Redhawk Sight Clicks

[Frank]

Anyone know what the elevation value is per click?

[44man]

It depends on barrel length. I had a formula here somewhere but can't find it.
My 10" SBH was 1, 2, 3, 4. 1" at 50 meters, 2" at 100, etc.
As barrels get shorter the amount goes up per click.
I found he easy way was to just shoot a group at 50, adjust the sight so many clicks and shoot another. Measure how far it moved the group. Divide by the clicks you added.

[Larry Gibson]

Shorter the barrel the larger the value per click.

Larry Gibson

[Frank]

44man:

It depends on barrel length. I had a formula here somewhere but can't find it.
My 10" SBH was 1, 2, 3, 4. 1" at 50 meters, 2" at 100, etc.
As barrels get shorter the amount goes up per click.
I found he easy way was to just shoot a group at 50, adjust the sight so many clicks and shoot another. Measure how far it moved the group. Divide by the clicks you added.

Thanks.

[runnin lead]

Any thing it wants to be, It could go up while going down or down while going up.
SERIOUSLY !
Back when IHMSA had a ruling that you had to use sights available from the factory I got rid of a pefectly good Redhawk with perfectly bad sights.
A friend put a dial indicator on a Ruger sight & what the indicator showed was happening in one revolution was nuts.
He thought I lost it one day while spotting for him & the indicator backed up EVERYTHING.

[44man]

Any thing it wants to be, It could go up while going down or down while going up.
SERIOUSLY !
Back when IHMSA had a ruling that you had to use sights available from the factory I got rid of a pefectly good Redhawk with perfectly bad sights.
A friend put a dial indicator on a Ruger sight & what the indicator showed was happening in one revolution was nuts.
He thought I lost it one day while spotting for him & the indicator backed up EVERYTHING.

That is true, had the same problems and bought new elevation screws by the pack. We could not change sights on production and Ruger would not go back to the good sights.
The very worst was the front sight on the S&W IHMSA revolver. It never worked and neither did the special TC front sight.
It was the reason some revolvers beat the Ruger not because the Ruger did not shoot but because expensive sights made the others better.
We argued about it forever but IHMSA was stuck on rules. It was unfair a man could spend over $2000 just to have better sights.
Yet, I made the Ruger work and yes it was the cheap screw. I think they were a quarter.
I put STP on them or they would wear fast too.

[Frank]

How much higher would you expect a 340 grain to impact compared to a 300 grain, with the same sight setting, at 50 yards, normally?

[44man]

How much higher would you expect a 340 grain to impact compared to a 300 grain, with the same sight setting, at 50 yards, normally?

I would just do it on paper because you might hold the gun tighter with the heavy boolit. It might be 2" to 3".
I have seen many boolits hit the same place too because the twist and velocity can change things up and down and even sideways. Heavier boolits even with a powder reduction can sometimes be as fast as the lighter boolit.
I don't think it can be predicted.
Record it all in your little book so you can move back and forth with sight settings.
My IHMSA book had all sight settings for everything. Even shooting cans had a change from the 6 o'clock hold used for steel.
The screwdriver is your best friend!

[subsonic]

http://www.castbullet.com/shooting/3030.htm

has this formula

"desired bullet impact movement in inches ÷ range in inches x sight radius = sight movement in inches"

I have used it before and it works. Need your dial caliper, a tape measure, and a calculator. To remember it easily, just think of two right triangles. The point of each meets at the visible tip of the front sight. You are just doing basic geometry where the angles of the triangle stay the same, so the lengths of the sides must stay in proportion to each other.

Clicks can definitely be sloppy, even in optics.

[44man]

http://www.castbullet.com/shooting/3030.htm

has this formula

"desired bullet impact movement in inches ÷ range in inches x sight radius = sight movement in inches"

I have used it before and it works. Need your dial caliper, a tape measure, and a calculator. To remember it easily, just think of two right triangles. The point of each meets at the visible tip of the front sight. You are just doing basic geometry where the angles of the triangle stay the same, so the lengths of the sides must stay in proportion to each other.

Clicks can definitely be sloppy, even in optics.

Great, I lost it somewhere.

[Frank]

What I'm doing is working up loads with my LBT 340 grain WLN. It has the longest nose you can fit in the Redhawk and has plenty of room for powder. With 23.0 grains H110, it is still printing higher, so it wants more powder. That is also mirrored by the point of impact. Each charge it gets lower and lower. With the Lee 300, 21.5 grn sight setting, the LBT 340 was printing 6 1/2" high. With 22.5 the LBT did OK, 1 1/2" at 50 yards. I'm going to take it up, 23.5, 24, 24.5, 25 grains next. Then the Leupy comes off and iron sights back on. The Lee 300 took 3 1/2 turns from the bottom. So there are plenty of clicks to throw any heavy bullet. But any heavier and it will take up powder room. The LBT looks like the perfect combo for the Redhawk!

[44man]

What I'm doing is working up loads with my LBT 340 grain WLN. It has the longest nose you can fit in the Redhawk and has plenty of room for powder. With 23.0 grains H110, it is still printing higher, so it wants more powder. That is also mirrored by the point of impact. Each charge it gets lower and lower. With the Lee 300, 21.5 grn sight setting, the LBT 340 was printing 6 1/2" high. With 22.5 the LBT did OK, 1 1/2" at 50 yards. I'm going to take it up, 23.5, 24, 24.5, 25 grains next. Then the Leupy comes off and iron sights back on. The Lee 300 took 3 1/2 turns from the bottom. So there are plenty of clicks to throw any heavy bullet. But any heavier and it will take up powder room. The LBT looks like the perfect combo for the Redhawk!

NO, NO, NO, wrong thing to do by raising loads. Use the screwdriver.

[subsonic]

From what I have read, the Redhawk should eat your top loads no problem.

That long cylinder/long nosed boolit and offset cylinder notches make for a wannabe .454
I read/heard some where that you can look at .454 starting loads/pressure for data for Redhawks.

I would not run top level .454 loads though, even at the same OAL. Use the .454 data to make sure you are not up there.

[Frank]

subsonic:

I read/heard some where that you can look at .454 starting loads/pressure for data for Redhawks.

I go by extraction and with 23 grains they pushed out easy.

[44man]

subsonic:

I go by extraction and with 23 grains they pushed out easy.

That is as high as I would go. Even that is high pressure.
You gain so little velocity when you increase loads that it scares me because pressure goes up.
There is a fine line between extraction and a blow up.

[subsonic]

If you go here: http://data.hodgdon.com/main_menu.asp

And punch in .454 data, you get this data, which I have cut out of the page:



Now a fellow might decide what pressure he feels is safe in his Redhawk, let's say he want's to run it at .44 mag pressure, which is more than "ruger only" .45 colt and less than full boogy .454 insanity. I'm not advocating this, but for argument's sake, lets say it's 40,000 cup or 36,000psi.

Now looking at that data, and comparing OAL, and knowing that the .454 brass is .100" longer than .45 Colt (1.280 vs 1.380), and considering boolit nose length..... Can a fellow maybe extrapolate to see if he's in the ball park or way out in left feild? I think he can.

And I would add, that a wise fellow could make some pretty accurate assumptions about how increasing nose length by .100 would affect pressures, velocity, and required powder charge.

[Frank]

44man:

That is as high as I would go. Even that is high pressure.
You gain so little velocity when you increase loads that it scares me because pressure goes up.
There is a fine line between extraction and a blow up.

From 22.O-22.5 there was a 3" drop at 50 yards. That must be because velocity increased. 23.0 was no problem extracting.

[Frank]

subsonic:

And I would add, that a wise fellow could make some pretty accurate assumptions about how increasing nose length by .100 would affect pressures, velocity, and required powder charge.
__________________

Right. Quickload helps you make those adjustments. I have chrongraphed the Lee 300 21.5 grain H110 load and it's only going 1083 fps. QL shows 24,000 psi with that load and the program shows that velocity. Change the figures to the long nose and pressures and velocities go down.

[44man]

If you go here: http://data.hodgdon.com/main_menu.asp

And punch in .454 data, you get this data, which I have cut out of the page:



Now a fellow might decide what pressure he feels is safe in his Redhawk, let's say he want's to run it at .44 mag pressure, which is more than "ruger only" .45 colt and less than full boogy .454 insanity. I'm not advocating this, but for argument's sake, lets say it's 40,000 cup or 36,000psi.

Now looking at that data, and comparing OAL, and knowing that the .454 brass is .100" longer than .45 Colt (1.280 vs 1.380), and considering boolit nose length..... Can a fellow maybe extrapolate to see if he's in the ball park or way out in left feild? I think he can.

And I would add, that a wise fellow could make some pretty accurate assumptions about how increasing nose length by .100 would affect pressures, velocity, and required powder charge.

I do not think Frank is shooting a .454 from his Redhawk, it should be a .45 Colt.

[Frank]

.454 brass is thicker, so it is wrong to pull out .454 data when discussing .45 Colt. I agree with 44man. He is probably right that it is right near max already. A little more will be OK. Not to load a bunch more or to decide it needs to be hot rodded, or that there is a new level of loads. Only the accurate load is what is important. Every shot counts. I may have to pull out the chronograph. Darn!