Redhawks gone?

Gather App
Guns.com Vault
DPris said:
Mo,
If I told you the sun was coming up tomorrow, you wouldn't accept it coming from me.
By all means, carry on with your gloom & doom.
Denis
Click to expand...

** This is a forum for discussions. I'm not exactly connected but have good friends at Davidson's and at Ruger here, and they all roll their eyes when asked about bringing back the Redhawk or any of the Six-series centerfires. Maybe Fifer will keep his word to you? Mark your calendar and a year from today, I'll buy the first round if the Redhawk is back on Ruger's site. I can't lose either way.
 
While I deal with Fifer, Ruger's product manager, Ruger's corporate spokesman, and Lipsey's. :)
Like I said- carry on with your gloom & doom.
Denis
 
I'm pushing for a Red Lite in .45 Colt, myself.
Blue or stainless, I could live with either.
Denis
 
Direct link to pdf, but it's 2013 catalog not 2014:
https://ruger-docs.s3.amazonaws.com/Ruger_Firearms.pdf

pgs. 35 & 36
 
I find it curious Ruger would discontinue a successful line. The Super Redhawk I was told was designed to replace the Redhawk. However people still wanted Redhawks. I have a Redhawk 44 Remington Magnum 7 1/2 inch barrel. Next on my wish list was a Redhawk in 45 colt. I hope they do bring them back. I had plans to convert it to 454 casull and pack it on my Alaskan fishing trips. Thought with the 4 1/4 barrel would get a little more pop than Alaskan 2 1/2 inch barrel.
 
I don't see the Redhawk coming back, at least in it's current form. The action design is the last of it's kind in the Ruger lineup. Coupled with the fact that it is more difficult and more expensive to manufacture...well, it just doesn't add up.

What I hope for, and I am crossing my fingers for, is a redesigned Redhawk with the GP100/SRH action and spike grip. I think that would address the two biggest issues people have with the Redhawk design. I also think the fact that Ruger now has a proverbial hole in their lineup (no big bore 4" gun) that we are likely to see something emerging soon, possibly for the SHOT show in January.
 
I could certainly appreciate a reworked Redhawk (Redhawk II?) as described. A nice six-shot piece without the mass of the Super Redhawk, chambered for stuff up to say .44 Magnum, offered in .44 Special. .45 Colt, etc.

And please, can we have blue ones?

;)
 
Ale-8(1) said:
I could certainly appreciate a reworked Redhawk (Redhawk II?) as described.

;)
Click to expand...


I believe that would be a "New Model Redhawk" in keeping with Ruger nomenclature convention!
 
Yeah, furthering the confusion.

Redhawks (and Super Redhawks) are "new models" by virtue of having a transfer-bar action.

Now, if they called it the "New Redhawk" I could go along with that.

:)
 
Ale-8(1) said:
Yeah, furthering the confusion.
Redhawks (and Super Redhawks) are "new models" by virtue of having a transfer-bar action.
:)
Click to expand...

Really? I know you're not serious. The Redhawk never had a "non-transfer bar" design, therefore nothing is "new". ;)
I am still looking for any hint of moving the machinery or re-introduction of a round-barrel Redhawk, etc. Here's hoping it re-surfaces, but with the marketing model of the past few years, I have some trepidation.

Bill Ruger once said they probably "never made a dime on the DA revolvers" of the first series, and the Redhawk is the same assembly technique with the same number of parts, etc. Plus the history of the barrel lube being so sensitive. A realist with manufacturing experience would take note... the SRH has a much more cost-effective parts list and assembly process, and is selling very well.
Here's hoping they re-manufacture several models of the past, including the great Redhawk.
 
I am indeed serious. The defining detail of New Models is the transfer bar system. Thus, the Redhawks can be considered "new models" even if we don't so name the individual models.

The Redhawk is not the same as the other double-actions. It uses the so-called "single spring" arrangement that is unique to that model. The Super Redhawk uses essentially the same action arrangement as the GP-100 and even the older "Six Series".

To avoid yet another Ruger naming SNAFU I'd go with "New Redhawk" and avoid the use of the word "Model" altogether.

So . . . if we can in fact get a New Redhawk using the same great action as the GP-100 and the Super Redhawk, I'd just be a happy camper. Unfortunately, I share your trepidation concerning the liklihood of this coming about. It would almost be too good to be true, particularly if they'd offer them in blue for those of us so inclined.

:)
 
Nah, when Ruger lists the gun as a "New" model in their catalog and nomenclature (ala NM Blackhawk, NM Single-Six, and New Bearcat, New Vaquero etc), I'll consider it as-such. Till then it's just a colloquialism.

Strange there's no discussion of the reasons for the re-design of the SRH, after the thread failures of the RH, and how that was remedied. Still, 33 years is a heckuva good run for the design. It sure has put venison in my freezer, I'm here to testify. 8)
 
As far as I know, the barrel & thread failures were in the Super Redhawk, not the Redhawk. That was solved with a change in the assembly lube and procedure.

I have no real problem with either the Redhawk or the Super version. The Super is simply bigger than I need for anything, and I'm not hugely in love with the "single-spring" action in the Redhawk, but I'd not turn either down as a gift. ;) ;) ;)

The only one I'd buy now would be a 4" blue Redhawk in .45 Colt, and if it were a New Redhawk with the same spring arrangement as the Super and GP-100 that would be the ultimate for me.

Diff'rent strokes . . .

;)
 
Ale-8(1) said:
As far as I know, the barrel & thread failures were in the Super Redhawk, not the Redhawk. That was solved with a change in the assembly lube and procedure. [...]
Click to expand...

cas posted pictures of his RH with its barrel broken off at the front of the frame, Contender has written about the same failure occurring with his early RH, and I've seen a couple other RH failure pictures on the net. In brand comparison threads I've seen a couple pictures of S&Ws that failed the same way but never a SRH. At any rate it is a rare failure and both Ruger and S&W replaced the revolvers for free.

A RH barrel on a SRH with the scope base notches machined off makes a better looking revolver than a standard SRH but still doesn't look as traditional as a RH. I'd be very tempted by the SRH frame/RH barrel hybrid at production revolver pricing but it couldn't replace my blued 5 1/2" .44.
 
I could be totally wrong about the barrel failures. Bottom line though is that whatever the problem was , they resolved it.

And I still want a blue 4" blue New Redhawk in .45 Colt.

:)
 
Ale-8(1) said:
I could certainly appreciate a reworked Redhawk (Redhawk II?) as described. A nice six-shot piece without the mass of the Super Redhawk, chambered for stuff up to say .44 Magnum, offered in .44 Special. .45 Colt, etc.
Click to expand...
When referring to the "mass" of the Super Redhawk are you referring to the weight of the gun or it's general "blockyness"? The SRH is actually a little bit lighter than a RH in the same barrel length. This is primarily due to the reduced weight of the spike grip vs. the full grip frame of the RH.

Regarding the barrel failures, they were all related to Redhawks, and I believe were isolated to a particular operator. I have read two basic accounts of what the actual cause was, both from sources I consider to be credible and knowledgeable in these matters so I am not sure which is correct.
Story #1 says that an operator was using the wrong lubricant on the barrel threads. This caused stress corrosion cracking of the threads, resulting in the barrel seperating from the threaded portion.
Story #2 says that an operator used the correct lube but left the barrels sit on his workbench over the weekend. The extended time sitting allowed the lubrication to dry out and for the barrel to see an unacceptable amount of torque when it was threaded onto the frame, thus the barrel failure.

Regardless of the actual reason, the issue was an operator training issue and has been corrected, and never seen since. As far as I am aware, there has never been a similar type of barrel failure in the SRH design.

I really want to see a catalog version of a big bore handgun with a 4 to 5 1/2" barrel in the same chamberings as the SRH (44Mag, 454 and 480R).
Something like that might actually sway me to pick up another big boomer DA revolver.
 
Ale-8(1) said:
I am indeed serious. The defining detail of New Models is the transfer bar system. Thus, the Redhawks can be considered "new models" even if we don't so name the individual models.

The Redhawk is not the same as the other double-actions. It uses the so-called "single spring" arrangement that is unique to that model. The Super Redhawk uses essentially the same action arrangement as the GP-100 and even the older "Six Series".

To avoid yet another Ruger naming SNAFU I'd go with "New Redhawk" and avoid the use of the word "Model" altogether.

So . . . if we can in fact get a New Redhawk using the same great action as the GP-100 and the Super Redhawk, I'd just be a happy camper. Unfortunately, I share your trepidation concerning the liklihood of this coming about. It would almost be too good to be true, particularly if they'd offer them in blue for those of us so inclined.

:)
Click to expand...

The New and Old Model designation is for single action Rugers alone. The DA revolvers always had transfer bars.
 
If all this talk has got you really needing one i just a red hawk for sale on arms list NH $550...
 
I find it easiest communicate using the most commonly used gun vocabulary except when talking to collectors who tend to copy the vocabulary the factory used in old catalogs and literature. You can call your DA revolver Roscoe, Blaster, Boomer or “New” anything you want, but you may have to be patient explaining what you’re talking about.
 
I still havent seen a Redhawk 4" in 45C much less had a chance to pick up a used model. I guess I'm out of luck until something happens......:(
 
Smee781 said:
I still havent seen a Redhawk 4" in 45C much less had a chance to pick up a used model. I guess I'm out of luck until something happens......:(
Click to expand...
pm sent
 
lfpiii said:
I do not remember the website but I recently saw a picture of a Redhawk with an accessory rail. I think they are comig out with a new model.
Click to expand...

oh jeez louise, you can count me out on that crap ,%@$€¥#@£ rail!
 
hittman said:
Plastic bottom feeders are where the money is.

We wheel gun fanatics are dinosaurs indeed! :(
Click to expand...

now wheelguns are being made in plastic, count me out on that .thank god for used guns. am i the only one sick of 410 revolvers, picanini rails, zombie crap and plastic guns?
 
montegomx70 said:
hittman said:
Plastic bottom feeders are where the money is.

We wheel gun fanatics are dinosaurs indeed! :(
Click to expand...

now wheelguns are being made in plastic, count me out on that .thank god for used guns. am i the only one sick of 410 revolvers, picanini rails, zombie crap and plastic guns?
Click to expand...


no
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Redhawk aftermarket grip Identification help needed.
Replies
3
Views
167
Neon Vernon
N
FHBrumb
Redhawk Project
2
Replies
44
Views
1K
drycreek
drycreek
L
Question on Redhawk Grips
Replies
20
Views
617
RoninPA
RoninPA
contender
Question; Super Redhawk
Replies
5
Views
318
375hh1973
375hh1973
Capt Jack
Redhawk 3inch - Handful
Replies
15
Views
592
Cholo
Cholo

Latest posts

Back
Top