Question for 44 magnum SHOOTERS
- Thread starter fighter62
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
I have a 5 inch Redhawk and it was my first .44 mag.
I bought a 4 inch 29 a while back and don't have enough rounds through it but I will not put the high end rounds through it like I would the redhawk... I will use the smith for lighter to standard loads and enjoy it.
I used that 5 inch redhawk for many years and it was a good "one .44 mag gun" choice- from mild to wild loads it shot straight and just fine- still does actually.
I wanted the smith and would get another 5-6.5 inch smith if found "right" but I also don't see my Rugers leavin anytime soon
I bought a 4 inch 29 a while back and don't have enough rounds through it but I will not put the high end rounds through it like I would the redhawk... I will use the smith for lighter to standard loads and enjoy it.
I used that 5 inch redhawk for many years and it was a good "one .44 mag gun" choice- from mild to wild loads it shot straight and just fine- still does actually.
I wanted the smith and would get another 5-6.5 inch smith if found "right" but I also don't see my Rugers leavin anytime soon
Last edited:
Hammerdown77
Member
I have a 629-4 Classic, 5" barrel. Don't have a Redhawk, but have some friends who do, and I own several Ruger single actions. In my opinion, the S&W is a much more finely finished and tuned revolver, much more "refined", and the ergonomics and balance for me are near perfect. The Redhawk, though, is going to be stronger if you are planning to put extremely heavy loads through it on a regular basis.
Triggers out of the box, the S&W is going to be much better. The Redhawk can be improved with action work, but in my opinion it will never be as good as the S&W. The Super Redhawk is a different story.
I wouldn't turn down either one, but if I had to choose it would be the 629.
Triggers out of the box, the S&W is going to be much better. The Redhawk can be improved with action work, but in my opinion it will never be as good as the S&W. The Super Redhawk is a different story.
I wouldn't turn down either one, but if I had to choose it would be the 629.
Joni_Lynn
US Veteran
Both are nice but in my mind the 629-3 & 4 Classic are the best of the stainless S&W 44 mags for those that shoot them. They just don't make them like that anymore.
Mule88
Member
I agree with Joni, also even though the Ruger may be stronger made, any reasonable .44 mag load will last a long time in the smith (especially those with the endurance package) plus ive always shot the Smith's more accuratly and the trigger is much better than any Ruger.
Got my Redhawk 27 or so years ago. My buddy just got a 629-1. In both of our opinions, the Redhawk has a better trigger and smoother action. The 8 3/8" barrel of his S&W vs. the 5 1/2" on my Ruger doesn't allow for equal comparisons. The finish on the 629 is brighter than the matte finish on the Ruger.
The Ruger does feel more solid. The weight also seems to soak up the recoil better. Close range handling with the shorter barrel is also better with the Ruger.
Both guns are great.
It's gotta end up being a personal preference thing in the long run. It really depends on what you want the gun for.
I'd take either.
For me at the time, little voice said buy the Ruger.
The Ruger does feel more solid. The weight also seems to soak up the recoil better. Close range handling with the shorter barrel is also better with the Ruger.
Both guns are great.
It's gotta end up being a personal preference thing in the long run. It really depends on what you want the gun for.
I'd take either.
For me at the time, little voice said buy the Ruger.
Joni_Lynn
US Veteran
My first handgun was my 7.5" Redhawk in 44. I still have it and wouldn't think of parting with it. I also seem to have adopted a couple 44 Bisley's and flat top anniversary model 44, a Freedom Arms 83 and a whole mess of N frames mostly all in 44. My next 44 I hope will be a 29-5 Classic in 5". I prefer the feel of the N frame and it's trigger action.
Either way, there's no wrong or bad choice here.
Either way, there's no wrong or bad choice here.
Any firearm is only as good as its trigger.
If I were in your shoes, I'd be going with the S&W. Even if the Ruger now has a better trigger than the S&W because of the action job, you can always have that 629-3 tuned-up to be as good or better than the Ruger.
But that's just me....
If I were in your shoes, I'd be going with the S&W. Even if the Ruger now has a better trigger than the S&W because of the action job, you can always have that 629-3 tuned-up to be as good or better than the Ruger.
But that's just me....
BruceM
Member
I have a number of S&W .44 mags and owned a 9 1/2" Super Redhawk. The Ruger was as accurate as any of my Smith's but not more so. There is no comparison in terms of the perceived "feel" of the action. The DA cannot be compared. The Smith is definitely better. The Ruger's SA pull on my particular gun wasn't bad, just not in the same league with the Smith. The Ruger is probably more durable but I've never had any real major issues with the Smith. I shoot neither reduced loads nor heavy bullet loads so the maintenance on my 29's and 629's was limited to DNCU and endshake issues-all minor repairs. It took thousands of full power rounds to get to the point where maintenance was needed.
All of that said, shooting the Ruger was a different experience compared to the Smith's. Cocking it for SA shooting reminded me of a crew served field piece. Cosmetically, the Ruger was just like most everything else Bill designed-utilitarian in the extreme. To me, the Smith is a little more expensive, a little less robust, lots easier on the eyes, at least equal in accuracy and a lot nicer to shoot.
Bruce
All of that said, shooting the Ruger was a different experience compared to the Smith's. Cocking it for SA shooting reminded me of a crew served field piece. Cosmetically, the Ruger was just like most everything else Bill designed-utilitarian in the extreme. To me, the Smith is a little more expensive, a little less robust, lots easier on the eyes, at least equal in accuracy and a lot nicer to shoot.
Bruce
Last edited:
I have the 5 inch AND two 7.5 inch redhawks a blue w/rings and an EARLY stainless. They are old early eighties vintages and are smooth... the SA trigger pulls are decent although not near as crisp as the smith, the DA blows the smith away. If the smith was tuned it would be fine other than the target hammer for double action work.
I may swap that trigger out one day but until then my redhawks are great guns also. the 5 inch stainless and a 7.5 blue gets shot fairly often and go out deer huntin with me. My smith is so clean n purty it might not- I really need to get some wear on her and get over it
I may swap that trigger out one day but until then my redhawks are great guns also. the 5 inch stainless and a 7.5 blue gets shot fairly often and go out deer huntin with me. My smith is so clean n purty it might not- I really need to get some wear on her and get over it
Joni_Lynn
US Veteran
The biggest problem with the Redhawk is that the hammer/trigger are both operated off one spring. Some have a good trigger pull and some not so good.
VAdoublegunner
Member
I have owned and used extensively both a 7.5" Redhawk and a 4" 629-4. It sounds like you have the trigger question answered to your satisfaction. That's pretty subjective for the individual gun anyway. Both of 'em feel pretty good in the hand to me. I like Ruger's factory wood grips, and have Ahrends on my 629-4.
If your interest is primarily shooting the heaviest possible 44Mag loads more often than anything else, the Ruger has some advantages, particularly if using it as a field gun. It is a bit heavier and can absorb more recoil, plus it is pretty rugged externally as well (and by that I mean cosmetically; I worry more about dinging up S&Ws with their prettier finish and contour lines).
However, the 629-3 will have the performance enhancements so you can shoot heavier SAAMI spec loads in it as well when you need them without much concern, say for hunting or "bears". I imagine most of the time you won't be, and that being the case I'd lean to the S&W for general range and woods carry where you are more often using less than 300gr+ dinosaur stomper 44Mag loads. Which is what I did. For as much as I liked the RH, I had one in 45 Colt too and decided to keep that one since I didn't shoot the RH as much for several years after I got the 629-4, so traded it on something else that caught my eye. And I can load up some serious monster loads in the 45 Colt RH.
If your interest is primarily shooting the heaviest possible 44Mag loads more often than anything else, the Ruger has some advantages, particularly if using it as a field gun. It is a bit heavier and can absorb more recoil, plus it is pretty rugged externally as well (and by that I mean cosmetically; I worry more about dinging up S&Ws with their prettier finish and contour lines).
However, the 629-3 will have the performance enhancements so you can shoot heavier SAAMI spec loads in it as well when you need them without much concern, say for hunting or "bears". I imagine most of the time you won't be, and that being the case I'd lean to the S&W for general range and woods carry where you are more often using less than 300gr+ dinosaur stomper 44Mag loads. Which is what I did. For as much as I liked the RH, I had one in 45 Colt too and decided to keep that one since I didn't shoot the RH as much for several years after I got the 629-4, so traded it on something else that caught my eye. And I can load up some serious monster loads in the 45 Colt RH.
Last edited:
I have the same setup as TallPaul--a 5 1/2" Redhawk and a 4" M29.
The Redhawk is a much better double action gun, at least for me. It's heavier and the double action seems smoother and is helped by having a narrower, smooth trigger. The grips are like smooth Magnas and work better than anything else I've tried on that gun, including Hogue and Pachmayers. It has interchangeable front sight inserts, so if you don't like the red ramp, you can put in something else. It is a very strong gun, with a locking crane, like the old Triple Lock Smiths. Stainless finish allows the vinegar/hydrogen peroxide soak method of bore cleaning. With 900 fps loads, it is almost like shooting a .38. Not quite, but almost. The Redhawk is a stronger gun and, if you reload, provides 'slightly' more margin of safety against overloads.
The M29 is, first and foremost, a beautiful gun. It is noticeably lighter than the Redhawk and would be OK in a hip holster. The Redhawk might be too much for me on my belt. Either gun handles my 'hot' 44 load with ease but the recoil is less noticeable in the Redhawk.
I'm lucky that I have both and don't have to choose between them. It would be a tough choice but you really can't go wrong with either one.
The Redhawk is a much better double action gun, at least for me. It's heavier and the double action seems smoother and is helped by having a narrower, smooth trigger. The grips are like smooth Magnas and work better than anything else I've tried on that gun, including Hogue and Pachmayers. It has interchangeable front sight inserts, so if you don't like the red ramp, you can put in something else. It is a very strong gun, with a locking crane, like the old Triple Lock Smiths. Stainless finish allows the vinegar/hydrogen peroxide soak method of bore cleaning. With 900 fps loads, it is almost like shooting a .38. Not quite, but almost. The Redhawk is a stronger gun and, if you reload, provides 'slightly' more margin of safety against overloads.
The M29 is, first and foremost, a beautiful gun. It is noticeably lighter than the Redhawk and would be OK in a hip holster. The Redhawk might be too much for me on my belt. Either gun handles my 'hot' 44 load with ease but the recoil is less noticeable in the Redhawk.
I'm lucky that I have both and don't have to choose between them. It would be a tough choice but you really can't go wrong with either one.
Joni_Lynn
US Veteran
The Classic has an easy change front sight and the top strap is factory drilled and tapped for scope mounting. Be fore warned, if you lose the rear sight on a 629-3 there aren't any available so far as I know. They are unique to the 629-3 & 29-5 Classic. (& Magna Classic)
There's probably a larger aftermarket selection of front sights for the S&W.
There's probably a larger aftermarket selection of front sights for the S&W.
Rawhyde
Member
I have a 7-1/2" Redhawk that I got new for my birthday in 1985 and a 4" round butt 629. If you plan to do any high volume shooting with magnum loads, I'd advise getting the Redhawk. I'm a huge S&W fan, but the heavier and stronger Redhawk is much more pleasant to shoot with high power loads. Also, if it's still available, the shallow vee rear sight with the gold dot front (called Express Sights I think) makes a great accessory for the Ruger.
Fuego
Member
Well, objectively speaking, the S&W is objectively a nicer looking revolver. Objectively speaking.
357larry
Member
I had a 5-1/2 inch stainless Redhawk. The SA trigger was great, the DA trigger not so great. Didn't get along with the factory grips and could not locate any aftermarkets that I could live with. The gun was damned accurate though.
Bought a no dash 629 with a 6 inch barrel. Found a grip set-up I like, both the DA and SA trigger pulls are better than the Redhawk was. Does seem to recoil more which can be expected with the lighter weight. Eventually the Redhawk went bye-bye.
Bought a no dash 629 with a 6 inch barrel. Found a grip set-up I like, both the DA and SA trigger pulls are better than the Redhawk was. Does seem to recoil more which can be expected with the lighter weight. Eventually the Redhawk went bye-bye.
There is no doubt that a Ruger Single Action, or a Ruger Double Action is more rugged than a S&W 44 Mag.... As is the Freedom Arms.
BUT, No revolver compares to the S&W 44 Mag, If you want/need Double Action, IMHO.
BUT, No revolver compares to the S&W 44 Mag, If you want/need Double Action, IMHO.
HaroldB
Member
Never owned a Redhawk, but did have one of the first Security-Sixes and hated the trigger pull.
I shoot a pair of 50th Anniversary 44 Blackhawks in SASS competition. But the trigger, even in single-action on my 629 Classic (5" barrel) is SO much better and even more accurate in my hands using SWC loads.
I shoot a pair of 50th Anniversary 44 Blackhawks in SASS competition. But the trigger, even in single-action on my 629 Classic (5" barrel) is SO much better and even more accurate in my hands using SWC loads.
Larry from Bend
Member
I had a 629-3 5" Classic and now have the same gun but in -4. I've shot a Redhawk some -- It was "okay" but I didn't like the trigger and I just didn't think the Redhawk was as "refined" as my Smiths, if that makes sense.
Some of the posters are comparing the recoil of a 4" 629 to that of a much heavier Redhawk which favors the Ruger. However, a 5" Classic (with Hogues, not the terribly uncomfortable round wooden grips my -4 came with) is a different animal than the light 4" when it comes to recoil. Mine is no problem at all with hot 285 grain loads. I carry it on horseback and on foot.
Some of the posters are comparing the recoil of a 4" 629 to that of a much heavier Redhawk which favors the Ruger. However, a 5" Classic (with Hogues, not the terribly uncomfortable round wooden grips my -4 came with) is a different animal than the light 4" when it comes to recoil. Mine is no problem at all with hot 285 grain loads. I carry it on horseback and on foot.
Similar threads
