The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Revolver Forum

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old September 8, 2008, 10:48 PM   #1
Smaug
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2004
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 3,210
Blew up my Redhawk

That didn't take long, seeing as how I just got it yesterday.

So I took it to the range today, intending to zero the scope for about 1/2" high at 25 yards. Just to get used to shooting a big 44 again, I loaded up one of my Light Magnum handloads. 240 gr. Ranier plated flat point bullet, over 6-12 gr. of Unique. should be about 44 Special power level. I'm 100% sure these loads are OK. Not double-charged or any of that jazz. I shot half of this batch probably 3 years ago in my S&W 29. They are beautiful loads. Very accurate, not too much kick.

So, I draw a bead on the target, cock the hammer, and cut 'er loose. BOOM clunk, clunk, clunk. It took a second to register what happened. The gun's weight was cut in half. I looked downrange, and the barrel/scope assembly had just stopped rolling.

I'm thinking the guy that traded this in somehow broke it. Maybe HE did a super-hot handload? Then glued it back together and traded it in on something. I don't believe gun shops test fire trade-ins, right? They probably just clean them up, give them the once-over, and mark them up 100% over what they paid, right?

Anyway, here's the gun:







Look at the cross section at the break. I'm no expert, but I didn't think gun barrel steel looked so... hollow. Doesn't that look like broken JB Weld to you guys?

The question is now: What do I do? Have any of you had something like this happen? The shop that sold it to me has a 30 day warranty. But I'm sure they'll ask what ammo I was shooting, and when I tell them it was a light magnum handload, they'll probably just slam the gate.

If I give the whole story to Ruger, they might fix it, but they also might not. I could of course furnish them with a couple of my handloads for them to disassemble and analyze if they ask. But I might have to pay them $100 or something for the service.

I wonder if I can get out of this without getting burned.
Smaug is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 10:59 PM   #2
tplumeri
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2007
Posts: 1,919
Quote:
I loaded up one of my Light Magnum handloads.
no, i'm sure you are mistaken.
you shot factory ammo right?
bottom line:
this gun was an accident waiting to happen. factory defect?
point is, let ruger figure out what the problem was. if it was defective out of the factory you'll get a new gun.
if it was blown up......well, they'll tell you that too.
JMHO
tom
tplumeri is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 11:04 PM   #3
Sarge
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 12, 2002
Location: MO
Posts: 5,453
Bad casting, severe over-torquing, or a combination of both.

Trust me...a handload didn't do that.

Call Ruger & make arrangements to send it back.
__________________
People were smarter before the Internet, or imbeciles were harder to notice.
Sarge is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 11:09 PM   #4
zxcvbob
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,720
Quote:
over 6-12 gr. of Unique
Which was it, 6 or 12? Twelve would be a significant overcharge (about 40000 psi) with a 240 grain bullet. But that's not how it should fail.

Quote:
I wonder if I can get out of this without getting burned.
The scope is worth $200+ (maybe a lot more). The gun looks OK, just needs a new barrel. I agree, the break shouldn't look like that (it should be shiny). I think you got screwed, but you'll come out OK.
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth
zxcvbob is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 11:13 PM   #5
laytonj1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 1, 2005
Posts: 4,443
An overcharge would have taken out the cylinder. Your barrel just snapped in half. Looks like a defective barrel, but it is coincidental that it broke on the first shot you put thru it... being a used gun.

Jim
laytonj1 is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 11:18 PM   #6
laytonj1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 1, 2005
Posts: 4,443
The break will be rough. And a little dark because of the burning powder charge in it when it let go.
Did the bullet make it out of the barrel?

Jim
laytonj1 is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 11:22 PM   #7
Stumper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Colorado
Posts: 438
That is a metalurgical problem, NOT an overpressure issue. If the cylyinder had ruptured, questions about the loads might be relevant. That failure looks like clorinated solvent induced cracking or some such.
__________________
"Let us speak courteously, deal fairly, and keep ourselves armed and ready." Theodore Roosevelt

"If only God has magic, how does Santa get down the chimney?" Natalie Peters age 4
Stumper is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 11:26 PM   #8
HoraceHogsnort
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 28, 2008
Location: Stanislaus Co., Mexifornia
Posts: 615
So, what's a rebarrel gonna cost ya if'n Ruger don't want to make it good? It probably won't break your bank account and you have a new barrel, whatever length you desire.

Oh, BTW, if the scope is damaged, ITS A LEUPOLD!!

I think you meant to say 6 1/2 gr. of Unique, did you not?
HoraceHogsnort is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 11:29 PM   #9
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,677
Not the first time I've heard abouot this

Although I can't remember exactly where I heard it before, but I do recall hearing about a guy who had the barrel come off of his Redhawk, some time ago.

I don't think your reload was the cause, but I do think you ought to find a better way to describe it. Saying 6-12gr Unique sounds like you don't know what is loaded in the case. Is it 6gr? or 12gr? or somewhere in between?

Call Ruger, and contact the gunshop where you bought it. The gunshop will have a record of who they got it from, and if it turns out the barrel came off on him and he JB welded it back on (unlikely, but not beyond possibility), there ought to be consequences for him.

Ruger will want the gun, and want to know what happened. BE HONEST! No matter how much it hurts. Yes, all the makers say that reloads void their warranty, but except for Glock, I have never heard of one not honoring the warranty when the reload wasn't the cause of the problem. Also there is the gunshop 30 day guarantee, and I would think that any costs Ruger imposes (and there may not be any) ought to be borne by the shop, not you.

The metal in your pictures looks crystalized, which is a flaw, not damage from your reload. An overcharged (overpressure) round in a revolver normally blows out the cylinder wall(s) and bends the frame. It does not shear off the barrel.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 11:31 PM   #10
Smaug
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2004
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 3,210
tplumeri - You're right, I was mistaken. It was in fact a factory magnum.

Sarge - I just sent a contact email through Ruger's website. They will supposedly contact me within 3 business days. (I'm hoping tomorrow)

zxcvbob - My 48th Edition Lyman reloading manual says 10.3 - 11.5 gr. of Unique for a 240 gr. jacketed bullet. 11.5 is at about 39k psi. I'm 90% sure this was more on the high side of the 44 Special loads, like 7 gr. The recoil was not in the same ballpark as a 240 gr. factory magnum. I don't have the load data any more. I had it in the Lee Shooter program, which crapped out on me. From now on, it is all going on good old fashioned paper.

laytonj1 - Yep, the bullet made it out. The barrel is still clean inside. It hit in about the right area of the target. Look at the bottom photo in this thread. That was shot at about 25 ft. I expect it would be low if the previous owner had it zeroed for 50-100 yards.

I'm already kind of a Ruger fan; if they make this right, I will be impressed. The more I look at it, the more it looks like bad casting.

I just hope they don't replace the gun. This one has a VERY nice trigger. Much nicer than the new Super Redhawks I've tried.
Smaug is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 11:33 PM   #11
Smaug
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2004
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 3,210
When did Ruger get into investment casting? Was it about this time, (1983) or was it much earlier? Maybe they were in their infancy when this one was made...
Smaug is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 11:34 PM   #12
HOGGHEAD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 2, 2008
Location: Rivesville, WV
Posts: 637
Burned???

You want to get out of it without being burned?? You have got to be kidding?? You are lucky you did not get hurt. You should go out and buy some lottery tickets immediately!!!

Honesty is the best policy. I would first ask the dealer for a refund, but you may not get one. I would then contact Ruger, and tell them the truth. They are not dummies. And the truth can go a long way.

However I agree with you. IF this was the first shot you took with the pistol then I would be a bit pis*** at whoever traded it in. I imagine there was a problem with the pistol, and the original owner wanted to get rid of it. I have a hard time believing the gun dealer would be involved. If you could prove that then he would be in a terrible liability position. Go talk to the dealer first. Tom.
HOGGHEAD is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 11:37 PM   #13
HOGGHEAD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 2, 2008
Location: Rivesville, WV
Posts: 637
Casting

The Ruger's are and have been casting. That is why the S&W's cost more. S&W machines their pistols, and that costs more. Tom.
HOGGHEAD is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 11:42 PM   #14
Sport45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 1999
Location: Too close to Houston
Posts: 4,196
I remembered something about Ruger having problems with barrels breaking due to the thread lubricant used in initial assembly. Found this on Wikipedia. Send it to Ruger and they should make it good.

Quote:
Originally Posted by On Wikipedia
Problems with the Redhawk
When Ruger started to scale up the GP-100 to build a .44 Magnum version, they began to have reports of failures in the Redhawk revolvers. Some Redhawks were reported to be separating at the junction between barrel and frame. It was not known at the time why this was happening; the Redhawk had been on the market for years with no reported problems, but Ruger decided to address the issue anyway, by extending the frame 2.5 inches past the cylinder face, all the way to the end of the ejector rod, to provide a massive surface into which to thread the barrel. The extended frame also provided enough length to allow scope bases to be mounted on the frame, rather than on the barrel as was done on the scoped versions of the Redhawk. It was eventually determined that the barrel separations on the Redhawks were due to a change in the lubricant used when attaching the barrels to the frames, but by that time the new Super Redhawk design was already well underway and the extended frame was kept.
__________________
Proud member of the NRA and Texas State Rifle Association. Registered and active voter.
Sport45 is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 11:46 PM   #15
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,930
Yup, known problem.

I suspect that the previous owner didn't shoot it much and that this is one of the batch (from quite a few years ago) that had the barrel separation problems.

Ruger will take care of you, no doubt about it. When you send them the gun, ask them to clean up the trigger while they have it. Might as well get a little something for your trouble.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 11:50 PM   #16
CraigC
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2001
Location: West Tennessee
Posts: 4,300
Couple things. You can't stuff enough Unique in the case to blow up a .44 Redhawk. Ain't gonna happen. These guns can take nearly 50,000psi in .45Colt. However, don't tell Ruger you used a handload. They have always recommended factory loads only in their guns. If the handload was the problem, the cylinder would've blown as the barrel does not contain the pressure. But Ruger 'could' use that as an excuse to charge you. I have heard of this happening with the first run of Super Blackhawk Hunters as the barrel shank is smaller than on the Redhawk. The added weight of the scope increased the leverage the barrel had against the shank and SNAP! I have not heard of it happening to a Redhawk but that doesn't mean anything. What you have is a defect, period.

Send it to Ruger, they will fix it and it will likely not even cost you shipping. Their customer service is unparalleled.
CraigC is offline  
Old September 8, 2008, 11:54 PM   #17
Smaug
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2004
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 3,210
If it comes up, I will be honest then about the loading. But if it was a known problem, it doesn't seem like the load had anything to do with it, and they probably won't even ask.

That must have been some damned corrosive thread lock, to eat into barrel-grade stainless steel like that. I suspect it was a bad batch of castings, and they didn't want to admit that this could happen with their castings, since the S&W were looking for a chink in the armor already.

Thanks for that quote, Sport45. It seems like this would have happened even with the extended frame at the front. (which I think looks hideous, by the way)
Smaug is offline  
Old September 9, 2008, 12:02 AM   #18
bcrash15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 7, 2007
Posts: 455
Agreed with comments so far. There is no way that was caused just by a reload.

Pretty much the only way you can screw up a revolver barrel is firing into a squib/obstruction.

Can't tell much from the pics, unless you can get a real close macro of the cleaned surfaces. But that radial ridge in the metal looks scary. Possibly overtorque of the barrel, but it'd really have to be extreme. Improper heat treatment, forming defect, or previous abuse would be my prime culprits. Barrels strike me as something that would generally only undergo sudden brittle failure without leaving metallurgical traces (like say a driveshaft or connecting rod would), so who knows how long it was like that.

edit: well, looks like you guys diagnosed the problem before I finished typing
bcrash15 is offline  
Old September 9, 2008, 12:09 AM   #19
HOGGHEAD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 2, 2008
Location: Rivesville, WV
Posts: 637
Wikipedia??

Isn't that the outfit that makes up history when it does not know the truth??

It said Ruger started to "scale up the GP-100 to build a 44 magnum version". This line is "Hogwash". The GP100 came out after the RedHawk, not before. And the Super RedHawk could no way be considered a "beefed up GP100". Tom.
HOGGHEAD is offline  
Old September 9, 2008, 12:18 AM   #20
Mike Irwin
Staff
 
Join Date: April 13, 2000
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 41,374
To the best of my knowledge, Ruger has been investment casting since the 1960s, but they have never used investment cast barrels.
__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Baby Jesus cries when the fat redneck doesn't have military-grade firepower.
Mike Irwin is offline  
Old September 9, 2008, 12:34 AM   #21
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,930
Hogghead,

The GP100 was scaled up to make the Super Redhawk (not the Redhawk). The GP100 came out in 1986, the Super RedHawk in 1987. The Redhawk and the Super Redhawk are two very different revolvers, the only similarities being their initial chambering, the fact that they're both made by the same company and the similar names.

The Super Redhawk is, in fact, a scaled up GP100. The action and the frame, with the exception of the frame extension at the barrel is are pretty much identical to the GP100 with the exception of size.

You are correct that the Redhawk came out before the GP100, but if you read the article carefully you'll see that it doesn't say the REDHAWK was the scaled up GP100, it merely says that at the time the GP100 was being scaled up (to make the Super Redhawk) Ruger began getting reports on the Redhawks failing at the barrel/frame junction. You'll also note that the article does state that the "Redhawk had been on the market for years with no reported problems".

The Wiki article seems to be pretty much correct as far as I can determine.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old September 9, 2008, 12:37 AM   #22
Sgt.Fathead
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 3, 2007
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 1,637
Ruger will make it good for you. Be honest and, me, I'd call them as a voice on the line is more speedy and easier to 'read' than an email. Glad you weren't injured! Bad that this happened but you could be typing your emails with stumps, right? I've had nothing but good luck with Ruger customer service.

Let us know how you fare.
Sgt.Fathead is offline  
Old September 9, 2008, 12:53 AM   #23
HOGGHEAD
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 2, 2008
Location: Rivesville, WV
Posts: 637
Wikipedia

John I agree with you somewhat. But the article says RedHawk-not Super RedHawk. And Super RedHawk is not referred to until the last line. Also I believe the author of the post has a RedHawk-Not a Super RedHawk. Or at least that is how his picture looks to me?? And the article says that there is separation at the frame and barrel connection-of the "Redhawk". Which as I stated was out before the GP100. So I stand by my criteque of the article, I do believe it is very misleading. But that is just my opininon. Tom.
HOGGHEAD is offline  
Old September 9, 2008, 12:56 AM   #24
ChicagoTex
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2008
Location: DFW Metroplex
Posts: 1,909
Quote:
I don't believe gun shops test fire trade-ins, right?
Mine does. They run a full magazine or cylinder through anything you trade in to them prior to finalizing the sale/trade and forking over your money/store credit. They don't want you pulling a fast one on them and they sure don't want to then extend that fast one on someone else. I call it good business.
ChicagoTex is offline  
Old September 9, 2008, 01:08 AM   #25
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,930
The article is about the problems with the Redhawk, if you read it carefully, it states (correctly) that the Redhawk had been on the market for years at the time that the GP100 was being scaled up to a .44Magnum.
Quote:
When Ruger started to scale up the GP-100 to build a .44 Magnum version, they began to have reports of failures in the Redhawk revolvers. Some Redhawks were reported to be separating at the junction between barrel and frame. It was not known at the time why this was happening; the Redhawk had been on the market for years with no reported problems,
The article isn't stating that the Redhawk was the scaled up GP100 or that the GP100 came out before the Redhawk, it clearly states that the revolver under development was the SUPER Redhawk.
Quote:
It was eventually determined that the barrel separations on the Redhawks were due to a change in the lubricant used when attaching the barrels to the frames, but by that time the new Super Redhawk design was already well underway and the extended frame was kept.
Yes, the author of this thread has a RedHawk, that's the model with the barrel separation issues in the article. There have never been any barrel separation issues with the Super Redhawk, it wasn't even in production during the timeframe that the Redhawk barrel separation issues were discovered.

What the article is saying is this.
When the Super Redhawk was being designed (scaled up from the GP100) Ruger got reports of barrel separations on the Redhawk which had been on the market for years at that time.

Ruger decided to beef up the frame on the Super Redhawk (which was being designed at the time) due to the problems with the Redhawk and made that design change (frame extension on Super Redhawk) before it was determined that the problem was actually improper lubricant in the Redhawk assembly process.
It may not be saying it in the most clear way, but it's not inaccurate.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
ruger redhawk hunter

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.11886 seconds with 8 queries