Ruger Redhawk .45 Colt 4.2 inch barrel

RWK · March 27, 2011, 07:45 AM

I have own three Ruger DA revolvers (an SP-101 and two GP-100s) for many years, and I truly like everything about them. I also enjoy the .45 Colt round and believe it is one of the most flexible and under-appreciated loadings (sadly, somewhat lost in the "modern" world of new, semiautomatic-oriented cartridges). My only .45 Colt DA revolver is a wonderful Smith 625 Mountain Gun. However, I am seriously considering purchasing Ruger's current production Redhawk (not SRH). I have read several reviews that suggest there are significant quality and manufacturing issues (not design problems) with this revolver, which would certainly be atypical for DA Rugers.

Therefore, I would appreciate your experiences -- both favorable and adverse. Thank you.

longlane · March 27, 2011, 07:55 AM

Thanks for the post; I too look forward to info on this gun in 45LC. I like the round too, and I've since gotten rid of my judge. So I'm looking for a DA revolver in this caliber too.

Unfortunately, all that I can contribute is that everywhere I check on buying one wants close to 9 bills for it. One shop said they'd had one before. When asked about their impressions of the gun, the proprietor just said, "Same as other Ruger DAs."

SwampYankee · March 27, 2011, 07:57 AM

I've got one, put may be 500 rounds through it without a hitch. I did have the chambers opened up and cut to the same diameter by CylinderSmith.com (but apparently he's not taking work now). It's fun to shoot but I get a lot of leading. I think I just have not found the right combination of bullet and load. Unfortunately I have not had the time to work with it more in the past year so I just load up jacketed bullets.

Smaug · March 27, 2011, 08:15 AM

My Redhawk Hunter (7.5", 44 Mag, w/ scope cutouts) was built in the 80s. I bought it used, and on the second box of ammo, the barrel broke off and tumbled downrange.

Turns out they were trying a new lube that they didn't find out until later that it was not good. So when they machine torqued the barrels into the frame, they were really stressing the metal. Many rounds later, the barrel would break off.

But Ruger dealt with it admirably. The shop I bought the gun from (used) picked up the shipping charge and sent it to Ruger. Ruger re-barreled it for free and sent it back working.

Ruger has a great reputation for fixing problems quickly, so it is probably that any manufacturing problems they had when the review guns were made is ironed out now. If not, and you really like the gun, buy one with the knowledge that Ruger will make it right if there's an issue.

BTW, the DA trigger on Redhawks is far superior to that of SP-101s and GP-100s. I did the work on my SP-101 mechanism (lighter spring, polish certain areas) and the stock Redhawk's is STILL better.

45 Colt* is a great round, especially for the hand loader. It is too damned expensive to shoot any quantity of otherwise. In a Ruger Redhawk, you can make 45 Colt loads that make 44 Magnum seem a bit light in the loafers. (although you will cure yourself of that pretty quickly) Or, make light loads that are easy to shoot, yet accurate and cut nice big holes in the target.

* - It is '45 Colt', not '45 Long Colt'. I'm sad to see so many manufacturers give in and print '45 Long Colt', because it means there are some people out there who would try to load 45 ACP in it. There never was a '45 Short' or '45 Short Colt' so the 'Long' part is superfluous.

Smaug · March 27, 2011, 08:20 AM

You may want to also consider the 44 Magnum model with 5.5" barrel, or a used 45 Colt with longer barrel. (I think they made a 45 Colt in 5.5" barrel)

5.5" barrel will make it much more fun to shoot, but without being overboard, like my 7.5". It will also make it a legal hunting gun in a lot of places, and will of course be more accurate due to the longer sight radius and less felt recoil due to the higher weight.

It is a perfect barrel length for a gun of this caliber.

44 Magnum is also a great caliber, and if you don't handload, you can shoot Specials through it, which have about the same power as standard 45 Colt. But the ammo is equally expensive.

WESHOOT2 · March 28, 2011, 06:02 AM

Of era boxes labeled long.

In fact, I heard there was short, medium, and long.

Oh, I had a 5.5" 45 Redhawk; it was superb. It took incredible abuse as a test and development platform.

stu925 · March 28, 2011, 07:48 AM

I thought I remembered hearing something about a .45 Short Colt too so I pulled out Cartridges of the World. A quick review of that shows only one .45 caliber Colt cartridge, the .45 Colt. Maybe it was omitted for some reason but I doubt it. Possibly the Long designation was to differentiate between .45 Colt and .45 S&W Schofield? Since the Schofield could be loaded in most .45 Colt guns this sounds plausible but I have no idea if that really is the reasoning.

Stu

chewie146 · March 28, 2011, 08:10 AM

I believe the long was to differentiate between the short S&W Scholfield and the longer .45 Colt. I'd say that would be a good purchase, though. In the short barrel, the velocity is going to suffer, and the .45 colt offers the option of a pretty heavy bullet. Even out of the short barrel, it will be a decent round. I'm a fan of the shorter barreled guns, as I will more likely have them with me.

Andy Taylor · March 28, 2011, 01:55 PM

The .45 Schofield is the "short" .45 cartridge. Back when the US military used both, they began using the term "Long" to differentiate between the two.

big al hunter · March 29, 2011, 12:15 AM

I have both the Redhawk and Super Redhawk. My Redhawk is a 44mag and my SRH is a 454 casull. I love shooting the 45 colt out of it, less recoil and less expensive. Never had a problem with either. bought the 454 new the year they first chambered it in 454. I bought the 44 used the year after the 454. Both have great triggers and are accurate. You won't be dissappointed.

charleym3 · March 29, 2011, 08:48 AM

I have a Redhawk 45 colt. It's new production. I've only put a couple hundred rounds through it. It gets a bit heavy by the end of an IDPA match. OTOH that weight soaks up a lot of recoil. I ditched the factory grips and put on Pachmayrs. Timing and lock up are excellent. I don't have anything negative to say about it. I wish I had bought it years ago.

Moondew · March 29, 2011, 11:25 AM

I think my eyes would "bug out" if I saw my barrel heading downrange w/o the rest of the gun!

Water-Man · March 29, 2011, 11:47 AM

I've owned both the RH and SRH in .44mag. I used them for hunting and target shooting and shot some pretty hot loads through them including Garrett. Never had any problems with them. Accurate and dependable with good triggers.

Clifford L. Hughes · March 29, 2011, 04:37 PM

Dear RWK:

Like you, I like the .45 caliber pistols. I have a Smith Modle 25 and a Smith Modle 625. With the 625 I shot a boar at point blank range with the 200 grain Hornady XTP bullet loaded to 1020 feet per second. The bullet ranged diagonally through ten inches of neck muscle. The bullet entered at the neck's base and took out three inches of neck bone only to lodge behind the jaw on the opposite side. I prefer Smith & Wessons; however, you don't have to hold your head in shame ownig a Ruger; they are fine guns.

Semper Fi.

Gunnery Sergeant
Clifford L. Hughes
USMC Retired.

March 27, 2011, 07:45 AM	#1
RWK Senior Member Join Date: August 20, 1999 Location: Occupied Virginia Posts: 2,777	Ruger Redhawk .45 Colt 4.2 inch barrel I have own three Ruger DA revolvers (an SP-101 and two GP-100s) for many years, and I truly like everything about them. I also enjoy the .45 Colt round and believe it is one of the most flexible and under-appreciated loadings (sadly, somewhat lost in the "modern" world of new, semiautomatic-oriented cartridges). My only .45 Colt DA revolver is a wonderful Smith 625 Mountain Gun. However, I am seriously considering purchasing Ruger's current production Redhawk (not SRH). I have read several reviews that suggest there are significant quality and manufacturing issues (not design problems) with this revolver, which would certainly be atypical for DA Rugers. Therefore, I would appreciate your experiences -- both favorable and adverse. Thank you. __________________ __________________ Μολών λαβέ!

March 27, 2011, 07:55 AM	#2
longlane Senior Member Join Date: November 13, 2009 Location: South Carolina Posts: 162	Ditto RWK. Considering one too. Thanks for the post; I too look forward to info on this gun in 45LC. I like the round too, and I've since gotten rid of my judge. So I'm looking for a DA revolver in this caliber too. Unfortunately, all that I can contribute is that everywhere I check on buying one wants close to 9 bills for it. One shop said they'd had one before. When asked about their impressions of the gun, the proprietor just said, "Same as other Ruger DAs." __________________ In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. -T.W.

March 27, 2011, 08:15 AM	#4
Smaug Senior Member Join Date: June 4, 2004 Location: SE Wisconsin Posts: 3,210	Manufacturing issues can happen to the best of them. My Redhawk Hunter (7.5", 44 Mag, w/ scope cutouts) was built in the 80s. I bought it used, and on the second box of ammo, the barrel broke off and tumbled downrange. Turns out they were trying a new lube that they didn't find out until later that it was not good. So when they machine torqued the barrels into the frame, they were really stressing the metal. Many rounds later, the barrel would break off. But Ruger dealt with it admirably. The shop I bought the gun from (used) picked up the shipping charge and sent it to Ruger. Ruger re-barreled it for free and sent it back working. Ruger has a great reputation for fixing problems quickly, so it is probably that any manufacturing problems they had when the review guns were made is ironed out now. If not, and you really like the gun, buy one with the knowledge that Ruger will make it right if there's an issue. BTW, the DA trigger on Redhawks is far superior to that of SP-101s and GP-100s. I did the work on my SP-101 mechanism (lighter spring, polish certain areas) and the stock Redhawk's is STILL better. 45 Colt* is a great round, especially for the hand loader. It is too damned expensive to shoot any quantity of otherwise. In a Ruger Redhawk, you can make 45 Colt loads that make 44 Magnum seem a bit light in the loafers. (although you will cure yourself of that pretty quickly) Or, make light loads that are easy to shoot, yet accurate and cut nice big holes in the target. * - It is '45 Colt', not '45 Long Colt'. I'm sad to see so many manufacturers give in and print '45 Long Colt', because it means there are some people out there who would try to load 45 ACP in it. There never was a '45 Short' or '45 Short Colt' so the 'Long' part is superfluous. __________________ -Jeremy "Rudeness is the weak man's imitation of strength." - Eric Hoffer

March 27, 2011, 08:20 AM	#5
Smaug Senior Member Join Date: June 4, 2004 Location: SE Wisconsin Posts: 3,210	By the way... You may want to also consider the 44 Magnum model with 5.5" barrel, or a used 45 Colt with longer barrel. (I think they made a 45 Colt in 5.5" barrel) 5.5" barrel will make it much more fun to shoot, but without being overboard, like my 7.5". It will also make it a legal hunting gun in a lot of places, and will of course be more accurate due to the longer sight radius and less felt recoil due to the higher weight. It is a perfect barrel length for a gun of this caliber. 44 Magnum is also a great caliber, and if you don't handload, you can shoot Specials through it, which have about the same power as standard 45 Colt. But the ammo is equally expensive. __________________ -Jeremy "Rudeness is the weak man's imitation of strength." - Eric Hoffer

March 28, 2011, 06:02 AM	#6
WESHOOT2 Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 1999 Location: home on the range; Vermont (Caspian country) Posts: 14,324	wish I had them pics Of era boxes labeled long. In fact, I heard there was short, medium, and long. Oh, I had a 5.5" 45 Redhawk; it was superb. It took incredible abuse as a test and development platform. __________________ . "all my ammo is mostly retired factory ammo"

March 27, 2011, 07:57 AM	#3
SwampYankee Registration in progress Join Date: November 1, 2008 Location: I can be found on a number of other forums. Posts: 1,333	I've got one, put may be 500 rounds through it without a hitch. I did have the chambers opened up and cut to the same diameter by CylinderSmith.com (but apparently he's not taking work now). It's fun to shoot but I get a lot of leading. I think I just have not found the right combination of bullet and load. Unfortunately I have not had the time to work with it more in the past year so I just load up jacketed bullets.

March 28, 2011, 07:48 AM	#7
stu925 Senior Member Join Date: December 20, 2010 Location: New York Posts: 953	I thought I remembered hearing something about a .45 Short Colt too so I pulled out Cartridges of the World. A quick review of that shows only one .45 caliber Colt cartridge, the .45 Colt. Maybe it was omitted for some reason but I doubt it. Possibly the Long designation was to differentiate between .45 Colt and .45 S&W Schofield? Since the Schofield could be loaded in most .45 Colt guns this sounds plausible but I have no idea if that really is the reasoning. Stu

March 28, 2011, 08:10 AM	#8
chewie146 Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2010 Location: New Mexico Posts: 853	I believe the long was to differentiate between the short S&W Scholfield and the longer .45 Colt. I'd say that would be a good purchase, though. In the short barrel, the velocity is going to suffer, and the .45 colt offers the option of a pretty heavy bullet. Even out of the short barrel, it will be a decent round. I'm a fan of the shorter barreled guns, as I will more likely have them with me.

March 28, 2011, 01:55 PM	#9
Andy Taylor Senior Member Join Date: October 22, 2010 Posts: 499	The .45 Schofield is the "short" .45 cartridge. Back when the US military used both, they began using the term "Long" to differentiate between the two.

March 29, 2011, 12:15 AM	#10
big al hunter Senior Member Join Date: March 12, 2011 Location: Washington state Posts: 1,558	I have both the Redhawk and Super Redhawk. My Redhawk is a 44mag and my SRH is a 454 casull. I love shooting the 45 colt out of it, less recoil and less expensive. Never had a problem with either. bought the 454 new the year they first chambered it in 454. I bought the 44 used the year after the 454. Both have great triggers and are accurate. You won't be dissappointed. __________________ You can't fix stupid....however ignorance can be cured through education!

March 29, 2011, 08:48 AM	#11
charleym3 Senior Member Join Date: December 14, 2001 Location: Central NC Posts: 538	I have a Redhawk 45 colt. It's new production. I've only put a couple hundred rounds through it. It gets a bit heavy by the end of an IDPA match. OTOH that weight soaks up a lot of recoil. I ditched the factory grips and put on Pachmayrs. Timing and lock up are excellent. I don't have anything negative to say about it. I wish I had bought it years ago. __________________ -When the need is great enough, limitations are meaningless. -Small helpings of experience become wisdom, while large servings become bitterness and despair. -I was once described as self-righteous and patronizing! I pointed out that I am actually arrogant & condescending.

March 29, 2011, 11:25 AM	#12
Moondew Member Join Date: March 22, 2011 Location: LA Posts: 28	I think my eyes would "bug out" if I saw my barrel heading downrange w/o the rest of the gun!

March 29, 2011, 11:47 AM	#13
Water-Man Senior Member Join Date: March 23, 2008 Location: Jacksonville, FL Posts: 2,126	I've owned both the RH and SRH in .44mag. I used them for hunting and target shooting and shot some pretty hot loads through them including Garrett. Never had any problems with them. Accurate and dependable with good triggers.

March 29, 2011, 04:37 PM	#14
Clifford L. Hughes Senior Member Join Date: February 24, 2011 Location: Southern Californis Posts: 795	Clifford L. Hughes Dear RWK: Like you, I like the .45 caliber pistols. I have a Smith Modle 25 and a Smith Modle 625. With the 625 I shot a boar at point blank range with the 200 grain Hornady XTP bullet loaded to 1020 feet per second. The bullet ranged diagonally through ten inches of neck muscle. The bullet entered at the neck's base and took out three inches of neck bone only to lodge behind the jaw on the opposite side. I prefer Smith & Wessons; however, you don't have to hold your head in shame ownig a Ruger; they are fine guns. Semper Fi. Gunnery Sergeant Clifford L. Hughes USMC Retired.