44mag. Ruger or S&W
- Thread starter abowlieb
- Start date
Because those are the two i like. Im not a big fan of the cowboy style and I dont really like the longer barrels on the super redhawks. I like the heft of the rugers and how they shoot and I like trying new reloads in them.
S&W are pretty guns and have good triggers but I dislike the locks and not as quick to throw hot reloads in them. Maybe Ill just get the 44 in S&W for now because I would like to have at least a 4" barrel.
Then later one try to find a 454 super redhawk.
S&W are pretty guns and have good triggers but I dislike the locks and not as quick to throw hot reloads in them. Maybe Ill just get the 44 in S&W for now because I would like to have at least a 4" barrel.
Then later one try to find a 454 super redhawk.
While there is no argument the big Ruger DAs are stronger than the S&W, I have to wonder, why you didn't realize that when you blew up the FIRST model 29??
I'm not picking on your choice to shoot the ammo you are shooting, that's your business. I'm just wondering why you did it twice?!
madmo44mag
New member
To 44 AMP =
The 1st one cracked the cyl and that was all.
I bought the gun used and and did not think the loads were that hot.
The powder charge was hot but I did not realized it was THAT hot.
The 2nd gun I bought from the original owner who hardly ever shot the gun.
That gun the cyl blew apart and cracked the top strap.
This all took palace back when I was young, dumb and fearless and wanted to see how far I could push a 44mag revolver and cartridge.
Now I mostly shoot hot 44 spl rounds.
It did prove to me how tough and rugged a Ruger was.
The 1st one cracked the cyl and that was all.
I bought the gun used and and did not think the loads were that hot.
The powder charge was hot but I did not realized it was THAT hot.
The 2nd gun I bought from the original owner who hardly ever shot the gun.
That gun the cyl blew apart and cracked the top strap.
This all took palace back when I was young, dumb and fearless and wanted to see how far I could push a 44mag revolver and cartridge.
Now I mostly shoot hot 44 spl rounds.
It did prove to me how tough and rugged a Ruger was.
Psychological factors (I am a neuropsychologist) are more important than even I often realize.
You really need to try to shoot a few before you commit.
I once owned an Alaskan in .44 magnum.
It seemed to me that it was way too much of a handful of steel for me and recoil seemed stiff, indeed.
I traded it for a Redhawk which seemed much more pleasant to carry and shoot. I ended up with a Gallagher custom Redhawk .44mag with 3.5 inch barrel
which, in my perception, shoots and feels much more pleasant than the Alaskan.
Imagine my surprise to discover recently that the difference in weight between the two revolvers is negligible.
Despite the loss of my innocence (ignorance) on the subject, the Redhawk still feels better in my hand than the Alaskan and is quite pleasant to shoot.
Go try some before you decide.
W.
You really need to try to shoot a few before you commit.
I once owned an Alaskan in .44 magnum.
It seemed to me that it was way too much of a handful of steel for me and recoil seemed stiff, indeed.
I traded it for a Redhawk which seemed much more pleasant to carry and shoot. I ended up with a Gallagher custom Redhawk .44mag with 3.5 inch barrel
which, in my perception, shoots and feels much more pleasant than the Alaskan.
Imagine my surprise to discover recently that the difference in weight between the two revolvers is negligible.
Despite the loss of my innocence (ignorance) on the subject, the Redhawk still feels better in my hand than the Alaskan and is quite pleasant to shoot.
Go try some before you decide.
W.
Last edited:
RIDE-RED 350r
New member
If you don't like the modern features found on the current S&W's, IE: lock, MIM, frame mounted firing pin, there is no shortage of nice classics out there. However, most run about the same price as a brand new model and in some cases more...
My 4" m29-2 that is my queen...
My 4" m29-2 that is my queen...
RIDE-RED 350r
New member
Got that one for just under $900 OTD with those factory combat grips, box, docs and tools. Was VERY happy to get it for that too! Was about $150 under bluebook for the revolver by itself with plain target grips at the time I bought it.
I love the .44 Magnum. I think it is the most versatile cartridge ever made. It can go from mild .44 Special for HD and plinkin to elephant stopper. Yes the .44 Magnum has stopped elephants with one shot.
I love S&W revolvers. I own many. Yet, all my .44 Mags are Ruger Redhawks or Super BH. The Rugers are just brutally strong. Why not a 4.2 inch Redhawk? It is my favorite handgun and the most versatile of them all IMHO. I have the new snubby Redhawk. It is easier to conceal than the 4.2.
Redhawks triggers/hammers can be smoothed out quite easily. A Wolfe spring and some mild stoning of the sear will make it very smooth.
I love S&W revolvers. I own many. Yet, all my .44 Mags are Ruger Redhawks or Super BH. The Rugers are just brutally strong. Why not a 4.2 inch Redhawk? It is my favorite handgun and the most versatile of them all IMHO. I have the new snubby Redhawk. It is easier to conceal than the 4.2.
Redhawks triggers/hammers can be smoothed out quite easily. A Wolfe spring and some mild stoning of the sear will make it very smooth.
Don't think you could go wrong with either. I love my Rugers (Especially my trusty SBH 7-1/2" acquired in 78 and fed a steady diet on full house loads) When it came time for a DA 44mag, I was set on the Redhawk. But the 4" 629 just felt great and has a silly smooth trigger pull. It also carries fairly well. (In my case, not my daily CCW around town piece, but rather for use when bumming around my property.) I never handload over published 44 mag specs and have no worries about putting many, many, max level rounds down range. Though 75% of my fun/plinking loads these days are light/midrange. If butt kicking "Ruger Only" loads are your thing, then a nice Ruger is the obvious choice. As I noted, you really can't go wrong with either the Ruger or S&W IMO.
Last edited:
I have a S&W 629 and a Ruger Redhawk .44 Mag. They both are four inch barreled models. I don't understand the point of a large frame .44 Mag snub if one is going to use it for full power ammo. The blast from a four inch is substantial. I find the four inch to be a good compromise between shooting comfort and portability. The 629 is a bit lighter and slimmer than the Redhawk and the stock trigger is a bit smoother. The Redhawk is able to handle the stoutest ammo that would stress the S&W. I like them both. The Redhawk and my Ruger 77/44 carbine make a very good combo.
Cosmodragoon
New member
It already seems to be the consensus but I too will recommend 4" or more. Then again, I don't even like .357 out of a snub. I'd also add that while I love Ruger and happily own five of them in various models, I could never warm up to the Super Redhawks. Only the Alaskan looks right. The other ones... well... they just look kinda fugly.
Case in point:
Case in point:
There's nothing nicer to hold and shoot than a NICE S&W N frame. There lies the major problem...getting a nice one. If you buy new, be prepared to send it back for work unless you're willing to accept mediocre fitting. My last 4" 629 arrived in atrocious shape, and after two return trips and a lot of battling on the phone it's perfect and I wont part with it. Ive heard of guys sending back 5 or 6 times and then settling on alignment issues that should have never made it out the door. There are always third part gunsmiths that will fix most any issue, but $800 plus paying osmeone to make it what it should have been fresh out of the box is a big pill to swallow. The fit, finish, and barrel alignment is much better on the Rugers. S&W's stainless finish is quite embarrassing to look at...talk about swirls and scratches.
WVMountaineer
New member
I own a Ruger Super Redhawk in 44 mag. I think it has a 7 inch barrel? I know that is terrible not to know. What I do know is that sucker is just plain BAD. It is a stainless, wood gripped, tack driver. When I load it hot, it is a handful. There is no way I would buy a gun for the range in 44 mag that had a snubbed barrel. No way. You won't likely shoot it much after trying it.
As much as I love my Ruger, if those were the two choices, I'd go with the Smith. But, if I were really looking at a range gun, I'd get me a longer barreled Ruger. They are great revolvers. God Bless
As much as I love my Ruger, if those were the two choices, I'd go with the Smith. But, if I were really looking at a range gun, I'd get me a longer barreled Ruger. They are great revolvers. God Bless
buck460XVR
New member
Then why would you even consider a snub nose with harsh recoil? Range guns should not only be accurate, but pleasant to use. Portability and concealment mean nuttin' when a gun's main purpose in life is being shot from a bench or standing next to one, while shooting off a box or two of ammo at a time. The "cool" factor of a big bore snubby will wear off faster than the sore wrists and hands.
shooter1911
New member
I have the 629-5 Mountain Gun in 4" which is ideal as a field gun for me from Texas to Colorado. I have standardized on a HC Keith 250gr over a stout load of 296/H110 for 44 magnums or the same bullet over a good dose of Unique in 44 Special. I can't imagine that I would be proficient in this caliber with anything under 4", but as others have suggested, I also would recommend you shoot some short barreled 44s with full loads before you make your decision. I personally had to drop from a 300gr to 250gr to make this gun manageable for my needs.
