I've wanted a 4" redhawk in .357 for years...Originally Posted by Bigghoss
The .357 Redhawk also got a couple new barrel options, 4.2" and 5.5".
http://www.ruger.com/products/redhaw...eets/5059.html
http://www.ruger.com/products/redhaw...eets/5060.html
Gotcha. I was curious because I've seen similar comments elsewhere about the blued Redhawks being collectable/desirable (regardless of bbl length). Not sure what drives those comments though...
Chris
Plenty of folks like blued guns and Redhawks, and collectability is subjective I guess. But as far as I'm aware Blued Redhawks don't command a premium.
Better get three.
I'm leaning more towards a 5.5" Redhawk and a 4" GP100.
Last edited by Bigghoss; 11-30-2017 at 07:58 AM.
I've seen canted barrels and ratchets that were rosebuds of burrs on both. Both are liable to have a burr at the entry of the forcing cone. Both should be detail stripped and solvent cleaned, then lubricated before significant use, as they are likely to leave the factory with grit inside the actions. Literal loose grit, not just roughness of the parts.
S&Ws have had badly non-concentric crowns come and go since the beginning of the two-piece barrel era, as far as I can tell. I had to send back a 640 Pro where the crane had never been fitted to the frame and had an interference that required significant force to swing it closed. All the pieces of evidence visible to me say that problem affected most of the inventory that particular dealer had received. The bead blasted finish can be pretty rough. I don't even remember what the problem was on the last S&W I handled at the LGS, I just remember checking a couple of standard trouble spots, then finding something else. Shook my head and said, "If it ain't one thing, it's something else..."
On Rugers, I haven't yet seen a Novak dovetail cut the way Novak says they should be cut. My GP had to go back to the factory to have the trigger housing refit to the frame so they could be separated with a reasonable amount of force. When it returned, it benefitted greatly from an overall deburring inside and out.
None of this is even getting into the fundamental finer-point dimensional inspections you read about of cylinder throat alignment to the barrel, consistent throat sizing, etc.
Inspecting in person before you buy isn't to find the one without defect (that's aiming unreasonably high, it seems), it's to find the one with only defects that can be corrected at reasonable cost.
.
-----------------------------------------
Not another dime.
What Oblong reports is true but a fact surprising to some is that it's nothing new. In 1970 I bought my first K frame Smith which was a good specimen. In '71 I bought a M25 .45 ACP that had numerous problems. As time passed I bought more and more Smiths and began working part time in gun shops and noticed that quality control issues existed in various other brands. In 1981 I began working for the Texas prison system which used M65 Smiths. Our armorers were factory trained. Once we received a large shipment of several hundred M65's, and so many were non functional that S&W had to send a factory team from Massachusetts to Texas to repair them. I had the privilege to observe master fitters repair them. Mostly they used a file and big hammer(lead bar). We also had several hundred 870 shotguns that had an outstanding service record. Our Colt AR15's were trouble free too.
I observed that when other state agencies or the feds trained, semi auto's frequently malfunctioned. One sheriff's dept had a new batch of 1911 .45's and six out of six continuously malfunctioned. So why has this problem persisted over decades? I'm certain that factory techs know the difference between good and poor work. My opinion is that they perform poorly because manufacturers continue to accept low standards because "good" quality control is expensive. Eventually nobody cares as long as the companies are making money. Law enforcement agencies have armorers to correct some crappy factory products. The guy buying a firearm at a box store or a lgs may lack knowledge to know the difference. And then we have guys like ourselves who either fix it at home or send it back.
Last edited by willie; 11-30-2017 at 11:56 AM.
Is the common GP100 in that bad of shape?
Are there more timing issues with 7 round cylinders vs 6?
I do remember reading about some S&Ws with 7 round cylinders that were problematic, but that may as likely have been ordinary crappy QC as something inherent to the number of holes, or maybe it was just a process wrinkle early on. I haven't heard of it in recent production. It's often the case that when a manufacturer tries something new and doesn't get it quite right, the user community blames the problems on some inherent characteristic or challenge of the new feature, rather than understanding that the manufacturer just dropped the ball on QC with the new process. Once they figure it out and get their poop in a group, it's no more inherently problematic than the older systems.
A new production revolver is like a box of chocolates. You just don't know what you're going to get. It may be fine, it may be just OK, it may be a disaster. It's really not the average that matters, it's the dispersion of results. I've said before that they are not beginner's guns, just because it takes a bit of knowledge and mechanical understanding to recognize common (or not so common) issues. Someone who will just continue using a machine that's not working exactly right all the way up until it stops working completely is not a revolver person. Although if a beginner is prepared to send their new revolver to a competent smith to have it worked over and made ready for use, that could work well. But it would be expensive.
Last edited by OlongJohnson; 12-01-2017 at 10:40 PM.
.
-----------------------------------------
Not another dime.
I had horrible luck with a GP100 3” and a WC GP 100. So much so, that I got pissed, sold them to gun plumbers, and condensed my revolver collection down to OLD Ruger Security/Service Sixes, and non-lock Smith’s.
I’d really love an 8 shot .357 that worked though. Coupled with a JM #3, that could be a great carry piece for regular folks with big hands, that need something for antibadguy and anticarnivore tasks.
civiliandefender.com
Ruger's website used to have an email link to send an email directly to the president. Back when I was shooting revolver division in USPSA I utilized it multiple times, basically illustrating how S&W had ZERO market competition in USPSA and ICORE and that an 8 shot Ruger .357 and a 45acp revolver would just be 'da bomb. All I heard was crickets. Then USPSA made the rule change allowing revolver division to allow 8 shots before reloading which basically killed all 6 shot guns. At that point I basically hung up my previously highly sought after 5" 625 with no lock hole in the side and picked up the 1911. Fast forward 3 or 4 years and Ruger has this awesome 8 shot Redhawk and what is that? A 5.5" .45ACP Redhawk too? Revolver division is basically dead in USPSA and if I want to shoot ICORE I have to get on a plane. Gee thanks Ruger....
Reply With Quote