. Frankly, I can shoot good groups with a dot but the crosshair definitely makes it easier.
The downside is that Simmons apparently no longer offers these particular Red Dot Sights (probably why I was able to buy a half dozen of them for small change on a couple of different close-outs). I have looked a good bit online and cannot find those. However, surely other manufacturers may have something similar to offer. Ultra Dot is the reliability champion of "affordable" dot sights (around $200.00 or so) and has a model that offers different reticle sizes and types:
http://www.ultradotusa.com/ultradotdist2010_008.htm
I have a couple of Ultra Red Dot sights that I use on the "heavy hitters" (.44 Magnum and .454 Casull). The Simmons techs told me in no uncertain terms that their Red Dot sights were fine up to and including .44 Magnum but would NOT survive the recoil of a .454 Casull. I have had no trouble with mine on ten to fifteen thousand rounds of .45 ACP in my 625's plus lesser calibers.
Just a thought or two...
Dale53