The Redhawk Barrel Problem

Guns.com Vault
Gather App
T

tacotime

Single-Sixer
Joined
Sep 9, 2010
Messages
367
Looking at a Redhawk, blue, 7.5in, warning-stamped barrel, not seen the SN yet. Was there a serial range that was known affected by the barrel problem? Were repaired guns stamped by the factory?

About how many guns were affected?

I'd like to be sure this one was not in the affected group.

Thanks.
 
This question pops up from time to time.
There were VERY few Redhawk 44 mags that had an "issue" with a barrel problem. It was a mystery for a while at Ruger but was eventually discovered that the lube on the threads used to assemble the barrels to the frame should not be allowed to set up. This didn't happen often. In fact,, there were only a couple of guns that had failures of the barrels due to this.
I know.
I had one do it to me.
I think mine was the first one observed.

If I had to guess,,, I'd say buy that Redhawk w/o worry.
 
I read on one post that the issue was limited to stainless guns... does that make sense?

Looks like this gun is 1987 approx.
 
Contender... What is the issue? Is it thread galling, with threads stripping if barrel is removed? Or, is it snapping off the barrel at the receiver on a Super Redhawk? What exactly was the problem, and what exactly was the cure?
David Bradshaw
 
The problem was your barrel broke off at the threads when you shot it. Kind of disconcerting I bet. Maybe Contender will tell us the whole story of his. It should be interesting?
 
That would make it a real CCW gun right? ......... a defacto Alaskan!

I have thought of an Alaskan in the .480 to go with my full size in that caliber but I'd be less than charitable if my barrel lobbed off like that ..............

Life's a bugger and then ......... well .......... it gets worse!!

Three 44s
 
The question was asked about serial number range, but is there a way to determine if this is an issue by visual inspection?

Or does this require a return trip to Ruger?

Thanks -

Monty
 
I am pretty sure it was only stainless revolvers that suffered the problem. I would not worry about it at all on a blued Redhawk.
 
The issue with the barrels was very limited in scope (i.e. one particular employee was doing it wrong).

It was not galling of the threads but an incorrect lubricant applied when the barrel was threaded in. The lubricant allowed the formation of stress corrosion cracking at the front of the of the stainless barrel shank where the frame/barrel interface was. Once the issue was identified, the correct lubricant was used and the problem went away.

If the gun you are looking at is blued, you are good to go, they never had issues with the blued guns.
 
98Redline has it correct.
It was on the Redhawk, NOT the Super Redhawk.
In fact I was told that the Super Redhawk was designed due to the fact that the barrel seperating from the frame was at first percieved to be a strength issue where the barrel met the frame. It took a while for them to figure out who & why it happened.
As for my story, I've written it before, but I'll repeat it again briefly.
I purchased a nice Stainless Redhawk, with rings, and proceeded to enjoy it. A very accurate Redhawk. I still have an old target somewhere with a single hole, 6 rounds, 50 yds, that the entire hole measures LESS than 1 inch. I never shot factory ammo in my gun, but I kept excellent records as to the test ammo I tried. I won't relate my exact pet load, but it was on the lower end of the loading chart, NOT a barnburner thumping load. Very comfortable to shoot, and extremely accurate.
Well, one day, out rambling around the mountains with my GF on my ATV, we stopped for a break. I unlimbered my scoped Redhawk, and went to shoot a Pepsi can an idiot had thrown out. (I take out my trash & others as well. I figured to ventilate the can a bit first.)
At my very first shot that day, two thing went through my mind immediately. One, I missed, and two "something" flew forward. I first thought; "my scope". It was the scoped barrel, found laying forward & to the right of where I was standing. Seperated right at the frame. All the threaded portion was still inside the frame.
I sent it back to Ruger with a detailed explaniation of how & when it happened. I gave them my detailed reloading & shooting notes. They sent me a release form (to say I wasn't injured,) & they replaced my gun.
It took a few years before they figured out what happened & why. Or at least it took a few years for them to tell me.
 
I called Ruger to ask about this, and the nice lady on the telephone told me that she had no knowledge of this.

I stated that it may have occurred prior to her time there, and she referred me to Jay Hanson, their "Ruger collector," in CT, and she gave me his telephone number in CT. She also stated that he is responsible for the "gunblast.com" website.

I tried his telephone number, and his voice mailbox was full, so I was unable to leave a message.

Can anyone offer any more information on this?

Thanks, and thanks to the OP for allowing me to ask this - it sounds like the blued models are not affected.

Monty

P.S. edit: Thanks, Ty. You were posting while I was typing.
 
Contender... Crystal clear description of mechanical failure with your Redhawk. (Took me a while to decrypt GF=girl friend!) Most bizarre. I have heard of thread-stripping when stainless barrels were unscrewed from a Redhawk or SRH----don't remember which.

I appreciate hearing your direct experience. Did the replacement revolver live up to the accuracy of the original? I measured chamber-to-bore runout of some early Redhawks and found them spectacular, such as .000"-to-.002" on all six. I have a feeling your original Redhawk would measure tight on chamber alignment and, to boot, have a short, concentric forcing cone. (As I have said, hogging out the forcing cone does not cure the accuracy deficit of serious chamber-to-bore runout.)
David Bradshaw
 
Interesting, I have an 84 vintage stainless redhawk. Are there any tell tail signs that I might look for??

Thanks,
Stephen
 
led said:
Interesting, I have an 84 vintage stainless redhawk. Are there any tell tail signs that I might look for??

Thanks,
Stephen
Click to expand...

Is the barrel still on it?







sorry couldn't resist........!
 
Yes the barrel is still on it. :) I just recently traded for it. Overall its in excellent condition and it shoots great.

Later,
Stephen
 
I would think by now all SS Redhawks would have exposed the problem.
At least having heard of that, I bought a 'shooter' and passed on a safe queen.
 
David, I had to laugh a bit at stumping you with GF. That first Redhawk was a scary accurate gun. The very first rounds out of the gun with a new scope (Leupold) at a large target at 50 yds away put 6 rounds touching mostly, where the center of the group just 3" left of center. After a little scope adjustment, it was dead on at 50 yds. Once I did a bit of reloading, the groups shrank. Uncanny.
However, the replacement Redhawk,,, well, it just never has lived up to its sibling. The best I've done is right around 2" at 50 yds, with more often, closer to 3" groups. That's scoped, and off a bench & rest.
It's a bit of a disappointment since the other one was so accurate. Oh well,,,,,,,,,,!
 
Contender... thanks. As letting go of your Olympic Redhawk illustrates, there is no such thing as a GOOD CHEAP EDUCATION. As the first International Revolver Championship approached, I took my 10-1/2" Silhouette Super to Ruger to have the barrel set back, as the forcing cone was beginning to look like a grain funnel. I got it back in time to check my sight dope, then head to Camp Curtis Guild National Guard range in Massachusetts.

Ran into Bill Ruger, Jr. "By the way, David," said Ruger, "we replaced the cylinder." The original cylinder was bubble-wrapped in the box. I hadn't even looked at it. "The ratchet is ground off; make a good pencil stand."

I flipped out! What if the chambers didn't all track? I rounded up Kim Kirchner, and put the hammer down for Dick Riley's range in Hooksett, NH. Sight & accuracy dope checked out. I finished by dropping my sights at hitting 4x4 turkeys in the leg at 165 yards. The leg is 2-1/2" or 3" wide. With that, I could relax and concentrate on shooting, which is difficult unless my equipment is "squared."

Two super shooters arrived from California in a Porche, having driven at Cannonball Run speed, well over 100 mph, according to them, pretty much the whole way. They told me that four of them had purchased NINETEEN Super Blackhawk 10-1/2" .44's, in the process weeding out all except one for the championship.

Your subsequent Redhawk sounds typical of many, printing 2"-3" @ 50 yards. Many Model 29's of the era were capable of 2" to 3" inches at 100 yards. In silhouette competiton some M-29's held up very well, but you could fill a truck with the ones that fell apart. Yours was silhouette-accurate until the barrel sailed downrange. Phil Briggs of Arizona campaigned the Redhawk hard and well.

I still wonder what sort of lubricant-induced corrosion took place. Perhaps Ruger also made an adjustment at the corner of the threaded shank and shoulder of the barrel.
David Bradshaw
 
Forgive me but I am not buying the lubricant story.
Imagine the factory. All assembly workers dip their threaded ends in a drum of lubricant, but ONE of them somehow managed to smuggle in a jar of last year's BBQ grease...
That's preposterous. $20 says that one worker over-tightened his barrels instead of shaving the shoulder.
 
RKBA4CA,, it was NOT a different lube,, it was the fact that the worker allowed the lube to sit on the barrels threads over a time period & it changed it's properties by drying out. Believe me or not,, but I'm the one who lived it, I'm the one who followed up on it, and I'm the one who personally discussed it with the people at Ruger.
 
Well, you just defined NOT a lubricant problem. You've defined improper torque problem. Just what I thought :)
 
If I remember correctly, the barrels were lubed on a Friday, allowed to sit over the weekend, and then installed on the frame and torqued. The lube had dried some changing its properties and the barrels were over torqued.
 
John Taffin was the one who published the lubricant reason in American Handgunner May/June 2002 as well as on sixguns.com

http://www.sixguns.com/range/454_super_redhawk.htm
 
I have a 5 1/2" stainless 44 mag Redhawk that I bought new. The serial number dates to 1985. I have
fired it some, but not a great deal with my standard full power load with JHPs of 24.0 grs of W296. So,
is there any way, short of wating to see if the barrel flies off some day, to find out if my gun has a
barrel problem?
 
Does anyone know if the problem was limited to the 5.25 inch stainless guns, or were there some 7.5 inch guns known to fail?

And were these truly limited to a brief short run of guns, or did the issue show up in various years of manufacture? I'm looking at a 1982 gun here.

Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
Super Redhawk problems
Replies
12
Views
722
Neon Vernon
N
FHBrumb
Redhawk Project
2
Replies
44
Views
1K
drycreek
drycreek
G
The 10 inch Redhawk 44 mag
Replies
9
Views
485
contender
contender
F
Redhawk (NOT the super) question.
Replies
18
Views
776
frontstuffers
F
contender
Question; Super Redhawk
Replies
5
Views
316
375hh1973
375hh1973

Latest posts

Back
Top