[WebHobbit]

Eventually I'm gonna get a .44 Magnum. This will be a "fun gun". Not specifically for SD or anything & I do not hunt.

Problem is I have very small hands. An L-frame revolver with open back strap grips fit me "OK" but not perfect. I can't get the trigger right there in the joint where it needs to go...it's halfway between there and the pad of my finger. But I still manage fine with a two-handed hold. I can't hit crap with any gun one-handed so I dont really care about that! :D

Anyway I do like big-bores & recoil doesn't bother me at all so I'm fine there.

I had a Ruger Blackhawk .45 Colt once that I enjoyed shooting so I am tempted to get one in .44 Magnum. But then again the other day I handled a Ruger Super-RedHawk in a gunshop that felt surprisingly good, almost as good as a S&W L-frame. And a DA revolver would be waaaaay easier to load up. And then there is the N-frame option. The S&W 629s are beautiful but will they stand up to a lot of Magnums?

So I dunno. I'll make this a poll question.

Which should I save for? BTW I want a barrel length of 6-7.5 inches no matter what I get.

[Peter Gun]

Super redhawk. I was in the same boat. The reason the SRH feels so good in your hand is that it is the only one w/ a post grip frame (metal post completely surrounded by rubber) as opposed to the traditional "triangle" grip frame. This allows for a smaller grip while still having enough rubber to absorb recoil. If you need to, you can even cut the grips down further. For me, the decision process ended with that fact. I almost sold my SRH last month cause I needed the money. I'm glad my asking price was too high, or I'd be kicking myself now.

[WebHobbit]

Cool! That sounds like a plan. Thanks!

[Standing Wolf]

I can't get the trigger right there in the joint where it needs to go

Shoot however you'd like by all means, but like many another bullseye shooter, I've found I'm noticeably more accurate when I pull the trigger with the pad of my index finger rather than the crook of the first joint. It took awhile to make the switch, but it gave me finer control and slightly better leverage.

[WebHobbit]

You get BETTER leverage that way??????

:scrutiny:

That's my only issue with having to shoot big-guns that way is the LACK of decent leverage with the heavy DA pull when using the pad rather than the crook.

But I am working on the finger strength bit.

These damn short fingers are sort of a curse.

[WebHobbit]

I see the 629 is winning by a small margin. You 629 backers care to post with your reasoning?

[Old Fuff]

If you look at an exploded-view drawing of the Ruger Redhawk you will see that the metal part inside the grip is relatively small. This means that the grip itself can be shaped in many ways to fit your hand and not run into any steel. Since you seem to have liked the Redhawk you examined I would suggest you go that way.

[Ala Dan]

5" barrel Smith & Wesson 629-5 "Classic"

Absolutely out-standing performer!


Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

[Grant C.]

Problem is I have very small hands. An L-frame revolver with open back strap grips fit me "OK" but not perfect. I can't get the trigger right there in the joint where it needs to go...it's halfway between there and the pad of my finger. But I still manage fine with a two-handed hold. I can't hit crap with any gun one-handed so I dont really care about that!

I too have small hands; an N-frame is WAY to big, L-frames are barely there. The solution for me has been a Dan Wesson! Aside from superior accuracy and durability, you'd get interchangeable barrels, sights, and of course grips. The latter are very important in your case, and very uniquely done on the DW.

The DW has a stud grip frame, and unlike the Rugers there have been a wide variety of grips made with a wide variety of trigger reach dimensions. The Pachmayr "Presentation" grips (which are a rubber version of your average target grip) for the large frame DW actually put the trigger reach at the dimensions of a K-frame, and maybe even a tad less! In fact, I found it a bit small even for my hands, and went with something a bit bigger. That's how adaptable the gun is.

[RCL]

Myself I would go with the latest variant of the 629 with a 4" barrel, what I consider to be pretty close to being the best "all around" handgun. Had one, sold it, been kicking my butt ever since. My hands are medium size, and the 629 with a Hogue rubber grip is a very nice fit, and comfortable to shoot. Only the Ruger Super Blackhawk with the Bisley grip frame, and the Freedom Arms guns, come as close.
I don't see a problem with the 629 standing up to a lot of shooting, as long as it's not a lot of full house 300 grain stuff.
The Super Redhawk is not far behind these guns I have listed. Both of my brothers have them, and I shoot them very well (one is a .454 Casull, the other a .44 Mag). Strong, heavy guns.
On the other hand, in my opinion the Redhawk model was made for someone with a pair of x-tra large mits. It's one of the most un-comfortable revolvers I have shot. Sold that one also. The shape of the backstrap does not fit my hand at all, almost like it has a hump in it. I tried it with factory and aftermarket grips, nothing helped.
FWIW :cool:

[WebHobbit]

Dan Wesson still in business? I haven't seen one in many years.

[WebHobbit]

:uhoh: :uhoh: :uhoh: :uhoh: :uhoh:

Whatever you all do - do NOT type in danwesson_dot com!

It's pretty nasty. Didn't need to see this stuff. I was already anti-abortion did not need to see those pics!

:banghead: :barf: :barf:

[ElmoH]

Here you go Little Buddy

http://www.danwessonfirearms.com/


If your going to go with the Redhawk line, I'll let you borrow my 5.5 Redhawk, and see how you like the grip on it, Its cheaper than the Super Redhawk, You'll never be shooting heavy 44mag loads. So the Super would be over kill.

[WebHobbit]

Thanks!

The Dan Wesson's look awesome & the grip does look good but the prices look almost DOUBLE a Ruger...but then again that is LIST price on the site. Anyone know what they go for in Shops?

As for RedHawk versus Super-Redhawk:

From what I've seen the Redhawk has a longer trigger reach than a Super-Redhawk because the Super has GP100 style stud thingie. Also I think the frame extension thing looks cool as hell on the Super!

;)

[WebHobbit]

Come on people I need more votes! I'm still leaning toward the Ruger Super-Redhawk but I dunno. I wish it had as good a trigger as a S&W.

I see the 629 is winning in the poll. People who own both - how does the trigger reach compare between the two. For the sake of argument lets assume the 629 wears open back-strap Hogues and the Ruger either has factory rubber or Hogues.

[tiberius]

I have relatively small hands and cannot properly shoot an N-frame in DA mode. I shoot them quite well in SA mode, however.

Since I am only going to use it in SA mode I personally prefer the look and feel of the blackhawk line ,so this is what I have. The Rugers are generally considered to be more rugged than the Smiths as well.

I have no experience with the DA Rugers or Tauruses, but since hand size is your question, I can definitely recomend the SA Rugers- Blackhawks, Vaqueros.

[kalibear45]

S&W 629 w/ Pachmayr "Gripper" grips

[44Caliber]

I have owned all manner of 44 magnums revolvers and the semi-auto Desert Eagle. My favorite is the S&W 629 6.5 inch Classic DX with Smith wood combat grips purchased about 10 years ago. Smith does not sell these grips any longer. (In fact if anybody knows where they can be purchased please drop me a line). These grips are beefy and permit a low hold on the gun. I generally shoot at least 100 magnum rounds on a trip to the range with great pleasure and no hand or skin problems.
44 Caliber:rolleyes:

[tex_n_cal]

Well, I had a Super blackhawk, and found it beat up my trigger finger. The SRH is better suited to the Casull, or the .480.

Which leaves this jewel:

[tiberius]

Tex,

Re. the beat up trigger finger....I had a 7.5 inch SS Super Blackhawk about 10 years ago that did the same thing. Apparently this was a common problem because the current issue Supers have gone to the rounded trigger guards and smooth triggers of the basic Blackhawk design. This eliminates the hand abuse....at least for me.

The best handeling model, and my favorite, is the Vaquero. Its frame is beautifully rounded....Of course your stuck with fixed sights and must work around them.

[firestar]

Shoot however you'd like by all means, but like many another bullseye shooter, I've found I'm noticeably more accurate when I pull the trigger with the pad of my index finger rather than the crook of the first joint. It took awhile to make the switch, but it gave me finer control and slightly better leverage.

I've that some people do have beter control when they use the pad of their finger rather than the 1st joint. I think I have figuired out the deal on this. If your finger is long enough to to use the joint but you use the pad instead I think it will work for you but if you are straining to get the pad of your finger on the trigger, the leverage is way off and poor shooting is often the result.

I have short fingers and find on certain guns I have plenty of reach and I can use the pad of my finger just fine with plenty of control but on certain guns, (CZ-40, SIG 220, etc.) I am straining to reach the trigger even with the pad of my index finger and I can't shoot very well that way.

Just an explaination form someone who has had to deal with long triggers.:D

[tex_n_cal]

I probably will buy a Ruger SRH in either .480 or .454, as a "heavy" revolver;) That .44 Smith, though, with its 6.5" barrel will easily outshoot me, and a 240 gr bullet at 1420 fps will solve most problems I am likely to encounter in the woods. The Hogue grips are plenty comfy for me.

I think I am going to buy either a .44 Mag Mountain Gun, or else that fancy new M329. An unobtainium 26 oz .44 mag will just the ticket, won't it?:D

I held a Mountain gun this past weekend, which has Smith's newest finger groove wood grips, and they are really comfortable for me.

Some folks (me included) really like the balance of the 5" M629 Classic, and I think it's really about as small as I care to go in a gun that shoots full power loads.

Seems to me that Keith and others have killed elk with hot loaded .44 Specials, and I think a 250 Keith at 1200 fps will be plenty at both ends out of a light .44:D

[WebHobbit]

Years ago I used to read and hear tales about how the N-Frames would "shoot loose" after so many rounds of full-house .44 Magnums. Has this been fixed? Are they more reliable now?

[denfoote]

I had a Blackhawk in .357mag and it fit my smallish hand quite well. As far as I know, the grip size doesn't change with the caliber boost. I would check it out!! It's also gunna cost you less money than the Squirrel and Weasel product!!! :neener:

[WebHobbit]

I am considering this bad boy:

http://ruger.com/Firearms/images/Products/122H.gif

http://ruger.com/Firearms/FAProdView?model=814&return=Y

This is a SuperBlackHawk but they dropped that awful square trigger gaurd so that's fine. The unfluted cylinder will add some helpful weight for Magnums.

The barrel length is 4 & 5/8ths...which is a bit shorter than I originally wanted but I love the way the ejector-rod goes to the end of the barrel like a "full-lug".....beautiful in a non-traditional way. If I go this route I will put on some rubber Hogue grips which I know is utter blasphemy to a lot of traditional SA shooters but I LOVE the way they feel!

[The Mighty Beagle]

Like Grant C., I too have a Dan Wesson and can tell you that the Pachy Presentation grips for it fit my small hand to a tee.

If you get the Smith, you can get Spegel "boot grips" from Dillon I think. I loved them on my M29.

[WebHobbit]

What did ya have to pay for that Dan Wesson? The list prices on their site are somewhat "scary"! :uhoh:

[tiberius]

WebHobbit - VERY good choice.

[The Mighty Beagle]

WebHobbit, my Dan Wesson 44 came to me in a trade - a guy wanted my .45 Colt Redhawk and he gave me the blued DW w/ 8" barrel and $150. I felt like I came away the winner on that one, since I promptly used that money to get a new production 4" barrel for it.

My DW is a Monson, Mass. gun and if you were looking I'd say to look for a used one from this era instead of buying new. Those guns, produced from the late 60's to the late 80's, were probably the finest DW's ever made, and can be had more cheaply. Additionally, all the new-production barrels and accessories will still fit the old guns, as the design has not changed although DW has changed hands several times.

I too feel the newer guns are a little pricey. I don't know about the quality on the new guns except to add that they did an excellent job on my new 4" barrel. It's very accurate. If I could not find another old 44, I'd not hesitate to buy a new one from them.

What I like about mine is that the grip and trigger geometry seem better than the other brands. The gun sits high up out of the hand, making for a trigger pull that's straight back instead of pulling back and up like on a Smith and Wesson. Put differently, my barrel points where my trigger finger points, instead of high like on most other DA revolvers. And, being a large, heavy revolver, it actually soaks up recoil without the necessity of ports. It works so well, I will not buy another brand of .44 mag. handgun, ever. And that's a small-handed guy talkin'.

[WebHobbit]

Thanks for all the input people!

Now can one (or more) of you people that own both do me a big favor?

I'd like to know how many inches it is from the back of the grip to the face of the trigger on the following:

Round-butt N-frame with Hogue rubber grips

&

Super RedHawk with Hogue rubber grips

If I can get the above data I think I'll be prepared to finally make a decision.

:D

[tex_n_cal]

Depends on exactly where you measure it, but on my M629 shown above:

3.25" with the trigger fully forward, 2.88" with it cocked ready to fire SA.

That's the distance about parallel to the bore, from the trigger arch to the rear of the gripframe. The frame in on a radius, so it's little hard to get an accurate measurement.

[WebHobbit]

Cool....now can we hear from the Super RedHawk camp?

[intimidator]

Question: Why is it that the Colt Anaconda has not been considered? Can it be your hand is that small or is it you do not like Colts? If is was not for hand size, where would the Anaconda match up with the Rugers or 629's?????

[WebHobbit]

I had an Anaconda in .45 Colt a long time ago and it had major problems right out of the box. The charge holes were way over-sized. I sent it back to Colt and they did replace the cylinder but it kind of soured me on Colt.

So I guess I'm mostly a Smith type of guy but I am not opposed to Rugers as I have had good luck with them as well.


I went to a local shop today (RAJO's Guns in Evansville) and I was able to handle both a Super RedHAwk and a 629. They felt pretty close as far as trigger reach but the Smith is simply beautiful while the Ruger is just "OK" in the looks department. For 550-600+ bucks I want a beauty!

So I guess I'm leaning toward the S&W.