Ruger went to a cold hammer forged barrel with a stainless steel shroud/sleeve on their Redhawk a number of years ago. 2017 I think. There was much pissing and moaning about the Redhawk being "cheapened" by Ruger by going to a barrel surrounded by a sleeve that held the front sight and the underlug that housed the ejector rod - a la Smith and Wesson (and a few others). Maybe it was a cheaper way to do it, but I simply cannot find any disadvantage. I prefer a hammer forged barrel. And the sleeve is machined out of a piece of stainless steel and is a heavy piece of equipment on this gun in its own right, with a heavy solid rib and a heavy underlug. This is not a cheap stamped part.

My new Ruger Redhawk .44 5.5" has this barrel and shroud, and it is indistinguishable from my Redhawk from years ago, except that it looks like the muzzle is crowned differently. Since the change, I cannot find a single complaint on the web about this newish change other than "it ain't the way it used it be."

But nor can I find some information I am interested in.

I like my new .44 Redhawk so much, I just bought a 4.2" 8-shot .357 Redhawk. It will be here Tuesday.

Ruger departed from the easily removable front site that the Redhawk used to have, and the GP100 does have. Now the sight is in a dovetail. I think I might want a fiber optic sight on my .357 and don't know the dovetail size. Does anyone have any idea? Ruger doesn't offer any aftermarket front sight for this new design like it does for the previous easily removable type. And I can't find any others specifically for it.

Also, any idea how the shroud is held on? Press fitted, maybe? This is merely academic. I don't intend to mess with it. But I am curious. I don't see any pins holding it on. There is no nut at the front. The exploded diagram simply shows the barrel, shroud and front sight. There is no visible gap - not even hairline- to give an idea as to how its held in place. The only way it seems to distinguish the older Redhawk with the 1 piece barrel from the new Redhawk with the 2 piece barrel is by the look of the crown. And the sight.

Ruger's new Super GP-100 (really just a hybrid Redhawk/Super Redhawk) in .357 has relief cuts in the sleeve and you can see the barrel through those cuts. It would seem to be a pretty good basis for some customization. S&W's Performance Center pistol with their unusual barrels are almost all barrel/sleeve designs.

You can see a locating pin at the top rear of the shroud which will mate with a recess on the frame front to keep the shroud in alignment. The barrel is larger than the hole in the shroud (flanged), and the barrel is screwed into the frame holding everything together. A special key that fits the rifling is used to screw the barrel into the frame, same as S&W.

I figured without a nut it had to be something like that. The exploded diagram shows the barrel going down the sleeve from the front, not the sleeve over the barrel from the front. I just had no idea you could torque on a barrel using a key and rifling.

I'd like to see a Redhawk barrel disassembled. There just doesn't seem to be anything out there right now to look at. Ruger doesn't sell the parts like S&W does. For work, one would have to send the revolver to them.

So, this is a S&W barrel:


Assembled holding the shroud on:


Still looking for an image of what the sort of wrench used to put this together looks like.

Interesting thread...I've been curious about the details of this myself. I always thought the barrel was pressed into the sleeve, but I wasn't sure how they prevented it from coming loose over time...now I see that's not the case at all.

quote:

A special key that fits the rifling is used to screw the barrel into the frame, same as S&W.

That's pretty cool...I'd love to see how that works.

My guess would be that the barrel (cold) is pressed into the (hot) shroud. That is the way that custom wheels are made.

Oh, ick. When did they start doing that?

Ruger started on the Redhawk in something like 2017. Smith and Wesson has been doing it for years. Virtually all of their Perfomance Center revolvers, including the .500 magnums, have shrouded barrels. Dan Wesson does it. Colt did (not sure what they are doing now). The German company Korth does it. No doubt others do, too.

I don't see a downside except that it offends traditionalists. It has eliminated "canted barrel" issues because instead of timing the barrel to the frame, it is keyed. And I haven't found a single complaint regarding durability, which popped up now and then on Redhawks and traditionally barreled S&Ws.

I have an old school 640 Pro. Love the gun but they timed it totally canted. I don’t have a problem with this construction. It certainly is better than my 640. Lol. Now if everybody would use the S&W way of quick install front sights.

Yeah, Dan Wesson was doing it in the 1970s. I prefer the traditional method, thank you.

I prefer the old way, too. I just don't see any downsides to doing it this way. I certainly liked the option of easily changing out my front site. But I also like the idea of a hammer forged barrel.

When I bought this Redhawk I didn't really understand what the "sleeve and shroud" thing meant. I knew the crown was different than my old Redhawk, and the front sight was now dovetailed. But as far as heft and the feeling of solidness, there is no change. This one is flawless as far as I can tell and shoots great.

Ruger's Super GP100, which seems to be really a Redhawk/Super Redhawk hybrid, uses it, too.

Much faster-easier to make them, you don't have to worry about barrel timing/clocking.

The up side to the shooter is it gets rid of, or at least reduces the problem of barrel choke where it's screwed into the frame, which is very detrimental to accuracy.

I was thinking the barrel face could have some grooves machined into it that are machined off after being installed and a final crown done.

But something keeps telling me I read how it was done and that wasn't it.

My LCR is sleeved. Shoots great!

Those "hi cap" RedHawks are a hoot! We'll need a range report. With pix, please.

Thank you. I too had been wondering about how they did that. You did a great job of explaining it to me.