newfrontier45
Moderator
More nonsense. The Redhawk is good to 50,000psi. It will easily digest loads that will turn a S&W into a fragmentation grenade....the cylinder not handling hot loads is something I know to be true.
More nonsense. The Redhawk is good to 50,000psi. It will easily digest loads that will turn a S&W into a fragmentation grenade....the cylinder not handling hot loads is something I know to be true.
To the na sayers of getting this gun is easy, well, you find him one.
When I was at the SHOT SHOW 2012, the Ruger rep told me they only make Redhawks once a year. They havE to retool the factory and make em all at once.
Yes, the S&W is prettier but the Redhawk is much stronger. U can rework the Redhawk action and they get pretty smooth. The Wolfe spring kit is worth it!
Well.... these loads were definitely not my hunting loadsI've no experience owning Rugers, but every time I look at them, they look bulky and unattractive to me personally. The amount of steel on the Ruger's is a lot more, and I've been told it's lower grade steel at that. I've also seen a Ruger .44 that had it's cylinder replaced from firing hot loads one time (due to expansion)...and a SW 629 fired the same loads for months and was fine.
When I first got my .44 mag. Redhawk I thought the trigger pull was unpleasantly heavy.
My used RH came with a fairly light trigger pull, I'm not sure how many lbs or what year it is though, SN# 503-079xx Anybody? did a search 1995
FoghornLeghorn post#30
Did you buy a used one? I had a Redhawk redone by Clark Custom Guns. Maybe you got mine.