Redhawk vs. Super Redhawk: Strength?

[Stoots]

Got a quick question.

I'm in the mood for a double action .44. I've owned a SRH in the past and liked it a lot.

I like the looks of the RH in 5.5. I don't want to scope this either. So between the 5.5 barrel preference and the no need for the scope, I have a question.

Is the RH and SRH the same in their strength? I like some heavy Buffalo Bore loads, and eventually I'd like to dabble in reloading.

From the info at Buffalo Bore's website, I'm inclined to believe they are:

•.44 Mag.: Use only in Ruger Redhawk/Blackhawk, Colt Anaconda, Freedom Arms and Dan Wesson Revolvers. Use in all S&W revolvers made since 1989. Use in T/C, Winchester 1894 and Marlin 1894.
•.44 Remington Magnum +P+: Use only in Ruger Super Blackhawk, Vaquero, Redhawk, or Super Redhawk models, Freedom Arms model 83, Taurus Raging Bull & Dan Wesson revolvers, Thompson/Center Encore, Winchester 1894 and Marlin 1894 rifles, the H&R Handirifle and any rifle with a falling block action.


Thought I'd ask the experts here.

Thanks in advance!

 

[Jimbo357mag]

Which is stronger, a locomotive or a bigger locomotive? I would give the edge to the SRH but for any .44 Magnum load that is half-way sane the Redhawk will do just fine. The Redhawk has that gripframe that can put a hurtin' on the web between your thumb and index finger. You might want to keep that in mind. JMO.

...Jimbo

 

[Thel]

I believe the important part, the cylinders, interchange as have seen Redhawks with scavenged SRH cylinders. Thus, inclined to believe in many ways they would have comparable strength. Also, the barrels can be switched between them as Bowen
when he gets rid of the frame extension uses RH barrels. As Jimbo states the SRH
has a more comfortable grip setup but never had a problem with my RH with
custom Herrett grips on them but the stock wood grip ate my hand web.

 

[CraigC]

If there is a strength difference, I have yet to see it documented. The important part, as Thel stated, is the cylinder and they interchange between the two. Cuz there's a dude floating around with a .454 SRH cylinder in his .45 Redhawk. IMHO, the only important differences are within the action (one spring versus two), the grips and the provisions for scope mounting.

 

[GhosT]

Stoots...
{Own a SRH}

Yeah,the SRH is a tad beefier than the RH...
But from years of threads I've read not a big enough difference to sweat.

The bigger difference is trigger designs.
One spring vs two, if wanna lighten trigger pull.
And that is not a big deal. Think WOLFF Springs.



Speaking of YEARS OF THREADS....
COUNTLESS of 5.5" Redhawk owners thrilled with their choice.
Seen many a monster game animal dropped by REDHAWKS!
WITH REALLY HEAVY HANDLOADS!

From what I hear, if gonna use ass kicking loads, research grips.
Most popular in threads...Hogue grips.

 

[Onty]

No difference in strength because the weakest part on revolver is the cylinder. Since they are the same or very similar, the only factor in your decision is which one you prefer.

If you prefer shorter revolver but with possibility of using scope, here is what can be done with SRH, shown are 454 revolvers:

From http://www.armco-guns.com/what%27s%20new%20at%20armco.htm

So, if you like SRH-s above, any good smith will be able to make this modification on your 44 model.

 

[Anonymous]

No difference in strength because the weakest part on revolver is the cylinder. Since they are the same or very similar, the only factor in your decision is which one you prefer.

If you prefer shorter revolver but with possibility of using scope, here is what can be done with SRH, shown are 454 revolvers:

From http://www.armco-guns.com/what%27s%20new%20at%20armco.htm


So, if you like SRH-s above, any good smith will be able to make this modification on your 44 model.

Sweet.....what are the barrel lengths on these guns please? 8)

 

[flatgate]

Well, I beg to differ with a few of the statements made above.

I certainly believe the Super Redhawk is significantly stronger than the Redhawk and/or any other Ruger revolver.

Please take a moment or two to read the following article.

Click Here

JMHO,

flatgate

 

[CraigC]

Yes but the Carpenter Custom 465 stainless is only used in the .454 and .480 models. They are indeed stronger than standard Redhawks but he asked about .44's. Unless I misunderstood the question, which is entirely possible.

 

[kf6gub]

Yes but the Carpenter Custom 465 stainless is only used in the .454 and .480 models.

OK...I guess the thinking is that the current, new SRH's are of different stainless steels dependent on whether the caliber is 44 mag or 454 Casull. Is that correct? thx Jim

 

[CraigC]

Yes, the .454 and .480 models are constructed of a stronger (more elastic) alloy to withstand the increased pressures without going to a five-shot cylinder. I reckon Ruger figured that from a manufacturing perspective, it was less expensive to go to an exotic alloy than to reengineer the action and tooling for a five-shot cylinder.

 

[Three44s]

With the steel used in a RH and SRH in .44 mag being the same ..... and the design differences taken into account .........

You'd be a long time beating either revolver into a plow share.

I own both ....... I bought a SRH to replace my RH ........ after the triggers were done on both ...... I fell into love with them to the extent I can't part with either!

But my Smith Mountain gun gets the most packin'

Three 44s

 

[k22fan]

Yes, the .454 and .480 models are constructed of a stronger (more elastic) alloy to withstand the increased pressures without going to a five-shot cylinder. I reckon Ruger figured that from a manufacturing perspective, it was less expensive to go to an exotic alloy than to reengineer the action and tooling for a five-shot cylinder.

Hmmmm.......?????????......OR....... The last batch of .480s were 5 shot because compared to machining the stronger steel required for .480 six shooters making 5 shooters was a less expensive way to use up the barrels left over from a caliber Ruger has given up on. I'm guessing Ruger originally wanted thier big boomers to be six shooters for marketing reasons. At least six shooters are a lot more appealing to me.

Just speculating,

Gil

 

[flatgate]

Oh, yeah, the discussion is about .44's......oops! I stand corrected.

Sorry about the confusion. I'll stick with a Model 83.......

flatgate

 

[Ale-8(1)]

The question I would ask would be: what pressure is generated by the so-called +P+ .44 Magnum ammo. There's no SAAMI spec for that, so we really don't know what we are dealing with.

This is not intended to renew the "Rugers can handle anything/no they can't" debate. We all know that Ruger, like other gun manufacturers, design with a "safety factor" over all SAAMI loads. We don't necessarily know what that is, but if we knew the working pressure of the ammo in question we could compare that to the known SAAMI pressure of the .44 Magnum, or .454 Casul, or .480 Ruger, and make an educated decision about how we feel about using "non-standard" ammo.

I seriously doubt I'd be wanting to shoot much ammo greatly in excess of SAAMI-standard stuff, either because of concerns for the guns or my personal well-being. That said, these guns have proven themselves to handle what we have thrown at them for quite a while and I'll not begin to criticize anyone who chooses to push the envelope if they so choose. It's your gun, your money, and your choice.

Enjoy.

 

[CraigC]

I know that Brian Pearce has provided about the only data that I know of for the .44Mag RH/SRH that exceeds SAAMI pressure standards and that no distinction is made between the two guns. I also know that I would not want to shoot enough of those loads out of any gun to wear it out in my lifetime but IF I did, I would have surely gotten my money's worth. Personally, I really don't see a reason for it. If you can launch 250's@1500fps and up to 355's@1200fps at standard pressures, another one or two hundred feet per second isn't gonna amount to much on the receiving end but it does translate to a lot more recoil.

 

[Knuckles]

The frame extends quite-a-ways down the bbl of the SRH, the Grip is the stub design like the GP100 for more grip choices, the SRH has two action springs.

The RH looks better to me with the stock wood grips but shoots much better with the Hohue "Bantam" grips, the RH's action can not be tweaked independently because there's only one dual-purpose spring.

Strength?... as previously stated, wouldn't really matter in .44mag but the SRH frame is massive!

Can't beat a 5.5" Redhawk !

I went with the baby-RH

 

[Axehandle]

If choosing between the two is the question there is an obvious answer. BOTH!!!
FWIW the SRH does make one fine 500 Linebaugh. Hamilton Bowen insists that it be done on the 44 version too!

 

[hittman]

Can't beat a 5.5" Redhawk !

I agree. And ... try a Tyler T Grip with those wood grips. Works wonders on my 5.5" .41 Mag.

 

[Knuckles]

T-GRIP?... DON'T GET ME STARTED AGAIN!!... my order is 3-Months old! :roll: