The Bisley Revisited

By Joe Berk

One thing about Ruger:  Nobody can top their customer service.    Ruger may not explicitly state their firearms come with a lifetime warranty, but in effect, they do.

You may remember my story on the Ruger Bisley I won in a Rock Island Auction (I wrote about it several months ago).  I had wanted a .357 Magnum Bisley for its heavy construction and longer barrel and, truth be told, I was surprised that my bid prevailed.  When I won the Rock Island Auction, I ponied up all the nutty fees that come with such an undertaking (they are significant), and then when I received the Bisley I was disappointed.  It wasn’t particularly accurate (the group sizes were mediocre), and it shot so far to the left the rear sight had to be adjusted all the way to the right to get the shots on paper.

I figured I was kind of stuck with the Bisley and my initial thought was I’d look at the gun for a while, stick it in the safe, and then maybe sell it somewhere down the line.  But it bothered me.  Owning a firearm that doesn’t meet my expectations doesn’t set easy.  If there’s such a thing as having an obsessive-compulsive disorder with firearms that are less than perfect, I’d make for a good clinical study.

I wrote to Ruger and told them what I wanted, which was an accurate Bisley  that didn’t shoot to the left.  I told them the revolver left their plant in 1986, so I was more than willing to pay whatever it took to make me happy.  I also mentioned that I wanted to buy new grip frame screws and a new ejector rod shroud (cosmetically, they looked beat up).  And finally, I mentioned that extraction was difficult with hotter loads.  I asked the Ruger folks to hone the chamber walls so the fired cases would extract easily.

Ruger charged me $45 for a Fedex mailer (which they emailed to me), told me how to package my revolver (a plain brown box, with nothing on the outside to indicate its contents), and advised it could be 4 to 6 weeks before I saw the gun again.  Four days later, it was on its way back to me, with no additional charges other than the initial $45 I paid for the Fedex mailer.

A new ejector shroud on the Bisley.
New grip screws all the way around.
The rear sight, approximately centered. This is way better than what it was when I returned the Ruger.
Ruger honed the chamber walls to prevent sticky extraction. The gun extracts flawlessly.

Ruger mentioned in the paperwork returned with the gun that they retorqued the barrel, installed a new ejector shroud, honed the chambers,  replaced all the grip screws, test fired it, and sent it home.  The first thing I looked at was the rear sight.  Comfortingly, it was a lot closer to being centered than it was when I sent the gun to them.

So how did it do?

Yessiree, that’s what I’m talking about!

Just fine, thanks.  The day I received it, I hopped in the Subie, motored over to my indoor range, and fired three different .357 loads at 10 meters.   Now, I know 10 meters is only 30 feet, but I wanted to get an idea how the revolver was working.   One load was a relatively mild Bullseye-powered concoction with cast 158-grain bullets, another was a gonzo 158-grain Hornady jacketed bullet load with a max charge of Unique, and the third was an even more energetic load with the same 158-grain jacketed hollow point Hornady bullet and a max load of Winchester 296 propellant.  On that indoor range, even with my Walker electronic earmuffs, the concussion of the big Bisley and its full throated .357 loads was starting to give me a headache.  But the targets?   Oh, boy…the Bisley and I were back in business.  I ran another target out to 50 feet (the longest range available at the indoor range), and that group was just as good as the ones at 30 feet.

Winchester’s 296, Unique, a finished .357 Magnum cartridge, the 158-grain Hornady XTP bullet, and the 180-grain Hornady XTP bullet.
A macro shot of the Hornady 159-grain and 180-grain XTP bullets. Viewed from outside the cartridge case, the bullets appear identical. The difference is in their length below the cannelure.
A couple of loaded .357 Magnum cartridges. I’ve always liked the .357 Magnum cartridge.

The day after that, I took the Bisley to our Wednesday morning Geezer get-together at the West End Gun Club.  I had three things in mind: I wanted to show off a bit to my friends, I wanted to chronograph the two balls-out .357 loads I mentioned above, and I wanted to see how the revolver would do at 100 yards.   Yes, you read that right:  100 yards.

100 yards with the Bisley. The first 30 shots or so were with the Unique load. When i switched over to the 296 load, the group tightened. Next time I’m out I’ll try the 180-grain bullets with 296 and dial in a little windage.

My buddy Kevin spotted for me with his spotting scope, and he was amazed with the first load (8.0 grains of Unique and the 158-grain Hornady jacketed hollow points).  Kevin gave a hearty “whoa!” and I suspected things were looking good.

Kevin said several of the shots (after I had warmed up a bit and got into my long-range groove) grouped like I was shooting a rifle.  I sure didn’t mind hearing that.  I checked the chronograph and the velocities were respectable, too.  The bullets were hitting to the left a bit, but I had room to adjust the rear sight to bring that in.  And where a gun prints on target is a function of how it is held.  I wasn’t consistent with the Bisley yet (I actually haven’t shot it that much).

The 158-grain Hornady bullet with 8.0 grains of Unique. It’s a max load and velocities were respectable, but not like what I attained with Winchester 295.

Then I switched to the heavier-duty 296 load (with the same Hornady XTP bullet), and wowee, I was keeping them in the black on that same 100-yard rifle target.  And those loads were smoking hot.  Winchester;s 296 propellant is good stuff.  Check this out.

Whoa, baby! 1500 fps plus! 296 is a dynamite powder in the .357 Magnum.

All the cartridge cases extracted easily and even with the 1500 feet per second 296 load above, there were no pressure signs (other than a hellacious muzzle blast). As mentioned above, Ruger honed the chambers for me and the prior extraction issues had evaporated.

With replacement of the grip frame screws and the ejector shroud, the Bisley looks like a new revolver.  And other than me paying for the initial shipping to Ruger, it was all on the house (Ruger’s house, that is).  Bear in mind what I said earlier in this blog:  The Bisley, purchased used, is a 38-year-old revolver.

The Bisley went from being a regret to a gun I’m excited about owning.  You probably know that Ruger also made these guns in other chamberings, to include .44 Magnum and .45 Colt, and you might be wondering why I wanted the .357 Magnum.  Back in the 1970s when I was a handgun metallic silhouette shooter, I competed with a .357 Magnum and I was a rarity.  While everyone else was shooting a .44 Magnum or a .45 Colt, or custom-built bolt-action handguns shooting what were essentially rifle cartridges, I was one of the very few people (in fact, the only one I knew of) who shot a .357 Magnum in that game.  With the right loads, the .357 would topple the 200-meter rams (the toughest target to knock over) more reliably than either the .44 Magnum or the .45 Colt, so there was a certain coolness (and a bit of smugness) on my part associated with that.  The other reason is weight.  When Ruger chambers different cartridges in the same firearm, the gun’s external dimensions remain the same, so the .357 Magnum Bisley weighs more than the .44 Magnum or the .45 Colt versions.  More weight means the gun holds steadier and that means greater accuracy.

What’s next for this revolver is working up a load with Hornady’s 180-grain jacketed hollow point bullet and 296 powder and getting the sights dialed in at 50, 100, 150, and 200 yards (the four stages of a handgun metallic silhouette competition).  When I used to compete in metallic silhouette competition, I used a cast 200-grain bullet, but nobody makes that bullet commercially.   Well, almost nobody.  I previously found a guy who sold a 200-grain bullet for the .357, but his bullets leaded terribly and accuracy fell off after the first three or four rounds (and cleaning the bore was a pain).  If I can get the 180-grain jacketed bullets to group well, I think the metallic silhouette rams at 200 yards won’t know the difference between a 200-grain cast bullet and a 180-grain jacketed bullet, and I may get back in the game.  We’ll see.


That term:  Balls out.  You might think it’s a crude anatomical and testicular reference, but it’s not.  Engine governors used to use lever-suspended rotating metal balls that moved further away from their axis of rotation as rpm increased.  When the engine speed reached a preset maximum value allowed by the governor, the centrifugal outward movement of the balls operated a lever that prohibit engine speed from going any higher.  At that point, the engine was running “balls out.”


Never miss an ExNotes blog:



Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!


Ruger Blackhawk Accuracy Testing

I recently tested several loads for accuracy in my Ruger .357 Magnum New Model Blackhawk.

The Ruger New Model .357 Blackhawk.

The .357 Magnum Blackhawk is available with either a 4 5/8-inch or a 6 1/2-inch barrel; mine is the 6 1/2-inch version.   I like a longer barrel when I have a choice.

In this test series, I fired four 5-shot groups at 50 feet and then calculated the average group size for each load.  I did not use a machine rest (more on that later); I used a two-hand hold rested on the bench, with no support for the barrel or any other part of the gun.

The Loads

I tested with five bullets and three propellants:

      • The Hornady 158-grain XTP jacketed hollow point
      • The Speer 158-grain jacketed soft point
      • The Hornady 110-grain jacketed hollow point
      • A cast 158-grain truncated flat point
      • A cast 148-grain powder coated double-ended wadcutter
      • Unique
      • Bullseye
      • Winchester 296
From left to right, the Speer 158-grain jacketed soft point, the Hornady 158-grain jacketed hollow point (designated by Hornady as XTPs), the Hornady 110-grain jacketed hollow point, a cast 158-grain truncated flat point, and the Gardner 148-grain powder coated double ended wadcutter (the wadcutters are loaded in .38 Special brass).

All loads were prepared using my new Lee Deluxe 4-die .357 Magnum reloading dies, with the exception of the .38 Special wadcutter ammo.  All loads were crimped.  I recently did a blog on the Lee dies.  I think they are the best dies I’ve ever used.  If you’re considering a set of Lee dies, a good place to buy them is on Amazon.

Lee’s Deluxe 4-Die Set. These do a fantastic job.

You can also buy directly from Lee Precision.

The different load recipes are identified in the table below.

The Results

Here are the results:

The biggest variable in this test series is me.  But, I’m what you get.

The most accurate load was 8.0 grains of Unique with the 158-grain Hornady jacketed hollow point bullet and a regular (non-magnum) primer.  You won’t find this load in any modern reloading manual.   It’s one that was in Lyman’s 45th edition manual (printed in 1970) as their accuracy load with a 158-grain jacketed bullet.  Sometimes there are jewels hidden in those old reloading manuals.  There are folks who say you shouldn’t use loads from old manuals.  When I do, I work up to them, watching for pressure signs.  Another one of my old reloading books goes up to 8.5 grains of Unique with a 158-grain jacketed bullet.  I didn’t go there because I didn’t need to.

The Lyman 45th Edition Reloading Handbook. I still use it. These older books contain loads the newer reloading manuals do not.
Back in 1970, the good folks at Lyman identified 8.0 grains of Unique and a 158-grain jacketed bullet as their accuracy load. They were right!

Recoil with the Lyman accuracy load identified above was moderate, and there were no excess pressure indications (extraction was easy, and the primers were not flattened).  I tried 7.0 grains of Unique first, and it was so calm I had no qualms about going to the Lyman-recommended 8.0-grain load.  I was impressed with the 8.0 grains of Unique and 158-grain Hornady jacketed hollow point load.  One of the groups was a one-holer (five shots clustered in a single ragged hole).   Was that simply a fluke?  I don’t think so.  The other groups with this load were larger, but that was undoubtedly me.

I wish I could do this every time.  This target was brought to you by 8.0 grains of Unique and the Hornady 158-grain jacketed hollow point bullet.

The second most accurate load (which is essentially as accurate as the load above) was the 158-grain Speer jacketed soft point bullet with 15.0 grains of Winchester 296 and a magnum primer.   These bullets are still listed on the Speer website, but good luck finding them.  No one has them in stock.  The ones I used were from a stash I picked up from my good buddy Paul.  Winchester 296 is a good powder for magnum handgun cartridges and it’s been one of my favorites for years.  I was a bit surprised that 296 did not take the accuracy honors, but it was pretty close.  296 is a slower burning powder, and the reloading manuals show it gives the highest muzzle velocity.  Recoil (and muzzle blast and flash) are significant with this powder.

Trust me on this: Bill Jordan’s No Second Place Winner is a good read.

The difference in average group size between the most accurate load and the next most accurate load was only 0.004 inches (the most accurate group average was 1.087 inches, the next most accurate group average was 1.o91 inches).  That’s nothing, really.   And I didn’t go higher or lower with the 296 charge with the second-place load; I only tried 15.0 grains.  It’s likely that variations in the 296 charge would have shown a slighly different charge to be better.  Maybe Bill Jordan (who carried a .357 Magnum) had it wrong:  There is a second place winner.

Surprisingly, one of my previous accuracy loads (a near-max load of Unique with the Hornady 110-grain jacketed hollow point bullet) was not a good load in the Blackhawk.  Accuracy was okay, but it was a fierce load and the cases would not extract (I had to take the cylinder out and drive the cases out with a rod).   I only fired two groups with this load and then I stopped.  This is a load that worked well in previous .357 Magnums, including a stainless steel Blackhawk, an earlier version of the Colt Python, a Smith and Wesson Model 27, and my current production Colt Python.  I had the Python with me so I fired a couple of groups with it.  It worked fine (it was accurate and extraction was easy).  I proved, once again, that every gun is different with regard to what it likes.

What I thought would be a good load (a 158-grain cast bullet and 7.0 grains of Unique) was not.  It was just okay accuracy-wise, but it leaded the bore big time and accuracy grew worse with each group fired as the leading increased.  That wasn’t unique to the Blackhawk, either.  It did the same thing in the Colt Python.  These cast bullets are fairly hard, but the charge (7.0 grains of Unique) is driving the bullets to approximately 1200 feet per second, and it appears that’s enough to induce leading.  The bullets are sized to .358 inches, so they should be sealing adequately.

The above observation led to a quest for a load using these cast bullets that wouldn’t lead the bore, and I tried a couple that kept velocity below 1000 feet per second (4.3 grains of Bullseye, and 5.0 grains of Unique).   Neither produced appreciable leading, but the accuracy was mediocre.

Mild leading after the 4.3-grain Bullseye and 5.0-grain Unique cast bullet loads. These loads kept the velocity below 1000 feet per second.

After cleaning the bore, I tried the standard .38 Special target load:  2.7 grains of Bullseye and a 148-grain double ended wadcutter.  I used Jim Gardner’s powder coated wadcutters and ammo I reloaded with my Star  progressive machine.  Accuracy was okay, but not exceptional.

Machine Rest versus Hand-Held Shooting

On the topic of machine rests, I don’t have one.  In the past, keyboard commandos criticized me for that.  I was recently was in the Colt plant in Connecticut.  The Colt manager took us through the famed Colt Custom Shop and he showed me one of their custom gun test targets.  It looked like my targets…four shots clusted into a cloverleaf with a single flyer.  I asked my Colt buddy about the distance and if Colt used a machine rest.   He told me the distance was 45 feet and said they do not use a machine rest.  “A good shooter will outshoot a machine rest,” he said.  I thought that was interesting and I liked hearing it.  I never felt a need to use a machine rest and what the Colt guy said reinforced that.

A Note on Safety

This blog describes loads I developed for use in my revolver.  Don’t simply run with them.  They work for me; I make no conclusions (nor should you) about what they will do in your guns.  Consult a reloading manual, start at the minimum load, gradually work up, and always watch for pressure signs.

What’s Next?

I have a blog in work that compares the Blackhawk to the Colt Python, and part of that is assessing how the Python groups with the same loads listed above.  I think you’ll enjoy reading it.  Stay tuned, folks.


Keep us in components…click on those popup ads!


Never miss an ExNotes blog!


More gun and reloading stuff?  You bet!