Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

1
Have money burning a hole in my pocket. I'd put it out, but it keeps me warm.

Anyhow - I started out really wanting to get the new-ish Ruger Redhawk .45Colt/.45acp. I reload both calibers, and the appeal of having a DA/SA revolver that can actually shoot both calibers was a big selling point for me. I already own a Ruger Blackhawk conversion which shoots .45acp or .45Colt (cylinders must be swapped) and that is a very fun gun, but being a single action (and with a 7.5" hose on the end) effectively renders it to the status of range toy. The Redhawk, by virtue of its DA/SA mode, would be a serious contender for a nightstand gun.

However, I've heard some complaints about spotty QC on these guns, and then seen some YouTube videos explaining how, when firing .45Colt, the minor recess in the cylinder designed for the .45acp moon clips means that the case head isn't fully supported, resulting in a slight bulge near the rim which might shorten the life of .45Colt brass and also potentially result in a kB!

So now I'm also thinking of getting just a dedicated .45acp-only revolver such as the S&W 625 or 325. The 325 appeals to me for no other reason than "it looks very cool" :) Seriously, though - reviews of the 325 seem quite positive and it has a few features over the 625 which I think are neat.
"Only the dead have seen the end of war."

"What about zombies?"

"Oh yeah - well, forget what I just said."

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

2
You won't get any naysay from me. I'm an unabashed enabler. If you want a gun -- buy it. =)

Ok with that out of the way, is there a certain appeal of firing 45 ACP from a revolver? I have actually never tried that ... or 45 colt, or 9mm from a revolver... yeah I'm behind the times revolver-wise.

Since you're reloading both cartridges I don't see cost as much of a factor, so is it just ever so sweet to go 45 ACP from a revolver?

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

3
I love the 625. Mine is very accurate, good single action trigger, perfectly acceptable double action, great sights. The grips on the JM version are a little skinny and slick for my taste, so I replaced them with full size round-to-square butt Hogue grips which feel great.

The main appeal for the .45acp for me is that it is great fun to shoot with moon clips, the only problem being that you run through the ammo twice as fast. And, of course loading and unloading the moon clips, but I kind of like messing around with them. It gives me an excuse to mess around with something firearm related even when I'm not shooting.
For all the compasses in all the world, there is but one direction and time is its only measure. -- Tom Stoppard
Image

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

5
@pdoggeth: .45Colt is the Mother of all Revolver cartridges (well, not really, I'm sure an historian can tell me which cartridge is the real grandfather of revolver rounds) but it was obviously one of the more common rounds of the Old West in the Colt Single Action Army. It's a big, honking cartridge that can be loaded very mild, all the way to basically duplicating .44mag power levels.

As far as .45acp out of a revolver, I once owned a S&W model 1917. Moon clips made loading and unloading it as fast as a magazine change in a semiauto. Plus, it was a very natural-pointing gun and quite accurate. I somewhat regret selling it, but it had already been butchered by previous owners (they drilled out the top strap to mount adjustable sights, and modified the front sight as well) and so its collectible value was quite low.
"Only the dead have seen the end of war."

"What about zombies?"

"Oh yeah - well, forget what I just said."

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

8
I'm going to sound just like JohnGradyCole, upthread.

I recently got a S&W 625 JM and I like it a lot. I also put some purdy Hogue wood grips on it that were a little bigger and grippier.

I bought it with the idea of using it for IDPA and ICORE competition, but it would make a great nightstand gun or packing through the woods gun if I ever feel the need for such a thing.
"To initiate a war of aggression...is the supreme international crime" - Nuremberg prosecutor Robert Jackson, 1946

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

9
So - went to the LGS today and handled (fondled?) several of the revolvers on my wishlist.

I'm more enamored now of the Ruger Redhawk. Holy cow it's a big, honking gun. If I run out of ammo, I can just break femurs or skulls with it.

The Smiths were also nice, but I still like the Redhawk and the .45Colt cartridge.
"Only the dead have seen the end of war."

"What about zombies?"

"Oh yeah - well, forget what I just said."

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

12
Bacchus wrote:Me three. Want badly. .44 is what's calling me; I figure it makes sense to get a .44 lever gun at the same time, right? I mean, that's just the sensible thing to do. Those Redhawks are Supernice. Did I see a picture of Beaurrr with one? Thing looked 20" long, tip to butt.

So yes, buy. :)
Never wrong with a .44 get a Redhawk or Super RedHawk add a Henry Big Boy in the steel version and your set. With the .44 you can go mild to wild especially if you reload.

I have the Super Redhawk, the Alaskan and The Big Boy Brass model.

Did the same with my 686 plus Smiths 357 have a 3 inch, a 6 inch and have added the Big Boy in Steel.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

13
Bacchus wrote:Me three. Want badly. .44 is what's calling me; I figure it makes sense to get a .44 lever gun at the same time, right? I mean, that's just the sensible thing to do. Those Redhawks are Supernice. Did I see a picture of Beaurrr with one? Thing looked 20" long, tip to butt.

So yes, buy. :)
I only own two firearms.

Both .44 ... and I reload for them for a quarter on the dollar.

One is a 4.2 redhawk that is too new and i need to smooth out.

The other one is the alaskan, which is perfect in every way after i changed springs and got the compact grips.

Multi caliber ... I ain't got no multicaliber. We don't need no stinking multicaliber.

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

14
nmgonzo wrote:
Bacchus wrote:Me three. Want badly. .44 is what's calling me; I figure it makes sense to get a .44 lever gun at the same time, right? I mean, that's just the sensible thing to do. Those Redhawks are Supernice. Did I see a picture of Beaurrr with one? Thing looked 20" long, tip to butt.

So yes, buy. :)
I only own two firearms.

Both .44 ... and I reload for them for a quarter on the dollar.

One is a 4.2 redhawk that is too new and i need to smooth out.

The other one is the alaskan, which is perfect in every way after i changed springs and got the compact grips.

Multi caliber ... I ain't got no multicaliber. We don't need no stinking multicaliber.
Bacchus, you must be referring to my Super Blingtastic nickel 29-3 with 8 3/8 barrel, maybe?

I've been mulling over a long gun to pair up with my one of my wheelguns. I got rid of my 45 Colt Henry so my Vaquero is all by itself.
Bullet metal consumption is a factor. I like shooting lots and even casting my own from cheeply sourced lead still adds up scary fast with the big bores. Powder-wise, 44 loaded to non-mousefart levels also adds up quickly. Point is, I think I will be getting a 357 rifle, but it HAS to be light and handy. No tankers.

Here's some quick math: 200 rounds x 240 grains =48000 grains.
48000/7000=6.85 lbs of 240 grain 44 cal bullets.

Scaling down to 357 (or 38 special) we get: 200 rounds x 158 grains = 31600 grains, or 4.5 lbs of bullets.

Major threadjack here, so yes to the question of should I buy.
Hell is where:
The British are the chefs
The Swiss are the lovers
The French are the mechanics
The Italians make everything run on time
And the Germans are the police

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

16
beaurrr wrote: Bacchus, you must be referring to my Super Blingtastic nickel 29-3 with 8 3/8 barrel, maybe?

I've been mulling over a long gun to pair up with my one of my wheelguns. I got rid of my 45 Colt Henry so my Vaquero is all by itself.
Bullet metal consumption is a factor. I like shooting lots and even casting my own from cheeply sourced lead still adds up scary fast with the big bores. Powder-wise, 44 loaded to non-mousefart levels also adds up quickly. Point is, I think I will be getting a 357 rifle, but it HAS to be light and handy. No tankers.

Here's some quick math: 200 rounds x 240 grains =48000 grains.
48000/7000=6.85 lbs of 240 grain 44 cal bullets.

Scaling down to 357 (or 38 special) we get: 200 rounds x 158 grains = 31600 grains, or 4.5 lbs of bullets.

Major threadjack here, so yes to the question of should I buy.
That must be the one. :) If I recall - which is unreliable any more - CD said something about it needing bipod. Nice gun!

I've had my eye on a .44 Redhawk, the one with a 7.5" barrel. Model 5001, I think. Why? Because I don't have one! :roflmao: And I think it's gorgeous. And I've got it's little sibling, the GP100.

Good point about the cost and reloading. I can see from your calculations that it's a significant increase in material over not that many rounds. A .357 lever gun would be nice, too, and I have heard many people here say good things about them.
"I am not a number, I am a free man!" - Number Six

Image

Image
Image

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

17
Bacchus wrote:
beaurrr wrote: Bacchus, you must be referring to my Super Blingtastic nickel 29-3 with 8 3/8 barrel, maybe?

I've been mulling over a long gun to pair up with my one of my wheelguns. I got rid of my 45 Colt Henry so my Vaquero is all by itself.
Bullet metal consumption is a factor. I like shooting lots and even casting my own from cheeply sourced lead still adds up scary fast with the big bores. Powder-wise, 44 loaded to non-mousefart levels also adds up quickly. Point is, I think I will be getting a 357 rifle, but it HAS to be light and handy. No tankers.

Here's some quick math: 200 rounds x 240 grains =48000 grains.
48000/7000=6.85 lbs of 240 grain 44 cal bullets.

Scaling down to 357 (or 38 special) we get: 200 rounds x 158 grains = 31600 grains, or 4.5 lbs of bullets.

Major threadjack here, so yes to the question of should I buy.
That must be the one. :) If I recall - which is unreliable any more - CD said something about it needing bipod.

Nice gun!

I've had my eye on a .44 Redhawk, the one with a 7.5" barrel. Model 5001, I think. Why? Because I don't have one! :roflmao: And I think it's gorgeous. And I've got it's little sibling, the GP100.

Good point about the cost and reloading. I can see from your calculations that it's a significant increase in material over not that many rounds. A .357 lever gun would be nice, too, and I have heard many people here say good things about them.
Small primers, the bane of a reloaders existance.

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

19
My family is 0-3 on Rugers
1. Dad's New Model Single Six needed a shim under the front sight before it would hit paper
2. My Mark II 22lr has never cycled shells correctly
3. My fixed sight single six didn't index correctly, wouldn't hit anywhere near the point of aim, and couldn't shoot better than 3-4". They fixed everything but the size of the groups

I'd go with the Smith. Of course the front sight fell off my Model 60 the first time I shot it :smart:

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

20
Certainly agree with Beaurrr that if you reload then .38/.357 gives you better "smile mileage".

But if you already own a "standard" revolver, then the Smith 625 .45ACP revolver is justifiably all giggles -especially if you have 1911's. Very fast reloads with a bunch of 6-rounds mooncliped worn around the belt like Jerry (and we all want to shoot like him, right?).

Can't speak for the .45LC/.45ACP setups nor Ruger Redhawks from personal experience but I doubt concerns for bulging cases is justified or we'd be hearing more about that from owners of such guns already.

While they look cool, understand the 325's have aluminum frames (with some voodoo metal mixed in) and probably not as strong as steel framed 625's, evident by the (steel) flash shield above the cylinder they installed to protect the top-strap from "flame cutting". Aside from the fact that felt-recoil will be greater on a lighter-weight gun, I have read many Smith revolver owners do not consider the 325 strong enough to shoot the big round regularly to qualify as a good "range gun". Many consider the 325 a great carry piece that is sometimes shot to get familiarized with.

Don't lean toward the S7W Governor (or Taurus Judge) for aesthetics/principle reasons... They'll do the job and arguably add the flexibility of .410 shotshells but just plain wrong as a handgun. -A novel wheel-gun carbine however.

Not to further confuse the issue but what about the affordable-to-shoot S&W 986 9mm revolver around the same price range? Not the same Ka-Boom as a .45ACP but helavu fun non-traditional wheelgun I imagine. Also fast reloads with mandatory moonclips... Eh? Eh?
:jerry:
"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. There is hope for a violent man to become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent." -Gandhi

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

21
If I can guess at Nmgonzo's meaning, the industry has confused the .45ACP round with two diffrent cases... one taking standard Large Pistol Primers and ones (mainly Blazer's that I've noticed) which take Small Pistol Primers. I don't know why the standard is changing and don't feel a noticeable difference in performance (without a chrono) shooting the two back to back with same powder pushing the same grain bullets. They just make sorting the brass somewhat a PITA for the reloader.
"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. There is hope for a violent man to become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent." -Gandhi

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

22
Bisbee wrote:If I can guess at Nmgonzo's meaning, the industry has confused the .45ACP round with two diffrent cases... one taking standard Large Pistol Primers and ones (mainly Blazer's that I've noticed) which take Small Pistol Primers. I don't know why the standard is changing and don't feel a noticeable difference in performance (without a chrono) shooting the two back to back with same powder pushing the same grain bullets. They just make sorting the brass somewhat a PITA for the reloader.
Years ago WW231 became the powder of choice for IPSC shooters that reload and it was felt that small primers were more efficient with that powder.

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

23
eelj wrote:
Bisbee wrote:If I can guess at Nmgonzo's meaning, the industry has confused the .45ACP round with two diffrent cases... one taking standard Large Pistol Primers and ones (mainly Blazer's that I've noticed) which take Small Pistol Primers. I don't know why the standard is changing and don't feel a noticeable difference in performance (without a chrono) shooting the two back to back with same powder pushing the same grain bullets. They just make sorting the brass somewhat a PITA for the reloader.
Years ago WW231 became the powder of choice for IPSC shooters that reload and it was felt that small primers were more efficient with that powder.
I've also heard the smaller primer were selected to reduce lead contamination when shooting at indoor ranges. Small pistol primer contain no lead?

I agree the mixing of small and large pistol primers is a PIA. I think it is in Leviticus there is a ban on mixing small pistol primers in 45ACP lest there be an abomination. :D

Remember, the only real fun caliber for real handguns end in Magnun or start with a 4.
45ACP cause it it is just silly to have to shoot twice.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: Convince me to buy (another) .45 revolver

24
eelj wrote:Years ago WW231 became the powder of choice for IPSC shooters that reload and it was felt that small primers were more efficient with that powder.
Image

TrueTexan wrote: I agree the mixing of small and large pistol primers is a PIA. I think it is in Leviticus there is a ban on mixing small pistol primers in 45ACP lest there be an abomination. :D
:rotfl:
Now I have to wipe beer off my computer screen...
"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. There is hope for a violent man to become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent." -Gandhi

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests