Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
.
Dec 24, 2015 13:26:38 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2015 13:26:38 GMT -5
.
|
|
|
.
Dec 24, 2015 13:33:58 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Encore64 on Dec 24, 2015 13:33:58 GMT -5
Well, first off on your request to be realistic. If a bear is trying to eat you, why worry if your gun has a goofy spring or is unattractive?
A 4.2" Redhawk 45 Colt loaded with the right ammo would work. So would the Toklat or Alaskan models in 454 Casull or 480 Ruger.
Several great guns to choose from. Can do upgrades as time and finances allow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
.
Dec 24, 2015 14:27:58 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2015 14:27:58 GMT -5
I mentioned the single spring in the Redhawk because in researching it, they have been known to go click instead of boom. That, and a possible too-short firing pin. I realize a bear encounter is rare and this prospective gun would be much more likely to shoot (at) deer and coyotes, hence the 4" barrel minimum, the Alaskan and other snub guns are too short for my taste.
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Dec 24, 2015 14:49:16 GMT -5
I have four Redhawks, all 100% reliable.
I would venture to say if they go "click," then someone has attempted a shade tree trigger job and botched it up.
You can talk yourself into or out of anything.
Merry Christmas...
|
|
45bbh
.240 Incinerator
Posts: 50
|
.
Dec 24, 2015 18:25:31 GMT -5
bulasteve likes this
Post by 45bbh on Dec 24, 2015 18:25:31 GMT -5
I had a 4.2" Redhawk 45 Colt a handful of years ago and it wasn't a bad gun by any means, but I bought a Toklat a while back and absolutely love it. I did put some Wolff springs in the Toklat to improve the stock trigger pull, but think about what you're getting for the money. There's barely any price (or weight) difference between the Redhawk .45 Colt and the Toklat, but you get a better sights, better trigger and a better grip by going with the Toklat. I can also say that my Toklat may very well be the most accurate handgun I've ever shot.
|
|
|
.
Dec 24, 2015 23:26:07 GMT -5
Post by Markbo on Dec 24, 2015 23:26:07 GMT -5
I have four Redhawks, all 100% reliable. I would venture to say if they go "click," then someone has attempted a shade tree trigger job and botched it up. You can talk yourself into or out of anything. Merry Christmas... Ditto. Even have 4 of them. That has never happened in any of mine. Not once. I dont own a SRH. I find them ... hiw can I put it nicely...exceedingly unattractive.
|
|
|
.
Dec 24, 2015 23:59:39 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Encore64 on Dec 24, 2015 23:59:39 GMT -5
I guess that's true, but have two SRHs in my battery. The reintroduced stainless models in 454 & 480.
After Max posted about their accuracy, I couldn't pass them up.
He was right, they both shoot great. That's why I don't fret over the throat dimensions on the new SBHs. Very similar to my SRH guns. Admittedly, the 480 throats are .001" tighter at .476".
|
|
|
.
Dec 25, 2015 6:47:56 GMT -5
Post by bulasteve on Dec 25, 2015 6:47:56 GMT -5
I no longer have a RH, never had a SRH and am amongst those that have issues with their looks. It is hard to argue with 45BBH's logic though. "Better sights, better trigger, and better grip". Add to that the accuracy folks are reporting and we are into pretty is, as pretty does territory.
|
|
|
.
Dec 25, 2015 20:34:47 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by trueat1stlight on Dec 25, 2015 20:34:47 GMT -5
Here's another option: I had my SRH in .44 Mag chopped down to 5 inches and a DX front sight installed: CHOPPED! I had my gunsmith cut the barrel down to 5 inches and install the DX front sight base and tall blade. I need to come up with a better profile since this blade sticks up so high I disengage it from the base when drawing from the holster and it pops out clear of the base. I haven't shot it yet so no idea if I'll even need this much height. Anyone else running this setup and if so, any solutions to this problem? Seems the DX base is a great idea in that you can swap out sights, except that you can also lose a front sight inadvertently. -John
|
|
|
.
Dec 26, 2015 0:29:20 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by jeffer on Dec 26, 2015 0:29:20 GMT -5
Redhawk 45 Colt/45 acp
Now that is versatile and can handle the best loads you desire
|
|
|
.
Dec 26, 2015 13:49:50 GMT -5
via mobile
BigBore44 likes this
Post by bradshaw on Dec 26, 2015 13:49:50 GMT -5
For a general purpose/outdoors/packing sixgun, and there's bears in them there hills. I want a 4"-ish, stainless, double action revolver, preferably in 45 Colt or 454 Casull, that can take a steady diet of heavy bullet hot ammo. This rules out the various Smith and Wessons, the Redhawk has the goofy single spring system, the Super Redhawks are not attractive, however the Toklat is kinda growing on me. Wish Ruger would make Bowens GP-44 a cataloged item! That's my first choice, but, alas, I'm not a rich man. I greatly prefer the rubber grip on the Supers versus the one on the Redhawk. I'm leaning toward the Redhawk, they seem popular with the resident experts here. Thoughts? Money's tight so be realistic. Money's burning a hole in my pocket but I don't want to make an expensive mistake. Thanks. Jlk45.... looks like you're answering your own question. Since you get along with the Super Redhawk grip and not that of the Redhawk, permit your hand----not your eye----to decide. Your eye will thank you at the target. The target is the other aesthetic, where accuracy warms the heart. Find a SRH, you may be limited to .454 Casull, and have the barrel shortened. Try deep seating in .454 brass. Do not settle for a grip your hand ends up fighting. David Bradshaw
|
|
|
.
Dec 26, 2015 14:16:01 GMT -5
Post by BigBore44 on Dec 26, 2015 14:16:01 GMT -5
Mr. Bradshaw Sounds like Great advice... I totally believe that grip comfort goes a long way towards accuracy. When I first got my CCW permit I bought a single 6. The grip always felt too short and it still does. I shoot it ok but its not a comfy grip to me. I installed a set of the rubber Hogue's and they feel GREAT, and it improved my shooting. Looks, Not great, feel is Awesome compared to the stock grips.
I believe that's why I like the SRH's so much, they just fit my hand and feel very comfortable. I WANT to like the single actions, but the DA guns just feel better in my hands. As soon as I can find a Ruger Bisley to handle, than maybe I will get some more SA guns in the safe.
Good luck BigBore44
|
|
|
.
Dec 26, 2015 21:33:46 GMT -5
BigBore44 likes this
Post by ecvmatt on Dec 26, 2015 21:33:46 GMT -5
I have had a Redhawk since the middle 80's and it has never failed to go bang. I also have an Alaskan, mostly for fun, but also for when I return to AK. The last time I went to AK I had a Glock 20 which worked well but had some shortcomings. The SRH Alaskan addressed most of those, but I would have perfered to get a 4-5" SRH. Now I am on the hunt for one to cut down. I agree with the others, go with the one that feels best in your hand.
|
|
Paden
.375 Atomic
Lower Goldstream Creek
Posts: 1,132
|
.
Dec 27, 2015 0:30:16 GMT -5
Post by Paden on Dec 27, 2015 0:30:16 GMT -5
I'd go with the Alaskan. I wish they would offer a 4" Alaskan in .45 Colt.
|
|
|
.
Dec 27, 2015 7:35:11 GMT -5
BigBore44 likes this
Post by Ken O'Neill on Dec 27, 2015 7:35:11 GMT -5
Well, to be a naysayer, let me preface my remarks by saying that I like both Redhawks and Super Redhawks. I've owned nine Redhawks in all four calibers, since they were introduced in 1980, and still own three of them. I've also owned two SRH's and still have one. Poor trigger strikes can definitely occur with the Redhawk, regardless of whether the single spring is left stock, modified, or changed. I've had the problem with 2 of mine, in both single action and double action with stock springs, and it can be induced in many of them in double action, if springs are changed. It's not urban myth. The trigger can be made to be superb and remain 100% reliable in single action and double action, in all the SRH's I've encountered, so my vote goes to the Toklat! By the way, if you don't believe you're going to need the DA capability, I'd vote for a Super Blackhawk.
|
|