Ruger’s New Super Redhawk in 10mm

[bmk20398]

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/11/10/rugers-new-super-redhawk-10mm/

The Cult of 10 should be quite happy with the latest announcement from Sturm, Ruger & Co, the Super Redhawk can now be had in 10mm.

[TKM]

I had a 10mm Ruger many years ago. Fun gun.

I don't see this one making it onto the roster though.

[bmk20398]

Revolver can be on roster, or RifleGear will do single action exempt $50.
I have several .40S&W so this one can be companion.
shooting 135gr from SRH... what a wasting steel

[plumbum]

Huh, interesting.
I would have totally guessed a 10mm in a Blackhawk or GP, but a Super?
Sexy, but that is going to be a hand loaders pet project, no doubt!

[dozer wright]

Can't wait hope to see one one soon.
It would be. A great Hunting gun or In a Ruger Alaskan sized gun would be awesome . It would shoot like a 22 lr out of a frame that size .

[splithoof]

I have one in .44 Magnum; it is a decent, large and heavy revolver. Why they think that chambering will sell much I don't know. For the size of the revolver, there are other and IMO much better cartridges to take advantage of the mass. If one must have that in a revolver, get a Smith.

[SloChicken]

No sensible reason for this chambering.

The 10mm struggles to keep up with standard .357 and IMO the SRH frame is huge for such a caliber.

[bmk20398]

10mm GP100 will be 5 shots, maybe too small.
I want to see accuracy review.

BudsGunShop have in stock

[CinnamonBear723]

The cult of 10mm is happy indeed

[Fishslayer]

Redhawk, yes. SRH is just overkill... and fugly to boot. SBH? Why?We already have .41 Magnum.

[Canucky]

What year did S&W stop making the 610?

[GW]

So its basically a heavy 6-round .41 Magnum or an underpowered .44 Magnum that requires moonclips, at a suggested retail price at $1,159.

Well, yeah but
but

It'll soak up the recoil?

[SloChicken]

So its basically a heavy 6-round .41 Magnum or an underpowered .44 Magnum that requires moonclips, at a suggested retail price at $1,159.

For comparison, a 10-round (in CA) Glock 20 has a suggested retail price of $637.

More like a .357 mag. And it struggles to keep up there.

10mm maxes out around 750lbft
.357mag is around 800lb/ft

[GW]

That's only comparing energy. Compared to a .357 Magnum, a 10mm has a larger diameter (.40" vs .357"), and heavier loads (200gr+) with much more momentum (momentum=mass*velocity). So a 10mm is more similar to a .41 Magnum (.41" diameter, 200gr+ loads) than a .357 Magnum.

That said, I agree with your earlier post that there is no sensible reason for this chambering.

The chambering is fine. 10 mm is a great round. It just doesn't need such a heavy revolver to manage it. I'm wondering if Ruger just made a giant run of Super RedHawk frames and decided to try this out.
Like someone left the CNC machine running over a holiday weekend and they came back to a huge pile of SRH frames.

[Jimmy's]

As there is NO comparison between a glock and a revolver. I'll take a 5 or 6 round anything revolver over any glock going.