[usp_fan]

The review of the new production Ruger Redhawk in .45 colt with a 4" tube is up on Gunblast. HERE (http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-Redhawk45.htm) is the link.

I've always said I wanted this gun. I had plans to build one, but this will be a much more affordable path to a customized mountain gun now. The only improvements I can see this needing are a lanyard ring, Bowen rear sight, Moon Clip treatment to handle .45 acp, and possibly a tritium front sight.

Supposedly the gun reviewed in the article was a production sample. They are supposed to begin hitting sometime Q1 in '08. I've been saving Birthday and Christmas money and I think this may be a good enough reason to spend it.

[Jim March]

What I found interesting is that the cylinder bores were coming up identical (and in a very good state).

This means either Ruger is doing a final reaming of cylinders by hand, or they're using the process developed for the New Vaquero (one drill per cylinder, each bore done in sequence with the same bit/reamer).

If that new process is migrating to the rest of Ruger's wheelguns, their average quality control and accuracy will in my opinion surpass S&W. I base that on the average quality control of the New Vaqs and it's cousin the 50th Ann. 357 Blackhawk built the same way. This is very, VERY good news if true.

I'm going to write to the Quinn brothers and see if they can confirm it.

[El Tejon]

Holy cow, how did I miss this???:eek:

Thanks for the link, usp. Have been kicking myself for trading a Redhawk .45LC back in '91 or so. Time to redeem myself.:D

[JohnL2]

Man. Ruger sure does know how to torture a guy.

[usp_fan]

I personally am very excited to see one. I've held the .44's but it wasn't in "my" caliber. I used to have a mountain gun--model 25. It was beautiful, but not stainless, and not upto handling my Bisley loads. It was traded for my SIG 220. This Redhawk will go into the never let go stack. Along with my 5.5" stainless Bisley, I hope to have two very good bases for some future custom work.

[kludge]

Officially saving my pennies. According to my wife's calulations, I'll have enough pennies in April. :D

[kmrcstintn]

yyyeee hhhaaahhh!!!!!!!!! I wants one for a bear defender gun...I'm not very 'magnum proofed' & my upper extent with any reasonable accuracy is .357 mag; I have tried several different .44 mag revolvers with poor results...flinching & poor accuracy; .45 Colt seems like a good large bore caliber with enough snot for bear defense...expecially if I learn to make myself 'magnum resistant' enough to handle smaller quanitites of the hotter stuff that is reserved for rugers & freedom arms products;

my only quam is this...a new 4" Redhawk (new grip model) in .45 Colt or a used (excellent condition) 5.5" Redhawk (old grip model) in .45 Colt w/ night sights & put a good set of Pachmayr grips on it

[Z_Infidel]

I've been considering buying a .45 Colt revolver lately, and now I'm thinking about which would be better: the new 4" Redhawk or a S&W 625 Mountain Gun. So far all the news I've seen about the new Redhawk is positive -- good quality, fit, finish and a smooth trigger. And of course it will handle heavy loads that the Smith will not. But it seems the Mountain Gun is also a quality revolver with some positive points of its own. It's lighter than the Redhawk, there are lots of holsters available for it, plus I've always liked the way 4" N frames balance and handle.

So, how about some discussion on pros and cons of each? A comparison of the two guns that goes beyond "the Redhawk can shoot ruger-only loads". Which would make a better general-purpose revolver? Just what type of loads can the Mountain Gun handle? Is a 255 gr SWC at 1000 fps or so good enough for about anything, or are the hotter rounds really a significant consideration?

OR, should this be a separate thread?

[44and45]

When you start reloading .45 Colt, do consider using HS6 Hodgdon powder if you've got a case of flinch ittice. It is capable of good velocity and punch at lower pressures than some other powders. It is also good at case filling the big .45 Colt brass.

Another powder might be Trail Boss, it really burns clean...but you'll have to work at how high it can perform safely.

Jim

[countryrebel]

Thats good to hear,I just bought the redhawk 4" 44 and it is a very nice gun.

[usp_fan]

Z,

The Smith is fully capable of pushing hot, but not Ruger Only loads. 255 grn bullet at 1000-1100 is easily doable out of the 25/625.

I liked the feel, the look, and overall package the Smith 25 gave me. I couldn't get passed the blued finish on a mountain gun. It was too nice. If I'd have had the 625, I think I'd still have it. However, I think I'd still be fighting the itch for the Redhawk.

The Redhawk is so over built that I would have total confidence in it regardless of what load and how poorly it had been maintained.

Seeing pictures of these in Taffin's Big Bore Handguns and on Linebaugh's site has always raised my heart rate. The Smiths are beautiful, the Rugers are tanks. Here (http://www.handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=12) is some interesting reading on the Model 25 and hot loads. Linebaugh thinks their great.

[jibjab]

And it will out shoot this; http://www.gunblast.com/Bulldog_Pug.htm 1.25" @ 21 yds from the pug :scrutiny:

[Z_Infidel]

usp_fan, thanks for the info and link.

I find Mr. Linebaugh's comment "velocity gives us trajectory and range, not power" somewhat interesting. I'm not disputing it, but by that reasoning a .30-30 should have equal killing power to a .308 within 150 yards or so. And a .38 Special+P should be pretty equal to a .357 Magnum at typical handgun range, assuming equal bullet performance. Yet Elmer Kieth discounted the .38Spl as a defensive round while holding up the .357Mag as a good "man-stopper". I'm thinking the lousy .38Spl ammo choices of Elmer's day were mostly to blame for this, since the 158 gr LSWCHP+P load is generally considered a good defensive round. The linked article makes some good sense but makes ya wonder about some things...

[jwxspoon]

I've never seriously considered the 45LC as a man stopper, but looking at the bullet weights and velocities in the chart on this review really surprised me. I will have to rethink my views on this.

jw

[44and45]

In the history of the old west the hombres using the .45 Colt and .44-40 were considered pretty well armed.

Even when these cartridges first came out and were loaded with black powder they still performed similar velocities as you read about store bought ammo today with smokeless powder.

My two favorite calibers are 44and45.

Jim

[Kimber1911_06238]

wow, looks like my next purchase

[learningman]

I have an old model Vaqeuro in 45 colt. But after seeing this I may have to add another colt to my collection. The double action and shorter barrel would be nice for carrying in the woods.

[Dienekes]

Just another plug for the recent quality as per the 50th Anniversary .357 Flattop and New Vaquero--I sprung for one of each because I was so impressed the the fitting and finish.

After fooling around getting the chambers reamed, etc., on my older NM .45 Convertible I made it a point to mike the ones on the NV. Right on the money at .4525. They shoot the same, which is to say very well.

Don't think I need a honker like the RH but if it's worth doing, it's worth doing well.

[Vern Humphrey]

I've never seriously considered the 45LC as a man stopper, but looking at the bullet weights and velocities in the chart on this review really surprised me. I will have to rethink my views on this.
Have you considered how many men have been stopped by the Colt .45? (Hint, it's more than a few.) The .45 ACP is merely the .45 Colt lite -- it duplicates the version developed to fit the S&W Schofield .45, which became the Army standard load.

During our struggle with the Moros in the Philippines, Moro Juramentados were nearly unstoppable. They would take an oath to kill a Christian, wrap their bodies with bandages (to retard bleeding), take drugs -- then don their regular clothes over the bandages and saunter into a group of Americans with a Bolo or Barang concealed under their clothes -- and suddenly go berserk, slashing and hacking away.

The .38 Long Colt that was issue for the period proved inadequate at discouraging this form of recreation, and troops who had used the .45 Colt earlier demanded the .45s be re-issued. It worked.

[wheelgunslinger]

Vern beat me to it. Great explanation.

Saying the 45 long colt isn't a manstopper is like saying the 1911 wasn't a military weapon.

I must buy one of these. I've been griping for years that there wasn't one available over the counter. Now, it's here.

I'm on it.:D

[jwxspoon]

Have you considered how many men have been stopped by the Colt .45? (Hint, it's more than a few.)

More people are shot and killed by .22's than any other round, but you won't see me defending myself with one.

In any case, my point was that I considered the 45LC little more than a blackpowder round, and this review has caused me to review my thinking. :)

jw

[wheelgunslinger]

Yeah, 45 colt is one of those odd rounds that people seem to overlook. It's a zen-like forest for the trees thing where people just never see or consider it. But, a glance back into history shows the colt all over the place.

I'm happy to be moving back to this round from the 357.

[Vern Humphrey]

More people are shot and killed by .22's than any other round, but you won't see me defending myself with one.
"Killed" is one thing,"stopped" is another. Many a mortally wounded man has killed his opponent before expiring himself.

[461]

If the .45 Colt version is anything like my .44 then it'll be a winner.

[Jim March]

Speer has this freakin' NEAT 45LC factory round. It's a 250gr JHP doing a bit over 900fps from a 4" tube. It's got a giant hollowpoint cavity. It's basically the Gold Dot 135gr 38+P "supersized to hell and gone" and should be an absolutely amazing personal defense round.

Other good 45LC JHPs work well - Speer has previously been pushing fat-mouth 200gr slugs to about 1,100ish for this role, and the Winchester Silvertip 225 works. Cor-Bon loads a 200gr @ 1,100 JHP. The thing I like most about the Speer 250 is that it should print to about the same place as the various hardcast 255/260gr slugs that are also common in this caliber as a "woods and hunting" load of excellent repute at around 1,000fps. It should be possible to dial in a fixed-sight gun for those or the 250 JHP.

[wheelgunslinger]

That sounds like a neat round, Jim. I'll have to check that out.

Hornady makes a big ole xtp hollowpoint in 452 also. Should be neato over some H110 moving about 1000fps.
Can't wait to get one of these in a carry rig.

Anybody want a Dan Wesson 357? :D

[OAKTOWN]

Nice. I've always wanted a DA 45 colt revolver that wouldn't come apart should I do something stupid and get one of my winchester loads into it.

I believe the Cor-Bon 200gr is a gold dot as well. Midway actually had them as components a while ago. They don't show up in the Speer catalog, the rep I spoke to had to do a little digging to find it.

FWIW - The 230gr 45acp winchester and speer hollow points have worked well in my lever action as well.

[Jim March]

Most projectiles designed for the 45ACP world work just fine in 45LC. The barrels are supposed to be the same bore, if they're standard.

Like the 357, it's hard to find a "useless" 45LC hollowpoint, at least where personal defense needs are concerned. In calibers like the 38Spl, 9mm and below I advocate being very particular about fodder for social service.

[usp_fan]

It's hard to find a useless .45 in general. Anything pushing a pill that size at speeds above 900 fps is going to make a hole with good penetration.

The more I read about this revolver, the more I like it for a general purpose woods gun.

--usp_fan

[Nightcrawler]

I told myself I wouldn't like the 4" Redhawk. At 47 ounces, it's heavier than my 629 Classic despite having an inch less barrel and a partial underlug.

I told myself it's ugly. I told myself that I never shoot barn-burner .44 loads anyway.

Then I handled one at the gun show. It doesn't feel as heavy as it is due to the balance. I bet it'd ride well in a Kramer holster (like the kind I use for my N-Frames). Holy crap, is it ever possible to just be happy with the wheelguns you have?

[Mac45]

While I love my M-25's, I've been wanting one of these for a long time.
Glad they brought 'em back

[Ultima-Ratio]

You said-

The Smith is fully capable of pushing hot, but not Ruger Only loads. 255 grn bullet at 1000-1100 is easily doable out of the 25/625.


Excuse me? Who defined a 255@1100 as hot? Current powders will allow Saami safe pressures for the SAA/P model colts at the mentioned spec.
You were aware that the 1873 40gns of black powder ran a 255@over 1000fps?

Back to the OPs Redhawk, I note that Quinn mentions tight throats (.4515) and since I've been inside several of the Redhawks I'll bet the forcing cone needs a tad of blueprinting but the Redhawk is strong, I've re chambered many to 454 Casull over the years and none have broken :).

The newer S&W 625s including the ultimate carry gun (IMHO) the Mountain Gun in .45 Long Colt is totally comfortable (after fixing throats and forcing cone) with 340s@1300fps (a bit over 1000fps@100yds!)

The newer enhanced stainless N frames are simply amazing both in strength, accuracy and of course the legendary smooth action.

[campbell]

The newer S&W 625s including the ultimate carry gun (IMHO) the Mountain Gun in .45 Long Colt is totally comfortable (after fixing throats and forcing cone) with 340s@1300fps (a bit over 1000fps@100yds!)

It should be mentioned that this load is way over the manufacturer's recommendations, and even Linebaugh, who is not one to shy from a hot .45 Colt load, keeps his loads at under 25,000 psi in the .45 Colt Mountain Gun.

[Ultima-Ratio]

It should be mentioned that this load is way over the manufacturer's recommendations, and even Linebaugh, who is not one to shy from a hot .45 Colt load, keeps his loads at under 25,000 psi in the .45 Colt Mountain Gun.

You are absolutely correct campell, I should have mentioned that!

I also should have mentioned that we here have fired thousands of these loads through two Mountain Guns and an extremely rare pair of 625 Power Ports.

I also should have mentioned that with one example we had a peening problem with the center pin in the ejector rod that was improperly hardened..easy fix.

[Hawk]

This thing look very interesting. I've had one ear to the ground for a .45 Colt DA for a while without result. All the S&Ws x25s locally have not been so configured. I went a little ".45 Colt bugnutz" in '07 and consequently have wound up with a metric pantload of .45 brass and no DA to use them with.

I don't own a Ruger DA but did have a Security Six way back in a different life - I recall it had a perfectly horrid trigger and was refreshingly free of screws. My recent reintroduction to revolvers has left me wishing for fewer screws generally.

Does the Redhawk in question have the two different springs for trigger return vs hammer or is it of the "dual purpose" type? I believe I heard the Alaskan was one way and some other Redhawk the other but I can't keep them straight. I'd prefer the one more amenable to trigger tweaking.

[usp_fan]

Hawk,

The Redhawk uses one spring for both the hammer and trigger return functions. I understand the newer Redhawks have a decent DA and a workable SA pull.

Ultima--I won't argue with your results, only say I'm not comfortable with that load in the Smith 25. However, I'd have no problem with it in the Ruger. My favorite load for my Bisley is very similar to your load (325 grn over a large dose of Lil'gun).

My wife saw me posting to this thread and asked if I'd found my next toy--I believe the purchase is approved.

[kludge]

I was at the Indy 1500 today, and my longtime favorite dealer had a 4" Redhawk in both .44Mag and .45Colt.

I also handled a S&W Mountain Gun in .45 Colt on a differnet table.

I'm not quite up to the required number of pennies yet, so instead of walking away with a new Redhawk, I walked away with a few impressions.

The look and proportion of the gun, well you just can't get it from a picture in a magazine. The size and heft are close to the Alaskan, but the proportions are more pleasing... rather like a scaled-up 3" Security Six.

The grip fills the hand in a very satisfying way... the Hogue grips on my SuperRedhawk and my Service Six just aren't quite big enough and I really have to concentrate on the alignment of my grip... this grip just falls into your hand right where it should be... full but not too wide, not too long, just right... as is the trigger reach.

(I'm hoping this grip might fit my SRH? Maybe? It would make a world of difference.)

The trigger was not quite as smooth as the S&W, but to be fair the Smith was not new. There was a hint of grit on the double action stroke, but it was not to my finger any heavier than the pull of my Service Six.. in fact the width of the trigger compared to the Six makes for less pressure on the trigger finger. What you do feel differently is the rotation of the mass of the larger cylinder, which will only get more massive with a half-dozen 250gr slugs in the chambers. The single action pull was, well, predictable.

The balance of the gun belies it mass, the 4" barrel means there isn't much leverage required to keep the barrel up; the well fitting grip helps to this end also.

So there you have it... and so will I... soon I hope. I celebrated by buying 100 new pieces of Winchester brass. In .45 Colt of course.

[Mr.Revolverguy]

Nice review. Thats what I would have figured because I have the 4 inch 44mag. Right now I am saving up my pennies as well. By that time I should have figured out if I want to get the 4inch 45 as a brother to the 44 or say I have that experience already and get the Alaskan 454 which more than likely will have 45 colt as the majority put through it.

[Baron357]

I have the .44 mag version and it is great. It is my first Ruger revo, all my others are S&W.

Not being too familiar with Rugers can somebody tell me if these 4" Redhawks accept the same grips as the other Redhawks? I don't like the exposed back strap.

[Stainz]

All Redhawks (RH) have a grip-shaped frame, so the exposed backstrap is a given. The Super Redhawk (SRH) have a post that the grip fits over, permitting a padded backstrap and a wider range of grips. The RH, like the Security Six, has a single spring lockwork with a long DA pull. The SRH is like the GP100, and smaller-scaled SP101, with a two spring lockwork - and similar grip studs.

My first DA revolver was an early new 7.5" .454 SRH, which I loved. My first S&W was a new 625MG (4") in .45 Colt, which quickly outgroupped the SRH with .45 Colt. I added a new SS 5.5" .45 RH several years ago, ordered along with another one for a friend - just before they were dropped - and put on closeout... we paid a lot for them. His had a warped frame - and he got another new one, which he sold. Mine had just too many QC issues - including burst casting bubbles between the cylinder bore exits. Both had consistent exit bores measured between .4520-.4525"... that problem was 'fixed' before they dropped them before. I kept mine for some time, selling it finally ~ a year ago... I had acquired a second 625MG in .45 Colt.

Both 625MGs would group better with 255 gr LSWC/850+ fps at 25 yd than the RH, much less the SRH. Of course, that SRH with 240gr XTP .454s (2k fps) was the best grouping - 1.5-1.625" at 44-50yd, scoped (Weaver 2x28), from sandbags. It was maybe 6+" with .45 Colt Cowboy Loads at 50yd - 4-5" at 25yd, while the RH was 4+", and the 625MG was 3+". The S&W grouped ~2" at 25yd with either 255gr LSWC or 250gr GDJHP ~840 fps, better than the RH. Also, the S&W ejected with never a problem, while the drooping RH ejector regularly slipped over the dimunitive .45 Colt rim, making reloading time-consuming. The trigger pull on the stock spring RH was long and often resulted in ftf's with my Federally-primed homebrews, while The lightly sprung S&W never had a ftf. The RH was a lot heavier, too.

Sure, the 625 cylinder, barrel, and frame is rated originally for .45 ACP - at least 22 kpsi vs the 'standard .45 Colt's 14 kpsi, but I won't quite run 'Ruger' loads in mine. I do like the better trigger, greater depenability, and assured reloading of the S&W - thus, the sale of my RH. No, I don't want either a 4" .44 or .45 RH - the SRH is a far better revolver - better lockwork, grip design, etc. A 4" SRH might interest me... I still know what to do to 'clean-up' a Ruger...

Stainz