I was able to feed my ruger revolver addiction on saturday. I added a redhawk 44mag 7.5 barrel stainless to my stable. I have a ruger GP100 and a super redhawk. To be honest i new very little about the redhawk before purchase. Does the redhawk enjoy the same reputation as the super redhawk and GP100, as far as overbuilt, bank vault toughness?? I could not be happier with my other two revolvers, and purchased the new redhawk (new to me) on that reputation. IT is specifical the redhawk hunter model mfg date was 10/12/2001, pistol had one cylinder fired through it since new.
ruger redhawk hunter
- Thread starter 4521dln
- Start date
robertkirksey
Blackhawk
Good catch. The cylinder in the Redhawk and Super Redhawk are the same if that tells you anything. Also, unlike the Super, the Redhawk is not ugly.
4521dln said:
The Redhawk was first and the others based off of it.
Smee781
Single-Sixer
If it shoots like my 45lc Redhawk Hunter then you should have no problems with it.
![Pampers Sensitive Baby Wipes, Clinically Proven, Fragrance Free, Unscented, Water Based, Hypoallergenic, Multi-Use, Hand Wipes 336 Wipes Total (6X Flip-Top Packs) [Packaging May Vary]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41KLBHu9CAL._SL500_.jpg)
Iron Mike Golf
Blackhawk
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2010
- Messages
- 945
I have Redhawk Hunter. Manufactured in the mid-80's, I think. Wonderfully accurate.
I like shooting full house loads (it's a 44 Mag, not a 44 Spl!). It did eat its fair share of optics. Buying cheap for this is false economy. I tried a Weigand aluminum mount, but went back to Ruger rings.
I did have to do some work to get mine to shoot lead bullets accurately and with no leading. Your gun may very well be different, as they are on the order of 15 years apart in age.
I put some Nill Griffe grips on mine.
I like shooting full house loads (it's a 44 Mag, not a 44 Spl!). It did eat its fair share of optics. Buying cheap for this is false economy. I tried a Weigand aluminum mount, but went back to Ruger rings.
I did have to do some work to get mine to shoot lead bullets accurately and with no leading. Your gun may very well be different, as they are on the order of 15 years apart in age.
I put some Nill Griffe grips on mine.
Quarterbore
Blackhawk
Can I confirm you are refering to the "R" models of the Redhawk - you know the ones with the ring cuts on the barrel? Ruger has never refered to these as Redhawk Hunters for the record...
I have a decent collection of these to go with my Blackhawk Hunters. To date I have six of them so far...
41 Mag Blue RH-41R
41 Mag Stainless KRH-41R
44 Mag Blue RH-44R
44 Mag Stainless KRH-44R
45 Colt Stainless KRH-45R
I also have the NRA Limited edition KRH-44R
The one I have been quietly searching for and may well not even exist is the GKRH-44R which would be the hi-gloss stainless 44 Mag. There has never been a blued 45 Colt in this line so I have an example of each so far.
All of mine shoot great!
I have a decent collection of these to go with my Blackhawk Hunters. To date I have six of them so far...
41 Mag Blue RH-41R
41 Mag Stainless KRH-41R
44 Mag Blue RH-44R
44 Mag Stainless KRH-44R
45 Colt Stainless KRH-45R
I also have the NRA Limited edition KRH-44R
The one I have been quietly searching for and may well not even exist is the GKRH-44R which would be the hi-gloss stainless 44 Mag. There has never been a blued 45 Colt in this line so I have an example of each so far.
All of mine shoot great!
quaterbore i have a 2010 Ruger catalog that list model # KRH-44R (hunter) . in the key feature area it reads HUNTER MODEL: features integral scope mounts and FREE scope rings. in my post i refered to my redhawk model as a hunter, it has the above features. my revolver is a 2001 model it probally was not called a hunter model back then. as far as i can tell the scope cutouts is the only differance between it and a regular model REDHAWK ( model #KRH-44). THANKS FOR YOUR HELP
tguil said:
They absolutely are. The GP-100 grip frame was added as it is vastly superior to the Redhawk's and the extention was added as Ruger determined that it would be better to mount optics to the frame aleviating stresses to the barrel. They are dimensionally the same. Here is my Redhawk with a .454 SRH cylinder. Drops right in.
I have a number of both and they are the same (save for the aforementioned differences).
Forgive the lousy quality of these photos, but you should be able to see that aside for the above mentioned mods.
Originally the Super Redhawk was developed to replace the Redhawk. After it went into production the standard Redhawk was still so popular that Ruger decided to continue to produce both. Both will take the same loads and one is as strong as the other.
Lee Martin
Hunter
Max is right. Same internals, same frame window dimensions. The difference is the barrel shank extension and the GP100 grip. The guts are identical.
41manor44 said:
Actually the Super Redhawk design was supposed to look like the Redhawk except add the new trigger group and spike grip of the GP100. Once the redesign was completed, the Redhawk would be replaced in the lineup by the SRH.
Problems with the RH revolvers having their barrels snap off accelerated the development of the SRH. The ugly snout and larger threads were added to better support the barrel as it was thought at the time the stresses of big bore magnum loads were the primary cause of the RH barrels snapping off.
Right around the time the SRH was put into production, the actual issue with the RHs was discovered (stress corrosion cracking due to improper barrel thread lubrication). Once the lubrication issue was corrected, Ruger decided to keep the RH in production as it was still a good seller and the SRH no longer had the same desirable profile as the RH.
MaxP is dead on correct, both guns are dimensionally the same in the frame area. The SRH looks bigger due to the snout.
GP100man
Buckeye
Was`nt it around `83-`84 ???????
