art g
October 21, 2003, 10:44 AM
Please excuse my ignorance on these guns but what is the difference between a Redhawk SS .44 mag and a Super Redhawk SS .44 mag? Thanks! Art G.
What is the difference between Redhawk and Super Redhawk?
If you enjoyed reading about "What is the difference between Redhawk and Super Redhawk?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Stainz
October 21, 2003, 01:11 PM
I think that originally the Redhawk had a barrel or barrel installation problem in .44 Magnum. That has since been fixed - and it is quite stout, although it only has one spring for the hammer and trigger. That makes it a bit harder to 'tune'. The even more stout SRH has separate hammer and trigger return springs, allowing some 'tuning'. The Redhawk is currently offered in 5.5" & 7.5" in both .44M and .45 Coltwith & without scope mount built in & rings. It is available in blued & SS.
The SS-only SRH was stout enough to permit a metal change to allow even higher pressure rounds like the .454 Casull and enough extra 'meat' to permit the larger .480 bore. Additionally, it is only made in the 7.5" & 9.5" lengths - with included scope rings. Besides the hi-tech grey SS .454 Casull and .480 version, the original silver SS .44 Magnum is still there - the ultimate in .44 Magnum revolvers.
New prices locally run from $450 for the 5.5" non-scope-able .45 Colt to $560 for the SRH in .454 or .480. I love my 7.5" .454 SRH - it has digested ~300 .454's and thousands of .45 Colts, which are getting harder to clean after... mine is now a .45 Colt until I find a better chamber cleaner. I put a hi-viz front sight on mine for 'bareback' and a 2x28mm Weaver H2 for long distance. I still want a 5.5" RH in .45 Colt...
Stainz
The SS-only SRH was stout enough to permit a metal change to allow even higher pressure rounds like the .454 Casull and enough extra 'meat' to permit the larger .480 bore. Additionally, it is only made in the 7.5" & 9.5" lengths - with included scope rings. Besides the hi-tech grey SS .454 Casull and .480 version, the original silver SS .44 Magnum is still there - the ultimate in .44 Magnum revolvers.
New prices locally run from $450 for the 5.5" non-scope-able .45 Colt to $560 for the SRH in .454 or .480. I love my 7.5" .454 SRH - it has digested ~300 .454's and thousands of .45 Colts, which are getting harder to clean after... mine is now a .45 Colt until I find a better chamber cleaner. I put a hi-viz front sight on mine for 'bareback' and a 2x28mm Weaver H2 for long distance. I still want a 5.5" RH in .45 Colt...
Stainz
art g
October 21, 2003, 01:15 PM
Stainz: Excellent information. I appreciate that you took the time to share your knowledge. Thanks! Art G.
Steve in PA
October 21, 2003, 05:52 PM
Super Redhawk.........there is no equal :)
Frohickey
October 21, 2003, 06:28 PM
SuperRedhawk (http://www.sixguns.com/range/454_super_redhawk.htm)
Trouble had arisen with the Redhawk about the time that they had decided to change the Redhawk so it had the grip and trigger mechanism of the GP-100. Before this could be done, a few Redhawks started blowing the barrel shanks at the threaded portion. To combat this the frame was extended to enclose about two and one-half inches of the barrel, which in turn made room for both of the scope rings on the frame rather than on the barrel. Now we know why the Super Redhawk is such a strange looking sixgun!
Then about the time they decided to change the Redhawk to this configuration, it was discovered that the problem with the Redhawk was not a design flaw or even a weakness, but of all things it was being caused by the lubricant that was being applied to the threads of the Redhawk barrel before it was screwed into the frame. So what to do now? Do you drop a very popular sixgun, the Redhawk, because of a problem that did not exist? Do you forget the new design and stay with the Redhawk? Or do you bring out the new sixgun, the Super Redhawk, and still maintain the Redhawk in the line? Sixgunners everywhere are happy that Ruger chose the latter option.
Now, if Ruger were to make a 4 inch SuperRedhawk in 454Casull. That would be a good mountain gun (bear medicine). The rubber grips really help in soaking up recoil, though, if you are down trying to fend off a bear, chances are you won't feel it at all, the recoil, I mean. :p
Trouble had arisen with the Redhawk about the time that they had decided to change the Redhawk so it had the grip and trigger mechanism of the GP-100. Before this could be done, a few Redhawks started blowing the barrel shanks at the threaded portion. To combat this the frame was extended to enclose about two and one-half inches of the barrel, which in turn made room for both of the scope rings on the frame rather than on the barrel. Now we know why the Super Redhawk is such a strange looking sixgun!
Then about the time they decided to change the Redhawk to this configuration, it was discovered that the problem with the Redhawk was not a design flaw or even a weakness, but of all things it was being caused by the lubricant that was being applied to the threads of the Redhawk barrel before it was screwed into the frame. So what to do now? Do you drop a very popular sixgun, the Redhawk, because of a problem that did not exist? Do you forget the new design and stay with the Redhawk? Or do you bring out the new sixgun, the Super Redhawk, and still maintain the Redhawk in the line? Sixgunners everywhere are happy that Ruger chose the latter option.
Now, if Ruger were to make a 4 inch SuperRedhawk in 454Casull. That would be a good mountain gun (bear medicine). The rubber grips really help in soaking up recoil, though, if you are down trying to fend off a bear, chances are you won't feel it at all, the recoil, I mean. :p
Nightcrawler
October 21, 2003, 06:31 PM
http://www.wildwestguns.com/Pistolsmithing/Custom454.jpg
http://www.clementscustomguns.com/handguns/images/1.jpg
I'd really dig either one of these.
http://www.clementscustomguns.com/handguns/images/1.jpg
I'd really dig either one of these.
Poohgyrr
October 21, 2003, 08:54 PM
To be honest, I kinda think the SRH is ugly, and the Redhawk not too bad. Of course, I used to think Glocks were ugly too. Well, they still are ugly, but have grown on me. Kinda like a beauty wart. :neener:
Hutch
October 23, 2003, 02:31 PM
Pooh has grasped the essence: The Redhawk is ugly, The SRH is UH-GLEE.
Kestrel
October 23, 2003, 05:00 PM
Isn't the frame of the SRH larger than the Redhawk? (I'm not just talking about the extended part on the barrel.)
Steve
Steve
Kestrel
October 23, 2003, 05:04 PM
Nightcrawler,
Who does the barrel chop on the picture of the Redhawk you have there?
Steve
Who does the barrel chop on the picture of the Redhawk you have there?
Steve
Nightcrawler
October 23, 2003, 05:14 PM
I WISH that was my Redhawk.
Clements Custom Guns (http://www.clementscustomguns.com)
Clements Custom Guns (http://www.clementscustomguns.com)
Poohgyrr
October 24, 2003, 01:27 AM
Nightcrawler,
That is not fair. Links to blued, custom revolvers is too distracting. And the drool leaves a big mess on the keyboard. And the Wife doesn't want nose prints on the computer screen. ;)
That is not fair. Links to blued, custom revolvers is too distracting. And the drool leaves a big mess on the keyboard. And the Wife doesn't want nose prints on the computer screen. ;)
Sunray
October 24, 2003, 03:04 PM
Al lthat and it's the only DA .44 made with grips for normal sized hands. Same grip as the GP-100. Still a very big revolver. I need at least one. Never had the bucks, they're worth a whole lot more than $560 up here, nor able to decide which barrel length. No handgun hunting up here.
If you enjoyed reading about "What is the difference between Redhawk and Super Redhawk?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.