I have a 4" Model 29-3, very nice gun. Considering trading for a new 4" Redhawk. The Redhawk would be my fishing in bear country, hiking/camping gun. I like the Redhawk because heavy loads can be run through it, it is stainless steel and well, Ruger just builds a good gun. I already have a Super Blackhawk and am wondering if trading the M-29 is really a good idea. If I were to trade I would have the Redhawk worked on a bit by a gunsmith, action job, fiber optic front sight, and all sharp corners rounded off
but probably not ported.

Anyone care to offer their thoughts regarding my trade idea?

I’d be unlikely to make the trade.

The Ruger is bigger and heavier than the Smith and less appealing for actual carry while fishing and hiking.

While the Ruger is a better choice if you’re loading with a coal shovel, standard 44mag ammo is plenty and is fine in the Smith.

I don't have an opinion on trading, But Gemini Customs does great work on Ruger upgrades. I have a SP101 from them and it is sweet.

I've never owned either of the Rugers....BIL has both and they're brutes...in .41 and .44.....I'd try to keep both if I could,if not, and I was in the 29 cheap enough, the Ruger would not be bad...

Reminds me of some of the selling & trades that seemed like a good idea at the time. So no.

In fact I have been thinking of selling my Lew Horton 629. Thanks for bringing me to my senses.

I wouldn't make that trade.

__________________
SWHF #595

Never..............

__________________
S&W Accumulator

what someone said....help pay the toll for the troll?

I wouldn't, but that's My opinion. You can shoot some heavy loads in Your Smith. Just not a steady diet. I'd carry some Buffalo Bore 300 grainers when in bear country and standard loads elsewhere.Besides, You are going to spend a lot trying to get a smooth action and trigger and You'll still have a Ruger. Keep the Smith.

I own a 629 and a Ruger Redhawk in 44 mag. If I were in brown bear country I would carry the Ruger over the 629 only because I could shoot the Buffalo Bore 305 gr. LBT LFN out of it. The S&W 29 IMO would always be more valuable and desirable handgun to own. And your correct about the Ruger being able to handle the "heavy loads" which is your intended purpose for the gun.

Sounds like a good trade to me...

if you're on the receiving end of the Model 29-3!

__________________
FBINA, 204th Session

I have a RH and a SRH, and love them both. I would never trade a 4" 29 for one, however.

For defense purposes you can carry your 29 with some pretty stout loads. I would never trade that off.

From what I have read , trying to tune the action on a redhawk is pretty hard . The Super Redhawk's mechanism is different so it's easier to tune , again from what I have read .
No , I would not trade a good S&W 29 for a redhawk w/o trying the redhawk out first to see how it feels , shoots and carries . I had one , once . They are built plenty tough alright , but are like hauling around a bag full of bricks when carrying them . Regards Paul

I am looking at the Ruger for (here we go) bear loads. Not that I will ever need them, but the motto of an old boys organization that is currently in deep **** is "be prepared". The organization may not be around much longer but the motto will be.

If you intend a steady diet of heavy loads, then the Ruger RH is the better choice. I own both, and my 7 1/2 inch RH is one of my favorite hunting handguns. Used it for years developing some pretty stout magnum loads, and it is as tight and accurate as when it was new almost 40 years ago.

Larry

Attached Images

rugerredhawk.jpg (94.5 KB, 93 views)

IF you do, make sure you check the barrel cylinder gap & over-all fit. Another thing the RH has a different internal trigger mech. etc than the SRH. Also aftermarket grips are harder to find I believe. I have never owned a Redhawk but do own a Ruger SRH Alaskan. I am not an expert on Redhawks however if you are planning on shooting a lot of the higher power stuff then this for you may be a fair trade.

I have the Redhawk .44 Mag.4" I love my tank it's a keeper!

Attached Images

16684215_1248662528545820_8571245418434249980_n_zpsky2mo1hj.jpg (74.9 KB, 96 views)

__________________
Life is short,live it fully.

Nope!

If the Redhawk is a great deal, then buy it outright....

The 29 should stay with the home team.....

I like the a Ruger's and have a GP100 and a Blackhawk in 357 but I would never trade a nice S&W for a Ruger. The best thing to do is get the plastic out or dig up a jar of money and buy the Ruger and keep the S&W.

Have considered that very thought. Would buy the Redhawk brand new. If I were to trade I really can't get what the Model 29 is really "worth". I am in it pretty cheap however, I bought it new in the mid 1980's and have rarely fired it.

I now have a backyard full of holes and so far no a jar of money has not been found. Actually I would like to have both, for whatever reason.

My Redhawk is just to heavy for a mountain carry gun which was my original intention. A 329PD now fills that bill and it is a wonderful carry gun , you hardly know its there . While it can´t take the loads the Redhawk can , I feel very safe with it stoked with 300 grains of hardcast over 19 grains of H110 .

Trade a Smith & Wesson for a Ruger???

Attached Images

3stooges_face_palm.jpg (21.0 KB, 129 views)

Unless I were trading for a different caliber for some reason, I would hold the 29 like it was my only child.....

Maybe we need to be a bit more explicit here: The Ruger DA revolver actions other than the blachhawk are pretty terrible and the worst of them is the regular redhawk. In it the trigger return and hammer run on the same spring, impossible to fine tune. The unfired 4'' 29-3 is a $1000 minimum gun, even $1200 or $1300 for the right person. The Ruger RH is a $500 gun regardless of current retail.

I have both;the S&W action is smoother than you'll ever make the Redhawk.But that is not to say that the Ruger's action is bad.Just not as smooth and a little harder.
If I'd be going fishing in Grizzly and Brown bear country,I'd probably look at other heavier options I have(454 and up).
Not that I dislike the .44;it's my favorite cal.

So, just what bear country are we talking about? Here in Colorado, I don't usually carry ANYTHING except a pocket knife, unless I am going to town Montana or Alaska might change the assessment.

__________________
Some collect art; I shoot it!

I have a Ruger on my one day list, but I would never trade my 629 to get it.
David.

I own both I'd trade for a redhawks in a heart beat no screws to come loose. Hotter loads no problem.

I've owned a Super Blackhawk, a couple Redhawks and a 629. I still have the 629, it just works better for me than the Redhawks did. The SBH is the only one that let me down. The 629 has a better trigger, is more accurate than the Redhawks were. As for the stronger of the 2, I'll never tear up or wear out the 629. The RHs are bigger but they are castings and castings are not not as tough as forgings as a rule. I think this is why Rugers Stuff is beefed up. You ain't gonna blow up a Ruger or a S&W with standard loads.......Trade a S&W for a Ruger, never gonna happen at my house.

Nope.

I like Ruger stuff, I've had Redhawks. Good revolvers. Overbuilt for sure. You can use then to pound nails if you lost your hammer.

But they will never have the slick action or finish of a 29.

If you could buy a Redhawk outright for a good price, go for it.

Trading a 29 for one, you will regret it, both for shooting pleasure and financially.

JMHO YMMV.

__________________
BTDT, Got The T-Shirt

I have a 29-3 and have no trouble at all with 100% reliability with my heaviest loads, the Hornady 300 grain XTP/JHP factory load, and my go to 20 grains of 2400 and 240 grain JSP/JHP. I suspect the revolver will take it longer than will I.

Seems like everybody has covered it well enough in the prior post. I'll just add that even though my Ruger revolvers out never my Smith & Wesson revolvers, I would rather keep the 29 then get the red hawk. Your Smith can handle enough heavy loads already just not the Super loads from Buffalo Bore or Underwood 340 gr +p+ variety.

Lube the Redhawk with moly inside and the sear work it in the trigger pull and roughness will smooth out. I lube everything with moly. On pistols don’t use too much.

Keep the M-29, bypass the Ruger, and get a 4" M-500 with a vertical Uncle Mike's shoulder holster.. Easy to tote, and no worries about "Heavy" loads damaging the weapon!!

There!! Problem Solved WITHOUT having to go to the Gunsmith!!

You can Thank me Later.....

Attached Images

100_1601 r.jpg (151.8 KB, 37 views)

I've tried to like the Redhawk, and have owned 3 (all .44 mag). They're just too chunky to suit me, although certainly bull-strong and capable of a steady diet of heavy loads. The older I get the more I appreciate a lighter weight gun, be it handgun, rifle or shotgun.

Remember , not only is " shot placement " important , be aware that you likely will need a 2nd , follow up shot . So a hotly loaded 44 magnum is going to require lots of practice to control --- quickly .
Personally , I would switch to the 45 Colt . It does what the 44 magnum does with a 4K--7K lbs less pressure . It will handle 300 gr cast bullets with ease . The LEE 300 gr RNFP gas checked would be my choice for bears . Instead of H-110 I would probably start with load data from Accurate Powder co. They have load data for the std 14K psi and higher w/numerous powders . H-110 can't be down loaded . It's either all or nothing . Just my opinion . Regards Paul

Yes, what I was thinking.

I purchased my first firearm last August, it is a 629 5”. I didn’t want to destroy it using loads just slightly more powerful, so I went out and bought a S&W500 3.5”. Now all I need
is a 640 for the pocket

If anyone here could be called a Ruger fanboy it would be me.

No way in hell would I trade a 29-3 for anything, let alone a Redhawk.

Keep the 29, save the pennies and get a Redhawk too.

Keep the 29 and buy a Redhawk, you will be money ahead.

__________________
Pine_Worker
Ex-LEO, NRA Life

I remember cartoons years ago featured a very thirsty cowboy, a steer skull and a water hole. The skull said "You'll be sorry" as the cowboy wanted to drink.

The deal may seem exactly what you want, in the future a steer skull will repeat the phrase.

__________________
U.S. Coast Guard, retired CPO

I would never trade a S&W for a Ruger.

I've seen Redhawk's for 550 around here. (Precovid tho. It seems prices for everything are a bit inflated. Dont get me started about that.)
A 29-3 4" will always be a 900-1k gun.

I've had three Redhawks in 44mag. Great guns, stainless is super for your application and double action is better than Smith weight wise. I could shoot hotter loads tolerably in the RH, not the Smith. Alternatively, buy a Glock 20, keep the 29.

Kid44,

You can get Redhawks for cheap on Armslist. Don't make that Trade. You can have the best of both worlds if you just wait a month or two and save up the cash.

Nope never. I have had Redhawks and they are OK but no way is that a trade. Add into it I think folks worry to much about possible bear trouble.

My RedHawk was my first 44 magnum handgun.Bought it back in 1982 it is one of the blued models.Accurate,dependable,super strong (Triple lock) and solid as a bank vault. It spoiled me for large frame revolvers and I didn't own a S&W N frame till I bought a 1917 only a few years ago. Maybe not a "collectible" but it will be with me till Im laid to rest.
If I needed a handgun for bear and wanted the best handgun possible to handle the power...and given the choice, (Redhawk vs 29-3) Id take the Redhawk without looking back.

Second thought, never sell or trade only buy. I’d buy a Redhawk. I traded in my 75 python only figuring I could replace it. The prices went bananas.
I regret it now.

I've had both. Both are good, accurate guns, but the 29 will always be easier to sell or trade and will have better resale value.