Redhawk 454 4" barrel..
- Thread starter gilgsn
- Start date
- Status
Scipio Africanus
Member
If Ruger made this, I would buy one now. This would be a fantastic side arm!
Gryffydd
Member
I'd jump on that. I love the Alaskan but I'm not a fan of the 2.5" barrel, or the weird broom handle barrel of the regular Super Redhawks.
memphisjim
Member
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2008
- Messages
- 1,265
wow
Coal Dragger
member
Never have understood the appeal of a 2.5" bbl on a .454. Not nearly enough barrel to get anywhere near a complete burn on a slow burning powder, so velocity will suffer a lot. plus the sight radius is going to end up being too short for fine iron sight accuracy if you wanted a good field or hunting revolver.
Plus as the proud owner of a Freedom Arms M83 in .454 with a 6" bbl, that managed to bounce his new revolver off of his forehead twice today shooting from a seated position; I can imagine how nasty a 2.5" bbl would be. Oddly enough other than the uh... not hanging on tight enough problem, the recoil wasn't as bad as expected with the 240gr XTP at a claimed 1900fps.
Plus as the proud owner of a Freedom Arms M83 in .454 with a 6" bbl, that managed to bounce his new revolver off of his forehead twice today shooting from a seated position; I can imagine how nasty a 2.5" bbl would be. Oddly enough other than the uh... not hanging on tight enough problem, the recoil wasn't as bad as expected with the 240gr XTP at a claimed 1900fps.
millertyme
Member
Send that one off to Ruger. They've been doing some interesting things lately and a fully shrouded 4" might be right up their alley next.
Yeah. It would be perfect for those times when that little concealed carry gun, the 4" Redhawk, just feels too small.
Just kidding. It would be a heck of a field gun if you were traipsing around in Alaska, or just wanted a big boomer for the range.
Glad you guys like my idea.. I too think the Alaskan's barrel is too short. You can get the same velocities in a Redhawk .45 Colt 4", so why bother with a snubby? Now, a Super Redhawk in 454 would take advantage of the 1.5" increase in length. The SRH looks kind of weird with it's round barrel, but if you make it look like the GP100, adding a bit of weight for recoil management, then you'd have a winner!
I also wish Ruger made more blued guns, instead of all that stainless.. A blued Redhawk .45 would look great.
At this time, I don't think anyone manufactures a .45 Colt double action with a 4" barrel.. Really surprising since it would be the "perfect packing pistol." Given how many people are into CAS, and already own revolvers and rifles in that caliber, you would think they'd like a double action.. Taurus had one, discontinued it.. S&W only has the 6.5" model 25. Used 4" 25-5s are hard to find..
Enough already with the 410/45s.. The world needs a blued .45 Colt 4" double action! Not another weird looking shotshell oddity.
They don't have an email on their contact page, but maybe someone at Ruger will see this thread.
I also wish Ruger made more blued guns, instead of all that stainless.. A blued Redhawk .45 would look great.
At this time, I don't think anyone manufactures a .45 Colt double action with a 4" barrel.. Really surprising since it would be the "perfect packing pistol." Given how many people are into CAS, and already own revolvers and rifles in that caliber, you would think they'd like a double action.. Taurus had one, discontinued it.. S&W only has the 6.5" model 25. Used 4" 25-5s are hard to find..
Enough already with the 410/45s.. The world needs a blued .45 Colt 4" double action! Not another weird looking shotshell oddity.
They don't have an email on their contact page, but maybe someone at Ruger will see this thread.
Last edited:
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Would look better like this, a Bowen creation (not mine either):
OregonJohnny
Member
Yeah, I think a medium-length .454 is one of the only things missing from Ruger. You either have to get a 2.5" "snubby" (the Alaskan) or the UGLY 7.5" standard model that looks like Bubba welded a 5" piece of pipe onto the Alaskan. If Ruger made a 4", 5", or 6" fully shrouded Super Redhawk .454, I would definitely buy one. I love my 4" Redhawk .44, but being able to reload, hunt and experiment with .454 and .45 Colt from a heavy Ruger would be too hard to resist.
Isn't Taurus the only other major manufacturer making a double-action .454? There is definitely a hole in the market. Come on, Ruger...
Isn't Taurus the only other major manufacturer making a double-action .454? There is definitely a hole in the market. Come on, Ruger...
I'm basically waiting for Ruger to offer this gun. A 4.2 inch 454 Alaskan would be perfect for me.
Even better would be a 4.2 inch Alaskan in 480, but only if they offer it with the 5 shot cylinder.
Until then, I will make do with my 4 inch Redhawk in 45LC.
Even better would be a 4.2 inch Alaskan in 480, but only if they offer it with the 5 shot cylinder.
Until then, I will make do with my 4 inch Redhawk in 45LC.
Fishslayer
Member
Hey now! I think ya done pretty good there. That looks kinda cool.
Thanks! It's only a lowly 44 magHey now! I think ya done pretty good there. That looks kinda cool.
but Hot 300gr handloads are a handful and do all I need done.A holster from Simply Rugged makes it an excellent woods carry gun, as you guys are thinking.
I completely agree Ruger is missing a market by not offering something like this it a 4-6 inch barrel.
A lot of folks don't like the 'ugly' SRH, but I love that look. I bought this SRH many years ago and used to hunt with it with the 7.5 inch barrel, both scoped and unscoped. When I stopped doing that and it sat in the safe unused for several years, I decided it would me a much more usable gun for me like this. ( just as you guys are thinking, it is a super combination of firepower, a gun that will handle heavy loads on a regular basis, but reasonable barrel length without being too long.)
It's also nice that I could still slap a red dot or scope on it if I did want to do that for a special circumstance/hunt. And it's still as accurate or better as it was with the 7.5 inch barrel.
Why don't you just take a 454 SRH cylinder and stick it in a 45 Colt 4.2" Redhawk?
http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=105441
People have been doing it for quite a while.
http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=105441
People have been doing it for quite a while.
Chuck Dye
Member
Gryffydd
Member
Well, for one thing, because the grip stud affords a lot more flexibility in grip styles than the Redhawk's grip frame.
Sniderman
Member
Ohhhh,,,,YES!
I've got the 7.5 bbl .454 and would love to get it a "Little friend"!
I've got the 7.5 bbl .454 and would love to get it a "Little friend"!
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Technically, if you have a .45Colt Redhawk, you don't need a .454 cylinder. The .45 Redhawk can be loaded to 90% of the .454's potential as-issued.
BCRider
Member
Ya know... Ruger could do this super easily. Use the existing Super Redhawk frame with a Dan Wesson like tube barrel and "full underlug" style outer sleeve that pins to a machined off front stub of the existing frame. Or a billet machined screw in barrel that has the same "full underlug" forward end that again mates up with a cleaned off front end of the stock frame. Either way very little actual tooling up would be needed for such a barrel option. And as mentioned the little extra weight up at the front end would do a lot to tame these big bruisers.
And yes please to the 4.2 barrel so that Canada and California can play too....
Actually I daresay that some shooting trials would be needed but I suspect that a gun the size of the SR would both look and shoot better with a 4.5'ish to 5'ish inch barrel for the little extra front weight while still being handy for whipping out from a holster.
And yes please to the 4.2 barrel so that Canada and California can play too....
Actually I daresay that some shooting trials would be needed but I suspect that a gun the size of the SR would both look and shoot better with a 4.5'ish to 5'ish inch barrel for the little extra front weight while still being handy for whipping out from a holster.
EVIL
Member
Great Idea. To me the Alaskan is too short to fully utilized the value of the .454 -and a full underlug barrel would be a welcome addition in a 4" or 6" SRH. Though - I'm sure it would be fairly heavy.
Floridave - man I love your custom SRH! Where did you find a custom gunsmith to do that?
Floridave - man I love your custom SRH! Where did you find a custom gunsmith to do that?
- Status
