Ruger Redhawk VS. S&W629

I recently went through a similar process of choosing my first (and then second!) revolver. Looked at Smiths (PC), and Rugers and even some Colt snakes.
I rejected the Colts because I planned on shooting the gun and didn't want to feel like I had to baby it to get my money out of it should I choose to some time down the road.
Between the Smith and Ruger, I really fell hard for the PC V Comp design. Heavy, interestingly modern lines and shapes and configurable to keep the muzzle well positioned after a shot. And just a much more sleek and attractive design with a better trigger in DA and marginally better in SA.
So I ended up with a pair of S&W PC V Comps - in 357 and 44.
Unlike that fellow mentioned in one of the earlier posts, I don't think I'll ever wish that I bought a Ruger.
B
 
29/629 vs the Redhawk is comparing the prom queen to a biker chick. The prom queen is pretty and refined. The biker chick will get it done no matter what.

It all comes down to why someone wants a .44 Mag. I wanted the most out of a .44 Mag, so I went Redhawk.

Do you want pretty gun that works but will in time whine and break down or get a biker chick that always does the job; AKA:Redhawk..

It comes down to refinement vs strength and reliability..
 
Do you want pretty gun that works but will in time whine and break down or get a biker chick that always does the job; AKA:Redhawk..



Funny.

I chose the prom queen.:D

I have never had a steel S&W shoot out of time, I have seen it with both but more often with Rugers. Ruger's have to be built heavily, pound for pound investment cast is not as strong as forged steel, that is a fact.
 
I have owned S&W 29's and 629's and the Ruger Red Hawks have always lasted and performed better than the S&W under heavy abuse.
Back in the day I abused the 44mag platform.
I loaded the biggest bullets I could find with WAY over max loadings of 2400 and my Rugers never failed.
I can't say that about the S&W's I owned.
 
Back
Top