Would Elmer Have Been Pleased?

Always liked the original Redhawk in black (blue?). No idea what the Grand Old Man would have thought, but fortunately for us Mr. Taffin is at no shortage for information!
"The original Smith & Wesson .44 Magnum is a classic, a thoroughbred, suitable for engraving, ivory grips, and floral carved leather. The Ruger Redhawks are Clydesdales, suitable for the heaviest work and toughest going. There is plenty of room for both in .44 Magnum sixgun stable. If I want an easy ride I will pick one of my old Smith & Wesson .44s from the 1950s; if instead I have a lot of heavy-duty work to do, I will summon one of the Big Reds. " 
Book of the .44, Chapter 30

Mr Taffin again shows that he is the "new" grand old man of sixguns....

Testing by H.P/White labratories ranks the following guns for strength.  This was a shock to me, but made sense once I thought about it, casting vs forging, Casting vs machining, ect.  Smith and Wessons are the strongest, followed by Colt, (the old ones that were forged and machined, no the investment cast ones like the Anaconda.) Then Taurus, then Ruger. Rugers came in last in pressure resistance, wear, an fit and finish. The reason for the bulkiness of a Ruger is the need for more metal to make up for inclusions in the frame, cylinder, ect. Smiths do not have this problem. I should say old Smiths, as the new breed may be cast by now, as the bean counters have taken over the asylum. So while Elmer would have liked the Redhawk, he would not have taken one afield.  Also the sights are no where as sturdy or as precise as a Smith and Wesson. Fine for pie plate bangers, not not for true pistolerios.

I owned one Redhawk, briefly, and knew a couple of others who also were Redhawk owners. I have to say, not trying to ruffle any feathers, but strength of gun was never an issue with the hawk. That sixgun would take +P+ handloads and shrug 'em off, without ever shooting loose. It is true, however, that both fit and finish were-shall we say-nothing to write home about. The Redhawk was all blue collar, all day. Nuttin fancy, just a big DA shooter.

What was particularly annoying about the Redhawk I owned was its wide variance in chambers and throats, its excessively long double action trigger reach, and its massive weight. All in all, the thing would not shoot for me. Some Redhawks were obviously far better in this regard, and capable of something called accuracy-I don't know why, but this was-at least in my circle of hawk owners-reserved for the 7 .5" versions. The 5.5" guns, of which mine was one, simply could not shoot with the long barreled brothers.
The Redhawk was in reality little more than a Rugerization-sorry for that word, just can't think of anything better-of the New Service and the 29. If you liked the Redhawk, then it was a great gun, if you didn't-well...
Ruger is a good company-back when the Redhawk was still making waves, they were the only company offering several types of Single Actions available at a price most could afford. However, until the arrival of the GP100, Ruger double actions were crude behemoths when compared to their inspiration.
I am not comfortable in predicting what Mr. Keith's response to the Redhawk would have been, but I doubt the gun would have worked well for him. First of all, Mr. Keith was known to have hands of modest size, and the grip frame/trigger reach of the Redhawk was not accommodating to any but large handed operators. Second, the trigger on the Redhawk was universally heavy, with a concurrently heavy hammer pull to fire in single action. While this is not a horrible state of affairs, most revolver lovers prefer a lighter pull for both trigger and hammer. Finally, the Redhawk is simply far too heavy for extended carry.

Its really a loss that Colt never followed up on their foray into a 44 Magnum Single Action. The prototype was quite a nice looking piece. With this gun, they might have peeled away some of the glory sticking to the 29, but as it is, the 29 will always have its special place in history, and I don't think the hawk can unseat it.

After reading the replies I would have to sayI guess I`am lucky when I purchased this early model Redhawk thats pictured above for two reasons. First , Its accurate-  Winchester 240gr SWC-GC factory ammo was still available at the time and I was amazed to shoot 100yd groups that were a little over 3". I used that same ammo to take my first boar. Granted, I had the gun worked over by Austin Behlert who cut  a new forcing cone, install a trigger stop ( that helped with those 100yd groups) and some new internal springs that helped with the trigger, but I`ve had the same work done on other makes of handguns. Second, As said above , its a strong revolver that`s shot some pretty powerful handloads with no ill effects. I`ve owned a number of S&W 44`s over the years and can remember when their lock up was not so good. Had a 29 and a 629 that when a factory 240gr load was fired the cylinder would unlock and rotate  backwards and the hammer would hit the round I just fired. I sold the 629 and had the 29 made into a mod 57 parts gun. I know the internals have been updated and now own a 29 Classic and Mtn. Gun and would never be without a S&W 44 but at the same time I would never be without my Redhawk 44.....I`ve added a picture of the boar I took with my Redhawk and it shows 3 recovered bullets and one loaded round of Win. 240gr LSWC-GC. 

Didn't mean to ruffle any feathers here. You have a gun you really like, and it works for you, what else really matters?
Best wishes.

No feathers ruffeled here but after reading your and Gunsmiths responce I thought (only for a second) that you 2 may have a direct line to the old master himself. Someone mentions that Keith has modest size hands and the grip frame and trigger reach was not accomodating to any but large handed operators . Do you think that grip size would have bothered a man like Keith. Besides, my glove size is a tight fit medium yet the Redhawk grip fits me perfectly. ....... Gentleman, since I did not personally know Elmer Keith and am unaware of things like his hat size and such why not let this go the way of the steam engine and just leave it at Redhawk 1      S&W 2           All the best, James

James, that old Win. GC load was a good shooting one, I used it and the REM-UMC loads for a while in my SB and never found them lacking. Now I just plink or target shoot and use lead bullets since I have no need for gas checks or jacketed rounds any longer. Keep up the good shooting and good luck on your next hunt. Chris

Chris , Thanks for your kind words....

I dug through my files of saved articles and came across the following:  Guns & Ammo/ March 1980  Gun Notes by Elmer Keith: Review of Ruger 44mag Redhawk paragraph 9: "Owing to the weight of the gun and its large comortable grip, it`s a pleasure to shoot, and all proclaimed it was the most comfortable double action they had fired" ........So much for his" modest hand size". He goes on to say that the gun had a horrible trigger pull but added " I think Bill designed this gun for a hunting handgun, and with lighter trigger pulls it should prove one of the finest in existence. I am sure, from the great many Ruger Super Blackhawks I have seen that had been shortened from 7 1/2 inches to 4 5/8 inches, that a lot of these guns could be sold if they werer brought out with shorter barrels"......Last paragraph: "Bill Ruger is to be congratulated on this fine , most modern of all double sixguns". It looks like Mr. Keith has answered my original question of "Would Elmer have been pleased"..........And hear  I thought that you guys had a direct line to the grand old master....

Right on the money James, nice to hear the words of Elmer on the subject. Chris

Took 2 days of going through my files to locate Keiths review of the Redhawk.  As for my original question asking if Elmer would have approved of the gun to shoot his 44 cartridge..... next time I`ll word it it a little different. Hand size and pie plate banger-  amazing.......

A dose of reality-Gun magazines exist to do what? If you guessed,  "sell new guns", you get the little star.
It is pretty evident that Mr. Keith was looking hard for good things to say. If, however, you take the time to review his earlier writings, especially his thoughts on what make a good companion gun, they make it quite clear that what is important was NOT what was said, but what went UNSAID.

Folks from previous times often had better manners than people today. It was practical. I would never have expected Mr. Keith to refer to the hawk as a p.o.s. , rather to try and find its good points. Elmer Keith could have any gun he wanted. Exactly how many hawks did he own? Now, how many 29's rode in his holsters?
 

I beleive he owned serial number 15, as Bill Ruger sent him that number on all new guns for his collection. Now, is it in the museum in Boise? Or did he sell it off for a good profit, like he was wont to do on guns he really did not care for. I know his Ruger no.1 is in the museum, But the Wickliffe , that he was given is not. So I totally back up what MAK wrote.

Gunsmith and Mak, I suppose you two don't believe in Santa Claus either!!!!! Chris

Jamesfromjersey, If Elmer wouldn't approve of your gun I do and I'll PM you with my address and send it my way. I saw this as I havent been here for a while and it looked interesting. I do know a few things as fact and they are that Elmer was invited by Bill Ruger to the factory several times. Not exactly sure of the content of their talks but Elmer always received the new Ruger that came out and #0015 was his number. As for Elmer's hand size, it was sizeable, he had a size 7 boot but his gloves were huge.......I've tried em on. I'm 6'3" and 250.......ok, 260(its the holidays) and they were too big for me. As for a gun report in 1980, he was 80 years old, how many reports had he done by that time ? I think it would be difficult to find new things to say about the average gun and be honest to the reader. So write about what you approve of and don't overglorify whats not really there like many of the writers of today. Nowadays all the writers say great things about every gun they shoot, doesn't matter what it is....they ain't all that good. I think Elmer lived by the less is more rule. O.K., I'll disapear again for a few months.   And Chris, I believe in S.C.........he brought me a new Redhawk last year!

Hope you like your Redhawk Don...... Merry Christmas, Chris

Hi James: Just wondering if you have been hunting lately. Also like the look of that knife in your last post. Mine is # 1 but I don't have the brass or inset like yours. Chris S
 

 

Hi James, I just happened to see your write up on another forum. Sounds like you had a grand time in Africa and I love the Cape Buffalo part. I have had a cape hunt in my mind for years but doubt I will ever see one now. Reading about yours was great! Let us know when you go out again. My Best to you, Chris S