New New Vaquero Range results

[Pilgrim]

A cuppla months ago I bought a New New Vaquero .45 in SS and a 3 screw unaltered BH in .41mag. I just got around to taking them to the range, today.

I started with the BK and was very pleased with it. I was a little surprised at the 'snap' of the round but enjoyed shooting t very much. It was more accurate than me !

Then I took out the unfired 45 NV. I fired 6 shots at a shoot & see target and couldn't see a hole anywhere ! Fired 6 more...nothing !

So I moved the target to a big blank peice of card board, and fired again. All the shots were so low I figured surely I'm doing something wrong.

I then put the gun on a rest, aimed at a line in the card board and watched where the holes appeared:

consistently 6-7 inched low...at 25 feet.

To show you, it's not my shooting, I submit a pic of the 5 holes from my BH:

(there really are 5 holes there)

So what's the verdict? How can a brand new gun shoot so consistently low? What do I do about it? I hate to file down the front sight as it seems it would have to be filed quite a bit and I'm not sure I could get it to look like the original contour.

6-7 at 25 feet. I can only image what it would be at 50 yards !

Thansk for any suggestions.

 

[FPrice]

What round were you using in the Vacquero? If it was lighter than the standard 255 gr bullet, that might be at least part of the reason right there. Another possibility would be to check if you are getting a good level sight picture with the SS sights.

 

[Pilgrim]

200 grain Ultramax. I had one box of that and a bunch of 255, so I figured I'd get rid of the 200 first.

 

[FPrice]

200 grain Ultramax. I had one box of that and a bunch of 255, so I figured I'd get rid of the 200 first.

That "might" be the problem. A lighter bullet, as I understand it, leaves the barrel faster, before the barrel has a chance to rise more. A 255 grain bullet would probably shoot closer to POA. Try it.

 

[terraformer]

I have both a 357 NV and a colt peacemaker from the 60s. The problem is not ammo weight, but your sight picture. You clearly are shooting well, either because of talent or the bench rest, with that grouping so that is not it.

That huge dorsal fin of a front sight is odd to get used to. The rear sights cut a huge channel as well making it even less "normal". Instead of placing the front towards the bottom, place it at the top of the rear sights and just cover the bullseye with the resulting sight picture. As you can tell, the gun is actually very accurate. Play around and you will see the right sight picture eventually. Although for a .45 LC, that will be an expensive eventually...

 

[Pilgrim]

this is how I sight all my stuff.

looks like I might have to put the target at the bottom of the front sight.

I'll try some 255gr and see what happens.

 

[BOBKATT]

Those front sights leave the factory a little tall so that you can file down the front sight according to the sight picture that your eyes demand. It was intentional on Ruger's part, or atleast appears to be so unofficially. The old gem "It's easier to take metal off than to put it back on" comes to mind.

 

[Pilgrim]

It does look like they went overboard with the front sight height.

 

[BOBKATT]

I have one in .357 and for my single actions I prefer to shoot dead on instead of a six o'clock hold that you take, and it is still about 6" low. Accurate though, suprisingly accurate. Almost every review that I have read about the new vaquero contains something along the lines of "and they left the front sight plenty tall so that it can be filed down to the shooters needs."

I haven't filed mine down yet as I can't decide whether I want to shoot cowboy loads in it or hotter loads yet, but I am going to file it down when I learn the best way to do it and the tools that I need.