Anaconda vs Redhawk

Which one would you buy given the option

  • Redhawk 5.5 44 mag.

    Votes: 35 59.3%

  • Anaconda Magnaported 44 mag used

    Votes: 15 25.4%

  • Redhawk 5.5 45 Colt

    Votes: 9 15.3%
  • Total voters
    59
  • Poll closed .
Gordo - yes, Hamilton Bowen does shorten Redhawk barrels, certainly to a 4" length: see his Web site, http://www.bowenclassicarms.com/. However, I wouldn't worry about .454 as the "ultimate snubby" - try his 5-shot Redhawk conversion to .50 AE! See http://www.bowenclassicarms.com/gallery3.html. IIRC, this particular gun is owned by Ashley Emerson, and I read a magazine column where the writer had shot it. To make matters worse (or is it that he caters to masochists???), Bowen then built a lightweight Blackhawk in the same caliber, weighing only 26 ounces - just over 1½ pounds! (See http://www.bowenclassicarms.com/gallery8.html.) You couldn't pay me enough to shoot that one! :eek:
 
OHHHH, and AHHHHH, I especially liked the "1917" but I mean the SUPER Redhawk with that barrel reinforcement that has the scope mounts milled in . The end of this enlarged area looks like a natural place to saw off and recrown the barrell.:)
 
Gordo - WHATEVER YOU DO, DON'T SAW OFF A SUPER REDHAWK BARREL LEVEL WITH THE FRAME!!! That "barrel reinforcement" is NOT intended to be used as a barrel alone. I spoke with a Ruger tech. support guy a few months ago about some problems encountered with a Super Redhawk, and in casual conversation, he mentioned having seen two SR's that had been mutilated in this fashion. He said that without the additional support of at least an inch or two of barrel beyond the frame extension, the metal of the extension erodes at a very rapid rate, since it's not designed to take muzzle gas directly applied to it. It will soon render the gun unrepairable - and Ruger won't do a thing about replacing it, since they feel that anyone who wants to convert a SR into a snubby has several screws loose! If you want a snubby conversion, go for the standard Redhawk rather than the SR.
 
Shortening Super Barrel

Although as mentioned one shouldn't cut the barrel flush with the support there is a picture in Bowen's book of a Super Redhawk snubby. What was done is cut back the frame extension to look like a standard Redhawk and then screw in a standard Redhawk barrel which was shortened.
 
It's to bad Ruger hasn't done that to make their Redhawks, then we'd have a Redhawk with a better trigger and better grip.
 
Gordo, you asked:
Wonder what kinda trash metal cant take "muzzle gases"?
Click to expand...
It's not "trash metal", but barrels are made of a very high-grade steel, that can stand up to thousands of rounds of bullets pushing their way through the rifling, superhot propellant gases following the bullet, etc. Their steel is of a special grade, which will stand up to this abuse. The frame of a firearm is NOT made from the same steel, as it doesn't have to take that kind of abuse.

A good example of this is to look inside the top of the frame of a .357 Magnum revolver that has fired a lot of full-power ammunition, particularly the 125gr. "quickies". You'll find a "flame-cut" just above the forcing cone, where the gases have cut into the top strap. The barrel won't suffer the same damage - it's a different, harder steel. This flame-cutting is the main reason why S&W went to the L frame for their .357 service revolvers, and Ruger did the same, going from the Security-Six to the GP100. The bigger guns have more metal on the top strap, and can better handle this sort of punishment.

So it's not "trash metal" - just a different kind of steel, perfectly adequate for its job. However, that job is NOT to stand up to thousands of rounds worth of propellant gases in close contact!

JohnK - check out new-production Redhawks. The trigger is vastly improved from earlier models, so much so that I don't know if a trigger job would be needed at all for double-action shooting. I don't know what Ruger's done with them, but whatever it is, I like it!
 
Go for the Colt

My advice is to go for the Colt.
yes, the Redhawk is cheaper. Yes you can abuse it. But do you want an anchor to abuse or a gun to shoot.
I bought my Anaconda when they came out to shoot full house magnum loads through and that is all it has fired. I have had no timing or endshake problems whatsoever. Of course, I shoot standard factory full house loads, not customized hunting loads. If you need more than a hot 240 at 1400 fps, I recommend either learning how to shoot straight or getting a rifle or a .454.
Yes, you will save some money on that Hawk...but a few years down the road, you will be regretting the beauty that got away, in favor of the homely one that could swallow the big loads but needed a six pack to look good....
 
:D

Sorry Tamara, but I just could not restrain myself from using a phrase that somebody else coined here a few months ago vis a vis the Redhawk's ability to digest hot loads.... It was the funniest thing I ever read in my whole life.;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top