Redhawk vs. Super Blackhawk


PDA






skidder
September 4, 2012, 08:00 PM
I know these 44s are both tough as nails, but I've always heard the Super Blackhawk is tougher.

Not sure how this is possible when the Redhawk has a bigger cylinder (wider and longer). I have both and just compared their cylinders.

This leaves me to wonder.... Do the older Super blackhawks have bigger cylinders than the newer ones? Mine was made in 2007.

I've always thought of this as a moot comparison, but after examining both I'm not so sure?

If you enjoyed reading about "Redhawk vs. Super Blackhawk" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Drail
September 4, 2012, 08:05 PM
I wouldn't necessarily say the Super Blackhawk is "tougher" but there's a lot loss moving parts to wear and get out of time. And a overzealous handloader can most certainly blow both of them to pieces. It just matters if you want or need DA capability. I own both and shoot both. As fas as cylinder size goes, it doesn't really matter. Standard pressure ammo (or a little more) isn't going to damage either one. If you want to fire 300 gr bullets at 200 meter steel rams all day the Blackhawk will take it longer than a Redhawk but only because the Redhawk will shoot itself loose enough to go out of time on DA. They will both hold up in SA mode just fine.

Bush Pilot
September 4, 2012, 08:11 PM
Send them to Clark, I'm sure he'd be happy to do the testing and report back here. Don't expect to get the guns back in one piece.

skidder
September 4, 2012, 09:02 PM
Clark?

skidder
September 4, 2012, 09:49 PM
the Blackhawk will take it longer than a Redhawk but only because the Redhawk will shoot itself loose enough to go out of time on DA. They will both hold up in SA mode just fine.
Good point.

Though the Redhawk has a larger cylinder the ratchet on the SBH is bigger.


http://i1212.photobucket.com/albums/cc456/exlogger/misc/44cylinders.jpg

rswartsell
September 4, 2012, 09:56 PM
That says it in the easiest terms to understand skidder. I like my SBH, for when not needing DA and not being the "push the envelope" type on loads I felt the SBH was the good choice for durability. Skidder showed me here I may have indeed been right. It always just "felt right" in lockup. I was paying more attention to the ratchet than the cylinder walls and didn't realize it 'til now.

98Redline
September 5, 2012, 05:39 AM
You guys have it backwards. The Redhawk is the stronger of the two guns. This is determined by the location of the cylinder locking notches. On the blackhawks the locking notches are directly over the chambers, at the thinnest part of the metal where on the Redhawk and Super Redhawk they are between the cylinders at the thickest part.

Both guns are essentially built like tanks and will take a lifetime of Ruger Only loads without shooting loose, however the RH has the slight advantage if you are going to push the upper.....upper end of the envelope.

BTW: I have never heard of a Ruger shooting loose. S&Ws, yes, but never a Ruger. I have a few of each of the flavors (BH, RH, SRH) that have seen thousands of hot/heavy top end loads and each is as tight as the day I bought them. No change in cylinder gap, endshake or timing.

Drail
September 5, 2012, 10:39 AM
Keep shooting them. I assure you they will loosen up eventually no matter who made them. You cannot change the laws of physics. If you still can't believe that read Kuhnhausen's Ruger DA shop manual Vols. I and II. Lots of photos of worn out Ruger DAs. There is a lot more to the "strength" of a gun than how thick the cylinder walls are.

skidder
September 5, 2012, 11:20 AM
I've always favored my Redhawk because of the cylinder size. I put off getting a SBH for a long time knowing the cylinder was shorter. I was afraid my favorite hunting loads would not fit. When I got the SBH home the first thing I did was run and grab my 300 gr XTP's. I was relieved to say the least. They were seated a hair under flush, but they fit! I had a Taurus Tracker that would not take this load.

Some might find this silly, "buying a gun for the bullet", but I was sold on this bullet year ago when an old guy took me out and demonstrated this bullet with his Super Redhawk. He shot it at a big boulder and went and picked it up and handed it to me. The most perfect mushroom you have ever seen. Looked so good you could have put it on your salad. :D I've been using this bullet for hunting ever since. I was ecstatic to find that the SBH could also handle this load.

CraigC
September 5, 2012, 12:29 PM
The cylinder of the Redhawk/Super Redhawk is larger in diameter and the bolt notches are between the chambers. They are stronger and will withstand higher pressures (50-55,000psi in .44Mag or .45Colt) but will shoot loose quicker. The Blackhawk/Super Blackhawk can withstand pressures in the 32,000-40,000psi range (.44Mag and .45Colt) but will take longer to shoot loose.

savanahsdad
September 5, 2012, 01:02 PM
I have a BlackHawk with a 10 1/2 bull barrel and it is NOT as strong as a RedHawk , there are loads just for the RedHawk that are to be used in nothing but a RedHawk or a T/C , Handloader Magazine did a right-up on the RedHawk a year or so back with some real hot and heavy loads , Not for the BlackHawk:)

Bush Pilot
September 5, 2012, 07:30 PM
Clark?
He's a legend for pushing the envelope with hot loads with a few guns ending up in pieces. If you ever see him post a load I wouldn't duplicate it.

BYJO4
September 5, 2012, 08:00 PM
I don't think strength is an issue with either model. To me, it boils down to which fits my hand the best and do I want DA/SA or just SA. Also there is the ease of loading and unloading the Redhawk.

firesky101
September 5, 2012, 11:18 PM
I went with the Redhawk, but I am pretty sure I can shake something loose inside of me before either of them.

murdoc rose
September 5, 2012, 11:23 PM
three screw supers all the way

TwoEyedJack
September 6, 2012, 03:09 PM
Here is some anecdotal evidence for the Blackhawk. I bought one in .41 mag in 1985 and proceeded to shoot the crap out of it. Over one memorable weekend we sent almost 1,000 rounds downrange. My favorite load was a 210 gr. JHP over 22.8 gr. of WW296, generating about 1000 ft.lb. After an estimated 5000 rounds, the aluminum grip frame broke. I sent it back to Ruger and they put a steel one on it and I have probably put a few thousand rounds through it since then. Lockup is as tight as the day it left the factory.

steveno
September 6, 2012, 04:28 PM
I have had both barrel lengths of the 44 mag Redhawk along with the 7.5 & 10.5 Super Blackhawks (both sst) and by far the better quality was in the Super Blackhawks. to say one is stronger than the other is immaterial as both will take safe loads forever. the 10.5 inch Super Blackhawk is the only 44 mag I kind of miss.

22250Rem
September 6, 2012, 08:06 PM
They're both tough as nails and when I was in the market I would have bought either one. But I wound up with 7.5" stainless Redhawk cause a mint one came into the LGS when the shop owner made a package deal buy on 8 or 10 guns from an estate. Then he gave me a great price and I couldn't refuse. The Redhawks are built like tanks but the Blackhawks ain't very far behind.

gamestalker
September 6, 2012, 11:11 PM
I reload for, and shoot both, and have yet to work either one loose using H110 / 296 jacketed loads in them exclusively for nearly 30 years, maybe more? Let me put it this way, I own magnum wheel guns so I can shoot magum loads, knowing that they are built to safely handle maximum book loads, and they do.

My approach to this is based on minimizing forcing cone damage by shooting only jacketed loads. I'm not knocking those that like to shoot lead, not by any stretch. What I am getting at here is that, if you are going to go to the range and blast 50+ rounds without cleaning the gun well, there is a risk of lead building up in the focing rather quickly. lead deposits can cause excessive pressures in the cone, thus splitting or fracturing it.

GS

CraigC
September 7, 2012, 11:20 AM
My approach to this is based on minimizing forcing cone damage by shooting only jacketed loads. I'm not knocking those that like to shoot lead, not by any stretch. What I am getting at here is that, if you are going to go to the range and blast 50+ rounds without cleaning the gun well, there is a risk of lead building up in the focing rather quickly. lead deposits can cause excessive pressures in the cone, thus splitting or fracturing it.
Sorry but this is utter nonsense.

skidder
September 8, 2012, 11:26 AM
I haven't had my SBH very long, but I did take it out last weekend and was very pleased with how it shot. My Redhawk group was not quite as good (not pictured). I have a bad habit of pushing up in the top right quadrant (I'm left handed), but I'm working on that so I didn't bother adjusting the sights.

I found this target pie chart online. Is this worth checking into? According to it I'm pushing (anticipating recoil) or no follow-through. note: reverse diagram for southpaws.

Both targets were shot at 25 yards.

http://i1212.photobucket.com/albums/cc456/exlogger/SuperBlackhawkTarget.jpg

http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k64/rustygun3030/correctionchart.jpg

Jaymo
September 8, 2012, 01:23 PM
You're not getting hurt by buying either one. I love my Redhawk. It's built like a tank.
I love my .44 spl Blackhawk and would love to have one int .45 Colt and love to have a SBH .44 mag.

If you enjoyed reading about "Redhawk vs. Super Blackhawk" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!