Blackhawk (with spare cylinder) vs. Stampede. Price question?

[mannyrock]

Dear Guys,
 
    A friend of mine bought a Stampede, and I really like the way it looks and handles.  I thought about getting one myself.  (in .357)
 
    Then, I was at a gunshow a few weeks ago, and I saw several new Blackhawks, in .357, with a spare 9mm cylinder, and adjustable sights.   I was surprised to see that these were about the same price as the Stampede, but appeared to offer a whole lot more for the money.
 
   Is the Stampede so much better, that it justifies its price, as compared to the Blackhawk?  Or, looking at it in the other direction, is the Blackhawk so poor compared to the Stampede that they go for less?
 
   I know that the Stampede "indexes" when you turn the cylinder, so that that when loading, you just slide the shells right in.   Maybe the Blackhawks don't index?
 
   Any info on this subject would be greatly appreciated.  I have no experience with single actions.
 
Thanks, Mannyrock
 
 
 
 

[flatgate]

Well, I'll put it this way.  If one could find out how many Blackhawks were made in the past 50 years and compared that number to how many Stampede's were made in the same time period I believe the Ruger products would trump the Stampedes by 10's of thousands if not 100's of thousands.


Me?  I'm a member of the Ruger Collectors Association and own the Ruger Forum on the web.   


Carl

[Bigeasy]

Both guns are about as different from each other as single actions can be.  The Stampede is made by Beretta, and is designed to mimic the original Colt S/A.  Probably has a little nicer finish then the Ruger.  The Ruger is the more practical, using gun for most people.  Stronger then the Stampede, adj. sights, extra cylinder versatility.  Both guns index, the Ruger by opening the loading gate, the Stampede by putting the hammer on half cock.
 
If you just want a gun for general use, and don't mind that it might not shoot to exact point of aim, nothing wrong with the Stampede.  If you intend to use a variety of loads, or handload max loads, the strength and adjustable sights of the Ruger come into play, as does its over-all durability for long term use.  I love my Colts and USAF S/A's, but when it comes to practical use, the Rugers are hard to beat.
 
Larry

[tacklebury]

I love my Blackhawk in .45LC/.45ACP.  I'm not into little bore pistols, so the .357/9mm wouldn't be my first choice.  My .45 ACP cylinder is more accurate with my handloads than the .45 LC and makes nice target shooting loads.  With FMJ/Factory, the .45 ACP is still sub 4" at 30 yards for me.  The .45 LC does have more versatility as I load it exclusively, everything from 200gr RNFP leads with 6 gr. Unique for target to 300 gr. FTX Magnums with 21.6 gr. H110 for heavy hitters.  Some guys report that their auto cylinders don't seem as accurate.  The Beretta's are nice, but limited to .45LC original level loads and thus pretty restrictive.  Some are happy with that level though, so it depends on what you desire. 

[gcrank1]

To some the esthetics are as, or more, important as the function; to others the function, strength durability, made in USA, etc. trump that. I have been attracted to the Stampede's case colors and clear blue, but the price for an import put me off. Then I traded into a Ruger 50th. 357M, which is a beauty too, but sans the colors. The new models index (an important issue for you!) and its likely you would be pleased with one.
But, regardless of choice, I would suggest you get to try out one, at least in store, to load & unload with empties or dummies.
If you could afford it, the FA are beautifully fit and finished, real heirloom quality, and to lust after.

[mannyrock]

 
   Guys,
 
        Thanks for all of the info.   It is exactly what I needed.
 
        I am not a single action guy, but that Stampede, in stainless, with a hardwood grips, is about the most beautiful handgun I have ever seen.
 
       I am a little concerned to hear that often, the Stampedes don't shoot to point of aim.  (Right-Left).  I have to tell you, if I paid $600 for that handgun, and it shot significantly right or left at combat range (15 yards), I would be outraged.  I would send it back to Beretta, two or three times if necessary.
 
     
  Regards,  Mannyrock

[gcrank1]

IMHO, the usual reason one shoots 'off' is the grip management by the shooter (I used to shoot competition NRA Bullseye so .....). Even so, at 15yds it should be negligible, but become more obvious at distance. Problem is that if that is the way the shooter shoots, and he/she isnt willing or able to learn proper technique, then it is a moot point and adjustable sights usually solve that part of the accuracy issues.
But some guns just arent right. I know it and so do those who have more experience than I and have experienced it. How to tell the difference? You have to have an accomplished shooter do a test with it. Now, if it shoots left for you and right for him then Id say you could work on technique and find it centering much better. Left for both of you and it is likely the gun.
Offhand, NRA Bullseye stance (one hand unsupported), two hand Weaver (and which is your strong side), or off a rest will all shoot a handgun to different places because of the recoil impulse coming back into a different set of muscles.
All this, and more, is why handgun shooting is considered to be so challenging.

[butchen]

..................................All this, and more, is why handgun shooting is considered to be so challenging.

and why we all love it so much!!!!!!!!

[Tom C.]

I have a number of Ruger NMBHs, in a variety of calibers. They all have adjustable rear sights with black, serrated front ramps. I had a pair of stainless Ruger 1^st Gen Vaquerso in .45 Colt. The sights shot pretty close to point of aim, but when I tried using them for CAS, I never could find the front sight. They are a couple of the few guns I have ever sold. I am sticking with sights I can see and adjust with a screw driver, not a hammer and file.
 
I am sure the Beretta Stampede is a very nice gun, but the sights would be deal breakers for me.

[SHOOTALL]

Over the last 30 years I have owned at least 20 Blackhawks . One was a SS 357 mag convert. One was a blue 357 mag that I found a 9mm cyl and fitted it to it. I have had one other BH 357. I have had and will have one Stampede . That should tell the story. The Stampede is a good gun the Rugers are great guns .

[SHOOTALL]

One other thing the Ruger with 9mm cyl. will keep all bullets on a paper plate at 25 yards the 357 cyl will keep them in a shot glass with the ammo it likes and a good rest.

[Tom C.]

I have a .357 NMBH with a 9mm cylinder. Both cylinders have .358" throats, which are oversized for the .355" bullets of 9mm, but mine actually shoots nearly as well with 9mm Blazer cheap stuff as the .357. I was very pleasantly surprised.

[crossfire]

One other thing. If you desire more power, you can rechamber the 9mm cylinder to Gary Reeder's .356 GNR (a .41 Magnum necked down to .357) and easily duplicate .357 Maximum velocities of 200-250 fps over the Magnum.

[gunner69]

I would have to go with the Blackhawk in .45LC/45ACP because of the adjustable sights and fine performance of both cartridges.   If I were to buy a .357/9mm Blackhawk I would definetly check out the Gary Reader .356 GNR conversion.   You could let your "significant other" shoot 38 Special in the .357 cylinder, you could shoot .357 Loads.   If you were of the mind to hunt with it you could use either the Reader or .357 cylinder.   I have owned 6 Blackhawks over the years and they WORK.

[Frank V]

I'm a bit late, but If it were me I'd grab the Blackhawk no questions.
The 9mm cylinder will let you take advantage of 3 ctgs. .38 Special, .357mag., & 9mm.
Unless you want a gun that looks more like a Colt, I'd go for the Blackhawk. Yes I think the Blackhawk is better made, some might not agree, but I'll bet the Blackhawk will give years of service without repairs over the Stampede.
Frank