Redhawk accuracy problems

[historicfirearms]

I recently bought a Ruger Redhawk 44 mag, 4 inch barrel. I got it used, but it looked like new. Now I think I know why the previous owner sold it.

I tried a number of different loads in it and the best groups I got with it at 25 yards were around 5 inches, some were MUCH worse than that. That was shooting off a sandbag.

Now, before everyone says its shooter error, here is my alibi. I had my S&W 629 with 6" barrel out on he same day, shooting the same loads, and was able to get 1" groups easily. Honestly, the trigger pull is better on the Smith, but the Redhawk isn't terrible at 5 pounds. I'm not recoil shy, I carry a scandium 357 j-frame, and shoot a bunch of other big bore guns.

I tried 5 different projectiles, from 245 to 310 grains, jacketed and cast. Powders were Titegroup, Unique, 2400, and H110 in a variety of charge weights.

The Redhawk's cylinder throats slug .432, the barrel groove slugged .4315 when pushed all the way through, and .432 at the muzzle as near as I could tell. So I think it does have a small thread constriction, but would it make that big of a difference?

The Redhawk has a .007 barrel/cylinder gap and also has .002 endshake. I don't have a 44 range rod, but wasn't getting any lead spitting so I think timing is on. The forcing cone and crown look like new. The throats and barrel appear fairly smooth, no major tooling marks.

I don't know what else to check. Anybody got any recommendations? I'd like to use the revolver as my survival gun (I'm a pilot and fly over some wild terrain.). So accuracy is pretty important if I have to use it to take game. I like the gun and am willing to put a little work into it. Maybe a trip back to Ruger is in order, but I'd like to get the gun shooting myself for my own satisfaction.

[Tatume]

Unless it is a very old gun, I doubt it has a thread constriction. Ruger uses a relatively loose thread and industrial thread sealer.

Having been through it recently, and knowing others who have also, my recommendation is to send it to Ruger. They know how to fix it.

Take care, Tom

[44man]

I had experience with a RH long ago. Nothing wrong with the gun but it preferred H110 over 296. OK, laugh but back then there was a burn rate difference even though it was the same powder.
Now the dies used, case tension and the primer. I bet you use mag primers.
It is a short barrel and can cause a problem with powder burn. Yet the gun should do better.
I would work with loads before anything else.

[deepwater]

I agree with Tom.
If you send it to Ruger it is essentially hand built with new fitted parts. Then you can work up your loads and realize satisfaction as to what your hand loads can do.

deepwater

[jrayborn]

I have an issue with my .45 Colt. It shoots way too far to the left even with the back sight all the way right. I just emailed customer service and we'll see how it goes.

[DougGuy]

All you gotta do is email or call them and tell them that the gun just won't group no matter what ammo you tried in it. Then let them tell you what they will do about it. It may take a day or two but most likely they will email you a prepaid next day UPS label and off it goes.

[9.3X62AL]

I would be sorely tempted to try some shoulderless-design boolits like a roundnose or round flatnose of at least .432" diameter, seated in brass expanded with a .429"-.430" expander spud, and crimped moderately. Load would consist of a faster-burning 44 Mag powder (Unique, Herco, etc.) with a velocity range of 900-1000 FPS. I smell an undersized boolit, or perhaps mildly out-of-range clocking. The shoulderless design will ameliorate a mild clocking problem, while for-certain boolit dimensions UNALTERED BY TOOLING ANOMALIES may also resolve the issue. You did not indicate the sized dimensions of your boolits used in the RH, only that its performance was quite different from that of the S&W. You may need to load two ammunition lots, one for each revolver, to align with their dimensional needs/wants/quirks. I've seen this movie a few times myself, particularly in 32-20 wheelguns.......3 lots, all different, in 3 brass makes to set them apart.

[Mal Paso]

I have that Redhawk although mine slugs about .429" groove and .432" throats. I also have a 6" 629 half lug. There's a big difference in trigger pull. Putting Pachmayr Decelerators on the Redhawk lengthened the pull and increased my accuracy.

I would be using .432 Boolits. Water dropped for supersonic. I would play with it a bit, the guy who built mine (at the factory) could have done better.

End shake, find the removal sequence for the Cylinder and replace the 2 ball bearings and see if it helps.

No screws, it's a trip!

Oh I almost forgot, I stretched the hand to fix timing issues. Put a little tension on the cylinder while cocking to make sure it locks up.

If you shoot Boolits the cylinder needs to be removed regularly to remove Boolit lube which slows the action and may cause timing issues. I do know for a fact, bad timing will open up groups. :smile:

[WALLNUTT]

Check the spring to see if it's been shortened to lighten trigger pull. RH has only one spring,if it's too light primers don't get hit hard enough.

[Lloyd Smale]

Ive had 3 short barreled redhawks. A 4 inch 44, a 4 inch 45 and a custom 3.5 inch 44 and never got stellar accuracy out of any of them. I had the 3.5 gun built just to finally have one that was a shooter and it was no better then the factory guns. My buddy whos a better shooter then anyone i know sold his 44 because it was mediocure at best. Im sure theres some out there that shoot fine but i havent ran accross one yet. Funny because Some of the most accurate 44s ive shot have been longer barreled redhawks and especially super redhawks. Before you blame it on barrel lenght about all of my guns are short barreled guns and i shoot them just fine if not better then a long barreled gun.

[historicfirearms]

Thanks for all the advice everyone. I should have mentioned that all my boolits were sized .432" and the jacketed were Hornnady 245 grains at .430, and also some factory Winchster and Remington loads.

I shot the Redhawk some more last night and am totally disappointed with its accuracy. I will call Ruger later today and see if they will fix it.

[outdoorfan]

With that big of groove diameter, is it possible that your boolits are being sized down in the reloading process and causing you this grief?

Edit: I just reread that your maximum groove is even bigger. I think your gun needs to go back to Ruger in order to get a new barrel with more user-friendly dimensions.

[Lloyd Smale]

I would defineately check it for a thread constriction. Many redhawks do have a problem there and its not just the old ones. Some of the first ones were bad though. Some had barrels screwed on so tight that that actually cracked and flew off the guns. I had a buddy that had one of those back in the day and watched his barrel go flying.

[jrayborn]

Well I got off the phone this afternoon with Angela in Customer Service at Ruger. They are going to scrap my beautiful .45 Colt Redhawk. But they are sending me a brand new 454 Casull Super Redhawk!!! Holy XXXX! I counted my Rugers to get some idea before I made the call. I own 15 different Ruger firearms. I am really pleased with the outcome.

I am a machinist and I understand that quality issues happen. It's how people treat you when you have an issue that really shows you what you mean to them as a customer. I will definitely miss my 4" Redhawk, but the Super Redhawk is something I never thought I would be able to own. I feel like a 10 year old on Christmas Eve!!

Thanks Ruger!

[MtGun44]

Must have drilled the barrel in crooked, which is unfixable. Again, Ruger comes thru.
Awesome company.

Bill

[jrayborn]

To be honest the problem was that the timing was not correct and the barrel just needed to be set back a couple thou. I really had to resist the urge to try my hand at doing it myself, I know I could do it, but the work at making the tooling and the possibility of disaster (and no more warranty!) kept me honest. The barrel just needed to be "tightened" ever so much and It would have been fine. They must not have been set up to do it.

I actually have been successfully shooting it for a couple years with a modified rear sight (more windage added) but it looked too goofy so after seeing how good Ruger C/S has been to other people I decided to give them a try. I'm really glad I did.

[paul h]

Sometimes Ruger puts out duds, and yes a 0.0005" of throat constriction can be an absolute killer on accuracy. I had that problem with an old model blackhack and no matter what bullet or powder I tried, 25yd groups were 5". I finally did a complete tune up on the gun, taylor throated it, put in a hardened bushing to tighten up the cylinder end shake, set the barrel back to tighten up the barrel/cylinder gap etc. Now it'll shoot 1/2" at 25 yds with wadcutter loads and pretty much everything else is in the 1-2" range at 25 yds.

You'll love the SRH, they tend to be very accurate. A bit of load work should have you down to 1" at 25 yds, if not at 50 yds. And many of them are mechanically accurate enough for 1" at 100 yds if the shooter does his part.

[jrayborn]

I am not that shooter! If I can get 1-2 inches at 25 yards I will be very pleased! In all honesty, I have a 6" GP100 that (to me) is scary at 25 yards. I have had more than one 1" group. If a real shooter had it I am sure it would possibly do much better. I really enjoy my Rugers!

[GP100man]

I`ve always felt Ruger would phase out the Redhawk as the Super is just better , but the plant they`re opening in Maydon NC. will produce Redhawks exclusively at first!

Cuz has a 7 1/2" barrled Super & says it`ll be in his coffin when they plant em !

I`ve been lookin for a 9 1/2" myself , a pure hunting rig.

You`ll like it , I promise, may be not as handy/qwik as the 4" barrel , but different.

GP

[tek4260]

A standard Redhawk has a plum awful trigger. I have had a few that shot well enough, but it honestly is too much work to shoot them well. Any little error in your technique is magnified 10x by that trigger and the effort required. I bought a 5.5" blued Redhawk a few years ago after reading an article in G&A titled "Make Mine a 44". I was showing it to dad and he cocked the hammer, squeezed a bit, and handed it back without snapping it. Said there is no sense in looking at it any more with a trigger that bad.

[subsonic]

Never had one of those. But I can tell you that if you are starting off that bad, something is definitely wrong with the gun mechanically. You did the "back to back" test with another gun, so you have ruled the ammo and shooter out to some degree.

I'd send it back to Ruger or trade it to someone that thinks "5 @ 25yds is great accuracy.

[44man]

Triggers just suck with the one spring. Change it to lighter and accuracy will go to pot. I did metal work for a better trigger. But the grip is an abortion for consistent hold.
The gun itself can be made to shoot but the SRH is better all the way. I was shooting beer cans at 200 yards with my SRH.

[Lloyd Smale]

one more thing the standard redhawks are notorious for is light primer hits. Its part of the design that was corrected with the super redhawk. Ive seen a couple of redhawks, one mine that went from good (not great) shooting guns to terrible shooting guns with just an action job done to them. the allready marginal hammer speed slows down even more with lighter springs. very few redhawks with spring kits in them will even reliably light off ammo unless your using federal primers.

[30calflash]

There is a lot of good info here.

The one thing that may be tried would be a lighter bullet, a 220 or 200 grain jacketed, to keep it simple. It could make a difference and you'll never know until you try.

[Mal Paso]

one more thing the standard redhawks are notorious for is light primer hits. Its part of the design that was corrected with the super redhawk. Ive seen a couple of redhawks, one mine that went from good (not great) shooting guns to terrible shooting guns with just an action job done to them. the allready marginal hammer speed slows down even more with lighter springs. very few redhawks with spring kits in them will even reliably light off ammo unless your using federal primers.

The heavy firing pin return spring on mine added to the light hammer strikes and increased the fail to fire issue with hard primers.

Too much of the energy of that single spring is devoted to trigger return and sear engagement and not enough to the hammer. I thought of changing the geometry but Ruger restricts the sale of the important parts and I am not a machinist. I tweeked the SA sear as much as I thought safe (Power Custom Stand) and shot the hell out of it. It's smooth and reliable now and my regular carry in the woods. If I run out of boolits, I still have a club.

I have not had accuracy problems other than a lousy trigger and the Pachmyer Grips fixed the pull length.

If anyone has a good trigger modification I'd like to hear about it.

[Lloyd Smale]

best thing to do to a redhawk trigger is take it apart and stone and polish every surface. Leave the spring alone. I destest a heavy trigger pull but have learned that in a redhawk its something you should just live with.

[Mal Paso]

That is where I left it. I installed a new factory mainspring, polished parts, and mashed the firing pin return spring down. I actually was trying to drift the pin housing out to replace the spring but it was in so tight I would have damaged the pin if I went further. In the process the spring got over compressed and reduced the tension which is what I wanted. Have not had an FTF in years with any primer but I also seat primers in a bench mounted APS.

It's poor geometry. If someone would make an aftermarket trigger group, I would buy it.

One good thing about Redhawks is you're Not looking for screws after a couple hundred rounds.

[98Redline]

I really like my Redhawk. I have an older 5 1/2" barrel 44 mag model and it has been accurate and reliable so far. That being said, if I were to do it again today, a Super Redhawk would be what I was after. The trigger group is much better, the weight is actually 1 oz less than the standard RH and the spike grip is an overall better design than the full gripframe of the Redhawk. The Talo exclusive SRH Toklat looks to be a nearly perfect combination of features.

http://www.handgunhunt.com/photopost/data/500/srh6.png

[WaywardSon]

I have owned several .44 Magnum revolvers over the years, mostly S & W and Ruger. The 5" Redhawk in a satin finish stainless grey was a favorite in the looks department, but I could never get it to group to suit me. So down the road it went.

Loaded up 100 rds. yesterday in preparation for deer season & will take my others to the range later today...looking forward to seeing which one will shoot best with this years load.