Preowned Super Redhawk 44 mag concern

[rengnath]

Hi everyone,

I'm new to the Ruger forum and just purchased my first Ruger and first revolver. I'm familiar with semi-auto pistols but really wanted something I could consider a show piece that I was confident would last generations to be handed down when I have kids/grandkids.

I was originally looking at new S&W revolvers but came across a used Ruger Super Redhawk 44 mag with a 7.5" barrel. The gun was within my budget and seemed like more gun for the money when compared to a 44 S&W. The 7.5" barrel over the 6" barrel of the 686 really sold me, as this gun may be used once a year for hunting. The gun included the original case, manual, and site mounts. The date stamped on the spent test shell is in 2013.

I read on what to check for on used revolvers and was happy with what I saw on this one before I purchased it. I have a 10 day warranty and really want to get to the range sometime this week. I honestly can't tell if the previous owner fired it, or if they did it was minimal. I usually look at the finish around the firing pin and it looks brand new.

After I got the gun home I took a closer look at the gun. I didn't catch it in the store, but the ejector rod doesn't sit in the center of the slot when the cylinder is closed. The cylinder chambers line up with the barrel and when I spin the barrel it doesn't wobble. I checked some pictures online and see some rods are centered while others appear to have the slight slant that mine does. I purchased it from Cabela's so I'm not entirely confident that their "gunsmith" would give me an accurate response to this concern and I'm certainly no gunsmith myself. Could someone give me feedback on this before I take it to the range to fire it?

Here are some pics:

 

[REB]

Its not an issue. The Ruger locks the front on the cylinder with a separate lock and does not use the ejector rod the way S&W does. the ejector rod sort of floats so it will depend on the position you are holding the revolver. As long as it isn't bent and it doesn't appear to be in the pictures its perfectly normal.

 

[rengnath]

Thanks for the response Rex! That makes me feel better. Hopefully I'll get to the range today or tomorrow

 

[Chuck 100 yd]

That is not a problem. The ejector rod on RedHawks and Super RedHawks have some play in them. That is the way mine are too. Ruger's front lock is on the crane not the end of the ejector rod like some other DA revolvers.

 

[Rumrunner]

Your grand kids will be able to pass down to theirs as well. Super Redhawks are like vaults. They are great guns.
Welcome to this forum also.

 

[Rumrunner]

Your grand kids will be able to pass down to theirs as well. Super Redhawks are like vaults. They are great guns.
Welcome to this forum also.

 

[Rumrunner]

Your grand kids will be able to pass down to theirs as well. Super Redhawks are like vaults. They are great guns.
Welcome to this forum also.

 

[Rumrunner]

Weird, wouldn't let me submit then all 3 times did.

 

[Chuck 100 yd]

Rum runner, it does that to me sometimes also. If you look at your last post you will see it gives you the option to delete . You have to delete them one at a time.
Kinda PITA. I was blaming it on my I Pad . The I Pad changes things with that auto correct program,should be called auto INCORRECT!!!

 

[Armybrat]

That is not a problem. The ejector rod on RedHawks and Super RedHawks have some play in them. That is the way mine are too. Ruger's front lock is on the crane not the end of the ejector rod like some other DA revolvers.

Yes, there is nothing wrong with that rod moving a little.
The ejector rod on my 20 year old SP101 .357 is the same - the front end of the rod is almost touching the bottom of the forward part of the slot housing lug. Mine wiggles around a bit - setting it on its side it'll move up a little towards the center of the slot. Holding the gun up in my hand, the rod droops down in the front:

Solid guns they are, and yours looks just fine. So no worries - just don't drop that hand cannon on your toes.

 

[rengnath]

Thanks for the replies everyone. I'm glad that it's not an issue.

Last item ofconcern is the barrel-cylinder gap. My feelers are putting the gap at .009, and the endshake is at .004. Do I need to think about adding endshake bearings? From my searches, it seems that some people state that these numbers are within spec (at the higher end of the specs) and others that differ, with the biggest concern being the b/c gap. Thanks again for all of the help!

Fwiw, those measurements are with the gun de-cocked. If the gun is cocked or in full lockup, the endshake remains at .004 but the b/c gap does lessen.

 

[Hondo44]

Most of the ejector rod issue appears to be the top edge of the slot that it's not parallel to, which is not a machined surface. Pretty much as it comes out of the mould.

I would not worry about the cyl gap unless you get excessive side gases and burnt powder. Shoot it before worrying about it. In any case you can always call Ruger for free shipping back to them and free correction. You'll have the gun back is less than 14 days.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

...and yes if you shake the revolver the transfer bar will rattle a little. Welcome to the world of Ruger revolvers. They are sturdy.

 

[Laserbait]

Thanks for the replies everyone. I'm glad that it's not an issue.

Last item ofconcern is the barrel-cylinder gap. My feelers are putting the gap at .009, and the endshake is at .004. Do I need to think about adding endshake bearings? From my searches, it seems that some people state that these numbers are within spec (at the higher end of the specs) and others that differ, with the biggest concern being the b/c gap. Thanks again for all of the help!

Fwiw, those measurements are with the gun de-cocked. If the gun is cocked or in full lockup, the endshake remains at .004 but the b/c gap does lessen.

Measure the gap by pulling the trigger and letting the hammer fall and keeping the trigger held back.

 

[rengnath]

Went to the range last night and put 50 rounds through it. All I can say is WOW! This gun is awesome. Now I just need to put a scope on it.

Thanks for your help everyone!

 

[LuckenbachTexas]

Your grand kids will be able to pass down to theirs as well. Super Redhawks are like vaults. They are great guns.
Welcome to this forum also.

What he said, said, said, said!

 

[dleong]

Glad to hear the gun shoots fine!

However, I am going to go against the grain and say that it is definitely not normal for the ejector rod to be sitting at that angle in the frame cutout. I have five SRHs and a GP100, and the ejector rods in all of them sit straight in their respective frame cutouts. True, as others here have indicated, the rods do have a slight amount of play, but I can't get any of mine to bend to the degree depicted in your image, let alone stay at that angle with the cylinder closed.

You indicated that your SRH has hardly been shot; if that is true, then the abrasion marks on your ejector rod are not commensurate with the low round count. My suspicion is that the scratches were caused by operating a bent ejector rod. Now, whether that bend is a manufacturing defect, or damage caused by the previous owner, is anybody's guess.

By way of comparison, here's a picture of the ejector rod on my 9.5" 44 Mag. SRH:

Notice that it sits quite straight in the frame cutout, and there are barely any abrasion marks on it, despite the revolver's relatively high round count.

It's easy enough to determine if your ejector rod is indeed bent. Just remove it from the cylinder assembly and roll it on a flat surface. Here's mine, out of the SRH pictured above:

If you are bothered by the aesthetics of a bent ejector rod, you can always contact Ruger to acquire a replacement. Heck, they might even send one to you at no charge!

 

[Chuck 100 yd]

Dieong is correct. I failed to notice the scratches on the ejector rod in your picture. I believe I would be replacing that part before much more use. Some play is normal but a bent rod is not.

 

[Hondo44]

Most of the ejector rod issue appears to be the top edge of the slot that it's not parallel to, which is not a machined surface. Pretty much as it comes out of the mould.

dleong,

You make a good point about the scratches on rengnath's rod. But notice that his rod is parallel to the bottom of his shroud. I still think the top edge of the shroud opening is not parallel to the rod.

rengnath,

Use a small ruler to measure the width of the ejector rod opening in the shroud. If the opening is wider at the front than at the rear, it's the shroud casting.

 

[rengnath]

Using a small ruler I measured ejector rod opening and the sides of it are parallel. I don't have a good way to measure the ejector rod opening to the top of the barrel unfortunately.

I appreciate the pictures, Dleong. I went ahead and took the gun back while under the 10 day warranty. The salesman pulled a brand new 7.5" SRH out of the counter and it had the same exact slant on the ejector rod. That puts me at a loss. When I disassemble to clean the gun I'll check for straightness. It functions fine and I saw the new one in person and it matches everything on mine (except for endshake, which mine has a little more of clearly identifying that the gun has been used) .... I could lay awake at night worrying about it but I'm not sure it would help. I was hoping I could return it under defect and purchase a brand new one but that wouldn't change anything.

Most of the ejector rod issue appears to be the top edge of the slot that it's not parallel to, which is not a machined surface. Pretty much as it comes out of the mould.

dleong,

You make a good point about the scratches on rengnath's rod. But notice that his rod is parallel to the bottom of his shroud. I still think the top edge of the shroud opening is not parallel to the rod.

rengnath,

Use a small ruler to measure the width of the ejector rod opening in the shroud. If the opening is wider at the front than at the rear, it's the shroud casting.