Ruger Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
750 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I was reminded of something today while looking at my 1873 Cimarron P .45 Colt. The trigger of the Vaquero is wide and centered in the frame while the trigger of the 1873 is narrow and on the left side of the frame.

I first noticed this when I was about 13 or 14 (1958 or 1959, I just turned 74). A shooter had an original Colt .44 percussion army revolver and he couldn't hit the target at 25 yards. He was quite upset that the gun was that far off. I asked if I could take a few shots. I hit two tens and a nine. I then told him that the Colt .44 percussion army was sighted in for 100 yards ad he was shooting over the top of the target. I had aimed at the lower edge of the target to get the hits. This was when I noticed that the trigger was offset to the left.

I read that Sam Colt was left handed so it stands to reason that he would design a left hand gun. Think about it. The trigger is on the left side making it easier for a lefty to reach and the loading gate is designed to be opened and loaded by the right hand while the left shooting hand holds the grip.

Anyway, I thought I would just throw this out here for you.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,944 Posts
Love my New Vaqueros!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
750 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I agree that the New Vaquero is a much safer and better designed revolver over the original design.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
143 Posts
I think the offset trigger is just a function of the mechanical design. Part of the fun of shooting a 1873 design is the nostalgia of it. I like it for what it is, timing issues and all. Shooting a piece of history.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,923 Posts
The NV and the Colt may be close in size, but there is enough of a difference for me to take the 1873 Colt every time as far as fit and balance. As for that trigger being set off to one side on the Colt, that is exactly where it should be for me as being a proper fit for the sake of the position of my trigger finger. Nothing against the Ruger NV, but I prefer the Colt design. Each to their own, as always.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,156 Posts
I have a original Ruger Vaquero Bisley large frame vs NM Ruger Vaquero. I much more prefer the large frame Ruger Vaquero. From what I originally had was a NM Ruger Vaquero very inaccurate. I also have a Pietta 1873 Colt clone .22/22 magnum that has a trigger off set to the left & I love this revolver vs a Ruger Single Six. To each their own!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,189 Posts
Hmmm... the Vaquero is an excellent gun. But if you wanna give me a Colt SAA, I’ll pm you my ffl’s info. To me it’s astounding that a design from 1873 is still relevant and completely functional today.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Comparing apples and oranges. The Single Action Army was not based on 100 years of single action design and usage. The only gun/revolver that feels as good in the hand to me as an SAA is my New Model Single Six. I love the Colt SAA. I no longer own one, but I do have a Cimarron clone, and it's a true clone. The Colt was originally designed and built before investment casting or CNC machining were ever dreamed of, and was dependent on a lot of skilled hand work.
I have a 1973 Ruger Blackhawk in .357, 6-1/2" bbl, a Ruger Vaquero in .44 Magnum, 6-1/2" bbl, a Ruger Single Six convertible with fixed sights and a 6-1/2" bbl, a Ruger Mark II with a 5-1/2" bull bbl, and two Ruger rifles.
All of my Rugers have at least some Wolff springs, as does the Cimarron, and the Blackhawk and the Vaquero have both had the throats lapped to improve accuracy due to Rugers penchant for over torquing the barrels into the frame. If the Super Redhawk was not so ugly in my eyes and looked like a bigger GP100 I would have one of those, too.
Rugers are overbuilt and as a result they are heavier, but about as tough and reliable as you can get. The fact that they look good, feel good, and shoot good doesn't hurt either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,140 Posts
Ruger makes a tough, strong, reliable and accurate revolver. I have a few.
But in no way do they equal the 1873 Colt for balance, great feel or compactness.
The smaller New Vaquero and Flattop come close though.

As a lefty I appreciate the right hand loading gate. Loading/Unloading seems to be more natural for a lefty than watching my right hand friends handle one.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
750 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
With my Wrangler and my birdshead NM Vaquero, I have elected to leave the factory hammer springs in place for good ignition. The springs are in the 17 pound range, I believe, give or take. My Cimarron Pietta 1873 El Malo 2 has the standard leaf trigger spring. I have seen several videos about either weakening or replacing the leaf hammer spring with a weaker one for competition. The force needed to cock the stock hammer spring is significantly weaker than the Rugers. I've read that the stock leaf hammer spring is in the range of 8 to 10 pounds. I would not consider reducing the force of the stock leaf hammer spring. In fact, I would consider increasing the force of the stock leaf hammer spring to get a stronger hammer cocking effort. I still have to shoot the Cimarron 1873 revolver to see how it shoots with assorted ammo.

I know this is not a Ruger question so please delete if required. I just want to draw on the vast amount of knowledge on this forum.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top