Author Topic: Opinions of the Ruger Redhawk? (Read 2481 times)

S.B. · « **on:** June 10, 2004, 11:54:56 AM »

Any Redhawk shooters out there? I'd like to have some opinions of this pistol with a scope on it. I had one several years back and the bore was very rough but, I still have the fire lapping kit to rectify this one. Anything else I should be aware of before taking the plunge? How do they hold up with a scope mounted on the barrel mounting system?

deerstalker · « **Reply #1 on:** June 10, 2004, 01:50:07 PM »

:cry: You may not like this, but here goes. I have nothing nice to say about the Ruger company. I sent in a .41 mag to be looked at and was took after 4 weeks that the gun was broke, the smith had crack the frame trying to remove the barrel, they push off onto me a .44 Redhawk that I didn't want in the 1st pace. 2nd I {had} a 6.5x55 swed in model 77, would fire 4 times and the firing pin would break, sent it back 4 times same results, the last time I was told that there was nothing wrong with the rifle, and would not do anymore with it. I got rid of the boat anchor. I do have a a Ruger .22 that has worked flawlessly, I just hope I never have to sent it in for a repair. I sure there are some folks out there that swear by old Bill Ruger, and his guns, but as I said you may not like it, just my 2 cents. Richard..

S.B. · « **Reply #2 on:** June 10, 2004, 05:07:26 PM »

Don't worry about my not understanding about your troubles with Ruger. I've been there myself, just thought I'd try another one hoping they had improved some since the last one. Maybe I should stay with the S&W brand? Thanks for your honesty.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #3 on:** June 11, 2004, 02:31:40 AM »

Quote from: S.B.

Any Redhawk shooters out there? I'd like to have some opinions of this pistol with a scope on it. I had one several years back and the bore was very rough but, I still have the fire lapping kit to rectify this one. Anything else I should be aware of before taking the plunge? How do they hold up with a scope mounted on the barrel mounting system?

Well, I have a Ruger Redhawk in 44 MAG. I have a red dot mounted on it and I do not have any problems at all. I have well over 2000 rounds fired through it and it is flawless. I have a Super Redhawk in 454 Casull and I have not had any problems with it. I have a Ruger Blackhawk in .30 carbine and not any problems there either. I have owned Rugers for over 20 years and have had nothing but great luck with them. I have a buddy that had a small problem with his MarkI and Ruger fixed it very quick and did not charge him a dime. I will always own a Ruger Redhawk in 44MAG, because I just love the gun. :grin:

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #4 on:** June 11, 2004, 02:35:20 AM »

Quote from: S.B.

Don't worry about my not understanding about your troubles with Ruger. I've been there myself, just thought I'd try another one hoping they had improved some since the last one. Maybe I should stay with the S&W brand? Thanks for your honesty.

I have had several S&W revolvers. I have always gone back to Ruger. I also had the S&W500 but sold it and kept my BFR in S&W500 MAG. IMHO Ruger and Magnum Research make stronger revolvers.

Wlscott · « **Reply #5 on:** June 11, 2004, 03:10:37 AM »

Put me down as a Ruger fan too. I have a SRH in .44MAG that I wouldn't part with for anything.

CASE · « **Reply #6 on:** June 11, 2004, 04:18:31 AM »

I HAVE A REDHAWK 5 1/2 , A SBH 7 1/2.. A SUPERREDHAWK 7 1/2 FOR YEARS , IVE SHOT MANY LOADS OUT OF THEM WITH NO PROBLEMS OR BACK TO THE FACTORY .PROBS . . NEVER HAD ANY SHOT LOOSE ....... . HOWEVER IVE HAD , SOME SMITHS IN NEED OF REPAIR AFTER A GOOD BIT OF SHOOTHING ... I THINK THE RUGERS A RE A BETTER HUNTING GUN THAT CAN CONSITENTLY TAKE HEAVY LOADS .AND SHAKE THEM OFF ... HOWERE I JUST CANT PART WITH MY SW MOD 19 4INCH ..LOL HOWEVER THE SBH .I FOUND IS MUCH HARDER TO SHOOT WELL ...

leverfan · « **Reply #7 on:** June 11, 2004, 08:29:49 PM »

Yesterday, my wife and I took a few guns to the range (CZ 85B, High Standard Double Nine, Kel-Tec P32, S&W M60, and a Redhawk 44). We were trading guns around, popping balloons at different ranges, and seeing who could pop all of their's first. I thought that the High Standard 22lr would be her favorite, but she said that she liked the Ruger best of all. It has gone in for repair one time, but Ruger fixed it right, and fixed it for free, so I have no particular complaints on that score. I quit scoping handguns a few years back, so my 5.5" blued Redhawk just sports open sights, but it pops balloons and rings gongs just fine. It's also my number one trail gun and hunting handgun for the past few years.

I think that the Super Redhawk is too ugly to own, but it certainly appears to be strong enough for any reasonable task. Since regular Redhawks are easily scoped, if that's your cup of tea, I would go with the non-ugly gun.

44hunter · « **Reply #8 on:** June 12, 2004, 01:07:02 AM »

I own 2 Ruger Redhawks one which was inherited and is over 20 years old. Both are great shooters and neither have ever needed to be sent in for repair. I shoot pretty strong handloads that woul destroy any S&W revolver and after the deal Smith made with the Clinton administration I would never buy any gun from them. The new owner still has not renounced the deal made by the previous owner. The only other double action revolver I would buy would be a Dan Wesson.

S.B. · « **Reply #9 on:** June 12, 2004, 03:56:08 AM »

.44hunter, People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Look in every corner of the closet and you'll probably find dirt. Just what reloads do you shoot that would destroy a S&W pistol? My original question wasn't meant to start another argument over who's toy is better. Rather to get honest opinions from people who have and own one of these pistols.

44hunter · « **Reply #10 on:** June 12, 2004, 01:36:57 PM »

S.B. I do not live in a glass houses nor do I "throw stones". Like I said I own 2 Ruger Redhawks both with scopes and there are some of the finest revolvers on the market. The Dan Wesson or the Freedom Arms are certainly superior to the Ruger, both the Taurus nor the S&W are inferior guns. There are several commercially loaded 44 Mag. rounds that clearly state on the packaging not for use in S&W revolvers. My hand loads are hot but perfectly safe in a reliable strong revolver. Many load books also contain loads that are listed as unsafe in S&W revolvers. I have owned several revolvers from many manufactures and none of them have been as good out of the box as my 20 year old Ruger

oso45-70 · « **Reply #11 on:** June 12, 2004, 06:22:15 PM »

Its sure hard to beat cold hard facts.

JOE MACK · « **Reply #12 on:** June 12, 2004, 07:26:23 PM »

I've got more than a few Rugers. One, with some 25,000 rounds of heavy,hot hunting handloads still performs just fine and these rounds would have sent a Smith back to the factory a couple times for rebuilding. I don't load for my Smiths anywhere near as hot as loading for the Rugers. I believe it to be a run of bad karma. I like my Smiths, but for durability, give me a Ruger anytime. :wink:

S.B. · « **Reply #13 on:** June 13, 2004, 04:01:01 AM »

Unless I'm mistaken, SAAMI has set pressure limits on all the ammo loaded today. I agree that nothing loaded by a an ammo manufacturer would exceed their limits, unless it would have been renamed to differentiate it from oriiginal ammo(.44special and .44magnums). Still maybe you know something I don't, where did you get you information? My reference to glass houses was in regards to your statement about he Klinton years, Bill Ruger was no angel in this time frame either! Still a lot of the posts on forums today seem to get off topic to serve a responders agenda rathir than deal with a posted topic. My original question wasn't to start another thread of my toy is better than yours.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #14 on:** June 13, 2004, 06:13:27 AM »

I think you will find that everywhere you go. The thing that has taken me a while is, sifting through all the information gathered and weed out the bad stuff and you will get your answer. But you will not go wrong with a Ruger Redhawk. Smith & Wesson looks nice but Ruger will last longer.
IMHO :grin:

Prof. Fuller Bullspit · « **Reply #15 on:** June 13, 2004, 12:22:07 PM »

I have two Redhawks. The .44 is outstanding. Smooth bore and chambers, light crisp trigger and a joy to shoot. The .45 is rough but shoots ok.

I've had good luck with Ruger's repair department. I bought a Vaquero that had been abused. Ruger gave me a new cylinder for free (shipping the gun back to them cost me $50.00 though).

If I was buying a gun for carrying a lot and shooting a little I would get a Smith and Wesson Mountan gun. (I wan't one!) For shooting a lot I always pick my Rugers.

leverfan · « **Reply #16 on:** June 13, 2004, 08:35:31 PM »

Not all ammo makers belong to SAAMI, and there's no law saying that an ammo maker has to adhere to SAAMI specifications. Non-SAAMI and non-CIP ammo makers are not bound to adhere to the pressure and length standards set down by those industry oversight groups. If you make a load that's likely to significantly shorten the useful lifespan of guns other than Redhawks/Super Redhawks, you just make it a little on the long side, so that it'll only fit in a Ruger's slightly longer cylinder. Call it +P, put your legal disclaimer on the package, and it's off to market.

Here in Washington state, where Garrett started his little business, his ammo used to be the only 44 mag factory ammo that you could legally use to hunt elk. We no longer have the strict 100 yard energy requirements here, but needing to have Garrett's ammo in your gun to be legal went a long ways towards building his business, I'm sure. A hunter could cook up his own loads, but you were required to shoot them over a DFW chrony to prove they had enough oomph.

Now, you can legally hunt elk with a 25 ACP, if you can find one with a 4" barrel. :? There are "recommended" loads, however, on the DFW website.

ice · « **Reply #17 on:** June 18, 2004, 05:27:02 AM »

I have owned a 5 1/2 Redhawk for many years. It has been an excellent handgun.
I prefer open sights and LBT style bullets @ 1100 to 1200 fps.

Twanger · « **Reply #18 on:** June 18, 2004, 08:30:30 AM »

I had the pleasure of shooting a 44-mag Redhawk w/ 9.5" barrel about two months ago.
It was sweeeeeet. Very managable recoil.
I've never shot a high-powered handgun before, and still managed to put in a 1.5" 6-shot group at 10-yds one handed.
I'd buy one of these guns in a heart-beat.
A long eye relief scope is kinda weird to shoot with.
I'd suggest a BSA red-dot. That's what I've got on my White Javelina pistol.

oso45-70 · « **Reply #19 on:** June 18, 2004, 06:23:49 PM »

Twanger,
I find some of these posts kinda strange, I have a Browning safe full of ruger guns, Some of the revolvers i have had for many years and have never had one fail me yet. The SRH--RH--SBH--BHs I don't know how many i have now, haven't counted them for a while but its a bunch. I don't just leave them in the safes either,,, I shoot them and i shoot some hammering loads through them and i have never had a moments problem
with them. I just don't understand the problems some people have with them.
Deerstalker,,, I'm sorry you have had bad luck with your rugers, I wish you had my good luck them............ stay Safe.........Joe...................

Mohawk · « **Reply #20 on:** June 19, 2004, 07:32:35 PM »

They are strong guns.

fast*eddie · « **Reply #21 on:** June 21, 2004, 12:50:45 PM »

OSO 45-70 ----- You forgot to mention your AARP Membership ! :eek:

GhosTT · « **Reply #22 on:** June 21, 2004, 10:54:44 PM »

Sorry

GhosTT · « **Reply #23 on:** June 21, 2004, 10:57:52 PM »

but i've never seen any factory ammo that state on the packaging not fyou'll not find me arguing that a Ruger is stronger than a S&W, because honestly they or use in S&W revolvers... i'd think that in todays age of lawsuits, any ammo manufacture would be crazy to make a .44 magnum round that wouldnt be safe to fire in any revolver so chambered in proper working condition. i know Garrett and Bufalo Bore makes some hot rounds...but i think they are still ok to shoot in a S&W. now there is a difference in "not being safe to fire in a S&W" and shooting a S&W loose in 500 rounds where the Ruger is still chewing them up and spitting them out after 500 rounds..."

Yer gonna give him the wrong Idea.
SW may not "BLOW UP" with Garrett loads but they were designed for guns like Rugers, NOT Smith and Wessons.

For a True powerhouse, that won't shoot loose..........RUGER

oso45-70 · « **Reply #24 on:** June 22, 2004, 08:18:04 AM »

Fast* Eddie
I noticed you didn't list yours either, Theres a lot I didn't list, Just put the ones that Americans might recognise................Joe.............................

Larry VeR.458 · « **Reply #25 on:** June 24, 2004, 01:41:12 PM »

Both me and my father have a .44 mag Super Redhawk, and I just bought a Super Redhawk in .454! (haven't shot it yet

) I agree with Redhawk1 that Rugers are just darn tough. I never had a BFR, probably never will because I am satisfied with what I have but they look cool too. Any caliber over .45 Colt or .357 Mag. I'd make sure it was a good strong revolver because we all know how fun it is to shoot the "hot" stuff out of these big boomers! ....and you can't go wrong with a Ruger. :grin:

ice · « **Reply #26 on:** July 12, 2004, 07:21:33 AM »

The Redhawk is a very good double action revolver for hunting. I have hunted with one for years.
I keep hearing that Ruger customer service is going down the tubes. So far I have not had to use their service.

Jim n Iowa · « **Reply #27 on:** July 12, 2004, 02:29:29 PM »

SB
I just acquired my 2nd Redhawk buy trading in a Taurus. I still have 4 44s but the mags are all Ruger. If I had done my homework I would have started out with a Redhawk 7.5 and scoped it. Today I am there but having spent alot of money doing so. I believe in the Ruger fire arms.
Jim

ftw · « **Reply #28 on:** July 13, 2004, 04:21:57 PM »

I was lucky enough to get a 7.5 Redhawk in .41 magnum late last deer season. It is stainless with the built in scope attach scallops. It was already equipped with a 2X Pentax scope.

Besides the fact that I am a .41 fan I really like this gun. I changed the grips and took it to the range. I had a lot of fun shooting it and found it accurate and easy to shoot. I hunted with it the last few weeks of deer season but the deer did not cooperate. It will be my primary deer firearm this season.
I have never cared for the Super Redhawks on looks alone. I think that big frame and smaller barrel is really ugly. I sure others think it is beautiful. :lol:

I own and have owned Smiths,Taurus,Colt,and Rugers and luckily have never had a problem with any of them. Customer service can make or break your firearms experiences based on if you had good or bad luck with them.

TScottO · « **Reply #29 on:** July 13, 2004, 06:25:59 PM »

The RedHawk is a nice gun and will last you a long time. Its a heavier built gun than the Smith but I dont consider the Smith weak by any means. Im not one to hot rod my guns. If I want more power than a 250-300grain bullet around 1200 fps can give me I go with a bigger caliber and not put my firearms through any unnecessary punishment. In reality more power than the 44magnum in a Smith or a Ruger will give us, for North American game, is really just to have more ohhhh ahhhh response. If you want a gun for shooting powerful stuff I would suggest going with a 454 or bigger.

Be Safe,
Scott