Strength of NM Blackhawk vs Redhawk?

[cbnutt]

As was stated above, it depends on which NM BH you acquired. The regular convertible BHs are basically as stout as the RH, and will shoot anything appropriately labelled .45 Colt. Over the lifetime of the gun, you'd probably be better with the BH and hot loads since there are fewer wear points on a SA revolver. HOWEVER, if your gun is one of the midframe/Vaquero/flattop BHs that have been released recently, it is not rated to handle these loads at all, let alone on an extended basis.

So will the 44SPL Flattop be ok with a load like underwood sells, its listed at 1000 FPS ?

 

[NikA]

The .44 guns are a whole different story, and unfortunately I don't have a sample to measure on. The reviews and reloading articles I've seen have run tests up to Keith-level loads, which clock around 1100 fps out of similar guns and run pressures in the high 20ksi range (slightly faster and perhaps slightly hotter than Underwood). I believe Underwood when they say the load is safe in a given set of guns because they do enough testing to cover their insurance as a performance ammunition manufacturer.

 

[Dale53]

I find this thread quite interesting. I have both a Ruger Red Hawk and several Ruger single actions. Carefully, reading between the lines, and with little care as to Ultimate Strength of either platform, it is obvious to me, that either platform is plenty strong for any "REASONABLE" load in either .44 Magnum OR .45 Colt.

My needs have never put me in a position where I have any desire to blow up any of my revolvers. I HAVE used 'Ruger Only" loads but there is little reason on my part (even when I was younger and hunting actively) to use those loads in great quantity. I think the prudent thing to do, with either platform, is to simply reserve those loads when NEEDED for seriously Big animals. Either platform will handle "Ruger Only" loads and I have NO desire to exceed them. So, Ultimate Strength becomes moot to me.

Just sayin'...

Now, having said that, I am grateful for those willing to explore the limits (so I don't have to) and give us better performance than the manufacturers will give us. Elmer Keith, Skeeter Skelton, and John Linebaugh come to mind...

These days, I admit that Brian Pearce's articles as well as John Taffin's and Max Prasac's books (as well as others) have been most helpful to this ol' shooter.

Dale53

 

[22/45 Fan]

Not being the owner of either of these guns, I've been following this discussion with some interest.

As to the question of which gun is inherently stronger, I wonder if the point is really moot. How many of those Buffalo Bore rounds is the OP really going to shoot in the lifetime of either himself or the gun? Given the cost of the rounds and the punishment to his wrists and elbows, I expect the round count is going to be quite modest and plain-jane much lighter .45 Colt rounds will be the great majority.

Conclusion: that Super Blackhawk, despite it's "inferior" strength, will far outlast him.

 

[CraigC]

The Redhawk and Super Redhawk are stronger, period. It's funny one would mention Bowen, because he said so right in his own book. While the Super Blackhawk is plenty strong for a lifetime of standard pressure loads, the RH/SRH have enough wiggle room to push things a bit further. As mentioned, Brian Pearce has published loads in the 50,000psi range and I'm having a custom oversized cylinder fitted to one of my .44's with the express intent of using those loads in a Ruger single action. Along with utilizing the lower crimp groove in some of the heavyweight cast bullets I use.

 

[Arisin' Wind]

What I call the Andy-Canon commemorative .454 six-shot Redhawk.

I have always admired that handgun.

 

[454PB]

Something I've found and not discussed here is the problem of brass sticking in the Ruger SRH .454 Casull. I own two other .454 revolvers, a Taurus Raging Bull and a Freedom Arms 83. The identical very heavy loads that fall freely from them, will stick in the RSRH. Note here that both the Taurus and FA are 5 shot cylinders. From what I've read on the internet, this is caused by the characteristic of the Carpenter metal's ability to expand and then retract upon firing.