Ruger Forum

ExArmy11b · July 2nd, 2012, 09:06 AM

I love my 9.5" Super Redhawk...........it's all business and it's basically a GP100 on steroids, they share the same action. I want another .44 SRH with the 7.5" to keep unscoped.I also have a .44 Alaskan on the way, a lot of people say those are ugly too, but not only do I think they are some of the neatest looking guns I have ever seen, but they are built to serve a specific function, as protection sidearms for large game hunters and outdoorspeople, basically compact hand cannons........so form follows function.

I use my 9.5" with a 7x target scope purely as a target revolver. These revolvers can be insanely accurate and are considered the strongest DA revolvers in existence, along with the Redhawk.

Both are still in production, because both of them sell very well. The SRH is for those who usually plan to scope the gun, the Redhawk is for those who want a "traditional" DA Magnum revolver and plan to use iron sights.

I personally think the Redhawk "Hunter" is ugly, a Redhawk with ring mounts isn't "right", IMO. That's why the Super Redhawk exists.

The Redhawk and the Super Redhawk are entirely different guns, they share almost none of the same parts besides the cylinder and maybe a few other small parts.

Breadman got it right, a very small number of Redhawks lauched barrels downrange and so Ruger corrected the problem with the Super Redhawk to ease hysteria that all Redhawks shed their barrels, when in reality it was only a handful of them with this defect. I'm glad this happened, the owners of the Redhawks that had the barrels fly off no doubt got brand new guns on Rugers dime, and now we have the SRH today

Brandi · July 2nd, 2012, 01:22 PM

I like the Ruger Alaskan, I think it's cool looking, I've always liked full lug short barrels. My GP100 3" full lug is beautiful. I'm curious why they put such a short barrel on the Alaskan though...the main purpose is for large animal defense but you lose energy from such a short barrel don't you? Seems like more velocity would be a better thing, especially in this situation. Certainly the little 2" barrel makes it easy move about but it seems like a longer 3" barrel would give you more velocity, better accuracy and still be extremely easy to pack in the backwoods. Maybe offer the Alaskan in 3" and 4", I would buy a longer barrel model in a heartbeat...the Redhawk just doesn't have the look that GP100 and Alaskan have. Dunno...anyone have an opinion?

Hornet · July 2nd, 2012, 01:53 PM

What's not to like???

Breadman03 · July 2nd, 2012, 04:29 PM

I thought I had my SRH itch scratched, but I really want a scoped long barrel.

44 Deerslayer · July 2nd, 2012, 04:52 PM

I always thought they were ugly too but I bought one for deer hunting. It's very accurate and that makes it look good to me.

Brandi · July 3rd, 2012, 09:46 AM

As they say beauty is in the eye of the beholder....while I will probably never buy one of them, I do see another Ruger in my future.....which will it be......hmmm....

terry_p · July 3rd, 2012, 10:00 AM

I'm not crazy about the looks of either the SRH or the LCR. They are functional and do the job but just don't bring out the artist in us.

RocknRod · July 4th, 2012, 12:52 PM

Brandi- I agree with you totally, the Alaskan looks great but needs a longer barrel. A 454 would be great but if they ever came out with a 5-shot 4" 480 Ruger Alaskan, I would be pounding the doors down to get one.

fungun · July 4th, 2012, 01:46 PM

For me it looks great with the 9.5" barrel, but maybe I'm biased

Casull 9.5" - Ruger Forum

At the end of the day though it's all about how it shoots

exlogger · July 4th, 2012, 02:49 PM

Quote:

I'm not crazy about the looks of either the SRH or the LCR. They are functional and do the job but just don't bring out the artist in us.

I agree.

If they could somehow make the current Alaskan extend out 1 more inch without the rounded barrel. Man, that would be one sweet machine.

matt90 · July 4th, 2012, 02:55 PM

I always loved the supper redhawk look personally. I always thought it looked unique, and epic cool!

Steve in PA · July 4th, 2012, 08:12 PM

I love the SRH. On another forum, there was a thread about Ruger revolvers and several statements were made about how "ugly" the SRH was. Personally, I think they are a bit touched in the head if you ask me. I think a scoped SRH is one damn sexy mutha of a revolver. Everyone has tastes I guess, because I find nothing appealing about the Redhawk.

My main hunting weapon.

Nick0410 · July 5th, 2012, 03:53 AM

It just never looked natural to me. Something about looking like a snub with a barrel attached, its just a weird transitioning area, if they tapered it a little bit more it wouldnt look so strange. I have only seen pictures though. At least if you wanted to convert it to a snub you would know where to cut in order to make it look normal. I like the looks of the RHs more and I want one.

Also thought the Mark III was a little strange looking but after I bought one, I got used to it and I think its a real looker. Functionality and accuracy can make strange looking guns beautiful

ExArmy11b · July 5th, 2012, 07:42 AM

If there was ever a revolver that was designed for a scope, it's the SRH!

Buck Ofama · July 8th, 2012, 04:57 PM

I had a 7 1/2" Super Redhawk in the late 80's and have regretted letting it go ever since. I recently bought a 9 1/2" Super Redhawk all these years later. I took it to a gunsmith after two days to have it cut down to 5 1/2" and just got a call yesterday to come pick it up. I completely understand why some people think they are ugly. I just don't understand why Ruger does not make one in 5 1/2" from the factory. I am sure they would sell like crazy.

Buck Ofama