What can a 7.5" SRH/SBH do ....

P

Pond James Pond

New member
…. that my 4” Redhawk can’t?

I guess I am just trying to get a feel of what I have and where it stands in the grand scheme of things. As some already know, I am toying with the idea of getting a second Ruger revolver. It might also be another .44Mag.

Getting it would mean major sacrifice and adjustment within my collection. For that reason I need to know what I have so I know what more an additional revolver would bring to the table since it would come at such a cost in other respects not to mention the financial.

So imagine a 7.5” SBH or SRH with a scope and my 4.2” Redhawk with a Weigand scope ring mount and scope.

Apart from great velocity and therefore a bit more range as well as slightly less felt recoil, what could the 7.5” variants do that my 4.2” cannot?

(Plus would a scope be at risk of muzzle flash from a 4” barrel?)

No nonsense assessment, please.
 
Facts:
--longer sight radius if shooting with the guns sights (lost with added optic)
--likely but only potentially more velocity with longer barrel
--more barrel is more weight... is less felt recoil
--longer barrel moves *BLAST* further away from shooter, this is noticeable
--more weight is also SLIGHTLY less physical beating on added optics, but not enough to matter
--radically different "look" to the setup, more appealing to most
--more difficult to carry on-person, less choices with holsters

You've probably made a half dozen threads on the subject of you getting a Ruger something-or-other chambered in .44 or .45 now. If you end up getting NOTHING, you'll be deserving of 50 lashes with a wet noodle at this point. :p
 
You've probably made a half dozen threads on the subject of you getting a Ruger something-or-other chambered in .44 or .45 now. If you end up getting NOTHING, you'll be deserving of 50 lashes with a wet noodle at this point
Click to expand...

Don't I know it! I almost feel ashamed hitting the submit button!..... Almost! ;).
I'd probably deserve a dry noodle, frankly.

Seriously, though.
There is a lot at stake: money, but also the future of either my Ruger MkIII or CZ Sp-01, both of which I like a lot.
If what I already have would do all the jobs almost as well perhaps I cannot justify it.

It all boils to the irritating 8-gun rule. 8 guns and I can store them as they are. Break that threshold and you need a bigger safe. I can't afford one and I can't fit one in the flat hence why I might have to ditch something else.

In doing so I want to be sure my IPSC club will still let me race with a revolver (probably the only guy to ask in the whole country) as loosing sports shooter status would close a lot of doors, legally speaking.
 
I have -NO IDEA- how one goes about international shipping around the globe, but a solution to a safe problem MIGHT be a SnapSafe. It's a modular safe that comes in pieces and assembly is "I'm blindfolded" easy.

Doesn't solve the cost issue, but being limited to 8 handguns would, for me, be a life-altering situation, and I would stop pining over new guns until I could resolve that problem, if it's a problem with a solution.

Just my take. I (obviously) know zero about living where you live and the restrictions you face. I just can't imagine a situation where I never get another handgun without getting rid of something. If there's a way around that, that is my focus... not more guns.
 
Gun laws get funky when you leave this country. The laws can make CA and CT looks downright agreeable.

A limited number of guns allowed if not involved in recognized competition.
A limited number of guns for specific storage capacity (read: government approved safes based on quantity instead of size).
Limited amount of ammunition.
Limited amount of primers and powder.
Specific storage requirements for reloading equipment.
Permits for manufacturing ammunition.

It gets really crazy in some places.


Personally, if I were to get a revolver for shooting competition it would be a 625. Moon clips are awesome things.
 
I sympathize with your situation. Is there any way possible you can handle the longer barrel gun (or better yet, shoot one a little?) without being committed to buying it?

For some people, the change in the balance of the gun makes enough difference between one they enjoy shooting, and one they don't.

As an example, I personally don't like the feel of S&W L frame revolvers. They have the same weight as the N frame (with the same barrel length), but I dislike the way they feel. Where, and how they balance in my hands.

Other people love them. Its quite personal.

I wouldn't give up a gun I love to get one I wasn't sure about. But if you're just so-so about one, then go ahead. And good luck.
 
If there's a way around that, that is my focus...
Click to expand...

There are two possible ways around it, at this stage, but have yet to see if they are workable. One is sell a gun to get the new one. the other is a .22 conversion for the CZ. That would mean I could sell the Ruger. However, I first have to check that the caliber conversion would not be registered as a seperate weapon as they do need to be registered. If so, back to square one.

And I would have to be able to get a threaded barrel for my silencers. That would also be the more expensive option as it means buying the Kadet conversion (€450) as well as the revolver (€1350).

That is a total of €1800 or just under $2500.... That alone should explain my treading carefully!!

Is there any way possible you can handle the longer barrel gun (or better yet, shoot one a little?) without being committed to buying it?
Click to expand...

Sort of. I can handle and shoot the 7.5" SRH in .454 or a S&W 629 with a long barrel. I don't know of any SA guns on the range books aside from a Vaquero in .45 colt, so it is not very easy.

So, in short, apologies for all the constant questions when I don't even know if it is possible but, as my wife says, "hope dies last"....

Unfortunately, I live half my life in a sort of "what if/perhaps if ..." reality and part of that is asking questions so that I know what is mostly likely the choice for the time at which the "ifs" become "when"
 
There are two possible ways around it, at this stage, but have yet to see if they are workable.
Click to expand...
You quoted me -- and yet missed what I said entirely. Your ideas are NOT a way around the 8 gun limit, your ideas are ways to conform to that limit.

You said the limit is in place due to the gun safe.
Need a bigger safe or hopelessly and perpetually stuck at 8 guns...
Forever shuffling what you'd like to own.

In your position... I would quit buying guns. I would quit buying everything except for electricity and food. :p I would focus my efforts in to figuring a method for gun safe compliance to legally rise above the 8-gun restraint.

If you have to sell one or two guns just so you can try the next one you seek...
How about you sell four guns and chase down a safe that allows you to grow your collection?

Just how it occurs from my view. ;)
 
The safe is an issue, but not because of the money (although that is something to bear in mind). It is because of the shape.

We have a loft conversion flat meaning sloping walls. For the safe to fit in a convenient spot and be bolted to the house's supporting structure, it would need to be a trapezium shape!! :rolleyes:

I just don't see how it would be possible to fit one in the flat. I will look into your snap-safe system suggestion, but it is the limiting step and so I have to look at alternative ways...

I add the following by way of an edit as it is all relevant to the quandary I'm in:

Additionally, I must say that my wife has some say in how our home is mutated to suit my hobby. My hobby. She has no interest in it.

Furthermore, I think I would limit myself to no more than 10 guns. Those extra two would require so much cost, adjustment and negotiation that sticking to the 8 is just more logical. There are about 6 guns I'd love to own in addition to what I already have, but if I got them, I guarantee they'd get shot a handful of times each year, if that.

As it stands I only shoot 3 regularly, and a further three more occasionally.
The last two are my grandfathers shotguns and despite being almost deadweight, I can't bring myself to think of selling them.

Unfortunately, I just don't have the time or finances to maintain this hobby beyond what I already shoot. This could consolidate my selection of ammo into a smaller, more manageable package.

If I had two .44s, I'd probably shoot 50% more than now. I barely put 500 rounds down range a year right now, but they are all quality shots if you know what I mean. I appreciate each one. That is not something that happens with my 9mm.
It's great fun, but shoot 100 or 300 and I feel about the same regarding the range trip. And it is so easy to lob an extra 100 rounds down range with a semi.
Does my rambling make any sense?

Or I keep what I have and just scope my 4".... and look ridiculous....
 
Last edited:
Nothing other than those mentioned; the longer barrel adds weight, longer sight radius, and potential higher velocities.

At any normal inside-120m shots there is no performance difference (worth mentioning :D).
 
Packing Heat

Aside from the already mentioned sight radius and internal ballistics, the only real consideration is portability. If you have the right/ability to carry your guns on your person in public, the 4" is a lot easier to carry concealed.

I pack a 5 5/8" Ruger Super Blackhawk in a vertical shoulder holster when driving cross country. I figure my chances of unexpected encounters with wandering livestock and wildlife far outweigh my changes of meeting a human with criminal intent.

(Assuming I survived my car hitting a large critter, I would not want to have to use and e-tool to put the animal down.)

Elmer Keith wrote about many of his deer kills were done with 4" guns because that was the one he had at the time opportunity knocked. In "Sixguns" he specifically states he prefers the 6-7.5" barrel or hunting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top