E-Mail from Ruger. New Redhawk

[Hardcast416taylor]

Just got an E-mail from Ruger announcing their new Redhawk convertible. Calibers are 45 acp/45 Long Colt in same cylinder. Barrel is 4.20" long with either wood or Hogue monogrips supplied. The suggested price is, get ready for it, $1029! Guess I`ll be happy with my Blackhawks for a while longer.Robert

[jrayborn]

Oh no, I will have one...

[jrayborn]

http://www.ruger.com/products/redhawk/images/5032.jpg

[RobS]

Yep my Bisley and Flat Top will be fine. Although it would be a nice Revolver.

[Deep Six]

I've had something exactly like this in my head for a while now. I may have to pick one of these up. I saw the standard 4" 45 Colt model for $700 new the other day and if these get anywhere close I don't think I will be able to pass it up.

The only concern I have is that the bullet (or boolit as the case may be) leaving the 45 acp case has a very long empty chamber to fly through before it gets to the 0.452" throat. I can't imagine this is going to help accuracy. It's not the same as the Blackhawk which has the proper throat diameter immediately in front of the 45 acp chamber. Maybe I'll have to let a few guinea pigs try it out first....

[Piedmont]

The ACP accuracy will be mediocre if one cylinder is used for both cartridges. I'll pass.

[RobS]

The ACP accuracy will be mediocre if one cylinder is used for both cartridges. I'll pass.

I missed that part............. if it is only a one cylinder deal with moon clips then I'm along the same lines.

[Mk42gunner]

What I don't understand is why they want to round butt it. There are probably only thirty seven people in the entire world that can conceivably carry a Redhawk concealed without wearing a winter parka.

Much as I like the Redhawk, a concealment weapon it is not.

Robert

[Hickory]

To me, it's a nearly worthless handgun.
It's too big and heavy for concealed carry.
The barrel length in not long enough to hunt deer.
Too expensive for a plinker gun.
Might be ok for the bedside stand.
I'm not interested.

[StrawHat]

I have no interest in Rugers, I find them too big and heavy for the cartridge for my purpose. However, I do read the comments about them. One comment caught my attention,

"...The only concern I have is that the bullet (or boolit as the case may be) leaving the 45 acp case has a very long empty chamber to fly through before it gets to the 0.452" throat... ".

As handloaders, we have a lot of control over this. This revolver is set up to use rimless cases with moonclips. If you are looking for the last bit of accuracy in a hunting revolver, use longer brass. Shorten some 308 or-06 brass to the length of the long Colt brass and load it. It will still headspace and eject with the moonclips and will then reduce the dreaded "long jump". Of course, it may work right from the factory with correct ammunition. If I wanted a heavy, awkward 45 ACP, this would be my choice.

Kevin

[contender1]

I know, "To each his own" is a subjective thing.
Some folks may not want this gun, saying it doesn't fit their needs or wants. But, Ruger has done a lot of marketing research, and they see a demand for a packable convertible revolver like this. It has been an often requested type of gun. Ruger also looks at the custom makers & see what is very popular for folks to have built.
I predict good sales for this one.

[lakeparkv8]

Nice looking gun for sure. Would love to shoot one before buying one.

[FergusonTO35]

Was excited, until I saw the ridiculous round butt. The standard Redhawk grip is one of the best to ever grace a wheelgun, why change? Honestly I'm surprised they didn't festoon it with those hideous Hogue things that GP-100's are now burdened with.

[dilly]

What will that do to the 45 LC brass fired in that chamber? Well it make it unreloadable, shorten the life, or have no effect other than making it hard to chamber in other revolvers?

[Rick Hodges]

ACP brass is smaller than 45Colt. .473" vs. .480" in diameter.

[dilly]

So will that shorten the life on the ACP brass then?

[Hardcast416taylor]

So will that shorten the life on the ACP brass then?

And as the old gunsmith would say about that......"if you listen very closely when you fire that cartridge, you can hear it banging into opposite walls as it goes down the barrel"!Robert

[bigboredad]

Count me in. I hope it hits the shelves soon unfortunately I'll be sellimg one or two but I have wanted something like this for a long time

[dilly]

I don't think I'll be concealing it but I do like the round butt aesthetically. How do you guys think the round butt will impact recoil?

[bearcove]

I've had a S&W mountain revolver for 30 years. 44mag, 38 oz, round butt pachmayr grips, will have it till I die, best carry gun I have. I like the round butt grips.

[Mk42gunner]

I don't think I'll be concealing it but I do like the round butt aesthetically. How do you guys think the round butt will impact recoil?
It has been more than twenty years since I had my Redhawks, both were 5½" stainless; never should have gotten rid of them. The stock wood grip panels handled recoil and shot as well as the Pachmayr or Hogues that I tried. The round butt will probably be okay, but I don't see them as being any better.

Robert

[MT Gianni]

If you believe the Ruger 45 is a better bear gun than a 44 this will be the ticket. Expand the acp to throat size and it will have a gap to jump but give you cheap plinkers.

[olafhardt]

I like it, it really looks cool. Who says you can't hunt with it? BS. Of course you can carry it. I much prefer round grips. I don't care about the ACP.

[TXGunNut]

I've had a S&W mountain revolver for 30 years. 44mag, 38 oz, round butt pachmayr grips, will have it till I die, best carry gun I have. I like the round butt grips.


I like the packable big bore concept and it has proved quite popular in limited-run and custom models. It's pretty much useless 98% of the time but I understand the appeal and suspect quite a few have been sold. I think Ruger is spot-on with their design but quite honestly I don't like Ruger DA's. Nothing against them, just prefer other designs.

[murf205]

If they had built a 5 shot 45ACP on a GP-100, it would have been a winner for sure. While you are at it put the scope mounts on the top rib of a GP 100 and you would have a great whitetail/pig gun with 180 gr boolits even if it is a .357.

[Silvercreek Farmer]

Yep, "Bear" guns are all the rage at the moment. LGS has one in, $800 sticker. A little rich for me, but I wouldn't turn one down if someone wanted to give me one!

[9.3X62AL]

After owning a couple of 45 Colt/ACP convertibles, my thoughts both times were that the ACP cylinder was superfluous......especially since I had bottom-feeders in 45 ACP already, and the 45 Colt in a Ruger is a VERY CAPABLE caliber on its own. Heck, it's pretty capable in its 1873 ideation. The added ACP capability is a gimmick and novelty, sort of like the cross-bolt safety on a Marlin levergun......a thing to ignore enthusiastically. A holster gun with 4.2" barrel in 45 Colt that can be beefed to Ruger pressures will sell very well. As a recent recipient of a S&W Mountain Gun in 44 Magnum, I was instantly enamored with it as an outdoors implement. Others will see this variant in a similar light.......portable projectable power.

Straw Hat's idea of using 308 or 30-06 cases cut to 45 Colt length has the potential to serve as speed-loaders in full-moon clips containing loads equal in strength to those put up in Colt cases.

[FergusonTO35]

A seven shot .357 Redhawk with the standard square butt would be awesome!

[bdicki]

$739 on gunbroker

[Lefty Red]

I would get one if made in 44 mag. Just like that caliber.
Jerry

[hporter]

LGS had one in stock a couple of weeks ago at $799. I own a 4" Redhawk 45 Colt with wooden grips that I dearly love, but that rounded grip on the new Redhawk felt like heaven. The gun felt good in hand and well balanced. I am seriously thinking of putting my Redhawk up for sale and picking one of the new models up.

[Char-Gar]

It is all about selling stuff to enrich the corporate bottom line. There are many folks who will jump on it, because they want to have the latest of whatever. These are the same folks that line up for every new version of the I phone. "Gee, if it new, it just has to better and therefore, I just have to have it!".

It is not about making a practical and needed handgun. You will not find me in line, with my hot little hand full of 100 dollar bills drooling to buy one.

[rintinglen]

It is all about selling stuff to enrich the corporate bottom line. There are many folks who will jump on it, because they want to have the latest of whatever. These are the same folks that line up for every new version of the I phone. "Gee, if it new, it just has to better and therefore, I just have to have it!".

It is not about making a practical and needed handgun. You will not find me in line, with my hot little hand full of 100 dollar bills drooling to buy one.

Took the words right out of my mouth. Interests me about as much as Rosie O'Donnell naked.

[hporter]

Char-gar,

I certainly agree with your example of the iPhone and the far too easily motivated buying public. But should firearms manufacturer's not try to be innovative? Or listen to their customer base?

I have written to Ruger several times in the past stating that I would like to see a 45 acp Redhawk or GP100 - as have a lot of other folks judging by recent posts to this forum in other threads. I have a 4" Smith and Wesson 625 that is a lovely revolver to take to the range with an ammo can full of pre moon clipped 45's. I think this new Redhawk would be equally nice to own and to shoot with moon clipped 45 acp's.

It puzzles me why we should not be enthusiastic when a manufacturer responds to public demand. After all, manufactures must sell merchandise to stay in business and motivating the purchasing public is a wise thing to do in that context.

Or should we not buy or explore new firearms once we have satisfied our basic needs at home? I ask this in a sincere way, as there are so many firearms that I have dreamed of owning throughout my life, and I hope to have a chance to do so before my time on earth is done. For example I have always wanted and would still love to have a S&W Hand Ejector in 45 acp. But since I already have a 625 in 45 acp is it wrong to lust after one?

Your post is genuinely interesting to me, as I do often ask myself how much is enough? My thirst for experiencing different firearms does not seem to be satiated yet. I am just a wee pup of 48, but there is so much more out there to learn, learn from and enjoy.

Apologies to all if I have gone too far off the thread topic.

Harold

[Lefty Red]

I like big girls!!!! And I will be the first in line to buy a 44 mag version of this rounded butt beauty!!!!
I just have to wait til the state decides to pay us our back pay. I'm going to hold my breath here in the corner, someone wake me up! :)

But seriously, its a proven design and yes its just a different version of the original. But its not like its a 5" barrel instead of a 5.5". Its 4" and with a round butt. Me thinks its a great idea. Great woods walking weapon for 2 and 4 legged critters wishing to do you harm.

Jerry

[Lefty Red]

A seven shot .357 Redhawk with the standard square butt would be awesome!

I always wondered way Ruger didn't offer a special run of the Redhawk in 357 and 41 magnum.
Jerry

[charlie b]

I had a Blackhawk in .45Colt/ACP. I thought it would be cool since I had two autos and plenty of ammo.

I shot it with the ACP cylinder exactly once. After shooting the long rounds in it there was no reason to use the other cylinder.

Now, if you want to be able to use moon clips with longer cases then the new gun makes sense. Otherwise a waste.

[Groo]

Groo here
I fail to understand the hate of the round but frame.
The Gp100,Sp101, and Super redhawks all have stub frames like a Dan Wession.
This allows almost any shape grip to be made and used.
I see that the Redhawk will go all roundbutts like S&W.
This will allow fitting the grip to the shooter [ don't we all do that when we change grips?]

[MtGun44]

Hmmm. Same cyl? SAAMI spec on cyl is .486 at the rear, .480 at front on a .45 Colt, on .45 ACP it
is .4796 at the rear and .474 at the front. .006 slop at both ends is going to be a bit on
the "large group" side, I would guess. But, let's wait for a range report.

How will it headspace the .45 ACP? Case is like 1/4" shorter. . . . and rimless, expects
to headspace on the case mouth, and that won't be happening. So some sort
of extractor spring clip deal? Maybe room for full moon clips? But then there
would be too much headspace for the .45 Colt.

Waiting for answers. Not impossible, but not obvious, either.

Bill

[Ola]

Maybe room for full moon clips? But then there
would be too much headspace for the .45 Colt..


Why do you think so? Because as far as I understand headspace is perfectly doable.
45 Colt the normal way at cylinders "outer edge" (hope you understand, it's morning here and my English is still sleeping..)
and 45 ACP with moon clip at inner. The moon clip just needs to be correct thickness..

[warf73]

Hmmm. Same cyl? SAAMI spec on cyl is .486 at the rear, .480 at front on a .45 Colt, on .45 ACP it
is .4796 at the rear and .474 at the front. .006 slop at both ends is going to be a bit on
the "large group" side, I would guess. But, let's wait for a range report.

How will it headspace the .45 ACP? Case is like 1/4" shorter. . . . and rimless, expects
to headspace on the case mouth, and that won't be happening. So some sort
of extractor spring clip deal? Maybe room for full moon clips? But then there
would be too much headspace for the .45 Colt.

Waiting for answers. Not impossible, but not obvious, either.

Bill


Bill,

I'm spit balling here on the headspace for the ACP case. I have a S&W 627 that is designed for moons but is fully capable of shooting without them(says so in the book)and have only done it a few times myself. Maybe the same concept is being used with the the ACP. The cyclinder is cut so the headspace is done with moons with the ACP and the case on the 45 Colt?
If I was guessing that would be the only possible way to get the ACP to headspace since the Colt brass is longer and headspacing off the mouth for the ACP would be impossible.

[Ickisrulz]

This Redhawk does indeed use moon clips for the 45 ACP. See the Gunblast article:

http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-RH45ACP.htm