Alright, guys. I am trying to determine whether this is an urban legend in the making. This claim has popped up a few times on various gun boards and I am trying to determine if it is valid. The claims have never been accompanied with pictures either. I have also heard the claim that Ruger has acknowledged this problem. I find that very difficult to believe as such an acknowledgement would call into question the safety of all the SRH 454s currently in circulation and would almost have to result in a recall. To say the least, a recall would be big news and would hardly go unnoticed. I really doubt the validity of either claim, cracked cylinders and Ruger's acknowledgement of "a problem". The only thing I can say for sure and have seen firsthand at the range is the difficulty of extracting some of the Hornady ammo. I would like for SRH 454 owners to speak up. I have one of these on order and would like to think I haven't purchased a hand grenade. Thanks in advance.

------------------

Go to sixgunner.com and look up the back issues. Someone did thoroughly research it, and there are no documented cases of cracked cylinders. Ruger has never recieved a 454 super redhawk with a cracked cylinder. It is an urban legend pure and simple. All the naysayers that said you have to have a 5 shooter for a 454 are wrong, and someone one of those dufuses started this. I guess enough folks had doubts, so started to pass on this false rumor.

To show my confidence in Rugers, I purchased a 480, with its, gasp, wafer thin steel between chambers. I've only put 50 rds through it, but my buddie has put 100's through his, and no problems, just amazingly small groups for a factory gun, and 390's @ 1200 fps isn't a wimp load, though less then published max loads.

I've shot a couple different 454's, and 480's, they are very well made guns. Can they be blown up, absolutely, so can any gun. Stick with published factory loads, and you'll be fine. The 454 cylinder has very thick walls, the thickness from the cylinder wall to the od of the cylinder is about the same as a freedom arms, actually, I think the 454 is a tad thicker.

Thanks, Paul. The only thing that I thought might account for this - if it even happened at all, which I doubt like hell - would be the shooter using a considerable quantity of 45 Colts and then attempting to load and shoot 454s without first thoroughly brushing and cleaning the chambers. I did see one guy at my range doing this, and he wondered why he had difficult extraction. Duhhhhhhhhh! Thank you for your input, sir.

One of my industry trade magazines had a write up in it a couple of months ago about the steel used by Ruger in the new SRH 454 and 480.

It is a proprietary steel alloy, developed specifically for Ruger, and they own the rights to it. They also proof test their cyl's with 70,000 psi loads! I would not worry about cracking the cyl's at all. You would have to turn your brain completely off while making handloads to break it.

I read an article in a machinist trade magazine about the steel also. It said that it is not so amazing to make the steel, it is easy to make it that strong. The fact is that it can be that strong and still be reasonably easy to machine. Now that is amazing! Slim

I've heard all this stuff, and I have faith in Ruger, and if anything would run a-foul, hopefully they'd let us know!

Dan: This is typical "internet bull$h!t"!! Don't believe a single word of it. If ANYTHING like this was even remotely true, Ruger would be posting recall notices everywhere but the Saturday Evening Post. The legal complications would be unimanageable! Something like this gets started, and is fueled by the "net", and off it goes. Ruger .454's are as safe as they can possibly be. I have a habit of NEVER believing these kind of stories unless they are substanciated with pictures of GOOD quality that remove any doubt. Now a days anyone with a keyboard can pull off an "internet hoax". Bill T.