The Super Redhawk......

[Murphy]

I did an action job on a friends Ruger Super Redhawk in 480 Ruger caliber last night. It really slicked up well. I used a Wolfe Spring kit which comes with two trigger return springs (12# and 10#) and three hammer return springs (12#, 10# and 9#). The trigger took the 12# spring and returned with a snap, the hammer had more than enough zip with the 10# spring. A little polishing and some Brownells super lube in the right spots and it became gave a very slick D/A and S/A trigger pull. I loaded six rounds and stepped out back to test fire it. Three rounds D/A and three S/A gave perfect results with some Speer 325 grain JSP's and a case full of H110 sparked with CCI-350 primers in what was original Hornady factory ammo brass.

Working on this gun is a real pleasure. They are very well designed from the perspective of assembly and disassembly. Very simple, strong and rugged. The trigger assembly contains all the lock work guts except for the hammer, strut and spring of course and is easy to get out and in with minimal effort and expertise. The gun shot into one ragged hole at 25 feet so I think accuracy is good, granted a very short range for most handguns. From start to finish including loading six rounds of ammo and shooting took only an hour. The D/A trigger pull went from 17# to about 9# and was very smooth. The S/A pull ended at about 3.5# with no creep. This action will impress even the S&W fan, it was that smooth and crisp. What a work horse this gun is, a little bulky (this model has a 7.5" barrel) and heavy but not for the caliber. Weight in the right places and with good grips is easy to control. For those of you who have one of these in this excellent caliber you have a serious duty hunting handgun.

[Brian Richardson]

Nice write up Murphy

Have to agree --- wholeheartedly!!!

I still remember the first season The Ruger Super RedHawk came out.

Man... I had to have this gun - no matter the wait.

I recall years ago now that it was $458 from Boondock's - an offer too awsome to pass up. They had received 5 guns for their Sportsmen Show.... They made an announcement over the loudspeaker. I had been wait-listed for one at the time. I jumped from the Alaska Magazine booth full of golfers and basket-weavers I was working with. Few minutes later was packing Ruger pride with my new 7.5" gun-metal-gray 6-gun.

Enzite Bob's phony smirk had nothing on my grin of excitement!!!

That gun goes just about everywhere in Alaska while looking no worse for wear. Still very accurate, reliable, and proven effective.

[Amigo Will]

I realy like my Alaskan so far,not as smooth as my old S&W 19 but very nice for a hunting carry gun

[Sterlingmike]

Thanks Murphy

Thanks for the information. I just picked up a .480, 7 1/2" SRH a few weeks ago and so far I'm VERY impressed with the accuracy and the way this handgun handles. I've had .22, .38spcl., .357, .41mag, and .44mag pistols, and this .480 is special. I can't believe the accuracy for an amatuer shooter like myself. I'll be looking for the mod you have described. I had a trigger job done on the .41mag S&W I had and it improved my shooting a lot. If it helps this .480 even more, it will be my companion. I got it just for bear back up, but it may be a hunter as well. Thanks, again.

Mike

[marshall]

Murphy,

I'm still perplexed about my 454 Alaskan not firing that BB ammo that we chatted about.

Reading your brief on the 480 and your trigger work got me thinking about the firing process and the discussion about having enough snap to light off the primer.

I have not seen a 480 round up close and personal. I'm assuming that it's a large high power round similar to the 454 Casull. If that's the case, and it may not be, why does the 454 use a small rifle primer and the 480 uses a large pistol primer. Is this a design flaw in the 454?

Previous discussions point to the small hard primer being tougher to light off than a large hard primer because of the surface area and pressure required by the strike.

Thanks for your information.

[ADfields]

Murphy,

I have not seen a 480 round up close and personal. I'm assuming that it's a large high power round similar to the 454 Casull. If that's the case, and it may not be, why does the 454 use a small rifle primer and the 480 uses a large pistol primer. Is this a design flaw in the 454?

The 454 Casull and S&W 460mag. are very high pressure just like a rifle and that’s why they use the stronger "rifle" primers. They are both rated to 65,000psi but the 480 is more like 35,000psi max pressure so no need for a rifle primer.

Andy

[Murphy]

Yeah, I believe the 454 and big S&W's use large rifle primers, Some of the 500 's use large pistol mags and the pockets are different in that brass. But in any case the rifle primer is more difficult to dent and the small rifle because of the smaller cup is more difficult to dent, mechanically, so therefore would be more difficult to fire needing a higher energy hammer fall. The lighter springs in the SRH will ignite any LP magnum primer cup, CCI being the toughest. I have used this same action improvement technique (lighter springs) with 44 mag, 45 Colt and 480 Ruger with good success and oddly enough I have made the SRH 454 reliably fire theCCI SR primer with these lighter springs. But I do other things to the guns and that is why I have been saying that in some SRH revolvers in the 454 caliber where the stacking of tollerances occur, I can fix them with some adjustments and still use lighter springs. I have only tried to fix one Buffalo Bore ammo failure to fire but thats all I've had the opportunity to fix and the owner would not let me fix it but offered to sell to me so I bought it from him then fixed it and sold it and made a $150 on the gun. I got the gun with two boxes of BB ammo and every round fired after I modified the gun. It is so simple, you won't believe it. I have fixed several SRH's that failed to fire other brands of 454 ammo. And a few guns in other calibers.

Some don't think I can fix their problem so I don't. I don't think the service department can or will do anything but replace parts, I will modify them to make the gun shoot when we pull the trigger. I do not reduce the effectiveness of the safety or by-pass any safety but do modify parts. Actually just one.

Is the small rifle pocket a design flaw in the 454? No the design flaw is the H110 or W296 powder that was allowed to be sold on the open market and be called gun powder. I would consider it fertilizer and not very good fertilizer. Use of correct propellant can be ignited with a large pistol magnum primer with quantities of 30 grains or so. I have some 454 brass with large pistol pockets and have used it with very good results with the CCI-350 primer and H4227, R-123 and N110 powders.

[marshall]

Murphy,

I have to be honest with you, I've lost confidence in my 454 Casull. The whole purpose of that gun is dangerous game defense while Moose hunting in case I get myself in a bad spot. Late night camp or tent invasions are another consideration.

After having two out of three rounds go click last month it makes me cringe thinking about having that gun and ammo on my hip last September. If there is a way to get the gun and remaining BB ammo to you for evaluation and or repair let me now. I would ship it ASAP if you want the job.

I have a gun shop that I deal with that could ship to a FFL in your area or to you if you have those creds.

Marshall

[Snyd]

....Is the small rifle pocket a design flaw in the 454? No the design flaw is the H110 or W296 powder that was allowed to be sold on the open market and be called gun powder. I would consider it fertilizer and not very good fertilizer. Use of correct propellant can be ignited with a large pistol magnum primer with quantities of 30 grains or so. I have some 454 brass with large pistol pockets and have used it with very good results with the CCI-350 primer and H4227, R-123 and N110 powders.

What powder do you suggest for the 454 with the standard SR primer pocket brass?

[almostfree]

I have a gun shop that I deal with that could ship to a FFL in your area or to you if you have those creds.

Does Alaska state law require you to ship to a FFL for intrastate shipping? It is not prohibited by federal law, so you shouldn't need to incur FFL fees unless state law requires it. You are stuck with a private carrier and cannot use the post office though.

[marshall]

Does Alaska state law require you to ship to a FFL for intrastate shipping? It is not prohibited by federal law, so you shouldn't need to incur FFL fees unless state law requires it. You are stuck with a private carrier and cannot use the post office though.

Not sure, just assumed. I have tried to Fed-Ex firearm parts and they always fuss. They claim that whole firearms can only be accepted by a dealer to a dealer or from an owner to a manufacture for repair. Could just be a bad day at the counter or could be fact. I don't ship many firearms so I don't know.

I did ship a Ruger back to Ruger with no problems. I also shipped just a barrel to a smith for a break job.

[Paul H]

Agreed, I got a 480 srh a few months after they came out, and it's become my favorite wheelgun. I did get a spring kit to slick up the action, but found that at low temps I was getting inconsistant ignition, so I went back to the factory springs and it's been flawless.

One of these days I should get another handgun scope and see what the gun is truly capable of accuracy wise. It's the only revolver I've had where I feel the mechanical accuracy of the gun exceeds my shooting ability. I have little doubt with the right load it'll put 3 shots in a 1" group at 100 yds. I had to do my load work at 50 yds because the 25 yd groups would be one ragged hole.

I still want to pick up anoter 480, and bob it to 5", as IMHO that will be the ultimate in packability and shootability. The 7 1/2" is good, but 5 would be perfection.

[bfrshooter]

Murphy,

I'm still perplexed about my 454 Alaskan not firing that BB ammo that we chatted about.

Reading your brief on the 480 and your trigger work got me thinking about the firing process and the discussion about having enough snap to light off the primer.

I have not seen a 480 round up close and personal. I'm assuming that it's a large high power round similar to the 454 Casull. If that's the case, and it may not be, why does the 454 use a small rifle primer and the 480 uses a large pistol primer. Is this a design flaw in the 454?

Previous discussions point to the small hard primer being tougher to light off than a large hard primer because of the surface area and pressure required by the strike.

Thanks for your information.

I tend to agree the SR primer is stupid in the .454. I have done a lot of work with a friends .454 and the SR primer just does not have enough heat with slow powders like H110 and 296. Both of these powders need to be loaded to max loads to be safe. Just using a starting load can have the boolit enter the barrel and the powder will not light. The primer has enough pressure to force a bullet into the bore and it would be a disaster if you are shooting fast and fired another behind it.
Even with a max load there is too much variation between shots. A faster powder like 2400 is safer in the gun but high velocities will not be reached. Fast powders just change the gun to a hot .45 Colt.
I cut down some .460 brass that uses a large primer and all the problems went away. ( The .460 is a high pressure round, why did they get away from the SR primer?) It is foolish to think the small primer will take more pressure then a LR primer.
However, being that most .454's do not have a strong enough mainspring for rifle primers I went to the LP magnum primer and worked to over max loads without even a flat primer and ignition was clean and positive. Accuracy was very good at 50 yd's. With starting loads, the SRH fired perfectly.
Remember that Dick Casull was doing funny things and destroyed a lot of guns. He was using triplex loads, starting with Bullseye for ignition. A kids cap would ignite that stuff. But the SR primer stuck and I still say it was a big mistake.
There is nothing you can load in the .454 that will cause a LP primer to fail. You will reach the point where a hammer is needed to extract brass before a primer fails. If there is fear, the LR primer will take care of anything clear to a blow up.
The bottom line is that cut down .460 brass is very good in the .454, removes any chance of danger and allows one to work with any load with any powder.
I even use nothing but LP mag primers in my .475 and 45-70 revolvers and have worked both to stuck brass without a flat primer. Once sticky brass shows up, the load has to be backed down anyway to the accuracy point.
What more can you get away with in the .454????? Sorry, but once you stick brass you are no better off then any other caliber.
I have seen a .45 Vaquero worked to 30 gr of 296 PLEASE DO NOT DO THIS---DANGER, using a 335 gr LBT WLNGC boolit with LP standard primers with zero pressure signs. Brass fell out and primers were normal.
Why does anyone think a SR primer is safer?
296 and H110 are GREAT powders and I have shot hundreds of thousands of loads in the .44 and .45 using the Fed 150 primers with superior accuracy. All it needs is primer heat at low primer pressure. Something a SR primer does not have. Blame the .454 case with a SR primer instead of the powder.

[Murphy]

I tend to agree the SR primer is stupid in the .454. I have done a lot of work with a friends .454 and the SR primer just does not have enough heat with slow powders like H110 and 296. Both of these powders need to be loaded to max loads to be safe. Just using a starting load can have the boolit enter the barrel and the powder will not light. The primer has enough pressure to force a bullet into the bore and it would be a disaster if you are shooting fast and fired another behind it.
Even with a max load there is too much variation between shots. A faster powder like 2400 is safer in the gun but high velocities will not be reached. Fast powders just change the gun to a hot .45 Colt.
I cut down some .460 brass that uses a large primer and all the problems went away. ( The .460 is a high pressure round, why did they get away from the SR primer?) It is foolish to think the small primer will take more pressure then a LR primer.
However, being that most .454's do not have a strong enough mainspring for rifle primers I went to the LP magnum primer and worked to over max loads without even a flat primer and ignition was clean and positive. Accuracy was very good at 50 yd's. With starting loads, the SRH fired perfectly.
Remember that Dick Casull was doing funny things and destroyed a lot of guns. He was using triplex loads, starting with Bullseye for ignition. A kids cap would ignite that stuff. But the SR primer stuck and I still say it was a big mistake.
There is nothing you can load in the .454 that will cause a LP primer to fail. You will reach the point where a hammer is needed to extract brass before a primer fails. If there is fear, the LR primer will take care of anything clear to a blow up.
The bottom line is that cut down .460 brass is very good in the .454, removes any chance of danger and allows one to work with any load with any powder.
I even use nothing but LP mag primers in my .475 and 45-70 revolvers and have worked both to stuck brass without a flat primer. Once sticky brass shows up, the load has to be backed down anyway to the accuracy point.
What more can you get away with in the .454????? Sorry, but once you stick brass you are no better off then any other caliber.
I have seen a .45 Vaquero worked to 30 gr of 296 PLEASE DO NOT DO THIS---DANGER, using a 335 gr LBT WLNGC boolit with LP standard primers with zero pressure signs. Brass fell out and primers were normal.
Why does anyone think a SR primer is safer?
296 and H110 are GREAT powders and I have shot hundreds of thousands of loads in the .44 and .45 using the Fed 150 primers with superior accuracy. All it needs is primer heat at low primer pressure. Something a SR primer does not have. Blame the .454 case with a SR primer instead of the powder.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying here. I agree the SR primer is not the right primer for any revolver round and also agree that a good LP magnum primer will ignite a case full of H110/W296 and I would certainly prefer a LP mag primer to any small rifle primer in the 454 or anything of that case volume. The 480 for example, works fine with 25-30 grains of H110 and a CCI-350 primer. You're also right about the triplex loads in Mr Casulls original development process and any cap would lite it.

Cutting off the 460 cases does work but the large rifle primer pockets are deeper than the large pistol primers and may set the primer too deep for positive ignition, did you have trouble with that? The 460 is a good case design and will take all the pressure the 454 cases take, and more, it was designed for large rifle primers because it's max operating pressure is above the Spec'd operating pressure for any pistol primer. I don't think it will ever be a problem but it is beyond what was spec'd for that cup thickness. I do know the 454 in brass with large pistol pockets works well to max pressures, I have shot lots of that brass heavily loaded with H110 powder. In any case using large rifle primers in any of these is easier to fire and will ignite large doses of powder better than a small rifle primer.
I don't know why anyone would think the small rifle primer will take more pressure than the large rifle, it will not. Neither can I see the thinking about the small rifle giving a hotter spark than the large pistol, it doesn't. So I agree the SR primer was a bad idea but I still don't like H110 powder in any larger bore revolver.

I don't agree with you opinion about the lighter springs, hammer and trigger in Blackhawk and Redhawk guns. There of course is such a thing as too light but we can get positive ignition, 100% of the time with springs lighter than factory. Also a lighter hammer fall is an advantage to accuracy just as a strong grip is. I don't think most gun owners are going to grind and reconfigure the sear notch to get a 1 1/2# pull nor do I think such a trigger is a good idea for most of us. What has worked for you will likely still work but the same for what I've done with hundreds of guns has worked well.

[bfrshooter]

I agree with a lot of what you're saying here. I agree the SR primer is not the right primer for any revolver round and also agree that a good LP magnum primer will ignite a case full of H110/W296 and I would certainly prefer a LP mag primer to any small rifle primer in the 454 or anything of that case volume. The 480 for example, works fine with 25-30 grains of H110 and a CCI-350 primer. You're also right about the triplex loads in Mr Casulls original development process and any cap would lite it.

Cutting off the 460 cases does work but the large rifle primer pockets are deeper than the large pistol primers and may set the primer too deep for positive ignition, did you have trouble with that? The 460 is a good case design and will take all the pressure the 454 cases take, and more, it was designed for large rifle primers because it's max operating pressure is above the Spec'd operating pressure for any pistol primer. I don't think it will ever be a problem but it is beyond what was spec'd for that cup thickness. I do know the 454 in brass with large pistol pockets works well to max pressures, I have shot lots of that brass heavily loaded with H110 powder. In any case using large rifle primers in any of these is easier to fire and will ignite large doses of powder better than a small rifle primer.
I don't know why anyone would think the small rifle primer will take more pressure than the large rifle, it will not. Neither can I see the thinking about the small rifle giving a hotter spark than the large pistol, it doesn't. So I agree the SR primer was a bad idea but I still don't like H110 powder in any larger bore revolver.

I don't agree with you opinion about the lighter springs, hammer and trigger in Blackhawk and Redhawk guns. There of course is such a thing as too light but we can get positive ignition, 100% of the time with springs lighter than factory. Also a lighter hammer fall is an advantage to accuracy just as a strong grip is. I don't think most gun owners are going to grind and reconfigure the sear notch to get a 1 1/2# pull nor do I think such a trigger is a good idea for most of us. What has worked for you will likely still work but the same for what I've done with hundreds of guns has worked well.

I have never had a problem with LP primers in LR pockets, there is only .010" difference and primers show deep indents.
I do like light triggers and agree it is not right for every shooter. I don't push it but just show that it is possible without a weak mainspring.
Now a weak mainspring is something else. I will forever stand by a strong spring for maximum accuracy. As you weaken a mainspring, groups will increase in size from primer ignition changes. This has been proven in BR shooting.
I spent years shooting IHMSA with Rugers and I would see hits decline. I found the Ruger springs take a set. After replacing the hammer spring, scores would be back up. I got in the habit of changing it every year. I shot too many 40's with a SBH and won Ohio state with 79 out of 80 to doubt what a good spring will do.
Hammer springs for LP primers run about 22# to 23#. For a LR primer, the springs will be 28#.
Even my 45-70 BFR has been changed to a 26# spring for accuracy although I use LP mag primers.
Here are average 50 yd groups with a variety of cast boolits. Notice the sighter target on the left. The center group is 7/16". This revolver will shoot sub 1" groups at 100 yd's. It groups better now then it did with the factory spring.
You must realize that just because a primer "pops" and the gun goes off, it does not mean it is right.