Ruger Super Redhawk 44m

J

JMP

New member
I very rarely venture into this side of the forums. I'm looking at getting a Super Redhawk .44 mag with the 9 1/2 inch barrel. I am going to put a scope on it. I plan to use it for hunting, kind of a new challenge thing for me. I don't own any revolvers and I know nothing about them really. Growing up, my father had a few so I have a little experience shooting them but I am so far out of the loop on revolvers its no difference than if I'd never been around them. I shoot a lot but its all rifles and long range. My wife owns a few pistols but no revolvers.

Is this a good choice? Is there other choices for what I'm looking to use it for? I want a longer barrel just for speed and I do want to put a scope on it.

Thanks!
 
Good choice and they are stout

Is this a good choice
Click to expand...
?
Don't see why it would not be a good choice. Just happens to be my first .44 mag Hunter and I had a RedDot mounted on it. Low power pistol scope would work just fine. They build these Super Redhawks by the pound and they are stout. .... :)

Be Safe !!!
 
Thanks for responding guys. I didn't think it wasn't a good choice, I was just making sure I wasn't overlooking something else.

It is a heavy gun but I won't be carrying it very much and maybe it will tame the recoil some. I've never shot a 44 mag but I'm sure it has considerable recoil. I plan on working up a good load for it the same as I do with rifles.
 
I have a SRH in .44 Mag with a 7.5" barrel and like this revolver very much. I subject it to loads, that I would not want to shoot through my S&W 629s.

There is nothing wrong with the SRH that I have found.

RugerGP4.jpg
 
Some people think they are ugly. I don't. In any event, beauty is as beauty does.

Make sure you get the Ruger Scope Rings with the gun. (Are you buying new or used?)

Congratulations.

Lost Sheep
 
I don't like the looks, particularly but would not flinch one bit from buying one as their performance vastly outweighs any aesthetic issues I might have.

In DA/SA, there is of course the more comely stable-mate, the Redhawk Hunter model.

They come in 7.5" max, I think, but if it is scoped a shorter barrel length will not hinder accuracy and you'll only lose 50-60 fps on the 9.5" based on what others have said.

I personally prefer the standard Redhawk looks wise.
 
I own a standard Redhawk with a 7.5 inch barrel topped with a 2x Nikon. Have had it for near 30 years and absolutely love it. I chose the standard over the super based on how it fits my hands, and it does fit mine better than the super.
I second Lost Sheep on getting the factory rings.
Can't see you going wrong with Ruger.
 
I had a nice SBH for years in 44 mag but I grew a bit tired of firing the full-power hunting loads--the fully decked out gun for me was hard to free-hand balance and then the recoil absorption grew to hit my wrists hard over the course of an extended session.

Then I bought a 41 mag BH and the SBH got sold. If hunting is your thing and you also reload I'd suggest taking a look at the 41 as a serious alternative to the 44. Just a suggestion--still love the 44 mag.
 
Best choice for a deer pistol! I've got one of the old Ruger Redhawks before the Supers came out with scope mounts. The 7 1/2" barrel seems to be most popular for hunting and you might want to consider it. I haven't handled a 9 1/2 but I think it would be a little long for my holster on the waist method of hunting carry. I've never used a scope because my vison is still adequate for its effective range, but a low power scope can be helpful if your vision is not so good, and in low light conditions, or for smaller targets at long range.

With the 7 1/2 " barrel I consider the recoil to be mild, but I'm sure not everyone feels that way.
 
I hunted white tail deer many years with a Ruger SBH with a 10 inch bull barrel.
Many a deer has blessed my table due to that gun.
For hunting with a 44 IMHO the SBH is the better option.
No need for a double action pistol because by the time you get back on target and have re-located your prey in the scope you have more than enough time to re-cock the revolver.
 
Thanks everybody! The responses have been great but are causing me to have a lot more questions!

@PzGren
I have a SRH in .44 Mag with a 7.5" barrel and like this revolver very much. I subject it to loads, that I would not want to shoot through my S&W 629s.

There is nothing wrong with the SRH that I have found.
Click to expand...
Very glad to hear this kind of stuff. That picture makes me want one NOW!

@Lost Sheep
Make sure you get the Ruger Scope Rings with the gun. (Are you buying new or used?)
Click to expand...
New. The prices I've seen for used weren't enough better for me to go that route, especially when I don't have experience with revolvers to know what problems to look for.

@Pond, James Pond
In DA/SA, there is of course the more comely stable-mate, the Redhawk Hunter model.

They come in 7.5" max, I think, but if it is scoped a shorter barrel length will not hinder accuracy and you'll only lose 50-60 fps on the 9.5" based on what others have said.

I personally prefer the standard Redhawk looks wise.
Click to expand...
I'll need to look into the barrel lengths more I guess. I would prefer the 7.5" but I would take the extra weight for a considerable increase in speed. If its 50-60 fps, I don't think I need the extra 2". I handled both the Redhawk and the Super and liked the feel of the Super a lot better.

@turkeestalker
I own a standard Redhawk with a 7.5 inch barrel topped with a 2x Nikon. Have had it for near 30 years and absolutely love it. I chose the standard over the super based on how it fits my hands, and it does fit mine better than the super.
I second Lost Sheep on getting the factory rings.
Can't see you going wrong with Ruger.
Click to expand...
Glad to hear the longevity of your love for the gun, hope I last that long with it! I was thinking the Nikon 2.5-8x28 for mine. I would definitely use the Ruger rings, mostly because I'm cheap and unless they are absolutely horrible I'd make them work. Glad to know they are decent.

@stagpanther
Then I bought a 41 mag BH and the SBH got sold. If hunting is your thing and you also reload I'd suggest taking a look at the 41 as a serious alternative to the 44. Just a suggestion--still love the 44 mag.
Click to expand...
I will look into it. I was going with 44 mag just because I know a guy that deer hunts with it so I knew it was enough. If brass isn't too hard to find I like having the less popular sizes.

@TimSr
Best choice for a deer pistol! I've got one of the old Ruger Redhawks before the Supers came out with scope mounts. The 7 1/2" barrel seems to be most popular for hunting and you might want to consider it. I haven't handled a 9 1/2 but I think it would be a little long for my holster on the waist method of hunting carry. I've never used a scope because my vison is still adequate for its effective range, but a low power scope can be helpful if your vision is not so good, and in low light conditions, or for smaller targets at long range.

With the 7 1/2 " barrel I consider the recoil to be mild, but I'm sure not everyone feels that way.
Click to expand...
I will look into it and I really hadn't planned on how I was going to carry it but I guess I need to. Vision is good but I just like scopes. I may get it and decide different though. I can shoot my 45/70s with hot loads or 416 Rigby all day long and may have a bruise the next day but it doesn't bother me. If I shoot two magazines out of one of my wife's .40s I whine to her for days about the recoil. I'm kind of a sissy when it comes to pistols. I'm hoping its not too bad because I shoot a lot before I feel comfortable hunting with something, especially if its something completely new to me like this will be.

@madmo44mag
I hunted white tail deer many years with a Ruger SBH with a 10 inch bull barrel.
Many a deer has blessed my table due to that gun.
For hunting with a 44 IMHO the SBH is the better option.
No need for a double action pistol because by the time you get back on target and have re-located your prey in the scope you have more than enough time to re-cock the revolver.
Click to expand...
I don't know why, but I hadn't even thought about the Super Blackhawk. I will look into it. I agree about the follow up shot, its going to be like a first shot each time I pull the trigger anyway. I would probably shoot the Redhawk SA every time anyway.

Thanks again everybody!
 
I have a SRH and it is far more manageable and reduces felt recoil more than my Taurus 44 or Smith 29-2. I could shoot full-house .44 magnum all day and not wear out my hand, unlike the other two. That said, there is merit to the suggestion to look at the .41 magnum. It is nearly as powerful, shoots flatter, has less recoil and brass is relatively easy to find. I recently got a Smith 58-6 and it quickly became one of my favorites to shoot. Scary accurate. I put Hogue grips on it because the wood grips slipped in my hand too much. Can't really go wrong with either one. For hunting the SRH is more scope-ready. Good luck deciding.
 
I'll need to look into the barrel lengths more I guess. I would prefer the 7.5" but I would take the extra weight for a considerable increase in speed. If its 50-60 fps, I don't think I need the extra 2". I handled both the Redhawk and the Super and liked the feel of the Super a lot better.
Click to expand...

If the SRH is more comfy to hold, then no contest: leave the Redhawk be.
As for barrel length, I guess that is also personal preference. You can get a lot of velocity out of a Redhawk/SRH.
I can get 1350fps from a 4" with a 240gr bullet and looking at Ballistics By The Inch, indeed the 7.5" looses between 20-70fps to the 9.5", depending on the load.

Not sure if it has been said, but handloading will get the most out of you Ruger.
 
Just my opinion but the longer barrel I found as a great help.
You do get a little more velocity and if you are a hand loader then you can custom load for hunting and barrel length but back on topic.
Why I liked the longer barrel is once optics are mounted it seems to me to give the gun a better weight balance and a more controllable recoil.
That extra weight out on the front of the gun keeps barrel flip to a minimal allowing fast acquisition of the target again.
With a longer barrel if you do take the optics off you have a longer sight radius and can make better open sight long shots.
 
That will be a great platform to get started with a high performance round. If you're not reloading, then the good old Green Box Remington 240JSP will shoot dandy and will shoot through a deer from any angle to 75 yards.
 
Way back in the depths of time, I bought a 9.5" barreled model and my shooting buddy bought the 7.5". We always passed them back and forth at the range. While mine became (and remains) a personal favorite, somehow the shorter gun just wasn't the same. I put a Leopold 2x scope on mine, maybe the longer barrel just helped with the weight distribution.

Neither one is going to be carried in a standard belt holster. I use a chest holster for my 9.5" with scope. And the two inches isn't going to make any difference in the deer stand. I prefer the balance of the longer model "in the hand" and I prefer its firing behavior on the range. Blast is further away, recoil a bit less. Certainly less harsh. I've put mega-hundreds of rounds through mine and it is still like new. Fine revolver. Mine even still has the factory grips on it. Liked the cushion feel in recoil.

Probably fired three bullets through it at the range more than any other. You can push the Sierra 180 JHC to crazy levels and it will really blow stuff up. And the two Sierra FPJ bullets they designed for silhouette. 220 and 250 grain. In my gun, the 250 was the long range star. It could hit things as far as you could realistically use that 2x scope.

Gregg
 
I actually picked up one of these last weekend.

Before I even had the pistol in my hand I had my mind made up that I would get it chopped. I'm just not into long barrels on pistols.

Then I got it into my hands. The balance is surprisingly nice and I was impressed by how light it felt. The trigger is excellent in SA. Better than my Smiths.

Then I shot it. The long sight radius is great and recoil was negligible with some 265 grainers I have.

While I am more of a "pack gun" guy, this one is going to stay the way it is.

Great pistol, just big.

Here it is in comparison to a SW Model 69 for a size reference.

A9FD28CF-F748-45EA-A1DB-EBD74F0872A3_zpsdnxvnvv0.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top