My next bucket-list gun is probably the 2.75 inch barrel Ruger Redhawk .357 mag. While any number of the stores in my area can order a Redhawk for me, I have been unable to locate one on store shelves or for rent at the nearby ranges. Are there any Redhawk owners out there who can advise me on how comfortable/uncomfortable it is to carry this revolver concealed? I am 6'05" with a large frame, if that would factor into your advice. I am not bothered by the listed weight of the gun, but would like to know if it is reasonably possible to carry the Redhawk without printing.
Concealing a Ruger Redhawk
- Thread starter wmg1299
- Start date
Thats what I like to here..... Big Guns with lots of firepower concealed. Yes it can be concealed.
Horizontal shoulder holster if your fat. If your slim belt carry either OWB, IWB or appendix. Cover it up with an over garment jacket or coat.
when I carry big bad monster guns I like high rise cross draw or high rise pancake strong side. You know its there but its comfortable. Shoulder holsters work but it can flop around a bit without some sort of chest strap.
Horizontal shoulder holster if your fat. If your slim belt carry either OWB, IWB or appendix. Cover it up with an over garment jacket or coat.
when I carry big bad monster guns I like high rise cross draw or high rise pancake strong side. You know its there but its comfortable. Shoulder holsters work but it can flop around a bit without some sort of chest strap.
TruthTellers
New member
I'm a fan of the .327 in the SP101 because it gives an extra round over .357 in what is a very easy to carry and conceal revolver.
The Redhawk is neither and it gives you one round over the 7 shot GP100. When you're going up in frame size to get one more round in the cylinder, you're not going about things right. It will be a LOT easier to conceal and carry the GP100, which is available in a 2.5" barrel in .357.
The Redhawk is built for .44 Mag and larger calibers. Putting the .357 is nice, but it's not frame .357 works best in.
The Redhawk is neither and it gives you one round over the 7 shot GP100. When you're going up in frame size to get one more round in the cylinder, you're not going about things right. It will be a LOT easier to conceal and carry the GP100, which is available in a 2.5" barrel in .357.
The Redhawk is built for .44 Mag and larger calibers. Putting the .357 is nice, but it's not frame .357 works best in.
the Black Spot
New member
I frequently carry a 6 shot single action in 45 colt. Iwb or owb, pretty comfortably.
I am 5'-9" not fat but not a string bean.
I am 5'-9" not fat but not a string bean.
.357 Magnum. I get that. Large frame revolver? I get that, too. Now why pee away most of the .357s advantage with a 2.75" barrel??
When you are trying to conceal it, the bulk of the gun is in the frame and the grips. Barrel length makes little difference, and so I would want a 4" or longer, personally.
Have carried 6" and longer pistols, vertical shoulder holsters (I don't like the horizontal ones) from Bianchi and Uncle Mike. A good jacket is all I ever needed, even an old Army field jacket does the job, if it's not tight fit.
Carhartt coat? the brown ones? Nothing shows through those, and its not impossible the coat itself could stop some bullets..
When you are trying to conceal it, the bulk of the gun is in the frame and the grips. Barrel length makes little difference, and so I would want a 4" or longer, personally.
Have carried 6" and longer pistols, vertical shoulder holsters (I don't like the horizontal ones) from Bianchi and Uncle Mike. A good jacket is all I ever needed, even an old Army field jacket does the job, if it's not tight fit.
Carhartt coat? the brown ones? Nothing shows through those, and its not impossible the coat itself could stop some bullets..
HighValleyRanch
New member
I tried to have a Ruger Alaskan on my carry permit. That cylinder is HUGE!
Like 2.5 inches in width. So it was like having an expose hernia all the time.
Carried AIWB but the weight was like a boat anchor. Gave it up.
Like 2.5 inches in width. So it was like having an expose hernia all the time.
Carried AIWB but the weight was like a boat anchor. Gave it up.
I own a 2.5" GP100 and love the way it shoots. That gun is what got me interested in the Redhawk in the first place. I was hoping to find one at my LGS or a range so that I could compare the two side-by-side. Does the Redhawk feel significantly larger than the GP100 when carried IWB or OWB, or do they feel reasonably similar in size?
This for the most comfort. If I can carry a 5” 629 on a hike and forget its there a hawk around town will be no issue.
I have a shoulder rig & a belt carry rig for my 4-inch Reds.
Have a chest rig for my 2.5-inch Red .44 Mag.
I cannot imagine regularly carrying any of them concealed.
Considerably bigger, bulkier, and heavier than a GP.
I don't see it as practical, at ALL.
You CAN, but why on earth would you want to?
Denis
Have a chest rig for my 2.5-inch Red .44 Mag.
I cannot imagine regularly carrying any of them concealed.
Considerably bigger, bulkier, and heavier than a GP.
I don't see it as practical, at ALL.
You CAN, but why on earth would you want to?
Denis
HighValleyRanch
New member
Because in some states, open carry is prohibited even on forest lands and parks.
TruthTellers
New member
Don't carry either, but I can tell you in the hand the Redhawk is significantly larger than the GP100. Carried on the waist or under the shoulder will be a difference, no doubt.
These Redhawks, especially the shorter barrel ones, are more often carried in a chest holster in bear country.
Now, I do know a 120 pound woman who carries a Ruger Alaskan in a pancake holster, so it's not impossible, but to me it's impractical.
TruthTellers
New member
For the extra round, of course.
Going with a smaller caliber to increase cylinder capacity is fine, especially in smaller frame revolvers, but when you're moving up to a larger frame to increase the capacity, you're making an improper decision, IMO.
Not to mention, the round butt grip on those Redhawks is much less comfortable than the GP100.
Having two 4-inch Reds, one 2.75 Kodiak Red, two 3-inch GPs in .357, and the new 7-shot 2.5-inch .357 Mag GP, along with three or four four-inch .357 GPs, I have the Ruger .357 line-up fairly well represented.
I do not have a .357 Redhawk, I see no reason for it.
Much as I like Rugers, I don't see a snub .357 Red as having much practical value.
If I want a .357 snub Ruger to carry concealed, I get 7 rounds in a very totable package with the 2.5 GP.
I would gain nothing useful by trying to lug a Redhawk snub .357 around concealed.
Just trying to put this idea in perspective.
The Red is a BIG & HEAVY gun to carry concealed, regardless of barrel length.
Denis
I do not have a .357 Redhawk, I see no reason for it.
Much as I like Rugers, I don't see a snub .357 Red as having much practical value.
If I want a .357 snub Ruger to carry concealed, I get 7 rounds in a very totable package with the 2.5 GP.
I would gain nothing useful by trying to lug a Redhawk snub .357 around concealed.
Just trying to put this idea in perspective.
The Red is a BIG & HEAVY gun to carry concealed, regardless of barrel length.
Denis