Ruger's New .45LC/.45ACP Redhawk...

[HOOfan_1]

Couldn't there be a caliber that would fit the stout frame better than home-brewing one to make use of the additional metal? .

No need to home brew...Buffalo Bore and Grizzly load .45 Colt loads which rival most .44 Magnums short of, not to be used in S&W revolvers, +P+.

Compare the Buffalo Bore
4B .44 Magnum
300 Grain jacketed soft point advertised at 1300 fps
to the
3B .45 Colt
300 Grain jacketed soft point advertised at 1325 fps

 

[C5rider]

Denis,

We've both been on here for a while. So far as I know, I've never "rained on anyone's parade" before and I'm not trying to do that now. But, I simply asked if the caliber merited the bulk. Hoofan makes a case, as does usfan.

Perhaps I'm biased since I've not so secretly pined for a 460 S&W shooter, but I'm in no way telling someone not to buy anything. Simply asked a question, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[DPris]

Of course the bulk isn't needed here.

But what's wrong with Ruger exploring their large-frame platform in directions other than grizzly-busting calibers & configurations?

This model's trimmer & lighter than previous Ruger .45 Colt models & not everybody requires (or wants) a hand cannon in the caliber.
The dual-caliber set-up appeals to some, and the ability to carry & shoot standard .45 Colt ammunition for regular use, or up the ante with hotter stuff for specific needs & occasions, appeals to others.

With this & the Kodiak, Ruger's expanding possibilities & I like what they're doing.
Denis

 

[C5rider]

Case made.

I realize that it's always easier on the firearm (and the company's lawyers) to go down in size/pressure/etc. with a Redhawk than to push an already-hefty-but-not-too-hefty GP or similar frame upward. I'm sure that designing a mid-sized frame isn't an option.

While the .357 sized Redhawk is highly sought after, due to being rare, the fact that it enjoys this status today indicates that Ruger didn't see a future in continuing it. Perhaps because it WAS so overbuilt? They COULD prove me wrong and bring it back for all I know.

I've kept my eyes peeled for a 45 Colt Redhawk, and the fact that it came back in the 45Colt/45ACP version shows viability. Perhaps it's closer to the realm of size=use?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for new guns making their way into the marketplace. I'm just sitting on the sidelines, watching a group of folks cheering and asking the question, "What's all the hubbub?"

 

[DPris]

I do that all the time.
There's a lotta new stuff out there I see no point in personally, but I grant others their preferences.
Denis

 

[usfan]

Here's what i like:
1. double action. Not a lot of those in 45 colt
2. factory cut for 45acp. People have been doing it for years with alaskans & other 45 colt pistols, but this comes ready out of the box.
3. 4". Handy size. easy carry, still accurate.
4. Ruger tough. this is a solid, strong pistol. No worries about hot loads.

I have been looking for a 45c in a d/a revolver for a while, but this ruger got me with all the right stuff. I like smiths, & if they had this combo, i'd have considered it. But there is not a thing wrong with this ruger, & it will no doubt last a lifetime of shooting.

I might get out to try out the new cut grip today.. & maybe a few more loads. I'm running out of .452 projectiles, though! Time to order more.

I have actually been planning on getting the smith xvr in 460.. but have balked at the size of the pistol. This one, shooting hot 45 colt loads that nearly rival 454 casull will satisfy that itch. And, i can carry it in my pocket (a big pocket!), or a simple holster. My last few pistol purchases have been smaller 9s, with one 357. but i've mostly shot 9mm's for a while, & the big bang of the 45 r/o loads were a fun change. My favorite caliber is still probably the 357m, but this 45 colt is growing on me. Very versatile, & combined with the 1911's the redhawk is a nice addition.

BTW, i haven't felt like anyone was 'raining on a parade', just thinking out loud. that is what we do on forums. I don't slam any firearm, as they all seem to have their fans. Of course, i have my favorites, & i don't mind singing their praises, but i see no point in bashing what someone else likes.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I do that all the time.
There's a lotta new stuff out there I see no point in personally, but I grant others their preferences.

I can't tell you how many new wonder guns and cartridges have come out in that last 50 years that inflamed me with an irresistible desire NOT to run out and buy one.

 

[Panzerschwein]

EHRAGHERRDDD.

Ruger, WHY!?

How can they release this RIGHT AFTER I bought a PTR-91 rifle??? I'm flat out 100% BROKE and now I'm going to have to buy this revolver... looks like it's Ramen till next Tuesday...

 

[Brett Byers AKA Slow]

Just picked one up, great balance and convinced myself to buy. I haven't shot it yet, will let you know results later.

 

[Brett Byers AKA Slow]

First time to range

I got out today for the first time with the new Ruger. I shot a variety of Colt rounds from Underwood( hardcast and their XTP load all standard pressure) and Winchester PDX and Silvertip as well as Federal ACP Full metal in brass and Aluminum cases. The Underwood ammo would make a great hunting round in either 225 or 255 Hard cast within 50 Yards in my hands as 225 recoil was very mild allowing fast follow up shots,255 was a little stiff with one handed shooting but still controllable at 10 yards on steel. The moonclips are easy to load and unload and all rounds extracted easily. The Federal ACP felt like .38 wadcutters.
I would probably use the ACP's for home defense and Colt for outside.
I am really satisfied with the purchase and look forward to further testing for accuracy at distance.

 

[usfan]

I shot mine some more a couple of days ago. I wanted to try out the rounded hogue grip, after trimming it.

Functionally, the grip was fine. It was a little better than the squared off grip that wasn't supported that well. Aesthetically, it leaves something to be desired, since you can see where the hard plastic underneath the rubber is.

I shot both 45 acp, one handed, weak, strong, & both. The DA trigger is smoothing out nicely & is nicer than the smith 625. I shot the hot colt loads in SA, & went out to ~ 130 yds. Still pretty accurate, for a pistol with iron sights, but i wouldn't hunt with it, or take a shot at that distance. You could hit a car, or a buffalo, but that's about the extent of the accuracy, for me, with open sights. Closer, under 50 yds, it was pretty good. Getting better, it seems to me, but maybe i'm just getting used to it. I was shooting it better than my xd at shorter ranges, under 40 yds or so. I didn't shoot much at under 20 yds.

If i didn't already have the smith 625, i'd probably pass on it. This ruger is just as accurate, has a better d/a trigger, & will shoot hot 45 colt loads. it's about the same size & weight. The 45acp plinking loads give me more range time with it, & the hot 45colt loads give me some fun hi power shots. I'll probably keep the modified hogue grip on it, until a hogue or pachy grip that is made for a rounded redhawk comes out. The wood grips are fine for 45acp, but a bit hard for the hot loads.. at least for me. 2 handed with the hogue are not a problem. Oh, it has a nice recoil, but manageable. I'm not going to bother 'upgrading' to a 454 or 460.. these hot colt loads are just fine.

 

[DPris]

No measured accuracy results in the ACP side?
Denis

 

[finfanatic]

I got seduced by one at a gunshow last weekend, and bought it even though at a nearby table, I had found a great deal on a 7 shot 686 2.5" I have been seeking for a year or so.

Once I held it all thoughts of the 686 were gone.

I bought some cowboy action 45 colt at the show also.

Mine seems to be more accurate then my aging eyes with 45 colt. 45acp shot well also, but I was shooting it fast double action.

I plan to do some more testing once I get some better 45 colt ammo.

And of course, as others have discovered, the S&W moonclips for my model 1917 do not work on the Redhawk. I only have 100 hundred of the clips from Ranch products!

Overall, I am very pleased with the purchase.

 

[DPris]

Picked up Gun II today, re-shot the .45 ACP loads through it.

I've now run 9 different factory ACP loads duplicated in 25-yard testing through both samples.

Gun II shot a bit better than Gun I, but ACP accuracy is still nothing spectacular.

Did not re-shoot .45 Colt through Gun II, too expensive.
And, that Buff Bore stuff ain't exactly pleasant, even with oversized Hogue wood.

No way I'd shoot those through the convertible with its smaller rounded grip.
Denis

 

[usfan]

I shot some more a couple of days back. I also brought the smith 625, the glock 30s, & the XD to compare. These were all 'seat of the pants' shots, i didn't keep record of the targets, or compile any statistics, so this isn't a scientific analysis, just the anecdotal views of a hobbyist.

I shot them all from 20 yds, 40, & 100, supported & standing. I shot some hi powered ruger only 45 colt loads through the ruger, but obviously not through the others.

I've always liked the accuracy of the 4.5" xd for an auto, and it beat out the glock 30 by a bit, but they were pretty close supported. But neither of the autos could hold a candle to the revolvers. The revolvers were all 'minute of tin can' at 20 yds, & minute of pie plate at 40. None of them were that great, even supported, at 100 yds, but of course, that is not the function of a 45acp pistol, usually. Only the 45 colt loads, supported, could consistently hit a 24" circle at 100 yds. These were all with open sights.

The ruger trigger in d/a is growing on me every time i shoot it. It is smoother than the smith, & not as much pressure is needed. I don't have a trigger gauge, but i'm pretty sure it would bear that perception out. No perceptible difference in S/A.

Next time i'll compare it to my 1911, & see how it compares with it.

With a better shooter, i'm sure the revolvers could be more accurate, & even with the better shooters, they would beat the semi-autos as well.. at least that is IMO.

The glock 30s was new, & i was shooting it for the first time, so it will probably do better after a few rounds run through it.

But right now, if i were choosing between the smith 625 & the ruger redhawk, i'd get the redhawk. It is just as accurate, has a nicer d/a trigger, & shoots the big 45colt. it was also ~ $100 less, so its a winner all around.

My smith is the 625JM, & it is a great, accurate pistol. I'm keeping it, & still like it a lot. It was my favorite & most accurate 45acp firearm. But now i have to say the ruger has taken over that spot, based on its versatility.

 

[DPris]

Still hoping for actual measured accuracy results from somebody.

Need quantifiable ACP measurements to compare with these two, if anybody can provide.

Triggers on both samples are notably heavy, more so than the two 625s I've had here (one each in Colt & ACP).

Current Smith N-Frames come with heavier triggers than they used to.
Mine were both older Mountain Guns (still have the ACP).

The Reds can be tuned a bit, the SA pull on my blue Red .44 was dropped by Bowen to about half of what these two new Reds are showing.
Denis

 

[usfan]

Still hoping for actual measured accuracy results from somebody.

Need quantifiable ACP measurements to compare with these two, if anybody can provide.

Triggers on both samples are notably heavy, more so than the two 625s I've had here (one each in Colt & ACP).

Current Smith N-Frames come with heavier triggers than they used to.
Mine were both older Mountain Guns (still have the ACP).

The Reds can be tuned a bit, the SA pull on my blue Red .44 was dropped by Bowen to about half of what these two new Reds are showing.
Denis

Yeah, i knew you wanted hard data, which is why i added the disclaimer. Maybe someday i'll do a more scientific 'test', but i usually just shoot for fun, & can't be bothered with all the controlled testing parameters.

I'm not sure what it would tell us, anyway. There can be a bit of difference in accuracy from ammo, weather, the shooter, & even the same models of gun. So while i appreciate all the hard work someone went into to post pics of the targets, showing the shot clusters, there are just too many variables to make any 'scientific' conclusion about the gun. I see that as something for anal retentive hobbyists... engineering nerd types who pore over numbers, charts, & statistics. ..kind of like me, but younger.

 

[jeff-10]

Still hoping for actual measured accuracy results from somebody.

Same. I just did some brief internet research (google) and didn't see anything that listed actual group size. I am sure some enterprising shooter will post group size soon enough.

Ruger needs to get off the fence already and produce a 10mm/40S&W revolver double action revolver.

 

[DPris]

What I'm looking at is how well the convertible aspect works in real life.

I'd suspected there'd be a lower level of accuracy in shooting the ACPs, with that relatively long gap between ACP case mouth and the internal chamber constriction set up for the longer .45 Colt, and so far my testing has confirmed it in these two samples.

Some of us want to know what we can expect from the ACPs.

If I'm getting 13-inch groups with one load, that's not practical.
If a second gun sample takes that same load down to 9 inches, better, but still not really worth bothering with.

If I get two or three ACP loads that'll run inside 4 inches, while the rest are up around 6,7 & 8 inches, that gives me useful info in deciding whether or not the ACP option is viable.

Tells me the concept IS viable, but picky about ammo.

Limited sampling has uses, but larger sampling gives more valid results.

Not knocking your enjoyment at all, but your definition of "Shoots good" may differ from mine, and my definition of "Shoots OK" may differ from yours.

Quantifiable data helps us all compare to see how the model fits in our own shooting world.

I understand not everybody wants to go through the hassle of shooting for strict accuracy.
Hoping somebody else might.
Denis

 

[DPris]

Jeff,

Gun I ran best 5-shot groups with 9 ACP loads from 2 11/16 inches up to 13.
Gun II ran best 5-shot groups same loads from 2 5/16 inches up to 8 7/8.

I'd REALLY like to see other measured results at 25 yards.
Denis

 

[Brett Byers AKA Slow]

Denis, which ACP's gave you best accuracy? 2-4" @ 25 yards would meet my combat accuracy demands. Handloads or factory?

 

[DPris]

Anything under 4 inches at 25 yards would meet my standards.

You get up beyond 4 inches & I 'm not happy.

I have to reserve details for publication, let's just say the 200-grain SIG JHP was the best, and the 230-grain Win white box FMJ was the worst, in both guns.

The Win WB even shot worse than a 255 lead load that keyholed.
All factory loads.
Denis

 

[usfan]

What I'm looking at is how well the convertible aspect works in real life.

I'd suspected there'd be a lower level of accuracy in shooting the ACPs, with that relatively long gap between ACP case mouth and the internal chamber constriction set up for the longer .45 Colt, and so far my testing has confirmed it in these two samples.

Some of us want to know what we can expect from the ACPs.

If I'm getting 13-inch groups with one load, that's not practical.
If a second gun sample takes that same load down to 9 inches, better, but still not really worth bothering with.

If I get two or three ACP loads that'll run inside 4 inches, while the rest are up around 6,7 & 8 inches, that gives me useful info in deciding whether or not the ACP option is viable.

Tells me the concept IS viable, but picky about ammo.

Limited sampling has uses, but larger sampling gives more valid results.

Not knocking your enjoyment at all, but your definition of "Shoots good" may differ from mine, and my definition of "Shoots OK" may differ from yours.

Quantifiable data helps us all compare to see how the model fits in our own shooting world.

I understand not everybody wants to go through the hassle of shooting for strict accuracy.
Hoping somebody else might.
Denis

I completely understand, & am not knocking those who make such careful analytical studies. They improve the sport, & contribute to our collective knowledge base.

Those who make a living shooting have a vested interest in these kinds of determinations. So i get it, but i also can give them a little jazz every now & then, & i hope it is taken as intended: good natured ribbing.

But alas, such things are a dying art form, as the internet makes serious work of everything, & allows no tongue in cheek humor. But i refuse to submit to this tyranny! Keep satire & wit alive! If we take ourselves too seriously, we seriously, need to take ourselves out more..

But to keep a serious view of this very nice firearm, i'll back off the subjective opinions.. i've said enough, & i get that, too.

 

[DPris]

Denis

 

[DPris]

If anybody's interested in the full monte, the Kindle book's live on Amazon.com.
Complete results using two Redhawk samples & 17 loads, accuracy, velocities, energy figures, 27 photos.
Denis