Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

HEAD0001 · Post by **HEAD0001** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 2:33 pm

I have been looking for a revolver to go with my Low wall in 45 Colt. I have been looking at the Ruger BH and the BFR. And I have done alot of research and discussion on these two. However I keep getting drawn back to the S&W Model 25. What do you guys think about the Model 25?? Been looking at a couple of older 25-5 and 25-7's. But also considering the new model(not sure what version the new one is, but I am thinking it is a 13 or above??).

Revolver will be used for shooting and hunting deer and ground hogs out to 100 yards or so. Tom.

adirondakjack · Post by **adirondakjack** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 2:48 pm

I like em BUT, they are not quite up to the strength of a Ruger..... For woodchucks, I'd want a 7 1/2" BH loaded HOT for flat trajectory.

rjohns94 · Post by **rjohns94** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 2:51 pm

saw a redhawk in 45 colt on gunbroker the other day. a lot stronger than the s&w

madman4570 · Post by **madman4570** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 3:35 pm

How bout ?
Deer Hunting out to 200yards? Can be wild or mild?
http://www.ktpguns.com/interior.php/pid/28/gid/151325

Otherwise like the .45 Redhawk like Mike said!

milton · Post by **milton** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 4:39 pm

I like the Smith 25 myself.Yes it is not a Ruger but I still like them as a side carry and they are "strong enough" Heck you have the rifle for hotter loads.If you do try to find one either buy a later gun or check the throats before you buy.My first one had .458 throats and a .452 barrel and many of the early guns were like this.
To the best of my knowledge all of the non-pinned guns have good throat diameters.

1886 · Post by **1886** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 5:04 pm

I had a Smith Mountain Gun in .45 Colt. Nice revolver. I now have a 4" Redhawk which I prefer only because I can load it he!! for stout! I had Jack Huntington of Grass Valley, Ca. work it over. It is a companion to a .45 Rossi 92. 1886.

Malamute · Post by **Malamute** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 5:06 pm

I don't think it takes super powered loads to shoot varmints at 100 yards, or to kill deer. The Smith will work fine, if that's what you like.

I tend towards Smiths also, tho in the 29's, and I rarely shoot full power loads.

.45colt · Post by **.45colt** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 5:36 pm

No way would I want a Smith to pair up with a low wall. They are fine guns no doubt but I wouldn't want to worry about any loads hotter than standard ammo. If a double action was in the picture, it would be an earlier Redhawk like this one.Good Luck. Jim.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewIt ... =191393910

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 5:57 pm

Having been the owner and user of an early 80s S&W 25-5 since it was brand new, I cannot recommend them for anything other than standard SAAMI pressure loads. The one I have has around 8,000 rounds through it and has developed end shake problems three times. And the central locking parts have worn to the point of looseness and have had to be replaced.
They are not durable enough for hunting strength loads, unless you keep them at or around 14,000 PSI.

Perhaps the newer ones made in the late 80s or 90s would be stronger, but I'm not willing to spend the cash to find out.

My suggestion would be to find a Ruger Redhawk if you must have a double action. You can find the older ones in 5.5" and 7.5" barrels and the current ones have the 4" barrel.
If you can use a single action then the Ruger Blackhawk makes a gem dandy hunting hand gun.

Joe

HEAD0001 · Post by **HEAD0001** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 6:03 pm

I had a fellow offer me a Black Hawk in 45 Colt for $375. But the barrel is 4-5/8". I really wanted one longer.

I imagine $375 is a decent deal. But it would probably take another $25 to get it shipped plus another $20 to have an FFL handle the deal. That brings it up to $420. And I can get a new Bisley with the 7-1/2" barrel for $525 out the door. So I do not think the used one is that good of a deal?? It is in good shape. Tom.

1886 · Post by **1886** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 6:27 pm

.45colt wrote:No way would I want a Smith to pair up with a low wall. They are fine guns no doubt but I wouldn't want to worry about any loads hotter than standard ammo. If a double action was in the picture, it would be an earlier Redhawk like this one.Good Luck. Jim.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewIt ... =191393910

This is a great point and why I opted for the Ruger. I can safely interchange loads for the Rossi and the Ruger. 1886.

Otto · Post by **Otto** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 6:39 pm

J Miller wrote:Having been the owner and user of an early 80s S&W 25-5 since it was brand new, I cannot recommend them for anything other than standard SAAMI pressure loads. The one I have has around 8,000 rounds through it and has developed end shake problems three times. And the central locking parts have worn to the point of looseness and have had to be replaced.

Joe

Was that with SAAMI loads, or warmer?

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 6:50 pm

Otto wrote:
J Miller wrote:Having been the owner and user of an early 80s S&W 25-5 since it was brand new, I cannot recommend them for anything other than standard SAAMI pressure loads. The one I have has around 8,000 rounds through it and has developed end shake problems three times. And the central locking parts have worn to the point of looseness and have had to be replaced.

Joe
Was that with SAAMI loads, or warmer?

Otto,
The vast majority was SAAMI strength loads. Some were 9.0grs Unique under a 265 gr SWC witch is about 21K or so, and only one cylinder was heavy loads and those were Keiths 18.5grs 2400 with the 265 Keith.

Don't get me wrong, I really do like the S&W 25-5, but from my experience the older ones are really limited to what they'll handle over the long haul. They won't blow up with heavier loads, but they will develop end shake quickly and that will render them inoperable due to the excessive head space it creates. The head space causes light firing pin impacts and misfires.

As I said, I have no experience with the later ones so I don't know for sure how much more, if any, durable they might be.

Joe

HEAD0001 · Post by **HEAD0001** » Mon Sep 20, 2010 7:39 pm

I do not hot rod the 45 Colt. No need to with a 255 grain pill. Tom.

milton · Post by **milton** » Tue Sep 21, 2010 7:54 am

Just for the information take a look at this link! http://www.handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=12

Idiot · Post by **Idiot** » Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:57 pm

A Ruger 5.5 inch NM Blackhawk is easy to pack (2nd lightest among the NMBH family - 4.5 inch is 1st) easy to hit with, can handle any 45 Colt hunting load short of the 5 shot cylinder stuff, and can be had for less than 500 bones brand new. Holsters to carry it come in any and every style imaginable and can be had for less than 50 bucks. The NM Blackhawk will work under adverse conditions, when wet, when dirty, and will continue to serve you and your great grandkids hunting needs. Right out of the box they shoot straight and are ready to go, AND, if you want to gussy them up, the menu is extensive beginning at bare bones no nonsense from one of the Linebaughs to full pimp from Reeder. There is no firearm better suited right out of the box to fit a hunter's needs than a Ruger NM Blackhawk.

After you settle down and bloody the Ruger, you can go out and find an older Smith and Wesson to plink with and take out occasionally for a little dry weather tree stand work. They are nice but just a tad light for real day in and day out hunting. I own Smith's too, but understand that they are the Jacobs of my handgun family while the Rugers tend to be the Esas. Have fun.

Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Re: Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Re: Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Re: Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Re: Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Re: Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Re: Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Re: Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Re: Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Re: Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Re: Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Re: Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Re: Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Re: Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Re: Back to the 45 Colt Revolver

Re: Back to the 45 Colt Revolver