Ruger SRH .45 ACP/.45 LC

[W.R.Buchanan]

Has anybody had any experience with one of these guns?

Never been a super big fan of the Redhawk, but I like the size and the looks of this gun and have wanted a .45 ACP Revolver for some time.

With .45 ACP rounds I can see shooting IDPA with it, and using it as a plinker. Being dual caliber, the .45 LC could be a good Back Up Gun. I'd need brass, dies and a boolit mould or two for it.< $200. I'd probably go for the Hogue Grips for this one.

I have avoided buying a dedicated .45 LC gun for a long time as I don't load that caliber, and already do load .44 Spec and Mag. which is close enough. However I do load .45 ACP so there would be no start up costs at all for that, and I could use up the 450 200gr SWC's I bought to shoot in my Glock that wouldn't feed reliably.

Anyway looking for any first hand info anyone has on this particular gun.
Randy

[unclemikeinct]

Hogue Grips or any nice over size wood will do...The factory grip is not comfy...Gun is solid..Trigger will need a tune...sa & da will require work..easy fix...Looks like it has newer updated sights..They will do...Under 200 bucks & you want it ? What is not to love about that ?...Mike in Ct

[NavyVet1959]

You can load those SRHs and SBHs pretty hot in .45 ACP. I've loaded my Bisley SBH with the .45 ACP cylinder in it to .460 Rowland levels.

[snowwolfe]

I came close to buying one several times. But in the end always talked myself out of it because it would have to be re sighted in every time I switched between 45 ACP and 45 Colt.
Still, seems like a nice revolver.

[CHeatermk3]

I have one--I ordered in October and they came in to my lgs in June--I always wanted a round butt RH and the Combo idea sounded like a good idea too.

It had some issues right ouyt of the box so the next day it went back to Ruger that was a weds. and I had the gun back the following Friday (8 days total).

Built like a tank and puts 4 into one hole at 15 yds(rested). This with 45 colt loaded 200 Lee LSWC over 7.0 ETR-7...This is over max charge for older guns but fine in the "Tank". Kinda odd balance but I'm likin' it more the more I shoot it.

I've put about 600 plinking level loads thru it so far and I'm just getting used to shooting DA again so I'm not really sure but I think I have 4 chambers one size, 453, and 2 that are different. This suggested by the" push a known size slug through the chambers" method. Seems 1 hole prints a couple inches to the right of the four good ones, and the other hits a bit left and high.

The action times nicely indexing into lockup then a bit more squeeze for let-off. Heavy, but smooth.

The 45acp does well enough I guess but groups the 4 good ones into about 2.5" at 15. Don't shoot very many acp they leave a mess in the chambers and I'm lazy.

[DougGuy]

They still need the throats sized properly and evened out. I have had a few RH cylinders in the shop, they are nice guns but still need a little addressing the finer points. AT LEAST Ruger didn't make the throats too big! We can always be thankful of this fact, as it is an easy and inexpensive one-time fix...

[DougGuy]

Actually the throat in front of the ACP case doesn't hurt accuracy or velocity. I like to have it .0005" greater than boolit diameter but they do a wonderful job of keeping the boolit squared up and concentric so when it does hit the forcing cone there is good alignment within the cylinder throat. It's not at all like shooting .38 Spl in a .357 Magnum cylinder where there is totally unsupported freebore.

I have a Schofield conversion project currently in the works now on a medium framed Vaquero, the Schofield makes perfect sense in the medium framed Ruger because the 23,000psi pressure ceiling of the cylinder adapts readily to heavier boolits and a choice of crimp over the .45 ACP chambering while still maintaining the pressure ceiling. It has this advantage over the shorter .45 ACP case, and it will in theory at least, be more consistent and efficient with light target loads than the .45 Colt case because it is smaller. Will be live firing soon and will post results in the coming months.

Forgive me for any thread drift.

[str8wal]

I just wonder about all that chamber area in front of an ACP round before the bullet hits the throat.

Certainly not good for accuracy. My Bisley 45 ACP cylinder shoots pretty good, but the throats are right up against the case mouth unilke that Redhawk. It would be nice if they offered a dedicated 45 ACP version for those who want to shoot nothing but 45 ACP.

[contender1]

Well, I have one similar to the now factory offering. I have one that somebody custom made from a dedicated 45 Colt. I can shoot 45 Colt, AND 45 acp. I also shoot USPSA,,, and looked at it as a back-up competition gun. (That, and I just liked it a lot.)
I think you'll be pleasantly surprised if you get one. Mine is just fine & at 100 yds, I can ring the 8" gong often enough to make me smile.

[skeeter2]

Now try to find one in stock.

[SSGOldfart]

I just went another route to the same end. I'm starting with a Ruger Old Army,and adding two conversation cylinders one in45acp and another in 45 colt(aka Long colt). I like to shoot the old black powder cartridges as well.

[CHeatermk3]

I forgot to mention that the Ruger "moon clips" are much easier to deal with as far as loading them with ammo and removing spent cases--I use a 4" piece of 3/8ths dowell to remove empties--the Ruger clips hold the cases in the middle of the clip, not on the outer circumference as do the other kind.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Thanks for all the input and it sounds like everybody has already found the areas that need attention in these guns. Cylinder Throats being the most major one.

I maintain that there are very few "Generic Guns" don't need some kind of TLC to make them into winners. I kind of enjoy tweaking them.

Definitely thinking seriously about this gun as I have money from selling my Spolar and a few other doodads. We'll see?

Randy

[SSGOldfart]

Go Luck with it Randy if nothing else you'll have something to work on right:bigsmyl2:

[Lburgau303]

After all these years of known issues why don't they fix it at the factory and get the negatives removed? How much does it cost to have these issues address at a smith?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[NavyVet1959]

After all these years of known issues why don't they fix it at the factory and get the negatives removed? How much does it cost to have these issues address at a smith?


If they fix it, then they are admitting that their original design was flawed. Plus, it's entirely possible that their design decisions had a reasoning at the time to allow the to work with some brand of commercial ammo or for reliability purposes. Or it could just be a manufacturing cost issue.

[DougGuy]

I just wonder about all that chamber area in front of an ACP round before the bullet hits the throat. Seems to me that the bullet has a lot of room to get weird on the way to the throat, maybe not. In my opinion that roller ought to be chambered for the Schofield round. Now that would be sweet. Just saying.
Marvin

My bad, when I made the initial reply above, I was thinking about the ACP cylinder in a CONVERTIBLE, not the Redhawk.. DOH!!

Yeah you are right, that long unsupported freebore would not be a good thing. It would shoot Schofield brass as is correct? The rim is .008" bigger but if it fits in a Vaquero it should fit in the RH?

[str8wal]

Yeah you are right, that long unsupported freebore would not be a good thing.

I wonder if they couldn't slightly taper a "throat" leading to the forcing cone rather than having that abrupt ledge. Accuracy likely wouldn't be as good as a proper throat but I'd think it would be better than the current Colt/ACP combo situation.

[DougGuy]

I wonder what their marketing strategy was in offering this? They had to know that much unsupported freebore would seem to limit the gun's potential when shooting ACP rounds.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Doug: like any other 'Universal" type of thing it is designed to both things, but probably won't do one or the other really well. Then again maybe it will. But it seems like with .010-.012 all the way around the boolit before it gets to the throat and there is .380 difference in the length of the two cartridges, seems like there'd be a lot of blow by and that wouldn't be conducive of any kind of good accuracy?

Then again after the boolit made the jump to the throat it would be sealed from there on out and maybe the accuracy would suffer too much.

The more I think about this??? I'll have to talk to my guy at Ruger and find out what is going to happen. I'm sure they already know.

Randy

[NavyVet1959]

I wonder what their marketing strategy was in offering this? They had to know that much unsupported freebore would seem to limit the gun's potential when shooting ACP rounds.

Well, looking at it from a reloader's standpoint, that freebore would allow you to load rounds well outside of the normal OAL rounds. Increase the chamber depth a bit more and you could chamber .45 mag rounds. Whether you *should* chamber .45 mag rounds would be a completely different question though.

[robertbank]

I am slowly parking money away for this gun. If it shoots as well as my BH Convertible I will be a happy camper. Doesn't take much effort to get both the 45acp and 45 Colt shooting near as possible to the same POI. I noted the difference initially using my favourite loads in both calbers (200gr LSWC 45 acp/250gr LSWC 45 Colt) and found it just as easy to continue to shoot my favourite load in each calibre and change the rear sight as appropriate.

The Redhawk should work well in IDPA and for us up here an option that is hard not to take given 625 Smiths are hard to find.

Just got my 5" Model 10 and loving it so the Redhawk can wait until next spring now. To much fun with the K Frame

Take Care

Bob

[DougGuy]

Well, looking at it from a reloader's standpoint, that freebore would allow you to load rounds well outside of the normal OAL rounds. Increase the chamber depth a bit more and you could chamber .45 mag rounds. Whether you *should* chamber .45 mag rounds would be a completely different question though.

If anybody IS entertaining a conversion even a simple one as this, they better get to doing it, as I understand it Osammy's poison pen has taken this from gunsmithing to "manufacturing" as of earlier this week.

Nevermind, 45 Win Mag brass is almost .090" shorter than .45 Colt brass so the Win Mag round should drop right in.

Not that you should arbitrarily touch off a round loaded to 40,000psi in a cylinder meant for an unpublished MAXIMUM of 32,000psi.

All you would need to do is use Win mag load data in .45 Colt brass to pretty much duplicate anything you could do with Win Mag brass in the same cylinder.

[NavyVet1959]

If anybody IS entertaining a conversion even a simple one as this, they better get to doing it, as I understand it Osammy's poison pen has taken this from gunsmithing to "manufacturing" as of earlier this week.


If these Communists had their way, even *cleaning* a gun would be classified as "manufacturing". Any ATF (or other government) employee tries to implement this, they should be declared an enemy of the people and dealt with accordingly. For evil to triumph, it must have collaborators. These collaborators are no different than the German prison guards at Nuremberg who claimed that they were "just doing their jobs" or "just following orders". They got what they deserved and I can only hope that once this country wakes up from this Communist infiltration, those in the government are likewise punished for their crimes against the Constitution.


Nevermind, 45 Win Mag brass is almost .090" shorter than .45 Colt brass so the Win Mag round should drop right in.


I hadn't examined the .45LC cylinder to see if there was a lip in the chamber that would allow you to headspace on the mouth of a case instead of the rim, but I just looked at mine and there is indeed such a lip, so there's a good chance that no modifications would be needed to the .45 ACP cylinder since the .45LC cylinder could be used instead. Even though the same thing could be accomplished with just .45LC brass, I'm thinking more along the line of having an alternative for when .45LC brass is hard to find. It would be possible to recycle .308 brass that has a damaged neck by cutting it down to whatever length the .45LC cylinder will support being headspaced on the mouth of the cartridge instead of headspacing on the rim like you would normally do. You could probably still use the .45LC dies in your press, but with a different shell holder.



Not that you should arbitrarily touch off a round loaded to 40,000psi in a cylinder meant for an unpublished MAXIMUM of 32,000psi.


Agreed... That was a possible concern of mine also. Now, I *have* shot a .460 Rowland level round (loaded into .45 ACP brass) from the .45 ACP cylinder of my Bisley .45ACP/.45LC SBH. It was using the published load data for the .460 Rowland, so it was probably close to 40K psi. I was using a cast lead 230 gr bullet instead of the Hornady HP/XTP that the load called for, so perhaps a little less pressure was generated. It was 12.0 gr of Longshot and I would have loaded it to a max OAL of 1.275" instead of the loading specified 1.245".

[DougGuy]

I hadn't examined the .45LC cylinder to see if there was a lip in the chamber that would allow you to headspace on the mouth of a case instead of the rim,

The SRH 45/45 has a .45 Colt cylinder with the normal ball seat/chamfer afaik, but the ejector star and the rear of the cylinder are cut so that .45 ACP can be loaded using Ruger moon clips. Theoretically they should work for .45 Win Mag brass as well. This discussion is exactly that, a discussion, and nothing more, of the possible fitment of .45 Winchester brass in the 45/45 SRH. In THEORY it should fit.

I for one am NOT advising ANYONE to load and fire .45 Winchester Magnum loads in their Ruger Super Redhawk 45 Colt/45 ACP revolver.

[NavyVet1959]

The SRH 45/45 has a .45 Colt cylinder with the normal ball seat/chamfer afaik, but the ejector star and the rear of the cylinder are cut so that .45 ACP can be loaded using Ruger moon clips. Theoretically they should work for .45 Win Mag brass as well. This discussion is exactly that, a discussion, and nothing more, of the possible fitment of .45 Winchester brass in the 45/45 SRH. In THEORY it should fit.

I for one am NOT advising ANYONE to load and fire .45 Winchester Magnum loads in their Ruger Super Redhawk 45 Colt/45 ACP revolver.


Don't know about the SRH in .45LC. I have a RH in .44mag and a Bisley SBH in .45ACP/.45LC.

Looking on Hodgdon's site at their reloading data for the .460 Rowland, it appears that the load I previously listed is 39,200 CUP. Seems kind of strange that a fairly recently introduced round would be measured in CUP instead of PSI. My load was probably a bit less pressure than that due to being powdercoasted cast lead bullet and seating the bullet slightly further out at the SAAMI max OAL for the caliber.

It's possible that using .45mag starting load data would be acceptable in this gun though. But then again, you could probably also use .44mag data given that since the OAL for the .45LC is more than the OAL for the .44mag and the diameter of the case is also greater, less pressure would be generated for the same weight powder and bullet. Of course, this is all theoretical and without pressure testing equipment, entirely experimental, but if we ever get that desperate, it is a reference that might be worth looking at.

[robertbank]

Folks the 45-08 cartridge developed by Gunnar Christenson in Pr. George, BC uses a cut down and reamed out .308 case. I have loaded and shot out of a standard 45acp 1911 barrel drives a 200gr bullet 1300fps. This wildcat was developed for hunting guides in that area for bear protection. You have to ream the interior of the case down to the webbing in order to allow a .452 lead bullet to seat. I will leave it to others to comment as to whether the cylinders of the Redhawk would be as strong as the standard 45acp 1911 barrel.

PM me if you want the load data and some info on the cases.

Take Care

Bob
The 45-08 cartridge has been around for some time up here.

[DougGuy]

Standard 1911 barrel as in US GI 1911A1 is only something like 17,000psi rated. I may not be accurate on the exact rating for them but the NOS Gov't surplus WWII/Korea/VietNam era barrels are not terribly strong. Modern barrels made of 416R stainless can go above 75,000psi ratings. Lot of variables there.

The Super Redhawk cylinder is probably the strongest big bore cylinder that Ruger makes, not counting the recent Carpenter Steel cylinders for the .480 Ruger or the .454 Casull chamberings.

SBH cylinders were tested to destruction some years ago and they took roughly 60,000psi to grenade one of them and afaik the Redhawk and Super Redhawk cylinders are quite a bit stouter than the SBH. They should be able to handle 40,000psi without question although Ruger will never disclose what they can realistically and safely handle.

In fact, what was the original .44 Remington Magnum SAAMI pressure? 44,000cup or 40,000psi?

The SBH being the weaker of the big bore models, if I am not mistaken years ago Ruger used to offer custom chamberings for .45 Win Mag if a customer wanted to send in his SBH they would fit a cylinder to it chambered in .45 Win Mag. This is a 40,000psi cartridge and if they did it to the SBH, and the RH and SRH being considerably stronger than the SBH, the SRH should be able to handle any of the .45 Caliber factory loadings that will physically fit in the cylinder. Just sayin...

[robertbank]

Thanks Doug. I am guessing the Redhawk will handle the 45-08 cartridge as well. In the 1911 I use a 22# recoil spring and a buffer. I have a Norinco for bush carry and do so occasionally. The 200 gr LSWC cast hard will do well enough on anything I have to deal with at short range. The Para LDA was once a popular carry piece for the cartridge I am told.

Take Care

Bob

[CHeatermk3]

Just to be precise, we are talking about a Redhawk, not a super redhawk, in 45 colt/45acp. I do not know whether Ruger puts the same materials in a RH cylinder as they do in a Super Redhawk.

[DougGuy]

The .44 magnum cylinders between the RH and SRH are the same part. That makes me think the .45 Colt cylinders are the same also. The difference in the .454 Casull and the .480 Ruger cylinders is that these are made of Carpenter Steel but I don't think they are any different than other RH or SRH cylinders dimensionally.

The OP typed SRH when he started this thread but I think he meant Redhawk.

[W.R.Buchanan]

The OP typed SRH when he started this thread but I think he meant Redhawk.

He did,,,

What I was most concerned about with this gun was the blow by when shooting Lead Boolits from .45 ACP cases. This is what causes leading in most guns. There is about .010 on a side (.470 case OD vs .452 boolit OD) for .380 in front of the case mouth to the throat in these cylinders.

When the boolit reaches the throat then it should seal up again but that is an unanswered question, and it seems like that first bit of "Freebore" might melt the exterior of the boolit enough to induce leading which is common with far less of a loose fit. Or maybe the milliseconds that it takes for this to occur are not enough to cause any ill effects, and shoving it thru the throat would resize it and solidify any exterior melt.

I know that I haven't seen any reviews of this gun using Cast Boolits. The AR review only used jacketed bullets in factory ammo. The whole purpose of this gun for me is I want to be able to load .45ACP's with lead boolits. The gun would never see a Jacketed bullet. If the freebore issue induced massive leading there wouldn't be any way to fix it beyond a different cylinder, and that would defeat the whole purpose of the gun for me.

I was hoping someone here had one and could talk about real world experience and whether or not this was an issue.

I might just call Ruger tomorrow and see if I can talk to Someone who knows about these guns.

Randy

[cpaspr]

I might just call Ruger tomorrow and see if I can talk to Someone who knows about these guns. Randy Unless you talk to them about factory lead loads, they probably won't discuss it. They have to maintain their "we don't recommend shooting reloaded ammo" mantra, even though they know these guns are shot more frequently with reloads than factory. My .45 Colt / .45 ACP Convertible Blackhawk has never had a single factory round through it, unless the factory test fired it with one. And probably never will.

[DougGuy]

If you were to get this RH, I think it would be a pretty big detraction to only want to shoot ACP loads in the much bigger .45Colt chambers. A Blackhawk convertible would easily outshoot it, and maybe a S&W chambered ONLY for the ACP round may be a better choice for a DA revolver. Talo issued several runs of the birdshead Vaquero in .45 ACP.

SAAMI .45 Colt chambers are .480" at the mouth of a .45 Colt case, and approximately .4825" at the mouth of a .45 ACP case. The cartridges are both straight wall, but the chambers are tapered to facilitate extraction so that .480" grows considerably as it gets closer to the breech face.

[robertbank]

I am going to defer to Doug's expertise here and cancel any thoughts of getting the Redhawk Convertible. I have the BH Convertible and it is a fun gun to play with. With the 45-08 cartridge at my disposal when i Brown bear territory and the .357 Mag for Black Bears with a 12 gauge in hand I think i can fend off what ever wonders in my way. If not, I will be in a world of hurt and likely won;t care much for the outcome.

Thanks for the info Doug. I appreciate it.

Take Care

Bob

[fecmech]

Randy--I had a Winchester 94 in .357 that had a long tapered throat that was .4" long before it met the rifling and normal groove size. It would give me all kinds of problems with throat leading and the first 1/2 inch of rifling. Based on my experience with that rifle I don't think .452 lead bullets in a .480 throat are going to end well.

[W.R.Buchanan]

The whole idea here would be to get a .45ACP DA gun that takes Moon Clips. Effectively a Ruger made S&W625. This could be a great IDPA Revolver. With a dedicated .45 ACP cylinder with proper throats instead of "Compromise" Throats.

I can get a "SCREAMIN'" Deal on this gun.

I can not get any deal whatsoever on a 625 Smith.

You can only load a BH or SBH one at a time, and they are SA and I already have a BH Bisley .44 Spec and a SBH Bisley .44Mag. These are not the proper kind of gun for the intended usage.

I can see this gun as a decent Convertible Gun with several options for "Factory or Jacketed Ammo." I see problems with Lead Boolits in the .45ACP. But for the average user it would probably do just fine as the average user doesn't reload ammo with Lead boolits or be able to shoot any better than the gun. The groups with factory ammo in the AR test weren't all that,,, between 3-4" at 25 yds. with .45ACP ammo and right at 3" with .45 LC ammo.

I haven't owned any revolver with the possible exception of my NAA Mini-Master in .22LR that would not shoot <2" at 25 yards. IE: several S&W's and Rugers. So if 3-4 is all it would do,,, it won't do.

The RH could be the answer and I see another product for this line with a dedicated .45 ACP Cylinder with properly sized Chambers and Throats. It would require only different chambering reamers which they already have for other guns.

I'll see if I can talk to one of the guys there. Let you know.

Randy

[CHeatermk3]

FWIW, My redhawk does not seem to have a leading issue shooting boolits in acp cases. I shot the Lee clone of the H&G 68 lubed with LSS 2500+ (it's what's in my lubesizer) and sized .4515; also the older Lee 200gn SWC usind BLL before and after sizing. Powder charge was 5.7 gns W231, my old IPSC load.

Not a true test as I also shot about 100 varied loads, in LC loadings and with both of those boolits mentioned above and Lee 255 RFN too that day; no leading except just a bit around the forcing cone. cleaned up very easily.

If you're going to be wanting a quick reload, be advised that the loaded Ruger clips will not just drop freely into the cylinder they need a bit of "Jiggling and a slight push to get the clip seated properly on the extractor.

If possible you should make up some dummy rounds, load them into a Ruger Moon clip, and put them into the cylinder--you'll see what I mean. It's still pretty quick though.

[DougGuy]

Randy, if you got a .357 RH, seemingly that cylinder would be a candidate for rechambering to ACP, maybe even a .41 magnum would have chambers small enough that they would take the .45 ACP finishing reamer and leave no trace of the previous caliber. Cannot do this with the .44 magnum, charge holes are already too long.

However, by the time you got done paying for a .357 RH, you could just buy the S&W because they only made the .357 RH for two years in the 1980s.

[NavyVet1959]

Randy, if you got a .357 RH, seemingly that cylinder would be a candidate for rechambering to ACP, maybe even a .41 magnum would have chambers small enough that they would take the .45 ACP finishing reamer and leave no trace of the previous caliber. Cannot do this with the .44 magnum, charge holes are already too long.

However, by the time you got done paying for a .357 RH, you could just buy the S&W because they only made the .357 RH for two years in the 1980s.

Now you got me curious, so I had to look and see the difference between the RH and SRH. The way the barrel attaches to the frame is the most noticeable difference to me.

The Redhawk looks like this:

http://www.ruger.com/products/redhawk/images/5003.jpg

Whereas the Super Redhawk looks like this:

http://www.ruger.com/products/superRedhawkStandard/images/5501.jpg

So, it looks like mine is a Redhawk instead of a Super Redhawk...

https://www.googledrive.com/host/0B8A9o0AImjXHfmlSQWdFVFRfSmd6d19mTG1jVXUzRWhrZk1KQ WFvdjJidlFtUERRcXh3M1k/ruger-redhawk-200w.jpg

[W.R.Buchanan]

Randy, if you got a .357 RH, seemingly that cylinder would be a candidate for rechambering to ACP, maybe even a .41 magnum would have chambers small enough that they would take the .45 ACP finishing reamer and leave no trace of the previous caliber. Cannot do this with the .44 magnum, charge holes are already too long.

However, by the time you got done paying for a .357 RH, you could just buy the S&W because they only made the .357 RH for two years in the 1980s.

Doug: I would be willing to bet that Ruger will release a dedicated .45ACP version at SHOT next year. Thus negating the need to modify after purchase.

Randy

[robertbank]

Doug: I would be willing to bet that Ruger will release a dedicated .45ACP version at SHOT next year. Thus negating the need to modify after purchase.

Randy

This +1

Bob

[DougGuy]

Now you got me curious, so I had to look and see the difference between the RH and SRH. The way the barrel attaches to the frame is the most noticeable difference to me.

The lockwork on the RH is all by itself. Nothing interchanges with any other Ruger, one spring does both the hammer and trigger so they can be rather dubious to do a trigger job on.

The SRH on the other hand shares a lot of the same internals as the GP-100 with many interchangeable parts. Internally the RH and the SRH are two completely different animals.