Ruger Redhawk Moon Clip Conversion

[modrifle3]

I am looking for advice. I am considering buying a Super Redhawk in 454 and having the cylinder converted by TK Customs to take the moonclips. I just want a revolver ... I have considered a GP100, SW625 as well as others but I have yet to buy. I really want the 625 JM, but the lack of ability to fire 45LC is making me reconsider.

I watched the video and the process does not seem to take much metal out of the cylinder, but my concern is with loading 454 rounds that are not in clips. Has anyone seen this small unsupported section of the case crack or rupture? I intend to reload and this is a concern for me. I will be completely new to the 454/45lc world so I apologize if this seems to be a stupid question.

I mainly intend to target shoot with 45 auto and is the reason I am considering the conversion. I know that it would be just as cheap to load 45 lc for target, but already load 45 auto for my 1911s.

Maybe its time to go back to the GP100 in .357 mag

 

[Boge]

Moon clips are great for competition/range & not so much for anything else. In the field they are fragile & easily bent, hence worthless for self defense. Another factor to consider is resale. It will be far harder to sell it once this work is done as you would be limiting your potential market.

 

[schloss]

I'm probably in the minority here, but I'm not a SRH fan. I already own a GP, and really enjoy it, but I'd probably be going for a 625 if all other things are equal. To me, the SRH is just too big and chunky. Definitely a purpose built gun, made for big stuff. If you just want a revolver, the 357 is really tough to beat. A lot of fun, plus the flexibility of running 38sp, as well as heavier loads. A 454 is only fun for certain people. I'm not one of them. (Although, I am looking for a SRH Alaskan in 480)

I think if you do the math, everything is going to balance out, once you add the 38/357 dies to your reloading setup, and the fact that lead is a little cheaper - not much, just slightly. I suggest you just decide what you want your revolver to do, and go from there. Maybe a 44 or 45 is a better choice, but I just personally wouldn't moonclip a SRH. S&W makes a model or two in 45acp, that would be a route to look at, if you can track one down.

 

[Jimbo357mag]

A 4" or 5.5" Redhawk with a machined cylinder for 45 colt/ 45 acp makes complete sense to me, the Super Redhawk not as much. I just can't see plinking with a Super Redhawk but the versatility is cool.

 

[modrifle3]

Good points...I like the 480 Ruger ... Much more mild than 454. I think I will stick to the 357.

 

[s4s4u]

I mainly intend to target shoot with 45 auto

How seriously do you take your target shooting? There would be a lot of freebore as well as an unsupported bullet with the 45ACP in a Casull chamber, along with the slightly smaller pill, which may not be conducive to accuracy.

 

[modrifle3]

If I want to get serious I will break out the 1911s with 200 grain swc. I just want a revolver.

 

[modrifle3]

I most likely will just get a 357 or the 625jm in 45 acp. Right now I am broke so I still have some time.

 

[KWYJIBO]

It's an interesting idea, starting with a 454 cylinder and using moon clips to fire 45 ACP. One reason to do this would be if you have a large supply of ACP ammo. You've said you reload that cartridge. But I agree with those who feel the Super Redhawk is too much gun. It's great for big game hunting, but for plinking, self defense, carrying in your truck or on your person, etc. it's rather big and heavy.

The reason 45 ACP is favored in rapid fire competition (i.e. Jerry Miculek's forte) and defensive pistol/practical shooting competition is because the fat, short cartridges can be reloaded very quickly using moon clips. Something longer, like a .357, is not much harder to reload in ordinary situations, but can make a world of difference when someone is timing you down to the 100th of seconds.

If you really want to shoot 45 ACP in a revolver, I'd keep looking for a Smith 25 or 625. The heavy barrel and the Mountain Gun versions both came in either 45 Colt or ACP at various times, just not both cartridges every year. Also very nice are the Model 1917, made by both S&W and Colt during WWI, and the very similar Smith Model 22. They came out with a new production Model 22 "Classic" several years ago that was pretty nice, although less desirable than a true classic in my opinion.

Another alternative is to get a convertible Blackhawk. Moonclips are not needed, because the ejector rod will push out anything. These guns are not expensive and are pretty widely available. Of course, you have to like single actions.

 

[k22fan]

As I posted in your previous thread firing a .45 ACP through a .454 chamber is the opposite of what you'd do to achieve best accuracy. That may not matter if your goal is modern draw and shoot fast matches, but for them neither 2 ¾" or 7 ½" barrels are ideal. The long tube is not allowed in many matches and for lack of sight radius a snub nose is harder to shoot than mid length barrels. Additionally, since you've indicated you don't have a lot of revolver experience I think you'd do your self a disservice trying to master a .454's recoil at this point. That leaves firing moderate .45 Colt loads through a SRH which is mostly what I enjoy in mine. After paying the $100 to moon clip cut a SRH you'd have spent the price of a 625.

Face it, the .45 ACP 625 is what you want. It's unfortunate, but Ruger will not compete in that market, so look to S&W. If you compare them to comfortable .45 Colt loads that stay within saami pressure levels, a 625 loaded with .45 Auto Rims gives up nothing to a .45 Colt. Depending on which reloading manual you look in both get up to 1,000 fps with 250 grain bullets, and the AR does it with less powder. You don't even need an additional die set, just the .45 AR brass. Let the gun market settle back down while you're saving for what you want: a 625.

 

[modrifle3]

I think you'd do your self a disservice trying to master a .454's recoil at this point.

What does the recoil have to do with anything? I am not speed shooting it. This is purely a fun toy. I have no desire to carry it. That is why I am looking at 6" and up barrels. I have fired a 454 and 480 Ruger in a revolver and 44 Mag and .50 AE in desert eagle. Not sure what there is to "master" . . . I am not 80 years old. Is there an age restriction on a .454 . . .

Sorry . . . had to rip that comment a bit!

 

[rangerbob]

One point not mentioned. If we are taking about the usual moon clips used in the various 45 acp S&W's( I own several), do they even dimentionally fit the big cylinder on the SRH. In other words, are the chambers the same width apart as on the S&W's. I've never measured a SRH cylinder, but it may be larger than a Redhawk or N-frame cylinder. It'd be like trying to use k-frame loaders in an L frame. BTW, I'm looking a TALO special that Lipsey's sells, a 5" SRH in 454 Casull, for shooting hot 45 colt reloads. Bob!! 8)

 

[k22fan]

[.... do] moon clips used in the various 45 acp S&W's [...] fit [...] ?
[...] Lipsey's sells, a 5" SRH in 454 Casull, [...]

Chambered for .44 magnum Redhawks and Super Redhawks use the same cylinder so they have the same hole spacing. There have been many posts about cutting Redhawks for .45 ACP moon clips without any comment about buying a different size clip than S&Ws and Colts use.

I was unaware of the Lipsey's 5" SRH. It's just what my budget didn't need: another temptation.

Edit to add: Lipsey's MSRP $1,115! Ouch! All temptation is gone. Maybe they'll be less used some day.

 

[MOUNTAIN WILLIAM]

Yep, they use the same moon clips.
http://www.rugerforum.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=124826&highlight=

 

[Lost Sheep]

Moon clips are great for competition/range & not so much for anything else. In the field they are fragile & easily bent, hence worthless for self defense. Another factor to consider is resale. It will be far harder to sell it once this work is done as you would be limiting your potential market.

Matter of opinion.

The long jump from the brass to the forcing cone, though, gives me pause for accuracy. But the diameter question gives me no concern whatsoever. Most 45 Colt guns nowadays are sized .451" and my 45ACP loads are as accurate as my 45 Colt loads in the same gun. Any difference native to the calibers/chamberings are masked by my (in)ability to aim well enough to find a difference.

(edit: s4s4u's post correctly points out an error. I should have referred to the long jump from the case mouth to the chamber throat AND the forcing cone. I tend to think of them as a single element and sometimes don't differentiate the terms. The bullet can get cocked off-axis and then be out of balance by the time it enters the barrel.)

Wild West Guns in Anchorage makes the conversion on a lot of these guns. It must have some popularity. Some are more fragile than others, I suppose, but the plastic ones seem to hold up pretty well.

454 Casull brass (and all 45 Colt manufactured in the past few decades) is solid head. While the Casull runs at rifle-like pressures I seriously doubt the brass would flow enough to make a hazard, at least not in any single firing.

I will keep an eye out for reports from anyone who has a revolver so "cut" and has fired full-power Casull ammo.

I have a SRH in 454 Casull, but have not done the conversion thing. I have a 45 Colt/45 ACP Bisley Blackhawk, too.

Lost Sheep

 

[s4s4u]

The long jump from case to forcing cone is but apart of the accuracy dilemma. The jump from case to throat may be more troublesome. With the shorter 45ACP you will have an unsupported bullet being launched through the throat, and then through the forcing cone. If one it going to perform this conversion it would be best to use a dedicated 45ACP cylinder to alleviate the freebore at the least, IMO.

 

[tulsamal]

I wanted to have a revolver like this myself. So I did my research and settled on a pre-ILS S&W 625 Mountain Gun. Mine was made in 1997 so it has the angled latch. The 625 MG came factory chambered in .45 Colt. Once it is machined for moon clips, you can still single load .45 Colt. Or use .45 Colt with MC's. Or use .45 ACP with MC's. Probably 98% of the rounds I fire out of this gun are .45 ACP.

I'm no Jerry but it is fast and quick to load and reload.

The biggest practical issue (to me) is that the cartridges shoot to widely different POI. Elevation is way different between a hunting level .45 Colt and my standard practice .45 ACP rounds. Since I mostly use it with .45 ACP, I just zeroed it for those. If I wanted to actually use it with .45 Colt, I would have to hit the target range and re-zero.

None of my clips have ever bent.

I like mine a lot. But then I like just about all four inch N frames.

It is always one of the most popular guns with visitors that want to shoot while they are here.

Gregg

 

[Hooch]

Dont know if I would spend the $$$ to convert it to moon clips............ its your money. Conquering the 454 casull is not a problem. I had one and loved the power of the revolver but did not enjoy shooting it.............. but I loved it. It was a brutal beast of a cartrige and I knew that as a caliber it was a destoyer. Although I will say I gained a whole new "UNAPPRECIATION" for hornaday ammo in that caliber........... it was junk. I had the SRH checked out by two smiths after I went thru it but every time I shot it the first shot was grand........... every shot after until shot six resulted in my face getting cut and it was not shaving and in time. I was layed off and my family always comes first before my toys so I sold it but............. its a awesome round................

 

[Lost Sheep]

Dont know if I would spend the $$$ to convert it to moon clips............ its your money. Conquering the 454 casull is not a problem. I had one and loved the power of the revolver but did not enjoy shooting it.............. but I loved it. It was a brutal beast of a cartrige and I knew that as a caliber it was a destoyer. Although I will say I gained a whole new "UNAPPRECIATION" for hornaday ammo in that caliber........... it was junk. I had the SRH checked out by two smiths after I went thru it but every time I shot it the first shot was grand........... every shot after until shot six resulted in my face getting cut and it was not shaving and in time. I was layed off and my family always comes first before my toys so I sold it but............. its a awesome round................

Very strange. I wish you still had the revolver. I love a puzzle. I would ask these questions:

What happened if you loaded only one round? Or only rounds 1 and 6?

Was the problem always on the same chambers?

Were primers getting blown?

If you were to fire the gun with a screen between your face and the gun, where would the screen get cut?

I do love a puzzle.

Lost Sheep

 

[modrifle3]

I don't like hornaday ammo either. I had issues with it in 45 acp.