New Caliber in the Ruger Super Redhawk.

[ECVMatt]

Honestly it is frustrating when I see things like this from Ruger. They need to stop wasting time on stuff like this and focus on core product improvement or perhaps a redesign of a classic.

I wish they would introduce a "new" Redhawk built off of the Super Redhawk system. Like Bowen's GP44. Sell them in .454 and .44 with a 4" barrel and what a woods gun you would have. I would not be adverse to down sizing the frame to .44/.45 Colt only.

Or how about just keeping up with the GP100 demand.

Or how about a Ruger "American" version in .357 or .44 mag. Bring the price point down to about $500, keep the rotary mag and they could not keep up with demand.

The Hornet will be popular with the Ruger Collectors, but I can't see much other value.

 

[Brian Williams]

If I had one, the first thing I would do is have a gunsmith ream the chambers to K Hornet.

 

[Bazoo]

Hmmm, interesting. Definitely not a caliber I was expecting. I'd give it a go though. Be interesting to see a writeup on it.

 

[dfish1247]

The Super Redhawk is meant for calibers where the round goes off and all you hear is the National Anthem.

The hornet is a terrific low recoiling round for varmint duty and nearly laser beam accurate as well, but the srh especially a 9.5” barrel one, seems too unwieldy for such a small round.

On the other hand, this configuration would last an eternity. A Kenworth will hardly wear out over 75 years of only pulling an 8x6 lawnmower trailer.

 

[westernrover]

I think I like the Gates super magnums, having never owned one. I know Ruger would choose the slightly different 357 Max because they went that way in the past, and I'd be ok with that. The 375 would be awesome but it is too obscure in terms of available bullets. The 41 is almost as obscure. The 445 would be a cool option for widely available .429" bullets. I know the SRH doesn't support the 460 and everything the X frame would, and it seems in that platform they've gone the way of the burgeoning Legend series. Personally, I doubt I would buy any of the big bore stuff or anything that requires a super-long cylinder like that or the 444 in the BFR, because the only use I'd have for it is carry. But the 357 Max would be very tempting. I'd want 8 chambers in a SRH and all the barrel length options.

 

[Pat Riot]

The 22 Remington Jet had problems in a S&W revolver. On firing, the case backed out, making it hard for the cylinder to rotate. The Hornet may also?
View attachment 1182166

I guess I am not the only one that wondered about this.
———————————————


I was thinking about it and I have never heard anyone that I have ever encountered say “Gee, I wish I had a revolver (or any other gun) in .22 Hornet.”
This just seems weird to me.

Dear Santa Ruger,
Could you step up your DA revolver line production? I would really like a Redhawk .45 Colt / .45 ACP that operates reliably with both rounds.
I would also like to see more GP100s in stock near me. Preferably a snubby with a wooden Hogue grip and a red front fiber optic sight and a white boxed adjustable rear. Make it in blued and stainless for those that don’t want to have to settle on what’s available.
Also, some more of those .44 Special GP100s would be cool too.

I have been a good boy this year…Honest!

 

[Riomouse911]

Hmmm.

.22 Hornet? No thanks for me.

If we are asking for “hope they make it” guns; a 7.5” SRH in .357 Max to pair with a 20” RSI No. 1 in the same caliber, would put a dent in my wallet, toot sweet!

Stay safe.

 

[Milt1]

Hard to believe Ruger would do this! I'd like to know their chain of thoughts regarding the customer set that they thought this would interest. Speak up Ruger!

 

[CraigC]

I have a 21” Contender Carbine in 22 Hornet an I used to have. 10” Contender barrel in 22 Hornet.

The 10” barrel just did no light my fire so I wonder if the Redhawk revolver will be similar.

Then there is the cartridge set back in the cylinder.

I had the 10” Contender barrel rechambered to 221 Rem Fireball.

My 22 Hornet Contender carbine is a great short range (<100 yards) varmint rifle.

Final note, I built a 221 Rem Fireball 22” Contender carbine with Bullberry furniture and barrel. It is one of my most accurate rifles.

If I was going to shoot a .22Hornet at varmints with a handgun, methinks the Contender would be the proper platform. Not any revolver.

 

[adcoch1]

Looking for information about this revolver on Ruger's website makes me wonder even more what the target audience is supposed to be. And why don't they have a 6.5" and 7.5" srh in 454 casull?!

 

[OS/N]

I don't see the point of 327. 357 Maximum turns me on more. Nothing wrong with a 32, but in a rifle I would want about 63 grains of H2O case capacity for it.

They took the rim off the max and call it 350 legend now. It was the 351WSL at one time (1905/1907).

The 327 was once the 32WSL but it wasn't man enough to do what they wanted it for.

The 401 WSL was strong - 200grn at 2000fps for 2000f#. It pushed the limit of a blow back design, was hard to load, and kicked like a mule.

 

[CajunBass]

Heck I'd take the Security Six ; )
Y/D

That would get my interest.

Probably not enough to get me to buy one though.

 

[KansasTrapper77]

I just can’t imagine how heavy it’s going to be with a SRH frame and 9.5” barrel only bored with a .22 Cal barrel. That things going to be a pig.

 

[KansasTrapper77]

Maybe it’ll make a good donor for someone to get a .357 Maximum built into the frame and barrel.

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

If Ruger is gonna go off the rails why not make it a .223 or a 5.7x25 ? Do the half moon clips, you ain't gonna be in a hurry to reload with something like that.

 

[BBarn]

It was something relatively easy to do within the confines of the existing frame opening and cylinder length. The rimmed case is another plus for use in a revolver. Though I have fondness for the cartridge, it's chambering in the SRH doesn't interest me personally.

 

[KansasTrapper77]

If Ruger is gonna go off the rails why not make it a .223 or a 5.7x25 ? Do the half moon clips, you ain't gonna be in a hurry to reload with something like that.

Alright. You’ve convinced me. I want a Ruger SuperRedhawk in 5.7x28.

 

[Onty]

I’m assuming they announced this at SHOT show but I sure missed it. I’m curious how successful this will be. I find the gun/cartridge interesting but not sure I’d splurge $1500 for it.

Thoughts?

First, we had BFR in 22 Hornet:



Nnd now SRH.

I would say that BP100 or even SP101 would be much better platform for this round. Slim barrel only, of course.

I was dreaming about getting barrel and cylinder from S&W M648 (22WRM), install them on M66 and rechamber to some sort of 22 Hornet Short. Well, kids, schools, layoffs, etc., and dream remained just a dream. If I ever win big jackpot, one of the first thing I will do is to contact Bowen and ask him to make something similar I mentioned, but with new longer cylinder for full length 22 Hornet, and to slim the barrel on something like this:

 

[crestoncowboy]

If I was going to shoot a .22Hornet at varmints with a handgun, methinks the Contender would be the proper platform. Not any revolver.

I use the fn 5.7 for varmint/predator.

Id almost say a super super redhawk in 460 or 500 would outsell a 70 oz 22 hornet. Lol

 

[reddog81]

If Ruger is gonna go off the rails why not make it a .223 or a 5.7x25 ? Do the half moon clips, you ain't gonna be in a hurry to reload with something like that.

.223 would require a much longer cylinder, which would require a new frame, but they would probably sell 100X more. Of course .223 in a revolver would be a big headache with typical problems encountered when shooting bottlenecked cartridges in a revolver.

I'm kind of surprised they haven't come up with something that can handle 460 and 500 S&W, but I guess that market is pretty small. But if they are willing to put out something in 22 Hornet...

 

[CraigC]

I'd rather see Ruger legitimize the .500JRH than build some long frame monstrosity for the absurd S&W cartridges. However, if they did, it would be the best platform for them and measurably lighter than the X-frames.

 

[KansasTrapper77]

I'd rather see Ruger legitimize the .500JRH than build some long frame monstrosity for the absurd S&W cartridges. However, if they did, it would be the best platform for them and measurably lighter than the X-frames.

A Ruger Redhawk or Blackhawk in .500JRH would have me drooling.

 

[dfish1247]

Double action 500 JRH would be unreal. I’d be in for that.

 

[Onty]

I'd rather see Ruger legitimize the .500JRH than build some long frame monstrosity for the absurd S&W cartridges. However, if they did, it would be the best platform for them and measurably lighter than the X-frames.

I doubt that Ruger will go for .500 JRH. My feeling is that they will make something with case length 1.285", same as standard magnums and Ruger 480. And nothing wrong with that! If new cartridge could lunch 440-450 grains bullet at 1200 fps, and at pressure about 30-32 ksi. I bet that noted bullet will go right through even largest polar or kodiak bear.

Also I would suggest same cylinder length as on Redhawk and Super Redhawk.

 

[CraigC]

I doubt that Ruger will go for .500JRH. My feeling is that they will make something with cartridge length 1.285", same as standard magnums and Ruger 480. And nothing wrong with that! If new cartridge could lunch 440-450 grains bullet at 1200 fps, and at pressure about 30-32 ksi. I bet that noted bullet will go right through even largest polar or kodiak bear.

Also I would suggest same cylinder length as on Redhawk and Super Redhawk.

Might run afoul of the .500Special, don't recall its length. I would go for it but it would be a good bit more than that pressure wise. The JRH is 50,000psi and is already factory offered in the BFR.