Ruger Super Redhawk 10mm

[pmer]

I saw one of these at the local gun store today and was tempted but it is still there. What a way to see what you can squeeze out of the 10 MM cartridge it comes with 3 moon clips.

[kens]

rimless in a revolver just doesnt make sense to me.
the whole moon clip thing doesnt make sense when there are other rimmed cartridges.
Yes, I do have a 1917 that shoots .45acp. I shoot it a lot, it still dont make sense.

[Beagle333]

Why would you want such a powerful gun to shoot 10mm?

[sawinredneck]

Why would you want such a powerful gun to shoot 10mm?

Because unlike the neutered rounds most sell nowdays, the 10mm is a powerful round! Look up some of Buffalo bores loads for a good reference.

[Valley-Shooter]

If I had the money, I'd buy one.
What's the gunstore price?

[osteodoc08]

For me it would be fun, but not practical. Plenty of higher HP cartridges out there in The SRH platform. I have a SRH and still find the thing ugly. Like beat with the ugly stick, fell out the tree and hit every branch down into a pile of ugly, ugly. But I still love it the same.

[DougGuy]

Why the SRH? Isn't the RH plenty adequate for the 10mm?

[pmer]

I don't know... I had a Smithy 625 JM 45 ACP (with moon clips) it was a lot of fun, it looked like a sports car compared to this flat bed dually. Ruger suggests $1159 but I don't think it was that high. I think someone should buy it so don't have to worry about it LOL.

I like the 10mm, I have a 40 S&W and a 38-40 Contender. I bet people that can operate chamber reamer can have some fun with this revolver too.

[475AR]

If I were to get one I think I would have it reamed to 10mm Magnum, to squeeze out the most power from it. I used to have one of the AMT Automags in 10mm mag and it was a great gun.

[contender1]

One thing I see is a rekindled interest in folks using a 10mm for hunting. There are a few companies making semi-autos in 10mm again,,, including Ruger. This big DA revolver is a good idea as a companion piece. Plus,, as noted,,, for those folks who like to play with "rocks & dynamite" loads,,, it'll fit their bill.

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

g ...

[Tom W.]

Sounds fun. And when one looks down the sights the ugly can't be seen....

[dkf]

Why the SRH? Isn't the RH plenty adequate for the 10mm?

The Redhawk is more than plenty, especially for a cartridge with the power level of a .357mag. At least Ruger didn't make it with short 2"-3" barrel like they have been doing lately.

[Outpost75]

NMSB would be a handier platform and easy to do.

I'd do a 5" single-action with extra .40 S&W and .38-40 cylinders if it were me.

[sawinredneck]

NMSB would be a handier platform and easy to do.

I'd do a 5" single-action with extra .40 S&W and .38-40 cylinders if it were me.
You wouldn’t need a .40 cylinder. When the .40 first came out the only gun on the market that could shoot it was the S&W 610 revolver. It shot .40’s just fine with the 10mm cylinder.

[Outpost75]

You wouldn’t need a .40 cylinder. When the .40 first came out the only gun on the market that could shoot it was the S&W 610 revolver. It shot .40’s just fine with the 10mm cylinder.

In a DA revolver with clips, sure, but in a single-action which doesn't use a clip a .40 S&W will drop farther into the chamber because there is no stop surface for it to headspace on.

[Any Cal.]

Can't see the SRH.platform for a 10. 10mag possibly. 10 wildcat, probably. I like 10mm, but that is one of the last guns I would purchase, behind a whole list of single shots, derringers, and poly pistols.

Don't even like the idea of .44m in that platform due to the size and weight . Seems expensive for a toy, heavy for much of anything, and under powered/ under capacity for any other reason.

Would definitely be interested in a GP size, or an aluminum handled, mid size Blackhawk.

[historicfirearms]

Why the 10mm? That would be a much better match in the gp100 if one really needed a 10mm in a revolver. I bet these will be a "collectors item" in a few years because they aren't going to sell very many.

[pmer]

It seems like I don't see as many large frame revolvers in 357 and 41 and these 10's will probably be grouped in that category. And you might take a hit trying to sell one if you buy one. I can't buy one right now either because my "hobby money" needs to elsewhere.

I like the idea though. I had a N frame .357 and it was a accurate, easy shooting gun that would go cylinder after cylinder full of rounds. It would take longer to get hot. The front sight was more steady because of the weight and recoil was easy. It wasn't any less of a .357 because I didn't feel as much recoil compared to a 357 snubby. It built in some confidence that made it comfortable to shoot.

This 10mm compared to a .357 offers more power and would still be comfortable for day of shooting. And wouldn't have any trouble as a critter gitter for a lot hunting situations.

[dkf]

A 10mm in a GP100 likely would have been a 5 shot. However I think more people would buy it in that configuration. A GP100 10mm 5 Shot with a 4" barrel would be a nice shooter.

[murf205]

A 10mm in a GP100 likely would have been a 5 shot. However I think more people would buy it in that configuration. A GP100 10mm 5 Shot with a 4" barrel would be a nice shooter.

OR....a GP100 in 41 spl or mag, 5 shot of course, with fiber optic sights please.

[murf205]

207846207841
For me it would be fun, but not practical. Plenty of higher HP cartridges out there in The SRH platform. I have a SRH and still find the thing ugly. Like beat with the ugly stick, fell out the tree and hit every branch down into a pile of ugly, ugly. But I still love it the same.

Doc, if you think they are ugly now, Have one DuraCoted. Butt ugly but man will it shoot.

[str8wal]

More gun than needed for the 10. I'd consider a 10 in the GP, but not the SRH

[rking22]

Dave Clements does the GP100 in 10 mm and 41 Special, both 6 shot ! The super Redhawks is just too big for me, glad they're doing some interesting revolvers!

[saleen322]

Dave Clements does the GP100 in 10 mm and 41 Special, both 6 shot ! The super Redhawks is just too big for me, glad they're doing some interesting revolvers!

I can't speak to the 41 Special as it may be fine but Clements warns to limit shooing full power 10mm loads in the GP100 conversion. The cylinder is just too thin at 6 shot for steady use of actual 10mm loads.

[kens]

I agree that the SRH is ugly, except for the Alaskan ... which is unbalanced ... ;)

Now why couldn't they re-work a GP100 Match Champion into a five shot 10 mm ... if they could only figure out how to install sights again ... ;)

While I'm not eager to play with moon clips ... why not just go ahead and make it a 41 Special! Since we're dreaming ...

I'm thinking that the way to go is a straight up .41mag. Why bother with the moon clips when you could run .41mag?
And while we are at it, why bother with 41mag. when the SRH is a 44mag ready gun??

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

s??? ;) :kidding:

[Intel6]

When I saw this I was like ????

I am a nut for moon clipped revolvers and have more than a few of them but this just has no interest for me as the platform is oversized for the 10mm. If I could ream it out for 10mm Magnum or just make it a .41 like others have suggested.

I will just stick with my 6.5" S&W 610.

[Lloyd Smale]

yup a gp100 sized 10mm might interest me but not in something as big as a redhawk. I had a 610 smith and it was a great woods bumbing gun.
Why the 10mm? That would be a much better match in the gp100 if one really needed a 10mm in a revolver. I bet these will be a "collectors item" in a few years because they aren't going to sell very many.

[mnewcomb59]

This 10mm compared to a .357 offers more power

The only time that would be true is if you compare Underwood and Buffalo bore 10mm loads to "low flash, low recoil" 357 such as golden saber 125@1300 fps.

When comparing apples to apples, such as Remington 10mm vs Remington 357, the 357 is always more powerful.

When comparing BB/ Underwood loads, the 10mm makes 600-700 foot pounds and 357 makes 700-800. 357 will shoot 180 grain bullets 100 fps faster, with a better SD and BC meaning more penetration and more down range power.

Where do you get your information that the 10mm is more powerful? That rumor started with the mall ninja tactical bros on youtube and is completely false for every bullet weight.

[Outpost75]

My friends and I now have the 10x25R.

This is a necked-down .44 Special to .40 cal. with the case shortened to 1". Lee .44 Special Quik-Trim die is shortened by .16" to accurately cut off cases. Capacity is about the same as the 10mm Auto, but we have a rimmed, bottlenecked case with 0.3" neck, and same shoulder angle and body taper as .38-40. Powder capacity is 28 grains of 3Fg Goex with compression die, or you can use either .40 S&W or 10mm data in rechambered Ruger revolver.

Dave Mansen did the reamers and gages. Will attach print, anybody can order the reamer.

John Taylor used Green Mountain 10mm blanks to rebarrel NM Ruger Blackhawk .357/9mm convertibles, doing one cylinder to 10x25R and the other to either 10mm Auto, or .40 S&W, as requested by the customer. Design intent was to have a cartridge which matched .38-40 Winchester '92 performance, but using a stronger case and not having the excessive free airspace of the .38-40. Experience with the 10mm Auto proved it had adequate capacity for a serious hunting load, so having that capacity in a traditional profile, strong rimmed case, in a strong revolver gives the best of both worlds, either a black powder cartridge having ballistics like the .41 Long Colt, or a powerful modern revolver hunting round, with the option of having extra cylinders for the revolver in either .38-40, .40 S&W or 10mm Auto. We think the 10x25R simply "Looks Right!"

DougGuy did the dies, much more less expensive and faster than ordering custom dies from the mainstream makers. He took a Lee .38-40 die set, shortening from the base both seater and sizer by 0.4", then honing neck portion of the sizer die to .420" and the neck portion of seater to .429. Bullet is Accurate 40-220H.

Once cases are fire-formed, fired cases can be reloaded by neck sizing only using .40 S&W or 10mm die set backed off with a .53" thick ring spacer.

209620209621209622

[Lloyd Smale]

well there close. Bufflalo bore 357 has 180s going 1400 and 10mm 180s going 1350 Switch to two different guns and that might switch to the advantage of either. Buffalo bore also loads 220s in the 10 to 1200fps and for truly big game where penetration is paramount it would be tough for a 357 to match. Bottom line though is there about identical in power. About like comparing the 270 to the 280. If I was out in big bear country I wouldn't want either but theres a heck of a lot more power on tap in a 14 shot 10mm glock then there is in a gp100 that holds six. One other thing your not factoring in is bullet diameter. A 10mm bullet if cast is going to have a bigger metplat and if jacketed is going to expand to a larger diameter all things equal like if both guys were shooting 180 xpts and create a larger wound channel. Cast bullet in handguns gain more power by bullet diameter metplat diameter and bullet weight then they do by adding 50 or a 100 fps. Foot lbs of energy is not a real good way to compare handguns. A 125 grain hp screaming of of a 357 at 1500fps is going to put some impressive numbers on paper but isn't near as effective on big game as it is pushing a 220 hard cast bigger diameter bullet at 1100-1200fps out of a 10 or 41. Bottom line is either one loaded to optimum hunting levels are so close it isn't worth arguing. Me if faced with something big would take the 10 with 220s at 1200fps over any 357 load but again its a minor difference. Where the 10mm really shines is in that you can get mag level performance out of a high capacity semi auto. My glock 29 holds 10 rounds compared to 6 45s in the same size gun and my 20 holds 14. Moon clip guns are fun and I liked my 610 but truth be told in the hunting field id if I have to carry an N frame id rather have a 41 or 44. .
The only time that would be true is if you compare Underwood and Buffalo bore 10mm loads to "low flash, low recoil" 357 such as golden saber 125@1300 fps.

When comparing apples to apples, such as Remington 10mm vs Remington 357, the 357 is always more powerful.

When comparing BB/ Underwood loads, the 10mm makes 600-700 foot pounds and 357 makes 700-800. 357 will shoot 180 grain bullets 100 fps faster, with a better SD and BC meaning more penetration and more down range power.

Where do you get your information that the 10mm is more powerful? That rumor started with the mall ninja tactical bros on youtube and is completely false for every bullet weight.

[mnewcomb59]

My point still stands.

When loaded with select powders that reach 100% pressure and 100% case capacity, 357 will shoot a 215-220 grain bullet the same or faster than 10mm loaded with select powders that reach 100% pressure and 100% case capacity.

357 does this while having better sectional density and better ballistic coefficient. This is because 357 has more case capacity and slightly higher pressure.

When loaded with projectiles with roughly the same SD and BC in each caliber (180 vs 220), the 357 makes almost 200 more foot pounds and shoots much flatter. How far does a fixed 25 yard zero Glock with 1150 fps projectile drop at 100 compared to a 1450 fps 357 zeroed at 75? The difference is like 9". This is less ballistics but practical application.

With the same SD they will penetrate the same but 10mm has less energy. Here is a rough example but beartooth's predictions are always spot on for hard bullets. 220@ 1100 fps and .32 meplat makes .88 inch wound in gel. 180 @ 1400 w/ a .28 meplat is .98. I was also generous with the 10mm meplat because many glocks can't take that large.
https://www.beartoothbullets.com/rescources/calculators/php/wound.htm?v2=1100&v1=.32

10mm finally starts penetrating like an average 357 when you run ultra heavy for caliber bullets.
160 -180 grain 357 has SD of .179-.202 .
10mm 200-220gr has SD of .178-.195 .
When 357 runs ultra heavy bullets (215 gr) it has .24 SD.

Basically the 357 shoots rifle bullets

[pmer]

215 grains sounds really long in a 357 case. Some cylinders are shorter than others too. I never tried more than 180 grains in a 357. Is anyone shooting 215 grains with accuracy?

That 40-44 looks interesting,what kind of velocities are you getting with it?

[saleen322]

...I like the idea though. I had a N frame .357 and it was a accurate, easy shooting gun that would go cylinder after cylinder full of rounds. It would take longer to get hot. The front sight was more steady because of the weight and recoil was easy. It wasn't any less of a .357 because I didn't feel as much recoil compared to a 357 snubby. It built in some confidence that made it comfortable to shoot.

This 10mm compared to a .357 offers more power and would still be comfortable for day of shooting. And wouldn't have any trouble as a critter gitter for a lot hunting situations.

I agree. The 10mm in a revolver offers a good balance of performance and comfort. SAMMI MAP for a 10mm is 37.5 K which gives a pressure edge over a 357 Mag at 35K so you can get a little more efficiency from the round. At the same time being in a large frame revolver it is pleasant to shoot. My 10mm revolver is a single action and I won't rule out getting a double action if the price is right.

[Bigslug]

10mm. . .in a Super Redhawk???

As long as we're being timid and silly, why not just chamber the gun in .22 Short. . .with the capacity of the cylinder reduced to five just to make sure it's able to hold up to the strain.

We have lots of rimmed revolver rounds that can equal or exceed the 10mm. Why struggle fitting an autoloader's round into a revolver that's massively overbuilt just to get reduced performance? A .41 or .44 dialed down gets you to the same place with no need for sheet metal adapters.

[Lloyd Smale]

both of my glocks feed even wfns with no problem and my point still stands. Food pounds of energy is a poor way to compare handgun rounds. No revolver shoots flat and if your looking to stretch hunting ranges to a 100 yards you need to learn your gun period. If I know it drops 9 inchs at a 100 yards its sure no bit deal to hold for it. Come out to a linebaugh seminar and learn that with proper hold over you can make hits out past 500 yards with a revolver. Been in the handgun hunting game for 30 years and what kills is a bullet with a good metplat that penetrates. Ive never shot bullets over a 180 grain in a 357. I have to wonder if they would even stabilize out past 50 yards with a 200 grain plus bullet and I don't consider 180s ultra heavy for the caliber. In fact its a mid weight bullet in a 10. If I did I guess id have to consider 200s heavy for the caliber in a 41 or 158s heavy for the caliber in a 357. Simple question for you. Would you feel better armed against a bear with a 357 shooting a hard cast 180 lfn or a 41 mag shooting a 180 grain lfn at the same speed. basically were within 50 fps with a comparison between the 357 and the 10 using 180s. Ive seen different barrels in the same caliber vary that much. Use what you want but ive killed enough game with handguns to know there not killed with a calculator. You might start seeing some advantage to higher velocity lighter bullets at a 100 yards if your talking jacketed soft points and hps but this is a cast bullet sight and I would have to guess that a hard cast bullet is what most here load in either of these calibers for hunting. You want to step up in power with a cast bullet you step up in caliber not in speed. Ive killed enough game with handguns to know that to be fact. Bottom line is a 45 colt shooting a 255 grain bullet at 900fps will kill better then either of those two cartridges will.
My point still stands.

When loaded with select powders that reach 100% pressure and 100% case capacity, 357 will shoot a 215-220 grain bullet the same or faster than 10mm loaded with select powders that reach 100% pressure and 100% case capacity.

357 does this while having better sectional density and better ballistic coefficient. This is because 357 has more case capacity and slightly higher pressure.

When loaded with projectiles with roughly the same SD and BC in each caliber (180 vs 220), the 357 makes almost 200 more foot pounds and shoots much flatter. How far does a fixed 25 yard zero Glock with 1150 fps projectile drop at 100 compared to a 1450 fps 357 zeroed at 75? The difference is like 9". This is less ballistics but practical application.

With the same SD they will penetrate the same but 10mm has less energy. Here is a rough example but beartooth's predictions are always spot on for hard bullets. 220@ 1100 fps and .32 meplat makes .88 inch wound in gel. 180 @ 1400 w/ a .28 meplat is .98. I was also generous with the 10mm meplat because many glocks can't take that large.
https://www.beartoothbullets.com/rescources/calculators/php/wound.htm?v2=1100&v1=.32

10mm finally starts penetrating like an average 357 when you run ultra heavy for caliber bullets.
160 -180 grain 357 has SD of .179-.202 .
10mm 200-220gr has SD of .178-.195 .
When 357 runs ultra heavy bullets (215 gr) it has .24 SD.

Basically the 357 shoots rifle bullets

[william l evans]

SRH 44mag. Butt ugly, smooth action (da and sa), scarry accurate, a keeper for me.

[osteodoc08]

207846207841

Doc, if you think they are ugly now, Have one DuraCoted. Butt ugly but man will it shoot.

Oh my bleeding eyes! You can't do that to me until I've had coffee!


Of note, we mentioned weight and energy. My smith 357PD is an absolute darling to carry. The 329PD would be similar. Not sure how it would hold up to a steady diet of hot loads

[mnewcomb59]

Bottom line is a 45 colt shooting a 255 grain bullet at 900fps will kill better then either of those two cartridges will.

So you know better than Ol Elmer? Why did he ever invent the 357 if superior cartridges were already available? He is actually quoted saying how the 357 is much more effective than the 45 Colt.

I skip the useless 10 and when I want lighter muzzle blast than the 357 I step right up to midrange 45 Super. 212 gr at 1200 fps or 260 at 1000 fps. Then and only then can your meplat vs velocity equals a 357 mag. 10mm just isnt a big bore hunting round like people think it is. Barely bigger meplat than a 357 but less energy and less velocity means it makes small wounds. The same people who say 357 is on the low end for bear protection, deer hunting, etc. are the same ones who think 10mm is like Thor's hammer.

And to answer your odd question if i would prefer a 357 or a 40 at same weight and velocity vs a bear, of course I would want the sectional density to break bones. Is that a serious question? The higher SD bullet will penetrate 25% more bones or CNS before it stops. You stop dangerous game with penetration of structural bones or central nervous system. Dangerous game are not like a video game where you can shoot your whole 33 round mag at it to bring its health bar down. You get one shot. Maybe 1 in 4 bear attacks you get a second shot.

[osteodoc08]

Some major thread drift guys. Let's please keep her on the rails.

[44MAG#1]

Just to keep this 10MM verses 357 Mag on level ground. All revolver shooter love to compare, let's say a 5 inch Semi Auto to a 5 inch revolver. No, no, a Semi Auto INCLUDES the chamber in the barrel. The revolver DOES NOT. So a revolver with a five inch barrel actually with chamber is longer than the five inch Semi Auto.
If one will look at Underwood 10MM ammo actual chrono test with their 200 gr load from a 4.6 inch barrel Glock M20 then compare that with a 357 with a barrel and cylinder length combined to make a 4.6 inch barrel length to be on a level playing field. With a barrel and cylinder length combined to make 4.6 inches in a 357, it will strain the guts out of a 357 to make it if it even does.
Revolver shooters seem to forget this.
An L frame Smith with 3 inch barrel is around 4.7 inches with the cylinder if I am not too far off.

I hope mentioning this is still on the rail. If not delete it as it won't be paid any attention too more than likely.

[fatelvis]

I would just buy a 41 magnum and be done with it, if I wanted a magnum in .41 caliber.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pmer]

There is another aspect that is specific to the 10mm Ruger SRH too and that is what the company is doing to the cartridge itself.

Let say you're a 10mm fan and have a couple 10mm pistols; you take one of these 10mm Ruger SRH's home and you start loading heavies to see how fast you can go. Loading up to the point you have sticky extraction from the revolver.

What do you think might happen if you shoot a couple boxes of "Ruger only 10mm" in your pistol? Ruger "45 Colted" the 10mm! It might be even more stressful if you load light for caliber top end SRH loads and shoot them in a pistol.

I'm not trying to ruin mnewcomb59's day, I have respect for the 357, but the commercial 10mm loadings that are for sale are considered safe in autoloading pistols. I think this big revolver will eat up a steady diet of the hottest commercial 10mm you can find.

[Bigslug]

Some major thread drift guys. Let's please keep her on the rails.

I think that the object of discussion here - a .40 caliber rimless round, requiring moon clip adapters, in a swing-out cylinder, .454 Casull-capable revolver - is a concept so far "off the rails" in the minds of many, that the discussion is bound to go many places.

Now, they COULD put a rim on the 10mm, cut the cylinder of the gun to ALSO take the Auto 10mm and .40 S&W with moon clips, and do it on the standard Redhawk or GP-100 chassis, and then they might have something. This 10mm SRH seems like trying to squeeze a 1.5 liter Honda motor into the body of a '68 Dodge Charger. . .with the rimless case equating to Metric mounting bolts trying to go into Inch pattern holes.

[osteodoc08]

I think that the object of discussion here - a .40 caliber rimless round, requiring moon clip adapters, in a swing-out cylinder, .454 Casull-capable revolver - is a concept so far "off the rails" in the minds of many, that the discussion is bound to go many places.

Now, they COULD put a rim on the 10mm, cut the cylinder of the gun to ALSO take the Auto 10mm and .40 S&W with moon clips, and do it on the standard Redhawk or GP-100 chassis, and then they might have something. This 10mm SRH seems like trying to squeeze a 1.5 liter Honda motor into the body of a '68 Dodge Charger. . .with the rimless case equating to Metric mounting bolts trying to go into Inch pattern holes.


Without a doubt, a 10mm SRH would have been the last new production gun from Ruger I'd of envisioned. I was excited to get one in 41 Mag.

[rking22]

Kinda like clambering the GP100 in 22lr.....
Still glad they are doing some different revolver things, may be testing the waters. Varity is the spice of life, as they say.