.357 Magnum Ruger Redhawk Revival??

[Surefire]

First, I know many think its too much gun for the cartridge.

Here is my solution.

Bring back the .357 Magnum Redhawk as a SEVEN or EIGHT shot .357 Magnum revolver. S&W is able to stuff 7-shots in their L-Frames...a Redhawk should easily hold 7 or 8.

This allows us Redhawk fans to shoot a cheap caliber (.38 special), and for home defense it gives us 1 or 2 more shots per cylinder.

I love the 5.5" Redhawk in stainless, I have a .44 magnum model...but its too darn expensive to shoot as much as I'd like to, and the recoil is more than I prefer (with full .44 magnum loads).

IMO, a 7 or 8 shot .357 magnum Redhawk would be a very handy all-around revolver, and I would buy one in a heartbeat. Anyone else agree?

[mec]

http://www.gunpix.com/gallery/Handguns/Double_Action_Revolvers/redhawk357.jpg
Even the 6 shot ones are pretty nice. This one shot good 25 yard groups even with the funky express sights. It's pretty much impossible to overengineer a gun for something as inherently violent as the .357 cartridge

[Surefire]

^I'd LOVE a 6-shot .357 magnum Redhawk....but they are discontinued and I don't think would sell well if Ruger brought it back due to the size of the gun vs. cartridge power.....unless it had an advantage such as more rounds.


If I come accross a used 6-shot Redhawk in .357 magnum, I'd buy one (assuming after examining it it is in tip-top condition).

[LAH]

You said:

I love the 5.5" Redhawk in stainless, I have a .44 magnum model...but its too darn expensive to shoot as much as I'd like to, and the recoil is more than I prefer (with full .44 magnum loads).

Have you thought of getting into rolling your own? You could load to meet your needs and shoot as much as you like.

[LAH]

BTW Mike, nice looking sixgun.

[mec]

belongs to a friend. We shot that group in New Mexico. He killed a doe with it here in texas. Used one of those Speer 146 grain swc long jacket hollow points.

[LAH]

MEC said: It's pretty much impossible to overengineer a gun for something as inherently violent as the .357 cartridge.

I agree. This is the reason I love the .357 on the Blackhawk platform. With that said though I'm pretty much happy with the L-358429, L-358156, or Saeco 353 at 1200 fps.

[scott5]

Hey folks;
If we petition Smith & Wesson real hard, do you suppose that they bring out their X-frame in 357 magnum?
Maybe it will be a ten shot. Whouldn't that be great rang gun? :D

[mec]

I can remember when I thought it would be neat if everybody would bring out their large frame revolvers in .22 Rimfire. Some of them did but I never did get my N-Frame 22.

When the NM Blackhawk came out in .357, I got one of the 4 5/8" ones. I was so impressed with the thickness of the chambers and barrel/cone that I shot quite a few full 125 grain/296 loads and some lead bullet 158s like they used to put in the Pre-SAAMI handbooks and gun magazines. I never did manage to reduce the accuracy or mechanical integrity of that revolver but I did cause a bit of end-shake and the forcing cone got pretty rough.

Some of those atomic rocket 125s would really do a job on adrenalin-charged running jackrabbits.

[HogRider]

"Handloader's Delight"
http://members.cox.net/wbhogrider2003/Images/Redhawk357b.jpg

[LAH]

Love it Hogrider.

[Jesse308]

IMO, a 7 or 8 shot .357 magnum Redhawk would be a very handy all-around revolver, and I would buy one in a heartbeat. Anyone else agree?

I would buy one

[mec]

Yeh. but there's probably only about ten of us.

[Surefire]

Have you thought of getting into rolling your own? You could load to meet your needs and shoot as much as you like.


Maybe some day. Right now, with my busy work schedule and little free time, reloading is not an option. The little free time I do have goes to shooting.....

[Surefire]

Beautiful Redhawk you got Hogrider!

[Magnum88C]

I'd rather have the 6-shooter.
You can shoot original load levels (you know, 158-grainers running faster than these 125s that folks think are sooooo hot. . .). :D

[Surefire]

Yes, the 6-shot model is great.....but many feel its too big a gun for the chambering. I can't see the 6-shot model being a big enough seller. There needs to be incentive to buy a Redhawk for .357....most shooters would NOT IMO want a six-shot .357 mag built on a .44 magnum frame. This is why I feel the Redhawk needs to be 7 or 8 shots to have ANY chance of selling enough.

[Ruger Redhawk]

I have one of those jewels with a 5.5"bbl.Great shooting gun. I had a 41 mag Redhawk. Stupidly I traded it. It was s/s and 7.5"bbl.I sure wish I had it back.I don't see Ruger ever bringing the 357 or 41 mag RH back.I personally think it's to big a frame for the 357 mag.For the 41 mag it was a perfect size just not a big selling cartridge.Seems to me I heard Ruger dropped the Redhawk in 45 Colt also.

Ruger Redhawk

[HogRider]

I cannot resist to post a second picture - since I have two of them. :D

http://members.cox.net/wbhogrider2003/Images/357RH-Stag02.jpg

[Marshall]

I can see me buying an 8 shot 5 1/2" Redhawk in 357. I have them in 44 and love them. But honestly, the 357 GP-100 6" will take care of anything I shoot through it and manage it quite well, therefore, I wouldn't buy a 6 shot 357 Redhawk.

[Stainz]

After great success with my 4.6" SS Vaquero .45 Colt Bird's Head Grip, I decided I had to have a .44 Special version. I bought another new Vaquero .357 Magnum 4.6" BHG to have 'converted' - before I priced said conversion. In shock, I bought a new 4.6" SBH and a QPR BHG and 'made' just what I wanted for a lot less - and had the .357 Magnum BHG 4.6" Vaquero to boot. I added a Bisley hammer and free-spin pawl, so the .357 & .45 were identical - too much so.

Picking up the .357M BHG Vaquero, you immediately noted something I am certain the .357M RH would have over the .45 RH (Like my 5.5".) - more mass. It's simple - smaller holes leave more mass in the cylinder & barrel. The .357M Vaquero proved to be boring to shoot, although, highly out of character for a Vaquero, it hit coincident POI/POA at 12-15 yd with 158gr LSWC over 4.5gr Titegroup in .357M cases. I tried a box of Blazer .357M I found in the trash at the range, oddly missing only 6 rounds. It was louder - a distinct crack - but the recoil was insignificantly larger than the lighter loads. Some .38 Special loads were also tried - almost .22 LR Single Six-like. I sold the .357M Vaquero. 'Much ado over nothing', or so I thought. Besides, my 6" 66 was used as a plinker with the aforementioned ultra-mild .357M loads - and is a lot handier.

I just think the .45 Colt is most appropriate in the RH format... shows what I know, they cancelled it, too!

Stainz

[444]

I also own two of the Redhawks chambered for .357.
For a long time, I didn't realize they existed. Once I read about them, I had to have one. One day, I found one sitting in a local shop. I immediately bought it. To be honest, I don't really like it. It is so heavy that I quickly become fatigued. Never the less, a year or so later, the same shop had another one in the case. This one had a longer barrel. So, I bought it also. I don't think I ever fired it.

[Surefire]

That is a bummer about the .45 Colt Redhawk being cancelled. Was it really not selling?

I find that hard to believe. The .45 Colt has a cult following, and the Redhawk was the only Ruger (other than the Alaskan) small enough to carry with comfort (i.e. barrel under 6").

I think being limited to only 1 caliber might actually HURT Redhawk sales...

[461]

I had a Redhawk in .357 and enjoyed it quite a bit but the shooting gods are correct and it is too big for the cartridge. Mine was a 5.5in stainless model and I really did like it but any hotrod round I ever made for it will still shoot just fine through my GP-100 as any round that would blow up a GP wouldn't be worth shooting anyhow. My thoughts were that the Redhawk would be a perfect platform for the .41 Magnum and I'm still looking for one. I also intend to get one in .44 as well, but the .41 is ahead of it on the list.

Now the purpose of this thread is what I find interesting. A seven or eight shot Redhawk in .357 would make a great deal of sense and I'd have to have one. Adding the extra holes would take some weight off as well as add to utility. Great idea, someone should approach Ruger about this and we should all start buying Redhawks before they get the idea we don't like the gun as it would be sad indeed to see such a great platform go away due to lackluster sales. Matter of fact maybe I need to do some shopping this morning. :uhoh:

[Surefire]

Now the purpose of this thread is what I find interesting. A seven or eight shot Redhawk in .357 would make a great deal of sense and I'd have to have one. Adding the extra holes would take some weight off as well as add to utility. Great idea, someone should approach Ruger about this and we should all start buying Redhawks before they get the idea we don't like the gun as it would be sad indeed to see such a great platform go away due to lackluster sales. Matter of fact maybe I need to do some shopping this morning.

You summed up my thoughts exactly.

7 or 8 shots reduces weight (less metal in the cylinder), and likely gives the same feel as the .44 magnum or .45 colt Redhawk. The Redhawk is such a huge monster that it would be safe to remove metal and still shoot heavy loads of .357 magnum. 7 or 8 shots increases utility.

And....to me the Redhawk grip is the best of the Ruger revolver grips for ergonomics. It just fits my hand perfectly. The squishy rubber on the GP is nice for controlling recoil, but it just doesn't "feel" right. Make a Redhawk in .357 magnum and increase the capacity, and I think there would be a loyal following. Maybe even knock the barrel length down to 4.75 - 5" range to reduce weight a bit.

I LOVE everything about my Redhawk, except the caliber: .44 magnum. Ammo is rare and expensive in .44 special, and expensive (but more common) in .44 magnum. Recoil with most .44 magnum loads is controllable, but NOT comfortable. A .357 version of the Redhawk would be more economical, a breeze to shoot (minor recoil), and a better choice for home defense (lots of GREAT .357 magnum defense loads, plus potentially 8 round capacity--while the .44 magnum is really more of a hunting round).

[turbonatr]

I'd definately buy a 7/8 shot .357 Redhawk.

Love my 45 Colt Redhawk. IMHO, the optimum cartridge for this platform.

[LAH]

You're making me sick Hog Rider.

[HogRider]

You're making me sick Hog Rider.


Thx. I see that as a compliment! :D

[Stainz]

I know folks love the RH... I do as well. I must admit, my longtime friend, a 7.5" .454 SRH, had a far better DA trigger than my 'tricked by Ruger' 5.5" .45 RH does. Neither can hold a candle to my S&W 625 Mountain Gun in .45 Colt, oddly priced new between the two Rugers when I bought it. From that experience, if I wanted a .44M - and could stand the 7.5" minimum barrel length, I'd opt for the SRH over the RH. The .45 Colt offering in the RH was unique... gotta wonder why it's gone.

Now for the higher capacity .357 Magnum question. I just like S&W's - and my 7-shot 5" half lug 'Stocking Dealer Exclusive' 686+ from last year, actually priced at the same price as the 4" 686+ ($519), was a bargain. It came with Ahrend's cocobolo finger-groove squared stocks, a HiViz front, and a V-notch rear sight. They have a new model 4" 7-shooter - the K-frame's replacement 620 @ ~ $489 locally. Now, you want an 8-shot N-frame? Look for the 627/327's from their PC shop at $900. The L-frames, and 'only' seven shots, are my choice. No RH .357M for me, thank you.

Stainz

[LAH]

Hog Rider said: Thx. I see that as a compliment!



And most certainly it was...........Nice sixgun.

[BusMaster007]

+1 for HogRider's version in an 8-shot. Whew!

I traded my Redhawk away to my Best Friend because the backstrap just beat the crap out of my thumbjoint. I bought a new SuperRedhawk because the grip is totally covered, thereby solving my problem.
I'm trying to be patient as I wait for my NEW, unfired SRH to return from being BLACKENED. It should be worth the wait!

Now, if Ruger would find a way to use the grip from the SRH on the Redhawk, they'd have something there. :D

[Marshall]

Now, if Ruger would find a way to use the grip from the SRH on the Redhawk, they'd have something there.

BusMaster, just throw Houge rubber on it, problem solved. Well maybe? Maybe your hands just aren't right for it? Mine couldn't be a better.

[mec]

the factory frame fitting grips draw blood when I try to shoot .44 magnums. the .357 doesn't seem near as bad.

[pezo]

yes give it eight shots then cut the barrel down to 3 inches. I'd buy one in a heartbeat. Im sure ruger is getting on this one quick!!! :p

[Ben Shepherd]

One last hit on this one, as I didn't have time the other day.

Relating to handloads not being any hotter in a redhawk than a gp100:

While it's true you're pushing dangerous territory with something that will shoot in the redhawk and blow up the gp, it's not about peak pressure or gun strength!

It's about cylinder length and availible powder volume. Example:

WARNING-USE AT OWN RISK-WORK UP SLOWLY!!

In the 357 redhawk take say a 180 hornady xtp and seat it in the REAR groove. You now basically have the same powder capacity as a 158 gr slug. So you use the now availble space for more powder. Work up slowly with a chrono and you'll find that getting a 180 to 1500 in a redhawk isn't hard with that extra powder room. You are basically creating a 357 maximum here, due to the extra powder volume.

Again-IF YOU DO THIS WORK UP SLOWLY!!!!

Try that in a gp100. Nope. The slug sticks out of the cylinder.

Just food for thought.