Redhawk .45C/.45ACP?
- Thread starter Model12Win
- Start date
That particular model is just a bit more temperamental in its likes & dislikes with ACP than other single-caliber guns are. 
I have a dedicated .45 ACP Smith that does much better across the board, with its short ACP chamber.
The convertible Red is a neat idea, and a very clever way to shoot those two calibers in the same DA cylinder.
There are inherent drawbacks to that approach, though, and you can't expect the same level of consistent ACP accuracy in the gun that the .45 Colt loads provide.
Good luck 1st.
Denis
I have a dedicated .45 ACP Smith that does much better across the board, with its short ACP chamber.
The convertible Red is a neat idea, and a very clever way to shoot those two calibers in the same DA cylinder.
There are inherent drawbacks to that approach, though, and you can't expect the same level of consistent ACP accuracy in the gun that the .45 Colt loads provide.
Good luck 1st.
Denis
The attraction for me is the round butt and 4", the 45acp is icing on the cake. I'll reload 45 colt anyway so if I want low recoil I'm sure I can find a load. 45 colt will be my primary ammo through it. Acp is more of a conviemce or curio factor. On rare occasions may put some hot buffalo loads, though I guess not recommended (?), no desire for steady diet.
TruthTellers
New member
What grips did you use? I'm curious as since this is not a standard Redhawk grip most of the Hogue grips don't properly fit to it.
I used a standard set of finger-grooved wood Hogues made to fit a Redhawk.
They are not intended to perfectly fit a square-butt gripframe, but they do bolt right on.
They leave an open space at the bottom rear where the steel curves inward, but they're just fine for shooting.
Finishing up the testing with very hot & heavy BB .45 Colt loads using the abbreviated gripframe (which I do like, overall) just wasn't gonna happen.
Denis
They are not intended to perfectly fit a square-butt gripframe, but they do bolt right on.
They leave an open space at the bottom rear where the steel curves inward, but they're just fine for shooting.
Finishing up the testing with very hot & heavy BB .45 Colt loads using the abbreviated gripframe (which I do like, overall) just wasn't gonna happen.
Denis
Not only accuracy issues, but I've read a number of user reports citing function and fitment problems with Ruger's goofy proprietary moon clips in the Model 5032. They're not the same as the "standard" .45 moon clips that S&W uses in its .45acp wheel guns.
And if you don't buy extra clips from Ruger, there is, if I recall correctly, only one aftermarket source for clips that are compatible with the 45LC/.45acp model 5032.
And with a Blackhawk that used two different (dedicated) cylinders, you wouldn't need moon clips anyway.
TruthTellers
New member
Shot this today with both .45 Colt and ACP. Shooting the ACP out at 20 yards with my hands resting on a plastic ammo box gave me a 3 inch group with PPU ammo. I think that given more time and better ammo I could shoot a tighter group and don't believe there is an accuracy issue with ACP.
Of course, this was my gun.
If someone is considering this revolver and is put off by claims of inaccuracy with .45 ACP in it, don't believe it. Within 20 yards, you can hit a man's torso in single action. Double action under 10 yards semi rapid firing is fine too.
My 2 cents
Of course, this was my gun.
If someone is considering this revolver and is put off by claims of inaccuracy with .45 ACP in it, don't believe it. Within 20 yards, you can hit a man's torso in single action. Double action under 10 yards semi rapid firing is fine too.
My 2 cents
TT,
Your conclusion regarding the accuracy of the gun based on one load at 20 yards is useless.
You base your entire assessment of the gun's accuracy on ONE load.
You have no clue.
Try TWO guns, with MULTIPLE loads, at 25 yards, off a solid rest, and then I'll grant you credibility.
In the meantime, having done that & found both guns to be wildly variable with ACP loads, I give you none.
The guns CAN shoot decently with ACPs, but you may have to experiment to find a load that does.
You apparently stumbled across one your gun shoots well early on.
In no way is that an adequate evaluation of the model's capabilities, and in no way does it support your broad advice to disregard "claims of inaccuracy" by those who do have a basis for making qualified conclusions.
When I was getting 25-yard groups of 5, 8, and 13 inches as BEST groups in 8 different loads through both guns, my fact-based impressions of ACP accuracy differ greatly from your extremely limited experience.
Denis
Your conclusion regarding the accuracy of the gun based on one load at 20 yards is useless.
You base your entire assessment of the gun's accuracy on ONE load.
You have no clue.
Try TWO guns, with MULTIPLE loads, at 25 yards, off a solid rest, and then I'll grant you credibility.
In the meantime, having done that & found both guns to be wildly variable with ACP loads, I give you none.
The guns CAN shoot decently with ACPs, but you may have to experiment to find a load that does.
You apparently stumbled across one your gun shoots well early on.
In no way is that an adequate evaluation of the model's capabilities, and in no way does it support your broad advice to disregard "claims of inaccuracy" by those who do have a basis for making qualified conclusions.
When I was getting 25-yard groups of 5, 8, and 13 inches as BEST groups in 8 different loads through both guns, my fact-based impressions of ACP accuracy differ greatly from your extremely limited experience.
Denis
Last edited:
Dragline45
New member
I had alot of interest in this gun at one time, though that passed after all the reports I had read. Cool idea, but not well executed. A better option is the .45 Colt/45acp Vaqueros or Blackhawks.
roashooter
Moderator
DPris sums it up nicely
TruthTellers
New member
Denis
It's not a target gun with .45 ACP, I'll give you that. But at 20 yards, with the average load and average groups, it's plenty capable of hitting the torso of a man.
That's all I really care about when shooting .45 ACP in this gun.
It's not a target gun with .45 ACP, I'll give you that. But at 20 yards, with the average load and average groups, it's plenty capable of hitting the torso of a man.
That's all I really care about when shooting .45 ACP in this gun.
How would you extrapolate "average" based on one load?
How could you expect to be taken seriously in your advice to disregard "claims" by much more experienced shooters regarding the accuracy results we got?
If I used a load whose best (BEST) was 13 inches for 5 shots at 25 yards, if that torso you refer to turned sideways while shooting at me, I could easily miss the torso entirely.
All you care about?
What if you run out of the one single ACP load you've tried?
You hit WalMart & buy another brand, because they've never heard of yours.
Your groups open up to 8 inches. Or 10. Or 12.
Would you still then advise everybody to disregard the accuracy "claims"?
Would you still be satisfied with what your gun was doing for you.
Most of the rest of us would not consider that acceptable.
I certainly wouldn't.
And many of us expect more of a gun's accuracy than the probable ability to hit somewhere on a torso-shaped object.
I certainly do.
Torsos frequently don't hold precisely still while you shoot at them.
Torsos frequently don't stand right out in the open, fully exposed, while they shoot at you.
It may be necessary to shoot at only a part of a torso that's exposed, or to more precisely place a bullet on an animal.
And so on.
The point remains that you take it upon yourself to advise people to ignore much more extensive experiences with these guns than you have, from the lofty elevation of your one-load sampling at 20 yards, and expect to be taken seriously.
There's a thread running on one of the Ruger forums right now on the subject, and one poster in particular says he's had people bring him their convertible Reds for him to determine if the variable ACP accuracy they were getting was them, or the guns.
And it WAS the guns.
Note that plural- "guns".
As in multiples, as in well beyond your one-load expert opinion.
Seriously- like your gun all you want, love it, sleep with it, enjoy the bejabbers out of it. The issue is not you expressing that love, nor am I trying to talk anybody out of that Red model. Just get yourself some sort of at least a half-serious data base to support your advice, before you go around telling potential buyers who may be considering acquiring the Red to disregard the existing body of other peoples' experiences with it.
Go shoot 6 or 8 different ACP commercial loads, at 25 yards, off a good solid rest.
Come back with your results.
If they differ from mine or anybody else's that's fine.
We don't have a lock on data.
Just provide some MEANINGFUL numbers of your own before telling others to ignore what we've found.
And one load isn't meaningful data.
Target gun or not.
Denis
How could you expect to be taken seriously in your advice to disregard "claims" by much more experienced shooters regarding the accuracy results we got?
If I used a load whose best (BEST) was 13 inches for 5 shots at 25 yards, if that torso you refer to turned sideways while shooting at me, I could easily miss the torso entirely.
All you care about?
What if you run out of the one single ACP load you've tried?
You hit WalMart & buy another brand, because they've never heard of yours.
Your groups open up to 8 inches. Or 10. Or 12.
Would you still then advise everybody to disregard the accuracy "claims"?
Would you still be satisfied with what your gun was doing for you.
Most of the rest of us would not consider that acceptable.
I certainly wouldn't.
And many of us expect more of a gun's accuracy than the probable ability to hit somewhere on a torso-shaped object.
I certainly do.
Torsos frequently don't hold precisely still while you shoot at them.
Torsos frequently don't stand right out in the open, fully exposed, while they shoot at you.
It may be necessary to shoot at only a part of a torso that's exposed, or to more precisely place a bullet on an animal.
And so on.
The point remains that you take it upon yourself to advise people to ignore much more extensive experiences with these guns than you have, from the lofty elevation of your one-load sampling at 20 yards, and expect to be taken seriously.
There's a thread running on one of the Ruger forums right now on the subject, and one poster in particular says he's had people bring him their convertible Reds for him to determine if the variable ACP accuracy they were getting was them, or the guns.
And it WAS the guns.
Note that plural- "guns".
As in multiples, as in well beyond your one-load expert opinion.
Seriously- like your gun all you want, love it, sleep with it, enjoy the bejabbers out of it. The issue is not you expressing that love, nor am I trying to talk anybody out of that Red model. Just get yourself some sort of at least a half-serious data base to support your advice, before you go around telling potential buyers who may be considering acquiring the Red to disregard the existing body of other peoples' experiences with it.
Go shoot 6 or 8 different ACP commercial loads, at 25 yards, off a good solid rest.
Come back with your results.
If they differ from mine or anybody else's that's fine.
We don't have a lock on data.
Just provide some MEANINGFUL numbers of your own before telling others to ignore what we've found.
And one load isn't meaningful data.
Target gun or not.
Denis
roashooter
Moderator
Well said DPris...
TruthTellers
New member
Denis, I think if people are interested in this gun, they should buy it and try it for themselves because not every Redhawk will shoot the same.