Ruger Super Redhawk 44 Mag

[Johnch]

I just got back from the range
As I was checking 25 yard groups out of the Glock 17

When I was cleaning up
I looked at the list of stuff people had for sale

Most of the stuff was WAY over priced IMO
But a 9 1/2" Ruger Super Redhawk 44 Mag on the list got me thinking
I have several 44 mag revolvers
But I started wondering if the cylinder of the Super Redhawk 44 Mag was long enough and strong enough
As I had a DW in 445 Supermag years ago and I still have some brass
Starline is not taking backorders for that brass

But I still wonder
Is the cylinder long enough and strong enough ?

Thanks
John

[Thor's Daddy]

There's not enough room for 445 SuperMag (1.6-inch case), but I believe you could pretty easily stuff a 1.4-inch case in that cylinder (think .429 Casull). And yes, cylinders in that gun are plenty strong. Plenty. Spare cylinders are available pretty cheaply for the Redhawk/Super Redhawk. Might even be worth a talk with a smith about a dual-cylinder gun. Jack Huntington comes to mind.

[Sasquatch-1]

I had a 9.5" SRH a while back. I friend had a chrono at the range one day and we ran some rounds I had made for a Desert Eagle over the Chrono using the SRH. Out of 5 rounds all clocked over 1900 FPS. These were 250 grn jacketed bullet swaged using .40 S&W brass. The handgun showed NO sign of stress afterwards.

[wilecoyote]

I bought a 9.1/2" one, next equipped with a 2-7x burris last year just to test my handloads without abusing a pair of vintage S&W ones.
I haven't used it much, but the only flaw, imho, they are the grips, perhaps suitable for smaller hands than mine.
but in .44 I only like target S&Ws grips and gloves, so just a personal thing_

[Thor's Daddy]

Along similar lines...

https://singleactions.proboards.com/...ts-chrono-data