Redhawk stronger than SBH

  • 3.7K Views
  • Last Post 18 April 2013
tturner53 posted this 15 April 2013

I was surprised to read in a Handloader article by Brian Pearce that the Ruger Redhawk is “significantly stronger” than a Ruger Super Blackhawk. I learn something everyday(and forget something too). The article dealt with .44 mag. loads, specifically a Hornady 300 gr. XTP loaded over H-110, His recommended load drove the 300 grainer to 1,366 fps from the 5 1/2” Redhawk. He mentions these loads would not be ok in other guns. Wow. I had no idea. For some reason I always had the idea the SBH was the strongest .44 mag. With that kind of power why would anybody want to carry an X frame around? A Redhawk with heavy cbs must be popular in Alaska. Pearce's 'Redhawk only' load exceeds published max. by a lot.

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
Ed Harris posted this 16 April 2013

When I was at Ruger one of the things I tried to do without success was to uncork a Redhawk cylinder. Taking a solid barrel forging with no bore in it, but threading it into the frame, fitting a .44 Magnum cylinder and touching off a proof load in the proof box succeeded only in blowing the quartz transducer out of the cylinder, shearing the threads, and extruding most of the 240-gr. JHP bullet out the cylinder gap, making a pretty copper and lead flower. The transducer had peaked at 100kpsi before imbedding itself in the concrete ceiling. But when you buy Navy Nuclear Pressure Vessel grade stainless, that is the sort of performance that you are paying for.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

Vassal posted this 16 April 2013

Uhh,,,wow.

Attached Files

delmarskid1 posted this 16 April 2013

I had no idea that people were paid to do such things.

Attached Files

CB posted this 16 April 2013

Ed Harris wrote: The transducer had peaked at 100kpsi before imbedding itself in the concrete ceiling. But when you buy Navy Nuclear Pressure Vessel grade stainless, that is the sort of performance that you are paying for.

Huh? SBHs must be made outa old '55 Buicks.

Attached Files

PETE posted this 16 April 2013

Good one Dan. If that one's true then I suppose the New Model BH's are made from beer cans.

Actually I'd think any of the material used in Rugers will pass nuclear standards of the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel code.

Pete

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 16 April 2013

PETE wrote: ....Actually I'd think any of the material used in Rugers will pass nuclear standards of the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel code. Pete

The standards used on nuc subs are much more stringent than that. Our government QAR who assisted us on our Federal contracts was MIT, Naval Academy and a Rickover nuclear power guy, and enjoyed coming to our gun plant for recreation. Less than his usual pressure cooker over at KAPL and Portsmouth NSY.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

tturner53 posted this 16 April 2013

Please don't bring Buicks into this. Mine was made of good steel, a '64 Skylark rag top. It came with $5 worth of gas(full tank), a bottle of Boone's Farm, and a cheerleader. Best car I ever had by a long shot. My Marine and Army brothers, fresh home from a tour of exotic lands, used it to batter a house in what is affectionately known around here as 'Rancho Cambodia' and the Buick held it's own thru the ensuing chase until the radiator ran dry. We should have monuments to cars like that and the men who built them.

Attached Files

PETE posted this 16 April 2013

Ed,

Won't argue with you but I was certified a nuclear welder on 127 procedures in another life and we welded up many a valve for the military and nuclear power plants around the world. These were what we called “Blue Pack” jobs. All material and any welding done on them had to meet strict govt. nuclear standards and everything was kept in locked cages that could only be accessed by certain personnel. All welds and parts had to go thru 100% X-ray and special heat treating and inter pass temp.s. All operations had to be signed off on and every valve sent out the door had a “book” at least 12” thick that went with it. The supplier of material also had to go thru the same stringent quality controls as we did and all documentation had to come with each shipment of material.

If you ever see a weld on a Fisher valve with a stamp that looks like this “D” then your looking at my weld. As long as Fisher is in business no one can use that stamp.

Now I don't know what Rugers standards are for the material or procedures they go thru in making a gun, but if you say the material they used met certified nuclear material then in order to make the claim the whole plant would have to be certified.

Now we used a lot of material that was shipped to us that was certified to have been made to nuclear standards but were used in what we called “green packs” and was used in valves that had to meet criteria more stringent than “ordinary” material but didn't go thru the nuclear work-up.

Pete

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 16 April 2013

Our metallurgist bought our stainless in 100-ton heat lots from the Navy's supplier, vacuum melted, argon-oxygen decarburized and ladle refined. We specified ingot position, and had our metallurgist was at the mill to witness the cropping. All the bar stock was rolled for us to the Navy's quality specs, cut-offs of bars were 100% inspected with dye penetrant and we also ran our own structures and chemistries to ensure we were buying anyone's scrap. Cylinder blanks also 100% untrasonic and xray inspected after proofing.

Not a Navy shop, but at the time the best in the US gun trade.

We never welded on cylinder or barrels, by the way.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

R. Dupraz posted this 16 April 2013

Interesting stuff!

RD :)

Attached Files

PETE posted this 16 April 2013

Ed,

I guess I'll have to admit that Ruger went/goes to a lot of expense doing the metallurgic analysis as you described. Glad you described the procedure to me.

Well if done properly welding frames and cylinders wouldn't make any difference. The valves we welded on were not repairing bad areas, altho you don't throw a $200,000 dollar casting away if you can help it. Mostly we were adding flanges of one type or another to fit the customers hook-up point. The smallest I welded on was a 2” and the largest was a 72” butterfly valve.

So. You didn't answer the question put forth on the other Blackhawks as to what material they're made of, or were when you were there.

Pete

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 17 April 2013

PETE wrote: ....Well if done properly welding frames and cylinders wouldn't make any difference. The valves we welded on were not repairing bad areas, altho you don't throw a $200,000 dollar casting away if you can help it. Mostly we were adding flanges of one type or another to fit the customers hook-up point. The smallest I welded on was a 2” and the largest was a 72” butterfly valve.

So. You didn't answer the question put forth on the other Blackhawks as to what material they're made of, or were when you were there.

Chrome-moly parts in my time were a low-sulphur 4140 with additional requirements which included silicates, copper and phosphorous being below the detection limits by xray diffraction.

Stainless barrels were a 415R used in the ball bearing trade, cylinder blanks were the same material, but with a different heat treatment.

Broached revolver barrels on the DA lines were Rc28-32, cylinder blanks were Rc38-40 for machining and finished parts to assembly after chambering roller burning and final HT Rc42 min.

Welding was sometimes used to repair castings, the procedure being to anneal, dig out the void, TIG it up, grind it off, xray and run back through the heat-treat cycle and remachine.

Internal lockwork parts were a 300-series, I believe 302, but I am not positive of that from memory.

Barrels on the single-actions were machined from blanks obtained from an outside vendor when I was there.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

Vassal posted this 17 April 2013

This thread has me searching for a Ruger!

I want to go Nuclear with a 357!

Is that OK???

Attached Files

PETE posted this 17 April 2013

Go for it Vassal. With some luck you can find some depleted Uranium to cast into bullets. But be careful or you'll glow in the dark. :)

Pete

Attached Files

mckg posted this 17 April 2013

Ed Harris wrote: When I was at Ruger one of the things I tried to do without success was to uncork a Redhawk cylinder. Taking a solid barrel forging with no bore in it, but threading it into the frame, fitting a .44 Magnum cylinder and touching off a proof load in the proof box succeeded only in blowing the quartz transducer out of the cylinder, shearing the threads, and extruding most of the 240-gr. JHP bullet out the cylinder gap, making a pretty copper and lead flower. The transducer had peaked at 100kpsi before imbedding itself in the concrete ceiling. But when you buy Navy Nuclear Pressure Vessel grade stainless, that is the sort of performance that you are paying for. "Young Man, you're paid to sell them, not have fun with them!” ...? :)

Btw, where did you “plug” the transducer? Case head, body, just out of the mouth? I think I have read somewhere that the highest pressure will occur close to the case head...

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 17 April 2013

mckg wrote: Ed Harris wrote: When I was at Ruger one of the things I tried to do without success was to uncork a Redhawk cylinder.... The transducer had peaked at 100kpsi before imbedding itself in the concrete ceiling...... "Young Man, you're paid to sell them, not have fun with them!” ...? :)

Btw, where did you “plug” the transducer? Case head, body, just out of the mouth? I think I have read somewhere that the highest pressure will occur close to the case head...

Don't remember the exact placement, but it agreed with the existing SAAMI practice for the 4” vented pressure barrel which simulates revolver conditions.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

mckg posted this 17 April 2013

Thanks Ed.

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 17 April 2013

Vassal wrote: This thread has me searching for a Ruger!

I want to go Nuclear with a 357!

Is that OK???

They made a few Redhawks in .357. Probably the strongest revolver ever made in that caliber. ALSO the heaviest!

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

Dale53 posted this 17 April 2013

I have always had a high regard for Ruger strength. Now, I have even MORE regard. Thanks for the information, Ed.

One word - WOW!

Dale53

Attached Files

PETE posted this 17 April 2013

Thanks for the info Ed. Never realised ANY of the gun makers went to that kind of work to put out a product. I'm impressed!

Pete

Attached Files

CB posted this 17 April 2013

I had a Redhawk once upon a time. I don't care what quality a stainless it was made from, it was a piece a crapp as far as a lead shooter :(

Mine was the first-year vintage..........

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 17 April 2013

Did you identify the cause of the poor accuracy? How bad did it shoot? Rough bore? Timing or alignment? Cylinder vs. barrel dimensions?

Curious as to what you found. Mine shot well, but I sold it,because it was heavier than I wanted.

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

CB posted this 17 April 2013

J-bullet accuracy was ok. Maybe the cylinder was good SS metal, but the barrel quality was lacking, seemed softer metal.

Dimensions for cast caused terrible leading. Cylinders were .429” diameter and barrel groove diameter was almost .432", I measured .4315. I didn't feel like I needed to purchase a new custom .432” mold when my M29 and Dan Wesson 44 mags shot well with standard off-the-shelve molds..........

Attached Files

mckg posted this 18 April 2013

Ed, would you remember what the GP100 are made of, and if there is a difference with the previous 'Six in 357.

Writing this, I seem to remember an article of yours about American Revolvers (?) in which you wrote for example about 38 +P, saying that DW and Ruger used the same steel in their wheelguns chambered in both 38 and 357.

...so you've got to know...;)

Attached Files

Categories
Search
Popular Tags
This Weeks High Earners
Hot Topics
Close