I want one of these, but can't make up my mind which one.

Main purpose would be a range gun ... but it would be called into service should a zombie apocalypse occur.

Which one would you buy and why?

(I know ... I know ... buy both ... )

I like the handiness of the 4.2" barrel Redhawk, not too long while carrying in a holster. I have the .44 Magnum version, it is very accurate....

I replaced the Hogue Bantam grips that came with the revolver with first a set of laminated grips like the ones shown on your photos, then with an older set of walnut factory Ruger grips, seen in the picture below:



The factory red laminated wood grips are good, a lttle slimmer than the walnut ones, but either are better than the rubber Hogues.

I agree with the 4.2 inch. Reason is that in the .357 it will balance much better and be more comfortable in the holster.
Range worthy? The 5.5 will not be that much better in accuracy than the 4.2 ...

__________________
John

...a slightly better range gun, but i'll bet the balance of the shorter one would be slighty better. For the purpose that you will be using it for and since you aren't hunting with it, the shorter barrel would be just fine.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

I would go with the shorter barrel especially if the 5 ounce noted difference is correct. Both are excellent well built guns.

I would go first class and get a Smith & Wesson 8-shot Model 627, in either a 4 or 6 inch barrel, if I were going to buy a new stainless steel .357 Magnum revolver.

I just wound up with a 5.5” 44mag in a trade. Came with factory wood and some snap on rubber that I assume are Hogues. Neither feel like they would be very comfortable with full mag loads. Was thinking of ordering a set of Decelerator grips

The 5.5" 44Mag I acquired came with thick Pachmayr's and they work well.

__________________
Release the Kraken

I would also agree with Warren and go with the S&W 627 Pro over the Ruger too. I will admit I am biased as I own one myself and love the way it shoots. Great trigger and accurate. Plus, looking at the specs between the 2, the 627 Pro is 4 ounces lighter than the 4.2" Ruger and both sell within $50 or so of each other. I also like the quick change front sight too and installed the gold bead patridge sight on mine as it is easier for my eyes to pick up.

I had the 5.5" .44. The 4.2" was not available back then. If it had been, I'd have much preferred the 4.2" gun.....ymmv

__________________
NRA Life, COTEP 640

The 4.2 inch will be more compact, by exactly 1.3 inches in length, and a few ounces lighter, which would make it easier to carry.

The 5.5 inch will be heavier, but you also get a longer sight radius, which will aid in accuracy, and you will get more velocity from your ammo.

Since it's primary purpose is a range gun, I'd opt for the 5.5 inch version.

1st IMHO getting a RH in .357 is a waste, gun is too big and heavy for that get a .44 if you want a .357 get an L frame Smith.
While I have a 5.5" I'd get a 4" if I had it to do over or maybe even the Ruger Redhawk Alaskan.
Here is my 5.5" RH with my 4" 66 for a size comparison:

Attached Images

post-26137-0-16670800-1408316952.jpg (114.0 KB, 29 views)

__________________
Expert at not being an Expert.

Go for the Ruger of your choice! The Redhawks are easily disassembled for internal cleaning compared to S&W sideplates. My Redhawk came with Ruger scope rings which hold my Leupold M8 scoper very well.

Get a GP100 or a 686 if you want a 357 mag

__________________
My sgntr is mor thn 30 chrctrs

I almost broke down and bought a Ruger instead of my 686, and I'm glad I didn't, because I WANTED a 686.

But the Rugers ARE good guns, my friends have them and I like them. The Redhawk and the old Security Six are two I wouldn't mind owning.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

Well, since Zombies don't exist, it would pretty much be a range gun, with self defense applications if the SHTF.

Personally, I wouldn't buy a Redhawk of any barrel length in .357 mag. Too bulky for the caliber. I'd look at a 686 7 shot, or an N frame 8 shot. Since its for range use, I would want the longer sight radious and slightly muzzle heavy balance of the 5.5 inch barrel. If you can comfortably carry a 4.2 inch Redhawk, you can comfortably carry a 5.5 inch Redhawk. But then, you didn't indicate it would be used as a carry gun.

I am actually a fan of the Redhawk, and one in .44 mag. has been one of my go to deer guns for about 40 years. If you like Rugers, the GP 100 would probably be a better choice.

Larry

4.2 vote here.

__________________
Dave Ramsey Cultist

The 4.2 , 45 Long Colt/45 Auto . Now you have the versatility of two different rounds and cheaper at the range too !

While I don't own one in 4.2'' thus I can't compare,I must admit that I'm particularly sold to 5'' bbl on any revolver.
My 5.5'' Redhawk is with a 5.5''bbl and I find that for me,it balances very well.Almost as good as a 5'' model 27!

I'd go with the 4.2", I have the 5.5" in .45 Colt and it gets a bit heavy at times. I'd also recommend that you look for the GP100 in 4.2" with a 7 shot cylinder the trigger pull is much better than the Redhawk. That's my recommendation if it's Ruger that you want.

I hear great things about the S&W TRR8 5" 8 shot which is considerably lighter than either of the Rugers.

For your information... I really like Ruger Redhawks, unless you want nothing less than 8 shots in your .357 then either the Redhawk or TRR8 are your options... unless Taurus makes one : )

I've had several. IMHO a RH in .357 is a waste. My favorite, and the only one left, is a 7 1/2" .45 Colt. It takes full potential of the RH frame.

357 in a Redhawk is a dream. The gun handles recoil so well making follow up shots quick and easy. Eight shots of 357 - bring that to the apocalypse and see so many confused zombies. "I thought he fired six. Didn't he fire six? How is it he's still firing?"

Redhawks fit the same holster as a N frame so the bulk isn't that much if at all.

Go for what balances in your hand. Some folks like the 4 inchers others the 5.5. Go with what you like in your hand.

That ruger weighs over 3 pounds . Thats a whole lotta weight for a .357

I agree with the .357 opinion. I myself would opt for the 45Colt/45ACP version. (who asked me, right?) Bob