Redhawk .45 Colt

[freakindawgen]

I have a 4 in barrel Redhawk 45 Colt and love it. I recently found out Ruger has made longer barreled Redhawks in 45 before but quit. Since it seems they have sold every one they made and they are popular enough that you dont see them used, you would think Ruger would be money ahead by keeping them in production,no?

 

[Jeff Quinn]

Pretty simple really. They will make what we will buy. I love my 4 inch 45 Redhawk, but never had a desire for one with a longer barrel.

 

[BlkHawk73]

What Jeff said. Production is spurred by sales and demand. When a model's sales are low enough and the resources for that model could be better used for a more popular model, something has to give. They wouldn't have dropped a hot seller.

 

[andyo5]

I have a 4" RH, but would have preferred a longer barrel such as 5" or 5 1/2".

 

[BearStopper]

I once found one used with a 7 1/2" barrel that I did not buy. At the time I did not see a use for it either since a 44 mag is readily available. However the 45 colt seems to have a nice following so I guess the reason more people did not create a demand for them may be due to the fact that the 45 colt lovers of this world also prefer their sixguns in single action. I know there are exceptions but apparently not enough to satisfy Ruger that it was worth regular production in the longer variations nowadays.

 

[EVR]

What is the weight of a 4" .45 RH?

 

[maxpress]

46oz

 

[Knuckles]

There's plenty of Redhawks on the market still... you should have no trouble finding the one you want ( except maybe .357mag Redhawks)

 

[freakindawgen]

It's kinda funny,I never thought about a Redhawk until the 4" came out. I had thought the barrels were too long. The 4" is perfect for just "one" gun but now that I have it I feel it needs a longer barreled partner. I have found one 7 1/2" barreled .45 Colt and it's used and already more than I paid new for my 4". When I found the 4" it was the only one Lipsey's had and I bought it thinking .45 Colt offering wont stick around long.They are not abundant but got a note from Ruger that in a couple of weeks production will start back up.(on the .44 mag anyway)

 

[MMichaelAK]

The 5 1/2 inch .45 Colt Redhawk is really nice. I looked for five years for one up here and finally found one. Paid $425 for it and Ive been very happy with it. Ive never looked at the 4" model. Prefer the mid length. And since you can load it frmo mild CB loads to heavy Ruger Only loads, its a great woods gun.
If they began making them again, I know two guys who'd buy one Right Now.

 

[yankee7809]

I don't mean this as a dig against those who love the .45 Colt but around here you see quite a few .45s in both Redhawk and Blackhawk models set in the gunshop's cases a long time compared to .44 Mags. I'm sure the long barreled .45s in Redhawks sold slower than the Blackhawks in .45.

 

[sourdough44]

The average shooter may gravitate to the 44 mag. I think you have to be more of a gun 'afficinado' to get the most out of your Ruger in 45 Colt, that usually means a little reloading too.

 

[WESHOOT2]

No.

 

[jrtrapp1]

I went out of my way to find a 5.5" 45 a few years ago. I had my smith go over the action as it was quite bad from the factory. It is now an excellent revolver.

 

[andyo5]

The average shooter may gravitate to the 44 mag. I think you have to be more of a gun 'afficinado' to get the most out of your Ruger in 45 Colt, that usually means a little reloading too.

The problem with the 45 Colt caliber is that there are so many versions, and most factory cartridges are loaded for the weakest revolvers made in that caliber.
Early cases were weak, and the early revolvers were made of low strength steel. That's what most factory loads are designed for. Some manufacturers like Buffalo Bore offer high power loads, sold in boxes with warnings that they are for Rugers and similar modern revolvers only. Still, many current revolvers are SAAs and SA clones, and are not suited to powerful loads.
The 44 magnum started off as a very powerful round, and no guns were designed for low power 44 magnum loads. So there is no chance of confusion with the 44 Magnum.
If I did not reload, I would not have chosen the 45 Colt.

 

[VAdoublegunner]

I have a 5.5" Redhawk in 45 Colt. It is an excellent shooter. You can load them up to some substantial pressures if you so desire, even above the Blackhawk. I traded a Beretta 96D for it at a gunshow. As I recall, the dealer made a half joking remark about finally getting that one off the table, but that was about 10 years ago. I think I got the better deal.

The 45 Colt offers some definate advantages if you are a serious handloader, but not so much over the more readily available 44 Mag if you are not. That is probably one of the reasons for its demise. I also think a lot of folks preferred the Blackhawk for a hunting handgun, there being no specific need for a double action in most field situations. With heavy loads, there is some advantage to the BH grip in that you can allow it to roll up with the recoil to dissipate some of the energy instead of it slamming back into your hand like the RH grip. But some folks just don't like a SA grip nor do they shoot it well, thus the RH's niche.

 

[freakindawgen]

I went the other way,.44 to .45. I still have my dies for .44 and may load for a friend that is getting a Redhawk .44. I have 4 NV in .45 but didn't plan on hot loads in them. The Redhawk was to replace a S&W M29 (with the lock) for hotter .45 loads. I no longer have any .44 mag guns.