What's better in .44 magnum, Ruger or S&W?
- Thread starter Viper99
- Start date
FrankenMauser
New member
No harm done. Just combine them into one post, next time.
It came across as though you were trying to beat us into submission.
Cosmodragoon
New member
That's why I always pack a salt shaker.
Most recent puppy that followed me home is the S&W Mountain Gun in 45 Colt; next is probably going to be a Ruger BH 5 1/2" in 45 too. It is great that we have choices like this!
By the way, I find it odd that in all my years of guns, I haven't seen many modern Colt revolvers at all. I know they are very expensive; is this the main reason?
By the way, I find it odd that in all my years of guns, I haven't seen many modern Colt revolvers at all. I know they are very expensive; is this the main reason?
I own and shoot the snot out of both. The age old smith vs ruger debate is only rivaled by the old Ford vs Chevy debate...though to me cool cars are cool cars regardless of brand. Same for handguns, a good shooting gun is a good shooting gun whatever yhe brand may be. Just my 2 cents
"How is the balance with that barrel? Pretty steady shooting offhand? BenP"
The 10.5 is perfection IMO. Perfect balance and feel. Took a buck at 80yds year before last, offhand.
The "Super 16".....not so much, more of a novelty. 13in. would prolly be the max. for me before good balance was affected.
The 10.5 is perfection IMO. Perfect balance and feel. Took a buck at 80yds year before last, offhand.
The "Super 16".....not so much, more of a novelty. 13in. would prolly be the max. for me before good balance was affected.
Last edited:
I have both
Ruger Super Redhawk purchased used for three hundred something, I traded an Italialn blue and wood Beretta 9mm and a few bucks for something I could actually use.
I shoot hunter shilouette with this gun every year at least a few matches. I shot a deer with it last year and decided 44 mag is plenty for deer.
I do not load over Sammi specs for this gun. It has fired a few thousand hand loads, no factory loads ever because I am too cheap. It shoots my cast gas check bullets far better than in the picture.
I also have a Smith model 25-7 (45 colt) with the unfluted cylinder. I shoot this gun in the Silhouette match as my iron sight gun. It has a 5" barrel and I do fine.
I bought the smith long before the Ruger, so it was my hunting gun that wore the scope pictured above. I loaded and shot ruger only loads in that smith for a few years until I finally bought the Super Redhawk.
Now I only shoot 9 grains Unique and a cast 255 grain bullet out of the Smith even for silhouette.
Both guns show no wear. Both fit the application perfectly.
If I load the Ruger light like with 44 specials, it leads the bore. Full house loads never lead. I don't shoot reduced loads in this gun. I do have 2 44 specials, a smith and a bulldog.
David
Ruger Super Redhawk purchased used for three hundred something, I traded an Italialn blue and wood Beretta 9mm and a few bucks for something I could actually use.
I shoot hunter shilouette with this gun every year at least a few matches. I shot a deer with it last year and decided 44 mag is plenty for deer.
I do not load over Sammi specs for this gun. It has fired a few thousand hand loads, no factory loads ever because I am too cheap. It shoots my cast gas check bullets far better than in the picture.
I also have a Smith model 25-7 (45 colt) with the unfluted cylinder. I shoot this gun in the Silhouette match as my iron sight gun. It has a 5" barrel and I do fine.
I bought the smith long before the Ruger, so it was my hunting gun that wore the scope pictured above. I loaded and shot ruger only loads in that smith for a few years until I finally bought the Super Redhawk.
Now I only shoot 9 grains Unique and a cast 255 grain bullet out of the Smith even for silhouette.
Both guns show no wear. Both fit the application perfectly.
If I load the Ruger light like with 44 specials, it leads the bore. Full house loads never lead. I don't shoot reduced loads in this gun. I do have 2 44 specials, a smith and a bulldog.
David
Opinions and cowboy hats...
Which is better, Ford or Chevy?
To me, all Ruger DA revolvers are ugly in the extreme. They are big and blocky because they are cast rather than forged and that requires thicker metal to achieve the same strength. Owners seem to love them. Having one in the house would give me nightmares.
Years ago when Colt was still making guns I traded for an Anaconda. I hate stainless and the gun seemed cheap compared to the Python. I traded it for a Ruger #1.
I've had 5 S&W Model 29-2s. All 3 of the common barrel lengths. Sold the 8 and the 4, kept the 6.5 but it was stolen in 1985 and I bought another. Couple years back I picked up another 4".
I don't know why I have two 44 Magnums. I don't enjoy shooting them. Too much recoil for me.
Which is better, Ford or Chevy?
To me, all Ruger DA revolvers are ugly in the extreme. They are big and blocky because they are cast rather than forged and that requires thicker metal to achieve the same strength. Owners seem to love them. Having one in the house would give me nightmares.
Years ago when Colt was still making guns I traded for an Anaconda. I hate stainless and the gun seemed cheap compared to the Python. I traded it for a Ruger #1.
I've had 5 S&W Model 29-2s. All 3 of the common barrel lengths. Sold the 8 and the 4, kept the 6.5 but it was stolen in 1985 and I bought another. Couple years back I picked up another 4".
I don't know why I have two 44 Magnums. I don't enjoy shooting them. Too much recoil for me.
coolbreezy
New member
I have both, a 1983 vintage redhawk with a 7.5 bbl and 629-1 with a 3" bbl. The smith is a real nice gun and a great shooter but I'm gentle with it using mid power factory loads. The redhawk, however will eat anything I throw at it, definitely beats the smith in the strength department. The smith has a way nicer trigger. I prefer the smith imo.
I have both S&W and Ruger revolvers. All my .357 revolvers are S&W L and N Frames, with the exception of a SP-101 for CCW. I like S&W revolvers a lot. I always open them up and stone the internals. I replace the springs with Wolfes.
All of my .44 Mag revolvers are Ruger. I love the Redhawk design. Bill Ruger claims his investment casting is stronger than S&W forged frames. He took a sledge hammer to both to see which was stronger. The investment cast was found to be much stronger.
A Redhawk and SRH can be smoothed out quite nicely. The trigger and hammer pull is longer on Rugers, but they can be made quite smooth. My last Redhawk, the 2.75 inch round butt, had a horrible trigger from the factory! The internals were rather rough and needed a lot of stoning and finesse to get it almost as smooth as the older Redhawks.
I have a SBH Hunter in .44 mag. It is a Bisley frame. I HATE plow handles and I hate the "Roll" of the grip when firing.
I was never a big fan of the N-Frame 29/629 I love my 686's, 627, and 27 though.
All of my .44 Mag revolvers are Ruger. I love the Redhawk design. Bill Ruger claims his investment casting is stronger than S&W forged frames. He took a sledge hammer to both to see which was stronger. The investment cast was found to be much stronger.
A Redhawk and SRH can be smoothed out quite nicely. The trigger and hammer pull is longer on Rugers, but they can be made quite smooth. My last Redhawk, the 2.75 inch round butt, had a horrible trigger from the factory! The internals were rather rough and needed a lot of stoning and finesse to get it almost as smooth as the older Redhawks.
I have a SBH Hunter in .44 mag. It is a Bisley frame. I HATE plow handles and I hate the "Roll" of the grip when firing.
I was never a big fan of the N-Frame 29/629 I love my 686's, 627, and 27 though.