5 shot .480 SRH

[bearmn56]

Did Ruger ever make any 5 shot .480 Ruger Super Redhawk revolvers? I know that the cylinders between chambers on the 6 shot models were quite thin. I don't know if this was ever a strength problem. Any info would be helpful.
Bearmn56
Montana Territory

[Fowler]

Yes they did but They probably only made less than 50 that left the factory in total for Alaskans and Super Redhawks. They now are expensive collectors items....

[Whitworth]

All 5-sots were Alaskans from what know. Not many made it into production, and the plug was pulled as they weren't evidently selling many. There were no strength issues with the 6-shots.

[NHlever]

At one point, I tried to talk folks into producing a 5 shot Blackhawk in .45 Colt since we had all the tooling for another project that got scrapped. I couldn't get anyone there to understand why anyone would want a five shot gun when they could buy a six shot in the same caliber.... well, I'm kind of weird anyway at times I guess. One time they found themselves with a couple of thousand .35 caliber 18 1/2" barrels, and I suggested that they could sell that many .35 Remington bolt action carbines too, but that didn't work either. Those barrels did become .358 Win. carbines eventually though, and that was probably a better idea anyway.

[Whitworth]

At one point, I tried to talk folks into producing a 5 shot Blackhawk in .45 Colt since we had all the tooling for another project that got scrapped. I couldn't get anyone there to understand why anyone would want a five shot gun when they could buy a six shot in the same caliber.... well, I'm kind of weird anyway at times I guess. One time they found themselves with a couple of thousand .35 caliber 18 1/2" barrels, and I suggested that they could sell that many .35 Remington bolt action carbines too, but that didn't work either. Those barrels did become .358 Win. carbines eventually though, and that was probably a better idea anyway.


Can you imagine how 5-shot .480 SBHs would have sold??

[dubber123]

Can you imagine how 5-shot .480 SBHs would have sold??

I can GUARANTEE at least 1 or 2... ;-)

[Heavy lead]

Wouldn't you just love to see a SBH Hunter Bisley in the .480, and a Bisley SS in 5.5". I'd buy them both tomorrow.

[Lloyd Smale]

i heard they shut down the production when they heard people were just punching them out to 475 and running monster loads in them.

[NHlever]

Lloyd, I worked there when the .480 production was stopped, and I'm not sure why they did it. I was more involved with tooling, and R&D work than in customer related issues though I did help out with some of them too. I think it was a combination of issues including sales volume, accuracy, customer handloads, etc. I think it was the 5 shot .480 that we initially set the tooling up for, but it was cancelled before we ever made any. Perhaps now that it doesn't take dedicated tooling to produce 5, or 8 shot revolver cylinders, some of this country will be revisited.

[ebg3]

I can GUARANTEE at least 1 or 2... ;-)

Make that three!

[outdoorfan]

Wouldn't you just love to see a SBH Hunter Bisley in the .480, and a Bisley SS in 5.5". I'd buy them both tomorrow.


5.5" Bisley!! ...Drooling uncontrollably!

[Whitworth]

Lloyd, I worked there when the .480 production was stopped, and I'm not sure why they did it. I was more involved with tooling, and R&D work than in customer related issues though I did help out with some of them too. I think it was a combination of issues including sales volume, accuracy, customer handloads, etc. I think it was the 5 shot .480 that we initially set the tooling up for, but it was cancelled before we ever made any. Perhaps now that it doesn't take dedicated tooling to produce 5, or 8 shot revolver cylinders, some of this country will be revisited.

Some five-shot .480s were produced and made it on the market -- I've actually seen one. I called and asked Ruger why they killed .480 production and they said it was a marketing decision -- very unfortunate.

[44man]

No Bisley for me! :bigsmyl2: I hate them, they hurt and I can't get the accuracy I want from them. They need to make both grips to fit everyone.
Ruger should have made a 5 shot .480 from the start. Since both the .480 and .475 are about the same pressures, there is no problem with the gun if converted anyway.
There is nothing wrong with the .480 and I think the mistake they made was only making the 5 shot in the short gun. Not everyone wants just a carry gun, many want a primary hunting gun with a longer barrel.
I don't know what the contract is between Ruger and Magnum Research and since a ruger company makes the castings for the BFR's, that might keep Ruger away from making a larger gun by agreement.
We have a choice we never had long ago, for a big gun, buy a BFR and for a smaller one, buy a Ruger.
Double action lovers are kind of stuck in the middle with the few options in one of the best revolvers made, the SRH.
I feel they should have dropped the RH when the SRH was made, to save money. Then the SRH could have been made in about any caliber and configured to even be lighter like the RH or with the full size frame barrel mount.
Why they don't take advantage of a great action can only be blamed on a few pencil pushers in the office.
Ruger has some of the best gun designers in the world but they must have hired ex government workers for the financial predictions. They never listen to the shooters---well, they did listen to the cowboy shooters with the Vaquero and took away a good hunting gun. Why don't they make both Vaqueros? Why didn't they make a Vaquero with adjustable sights too?

[DLCTEX]

I have a 5 shot 480 Ruger, but it says Tarus on it.:bigsmyl2:

[BABore]

I own a 6-shot 480 SRH. When the 5-shot was announced, I gave Ruger a call and asked why. I didn't get a satisfactory response either. I then inquired if they could replace my cylinder and necessary parts to make it a 5-shot. The lady asked "why, is there a problem with yours". I said not currently, but if your brooming the 6-shots and only going to make 5-shots, should I not be concerned that there will be a problem. Why else would you have changed them??????

Well, I dropped it as I was getting nowhere with Ruger. I am making an educated guess here on what it was all about. The stainless Ruger uses is super strong. The 6-shot chamber walls are very thin. The steel is plenty strong, but it expands with the pressure and contracts. At the time of introduction, Hornady was the only brass source. CCI and Star Line stepped up later. I found that new Hornady brass was very soft. I had sticky case extraction well below maximum. I shot at that level for a while. Later I made up some new boolit designs and started from scratch on load developement. My Hornady case had at that time been fired and sized at least 3 times. Both my original boolit and new one were 400 grains. My original 400 grainer was made by Mnt. Molds and utilized the full 1.720" cylinder length less a bit of clearance. In effect I had the case capacity of the 475. My new design was the same. Both protruded into the case the same amount. As I worked up loads, I surpassed my previous boolits max by 3 grains using WW 296. Something was amiss now. The soft Hornady brass had work hardened enough that sticky cases were no more. I ended up reworking my original boolit's load to match the new one. My new brass purchases were all treated to soft loads until they got hard enough for full house loads. Where I'm going with this is all of the original factory ammo was Hornady. I'm sure alot of people had problems with it sticking. I know personally of a few who did.

So what's the fix now. SAMMI already established the 480's pressure ceiling. Hornady had their loads that were within that limit, softer brass or not. The Taurus was not an issue cause it was already a 5-shot. Nobody wants to download the 480 in this magnum velocity climate. Hodgdon already screwed that up enough by listing reloading data that used an unvented test bbl for velocity (I confirmed this). Velocity that you couldn't even get close to. So, IMO, Ruger was forced to take the only course available without ticking off all the other players now involved.

[44man]

Babore, that was right on the money. Maybe Ruger feared all owners would want the five shot cylinder installed free. In reality, they could have made a little profit once set up for 5 shot cylinders.
Marketing rears that ugly head again! [smilie=p:

[felix]

That steel used for the 6 hole cylinders was developed for the 454, and naturally went into other production guns. I have the manufacturing specs for that steel upstairs somewhere. Ruger released the custom specs of that steel by permitting the printing of the article in a general purpose manufacturing rag. ... felix

[yondering]

Why didn't they make a Vaquero with adjustable sights too?

Uhh, they do. It's called the Blackhawk. I'm betting you even own one or two... [smilie=1: