.44 Magnum VS .44 Magnum

S

Southern Shooter

New member
If you had to choose a gun for general protection in the backcountry of Wyoming, Montana, or Idaho...strictly sticking to the two listed here...which would you choose and why??

1)
Ruger Redhawk, .44 Magnum, Double-Action, 4" barrel

2)
Ruger Super Blackhawk, .44 Magnum, Single-Action, 7 1/2" barrel
 
Double action only for me. I have studied both animal and human attacks and the one thing that stands out on the vast majority of them is the speed and suddeness of the attack. I want to know all I have to do is pull the trigger.
 
I think the choice is entirely up to you & what your most comfortable with. For me, I don't notice a discernible time difference in getting away a quick couple of aimed shots from a single action 44 mag when compared to a double action. The recoil from a 44 mag tends to give enough time between shots a pull the hammer back ready for when your next on target if going single action.
If you wanted a gun that was quick to draw, and mainly for defense as opposed to hunting, I would definately go with the shorter barrel. I had a S&W 44 with 8 inch barrel & found it a little slow to draw because of barrel length, when compared to other handguns I've hunted with, but for hunting the longer barrel proved more accurate.
 
Although I own several SBH's and am partial to them, I think I'd opt for the DA,SRH for same reason as 30-30remchester stated.
 
I'd pick the Redhawk since it has the shorter barrel. For wildlife moving quickly towards me I'd want the one that's easiest to draw.
 
4" RH

Shorter barrel makes for a handier gun that carries better and draws better. Can be easily fired DA single handed if one hand is injured or busy. Those big sticky Hogue grips they're putting on them now would have to go, otherwise a great gun.

It is still accurate and powerful enough to hunt with if one desires.
 
a 44 mag vs a 44 mag? the end result should be the same. it is what happens before the bullet hits the target that should concern you. how fast can you draw, holster and barrel length are a factor. how easy to aim, sights and pointability are a factor. speed of first and follow up shots, comfort and confidence. while this might seem to favor the da revolver an experienced shooter with a single action can be just as effective. so you make your choice and pay your money but remember the odds of needing to protect yourself from a bear are small. your gun should be able to do many other tasks that may interest you.
 
I've had two or three of the SAs. I have found that with a Weaver stance and hot loads, I can get pretty tight double-taps with my 7.5" Redhawk, quite rapidly.

The SAs are fun, but the Redhawk IMO is more practical as a bear-defense weapon.

When shotgunning for quail in my far back-country, I carry my Redhawk in front of my left hip for cross draw in the event I'm attacked by a rabid Bambi.
 
I like the 6 in Smith Model 29. Not that the Rugers arnt good, I can just shoot the Smiths better.

I've had several Rugers, I just cant shoot them as well.

Having said that, I do a lot of back country travel in Wyoming, all I carry is my model 642. I've found that while camping, fishing, or horseback, the heavy pistol, or rifle is often left with the tac while doing camp chores, my 642 is always in my pocket.
 
I'll sure agree with kraigwy about "The best handgun is the one with which you can best hit a target." I once did a comparison test of a Python, two nice S&Ws and a GP 100. 50 rounds of hot loads through each. IPSC-style speed on multiple targets. I did best with the Ruger. Go figure...

But I figure my 642 CT is more of an in-town social-use critter than what I'd want in bear country. :)
 
I would definitely choose the Ruger Redhawk due to the compactness and ability to rapidly fire in double action if necessary. Also I believe you can reload quicker not that you are likely to have to reload.

If you shoot single actions, you can get pretty darn fast with them. I would however choose a shorter barrel for your purpose.
 
I aggree with Phil Micwilliam, I think time wise recoverying from the recoil would give you time to get a better aimed second shot, I also will say that I am like Kraigwy I can shoot the Smith better than the Rugers for some reasons. Not saying the Rugers are not a great firearm. I seen lots of folks shoot them real accurate.
 
Love my Blackhawk but the Redhawk is kinder to my hand and in a life and death situation the double action could be the difference between good/bad outcome. For target shooting and deer hunting I'll stay with my Super Blackhawk but its not my gun of choice for carry.
 
I have spent a lot of time bow hunting in grizzly country with a 629 S&W which for all practical purposes is the same as the RedHawk. I like the idea of the double action.

I have been 40 yards from a grizzly and it is sobering.

I had a close guide friend that had one of his hunters mauled by a bear he stumbled on that was on an elk carcass. He kicked the bear in the side trying to get him up where he wouldn't hit the hunter and as he turned up shot him three or four times with a 44 mag in the side.The bear left with the hunter's rifle in his mouth shaking it. They trailed the bear several miles in the snow but never found him.

So, depending on your talent take whatever shot you can to the head. With me, I would probably have to stick it in his ear as he knocked me down.


If a bear is on a carcass there is usually a bunch of birds in the trees overhead raising hell. Ravens, vultures fussing waiting for their turn. If you see that approach with extreme caution or go around. Sow bear with cubs is the other bad scene.

Hunting companions of mine have got on to a grizzly twice over the years. In both cases they ran one way and the bear ran the other. But, you never know.
 
The one with the shorter barrel is what I'd choose.

SA vs DA is a legitimate concern, depending on which one you shoot best.

But for defensive purposes, I don't like long barreled handguns. To me, the overrides action type in importance.

Long barrels are great for shooting, and allow a longer sight radius for more accurate shots while hunting (for most, anyway).

But self-defense seldom involves precise bullet placement. If you need it fast, it's gotta clear the holster quickly.

Daryl
 
geography aside

I have never wandered the states you mention, but I have toted handguns for "general protection" afield here in the south and east for a long time.

I traded away two very nice 6" N frames, a 27 and a 29, because 6" was just to darn long for strong side hip holster for me for everyday, everywhere carry, afoot on trails and rough country, and awkward in and out of a vehicle and off and on an ATV to boot. An ahead of hip, cross draw was most practical and accessible for me, w/ these guns, but it put to much gun right where I didn't need any more bulk, especially when very active. (little did I know what a blue M27/29 would be worth down the road)

I can only believe that a 7-1/2 bbl on the SuperB would be even worse.

The 4" redhawk sounds more compact. I believe they are a bit stronger and heavier than a comparable Smith 29 but that may not be a bad thing in .44mag.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top