Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Will Buffalo Bore 340 gr +P+ Hurt my New Ruger Redhawk 44?

Discussion in 'Handguns: Revolvers' started by Evergreen, Aug 5, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Evergreen

    Evergreen Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2009
    Messages:
    533
    Location:
    Seattle, Washington
    I just purchased a brand new Ruger Redhawk 44Mag with a 4in barrel. I'm going on a trip to Glacier NP and decided to ditch my old S&W 629-4 4in, because I want the gun primarily to be used for bear defense and the 629 just cannot handle the heavy loads like the Ruger. After purchasing the Ruger and seeing its solid construction I really feel much happier with it than the Smith. Needless to say, even though I love the Smith, I cannot afford to keep it and will be getting rid of it..

    I also own a S&W 460v which supposedly can handle the heaviest of the heaviest, yet the Buffalo Bore ammo screws up the gun and I have extraction issues, as well as cylinder locking issues. I had to force open my cylinder once as it got stuck after the last round. Only through constant hammer cocking and pulling the trigger could I finally get it to budge. I'm told there are many reasons why the Buffalo Bore 460 doesn't work in a .460. Everything from being too hot, to have improper dimensions on the casings or bullets, etc. I don't know why, but Buffalo Bore is out for my 460.

    Now, I am told that the Ruger Redhawk can handle the heavy loads. So, I see Buffalo Bore makes a very nice 44 mag round that almost seems on par with a .454 Casull round. Since, I am going into Grizzly Bear country in Montana, I would like to have the best load I can handle. Also, I would like to do a little plinking and practicing with the round I load for my hikes. Basically, I would like to shoot a box or so. Would, using the Buffalo Bore 340gr +P+ hurt my Ruger Redhawk or can it take a good number of these rounds without any risk of abuse? I know my Smith could not even handle the 320gr hardcast COrbon loads. S&W told me themself on the phone not to shoot more than 3 or 4 rounds ever for the life of this gun for practice. I am told the Redhawk can take a steady supply of these without any issues. I guess, I know the Buffalo Bore is pushing the 44 mag to the limits and want to make sure there won't be any repercussions with this round. I do want to get a feel for it if I will be carrying it with me.

    I'd appreciate to hear people's opinions. Do most people think I should stay with the Corbon Hunter 320gr Hardcast round or would it be to my advantage to use the 340gr +P+ Buffalo Bores, considering the Ruger Redhawk, is supposedly built like a tank .

    My thoughts are accuracy won't be an issue, as if I am being charged by a Black Bear or Brown Bear I would only get one or two shots and would wait until it got close. For the most part I will rely on pepper spray for protection, but if I am in that unfortunate situation where all I can reach for is my gun, I'd like the best round I can get for that situation. I feel the more knockdown power the better.

    I'm assuming I can handle the recoil of this round, because the Redhawk is a thick frame and I can handle the recoil of the .460 rounds out of my 5in S&W 460v. I'm assuming it would be somewhat comparable to that, although my 460v does have a compensator.
     
  2. David Sinko

    David Sinko Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    85
    My 4" Redhawk .45 Colt does 335 gr. cast bullets at 1260 FPS. Your chambers have even more steel wrapped around them so you (and the revolver) will be just fine. Recoil is definitely brisk, but the cylinder latch is out of the way on the Redhawk and will not mangle your thumb. Also, I needed a taller front sight for proper regulation.

    Dave Sinko
     
  3. RETG

    RETG Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    123
    Location:
    Utah
    I would fire quite a few rounds and check for crimp jumping by the bullet out of the cartridge.

    BUT, your statement on accuracy and getting two shots off after the bear gets close means you won't be around to see if the cartridges expand too much in the cylinder for removal.

    You do understand that even if you were able to hit a charging grizz at 10 feet with two rounds, chances are, unless they were head shots, the grizz would still get to you and be able to do massive damage, possibly death?

    Granted, most bear encounters happen at close range due to most happen when you suddenly come upon a bear. And from my experience with black bears (so far no grizz) has been if the bear is 25 feet away, they look, smell, then leave. Happy to say, I have never had a bear actually charge me. And only once have I come across a bear and her cubs and that was at a good distance away, and I just did not move and she and the cubs went their way, I went the other way.

    My practice with a .44 mag for bear country is place a target 25 feet away with a 12 inch pie pan in the middle of the target; then turn and shoot four DA rounds at the pie pan and get at least three into the pan.

    Believe me, it is not easy when shooting 320 Cor-Bons, which is the round I use in m Taurus Ultralite Titanium, and it took quite a few practices to do so, and when I venture into the rockies, I do this exercise before going.
     
  4. highlander 5

    highlander 5 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,347
    Location:
    lynn,ma
    Ruger Redhawks are tanks,you'll be hard pressed to break it. I have 3 Redhawks 357,44and 45 Colt and the only part that ever broke is the hook that goes from the hammer to the main spring and it's a 3 min job to replace it.
     
  5. CraigC
    • Contributing Member

    CraigC Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Messages:
    15,317
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    No, those loads are MADE for Redhawks. You simply cannot get enoug slow burning powder into the case to produce enough pressure to damage a Redhawk. These guns are rated to 50,000psi in .45Colt and your .44 has more meat in the chambers.
     
  6. Mike1234567

    Mike1234567 member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,084
    Location:
    Alamo City
    Sorry to hi-jack but I'm thinking it's better to post here than start a very similar thread.

    What about the same round in a stainless steel Taurus Raging Bull?

    ETA: (regarding post below) Thank you Evergeen. Yes, that link helped.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2011
  7. Evergreen

    Evergreen Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2009
    Messages:
    533
    Location:
    Seattle, Washington
    Probably would be better to post another thread, as these are two different guns and would probably get a different set of answers.. I'm trying to keep thread specific to the Redhawk.

    I will say I have heard that the Taurus is not really built up to the standards or durability of the Ruger. That is one reason I generally stay away from Taurus.

    Mike, I do have a post that you might helpful on another website about this:
    http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/t...o-raging-bull-44-magnum-anyone-use-these.html
     
  8. GRIZ22

    GRIZ22 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,201
    I have always held the belief that you shouldn't try to make a gun something it was not designed for. If you feel you need more gun get more gun don't push the limits of what you have. If you feel you need more power than a 44 mag has to offer i'd suggest you carry your 460.

    The Redhawk is much stronger than it needs to be. There is another issue you seem to not make mention of and that is controllability. That +P+ 44 mag load is a rhino roller but can you recover quickly enough for a second shot if the first doesn't stop that bear? RETG relates a practice regimen which is taking that into consideration.

    I have zero experience trying to stop grizzilies but have read a little about it. Many of the people who do feel you can usually avoid confrontations by being alert and if it comes to shooting recommend a 12 ga with slugs.
     
  9. Dan-O

    Dan-O Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    781
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Your wrist would probably break before the gun will.
     
  10. beeenbag

    beeenbag Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,027
    Location:
    Grayson, Ky
    Why not carry the 460? You don't have to use buffalo bore in it for it to be a powerhouse.
     
  11. CraigC
    • Contributing Member

    CraigC Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Messages:
    15,317
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    You don't have to use Buffalo Bore loads in the Redhawk to make it a powerhouse either. Bullets and data are readily available.


    This line of thought never made sense to me. The .44Mag was "designed for" (whatever that means) a 240gr at 1500fps. Should we have just stopped there? Does that mean that nothing beyond a 240@1500fps should be used because it was not "designed for" a 330gr at 1350fps or 355gr at 1250fps, even though pressure levels are within SAAMI specs? Nonsense. What a firearm/cartridge is "designed for" is immaterial if it is capable of much more. It's a glass ceiling.
     
  12. Evergreen

    Evergreen Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2009
    Messages:
    533
    Location:
    Seattle, Washington
    I agree with Craig.. If my gun can eat it and the gun is not damaged or abused from the load, I would classify it as "designed" for that gun. Why would I not want to pack the most powerful round possible when travelling in Grizzly country? And, if my Ruger can handle it, why not try to practice with the round and try to improve my skills with it? Of course, I would probably use a lighter round if I was hiking around Oregon, where Black Bears are the main threat. Anyway, I think Big Bore and heavy loads are fun.


    Why not carry the 460? Well, it's a tank for one. The thing weighs like 1.5 times more than my Redhawk and it takes up a lot more real estate. Also, the ported barrel will destroy my ears, if I ever have to use this gun in a defense situation. I have thought about carrying it with me, but I can just picture that big honkin piece of steel with take a lot of room on my chest and be a bit tough when hiking up steep grades on my hikes. I also will be carrying a 20-30lb pack with me.
     
  13. hardluk1

    hardluk1 member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Messages:
    4,405
    Location:
    nc mountains
    The only place those heavy hot loads are a worry is in the few 2" barreled light weight revolvers . There it can be an issue with the bullets backing out of the caseing under recoil and causeing the cylinder to not rotate. Not a problem with your standard 4" model.
     
  14. Stainz

    Stainz Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Messages:
    3,117
    Location:
    Pinson, AL
    They likely won't hurt the gun... but your hand & wrist will remember them!

    Stainz
     
  15. Mike1234567

    Mike1234567 member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,084
    Location:
    Alamo City
    If I "needed" to use a .44 Mag revolver to hunt medium-sized game (e.g. whitetail) I'd use a light-medium weight SP bullet with a relatively light charge in .44 Special. If I "needed" to use a .44 Mag revolver for SD I'd use a lighter HP bullet with a somewhat light charge in .44 Special. If I "needed" to carry a .44 Mag for protection against large boar or black bear I'll want the heaviest hard-cast semi-wadcutter bullet I can get (320gr ++) with enough power behind it to make a real mess.

    Was the .44 Mag "designed" for any of the above scenarios? No.

    ETA: (for clarity) I'll use whatever load a firearm is capable of handling to suit whatever need I have regardless of what the gun was "designed" for.
     
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2011
  16. hardluk1

    hardluk1 member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Messages:
    4,405
    Location:
    nc mountains
    hay mike was the 30.06 designed for hunting game animals??? NO, but it also does a fine job of it.. 44mag does a good job of it to and it was not made for anything but hunting.
     
  17. Mike1234567

    Mike1234567 member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,084
    Location:
    Alamo City
    Agreed... whole-heartedly... and this is what I meant with my post. I was agreeing with others who don't believe in "limiting" a firearm strictly to what it was "designed" for.
     
  18. CraigC
    • Contributing Member

    CraigC Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Messages:
    15,317
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    Good posts, gents!
     
  19. Waldo Pepper

    Waldo Pepper Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2007
    Messages:
    182
    Location:
    BFE
    22LR for rodent and plinking, 357 for range plinking, 10mm for when 45ACP isn't enough and 44 Magnum for everything else. :neener::neener:

    Only thing stronger then Ruger Redhawk is Dan Wesson large frame in 44 Magnum or one of the super magnums with forged steel frames & cylinder. All that and they are renowned for accuracy, this one with the 8" barrel installed will out shoot the 20" Marlin 1894 or Ruger 44 Carbine.

    SANY0014.jpg
     
  20. CraigC
    • Contributing Member

    CraigC Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Messages:
    15,317
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    Dan Wessons are not stronger than Redhawks and Super Redhawks. The only thing stronger is a Freedom Arms 83.
     
  21. Waldo Pepper

    Waldo Pepper Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2007
    Messages:
    182
    Location:
    BFE
    Don't bet your life on it.

    Blued M-44 6" and it has heavy 2lb SA trigger and 744 has 1.5lb SA trigger and both have factory stock actions. Got to get a 4" barrel for this gun. it has 6", 8" and 10" barrels.

    101_3007.jpg
     
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2011
  22. CraigC
    • Contributing Member

    CraigC Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    Messages:
    15,317
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    Prove it!
     
  23. kwhi43@kc.rr.com

    kwhi43@kc.rr.com Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2008
    Messages:
    2,153
    All-Right!! Lets blow something up!!
     
  24. Waldo Pepper

    Waldo Pepper Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2007
    Messages:
    182
    Location:
    BFE
    I had it proved several years ago when a DW forum member took measurements of some of his DW's, S&W and his Ruger Super Redhawks. The DW's had thicker cylinder walls and frames the the S&W or Ruger, the cylinder wall thickness on his S&W 629 was so much thinner then the other two he sold the Smith later on.

    This had come about when a guy on forum was shooting his DW and then switched to his S&W 44 and using same ammo blew up the cylinder and blew off top strap. I have shot 300 gr Noslers loaded to the max in my DW and they seem like the 850 fps stuff I load using Trail Boss for my 629 3" Smith.

    Actually I really didn't there was that much difference between the two guns until about 2 years ago a friend blew a cylinder on his new Ruger SR with same load I have loaded to stop cars and bears. He said it happened on first round fired. He sent it back to Ruger and they replaced the cylinder, saying it was defective casting or defective cylinder, don't remember which. He still has the Ruger but he don't load any thing super hot anymore for it, he says he is looking for a good buy on DW 445 SuperMag. However says he's leaving the hot stuff to his T/C Encore, now there is a gun that's built for the big stuff.
     
  25. Waldo Pepper

    Waldo Pepper Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2007
    Messages:
    182
    Location:
    BFE
    Sorry, raising two grandsons so no money to spare to tear up my toys.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page