|
Post by Tom Richardson on Oct 17, 2009 8:22:29 GMT -5
I have finally made it into good company. I totally agree with John Taffin, Carl by whatever alias, and Boge Quinn on the subject at hand.
|
|
|
Post by AxeHandle on Oct 17, 2009 8:24:23 GMT -5
Dang boys.... I stay away from a thread for a short while and you take off on all sorts of tangents.... ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) Surely you guys know better than to get into it with a school teacher about spelling and grammer? ![::)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/eyesroll.png) I read in Veral's folder on Graybeard where he asked that the odd term for bullets not be used in his folder... I can say that the first time I saw it I thought it was cute... I got over the cute thought pretty quick.. Not planning to tar and feather anyone over it but it sets the tone in my head when I see it...
|
|
|
Post by taffin on Oct 17, 2009 8:24:29 GMT -5
Hey, whose head did I bite off? ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png) If you go to the cast boolits site, you will see it is spelled "BOOLITS." Not my doing and everyone there uses the word. Some of you can type but when I have to use one finger and search for letters, it makes it easier. I have pet peeves too like "you have to obturate the boolit." Well you can't obturate a boolit, you can obturate the bore by expanding the boolit or using the right diameter to start with to obturate the bore. Another good one is the gun "rolls" in the hand nicely. I just ignore all of that stuff until it is causing someone a problem. If you don't like "boolit", I will use bullet here but nobody will know just what bullet I will be talking about because I will not type cast or jacketed. Should I become a spelling or definition Nazi against all of you too? THAT IS EXACTLY WHY I WON'T GO TO THE CAST BULLET SITE. YOU CAN TYPE ALL THIS BUT CAN'T WRITE "CAST" OR "JACKETED"
|
|
|
Post by bigmuddy on Oct 17, 2009 9:27:06 GMT -5
I always learn a lot from this site,....and just when I thought I knew it all..... ;D I have seen that "boolit" thing for years and thought it was a futile attempt to be cute. I never knew it was referring to cast bullets. Silly me, I just call them cast bullets. Live and learn I guess. BTW every time I see the NM or OM Vaquero, I just laugh and count how many replies will it be until someone corrects the author. To the "topic" I never gave it much thought as to why they were different bore size, just know that they are. The two cartridges are not similar at all, so it has never been an issue for me. I would not interchange bullets (notice I said "bullets" ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png) ) in them anyway. I don't think a 45 Colt would do well with a 420 grain bullet.
|
|
|
Post by CraigC on Oct 17, 2009 10:19:24 GMT -5
We also have to remember that there was very little, if any standardization back then as well as fierce competition between manufacturers. Companies basically just did what they wanted and used what they thought would work with little or no concern for compatibility. There would have been absolutely no concern for making components interchangeable between the .45Colt and the .45-70, due to their respective weights if nothing else.
|
|
|
Post by bfrshooter on Oct 17, 2009 13:54:52 GMT -5
Go to any cast site and see how many call the sprue plate a "spruce " plate. Darned if I ever seen one made of wood but I ignore it. Then for pages and pages of the same spelling, not a single person will correct the fella? Now explain the Vaquero thing to me. Everyone knows the new one is smaller all around and will not take the same loads as the old one. It was made for the CA guys to be closer to the Colt in size because many shooters are lacking in strength and since none of the loads kick more then a .22, a decent revolver is not needed. To me there is an OM and a NM so loads developed in the old one can be dangerous in the new one. We are talking two different guns so if any of you want me to send you my loads for the OM to shoot from the NM, I will only laugh when your gun comes apart. Now just how do all of you guys designate the difference between the two Vaquero's? Yeah, we are off topic, but I did not start it, some with tight butts did! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Ken O'Neill on Oct 17, 2009 14:26:19 GMT -5
Those who understand, do. Those who don't, won't.
|
|
|
Post by bigmuddy on Oct 17, 2009 14:55:07 GMT -5
Everyone knows the new one is smaller all around and will not take the same loads as the old one. It was made for the CA guys to be closer to the Colt in size because many shooters are lacking in strength and since none of the loads kick more then a .22, a decent revolver is not needed. I'm back from a great day of shooting 44's. I wish it would stay fall all year long. ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) WOW! That one has so much "pot stirring" in it that I think I will leave it alone.
|
|
|
Post by taffin on Oct 17, 2009 15:08:38 GMT -5
We are talking two different guns so if any of you want me to send you my loads for the OM to shoot from the NM, I will only laugh when your gun comes apart.
YOU WOULD ACTUALLY LAUGH IF SOMEONE BLEW UP THEIR GUN!!!!!
Now just how do all of you guys designate the difference between the two Vaquero's?
EASY: VAQUERO AND NEW VAQUERO. HOW HARD IS THAT?
|
|
|
Post by nonpcnrarn on Oct 17, 2009 18:46:24 GMT -5
I think that if someone needs to specify whether they are talking about the New Vaquero or Vaquero, then just use the word "original" in front of Vaquero when refering to the larger framed gun. It shouldn't be necessary in most conversations, as Vaquero and New Vaquero are two different models, and most people know one from the other. Now if you are giving out load information and want to make sure that your Blackhawk level loads aren't used in New Vaqueros, then use Blackhawk level or original Vaquero level when describing the load info. Or you can say "Not to be used in the smaller framed New Vaquero". But in normal conversation, the use of the term "old model Vaquero" only leads to confusion as "old model" and "new model" in Ruger parlance refer to whether or not it was the original design without a transfer bar safety or the current design with a transfer bar safety. Irregardless, I've written too much already as none of this has anything to do with the original topic! ![::)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/eyesroll.png)
|
|
|
Post by Tom Richardson on Oct 17, 2009 19:02:25 GMT -5
Irregardless??
|
|
|
Post by AxeHandle on Oct 17, 2009 19:16:58 GMT -5
What he said! ![:D](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/grin.png) Next thing we know we will all be "unravelled" ;D
|
|
|
Post by bfrshooter on Oct 17, 2009 21:49:09 GMT -5
Vaquero, new Vaquero, OM, NM, seems to be the same to me. No, I would not laugh at someone ruining a gun nor would I give out my loads even though they are not hot, only accurate, because of the differences in the guns. But trying to prove a point is useless here because of the attitude of a few. I don't know where this comes from, must be there is always someone that has to at the top of the heap and is afraid to fall off. I attribute those feelings to a lack of confidence and knowledge, just bluff the way up so some will bow down. I don't understand the chip on the shoulder thing unless it is because I can make a revolver shoot and some have seen my posted pictures. I must be a threat instead of a teacher!
|
|
|
Post by CraigC on Oct 17, 2009 22:14:41 GMT -5
Vaquero, new Vaquero, OM, NM, seems to be the same to me. Therein lies the problem! ![::)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/eyesroll.png) The only chip I see is your own. Folks around here didn't just fall off the turnip truck so your wild stories of 2.5" groups at 500yds might be better spent on a less educated crowd.
|
|
|
Post by AxeHandle on Oct 17, 2009 22:24:03 GMT -5
The 45-70 and 45 Colt thing is interesting.... While I am sure it originated as just individual gun builders doing their thing it looks to have evolved into .451/.452 for 45 bore handgun cartridges and .458 for 45 bore rifle cartridges. One of the most significant advantages I see in the 45-70 and 450 Marlin BFRs over the 460 S&W is their use of .458 rifle bullets... ;D
|
|