Silhouette Revolver

[R112mercer]

I'm looking to build a .44 Magnum Silhouette Revolver for next year. I'd like to be able to use the gun for both Iron and Optic Class (tip off scope, in other words). As much as I love Smith revolvers, they don't readily come with an easy to remove scope set-up that allows you to keep your iron sight settings. Plus I'd kind of like the added durability of the Redhawk frame. I'm thinking of a Redhawk Hunter model with the 7 1/2" barrel and integral ring bases. Here's my questions:

1. What kind of trigger job can you get out of the Redhawk? The factory trigger is definately NOT like a Smith, in particular the single action (feels almost as heavy as the double action)!

2. How are the factory grips? The wood looks like it could be uncomfortable after 80 rounds. Are there good options aftermarket?

3. How is the accuracy compared to a Smith? I'll be handloading, and I'll only be shooting the reduced course (100 yards max.) but I'd like as much accuracy as possible.

4. Are the front sights readily available? I don't like the factory red ramp and would like to swap in a black partridge. Brownells would be my first guess.

5. How strong/repeatable are the factory rings? I would probably use a Leopold 2x glass scope and would like to be able to maintain zero as close a possible.

I like the Redhawk for the double action trigger (usually gives a better single action trigger job than a true SA and allows for fast follow-ups if I use it for hunting), integral ring bases, durability (especially with HEAVY loads only the Ruger's can handle), and the interchangeable front sight. Am I missing anything? Any other guns (Super Blackhawk?) or issues for Silhouette?

[hopalong]

Rob,

I have a Redhawk in .454 Cassull.

Use it to deer hunt when in the bad thickets.

I put a Wolf reduced power kit in it and did some polishing, made for a nice hunting trigger in SA (about 2 3/4 lbs if I remember correctly) DA pull is around 8 or maybe a little less.

My gun will group 4 inches with a good rest at 150 yds using the Burris 1 1/2 x 5 scope on it.( in the right hands I'm sure it will do better)

My Smith .41 shoots as good and doesn't have all that RECOIL as the redhawk but I like them both and use them both.

It is not even fair what the .454 does to a coyote.

You may want to consider the .41 mag Nice round, plenty of power for steel animals and live ones too.

Just a thought.

SAM

Edited October 5, 2005 by hopalong

[Intel6]

1. The trigger can be made better but you will never get it like a S&W. As Hopalong said a spring kit and polishing will go a long way.

2. The factory grips suck IMHO. I replaced then with Pach decelerators very quickly.

3. I have had good luck with accuracy from my Redhawk (7.5 with rings). I have shot lots of loads with it in testing from my Ransom Rest and have been pleased. Big difference will be if you shoot jacketed or lead. I have been shooting an LBT 350gr. LFN out at 1,200 fps or so, lot sof recoil but it hits hard.

4. I know there is a nice black partridge sight available from Brownell's. I think Bowen Arms makes it. I think they also make a nice rear.

5. I have the 2x Leupold and it holds up to the 350's at 1,200 fps so I think the factory rings are strong enough. I have taken mine off in the past and got decent repetability. I would guess that would be a gun specific issue?

Neal in AZ

[R112mercer]

Guys;

Thanks for the replies, just the info I was looking for. Sam, I'll agree that the .41 Magnum may be ballistically superior to the .44, especially at Silhouette-types distances. But the .44 has something in common with the Cheerleader who wore low-cut tops to school: Popularity. The .44 has a lot more (and cheaper) components and load data for it. In the end I don't think the Ram or a Deer will appreciate the subtle difference in striking power.

Intel6, I've seen Bowen's rear sights for the Redhawk/Blackhawk. They're very nice and a tad pricey. They also make their rear sight for Smith's now. I haven't gotten a good look at Ruger's rings, I was wondering how sturdy they are and if they'll stretch any from repeated firing. I guess you answered that. Some degree of loss of zero is fine, I just don't want to have to burn 30-40 rounds to find out where the thing hits every time I take the scope off.

[hopalong]

Rob,

As far as the rings go, they are plenty strong....Just like the gun.

Poor ole .41 mag....Just like Rodney Dangerfield....NO respect!

Have fun with the Redhawk, Nice guns even if they are not built like a smith in the action.

HOP

[Jeremiah]

Rob,

As far as the rings go, they are plenty strong....Just like the gun.

Poor ole .41 mag....Just like Rodney Dangerfield....NO respect! 

Have fun with the Redhawk, Nice guns even if they are not built like a smith in the action.

HOP

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why? Why would you want to shoot a 44 in 100 yard silhouette matches? I'm not sure what organization's rules you are using, but the 44 is way to much gun for either IHMSA's "field pistol" and NRA's "hunter pistol." Both organizations use 1/2 scale targets, so why would you want to build a gun for silhouette using the 44? You mentioned that the 44 components are a little cheaper and more available than the 41, but that's about the only legal caliber they are cheaper than. You also talk about wanting to use the redhawk because of the high strength of the frame, that brings it up again, why would you want to utilize it in silhouette? Everyone I know loads DOWN their guns and they are using smaller calibers to start with.

Now, on the other hand, if you are just doing this for kicks, well, you'll get plenty of kicks. If you want to win, you are barking up the wrong tree. If you are just doing this to have fun and you have a lot of spare time to make a very average gun just a little better by polishing and smoothing the action, doing extensive load development, and buying a whole bunch of expensive bullets, go for it. But, if you are building a highly accurate offhand 1/2 scale sillywet blaster, you are starting with the wrong platform. For one thing, in the 100 yard categories of both organizations, you would be competing with a revolver against the single shot contenders and MOA's. For another, no matter what grips you put on it, it will still kick quite a bit harder than a 22 hornet or a 32-20. The list goes on and on for reasons why a 44 redhawk isn't the best gun to put a bunch of time into to become competitive.

The redhawk I had was a fine gun, and it had it's place, but the silhouette field isn't really one of them. If I were going to shoot one again for metallic ones, I'd set it up for the big bore classes. That's the best fit for one. You get to shoot at big targets far away. The heavier bullets really shine here, plus there is a revolver division so you don't have to shoot against any bolt guns or single shots.

Don't get me wrong, and don't get the wrong idea, if you are just looking for a good time, it's a great idea. But, I bet you won't be happy long doing it and getting beat over and over by smaller guns at the hundred yard line.

Just my two cents.

[anachronism]

1- If you want a really nice trigger, start with a Super Redhawk, instead of a standard model. The standard Red only uses one spring, for both the hammer, and trigger return, the Super uses seperate springs, making the trigger more easily tunable to your preferences.

2- Once again, the Super has the edge here. With it's grip frame stud, you can use many different styles of grips, much more than the standard model. The factory Super Red grip is much more comfortable than the "splinter" grips the standard model comes with. I use Hogue rubber fingergroove grips on my Super Red, and my GP-100. Very comfortable. I've tried Hogues on my standard Red, as well as Pachmayer. They all suck sooo badly....

3- Either the standard, or Super will have all the accuracy you'll ever need. Like any gun, you'll have to do your load development.

4- Bowen Classic Arms offers a superb replacement rear sight that'll work for either Ruger. Expensive? Yes. Worth it? Yes again. You can also get front sight "blanks" from Brownells for them, if you don't find a ready made one that suits you. I have a Millet blaze orange front sight on my hunting GP-100 & Super Red.

5- Repeatability for the scope rings is okay. Not great, but okay. They're not perfect. Another option would be a scope base adapter from Wiegand to change you over to a Weaver style base. Them you could perhaps find some QD Weaver rings that'll work better for you.

Do, by all means, take a long look at the Super Redhawk for your needs. It's not breathtakingly beautiful, by any stretch of the imagination, but I've yet to see one that's not a 100% performer. And go ahead with the 44 magnum idea. Half the naysayers in the world think it's weak, and the bullets will just bounce off anything you shoot, the other half of them believe it's too powerful for any use, and that anyone who has one is nuts. You'll never convinve either side that they're wrong, so don't waste the effort.

Bob

[R112mercer]

Bob;

Thanks for the insight on the Super Redhawk. I didn't know there was a significant difference (outside of the frame extension) between the two. This is particularly helpful when it comes to grips. I looked at factory grips and noticed that the rubber grips where only for the Super and GP series. I didn't know there was a difference in the grip frame for the Super and plain Jane Redhawk.

Jeremiah;

No harm here! I appreciate insight from somebody who knows what he's doing. I'v thought long and hard about using a Contender. Interchangeable barrels would be a great way for me to spend a lot of money ! Most of the guys that shoot Silhouette in my area use large caliber revolvers, and I figured that would work for what I wanted and for hunting. There's no doubt that the Contender would fill both roles excellently, so maybe I'll have to buy both and compare !

Thanks for the help and info guys.

[Jeremiah]

If your looking for versatility, a contender with a Ken Light rib system would do just about anything you could want to. The KL system lets you shoot either a scope or a nice set of bomar open sights at the same time. Get a contender in 357 mag along with the KL sight rail and you can cover just about every category in IHMSA barring the small bore stuff.

A 357 mag loaded with 2400 or 296 with some 200 speer tmj's will knock over any big bore animal and loaded with titegroup and some 158's will do for the 100 yard stuff.

If you want to win, you need to get more specialized, but for having fun, nothing can beat a 357 mag contender in silhouette. Also, these days in the standing silhouette classes, people are using high powered rifle scopes 10 to 1 against the handgun scopes. And they all use the "taco hold." That is one of the reasons I really don't shoot as much as I used to. Holding a handgun three inches from your eye with a 24x scope is getting pretty far from "handgun shooting" if you ask me.

If you wanted something to combo silhouettes and hunting, you would be going down the right road.

[anachronism]

If you want to win, you need to get more specialized, but for having fun, nothing can beat a 357 mag contender in silhouette.  Also, these days in the standing silhouette classes, people are using high powered rifle scopes 10 to 1 against the handgun scopes.  And they all use the "taco hold."  That is one of the reasons I really don't shoot as much as I used to.  Holding a handgun three inches from your eye with a 24x scope is getting pretty far from "handgun shooting" if you ask me. 

If you wanted something to combo silhouettes and hunting, you would be going down the right road.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Been there, too. Back in the 80's I shot a lot of handgun silhouette, I preferred Field/Hunter pistol (depending on the governing body). I found a 10 in. .357 mag. Contender, loaded with hot 110 gr. loads, to be perfect for my needs. I tried the rifle scope thing, hated it, and pulled the scopes from my silhouette guns. My last year I took the State Iron Sight Field Pistol Championship in IHMSA, and finished second in NRA. Still disgusted with the gamey rifle scopes, I never went back.

Bob

[R112mercer]

Jeremiah, Anachronism;

Looks like you guys have convinced me. I'm going to go with a 10" Contender in .357 Mag. I'm not to fond of the looks of the Contender, or the one shot at a time thing (I know, this coming from a revolver guy), or that the Contender is pretty much a rifle with the stock sawed off, but the accuracy and flexibility of it is what sold me.

I'm thinking of a comped or ported 10" tube in .357 Magnum with iron sights and a removable scope (still debating between a dot and a 2-8x EER pistol scope). What would be a good source for this set-up? How is Fox Ridge Outfitter's (T/C's Factory Custom Shop)? Can you use the iron sights with the weaver scope base still on? What's a good bet in iron sights? Is the add on muzzle break legal, or should I go with Magna-porting (for that matter, are comps/ports legal)?

Finally, I went with .357 Magnum because I'm already set-up to reload it and you guys said it works. Anachronism, you mentioned using 110 gr. bullets, do you think 125 JHP's will reliably take rams at 100 yd. with this set-up? I only ask because I have a ton of them that I want to burn through, otherwise I'll use 158 CMJ's all the way out.

[anachronism]

Jeremiah, Anachronism;

  Anachronism, you mentioned using 110 gr. bullets, do you think 125 JHP's will reliably take rams at 100 yd. with this set-up?  I only ask because I have a ton of them that I want to burn through, otherwise I'll use 158 CMJ's all the way out.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My 110 grainers gave the 100 yard rams wings!!. I used 110 gr. because I could (over) load them fast for a flatter trajectory than the 125 gr. gave me. Flat trajectory is a subjective term, like recoil, and most handguns bullets drop like bricks anyway. Plus, the 110 gr. were cheaper. If you have 125 grainers to use up, then use them. I tried lighter bullets, but they would sometimes blow up on the targets, with minimal effect. Only experimentation will give you the final answer there. What ever you do, don't use a 10 in. 44 mag Contender. These add an all new dimension to the word recoil.

Bob

[R112mercer]

Jeremiah, Anachronism;

  Anachronism, you mentioned using 110 gr. bullets, do you think 125 JHP's will reliably take rams at 100 yd. with this set-up?  I only ask because I have a ton of them that I want to burn through, otherwise I'll use 158 CMJ's all the way out.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What ever you do, don't use a 10 in. 44 mag Contender. These add an all new dimension to the word recoil.

Bob

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

One of the guys at the last match had a .44 mag Contender there. The muzzle report was something else! All that gas had only one place to go and man, did it ever!

[anachronism]

I just thought of something. In your original post, you said you wanted something you could shoot in both scoped, and iron sight classes. The Contender won't do that, unless you set up two barrels, and swap them out between rounds.

Bob

[R112mercer]

I just thought of something. In your original post, you said you wanted something you could shoot in both scoped, and iron sight classes. The Contender won't do that, unless you set up two barrels, and swap them out between rounds.

Bob

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Bob;

I've given some thought to that. It looked as though the factory weaver mount would interfere with the somewhat low iron sights. We shoot the NRA course and the guys I shoot with are pretty forgiving when it comes to rules and classes. This is one of the reasons I feel kind of bad for gaming with a Contender, most of the guys are using S&W 29's or Redhawks. At any rate, I looked around and found a rib system from E.A. Brown that has the iron sights built into the rib, thus allowing you to see them once the scope is taken off. I know this would knock me out of Production class, but I think the guys at the match would have given a hard time no matter what for shooting a "Race Gun" (imagine a single shot race gun) !

[Jeremiah]

Ken Light makes the same type of rib for a contender so you can go from scoped to open sighted with the turn of a couple of knobs.

[BigBoreShooter]

As has been noted, the SRH trigger is sweeter out of the box. Take the factory grips off and put them in the box the gun came in. You'll never use them. I have a 5 3/4" inch barrel RH .44mag that was worked over by Bowen. The action and trigger are as good as they'll ever be on a RH and the lockup is tighter than tight. He also installs a longer than stock firing pin to ensure reliable ignition, which can be a problem with stock RH.

I had his adjustable Rough Country rear sight installed and the Weigand DX type front sight base that allows fast interchange of front sight blades. I have an express type White/Tritium dot on mine at the moment.

Obviously this is a packing gun for here in grizzly country and not a hunting piece but the above should all apply in your case.

I'm using the Pachymar soft rubber grips on mine and they are very comfortable. I shoot factory and handloads from 180gr to 330gr and don't find the recoil to be uncomfortable on any of them. Interestingly enough, the full bore 240gr load is the one that gives me the biggest "Wow" factor.

So, in my opinion you won't be unhappy with either the RH or SRH. Be prepared to smile a lot though.

John

[R112mercer]

John;

That's a beautiful gun you've got there, probably almost as pretty as the land it's carried in. I've always been a fan of Bowen's work, just couldn't justify the expenditure for what I'd use it for (the only critters you need to pack for in my area are two-legged and usually don't need .44 Mag levels of stopping power). Jerry showed me the Rough Country sights for Smith Revolvers at the Nationals this year. They looked very nice and real tough.

I decided to go with the gamer's gun, though. I bought a G2 Contender in .357 Magnum. I'm having the factory barrel cut to 10" and re-crowned and am putting a combination Weaver rib/Bo-mar iron sight system from E. Arthur Brown. The rib appears to be identical (if not the same manufacture) as the Ken Light rib. I went with .357 because I'm already set-up to reload it, and if I need more horsepower I can re-cut the chamber to .357 Maximum and only need to buy new brass. If I need a real lot of horsepower I can buy a new barrel/reloading set-up for .44 (or more). The only thing I can't do is make follow-up shots ! Guess I'll have to work on that whole one shot, one kill thing.

Thanks for all the insight, and pictures, too!

[anachronism]

John;

That's a beautiful gun you've got there, probably almost as pretty as the land it's carried in. I've always been a fan of Bowen's work, just couldn't justify the expenditure for what I'd use it for (the only critters you need to pack for in my area are two-legged and usually don't need .44 Mag levels of stopping power). Jerry showed me the Rough Country sights for Smith Revolvers at the Nationals this year. They looked very nice and real tough.

I decided to go with the gamer's gun, though. I bought a G2 Contender in .357 Magnum. I'm having the factory barrel cut to 10" and re-crowned and am putting a combination Weaver rib/Bo-mar iron sight system from E. Arthur Brown. The rib appears to be identical (if not the same manufacture) as the Ken Light rib. I went with .357 because I'm already set-up to reload it, and if I need more horsepower I can re-cut the chamber to .357 Maximum and only need to buy new brass. If I need a real lot of horsepower I can buy a new barrel/reloading set-up for .44 (or more). The only thing I can't do is make follow-up shots ! Guess I'll have to work on that whole one shot, one kill thing.

Thanks for all the insight, and pictures, too!

You might check the rulebook before shortening a TC barrel. Way back yonder, when I played the game, I wanted to shorten a 14 in. .357 Max barrel, to 10 inches, redrill and tap for a front sight, and asked for a ruling on the legality of doing so. I was told by the IHMSA technical director that I could probably use the barrel for club matches only, if noone objected. I could not use it for Championship Field pistol, or Production matches, either State or National. The Reason? Although TC does offer that caliber in that barrel length, the 14 inch barrel has a heavier profile than the 10 inch (it's true, I measured it), and the barrel would not weigh the same as a factory 10 incher. If I won a Championship match, and someone protested that I was using a non-production barrel, the judges would have no option but to disqualify me, for using non=production equipment. The shortened barrel would be legal in any Unlimited class. I realize the rules are really loose now, compared to what we were using, but you should get a ruling on this in advance... in writing.

Bob