SRH or Redhawk

[NSP64]

I;m shopping for a christmas Gift (mine:mrgreen:) and was looking at Ruger SRH and Redhawk. Had a Redhawk years ago and loved it. I will use it mostly for hunting but like to plink with reduced loads. Want to stay with 44mag. I'm big (6' 300lb) and was looking at the SRH just because it's there. difference is $80.00 between the two. I handled a stainless Redhawk 5.5" and liked it. And the SRH 7.5 is nice also.:confused: I have seen alot of people here (cast boolits) are shooting SRH's in bigger calibers but was wanting input on reliability. Both can be had with rings.

[Lloyd Smale]

for me if i was going to scope it id step up the the super but if not id go with a redhawk just because supers are ugly.

[jtaylor1960]

Ruger's web site confirms what LLoyd told us earlier about the 480 Ruger with a five shot cylinder.That would be a tempting choice.

[Bass Ackward]

Lloyd mentioned scoping. But then there are carrying considerations. Hard to plink with something that's home in a drawer. General appearance and steel preferences. I prefer the internals of the Super if you like the flexibility of easily altering trigger pulls.

So no free lunch. You gotta run all this through and see how it shakes out. Or buy both. Get a 4" Redhawk to wear and a 9 1/2 Super to shoot. Ruger'd love ya then.

[NSP64]

I prefer the internals of the Super if you like the flexibility of easily altering trigger pulls.

Or buy both. Get a 4" Redhawk to wear and a 9 1/2 Super to shoot. Ruger'd love ya then



Oh so tempting:-D can the SRH trigger be adjusted easier?

[NSP64]

for me if i was going to scope it id step up the the super but if not id go with a redhawk just because supers are ugly.

The redhawk can be had with scope rings and built in ring cutouts. I may have to go play with them both again. internally are there any/many diferences between the two. I wasn't sure if the cylander was bigger on the SRH, or if had an extra locking latch. There seems to be more aftermarket grips for the redhawk, and not much for the SRH.

[lastmanout]

I have owned a few large frame Rugers (8), even had a 357 Redhawk with the 7.5" barrel (kinda rare). The Redhawk hammer has a larger travel arc compared to the Super Redhawk. That makes for longer locktime, add a non fatory spring kit and the action has a 'mushy' feel. The factory scope mounting of the Super Redhawk is much better that the early Redhawk (gets very nose heavy). I just sold my 9.5' 44 mag. It was a great shooter with 300 grain Boolits and a red dot scope, But was VERY large. All the Ruger 44's are strong but heavier pistols. Mine where all accurate enough to plink at 100 yards comfortably. Today I am down to only one 44 mag. It is an early Super Redhawk with 7.5" barrel and a red dot sight. It seems the best compromise for me. Through the Rugers do not have the sweet triggers or graceful lines of the Smith's, they are strong, accurate and last a lifetime- that is their beauty.:drinks:

[NSP64]

yep, I'm leaning toward the SRH with 7.5" tube.

[Bass Ackward]

Oh so tempting:-D can the SRH trigger be adjusted easier?


NSP,

As you refine a Redhawk trigger, you end up making it so that it doesn't cock as far. As it doesn't cock as far, the hand doesn't come up as high. This change in height "MAY" be critical to pushing up far enough to index the cylinder properly. This can be compensated to a small degree by working the action faster but that increases wear too as the only thing left to rotate the cylinder is the stop spring in the notch itself.

In the end, you need to buy several new hands to do a good action job. They will all be different lengths as the last 5 I bought varied by .020. Then if you aren't lucky to get the proper length, you will be fitting up a new hand. This is a trial and error (PIA) process, that would have pushed Job to suicide. Especially, if you have to do so, that you break through the surface hardening. Then you will need to HT it to wear properly again. If you don't heat treat, you will be fitting up another hand in what seems a short order.

The same thing CAN happen with a super if you don't watch what you are doing, but you have more options change and alter springs without having to remove metal.

The best handgun solution Ruger doesn't make yet. This would be to bob the frame on the Super to look like a Redhawk. A bigger GP100 for all intents and purposes and simply offer multiple barrel lengths to customer preference. I believe costs will eventually do this. Making two frames for basically the same market is costly. I anxiously await the GP 1000.

[Dale53]

I use both a Smith Model 29, 8 3/8" (scoped) and a Ruger Red Hawk 7.5" (scoped). I DO prefer the Smith Trigger (pure poetry) but when hunting in inclement weather, I grab the Ruger. The Ruger has had a trigger job and is MUCH better than issue, but it does not equal the Smith trigger. However, the Ruger is undeniably more rugged and I shoot the 310 gr Lee RF in the Ruger with no worries.

So, for strength and bad weather, the Ruger is it. Both revolvers shoot about equally well (under 4" at 100 yards - sometimes WELL under 4").

I don't care for the SRH - it is just too ugly and too big...

Dale53

[waksupi]

I did try the spring kit with my old Redhawk. Once I got the trigger down to where I liked it, it would no longer fire reliably when shot fast double action. So, I went back to the stock springs.

[NSP64]

has anyone checked the cylinder throats, to see what they mic at? didn't know if one (SRH/ redhawk) might be tighter or has anyone gotten a lemon?

[MT Gianni]

My Redhawk's cylinders all miked under .430 and over .429 which I considerd excellent. Take a jacket bullet with you that measures .429 and make sure that it falls through all the holes. Gianni

[Mk42gunner]

I had two different Stainless 5 1/2" Redhawks in 44. Both were capable of easy double action hits on a 3 lb coffee can at 100 yards, wish I still had one.

The only drawback that I can remember about the Redhawk was that with factory loads it would torque enough in my hand to scrape the top edge of the trigger guard along my trigger finger. Putting a slightly larger radius over the trigger cured this.

The best grips in my opinion were a toss up between the factory ones and Hogue Monogrips.

I will have another one someday......

Robert

[NSP64]

My Redhawk's cylinders all miked under .430 and over .429 which I considerd excellent. Take a jacket bullet with you that measures .429 and make sure that it falls through all the holes. Gianni

this is to make sure the chambers are at least .429? As long as the chamber mouths are .429 or bigger the forcing cone should squeeze it down to the bore size? Why a j bullit?

[NSP64]

I found somewhere that the SRH has a trigger spring setup like the GP100 (spring inside of spring) so its easier to reduce tension without affecting performance. the redhawk has only 1 spring for the job.:confused:

[BOOM BOOM]

Hi,
I prefer the RH myself, am still looking for one in 357.:Fire:

[Rafe Covington]

for me if i was going to scope it id step up the the super but if not id go with a redhawk just because supers are ugly.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, like mine alot.:drinks:

[NSP64]

Buff hunter, is your a 44 or some other cal? I just worry that I'm overkilling it. They look like an m1 tank.

[45nut]

I've never owned a standard RH, but I have 2 SRH-454's and they have done some impressive shooting for me. Buckshot witnessed a one shot kill on a steel pillow at NCBS that must have weighed well over 100#'s.

I sent one back to OTT.LLC and he added a brake and I duracoated the frame.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/45nut/SRH/100_1058.jpg

Turned out well enough for me.

[wonderwolf]

Thats a nice SRH there 45nut.....Shame its not in .44 [smilie=1:

[snowtigger]

I have two SRH's. One in 44, and one in 454. The .44 has over 25,000 rounds through it, mostly full bore loads. It is still solid. The trigger is worn in to about the smoothest I have ever owned. I have had exactly zero problems with it.
The SRH had a problem with ACCIDENTAL Discharges. Ruger fixed it, with no questions asked. BTW Those guys? in the repair shop know how to work a trigger. It is the best trigger I have ever seen come out of Ruger. Wish they were working in the original assembly plant.

[Lucky Joe]

And now Ruger has a 4" Redhawk .45 LC. That about settles it for me, I think this package will get a lot of votes for the perfect packing pistol. Although mine will probably always be a 4 5/8 Blackhawk .357.

[wonderwolf]

And now Ruger has a 4" Redhawk .45 LC. That about settles it for me, I think this package will get a lot of votes for the perfect packing pistol. Although mine will probably always be a 4 5/8 Blackhawk .357.


I got to handle one of these not too long ago at a gun shop on the way home from a gunshow hehe. 2 things bother me about it though 1 is only because I have not shot it and don't know but I think the ejection rod set up looks a fuzz flimsy compared to my 29's? The other thing that bothered me was how the special grip that came on it was formed. the gun sits really high up and the grip is a little short for my hands. But I would have to shoot one before I could really put those 2 complaints in stone. I would like to get a 4" or a 5" :-D Havn't done presents yet so who knows whats under the tree.

[Lucky Joe]

I got to handle one of these not too long ago at a gun shop on the way home from a gunshow hehe. 2 things bother me about it though 1 is only because I have not shot it and don't know but I think the ejection rod set up looks a fuzz flimsy compared to my 29's? The other thing that bothered me was how the special grip that came on it was formed. the gun sits really high up and the grip is a little short for my hands. But I would have to shoot one before I could really put those 2 complaints in stone. I would like to get a 4" or a 5" :-D Havn't done presents yet so who knows whats under the tree.

I know what you mean by judging before you shoot it. I'm not climbing over rocks just to get one of the big Redhawk .45's. Actually I would like to find a Stainless .357 Redhawk at the same time that funds are available. To fill the .45 LC need I have an AccuSport Blackhawk Convertible Bisley that fills the bill quite nicely.

[anachronism]

I've had plenty of both revolvers. If I had to choose between them, for functionality I'd choose the Super. The action of the Super is far easier to tune than the Std. model is. You can get a really nice trigger on a Super, much simpler than you can on a Std. model. During my last financial upheaval, I let my Std. model go, and kept the Super that I tuned myself. Add a set of Hogue grips, and you're ready to go.

[NSP64]

Well thanks to everyone for their input. I stopped by shop on way home tonight and played with the Redhawk and the SRH again. I bought the SRH.:drinks: This weekend I'll be at the bat cave slugging barrel and mic'n throats and checking forcing cone:Fire: I'm a DA kind of guy even though I use them SA most of the time, but they had a stainless bisley in 45 colt that felt soooooo good.

[Lucky Joe]

Newsmokepole64,

Hay buddy if that Bisley was an AccuSport Ruger offering you may have let the bettern of the bunch get away. I have the convertible .45 and it is for sure a keeper.

[NSP64]

Newsmokepole64,

Hay buddy if that Bisley was an AccuSport Ruger offering you may have let the bettern of the bunch get away. I have the convertible .45 and it is for sure a keeper.

How can you tell?

[NSP64]

this one was shiny (polished stainless?) unfluted cylinder with some kind of engraving on it, smooth wood grip panels.:-D

[Three44s]

It's a tough call between the SRH and the RH .......

I bought a SRH for a barrel shortening project and planned on selling my RH 7.5" integral.

The SRH still wears it's 9.5" and the RH is still with me ....... and it's been 7 years and still can't decide which I like better.

Both Ruger DA's were tuned by the same gun smith ............ truely fine triggers now (and I am fussy about triggers as I have a Smith MG 629 that's simply outstanding as to it's trigger).

But both Rugers must have Federal primers due to light hammer fall ...... OR the firing pin protrusion needs to increase!

When my old stock of Federal primers run out ....... I might be in trouble as I understand that new product (when you can find them) is manufactured with the same cups as CCI's.

It's always something!

If you really want to understand bullet fit up and cylinder/cylinder mouth/bore size issues .... I recommend the book from Beartooth Bullets:


http://www.beartoothbullets.com/bulletselect/index.htm

(Look at the left side of your screen and click on "Book" .......)



Good luck chosing and enjoy the ride!

Three 44s

[Naphtali]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/45nut/SRH/100_1058.jpgAre these medium height rings, or low? One-inch, or 30 mm?

[Lloyd Smale]

thats one thing i cant argure about them. the ones ive shot have been some of the most accurate out of the box handguns ive ever had on a bench.
I've never owned a standard RH, but I have 2 SRH-454's and they have done some impressive shooting for me. Buckshot witnessed a one shot kill on a steel pillow at NCBS that must have weighed well over 100#'s.

I sent one back to OTT.LLC and he added a brake and I duracoated the frame.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/45nut/SRH/100_1058.jpg

Turned out well enough for me.

[Lucky Joe]

Smokepole64

AccuSport Bisley, made as a special run for AccuSport who are distributors in the firearms market.
http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k168/Luckyjoe_01/Accusport-3-2910-55.jpg
http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k168/Luckyjoe_01/11N07-3-3012-59.jpg
http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k168/Luckyjoe_01/AccuSport2-3-3011-30.jpg

[NSP64]

I called the shop today, and It is just a factory 45c/45acp convertable SBH bisley:(

[Tom W.]

Ruger must Really love me! I have two SRHs, a 22/45, .45 Colt BH convertable and a S/S
S-6, not to mention the rifles.


I'd go with the SRHs, you can't really tell how ugly they are when you're looking down the sights or through a scope. And a Redhawk with a scope is really ugly!

[Lucky Joe]

To the best of my knowledge:

All the centerfire, stainless Bisleys (not including the Hunter amd Vaquero models) are Acusport guns.

[Lloyd Smale]

heres my take on the triggers. A redhawk trigger can be made reliable and light. If someone that knows what hes doing does it it can be done as well as a super. Problem is it takes much more work to get there. My buddy does my triggers and does them right. But he spends many hours getting them right and if you had to pay a gunsmith to do one it would be astromicaly expensive. What your not going to get is a superb trigger on a standard redhawk for the 100 bucks a gunsmith will charge but then i havent see any trigger that was done by a gunsmith for a 100 bucks that i would consider superb. You can get a decent pull on a super by just changing springs and that wont do it on a std redhawk but theres alot more to it then changing springs and like was said with the availability of fed primers in question id be skeptical about lightening up the hammer spring on any gun very much anymore. But dont let anyone tell you a redhawk cant be done right.

[44man]

A light mainspring is death to accuracy in any gun. Work must be done to the RH that leaves the mainspring alone. I have had good luck with making a great trigger on them.
The SRH is a different animal and I have seen many perfect triggers from the factory, only a few have been a little hard but still broke clean. A few minutes work and they are great.
Even on my SBH and BFR's, I put in STRONGER mainsprings. As soon as I see groups start to open, I will change the factory spring. Ruger springs have never been the best at keeping their power.
If any of you have a Mark II and kept the magazine full for a few days, you know what I am saying. It will not feed all of the shells and the spring needs stretched back out. This is one spring I can't find a replacement for.
Strange that a 1911 left loaded since WWII will still work! :drinks:

The standard BFR springs are 22 to 23#, any for rifle primers are 28#. I replace the standard spring with a 26# Wolf variable and is just one reason I get down to 9/16", 50 yd groups. I still get the trigger pull down to 19 oz.
In no way, shape or form will I reduce a mainspring to get a better trigger pull.
In the old days guys would grind the mainsprings thin on S&W's, then turn out the strain screw. Might as well throw rocks at the target! :mrgreen:

[Dale53]

My
RedHawk has a decent trigger. The one it came with was near horrible. I did the job myself, and would NEVER spend that amount of time on someone else's. However, it was worth it in the end. It will never be mistaken for a Smith, but it is quite decent (4lbs) and minimal creep. I can do good work with it.

The Super has a much more user friendly trigger simply because of the design. I would own a SRH but I just balked at the extra weight and bulk. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with the Super, I just can't warm up to one. It's more of an esthetics thing (and here I claim to be a "form follows function" type of guy but...).

I have reduced spring rates on some guns successfully, but I still insist on a 100% reliable sixgun - NO MATTER WHAT!!

Dale53

[454PB]

where has anyone found heavier springs for a SRH? Wolfe doesn't offer them.

[44man]

The SRH has a decent spring but it can weaken over time too with a lot of shooting. I used to just buy extra springs from Ruger for my SBH when I shot IHMSA and changed it once a year.
Most shooters can go for many years before seeing a problem but they will blame something else.
If the SRH shows a loss of accuracy, just buy a new spring from Ruger, they are very cheap. If you shoot little, the spring will last forever anyway.
Wolf makes reduced power mainsprings for a lot of guns. The thing to remember is that Wolf springs are faster and still work. It is when you mess with a factory spring that you can lose accuracy fast. Or just wear one out.

[NSP64]

To the best of my knowledge:

All the centerfire, stainless Bisleys (not including the Hunter amd Vaquero models) are Acusport guns.

That would explain why the acusport guns on the web, look just like the one in the store:-D

[Rafe Covington]

Buff hunter, is your a 44 or some other cal? I just worry that I'm overkilling it. They look like an m1 tank.

Both my SRH's are 44 Mag, I also have a Redhawk in 45 Colt. I guess I just like the SRH better, wish they would make it in 41 Mag and 45 Colt.:drinks:

[NSP64]

brought the SRH 7.5" 44mag home today. Chamber mouths are .430, forcing cone .458, grooves .430, lands .416. now to load some food for it:Fire: Temps are in the 40-50's so shooting will be tomorrow:castmine:

[Three44s]

My RH with a lighter hammer spring is deadly accurate ....... that's why I "dare not" let go of it.

Three 44s

[JonB_in_Glencoe]

yep, I'm leaning toward the SRH with 7.5" tube.

Yeah, that sounds like a great choice.

[ioon44]

Yea, go with the SRH.

[str8wal]

12 year old thread resurected, gravedigger, haha. The Super is more shooter friendly.

[winelover]

I purchased a 7 1/2" RH when they first came out. Heavy, without a scope. Forget a belt holster. Shoulder or across the chest carry, is a must. Can't fathom toting around the Super...........besides being butt ugly.

Winelover

[murf205]

I got to dive in here. The SRH that lives in my safe might not have the glitz of a Smith but it came out of the box with a pretty good trigger and I Lauer coated it in flat black. It will do 1 1/2" at 100 yds when I do my part and some might think they are ugly but they are the finest hunting revolver this side of a Freedom Arms and although I am a confessed S&W addict, I wouldn't part with it for love nor money. I can always count on it to deliver the most accuracy my tired eyes can muster again and again. I carry mine with a sling looped around the 9 1/2" barrel and a long swivel stud in the bottom of the grip. It carries just fine under a hunting coat and leaves the hands free to muscle your way through the thick stuff or climb a tree.255208

[jrayborn]

My vote is for the Redhawk. I just love the feel.