[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Is the Redhawk frame slightly smaller (i.e. easier to fully reach and control the trigger for small and medium-handed people), as compared to a Taurus Large Frame / RB, and a Smith N Frame?

Or is it about the same?

[RugRev]

Don't know about the Taurus but have had 629 N frames and Redhawks. John Taffin once was asked about trigger reach on his old forum which is defunct and he measured a bunch of different revolvers. If I recall the N frame (using however he measured) was 2.88" reach vs. about 2.76 or so for a Redhawk. For me the RH seemed to have less trigger reach. Of course this can vary when not using the same type of grip due to girth and such. In my case I have a medium size hand (9.5) with somewhat short fingers. I found the Redhawk worked extremely well with a Herrett Roper grip which was made to fit my hand via a hand tracing sent to them.

As a comparison on trigger reach Taffin measured an Anaconda (2.80"), K & L frames (2.75-76") and a Python (2.90"). Whatever you select having a proper sized grip made to fit your hand reach can go a long way into making the gun more useable.

[hardluk1]

The other + is the ruger will handle heaver rounds than the s&w.

[batmann]

Trigger reach will vary with the grips, but I have found the Ruger Redhawk/Super Redhawk to have a little shorter trigger reach than my Smith's. The biggest thing I have noticed with the Ruger is they seem to 'guide' your hand to the high hold.

[Walkalong]

As far as feel, my Redhawks trigger reach just felt a bit shorter than my 25-5 and my Anaconda felt a hair sorter than the Redhawk.

Not big differences, but there.

Argh. Forget about the Anaconda. It has aftermarket grips, and I am too lazy to pull out the factory ones and try it.....

[moxie]

No. Even with exposed backstrap grips, e.g., Hogue Monogrip, the Redhawk has greater "reach" than the N frame. I traded away a Redhawk for that reason and got an N frame. I have small hands and the N frame is a better fit. Don't know about the Taurus. You didn't ask, but the Super Redhawk's "reach" is less than the Redhawk's as well.

[oak1971]

I have 3 629's but I do love Redhawks. I will get one one of these days. Redhawks fit my medium size paws just fine. My Smiths seem to be made for my hand with the Houge rubber finger grooves.

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Wait the Super RH reach is LESS than the RH's reach? :confused:

[batmann]

I haven't measured the diff between the Redhawk and the Super Redhawk, but there is a difference in grips. The grip frame extends down on a Redhawk (like a Smith or Taurus) and on a Super Redhawk, it is a 'post' the extends down from the frame. They are different guns with different trigger works, but look the same around the frame. Confusing I know, but your best best is to try and handle each one BEFORE buying. Trigger reach is such an individual thing that you need to factor grip size, frame to trigger, shape of the frame and your hand size. That is why you want to see and handle each before you drop your hard earned cash one one. Good luck--

[BMF500]

I have medium/large hands (big paws and medium length fingers). I've handled and shot most of the Smith's, Ruger's and Taurus', and ultimately purchased a Redhawk beacause it felt more comfortable to me. I did install a Houge hard wood grip for added comfort.

[almostfree]

I have large hands, but the redhawk tore them up. After shooting 50 rounds or so my index finger would be bleeding from contacting the trigger guard. I am not sure what the problem was, but it doesn't seem to happen with the 629 or Super Redhawk.

[ArmedBear]

Wait the Super RH reach is LESS than the RH's reach

RH has a grip frame like a S&W square butt.

SRH has a stud like a GP100.

[D R Greysun]

For the longest time I didn't think I could live without a 5 1/2" Redhawk. Came across one at a gun show, priced right too, picked it up and put it down. It just didn't do it for me, I'm happy with my 5 1/2" Bisley's.

D R

[Action_Can_Do]

The Taurus large frame is pretty comparable to the N-frame. The Raging Bull is a larger frame with a larger grip.

[altitude_19]

Are you looking for a tie breaker? Because if you are, you should take note of the fact that Smith can build a lighter N-frame (for carry purposes) than ANY redhawk you will ever find. I LOVE to shoot Rugers, but I hate to carry them.

[Ben Shepherd]

Wait the Super RH reach is LESS than the RH's reach?

Yep. And to my short stout fingered hands it is a big difference.

As AB already noted, the SRH and GP series share similarities in the grip frame dept. Ergo, holding a SRH feels like you're using a super-sized non-underlugged GP100.

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

Thanks everyone. Think I'm gonna look for a pre-lock smith N-frame - I'm needing a shorter trigger LOP for my medium-ish hands. The Smith will also be lighter. Wanting a 4" .45 Colt, and was looking at a Redhawk in that config. It's a beaut, but also large and heavy.

[RugRev]

I think the 4" Redhawk weighs about 46 oz. The N frame 4" sb about 43 oz UNLESS you can find a 625 Mtn. Gun which is probably about 38-39 oz. Had a 625 Mtn. Gun once (wish I still had it!). Weight wise it wasn't but a couple oz. heavier than a 4" 66 K frame. It was an early one with hammer mounted firing pin. There are later versions in MIM w.o lock and with the lock and I think Smith made a run of blue ones.