Redhawk 4" .45 Colt Review on Gunblast

[wheelgunslinger]

That sounds like a neat round, Jim. I'll have to check that out.

Hornady makes a big ole xtp hollowpoint in 452 also. Should be neato over some H110 moving about 1000fps.
Can't wait to get one of these in a carry rig.

Anybody want a Dan Wesson 357?

 

[OAKTOWN]

Nice. I've always wanted a DA 45 colt revolver that wouldn't come apart should I do something stupid and get one of my winchester loads into it.

I believe the Cor-Bon 200gr is a gold dot as well. Midway actually had them as components a while ago. They don't show up in the Speer catalog, the rep I spoke to had to do a little digging to find it.

FWIW - The 230gr 45acp winchester and speer hollow points have worked well in my lever action as well.

 

[Jim March]

Most projectiles designed for the 45ACP world work just fine in 45LC. The barrels are supposed to be the same bore, if they're standard.

Like the 357, it's hard to find a "useless" 45LC hollowpoint, at least where personal defense needs are concerned. In calibers like the 38Spl, 9mm and below I advocate being very particular about fodder for social service.

 

[usp_fan]

It's hard to find a useless .45 in general. Anything pushing a pill that size at speeds above 900 fps is going to make a hole with good penetration.

The more I read about this revolver, the more I like it for a general purpose woods gun.

--usp_fan

 

[Nightcrawler]

I told myself I wouldn't like the 4" Redhawk. At 47 ounces, it's heavier than my 629 Classic despite having an inch less barrel and a partial underlug.

I told myself it's ugly. I told myself that I never shoot barn-burner .44 loads anyway.

Then I handled one at the gun show. It doesn't feel as heavy as it is due to the balance. I bet it'd ride well in a Kramer holster (like the kind I use for my N-Frames). Holy crap, is it ever possible to just be happy with the wheelguns you have?

 

[Mac45]

While I love my M-25's, I've been wanting one of these for a long time.
Glad they brought 'em back

 

[Ultima-Ratio]

Ummm? usp fan?

You said-

The Smith is fully capable of pushing hot, but not Ruger Only loads. 255 grn bullet at 1000-1100 is easily doable out of the 25/625.


Excuse me? Who defined a 255@1100 as hot? Current powders will allow Saami safe pressures for the SAA/P model colts at the mentioned spec.
You were aware that the 1873 40gns of black powder ran a 255@over 1000fps?

Back to the OPs Redhawk, I note that Quinn mentions tight throats (.4515) and since I've been inside several of the Redhawks I'll bet the forcing cone needs a tad of blueprinting but the Redhawk is strong, I've re chambered many to 454 Casull over the years and none have broken .

The newer S&W 625s including the ultimate carry gun (IMHO) the Mountain Gun in .45 Long Colt is totally comfortable (after fixing throats and forcing cone) with 340s@1300fps (a bit over 1000fps@100yds!)

The newer enhanced stainless N frames are simply amazing both in strength, accuracy and of course the legendary smooth action.

 

[campbell]

The newer S&W 625s including the ultimate carry gun (IMHO) the Mountain Gun in .45 Long Colt is totally comfortable (after fixing throats and forcing cone) with 340s@1300fps (a bit over 1000fps@100yds!)

It should be mentioned that this load is way over the manufacturer's recommendations, and even Linebaugh, who is not one to shy from a hot .45 Colt load, keeps his loads at under 25,000 psi in the .45 Colt Mountain Gun.

 

[Ultima-Ratio]

campell

It should be mentioned that this load is way over the manufacturer's recommendations, and even Linebaugh, who is not one to shy from a hot .45 Colt load, keeps his loads at under 25,000 psi in the .45 Colt Mountain Gun.

You are absolutely correct campell, I should have mentioned that!

I also should have mentioned that we here have fired thousands of these loads through two Mountain Guns and an extremely rare pair of 625 Power Ports.

I also should have mentioned that with one example we had a peening problem with the center pin in the ejector rod that was improperly hardened..easy fix.

 

[Hawk]

This thing look very interesting. I've had one ear to the ground for a .45 Colt DA for a while without result. All the S&Ws x25s locally have not been so configured. I went a little ".45 Colt bugnutz" in '07 and consequently have wound up with a metric pantload of .45 brass and no DA to use them with.

I don't own a Ruger DA but did have a Security Six way back in a different life - I recall it had a perfectly horrid trigger and was refreshingly free of screws. My recent reintroduction to revolvers has left me wishing for fewer screws generally.

Does the Redhawk in question have the two different springs for trigger return vs hammer or is it of the "dual purpose" type? I believe I heard the Alaskan was one way and some other Redhawk the other but I can't keep them straight. I'd prefer the one more amenable to trigger tweaking.

 

[usp_fan]

Hawk,

The Redhawk uses one spring for both the hammer and trigger return functions. I understand the newer Redhawks have a decent DA and a workable SA pull.

Ultima--I won't argue with your results, only say I'm not comfortable with that load in the Smith 25. However, I'd have no problem with it in the Ruger. My favorite load for my Bisley is very similar to your load (325 grn over a large dose of Lil'gun).

My wife saw me posting to this thread and asked if I'd found my next toy--I believe the purchase is approved.

 

[kludge]

Got to see/touch one today.

I was at the Indy 1500 today, and my longtime favorite dealer had a 4" Redhawk in both .44Mag and .45Colt.

I also handled a S&W Mountain Gun in .45 Colt on a differnet table.

I'm not quite up to the required number of pennies yet, so instead of walking away with a new Redhawk, I walked away with a few impressions.

The look and proportion of the gun, well you just can't get it from a picture in a magazine. The size and heft are close to the Alaskan, but the proportions are more pleasing... rather like a scaled-up 3" Security Six.

The grip fills the hand in a very satisfying way... the Hogue grips on my SuperRedhawk and my Service Six just aren't quite big enough and I really have to concentrate on the alignment of my grip... this grip just falls into your hand right where it should be... full but not too wide, not too long, just right... as is the trigger reach.

(I'm hoping this grip might fit my SRH? Maybe? It would make a world of difference.)

The trigger was not quite as smooth as the S&W, but to be fair the Smith was not new. There was a hint of grit on the double action stroke, but it was not to my finger any heavier than the pull of my Service Six.. in fact the width of the trigger compared to the Six makes for less pressure on the trigger finger. What you do feel differently is the rotation of the mass of the larger cylinder, which will only get more massive with a half-dozen 250gr slugs in the chambers. The single action pull was, well, predictable.

The balance of the gun belies it mass, the 4" barrel means there isn't much leverage required to keep the barrel up; the well fitting grip helps to this end also.

So there you have it... and so will I... soon I hope. I celebrated by buying 100 new pieces of Winchester brass. In .45 Colt of course.

 

[Mr.Revolverguy]

Nice review. Thats what I would have figured because I have the 4 inch 44mag. Right now I am saving up my pennies as well. By that time I should have figured out if I want to get the 4inch 45 as a brother to the 44 or say I have that experience already and get the Alaskan 454 which more than likely will have 45 colt as the majority put through it.

 

[Baron357]

I have the .44 mag version and it is great. It is my first Ruger revo, all my others are S&W.

Not being too familiar with Rugers can somebody tell me if these 4" Redhawks accept the same grips as the other Redhawks? I don't like the exposed back strap.

 

[Stainz]

All Redhawks (RH) have a grip-shaped frame, so the exposed backstrap is a given. The Super Redhawk (SRH) have a post that the grip fits over, permitting a padded backstrap and a wider range of grips. The RH, like the Security Six, has a single spring lockwork with a long DA pull. The SRH is like the GP100, and smaller-scaled SP101, with a two spring lockwork - and similar grip studs.

My first DA revolver was an early new 7.5" .454 SRH, which I loved. My first S&W was a new 625MG (4") in .45 Colt, which quickly outgroupped the SRH with .45 Colt. I added a new SS 5.5" .45 RH several years ago, ordered along with another one for a friend - just before they were dropped - and put on closeout... we paid a lot for them. His had a warped frame - and he got another new one, which he sold. Mine had just too many QC issues - including burst casting bubbles between the cylinder bore exits. Both had consistent exit bores measured between .4520-.4525"... that problem was 'fixed' before they dropped them before. I kept mine for some time, selling it finally ~ a year ago... I had acquired a second 625MG in .45 Colt.

Both 625MGs would group better with 255 gr LSWC/850+ fps at 25 yd than the RH, much less the SRH. Of course, that SRH with 240gr XTP .454s (2k fps) was the best grouping - 1.5-1.625" at 44-50yd, scoped (Weaver 2x28), from sandbags. It was maybe 6+" with .45 Colt Cowboy Loads at 50yd - 4-5" at 25yd, while the RH was 4+", and the 625MG was 3+". The S&W grouped ~2" at 25yd with either 255gr LSWC or 250gr GDJHP ~840 fps, better than the RH. Also, the S&W ejected with never a problem, while the drooping RH ejector regularly slipped over the dimunitive .45 Colt rim, making reloading time-consuming. The trigger pull on the stock spring RH was long and often resulted in ftf's with my Federally-primed homebrews, while The lightly sprung S&W never had a ftf. The RH was a lot heavier, too.

Sure, the 625 cylinder, barrel, and frame is rated originally for .45 ACP - at least 22 kpsi vs the 'standard .45 Colt's 14 kpsi, but I won't quite run 'Ruger' loads in mine. I do like the better trigger, greater depenability, and assured reloading of the S&W - thus, the sale of my RH. No, I don't want either a 4" .44 or .45 RH - the SRH is a far better revolver - better lockwork, grip design, etc. A 4" SRH might interest me... I still know what to do to 'clean-up' a Ruger...

Stainz