Anybody hankerin' for the new Redhawk in .45LC/.45ACP?

You can see it here: http://ruger.com/products/redhawk/specSheets/5032.html

It uses moon clips for the autopistol rounds, and .45 Colts headspace on the outer part of the cylinder mouth. No swapping of cylinders: just load what you want to shoot!

I've wanted a revolver in .45 Auto since I first saw a Smith & Wesson M1917, and since I read Skeeter Skelton's short story: "Flight from Mexico". Never found a 1917 (Smith or Colt) for a good price, and none of the Smith M25s ever followed me home.

This new Redhawk, OTOH, is chambered in my favorite caliber, plus .45 ACP. I have medium hands, and I'm hoping to find one to see if those slim, round-butt grips let me reach the trigger. If it fits me, I'm planning to wait the prices down a bit and see if I can find one later this year -- or sometime next year -- for less than retail. I think I'm in love.

Anyone else?
Dirty Bob

I would imagine you might have the same issues of fouling that .38 Spl/.357 Mag have, based on case length.

?How the heck does a revolver headspace on the outside of the cylinder rim. I always thought it did it with the back of the case vs the front of the back of revolver frame. Indee, I had real issues with my RM adaption of Navy .36's and ended up counterboring the back of the cylinder to get the 0.004-0.006 space.

Hmmmm, I would definitely have to look one over and shoot one before buying. Not having to swap cylinders would be quite nice, but I would worry about the fouling issue.

Incidently, ?ever spent any real time trying to clean out the ring from a .38 Spl in the cylinder of a .357 Mag. Takes some serious work, at least in my experience.

Maybe this is a bad way to do it, but sometimes I will stick a copper bore brush on a drill and turn the drill on for a few seconds per hole in the cylinder. It seems like it does the trick--and I haven't seen any extra wear from it.

Copper shouldn't be a problem. I would tend to do the Chore Boy route - less potential wear. You might try that the next time.

Still, I found you cleaned and after when you inspected closely, the ring was still there. One thing I haven't done is squirt some of that foam cleaner in and leave it for a couple hours. That stuff is suppose to be great, but I haven't done that.

I've owned 2 Redhawks in .44 Mag~~5.5 & 7.5 both in SS...massive heavy guns...but very solid...I'm guessing this gun is for the .45LC hand loaders and the .45ACP is simply a bonus option....

I guess with the size of the case of a .45 Colt you could put a HEAP of powder in there. That would require some serious containment. Figure that the max load of TiteGroup for a .45 Colt with a 250gr lead bullet is only 6.3 grains - that leaves just a whole bunch of case space to fill.

So I guess a Super Red hawk might be appropriate.

45 colt is a pretty fun cartridge to load for. Quite a variety of loads you can do.

I think I will be looking for a load with Trail Boss. Something that is less snappy in recoil. Maybe a lighter bullet too. I have generally shot 250 gr at max load because I felt that the cowboys of the times didn't skimp on loads. My "toy" gun is the Navy with the wimp .38 Spl, probably a good idea seeing as they haven't a very sturdy frame, being cap 'n ball. So I shoot a 105 gr bullet over 3.2 gr Trail Boss. Hardly even rises up!

I'm seeing it as a .45 Colt platform. The ability to load the "pipsqueak" .45 ACP is a bonus. If I'm using .45 Auto in such a pistol, it's to save money, so some scrubbing doesn't bother me.

That long cylinder allows the 300 grain (or more) bullets, although my favorite load right now is straight out of the Lee manual and uses Blue Dot under a Lyman Keith-style bullet of about 255 grains. Feeds in my leever-actions and is a lot of fun in handguns. Pressure is low, but it penetrated 7 gallon jugs -- 42 inches(!) of water -- (all I had at that moment) and kept going. I found the bullet in the berm, and it almost looked ready to fire again. The cases almost fall out of my New Vaquero. It's amazing to get such performance with very little pressure. The load is one of those that can be fired in any .45 Colt firearm.

I also have a 300 grain WFN mould and am just getting started with it. I love that huge meplat. Even a subsonic-from-a-carbine load with such a bullet would hit pretty hard. I'm amazed at how hard a Magtech cowboy load hits from my Rossi 92 "trapper."

To see how the rounds load with the rimmed .45 Colt and the moon-clipped ACP rounds, take a look at this article on the Gunblast site. They have some useful photos with the review that show the cylinder pretty clearly.

Of course my enthusiasm is based on the assumption that I'll be able to reach the trigger. I still haven't held a Redhawk with the round butt and slim grips. I plan to use Grant Cunningham's method and place the finger on trigger, then wrap the hand around the grip to check if it fits me (gun checked to be sure, and pointed in a safe direction).

Regards,
Dirty Bob

That's a nice looking wheelie, especially the 4" barrel. I am not a big fan of snubbies, but 4" are really kool.

I want to be excited about this revolver, but can't say it fills any gaps in my collection.

If I didn't already have a 4" S&W 629, I might feel differently. In fact, if I didn't have that magnum, I'm pretty sure I'd be all over this Redhawk. Part of my ritual cleaning routine when shooting the 629 is tightening screws, which always bothers me, and that's not gonna be an issue with the Redhawk. In addition, I prefer the way Rugers can be more easily disassembled and I prefer that Ruger DA triggers have a shorter length of travel than S&W.

Additionally, I would love to do some experimenting with "Ruger Only" 45 Colt handloads.

Also, I think it would be fun playing with 45 acp and moonclips.

However, there are sentimental attachments between my 629 and me, so while I think the Redhawk is cool, I can't say I'll be adding it to my collection. There are too many other things at the top of the list for me right now.

Tennessee Jed wrote:If I didn't already have a 4" S&W 629, I might feel differently.

I never got bit by the .44 bug...I don't know why. The 29 and 629 are some of the most beautiful handguns of the 20th century, although they were priced out of sight when I started looking at handguns in my late teens and early 20s (Dirty Harry movies).

For some reason I gravitated to the .45 ACP, and then to its big brother, the .45 Colt. The .45 Colt's become my all-time favorite caliber, and my second favorite is the .303 Brit. If I could only have one caliber, the .45 Colt would be it. I love its history but also its efficiency. It gets a lot done at modest pressures, but it can be loaded up to much higher levels in the right guns. It's easy to reload, and any big-bore fan who can't find a .45 Colt load recipe they like isn't tryin' very hard.

I started with a single action revolver, followed by a leeeever action (Doc Wesson pronunciation), but I've wanted a DA revolver in .45 Colt for a long time. I just wished the Redhawk had a grip post like the GP100 and Super Redhawk. If the round-butt Redhawk fits me, though...

I need to start browsing more gunshops! I'm bound to run into a round-butt Redhawk eventually! And it will be fun to look for it!

Dirty Bob

I'd love to add a double action revolver chambered in 45 colt to my collection sometime. It is just hard to rationalize it when I already have a super redhawk chambered in .44 mag. I think I will put it on my long list...

DB - I have a friend out here in Evansville who shoots a .45 Colt pistol. It is a DA, and I think it's a Ruger, but I can't be positive. But he loads some REALLY STOUT loads - to the point I'm leery of shooting them in my SAA's. But he seems to like stout loads in general. He loads .45-70 to buffalo levels. Personally, I kind of enjoy shooting, and don't find getting my butt kicked by some house-moving load to be my cup of tea.