[1858]

A recent episode of American Rifleman featured the Ruger Redhawk in the "I have this old gun" segment. I really like and respect Phil Schreier's expertise but I'm still confused by his explanation as to why the Ruger frame is so strong. For those of you that don't know who Phil Schreier is, he's the Senior Curator for the NRA National Firearm Museum. Anyway, this is what he said when talking about the Redhawk ...

"Ruger developed a way of offsetting the ejector pin on the cylinder so that you can nearly double the strength of the frame of the revolver by moving the axis of the ejector pin away from the centerline of the revolver cylinder."

Any clarification would be much appreciated. I've watched the episode in question at least five times but I'm still not sure what he means. I've looked at my Redhawk and I don't get it.

Thanks.
:)

[JohnKSa]

Swing out the cylinder and look at it from the top of the gun. NOT the top of the cylinder, but from the top of the gun.

You'll see that the ejector rod is not centered on the cylinder. It's even more apparent if you push a little on the ejector rod--you can then tell that the ejector rod is not lined up perfectly with the rod attached to the ejector star.

That means that the ejector rod sits slightly lower than the centerline of the cylinder when you swing the cylinder back into the frame.

I haven't figured out how that makes the design stronger yet...

By the way, I checked this on the GP100 and the Super RedHawk--they're both that way. I don't have a plain RedHawk, but I assume they're similar.

[Thingster]

I don't own a Super Redhawk, but here would be my take:

If it's offset towards the left side or bottom of the gun, then it would mean you'd be able to get more material on the frame and less on the crane, making the frame stronger immediately under and around the barrel.

[Confederate]

I've talked to a lot of techies in my time, and every single one of 'em would have preferred the Redhawk be a direct copy to the Security-Six. I don't like (and neither do they) the single spring that does the work of two springs. It's a gimmick. I want TWO springs that do the work of TWO springs.

The Redhawk is simply too heavy for me.

[JohnKSa]

If it's offset towards the left side or bottom of the gun...I can't see any lateral (side-to-side) offset in the ejector rod on the GP100 and the Super Redhawk but it's definitely offset downwards a bit.

[Thingster]

Then yeah, that's the point. The downward offset allows there to be more material on the frame under and around the barrel yielding a stonger gun.

[RyanM]

Then yeah, that's the point. The downward offset allows there to be more material on the frame under and around the barrel yielding a stonger gun.

Hm. I do recall reading that the bottom of the barrel forcing cone is often the first thing to go with .357 K-frames and J-frames, especially when 125 gr ammo is involved. That's the area which can be built thicker with the offset ejector rod.

[1858]

JohnKSa, thanks very much. :) I did exactly as you suggested and now I see what Phil (and you) was talking about.

Thingster, I agree with your comment about the extra material in the frame beneath the forcing cone of the barrel adding a significant amount of strength . I would estimate that there's an extra 1/16" based on the offset of the ejector pin. That part of the frame (beneath the forcing cone) still has a lot less wall thickness compared to the frame at the 9, 12 and 3 o'clock positions around the barrel but obviously it's enough.

Anyway, thanks for the help ... it's much appreciated.

:)