Any Members Own A Redhawk 2.75 in .357 pros/cons thanks for everyones help.

Cons: it's heavy.




------

Yes, but it's a lightweight compared to my 357 Redhawk

Yep. Had one of the older models when they first came out, but my oldest son wanted it so badly that I finally gave in and gave it to him.

They are great, solid, well-built revolvers. Flattop 5 was right when he said they are heavy. But, on the good side...and I mean the very good side...you can fire the heavy duty "wart hog" loads through them and the recoil is very manageable.

EDIT: Oops. Just saw that you mentioned a 2¾-inch barrel. Sorry. Can't comment on that one. Mine was a 5-inch or 5½-inch barrel.

__________________
Pack light and cinch tight.

I don't own one, but I can tell you that the Redhawk is oversized and overweight for the 357 Magnum caliber. The Ruger GP-100 and S&W 586/686 have much better dimensions and weight for a long life of shooting 357 Magnum cartridges.

Having smaller holes than the 44, the 357 was actually heavier. Mine was the 5" & tricked out for competition by Jack Wiegand, when they were first only available in 357. Sold it cuz "I'd never do any competitive type shooting". STILL KICKING MYSELF.

I have that gun in .44 magnum. Heavy? I prefer “robust”. It is well made and easily handles the heavy grain bullet loads that are available. The front sight is simple to swap out. The factory wood stocks were ill fitting so I replaced them with a set of Hogues. I haven’t found a holster I like yet, but Lowe’s had wheel barrows on sale so I can tote the gun around.

The eight shot .357 magnum version should serve you well.

Attached Images

	39D98BC7-EE1F-4B14-9C1D-8AE7C5E1C897.jpg (64.7 KB, 58 views)
	E498C3FF-216E-4F31-B2F8-798705B305BD.jpg (50.4 KB, 44 views)

I had hoped Ruger would r-introduce the Redhawk .357 Magnum and my evil plan was that if they did, it would finally tame the market for the original 1985 model.

Well, Ruger one-upped me (actually they two-upped me) and they did reintroduce it but this time, adding TWO rounds capacity.

Then I thought for sure my evil plan was in motion! Folks would be all over it and the old-timey six shooter would be available in the bargain bin!

No such luck. I still want one, I still won't pay Smith & Wesson money to get one. It's a gun that sits perpetually on my "yeah I'd get one!" list, waiting for a rational price.

It's massive and pure beef and that's why I like it. It also, unfortunately, has a Ruger Redhawk trigger and not a Smith & Wesson trigger, which I knew very well from my 7.5-inch Redhawk .44 Magnum. (also from 1985) The double action trigger is very springy and useable, but it couldn't carry a S&W's jock. The single action trigger which should be a slam dunk is a pure stink-a-thon, and it actually makes me laugh at how long, gritty and heavy it is.

It's a brute, and I like it because of that, but not enough to pay S&W money for one.

I own a 7 1/2" 6 shot like the one p8riot posted good pictures of. I even installed similar Houge wood Mono-grips to help keep the muzzle up. I like the old style factory wood on my 5 1/2" .44 but my .357 is so muzzle heavy that it needed some kind of filler in the space grip adapters fill. My .357 weighed 56 ounces with its original wood. The only role it is the best .357 revolver for is a revolver with minimum recoil. The only repeating .357 handgun that I know of that kicks less is the gas operated Desert Eagle.

Snub nose revolvers with huge cylinders make no sense to me. The best way to conceal one in warm weather would be to spray paint it yellowish orange and hide it among a the grape fruit in your shopping cart. On the other hand, if they make sense to you, a Redhawk's double action can be made very smooth.

I can see the pure utility in a snub nose but massive revolver as an outdoor heavy animal defense arm, but that's a definite niche and one I wouldn't have much use for, but I can see the sense in it.

I load 360DW level rounds for mine. one of the only 357 revolvers around that will handle it.

Found this little tidbit of information posted by DWFan on TheHighRoad.org

Redhawk Trigger story:

I had a friend who wanted to buy my 29 Classic 8 3/8", I decided I would sell it to him and went to his house, and low and behold he had already bought a 44 Redhawk in the 8" area of length. He had installed a Wolff spring set in the 3 hours he had the gun and was just so pleased with the trigger...that is until I pulled out the 29 and let him feel a real trigger. He was almost crying, the Ruger trigger was so bad!

So I took pity on him and said I would look at his gun and see if there was anything we could do without modifying the gun. At the dinning room table, we put a 3 foot square piece of butcher paper on top of a beach towel to protect the table. We detail stripped the Redhawk for the second time that day, and using a bright light started looking for problems. The first thing I noticed was the milling was full of machine marks and there were "tails" from milling folded over almost all the edges! I took jewelers files and small diamond stones and started to break the folded tails off and smooth the obvious bearing surfaces.

As we reassembled the action, I put dry graphite on everything that looked like it would rub against something else.
When we were done, I folded the butcher paper in half and poured all the spurs and tails into a pile. It filled a 2 liter bottle cap! We started dry firing on fired cases. Was it as good as my S&W 29? Not on your Life! But is was about 2/3 as good. That's all one friend can do for an impatient fellow!

Ivan

Someone who understands sear engagement better than I do might get a little crisper break, but I wouldn't know where to begin! But springs alone are seldom the answer.

Haha, that's a great story.

Two things occur me to me about the original (not Super) Redhawk trigger

1) I've tried MANY and I give them a lot of credit for the simple fact that at least all of them are SAME SAME SAME! Not good, but if you have experience with one, you can safely bet on the next one being the same as long as it hasn't been altered. This must be good in some way... consistency?

2) it makes me laugh that the double action "well, acceptable I guess" and the single action which should, in theory, be so much easier to do well is such a joke, a bad joke.

I'm not a hunter but if I were and I were staring down a deer with my Redhawk, there's no way I would cock that hammer. I would absolutely go double action, and I can't get over how silly that seems.

Believe me, I understand the origin of my problem -- I started with S&W in my formative years. I can make great use of other revolvers, but the DA trigger for me will always either be a S&W or a trigger that juat fails to get where even an average S&W trigger is.

Yes, I'm sure a Korth or Manurhin trigger could be all that and a bag of donuts but the price to try is one I haven't (yet) been able to justify.

Very strong guns for sure, but I'd put my Freedom Arms 83 357Mag up against it any day.

Ha! That's a bad bet. Because when it comes time to do the royal thrashing, he's beating up a production Ruger and you'd be putting the screws to a gorgeous Freedom!

That would be akin to accepting the challenge of a 25-lap paint-tradin' race around a 1/4 mile dirt track, with him in his '75 Vega and you in your "sure to beat him" '69 COPO Camaro.

True, you got me there.

Problem is I don't have any beater 357's any longer, mainly just Pythons, Registered Magnums, MR73's, Korths, and the one Freedom 83.





Actually, all jokes aside, the Korths and Manurhins are incredibly strong guns.

A hogleg with all those gorgeous double-action revolvers?!

Jeez, why not stick a COP 357 derringer in there also?!

I recall something that the action of the GP100 and the super red hawk are the same and easy to work on, the redhawk is different and more difficult to tune apparently due to the single spring driving hammer and rerturn. Whatever...I do not own a Ruger revolver. If I would I'd get a 44 mag super redhawk 10'' barrel with some nice glass. I do own a brand new Ruger PCC 9mm carbine, my first ruger ever and it's great!!!

You are correct, the GP-100 action was patterned after the Super Redhawk action and it is easy to service and reasonably easy to turn into a nice trigger pull, even double action. The only thing I don't like about the Super Redhawk, and I do have one, is that massive frame extension for the barrel. The plus side of it is that you can mount a scope to the frame, but it does add a lot of weight and size to the revolver.

I want one of the old 6 shot versions to turn into a 360 Dan Wesson.

__________________
-Matt

took it out to the range boy is this gun heavy 125gr .357 rounds were slightly warm 158 gr were a pleasure to shoot gun needs to be sighted in better was all over the target. Now all i need is to find a holster

I believe I'll stick to S&W m27s. I don't hunt with 357s. I have 44mags for
that. I have never seen a Ruger to match S&W trigger. Sure you can have
it tuned, but that is apples & oranges. You can have anything you want if
you are willing to pay the price. I have never wanted a Korth or such because I'm not good enough to extract the benifit vs cost out of one.

I enjoy my RedHawks no screws to come loose with stout loads. I like my smiths and colts but my ruger’s are for shooting.