Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: Ruger Redhawk grip question, and Bowen Classic Arms

  1. #11
    There is a solution the the Super RHs aesthetic challenges. It's a bit spendy though. Bowen offers the GP44 SRH. It's about halfway down the page. My crystal ball suggests that there will eventually be a Ruger factory version of this gun. The groundwork for it is suggested by Rugers new Super GP100 which is also pricey in its own right.

    http://bowenclassicarms.com/catalog/...nversions.html

    https://www.ruger.com/products/superGP100/models.html

  2. #12
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by 358156hp View Post
    It's interesting that you mention this. I like the way RB Smiffs carry, but I almost always ended up with square butt conversion grips on them. And for the same reason. Perhaps the std Redhawk simply needs to have the butt thinned a mite, and matching grips crafted.
    To be clear, it's not the thickness of the gripframe, but the depth front-to-rear toward the bottom. The answer from most smiths is to round butt it, but that brings up the issues mentioned by GJM. I've never seen a reshaping of the gripframe that retains a traditional square butt profile that is more in line with the size/shape of a S&W N-frame. Additionally, because the one and only action spring is within the gripframe, there is only so much you can do without affecting operation. I owned a Redhawk for nearly 15 years and looked into a variety of options. Short of a completely bespoke gripframe reshaping with necessary custom stocks (that no smith anywhere offered), I never found a good solution. The Nill grips were the only solution that came close for my needs.

    It's probably cheaper at this point to get the GP44 build from Bowen or just get an N-frame Smith (assuming 44mag or smaller caliber).

    Chris

  3. #13
    Member Hizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Texas
    I knew I had taken measurements previously. I found the post and copied it.

    Backstrap to trigger face measurements:
    SRH Alaskan w/Lett grips 71mm
    RH 4.2" w/Hogue Tamers 69mm
    GP100 w/Compact Letts 70mm
    Quote Originally Posted by caleb View Post
    Oh man, that's right. I forgot that some people feel like they need light SA triggers in DA guns instead of just learning to shoot the gun better. You can get a Redhawk DA trigger pull down to 10 lbs, and if you can't manage that you suck and should probably just practice more.
    *RS Regulate Affiliate*

  4. #14
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by Hizzie View Post
    I knew I had taken measurements previously. I found the post and copied it.

    Backstrap to trigger face measurements:
    SRH Alaskan w/Lett grips 71mm
    RH 4.2" w/Hogue Tamers 69mm
    GP100 w/Compact Letts 70mm
    The problem for me was the slope of the backstrap and the depth, front to rear, of the lower portion of the gripframe. This resulted in a gun that tended to roll in the hand, battering my thumb knuckle. The Nill grips, with their backstrap covering design, flattened this out a bit without adding significantly to the lower grip depth (ie more material up top than down below). The S&W gripframe, is flatter top to bottom and not as deep at the bottom.

    When I had a Redhawk 5.5 44mag, I tried the factory stocks, Hogue rubber, Hogue wood, Pachmayr rubber presentation grips, and finally the Nill grips.

    Chris

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by 358156hp View Post
    There is a solution the the Super RHs aesthetic challenges. It's a bit spendy though. Bowen offers the GP44 SRH. It's about halfway down the page. My crystal ball suggests that there will eventually be a Ruger factory version of this gun. The groundwork for it is suggested by Rugers new Super GP100 which is also pricey in its own right.

    http://bowenclassicarms.com/catalog/...nversions.html

    https://www.ruger.com/products/superGP100/models.html
    I've kind of put my big-bore, double-action revolver search on pause while I wait and see what Ruger does with the Super GP100. I'm keen to have one in .44 Magnum.
    I was into 10mm Auto before it sold out and went mainstream.

  6. #16
    Member Hizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Lester Polfus View Post
    I've kind of put my big-bore, double-action revolver search on pause while I wait and see what Ruger does with the Super GP100. I'm keen to have one in .44 Magnum.
    Yup. Production GP44 is my dream. A 4.2 would immediately replace my Alaskan. I would sell off an extra rifle if necessary.
    Quote Originally Posted by caleb View Post
    Oh man, that's right. I forgot that some people feel like they need light SA triggers in DA guns instead of just learning to shoot the gun better. You can get a Redhawk DA trigger pull down to 10 lbs, and if you can't manage that you suck and should probably just practice more.
    *RS Regulate Affiliate*

  7. #17
    Florida Man RJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Tampa FL
    Paging @Malamute.
    No one can pass through life, any more than he can pass through a bit of country, without leaving tracks behind, and those tracks may often be helpful to those coming after him in finding their way. --Robert Baden-Powell USPSA#A92555

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbkr View Post
    The problem for me was the slope of the backstrap and the depth, front to rear, of the lower portion of the gripframe. This resulted in a gun that tended to roll in the hand, battering my thumb knuckle. The Nill grips, with their backstrap covering design, flattened this out a bit without adding significantly to the lower grip depth (ie more material up top than down below). The S&W gripframe, is flatter top to bottom and not as deep at the bottom.

    When I had a Redhawk 5.5 44mag, I tried the factory stocks, Hogue rubber, Hogue wood, Pachmayr rubber presentation grips, and finally the Nill grips.

    Chris
    I have tried almost every commercially available grip myself. I ended up going back to the factory wood grips. My earlier rather wordy post about comparing the RH grip to the 3 screw Blackhawk grip frame pretty much echoes your experience as well. I never did get into SAs because of it. I never did try Nill grips though. They were kind of spendy for my cheap tastes. I had a SRH years ago and traded it off for some fad gun that didn't stay long. That was the one I should have Kept.

  9. #19
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    America
    I just sold my super redhawk .44 mag because I never used it. It had a 7.5 barrel and a 2x Leupold. I should have kept it and sent it to Bowen to chop the frame and barrel back to 4

  10. #20
    Hillbilly Elitist Malamute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Northern Rockies
    Quote Originally Posted by 358156hp View Post
    I have tried almost every commercially available grip myself. I ended up going back to the factory wood grips. My earlier rather wordy post about comparing the RH grip to the 3 screw Blackhawk grip frame pretty much echoes your experience as well. I never did get into SAs because of it. ...
    The rolling in the hand is one reason single actions are easy to shoot, they dont have the DA hump in the grip to slam into that web of the hand or thumb joint, which is the main difference. When I get deeper into geezerhood and cant shoot a DA of any larger caliber, Im confident Ill still be able to use a larger caliber SA, if my previous experience with a torn ligament in my right thumb holds true. In similar calibers/loads, I was able to shoot an SA revolver a couple years sooner than a comparable DA in my recovery.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •