Toughest, beefiest 357 Magnum? Ruger Redhawk??


PDA






Peter M. Eick
March 10, 2013, 03:08 PM
I am interested in getting the biggest beefiest, heaviest 357 Magnum to see what I can do in terms of reloading. I have vague memories of someone saying the Ruger Redhawk was made in 357 Magnum which was the strongest one out there. I was also thinking of a Freedom Arms was another option.

My sole goal is a very strong revolver, either single or double action, that I can try and push the limits of what a 357 magnum can be loaded too. I could try it in my DW MD40 (A Supermag) or the like. I have just decided that I don't want to put my hot loads in my Pre-27 8 3/8" or Registered Magnum any more.

So does anyone have an opinion or a suggestion?

If you enjoyed reading about "Toughest, beefiest 357 Magnum? Ruger Redhawk??" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
beag_nut
March 10, 2013, 03:38 PM
Ruger no longer makes any Redhawk in .357. Get a GP100 instead. It can handle anything normally recommended, and then a lot more. Mine (6") feels like a .22 when I shoot "starting loads" (I handload).

Lost Sheep
March 10, 2013, 04:11 PM
I would think Thompson-Contender would be the strongest handgun. Remington's XP-100 was never chambered in .357 Mag, but if you found one, you could have it re-chambered. Then there is the Savage Striker, another bolt-action handgun.

If you want a revolver, the Dan Wesson chambered for .357 Maximum would be a candidate. (Is that the same as your Supermag?) Good luck finding one, and finding one owned by someone willing to part with it... but they are out there
http://www.gunauction.com/Search/DisplayItem.cfm?ItemNum=9812702

Among single actions, the Freedom Arms would be my suggestion, but I bet John Linebaugh would bore one of his large-caliber guns for the .357 Mag if you asked.

I must ask why? Finding a load that the brass will withstand, but only in one gun is not very versatile. However, if it is for bragging rights, a pressure test barrel mounted on a handgrip should do it, as anything else is something that could be surpassed.

Lost Sheep

Bio-Chem
March 10, 2013, 04:13 PM
if it's just more power, why not go .44mag?

rcmodel
March 10, 2013, 04:19 PM
that I can try and push the limits of what a 357 magnum can be loaded too.Then you want a single-action Ruger Blackhawk.

Pushed to the limit in a DA, hard extraction will require beating them out with a stick on the ejector rod to extract 6 at a time.

rc

critter
March 10, 2013, 04:35 PM
The FA was a good suggestion.

slick6
March 10, 2013, 04:42 PM
Following is a picture of my 5.5" Redhawk .357 which is the gun in the front with a Police Service-Six in the rear.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v631/shootit/Ruger/P1030003.jpg
The following two pictures shows how much beefier the Redhawk .357is compared to the Smith & Wesson Model 27-2 shown on the left!:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v631/shootit/P1020240.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v631/shootit/P1020236.jpg

Lost Sheep
March 10, 2013, 04:48 PM
And notice the notches in the cylinder are between the chambers, not right over them.

Lost Sheep

CraigC
March 10, 2013, 05:01 PM
The FA 83 (not the 97) is without a doubt the strongest and last I heard, they provided ".353 Casull" data. That said, you really can't get enough slow burning powder into the .357 case to hurt even a mid-framed gun like the Colt SAA or Old Model Blackhawk. Guns like the Redhawk are really just a lot of unnecessary steel.

PO2Hammer
March 10, 2013, 05:09 PM
Redhawk in .357 if you can find one.
F/A model 83 (large frame) if you can afford one.
The smaller frame model 97 is quite petite for a .357, no extra beef there (I do love mine though).
I don't think the Contender is all that beefy, it's very easy to blow up a barrel or stretch the frame. Recoil with heavy loads is hard on the shooting arm.

I used to have a custom (MGM) 9" .357 Encore that was affordable and very beefy. That was my test bed for .357 loads of all sorts.

My beefy .357 now is my GP100. I just got back from shooting some warm loads that were flattening my WSPM primers but felt good. Very solid gun.

If I could keep all the Ruger single action frames straight in my mind I would recommend a New Model Blackhawk (standard Blackhawk frame with XR3 -Red grip frame (I think )), not the new mid (smaller) frame models.

S&W model 27.

joeschmoe
March 10, 2013, 05:44 PM
Isn't the top/back strap the weak point on these guns, not the cylinder?

TennJed
March 10, 2013, 06:10 PM
I have always wanted Ruger to bring back the Redhawk in 357, only this time 8 shots (heck 9 may even fit)

L-Frame
March 10, 2013, 06:21 PM
.357 redhawks can be found occasionally on gunbroker and the classifieds. I can't imagine that something that's considered quite overbuilt for the .44 mag wouldn't be the strongest platform shooting .357's.

Confederate
March 10, 2013, 06:59 PM
I would rethink cobbling up heavy reloads, as pressures are sometimes unpredictable PLUS you soon reach a point of diminishing returns. Can one blow up a massive gun frame or cylinder like the Redhawk with a .357 round? I honestly don't know, but I wouldn't just keep increasing my loads past all safety levels. Any load found in a book should be okay with a Redhawk. Just be prudent. Modern .357 factory loads have been downgraded since the round made its appearance many years ago; however, modern loads still show superb stopping power. Higher pressures may add only nominal performance.

TomADC
March 10, 2013, 07:07 PM
If I wasn't worried about money I'd get a 5 inch S&W model 27, I still kick myself for passing on one twenty some years ago, they were much cheaper then.

Drail
March 10, 2013, 07:12 PM
Man, LOOK at the amount of steel between the chambers on that Redhawk! You probably will not blow up any Ruger in .357 but you can and will destroy the forcing cone if you run a steady diet of 110-125 gr. heavy loads through it. This is not an internet rumor. I have done it myself. Still have the gun. I was young and stupid. It only took about 2 months to do this. Kuhnhausen's Ruger DA Revolver shop manual has multiple photographs of Ruger barrel's forcing cones that were destroyed by people using light bullet heavy loads. Use 158 gr. loads and it will last forever. The Kuhnhausen book also has photos of barrels cut lengthwise to show results of some tests that Ruger conducted to prove how strong their barrels are. They threaded a steel plug into the muzzle and fired rounds until the entire length of the bore was filled with bullets smashed into each other. The barrel never blew, bulged or even cracked. They also did the same thing with a S&W and Colt revolver and they both let go after 2 rounds. There are other photos of customer's gun where they fired a squib into the barrel and then kept firing rounds until the barrel coud not revolver any more because of the bullets sticking out the rear of the barrel. It did not blow or even bulge the barrel. Ruger's design philosophy has always been to design it to withstand normal use and then double it. It works very well.

JVaughn
March 10, 2013, 07:21 PM
What about S&W 27, like Tom said. It's extremely heavy and solid.

R.W.Dale
March 10, 2013, 07:43 PM
You guys are all barking up the wrong tree.

I have a TC Encore barrel in 357mag/Max 24"

This is a 357 magnum that is on a platform that's OK with 270wby magnum pressures (70,000psi)




posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about

Cosmoline
March 10, 2013, 08:13 PM
I was just going to say Encore.

But in general one thing I noticed with my .357 Max experiments is that when you get up above the normal magnum loads, you're really dealing with a new kind of cartridge. The powders are different and the bullets are heavier, making that extra bit of room in the .357 Max brass very useful.

Texan Scott
March 10, 2013, 09:01 PM
+1 TennJedd... an 8 shot, 4 inch bbl, fixed sight Redhawk. I'll take two!

wally247
March 10, 2013, 11:21 PM
They don't call them "Ruger only" loads for nothing...

Drail
March 10, 2013, 11:40 PM
While a Thomspon Contender may be legally classified as a handgun it is essentially a cut down rifle. No comparison to a revolver.

GP100man
March 10, 2013, 11:51 PM
I had the joy of being young & set bad examples once in my life & wringing the 357 magnum out was 1 of em with a 5 1/2" Redhawk !!

You CAN pack enuff H-110 into a 357 case that it actually slows down , even small rifle mag primers could`nt get thru it was packed so tite !!!

The fast powders just blew the core out of the jackets with what we had to work with 25-30 yrs ago . Inspect bore after every shot please!

Now I`m old enuff that all I can do is give good advice :)

R.W.Dale
March 11, 2013, 07:49 AM
While a Thomspon Contender may be legally classified as a handgun it is essentially a cut down rifle. No comparison to a revolver.

The op wanted to know about the strongest 357 magnum to explore the potential of the cartridge.

A revolver cannot do that.

You can load up the most insane over the top handload Clark can imagine in a redhawk and a milktoast factory load for the same bullet weight in a TC of the same barrel length (measured to breachface) will outrun the revolver by up to 200fps+

I've loaded and owned all sorts of 357's and if the op wants to do what he says he wants to do then he needs to step outside the limitations of a revolver.




posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complains about

Peter M. Eick
March 11, 2013, 08:16 PM
I have a Contender but I should have mentioned that. I was after a revolver to see what I could do in that format.

27's are out as I have a bunch of Pre-27's and I know what they can do.
Dan Wesson Supermags are out as I already have one and don't want to mess it up.
GP100 is out as there is not enough steel there. A 27 is better off than that.

Ruger Blackhawk is an option, but why not go the FA 83 (I believe) which has more steel on it. I keep thinking this is a good choice.
Ruger Redhawk 357 like shown in the pictures above looks quite interesting.

I will see what the backlog is at Freedom Arms and then start poking around for a blackhawk 357. They look almost perfect for what I want to do.

By the way, my goal is to load up to 1550 with a 158swc in my 8 3/8" pre-27's and then sacrifice a gun like the blackhawk or redhawk to a steady diet of them. I am just curious how long it would take it (Forever I presume) if shot with near original power levels. Then I want a test bed that I can piddle with different powders in the 38/44 and 357 magnum and not worry about damaging some fine 60 year old Pre-27's or my beloved 38/44s.

Walkalong
March 12, 2013, 11:28 AM
Without a doubt the Redhawk is the strongest as far as handling pressures. It's a simple matter of mass in the cylinder.

Certaindeaf
March 12, 2013, 11:58 AM
The GP is fairly overbuilt. It's purportedly much stronger than the Six series and they were pretty darn strong. Then you'd also have a normal handgun instead of a boat anchor.

CraigC
March 12, 2013, 12:23 PM
The Redhawk is no doubt a strong sixgun and the Contender has a lot of potential but neither are as strong or as durable as the FA 83. Think about it like this, only the FA 83 is designed to handle 65,000psi, in a much larger chambering, for its lifetime. It is built for far more precise tolerances and of stronger materials. For this sixgun, we have loads consisting of 160's@1750fps, 180's@1650fps and 200's@1500fps.


By the way, my goal is to load up to 1550 with a 158swc in my 8 3/8" pre-27's and then sacrifice a gun like the blackhawk or redhawk to a steady diet of them.
All that said, a Blackhawk would probably be your best choice for this. They're cheap and plentiful and will stand up nicely to your loads.

skidder
March 12, 2013, 01:47 PM
All that said, a Blackhawk would probably be your best choice for this. They're cheap and plentiful and will stand up nicely to your loads.

I agree with Craig. They are built on the same same architecture as the 44 Super Blackhawk. The price is good and so is the strength.

roaddog28
March 12, 2013, 03:07 PM
Man, LOOK at the amount of steel between the chambers on that Redhawk! You probably will not blow up any Ruger in .357 but you can and will destroy the forcing cone if you run a steady diet of 110-125 gr. heavy loads through it. This is not an internet rumor. I have done it myself. Still have the gun. I was young and stupid. It only took about 2 months to do this. Kuhnhausen's Ruger DA Revolver shop manual has multiple photographs of Ruger barrel's forcing cones that were destroyed by people using light bullet heavy loads. Use 158 gr. loads and it will last forever. The Kuhnhausen book also has photos of barrels cut lengthwise to show results of some tests that Ruger conducted to prove how strong their barrels are. They threaded a steel plug into the muzzle and fired rounds until the entire length of the bore was filled with bullets smashed into each other. The barrel never blew, bulged or even cracked. They also did the same thing with a S&W and Colt revolver and they both let go after 2 rounds. There are other photos of customer's gun where they fired a squib into the barrel and then kept firing rounds until the barrel coud not revolver any more because of the bullets sticking out the rear of the barrel. It did not blow or even bulge the barrel. Ruger's design philosophy has always been to design it to withstand normal use and then double it. It works very well.
Drail is spot one about destroying even the strongest revolvers by shooting light grain high velocity with slow burning powders rounds. Here is a example of what happen to a GP100 after a years worth of shooting the so called "flame throwers"

http://i656.photobucket.com/albums/uu283/HPitt74985/crackedforcingconeGP100.jpg
The round: 125 grain Hornady XTP over 22 gr. of H110 with a Remington 5 1/2 primer. This round is at 45,000 cup pressure. This round is in the Hodgdons loading manual.

Notice the forcing cone and how eroded it is. No matter how strong the revolver is if you reload these type of rounds this could happen.
Howard

TAKtical
March 12, 2013, 03:48 PM
Is it just me or does that redhawk look like it has the beefiest cylinder ever???

dvnv
March 12, 2013, 05:14 PM
I'll vote for the FA 353...as Clark mentioned it was designed to run at high pressure with 45 cal. holes.

Taffin did some loadwork for the 353, link:

http://handloads.com/loaddata/taffin.asp?Caliber=32%20Magnum&Weight=All&type=Handgun&Order=Powder&Source=

He said the brass was the limiting factor...fwiw, dvnv

Peter M. Eick
March 12, 2013, 07:54 PM
So the hunt begins.

I know I can find a blackhawk pretty much any day at my local dealer. I can also occasionally see a FA 357. I will watch and see if I can shake up a Redhawk 357 and if I get bored get the Blackhawk.

So off to the classified to post a "I am a looking for one"..

Thanks a bunch for the advice.

TennJed
March 12, 2013, 08:25 PM
So the hunt begins.

I know I can find a blackhawk pretty much any day at my local dealer. I can also occasionally see a FA 357. I will watch and see if I can shake up a Redhawk 357 and if I get bored get the Blackhawk.

So off to the classified to post a "I am a looking for one"..

Thanks a bunch for the advice.

Good luck, if I am not mistaken they are the hardest Redhawks to find

Certaindeaf
March 12, 2013, 08:33 PM
And they may well have been proof tested for years by some nimrod.

BullRunBear
March 12, 2013, 08:54 PM
If you can find the 357 Redhawk, I think it will suit your purposes. Mine is a stainless with 7.5" barrel. When I was younger and, possibly, dumber, I put some very heavy 158 gr. and 180 gr. loads through it. No problem or signs of stress at the forcing cone. I don't go for that level of recoil anymore but it is still a satisfying (and attention grabbing) revolver to use. The joke is that it does a beautiful job with 38 special WCs. Feels like a 22lr.

Just to be annoying, when I got mine almost 30 years ago I traded a pawnbroker a manual typewriter for the Redhawk. Probably the best firearms trade I'll ever do. :D

Jeff

IlikeSA
March 13, 2013, 07:57 AM
It has been estimated by some that the redhawk should have a burst strength of over 100,000 psi. I recently saw some redhawk loading data that puts a 250 grain LFP at close to 1200 fps.

I am not recommending the data, but posting where I found it: http://www.handloads.com/loaddata/default.asp?Caliber=357%20Magnum&Weight=All&type=Handgun

It is found at the end of the list.

smkummer
March 13, 2013, 10:44 AM
I cracked the forcing cone on a Colt Lawman MKIII with an Alliant recommended load of Blue Dot and 125 JHP. I fired about 70 rounds that day and they were on the hot end for sure, maybe if I let the gun cool between cylinder loads, it might not have happened but it did. Alliant now has a warning that the 357 load data for 125 grain bullets is no longer recommended. Remember that the Ruger .357 maximum was discontinued due to flame cutting the top strap. I believe SAMMI did everyone a service by lowering the max. pressure on current .357 ammo.

joeschmoe
March 13, 2013, 03:08 PM
I still don't get it. If you're going to get a new gun anyway, why not just get a .44 mag. All of my reloading books explain why increasing pressure does not equate to increased performance.

Iggy
March 13, 2013, 06:41 PM
Peter has more great old guns than God.. I reckon he's testing the limits of a caliber more than looking for more power from another caliber.
He's kind of an Elmer Keith revisited.
He can shoot the whiskers off a gnat too.

zxcvbob
March 13, 2013, 06:52 PM
Look up ".353 Casull". That should give you most of your answers (Freedom Arms, not sure which model)

For a double action, you are pretty much limited to a used Redhawk.

I've pushed things pretty far with a Taurus Gaucho (SAA) where I was getting case head separations. The fun wore off pretty quick because I don't have a lot of .357 brass. Also I don't want to wear out the gun prematurely, even if it's a Taurus.

Peter M. Eick
March 13, 2013, 09:19 PM
Iggy is right. I am only interested in what the 357 Magnum can really do. If I want more power I just go to my 357 Maximum. This is just a study in understanding what the actual round is capable of.

Much like my love of the 38/44s. The 357 Magnum makes more sense but the romance of the 38/44 is what is neat to study.

Besides, I don't reload 44's and yet I usually load about 10,000 .358 caliber 158's every year for my hobby. It just makes sense to stay with the 357 magnum over the 44 magnum.

Zoogster
March 14, 2013, 06:40 PM
They even made some Super Redhawks in .357 Magnum. I would presume those are even more robust than the standard Redhawk.



These .44 Magnum+ revolvers that are considered robust for even the .44 magnum in .357 are severely overbuilt and very tough.
If I recall the barrel is the same overall external diameter as the .44 Magnum versions using the same barrel blanks, and so it is just thicker and even tougher, like a bull barrel.
I have even seen some unfluted .357 cylinders which would be even tougher with more metal. Not sure how they were obtained though.


However on the same note I would be careful of used ones because with such a reputation many that have gone out of thier way to get them have done so to push them to new limits.
Meaning they may have experienced more punishment than similar aged revolvers.
They may have had large quantities of fast powders and maximum velocity rounds shot through flash cutting the top strap or similar wear to barrel and other areas.
It is still metal, and fast hot gases cause wear.

As you get further from when they were produced and more excessive handloaders have owned them the higher the percentage that have been severely abused.

The current production GP100 is pretty robust.

Peter M. Eick
March 14, 2013, 07:05 PM
Thanks for the advice. I figure if I get one and it has seen some hard times, I will send it to Ruger for a rebuild. If not, well, I am going to do the same thing to and just see how far I can go.

I know this is a phase I go through occasionally. I first learned about the 38 special. Then the 38/44 and now I am looking to take on the 357 magnum.

http://eickpm.com/picts/357maxes.jpg

If I wanted more power I would go to my 357 Maxes or my

http://eickpm.com/picts/contender.jpg

357 Max Contender.

The key to me is a gun I don't have an attachment to like my Registered Magnum

http://eickpm.com/picts/reg_box.jpg

(although I have actually fired full original power 357 magnums out of my 1939 Registered Magnum).

So I can investigate what the 357 Magnum can do in a revolver format. Basically I want to work up in a bunch of different powders to the 1937 load levels of Sharpe. How can I get there, can I get there, and if so with what powder would give me the lowest pressures and most reliability.

To me it is just a game of research. I am close to finishing up my investigation of the 38/44 and have now worked out some great loads for my 32 odd 38/44s. I am starting to hunt for a new reloading challenge to study and the mighty 357 Magnum seems interesting.

I should have probably put that in my first post, but I had not really crystallized in my head what I wanted to do and why. I just had a concept and was pushing it forward.

CraigC
March 14, 2013, 07:09 PM
They even made some Super Redhawks in .357 Magnum.
I've never seen or heard of one, prove it.


I have even seen some unfluted .357 cylinders...
Never seen or heard of this either. Seen plenty with unfluted cylinders but they were either .45's fitted with .454 SRH cylinders or custom five-shot .45Colt, .475's or .500's. Besides, unfluted cylinders are heavier but not stronger.


They may have had large quantities of fast powders and maximum velocity rounds...
You do understand that maximum velocities are obtained with slow powders, right?

Iggy
March 14, 2013, 07:09 PM
Peter, What's your final verdict on the 38/44s? Are your posts from a couple of months back the final word?

blindhari
March 14, 2013, 07:29 PM
Hello Peter,
It sounds like you are intrested in test to destruction. This has long been the only way to find upper limits on men and machines. Major Bong died I believe in a test flight, Yeager took the Bell X1 to a speed no one had ever been able to live through, Mercury astronauts climbed into a tin can with almost no room and almost no controls to find a way to the moon. You are trying to hit a moving target of maximum potential in the thin slice of time known as right this minute. Once you find maximum potential for .357 and a revolver, you have given some person some where a new goal to reach. If there weren't crazed people like yourself, the Navy would still be using boarding cutlesses at 18" instead of trying to squeeze a rail gun onto a cruiser.
Keep it up, be careful but keep it up,

blindhari

Zoogster
March 14, 2013, 07:33 PM
I've never seen or heard of one, prove it.

Made for the Uk market in small numbers.
Certainly be hard to get ahold of, but they are out there.

Here is a video of one being fired on you tube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNDlPH0ZHAw

Never seen or heard of this either.

Seen them on a regular redhawk. They may have been custom or maybe they had Ruger to do something special (unfluted would after all be even easier for them to make than fluted.)
They stuck with me because I later wanted to do the same in a .44 Magnum version of the super redhawk, but the unfluted cylinders were only available in the larger calibers. So I spent some time trying to figure out how to go about it.
And I do believe they are stronger. A solid cylinder is going to have more resistance to giving out. Even in areas other than the fluting like where the notches are cut (often the weakest point and stronger in Rugers because they are between the chambers not on them), because a circle will resist deformation better. Granted not by much.
Plus they look different.

rchery59
March 14, 2013, 09:26 PM
Iggy is right. I am only interested in what the 357 Magnum can really do. If I want more power I just go to my 357 Maximum. This is just a study in understanding what the actual round is capable of.

Much like my love of the 38/44s. The 357 Magnum makes more sense but the romance of the 38/44 is what is neat to study.

Besides, I don't reload 44's and yet I usually load about 10,000 .358 caliber 158's every year for my hobby. It just makes sense to stay with the 357 magnum over the 44 magnum.
I too am trying (just getting started) to develop loads for my 357 blackhawk. I've sold my heavy revolvers due to the combination of me not being able to shoot accurately and I can't take the recoil. I kept the 357 because it is really an accurate gun and the recoil doesn't bother me.
Right now I'm playing with 170 gr keith bullets, next is 180 gr fp and I may try a 200+ grain lead rifle bullet if I can't get the results I want from the other two.

CraigC
March 14, 2013, 09:29 PM
You're probably right about those for export to the UK. I thought about that after I posted.

Fluting does not lessen the strength of a cylinder. This is well proven and Hamilton Bowen wrote of it in his book, The Custom Revolver. The weak point is at the bolt notch and this area is unchanged when the cylinder is fluted.

murf
March 14, 2013, 09:48 PM
bludot powder changed a while back. it got a bit faster. alliant issued a warning not to use bludot in light bullet (125 and 115 grain) 357 magnum loads and all 41 magnum loads.

i believe new load data is out for light bullet in 357 magnum. the powder charge has been reduced quite a bit.

murf

Lost Sheep
March 15, 2013, 01:03 AM
Edit: I stand corrected. Picture in post 5 of the thread in the link provided in post 53 of this thread. Wow.


Made for the Uk market in small numbers.
Certainly be hard to get ahold of, but they are out there.

Here is a video of one being fired on you tube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNDlPH0ZHAw

Wow! A five-shot .357 Magnum Super Redhawk. Will wonders never cease?

Pardon my skepticism.

If the video is the best evidence you have, I would suggest you have fallen victim to naivete.

Remember, only believe half of what you see and one quarter of what you hear. This goes double for anything you find on the internet.

I think you've been had. The amount of recoil in the video suggests a standard .357 load or even 38 special, but seems more likely 44 Special.

Sorry, dude.
(edit) OK. looking at stills from the video, clearly only five rounds were loaded and an empty chamber is apparent in the cylinder. The title clearly says ".357 Magnum" and the frame is unmistakeably a Super Redhawk. Also, the case heads COULD be .357 Mag. But seriously, what market "genius" would chamber a Super in .357 when Ruger had already discontinued the Redhawk .357?

Second edit: OK, I have examined the video as closely as I can and it does look as if the case heads COULD be .357 Mag. This boggles the mind. And I am still skeptical.


Seen them on a regular redhawk. They may have been custom or maybe they had Ruger to do something special (unfluted would after all be even easier for them to make than fluted.)
They stuck with me because I later wanted to do the same in a .44 Magnum version of the super redhawk, but the unfluted cylinders were only available in the larger calibers. So I spent some time trying to figure out how to go about it.
And I do believe they are stronger. A solid cylinder is going to have more resistance to giving out. Even in areas other than the fluting like where the notches are cut (often the weakest point and stronger in Rugers because they are between the chambers not on them), because a circle will resist deformation better. Granted not by much.
Plus they look different.
I have to ask. Seen them in real life? Up close? Enough to actually read the engraving that specifies the caliber? Did you get to ask the owner if it was a custom job?

I have credible reports that Jack Huntington built a 44 Magnum / 45 Colt convertible Redhawk (using interchangeable cylinders and interchangeable Dan Wesson barrels), so anything could be done. And, then of course, there is the .357 Smolt (Smith & Wesson frame and Colt Python barrel) and the 454 Casull Redhawk, where a 454 Casull Super Redhawk cylinder is swapped into a Redhawk 45 Colt frame.

But a .357 Super Redhawk? Doable, but I highly doubt if anything like that ever left the Ruger Factory as a catalog item.

Lost Sheep

Edit: I stand corrected. Picture in post 5 of the thread in the link provided in post 53 of this thread. Wow.

skidder
March 15, 2013, 01:36 AM
Second edit: OK, I have examined the video as closely as I can and it does look as if the case heads COULD be .357 Mag. This boggles the mind. And I am still skeptical.

Ruger did make a SRH in 357 (I believe UK only).
I hang out on the Ruger forum quite often. They do surface from time to time.

Here is a link to a thread on the Ruger forum. Post #5 has pics.

http://rugerforum.net/ruger-double-action/67851-357-super-redhawk.html

CraigC
March 15, 2013, 11:06 AM
Ruger did make a SRH in 357 (I believe UK only).
I hang out on the Ruger forum quite often. They do surface from time to time.
Yep, seems like I saw them on the other RugerForum.

Cosmoline
March 15, 2013, 01:13 PM
Ruger is known for making very small runs of certain firearms, often sent through just one distributor. If they do really well they may or may not produce more. It's one thing that makes even fairly recently Ruger surprisingly collectable.

tuckerdog1
March 15, 2013, 03:51 PM
This article seems to favor the FA.

http://www.sixguns.com/tests/tt353.htm

Tuckerdog1

Peter M. Eick
March 15, 2013, 06:22 PM
Regarding the 38/44 question to me. I will do a writeup soon on the second and third round of testing.

By the way, with the help of this site and Rugerforum, I have a 5.5" Redhawk 357 Magnum purchased and hopefully even shipped today. That was a lot easier than I thought.

I hope to pick it up monday!

Once I play with it a while I may get an FA but for now I have my test subject on the way.

Thanks again for the advice to all.

walnut1704
March 15, 2013, 07:29 PM
I think this is all academic. You'll reach the limits of the cartridge (mostly extraction problems) long before you reach the limits of a Smith 27/28, Blackhawk, Redhawk, et al.

It's like arguing about what are the best high speed tires for a Yugo. You'll never get there.

SabbathWolf
March 15, 2013, 08:07 PM
This right here works just fine for my 357 needs.
Has a spare cylinder so I can shoot 9mm too if I ever actually need to in a pinch.
I chose it for the versatility.
Having one gun that can fire 9mm, 38spl & 357mag was hard to pass up.
There may be other guns out there even tougher, but this one still certainly gets the job done.
CraigC gave me some grip advice for this thing many moons ago.




http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v648/Swampdragon/a632c901.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v648/Swampdragon/003_zpsc85ebaec.jpg

CraigC
March 16, 2013, 09:47 AM
Looks good! ;)

SabbathWolf
March 16, 2013, 02:50 PM
Looks good! ;)
Glad you talked me into smooth grips instead of checkered. It's much more comfortable now than with the factory checkered plastic.

CraigC
March 16, 2013, 03:00 PM
I'll bet! Checkered hard rubber or plastic looks good on a lot of sixguns, particularly the early Rugers and late model flat-tops but they're sure rough on the hands.

Peter M. Eick
March 16, 2013, 05:05 PM
Walnut 1704,

This is where we have to disagree. The question at hand is what modern powder allows me to get 1550 fps out of my 8 3/8" Pre-27 with a 158 grn lead slug at the lowest pressure. Buffalo Bore and others effectively do it, so why can't I?

I like sorting out these problems. Yes I may be delving into above SAAMI pressure levels. Hence I want I biggest beefiest 357 Magnum I can get. I know I can achieve it with 2400 and I know I can achieve the goal with Unique. I can probably do it with bullseye by the risk and tolerances are higher and harder to maintain. That is the fun and challenge.

So the 357 magnum is my new research project. Just a game to make reloading interesting and try and figure out how to duplicate the original ammo from the mid 1930's instead of the watered down commercial stuff offered today. This is the reason for needing the biggest baddest toughest 357 Magnum I can find.

I can then answer this question. How can I get to 1550 with a 158 with less pressure than 2400? If so how?

Lost Sheep
March 17, 2013, 01:45 AM
Walnut 1704,

This is where we have to disagree. The question at hand is what modern powder allows me to get 1550 fps out of my 8 3/8" Pre-27 with a 158 grn lead slug at the lowest pressure. Buffalo Bore and others effectively do it, so why can't I?

I like sorting out these problems. Yes I may be delving into above SAAMI pressure levels. Hence I want I biggest beefiest 357 Magnum I can get. I know I can achieve it with 2400 and I know I can achieve the goal with Unique. I can probably do it with bullseye by the risk and tolerances are higher and harder to maintain. That is the fun and challenge.

So the 357 magnum is my new research project. Just a game to make reloading interesting and try and figure out how to duplicate the original ammo from the mid 1930's instead of the watered down commercial stuff offered today. This is the reason for needing the biggest baddest toughest 357 Magnum I can find.

I can then answer this question. How can I get to 1550 with a 158 with less pressure than 2400? If so how?
Win296 or H110. Or, you might try some rifle powders.

Take care, you are venturing into uncharted waters where only those with their own ballistics labs and the willingness to destroy firearms go with any degree of hope.

Good luck.

Lost Sheep

CraigC
March 17, 2013, 12:07 PM
H110/296 or Lil Gun will yield higher velocities at the same pressure. Wouldn't be much reason to go any slower than those three.

Pudge
March 17, 2013, 01:32 PM
I don't (yet) have experience with it, but VihtaVuori lists (here: http://www.lapua.com/en/products/reloading/vihtavuori-reloading-data/relodata/6/27) their N110 powder pushing a 158gr HP to 1569fps. Might be worth a look. My Lyman Manual lists a pretty quick 140gr load for N110 that doesn't produce the pressure of the slower listings.

Walkalong
March 17, 2013, 05:53 PM
That is from a 7" pressure barrel with no cylinder gap.

I tried 13.5 Grs N-110 under a 158 Gr bullet at 1.573 OAL and got 1073 FPS from a 6" Trooper Mk III. It was a slightly compressed load. Then I tried 15.0 Grs and got 1031 FPS at 57 degrees. I don't see getting to 1569 with 15.9 Grs, but I could be wrong.

Pudge
March 17, 2013, 09:49 PM
My Lyman manual lists an N110 load behind a 140gr JHP going 1505 fps at 39900 CPU. The powder with the next fastest max load was 1372 @ 41400 CPU. The 158gr load listed for N110 barely breaks 1100 fps. A look at the factory site shows some pretty optomistic performance. I thought it would be worth considering, but I'd love to read about more actual experience with VihtaVuori and the .357 magnum.

I tend toward H110, and doubt that the targets I might encounter can distinguish higher performance as readily as my firearm can excesive pressure.

Cosmoline
March 21, 2013, 01:40 PM
Once again THR has cost me money. I saw a Redhawk .357 at the store--only the second one I've ever found in the flesh--for $700. Looked at the GB completed auction prices running over $1,000 and snatched it up.

I'm currently working up some loads for 200 grain hardcasts and some of the single shot spitzers made for the .357 Max. For now I'm keeping loads at the high end of magnum territory.

For such a big revolver it balances very well, and should soak up the recoil from the heavy hardcasts a lot better than most .357's do. And using this for my experiments will not tax the joints on my smaller Sixes.

But speaking of Sixes, I remembered that this Redhawk is in effect a big version of the Security Six. It has the full grip frame not the stud, and internally it seems very similar to the Six design. That's a big plus in my book.

Right now it's got Packy recoil grips on, which I usually don't like so much but these seem to fit it well. The trigger is heavy but smooth. Also reminiscent of the Sixes.

Weather permitting I'll be doing some range tests this weekend. I'm seating the bullets out a bit where possible and marking the base of the cartridge with an "X" to denote that these are not to be used for smaller magnums. But I doubt I'll need to get into Maximum territory to see some excellent ballistic results from this thing. My goal is to get a solid 200 or 180 grain hardcast shooter with easily controlled recoil.

Colt451985
March 21, 2013, 08:50 PM
I wouldn't want to test out the theory that more mass in the cylinder equals higher pressure without knowing what alloy and heat treating process Ruger used to manufacture that cylinder.

Perhaps you should invest in a Magnaflux Zyglo fluorescent penetrant inspection kit with a black light to detect surface cracks in the cylinder if you plan to push the limits. These kits are fairly inexpensive.

Lost Sheep
March 22, 2013, 01:21 AM
But speaking of Sixes, I remembered that this Redhawk is in effect a big version of the Security Six. It has the full grip frame not the stud, and internally it seems very similar to the Six design. That's a big plus in my book.

Point of fact:

The Redhawks, while having a full grip frame like the Sixes, have a lockwork unlike any other gun in the Ruger lineup, or, indeed, unlike any other revolver ever produced by anyone.

(One horizontally oriented spring powers both the hammer and the trigger return. No other firearm I now of does it that way.)

Other than that, i find no other fault in your post.

Congratulations on an excellent find in your .357 Redhawk.

Lost Sheep

DWFan
March 22, 2013, 03:40 AM
Mr. Eick,
Something that might interest you...
http://www.metalsmithpro.com/357MagnumRifle.htm
H-4227 might be a bit slow for your purposes, but it's a starting point. Personally, I would extend the chambers of the Redhawk for the 1.415" .360 Dan Wesson and use this data...
http://www.handloads.com/loaddata/default.asp?Caliber=360%20Dan%20Wesson&Weight=All&type=Handgun&Order=Powder&Source=
.353 Casull load data here...
http://www.handloads.com/loaddata/taffin.asp?Caliber=357%20Magnum%20%28Casull%29&Weight=All&type=Handgun&Order=Powder&Source=

BullRunBear
March 22, 2013, 05:57 AM
Cosmoline,

Congrats on the new piece. What's the finish and barrel length? I winced at the price you mentioned compared to my costs umpty-ump years ago, but understand it was a decent price these days. I think you'll appreciate the rubber grips with heavier loads.

As mentioned in an earlier post, mine does a great job with 38 special WC loads. As you work up the heavy stuff, those WCs can give some cheap double action trigger practise.

Jeff

Peter M. Eick
March 22, 2013, 08:14 AM
Dwfan,

Thanks! I had not seen that site before.

To the followers of the thread. Still no 357 RH yet. Cabelas said they have the FFL paperwork and all is good. They just planned on shipping it a week after I got them the paperwork. Supposedly it will go out this weekend.

SIGH.........

I am now WOG!!!

(waiting on gun)

Cosmoline
March 22, 2013, 12:49 PM
The Redhawks, while having a full grip frame like the Sixes, have a lockwork unlike any other gun in the Ruger lineup, or, indeed, unlike any other revolver ever produced by anyone.

Quite right. I realized that when I took it apart last night. Very unusual. But externally it does remind me of a giant size Security Six. And I like the trigger a lot more than the SRH trigger. The balance is impressive. I've had the Alaskan and the full size SRH, and both handled like a brick in a swimming pool. This one for all its size hops up fast and is easy to steady.

What's the finish and barrel length?

Stainless with the 5 1/2" barrel. It's only been shot a few times from the look of it.

Yeah the price would have made me balk five or ten years ago, but check these out:

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=329188766
(sold at $895)

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=331501598
(5.5" sold at $1,200)

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=326442798
(Sold at $1,030)

Granted you get some crazy bid wars on GB sometimes but I ain't seeing these going for $500 or $400 like they used to. Anymore than I see Speed Sixes going for $250 LOL. And in this case I'm just not seeing them at all. I remember seeing one about ten years ago in the flesh, but that's it. They are rare around these parts. I suspect most Alsakans scoffed at them when they came out and went with .45 and .44 Mag Redhawks instead. You can certainly always find .44 Redhawks for sale. Personally if I can get this thing to shoot high octane 200 grain solids and stay stable I might even use it as a trail gun. As I get older I do not enjoy revolvers that flip back up at me when fired. And I'm getting to be more of a fan of control over raw power.

Limited run Rugers are actually becoming true collectables these days. And these particular revolvers seem to fill a niche for us .357 fans that no other piece can fill. Even with the price creeping into Freedom Arms territory. So I'm more than happy with the price I paid.

CraigC
March 22, 2013, 01:16 PM
I wouldn't want to test out the theory...
The "theory" is well tested. The same gun in .45Colt, which has a lot less meat around the chambers, is safe to 50-55,000psi. So chambered in .357Mag, there is no way you can get enough slow burning powder in the case to hurt the gun. You'll reach the compression limit of H110/296 before anything bad happens.


The Redhawks, while having a full grip frame like the Sixes, have a lockwork unlike any other gun in the Ruger lineup, or, indeed, unlike any other revolver ever produced by anyone.
Regardless of differences in the lockwork, the Redhawk is based on the Security Six design. There's more to the design of a revolver than the lockwork.

Peter M. Eick
March 22, 2013, 02:52 PM
I almost went after the $1200 one on gunbroker. I posted here instead to ask if I should have. The answer is yes but I got mine (now) for a lot less when it shows up.....

Still WOG!!!!!!

(Waiting On Gun)

DWFan
March 22, 2013, 11:24 PM
Wait til you get your Redhawk and someone tells you that you can convert it to use Dan Wesson barrels and shrouds.
Oops, did I say that?

bluetopper
March 23, 2013, 12:53 AM
The best magnum handgun powder for over max testing is Accurate 4100/Ramshot Enforcer (same powder).

Very fine granulated and you can load it very dense and heavy yet slow burning like you need. You can put much more weight of it in a case than you can H110 or 2400. A lot less muzzle flash too in comparison.

4100 and my FA 44 Mag have teamed up for some great experimentation.

Lost Sheep
March 23, 2013, 03:21 AM
Wait til you get your Redhawk and someone tells you that you can convert it to use Dan Wesson barrels and shrouds.
Oops, did I say that?It has been done.

http://forums.outdoorsdirectory.com/showthread.php/110325

Post #43 on page 3 posted by jwp500 2/25/2012

Lost Sheep

DWFan
March 23, 2013, 06:42 AM
Sure it's been done. It is/was available thru Clement's Custom Shop for several years. The first conversions used Dan Wesson barrels. He still does one or two on a special order basis, I believe but the custom barrel is the only option now. I just wanted to tease Mr. Eick since I'm pretty sure he has a spare DW barrel or two.

Peter M. Eick
March 23, 2013, 11:22 AM
Now that is absolutely "Cool"!!!!!!!!

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

I had never even considered such a thing and yes, I have 715 barrels and shrouds.

I will have to complete my experiments with the 357 Magnum and then get it converted. I am pretty sure I have a 8" and a 6" VH (Vent Heavy - full underlug) barrel for my old 715 but I should really get a 6" and 4" VL (Vent light - no front lug).

Now I really feel better about buying the Ruger!

Thanks!!!!!

:):):):)


Still WOG though

(Waiting On Gun)

DWFan
March 23, 2013, 09:50 PM
You can't use the small frame shrouds. The conversion requires the large frame shroud and, in your case, either an M40 SuperMag or custom barrel.

Peter M. Eick
March 24, 2013, 10:55 AM
Bummer. Oh well, I have a MD40 supermag, so I have the tools. Unfortunately its blued. I will have to hunt up some barrels and shrouds for it. Now the decision. Blued to match the MD40 or Stainless to match the Redhawk?

Decisions, decisions.

Still WOG!

(Waiting On Gun).

Cosmoline
March 25, 2013, 02:30 PM
I'm WOW (waiting on weather). We're in yet another blizzard now. So next weekend maybe. I've got a number of 200 grain hardcast loads worked up with H-110 and Ramshot Enforcer. I've also worked up some 180 Hornady SSP loads though these need to be seated back a ways to fit in the chamber. They're intended for use with T/C's. By taking them back as far as I can and still get a good crimp, and gently taping down the exposed lead tip of the bullet, it will just fit in the chamber. I suspect those are not going to work well but you never know. Even a slight shift in recoil will jam up the cylinder. If you were to cut off the exposed lead tip entirely it would probably work fine at least as far as chambering.

Still keeping all pressures to high end of the usual .357 Mag range. Not pushing it into Max territory. And if I do, it occurs to me that I'll need to use trimmed down .357 Max brass in order to have the usual benchrest rifle primers. But to my mind, the main point of this piece is to shoot stout Mag loads with low recoil and high accuracy. So if it does that I'll be happy.

DWFan
March 25, 2013, 04:23 PM
If you want a heavy bullet that will fit the chamber, a Lyman #327627 215gr SWC seated to its lower crimp groove will work. The www.handloads.com website has a 1200+ fps load using 13.5gr of Lil'Gun in a 5.5" Redhawk.

eldon519
March 25, 2013, 04:41 PM
I was pretty interested in getting something like a FA83 and letting the .357 magnum "be all it can be" I guess you could say. When I was reading about it, I got the impression that the most extreme "353 Casull" loads basically ruin the brass by loosening the primer pocket with 1 or 2 firings. I haven't done it myself as that turned me off from it, but that's just something to think about.

Peter M. Eick
March 29, 2013, 04:30 PM
Got an update. The gun is on the way.

I am no longer "WOG" (Waiting On Gun).

I am now "WOU" (Waiting On UPS!)

Yeah!

IlikeSA
March 29, 2013, 11:52 PM
Keep us informed. I have a 357 Redhawk that I want to push as well, but only to a certain extent to keep its value.

InkEd
March 30, 2013, 12:08 AM
Why not look for something in .357maximum?

Peter M. Eick
March 30, 2013, 08:07 AM
http://eickpm.com/picts/357maxes.jpg

I already have several which I shoot a lot.

http://eickpm.com/picts/max_brass.jpg

I load a lot of max as you can see.

This quest is not about achieving some power level. I could easily do that with other rounds and other guns, this is about trying to understand what the 357 Magnum could do back in the day. The original 357 Magnum loads did around 1550 with a 158 LSWC out of a 8 3/4" barrel.

My design goal is to recreate that power level with modern powders.

Because this will require going above SAAMI "modern" specs for the round, I want to get something beefy I can work out the loads with, guess at the pressures and then take the lowest pressure ones and cross check with my 8 3/8" pre-27's. This way I can boot-strap my way up to 1550 FPS without taking the risks on some very find 1950's vintage Pre-27's.

I could do it with my Maxes but that would not be as much fun!

I will say as I have learned more about the Redhawk, I am now starting to think I need to find a 7" version over the 5.5" version I bought. Oh well another quest. First though I will play with my 5.5" Redhawk that should be here mid-week.

Iggy
March 30, 2013, 10:05 AM
Hey Peter!! There is a law against having too much fun, ya know!

Keep us posted.

Cosmoline
April 1, 2013, 06:21 PM
I wonder if old Elmer has some "hot" data in his Gun Notes.

Deer_Freak
April 2, 2013, 05:21 AM
The redhawk is a stout gun but it is not as tough or durable as the single action blackhawk.

DWFan
April 2, 2013, 09:07 AM
Mr. Eick,
Contact the gentleman at EWK Arms and see if he'll sell you a stainless .44 Mag shroud by itself. The .357 Maximum barrel you'd need shouldn't be too hard to find since those revolvers came with two from the factory. If nothing else, Green Mountain has 1:14 twist stainless blanks.

Thaddeus Jones
April 2, 2013, 09:47 AM
The title of "toughest, beefiest 357 magnum" is held by the French Manurhin MR-73.

Show me one other 357 revolver, made by anyone, that will go 200,000 rounds of Norma 158 grain 357 magnum with no appreciable wear, or change in the sub 1 inch accuracy at 25 meters.

I wish I owned one...........

Taurus 617 CCW
April 2, 2013, 09:51 AM
The beefiest .357 I have ever held was a Dan Wesson Super Mag. It was actually a .357 Maximum chambering but will shoot .357 Magnums, and .38 Specials as well. It was as heavy as a Desert Eagle and the regular .357 Magnum rounds felt like specials when I shot it.

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d141/moltoforte/Misc/dwsuper2_zps35eb792e.jpg

Peter M. Eick
April 2, 2013, 06:28 PM
I picked up the Redhawk today. It is a beast! It looks in great shape and there is so much steel around it, it is hard to describe. It makes my N frames look dainty.

I will have to pull out the Supermag and compare it but they seem close to the same size!

Pictures and gun review to follow.

Now I need a 7.5" barreled one! Another quest!

Peter M. Eick
April 5, 2013, 06:11 PM
For those of you still following this long thread, I have now achieved the next goal.

I have a 7.5" Redhawk 357 Magnum inbound. I should have it next week and then I can do a new thread on the both of them.

I like the 5" so much I started looking for a 7.5" and I found one in a few hours. I was really happy and ordered it immediately.

rchery59
April 5, 2013, 07:13 PM
Glad you found your "holy grail". I've just begun to become a 357 nut and am playing with a blackhawk now. Heavy bullets pushed as hard as possible(safely) is my quest. I'm waiting on some 250 gr gaschecked bullets now.

Cosmoline
April 5, 2013, 07:19 PM
Wow you're lousy with Redhawks. I still need to get mine to the range. Tomorrow--snow or no!

slick6
April 5, 2013, 08:06 PM
For those of you still following this long thread, I have now achieved the next goal.

I have a 7.5" Redhawk 357 Magnum inbound. I should have it next week and then I can do a new thread on the both of them.

I like the 5" so much I started looking for a 7.5" and I found one in a few hours. I was really happy and ordered it immediately.

1)Wow! You did great in finding both of your .357 Redhawks so quickly! You must have been looking into the right "Crystal Ball"? Congrat's!

2)It took me a long time to find my three .357 Redhawks pictured below! Two of these three were like new and one of the 5.5" .357 Redhawks was NIB(Unfired)so, I eventially sold the other two(Unfortunately)to fund some other revolvers. However, I still have the NIB .357 Redhawk:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v631/shootit/Ruger/P1030114.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v631/shootit/Ruger/P1030134.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v631/shootit/Ruger/P1030096.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v631/shootit/Ruger/P1030138.jpg

Peter M. Eick
April 6, 2013, 12:58 PM
Great job!

I really liked the 5.5" and when the 7.5" popped up I just hit the "buy it now" and was happy. I can see continuing to search for an NIB like yours.

I had never heard of the 357 SRH before. It appeals to my natural desire to buy big solid guns that are way over built. This is why I like my 38 specials built on an N frame. The 38/44's. Way overbuilt for what they are.

I will be taking my 5.5" to the range tomorrow. I have to start the hot load workups and just test it out with some good "book max" loads.

bluetopper
April 7, 2013, 12:10 PM
Hitting the "Buy it Now" button always puts a smile on my face too.:D

Cosmoline
April 7, 2013, 02:47 PM
Tomorrow--snow or no!

See, I say stupid things like that and we get hit with a totally unexpected BLIZZARD. I need to learn to keep my trap shut. But I have used the opportunity to work up a variety of 200 grain hardcast loads for the beast. So whenever breakup actually arrives in earnest I'll be set.

BullRunBear
April 7, 2013, 10:37 PM
Cosmoline,

Yeah, you should have known better than to provoke the weather gods. They have a nasty sense of humor. Unfortunately, even after 60 years, I still do it. :o

I mentioned this in an earlier post. Take some 38 special wadcutters along with the heavy artillery. They are a hoot in the Redhawk.

Jeff

bluetopper
April 8, 2013, 06:56 PM
148gr wadcutters are also a hoot loaded in magnum brass with full magnum charges behind them.

Cosmoline
April 9, 2013, 02:27 PM
Any leading problems with swagged wadcutters at those velocities?

Peter M. Eick
April 13, 2013, 08:39 PM
http://eickpm.com/picts/redhawks.jpg
http://eickpm.com/picts/redhawks_right.jpg
http://eickpm.com/picts/redhawk_barrel.jpg

Nice guns. I put just shy of 800 rounds of full power 357 magnum down them today and they worked well. I like the Pachmeyer rubber grips over the wood ones. The frame cut into my hand on the 7.5".

Shooting the 5" with hot 357 Magnum loads is like shooting 38/44's out of a heavy duty. Lots of fun and pretty mild. I think with better grips the 7.5" will be a really gem though. Better hang for me.

Next to a Python or a N frame S&W, these are tanks. I love it!

Range report to follow next time I get them out. Today was just a shoot and get a feel for them.

Walkalong
April 13, 2013, 08:49 PM
Redhawks are nice (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=6235064&postcount=9), aren't they. I don't have a .357 though.

Peter M. Eick
April 14, 2013, 07:06 AM
I agree completely. I feel kind of foolish that I never even gave Ruger double actions a second thought. I think of Ruger as my MK1, #1 and my SBH 357 Maximum. I just never gave them the time of day before this.

What I found is a well made, nicely built, well engineered solid revolver. Both have good triggers, great double action operation and excellent handling for the round I like, the 357 Magnum.

It was really an eye opening experience for a die hard Colt/S&W fan.

I already have new grips, both Pachmeyer and Ruger originals on order so I can go either way on the grips. Right now I will go back to Pachmeyer for a while since they felt better for what I will be doing with the guns.

I am surprised that the 357 Magnum was not more popular in the Redhawk. It seems like the perfect combination to me.

captain awesome
April 14, 2013, 01:19 PM
here's an idea, albeit an expensive one...
get yourself a Smith X frame, doesn't matter which one, and find a custom gun maker to build a new cylinder and barrel for it. I have often thought of the possibility's of other smaller calibers chambered in that massive revolver. Combining a revolver that didn't blow when tested to 90k PSI in a 50 cal, and a 2.3 inch long cylinder to increase your OAL as long as you could possibly want it, drop it down to 357, and I doubt its even possible to blow it up.

Peter M. Eick
April 14, 2013, 02:16 PM
I have been debating that for a 357 MaX build to go with my other maxes. Once I run the 357 Mag to its limits, I may go build a MAX like that.

captain awesome
April 14, 2013, 11:18 PM
if you do be sure and post about it. I would love to see one. I may do it someday myself, though there are a lot of other higher priorities.
Congratulations one your Redhawks, they sound like lots of fun.

Walkalong
April 15, 2013, 09:24 AM
great double action operationYes, very well engineered DA. They don't get enough love though. :)

slick6
April 15, 2013, 10:42 PM
I agree completely. I feel kind of foolish that I never even gave Ruger double actions a second thought. I think of Ruger as my MK1, #1 and my SBH 357 Maximum. I just never gave them the time of day before this.

What I found is a well made, nicely built, well engineered solid revolver. Both have good triggers, great double action operation and excellent handling for the round I like, the 357 Magnum.

It was really an eye opening experience for a die hard Colt/S&W fan.

I already have new grips, both Pachmeyer and Ruger originals on order so I can go either way on the grips. Right now I will go back to Pachmeyer for a while since they felt better for what I will be doing with the guns.

I am surprised that the 357 Magnum was not more popular in the Redhawk. It seems like the perfect combination to me.
Well, as for popularity, the Redhawk .357 was not in production very long and Ruger had ceased production on these early on in 1985 whenever the GP100 was introduced. And this is the reason the Redhawk .357's had become instantly collectible.

If you enjoyed reading about "Toughest, beefiest 357 Magnum? Ruger Redhawk??" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!