Redhawk vs. Super Redhawk

[Fuel Fire Desire]

I’m trying to decide if I really need (want) to get another Ruger. Here’s the deal;

Lately I’ve had an infatuation with hand loading .45 Colt. I’ve been shooting them through a Toklat, which is a 5” SRH with a slab side barrel. It’s an ugly pig, but it’s a tank that shoots very well. It makes .454 Casull pleasant to shoot, and makes standard pressure .45 Colt feel like a .38. I’ve had the itch to get something a bit more svelte, while still keeping with a DA/SA stainless revolver.

Not having seen a standard Redhawk in person (surprisingly) I’m curious how much smaller, if at all, they are. Is my understanding correct that a SRH is essentially a Redhawk with an extended frame and a GP-100 grip frame? Would it feel and smaller and less bulky than what I already have? The .45 Colt/ .45 ACP 4” Redhawk I’d be interested in shows that it’s 6 ounces lighter than the 50 ounce 5” Toklat.



The other option I’m thinking of, which is no longer in production and getting a collectors premium on auction sites, is the 625 Mountain Gun. Significantly lighter than both the others at 36 ounces. Though, contrary to Linebaugh’s valid points about the 625 (in that the .45 ACP version is +P rated to 23,000 psi), S&W recommends only standard pressure .45 Colt, 14,000 psi.....which only yields .45 ACP-like performance out of that big case. The SRH is a 65,000 psi monster, and the Redhawk is claimed to be good up to 50,000 psi. While I don’t hot rod all of my Colts, and never on the max side, they’re still running in the low-mid 20k’s. (1250 fps 250 gr is my preferred load, which usually puts pressure in that range).


In any case.... my real question to those that have owned both (or all three) is would it be worth it to get a 4” Redhawk, or would having a 5” SRH already make it entirely redundant.....which would mean pursuing a 625MG and keeping the pressures down? I already carry the Toklat in the woods, and this would be carried as well, so the lighter weight and smaller profiles (if they exist) are attractive.

[jackstan]

A Pal of mine has had Mountain guns , two of them in .45 and I think just one in .44 it was . He liked them a lot , even shot the .45 in IDPA compitition . He eventually felt the lure of semi-autos and doesn't use revolvers much But he did enjoy carrying and using them .

Jack

[heyyoustoopid]

Between the two Ruger? Red hawk all day long. Better trigger and much more easy on the eyes. I have a 44mag 7.5”.

SRH of you plan on going 454. The SW 460 is a fun shooter too.

[crankythunder]

Dear Fuel Fire:

I own a Ruger Redhawk and at the time of purchase, I did extensive evaluations of fellow gun club members Ruger Redhawks and Super Redhawks.

For what it is worth, the only discernable difference was the position of the scope mounting locations, the Redhawk positioning the scope/red dot over the barrel whereas the Super Redhawk the scope is positioned further back over the frame. Furthermore, the Super Redhawk requires a combination of low and high rings whereas the regular redhawk uses scope rings of the same height. Also of consideration is that the Redhawk positions the objective lens of the scope further to the muzzle where is it more susceptible to collect muzzle blast, debris, and incurr damage from buring powder as the round is ignited. There is a slight difference in balance as well.

For my usage, since I was planning on experimenting with a 1 inch pistol scope, and also with various red dots I went with the Regular Redhawk to simplify optics mounting. I know with a 1 inch scope or red dot, the super redhawk requires a high ring and a low ring whereas the regular redhawk uses rings of the same height. I am glad that I did whereas I started out with a variable power 1 inch pistol scope, I have since settled on a 30 mm ultradot red dot which fits the redhawk like a glove. I have no idea what rings are required for a 30 mm red dot or if one can get rings to fit the ruger ring mount at all. Not only must you consider ring height, but the distance between the rings to fit the turrets of potential scopes or red dots as well.

I will also say that the 44 magnum regular red dot has destroyed a simmons pistol scope, a tasco pistol scope, has sent a bushnell pistol scope back to the factory a couple times until they refused to repair it, and a leupold back to oregon a couple times as well. Leopold has continued to repair it but I since switched to the ultradot red dot and it is holding up well. the ruger rings retain zero when I remove the red dot to use the irons.

All in all I am happy with the redhawk and am not sure of any advantages to the super redhawk other then the more cooler sounding name. I have run super hot handloads through the pistol with no ill effects (other then the destroyed optics), and its accuracy is really good. I can and do hit a milk jug at 50 yards consistently, and nail the same milk jug about half the time at 75 yards. 100 yards is a bit tuff. there is some pitting from burning powder hitting the objective of the ultra dot and the leupold. I still keep the Leupold on a set of rings in case I ever want to put the pistol scope back on but I enjoy and shoot the 1 power ultra dot a lot better.

For what it is worth, I am a pretty good pistol shot, retain a master nra certification for outdoor precision pistol, and have harvested a number of deer with said redhawk. I have no desire to upgrade if the super redhawk is indeed a upgrade. I also have no experience with the toklat.

Regards,
Cranky

[Fuel Fire Desire]

The Toklat I have came with the rings and two different iron sights included (red ramp/ rear notch and a brass bead/ V-notch). Since I carry it as a wildlife defensive gun, I never had an interest in scoping it. Which, unfortunately, it a detriment to the .454 Casull’s abilities. But all I have or plan to use it for is banging steel and bowling pins within 100 yards, and angry critters within 25 yards.


Overall I’ve been very satisfied with the Toklat, even if it’s action isn’t as refined as a smith. My only complaint is it’s girth. It has a lot of steel in its frame. I’m also craving a big bore with a nice set of wood target grips, but can’t do it with the Toklat and the pipe-bomb .454 loads I run through it.

Between the two Ruger? Red hawk all day long. Better trigger and much more easy on the eyes. I have a 44mag 7.5”.

SRH of you plan on going 454. The SW 460 is a fun shooter too.

The Redhawk has a better trigger than the SRH? Do they have different actions? If so, this is something I didn’t know. I had assumed they shared actions.

[tenthumbs]

The SRH shares the action and grip frame of the GP100 and the SP101.

The RH has an action and grip frame that stands alone. The RH is different than the Security Six series also.

At least that's my recollection pre coffee.

[slingshot77]

It kind of boils down to what you want to do with them or use them for.

I have both,

Good hand fitting grips are easier to find for the SRH/

The SRH will handle higher power loads but that only matters if you are pushing the edges.

But to me the biggest difference comes in HOW you want to shoot them, the RH uses a single combined trigger hammer spring so getting a good double action trigger pull WITH a reliable primer ignition is about impossible. You can get one or the other but not both. The SRH has a trigger spring setup more like the GP100 so is MUCH easier to get a decent double action trigger pull and still retain good a primer hit.

Now if you only shoot single action then the difference is no big deal as it can be tuned out.

[Fuel Fire Desire]

It kind of boils down to what you want to do with them or use them for.

I have both,

Good hand fitting grips are easier to find for the SRH/

The SRH will handle higher power loads but that only matters if you are pushing the edges.

But to me the biggest difference comes in HOW you want to shoot them, the RH uses a single combined trigger hammer spring so getting a good double action trigger pull WITH a reliable primer ignition is about impossible. You can get one or the other but not both. The SRH has a trigger spring setup more like the GP100 so is MUCH easier to get a decent double action trigger pull and still retain good a primer hit.

Now if you only shoot single action then the difference is no big deal as it can be tuned out.

This is great info I didn’t know about. My SRH doesn’t like CCI 450’s, even with the full power spring (I have a Wilson spring kit in it). But, that’s a moot point since that primer isn’t used in the Colt or ACP. WLP’s ignite just fine, even with the lighter springs, which is what the Redhawk would see.

What’s your opinion of the stock DA/SA comparing the two? Is the Redhawk any better out of the box than the SRH? I’m satisfied with the SRH’s DA, it’s smooth and linear, with a crisp light SA, but it lacks the refinement of my Smiths (and I do understand that I’ll never get it there by its inherent design). I typically shoot it in SA, mainly because I’m terrible with its DA and have a tendency to nose dive 25 yard shots (which is entirely a YSINTG issue). But I like having the DA option to squeeze of fast follow ups in a pinch.

The Redhawk isn’t intended to be any sort of competitive revolver, and I don’t shoot like JM. I’m just wanting something lighter and more handy than the SRH to carry around when .454 is overkill for the critters in the area, but still has the ability to run mid-range Colts (in the 20,000-23,000 psi range).

[slingshot77]

I can't really answer your (out-of-the-box) question as I bought both my SRH & RH used, but both were very low round count.

I didn't like the as-received double action pull on either but both had an acceptable single action pull.

I bought the RH first without realizing that darn gun used that unique single spring for both trigger and hammer. It stacked pretty bad in double action due to the fact that the farther back the hammer was the more tension it put on the trigger.

With a fair mount of work I have the RH trigger pull usable (can at least keep the sights on target throughout the double action pull). Still on the heavy side and still stacks, but usable. I can/could make the trigger a bit better in double action but it would be at the risk of having a mis-fire with magnum primers at very cold temperatures. (I put reliability over double action trigger pull).

The SRH is just different, on that I could get a decent double action pull (not really low into the 6# range but smooth with less stacking. I could get it lower if I wanted but that would be at the expense of a sluggish trigger return. Last thing I need is for my bear protection gun to jamb because my trigger finger out ran the gun's trigger return.

I don't have my SRH handy at the moment as my brother-in-law has borrowed it for a hunting trip to the UP (Covid 19 gave him most of hunting season off this year)

Where are you located as some of us on this board with a RH or SRH might live close enough for you to evaluate the double action triggers.

There are usually some SRH or RH floating around in gun shops on consignment, or a trade-ins, as people seem to buy those things but only shoot them a few times then they sit until they get traded in or sold.