Redhawk vs. Super Redhawk

[b79holmes]

Without making a 'size matters' joke I read often about "Ruger only" heavy loads for magnum revolvers.
I understand S&W and Ruger use different metal processes with accounts for part of the differences for the mass of a Ruger revolver.

So while slightly smaller and lighter can a Redhawk handle all the most heaviest of loads that Super Redhawk can?

Thanks,
Bill

 

[CraigC]

The Redhawk is not smaller or lighter. In fact, the guns even use the same cylinders. Strength is the same.

S&W's use forged frames but are also outdated in their design. They simply adapted existing designs to high pressure cartridges. Ruger uses castings for their frames but ole Bill also eliminated all the S&W's known weaknesses, so the design is state of the art and they were built around high pressure cartridges. S&W's are shooting loose at 36,000psi while Rugers are good for 50,000psi (or more).

 

[robert4301]

I'm a Super Redhawk fan. The Redhawk is a better looking gun for us traditionalists. The Super has some features I prefer. The peg style grip frame, scope ready frame, easily tuned two spring action and greater caliber choice are nice. I have SRH's in 44 mag 7 1/2" and 10mm 6 1/2". The looks of the SRH have grown on me but I'd buy a Redhawk in 357 if/when a blued version comes out.

 

[David Bradshaw]

"I understand S&W and Ruger use different metal processes with accounts for part of the differences for the mass of a Ruger revolver."
----Bill

Answer: Negative. S&W M-29 adopts, fifty years later, a turn-of-the-century Model 1905 .44 Special to .44 Remington Magnum. Beefed up, better steel and heat treatment. The Redhawk was specifically designed around the .44 Mag, to survive continuous fire with full house loads. The S&W frame is drop forged and of "side plate" design. The Ruger is lost wax cast, and of "solid frame" construction, with modular trigger assembly. The S&W cylinder locks up vis a spring-loaded cylinder pin held in the standing breech, and at the front by a spring-loaded plunger in the extractor rod. The cylinder pin arrangement on the Smith limits thickness of the barrel socket in the frame. The Redhawk extractor rod is lower than the cylinder axis, making room for a thicker barrel socket. The Redhawk cylinder is latched via cylinder pin at the standing breech, and with a strong sliding latch securing yoke to frame.

"... can a Redhawk handle all the... heaviest of loads that Super Redhawk can?"
----Bill

Answer: Yes.
Loadwise, the RedHawk and SRH are equal. Frame, cylinder, yoke, all the same size. The Super Redhawk incorporates three features absent the Redhawk: 1) extractor shroud integral with the frame; 2) separate mainspring and trigger spring, which allows for a cleaner trigger job on the SRH; 3) grip spike on SRH provides mounting for a better variety of grips.

Because the SRH replaces the drop forged barrel of the Redhawk with round stock, machining is greatly reduced. And without the Redhawk's grip straps to finish and polish, the SRH grip spike saves additional labor. The Super Redhawk costs less to make, and is the better design for shootability.
David Bradshaw

 

[Jimbo357mag]

I believe the Super Redhawk 454 Casull cylinder is stronger than all the others. It uses a different stainless steel.

 

[Flyover_Country]

I believe the Super Redhawk 454 Casull cylinder is stronger than all the others. It uses a different stainless steel.

The Super Redhawk .454 and also the .480 Ruger are a little different than the other Super Redhawks and Redhawks. The cylinders are made of a different and extremely high strength proprietary stainless steel and the barrels are also made of a different stainless steel as well. The barrels were made of a different steel because the steel Ruger originally picked for the .454 Casull took too long to drill the bore through the barrel blank, the steel they originally picked took nearly an hour to drill through a 24" barrel blank. The barrel steel on the .454 (and possibly the .480 as well, although it was not specifically mentioned) came from the same vendor who provided the cylinder steel and they had a writeup about this on their website. The other Super Redhawks and Redhawks are all 416 stainless steel.

 

[henry-b]

Some RHs have scope cutouts (I call them too...some don't though.

Does the SRH not weigh more with that 'reinforement' at the barrel/frame ?

I read there wa sa time when Ruger's had a barrel-coming-loose issue, and I always wondered if that beefed up area was a fix...at least for 44m. For 454 and 480 I can understand the need.

 

[CraigC]

Does the SRH not weigh more with that 'reinforement' at the barrel/frame ?

Nope. Between the top rib and full grip frame of the Redhawk, round barrel and grip stud of the Super, the weight is the same for equal barrel lengths. I think people just perceive the Super as a beefier, heavier sixgun because of the frame extension.

Problem with Redhawk barrels was ultimately traced to a small run that had thread adhesive applied to their threads on a Friday but were not assembled until the following week. They had to over-torque the barrels to get them installed and this caused the shank to ultimately fail at the shoulder on some guns. By that time the Super was in full production and selling well. While not as attractive or traditional in its appearance, it's a better gun.

 

[henry-b]

Good to know

 

[Laserbait]

I believe the Super Redhawk 454 Casull cylinder is stronger than all the others. It uses a different stainless steel.

Yep! That'd be Carpenter 465. It's a hell of a steel. My Dad was working for Carpenter Steel when 465 was being developed, and Ruger was a big customer for it.

 

[jgt]

I would take a Redhawk any time over a Super Redhawk. I know from experience the Redhawk can have a wonderful trigger when worked on by someone who knows what he is doing. I also like the grip frame over the grip stud design. And the Redhawk lends itself to a variety of barrel choices not available to a Super Redhawk.

 

[powder smoke]

I agree 100%! I had a smith in NH do some tuning on my Redhawk, everyone who has
shot that gun comments on the smoothness of the action. One sweet revolver. Definitely a keeper. ps

 

[Quarterbore]

I wish Ruger would make a NEW model Redhawks with the Super Redhawk grip frame but without the extended "nose" over the barrel. Simple enough and make them in 41, 44, 45 to start with 5.5 and 7.5 barrels and do them in blued and stainless. Later add some with the scope mounts on the barrel and sell even more of them.

 

[henry-b]

Is the SRH frame/handle area larger ? I held one not that long ago, didn't seem all that much bigger...btu I will say the std RH grips are too small. The Pachmayr Presentations solve that though.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

I wish Ruger would make a NEW model Redhawks with the Super Redhawk grip frame but without the extended "nose" over the barrel. Simple enough and make them in 41, 44, 45 to start with 5.5 and 7.5 barrels and do them in blued and stainless. Later add some with the scope mounts on the barrel and sell even more of them.

2nd post this year for Quarterbore. You have got to do better and I hope you do visit more often.

 

[Quarterbore]

I've been very sick. I managed to develope an an I ear ear problem that has screwed up my hearing, cause vertigo, severe tinnitus, migraines and balance issues. I have been out of work for over a year and had to sell the lions share of what I once had.

I still have a few and I stop in every few days but I can't afford to get tempted to buy as my finances are not so great anymore.

The doc is calling it autoimmune inner ear disease with Ménière's and there are weeks I don't want to stand it's so crazy.

 

[Flyover_Country]

Is the SRH frame/handle area larger ? I held one not that long ago, didn't seem all that much bigger...btu I will say the std RH grips are too small. The Pachmayr Presentations solve that though.

The SRH grip on older revolvers with the original type rosewood insert grips such as my '99 are a very normal circumference and fit my 7 1/2 glove size hands well. They fit about the same as a Smith 686. The newer SRHes with the Hogue solid black rubber grips are sized for somebody with absolutely giant hands.

 

[s4s4u]

The newer SRHes with the Hogue solid black rubber grips are sized for somebody with absolutely giant hands.

I don't know about that. I don't have large hands and I find the Hogue Tamers on the SRH's a good fit. I also like the older Lett style grips but the Tamers are nice on the 480 when it comes to recoil

 

[Jimbo357mag]

The doc is calling it autoimmune inner ear disease with Ménière's and there are weeks I don't want to stand it's so crazy.

Good luck with that and let us know how you are doing from time to time.

 

[CraigC]

I might like the Tamer a little better if they were slightly thicker. I wear a size 9 glove.