Would you trade this for that?

Status
Not open for further replies.
bikemutt

bikemutt

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2010
Messages
4,479
Location
Vancouver, WA
I have a trade to consider I need to poll the audience on. Both guns are in near-virgin state and cosmetic condition.

Mine: a S&W 29-2 8-3/8" .44 mag
His: a Ruger Redhawk 7-1/2" SS .44 mag

I'm thinking of my S&W as more of an investment, the Ruger I'd take on the trail. My motive is I'd like a .44 mag to go hunt with and can't stand the thought of putting a scratch on the Smith.

One concern I have is what did Ruger "fix" on the Super Redhawk? I know a bit about the trigger/hammer springs although I've never shot either gun, anything else? I'd hold out for a SRH if I have to.

:banghead::banghead:
 
Just another voice that says go for it if you want to, but the value is at least 150-200 off in his favor.
 
The only way I would is:

You have absolutely no money, and no time to sell your weapon and just buy one like his (and pocket a couple hundred bucks), and you, for some unconceivable reason absolutely had to have some of the super heavy hot .44 loads that are too long for the smith to accept.

29-2 Pros: worth more, beautiful, slick and awesome trigger

29-2 Cons: none, unless the striker on the hammer freaks you out, or you need the silly hot .44 loads that you should just get a bigger gun if you need in the first place.

redhawk pros: arguably stronger, striker not on the hammer (If that matters to you.)
redhawk cons: uglier (imho), worth less, not as slick unless it's had 1000 rounds through it, or has had work done (and is still probably not a nice as the smith, and never will be.)

I love both guns, but I think you are gonna take it in the exit if you make the trade. As the only current production .44 magnums I would think of trading your piece on is a freedom arms, or desert eagle, and even then I would regret it later.
 
As others have mentioned, the Smith is more valuable than the Ruger.

As long as your friend is willing to kick in some boot (~ $200) you could do a fair trade.

Long term, the 29-2 is going to continue to appreciate in value...the Ruger not so much.
 
Ok, someone has to be the voice of reason here....

Hell yea!! Dump that safe queen and get ya a real handgun......:eek:

To me a pretty gun is like those dishes your going to bring out for dinner today, they sit in a cabinet all year just taking up room and don't dare use one or far worse chip it or scratch it. They are made to shoot, and enjoy, if you cannot bring yourself to do either, what is the purpose of having them? Investment? In what, something your not going to use, so you can trade it off on something else your not going to use? For hard times, if you need a buck, do you feel that this would be the first on the list to go if your in that situation? Are they to be left to heirs, who may or may not even appreciate them? Might as well pick out a nice brick and have it gold plated.

Or you could simply take that great piece of workmanship and put it to use like it was meant to be. If you don't go around tossing it here and there whilly nilly and are reasonably careful with it, you can have the best of both worlds. Just don't tie it to a string and drag it around with you, get it somethin nice to ride in and get on with enjoying it. I appreciate a well used firearm which has been taken care of but has some character to it. Yes there are times when you will get a small ding in the grip or what not, maybe wear a little of the bluing around the cylinder and muzzle, but these are to me signs of appreciation like a well loved friend, not a depreciation in value.

Having a firearm that simply is too pretty to use is like buying a 4x4 truck to sit in the driveway, or run around town to the grocery store, and never get off the pavement. Or even worse, buying any pick up with a 6' or shorter bed to use as a town car. I purchase things to use, and I use them for what they were designed to be used for, sometimes even for things they weren't designed specifically for. Both of 4x4 have scratches on them from going to the woods and getting me to where I want to go. When I get rid of them, I have gotten my money's worth out of them, just like my firearms.

Oh yea, I LUV those ol ugly Redhawks, and if they ever made a Smith that was half the gun they were I would luv them too.:D
 
I tended to make trades based on utility. And lost money in exchange for utility. And I like Ruger single actions. But I just don't see an even swap here. The Smith 29 versus the Ruger would be equal utility in my estimate, but the Smith is more valuable objectively speaking.
 
NO!!! Personally, I would not even consider it .Sounds like one of those trades, when the new wears off, you'll be regretting it. Carry the S&W, if its get a character mark from use, so much the better.

If you are determined to get the Ruger. Why not ask for $300 boot, otherwise sell you S&W for the market value, and then buy a Ruger. Spend a few minutes on Gunbroker and Guns America and see what yours is worth VS what your wanting.
 
Last edited:
You're trading a Corvette for a Land Rover, both are valuable with different designs/purpose. If you want a rugged, reliable trail gun, then by all means get the Redhawk. If you prefer the ultra hot loads remember the warning doesn't say Smith & Ruger only loads!;)

Happy Thanksgiving..........LD
 
I would keep the S&W and use it for that for which it was intended!

Have fun putting the first beauty-marks in it!
 
Bikemutt Depending on how many rounds you have fired thru that S&W and how close it is to 99% + should help you make the choice. If it has shot many rounds of standard 240gr loads that alone can screatch a frame out even if it still looks great. TRADE plus some cash. I don't buy a firearm for an investment or safe it because its pretty . Maybe sell your S&W out right if no extra bucks come with the ruger and have enough money to get a good holster and some ammo. I do understand wanting the ruger for a trail hunting revolver over the S&W.
 
Never, ever trade a nice prelock S&W for a Ruger anything! EVER! Those kinds of thoughts make me jittery and cranky.

Besides, would you REALLY drag around a 7 1/2" Ruger more often than an 8 3/8" S&W? Probably not. Neither rates very high on the lightweight and portable list. I doubt there's enough weight difference between the two to matter. Just get a quality holster for the 29 and enjoy it.

On the other hand, you could track down a S&W .44 Mountain Gun. Find one in stainless. They come with a 4" tapered barrel. There's something that is enough smaller and more portable it would probably spend more time out of the safe. And in stainless you won't worry about wearing the finish off.

(My list of guns I don't regret trading: Ruger Super Blackhawk, Ruger 96/44, Ruger Single-Six. Guns I won't ever part with: S&W 629, S&W M-18, S&W M-19. Notice a common theme? :evil: )
 
The original .44 Magnum Redhawk had barrel threading problems and could 'launch' the barrel. Bill Ruger decided, even though they had found and fixed the manufacturing problem, to introduce the 'Super Redhawk' in .44 Magnum - a greatly 'enhanced endurance' model. Speaking of that, your 29-2 is pre 'endurance enhancements' and should be shot accordingly. In my mind, if your long barrel 29-2 is really nice, it will command enough to permit you to sell it and fund the purchase of exactly what you want.

I've had a 629MG - and replaced it with a current model 4" 629-6 (SKU 163603), MIM parts and IL included, and I am much happier. It has an OR front/WO rear sight as well as a larger trigger and hammer than the MG. The extra 2 oz is mostly in the non-tapered but partial lugged barrel - which helps keep the muzzle down during recoil. Speaking of recoil, a late model 29/629 will also have a round butt at the grip frame, permitting the recoil absorbing covered backstrap .460/.500 Magnum Hogue/S&W monogrips to be mounted - a great recoil aid. Below is my 4" 629 with the .460/.500 Magnum grips. They add ~3/16" to the trigger reach over an exposed backstrap.

IMG_3465.jpg

The 296 AirLite Ti, with 200gr Gold Dot JHP in .44 Special and sporting those wood boot grips is a lot more memorable to shoot than the 4" 629 as shown with 240gr JSP Remington .44 Magnums!

Stainz
 
Last edited:
Even as a Redhawk fan, the trade is not a fair one money wise. Get some boot. :)

Me? I would want a shorter barreled Smith for carrying in the woods, like a 4".

I have that handled though, in .41 Mag, but now I want a 4" 29.
 
OK, that settles it then, the 29-2 stays with me.

BTW, I have shot the 29-2 at the range and will continue to do so from time to time. Taking it the range occasionally is unlikely to result in cosmetic wear, not impossible, but unlikely. Taking in the field is almost certain to add character marks.

I've got a SS 4" Anaconda I can use for woods carry, it has never been a safe queen.

I'll just keep an eye out for a hunting handgun to buy outright, that 'ole Smith may be worth it's weight in gold, well, maybe silver some day.

Thank you all :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Your thoughts Super Redhawk vs S&W 629 Classic
Replies
16
Views
5K
Tony Mig
T
bikemutt
  • Locked
.44 magnum help me decide
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
bikemutt
bikemutt
O
  • Locked
Trade My Redhawk For a Super Blackhawk?
Replies
13
Views
731
gazpacho
G
A
  • Locked
Bought a Redhawk insted of a SRH - will I be sorry?
Replies
17
Views
1K
absolute0
A
B
  • Locked
Our bigger revolvers (and generally handguns)
Replies
10
Views
1K
mtngunr
M
Back
Top