|
Post by whitworth on Jan 16, 2014 14:17:08 GMT -5
David Bradshaw asked me to post his musing on the subject of Redhawks and here it is:
On the subject of Redhawks.... in discussing this very topic this morning with "whitworth," a.k.a. jarhead with a revolver, a.k.a. Max Prasac, we whispered our own idea of improvements. Primary fault of the Redhawk is, as with a handbag built of fine holster leather, it doesn't wear out. There is no getting around the fact that, for its seeming bulk, the Redhawk represents the most strength and therefore the strongest cartridge capacity, of any big bore double action. And don't say the .44 Remington Magnum isn't a big bore cartridge. It most certainly is. There are one or two larger double action frames, but none tougher. The Super Redhawk has a longer, but not larger, frame; in strength the RH and SRH are equal animals. The issue probably won't go away, and members of the forum are correct to speculate. Hell, why not? The SRH costs less to produce. Its main advantage lies in grip versatility and scope mounting. The drop forged barrel of the Redhawk is out-sourced and arrives as a raw forging, yet to be machined, gun drilled, and broached. The SRH starts as round stock, is drilled and hammer forged in-house.
Doubt I am the only one would like to see the Redhawk continue. There is nothing like a fine S&W M-29... until we inflict PUNISHMENT. That is where the Belgian pulls away from the quarter horse. And to think I almost sold my Redhawk 5-1/2 inch.
The RH with a single spring to drive hammer and rebound trigger, versus the SRH with separate springs, remains less an issue in my pea brain. Certainly on a hunting revolver or trail gun. (Whitworth may assail my grammar; sometimes you got to bend the rules.) I know shooters dearly love their Redhawks. Some shoot these hardy DA's often, others shoot them infrequently. Either way, I see them shoot their Redhawks well. Which may be why they express no interest in letting them go. David Bradshaw
|
|
|
Post by Ken O'Neill on Jan 16, 2014 20:00:56 GMT -5
I bought my first Redhawk ($325) when they first appeared around here in early 1980 - a very low serial number. After shooting it for perhaps a year, I traded it for 2 new Contenders and $115 - clearly one of my better gun swaps.
Since then, I've owned 3 more .44's, 2 .357's, 2 .41's and 2 .45 Colts. All have since gone somewhere else, except for the last 3 .44's, and they aren't going anywhere. I've taken a lot of game with them, and all have been customized to suit me. I mention all this as a way of saying I've learned a bit about Redhawks over the years.
To me, RH's are a bit like Corvettes ... classy, attractive, and capable of running hard. The styling and lines of the SRH's on the other hand, remind me of a muddy John Deere tractor. Good looks are not their best feature, in my eyes.
BUT, the SRH can be given a superb, even perfect, SA and DA trigger, not something that can be accomplished easily, if at all, with a RH. You can have 1 or the other, but not both on a 100% reliable basis. AND, in my experience, my SRH's have proven themselves to be the accuracy equals of nearly all of my FA's. These 2 attributes can make that "muddy John Deere" look pretty attractive
|
|
|
Post by Squatch on Jan 16, 2014 21:43:23 GMT -5
It's for that same reason that I'm trying to buy a couple in 45 colt. I really hope they fire the production line back up. Hope Ruger doesn't let me down.
|
|
|
Post by kaytod on Jan 16, 2014 23:04:46 GMT -5
From the "ask the president" on Ruger
Dear Mr. Corder,
The Redhawk is on temporary hiatus as we move lines around to increase capacity. Look for them to return to store shelves in late spring 2014.
Best regards, Mike Fifer
|
|
|
Post by Ken O'Neill on Jan 17, 2014 8:16:54 GMT -5
Yep. The production is set to resume in their new North Carolina plant.
|
|
Otony
.327 Meteor
Posts: 722
|
Post by Otony on Jan 17, 2014 10:19:03 GMT -5
We got a new 5.5" Redhawk in the shop two days ago......
|
|
|
Post by 98redline on Jan 17, 2014 12:53:02 GMT -5
I really hope they start production again of the 4" 45colt Redhawk. I have been yearning for one from pretty early on.
Do I need one, no, I have a 5 1/2" 44mag that shoots lights out, but when has need ever been part of the gun collecting equation?
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Jan 17, 2014 14:10:17 GMT -5
Ken.... While I have no idea what will be built in Ruger's North Carolina plant, it seems sensible that new products would top the list. I watched the Redhawk, around 1979-80, during tool-up in New Hampshire. On the face of it, it doesn't make sense to separate RH from SRH production----nor other medium to big frame double action production. As I see it, the Super Redhawk offers the more flexible platform for model and barrel variety. To repeat, I have no dope on facility or product plans.
98redline.... despite having a Redhawk .44 5-1/2", a RH .45 4" may compliment it, and thereby advance your skill. One could live his whole life or most of it with one Model 29, but circumstances of carry justify an expanded armory. For sustained long range accuracy the 4" 29 cannot take the place of the 6-1/2" and 8-3/8-inch. Yet, to become proficient with the short barrel teaches inner lessons which cannot be bought.
It is beyond my ability to criticize the practicality of the short barrel. As a practitioner of the Model 29 with its various barrels, my respect abides. I do not insult that respect by hiking the payload. Increased payload----velocity as well as bullet weight----calls for the RH and SRH. If the Smith would do that, there would be no need for the Ruger.
Short barrels force concentration on the fundamentals. Very often the bullet doesn't care what barrel length it comes from, only that the revolver be a damn good one. David Bradshaw
|
|
|
Post by whitworth on Jan 17, 2014 14:13:31 GMT -5
I was in the New Hampshire plant last March (with David Bradshaw) and I don't think they're going to move any of their revolver production south. All of those production lines (cells) are firmly established. I too think new products will be produced in NC. JMHO.
|
|
|
Post by Ken O'Neill on Jan 17, 2014 18:21:15 GMT -5
On Nov. 8, Denis Pris reported on the Ruger Forum that the SRH and RH would be made in N.C. But I admit to knowing nothing else on the topic.
|
|
|
Post by dale53 on Jan 17, 2014 20:39:27 GMT -5
I had a Smith Model 29 with 8 3/8" barrel. The only problem I've had with it is that it is blued. I have hunted in miserable weather and you can almost watch a blued gun rust. Further, in the areas I have hunted it wasn't legal (at the time) to wear the handgun under your coat. It had to be displayed. The Ruger Redhawk had been out about a year when I bought one (they were all 7½" at the time). I put a scope on both my Smith and the Ruger (sure was easier on the Ruger LOL). So, I hunted with the Smith during good weather and used the Ruger in bad weather. The Smith's trigger is much better (even after I did a trigger job on the Ruger) due to design. However, as stated above, I seem to shoot the Ruger about as well as I do the Smith. I have taken an equal number of deer with each.
When I discovered heavy bullets, the Ruger was a natural. The Smith is a bit tender for heavy bullets (over 300 grs is heavy) in my opinion. I have always had a .44 Special at hand so my .44 Magnums have always been loaded with full loads (not necessarily "maximum" but full. Every hunting season, in the weeks leading up to opening day, I would shoot about 2500 rounds to accustom myself to the recoil. The rest of the year, I would shoot lesser guns for pure pleasure.
I will not be getting rid of either until they plant me. I like them both but for slightly different reasons.
Good gear, both!
Dale53
|
|
|
Post by paul105 on Jan 17, 2014 21:28:17 GMT -5
Bought one of the first stainless Redhawks w/integral scope mounts in the early 80s. It was always a very accurate gun, but over the years, the factory grips proved to be a problem – absolutely killing the bone at the base of my thumb. Tried two different pachys (gripper & signature?)-- both were to bulky. Finally sold the gun and replaced it with a Super Redhawk with the Hogue Tamers. With a Bushnell 2x-6x and the Hogues, the SRH is a pussy cat. Never tried the +P loads that Brian Pearce tested, but ran some 325gr Bear Tooth LFNGC 22.0gr H110 and 355gr Bear Tooth LFNGC w/ 18.8gr H110 (both Hodgdon Standard Pressure loads). Chrono results show the 325gr 1,279 fps and the 355gr at 1,164 fps respectively. I suspect Brian’s +P stuff would generate some higher numbers.
For looks, I prefer the Redhawk – comfort wise, it’s the SRH hands down.
Paul
Paul
|
|
|
Post by kaytod on Jan 18, 2014 2:45:30 GMT -5
I put a plug in for limited runs of the 4" in 357 and 41 for us twisted folks....The 4" 357 is one of my goals.
|
|
|
Post by savit260 on Jan 18, 2014 11:00:40 GMT -5
I know some say they are ugly, but I sure do think my factory polished (GKRH-445) is a fine looking double action. I'm quite happy with the double and single action trigger on this one as well.
|
|
mtnbkr
.30 Stingray
Posts: 294
|
Post by mtnbkr on Jan 18, 2014 17:08:54 GMT -5
A blued 5.5" Redhawk was my first 44magnum. The gripframe is on the large size for me. Most grips are way over-sized or have too much material behind the trigger guard, pushing the bore axis too far above the resulting grip. I finally found a solution in a set of discount Nills grips from Ebay. It has a very nice DA trigger and a passable SA trigger, though I seldom shoot anything other than DA. For a while, it did have a problem where the mainspring would get soft and it wouldn't reliably ignite primers. I would replace the spring with a new factory one and the problem would go away for a few hundred rounds. Eventually, I had a friend with a mill reduce the height of the hammer step, allowing more movement before the hammer hits the frame. I haven't had a failure to fire since.
I shot it exclusively for several years before picking up a 4" 629. I like the 629, but the DA trigger isn't nearly as nice as the Redhawk. I tend to treat it more like an oversized 44 special, leaving the true magnum stuff for the RH. I keep the 629 for two reasons: It's a S&W and it's smaller and lighter than my RH, making it a better hiking gun.
Chris
|
|