Ruger Redhawk 4" or5.5" Bbl

Status
Not open for further replies.

cowboy77845

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2005
Messages
229
Location
Texas
I am in the market for a Ruger 44 mag. I have a Redhawk in 45/45ACP but it does not seem to balance quite right in my hands. Does anyone have an opinion on which bbl length has the best balance.
 
I don't own either, my Redhawk is a 7.5", but when looking at them in the gunstore the 5.5 seems to point better for me. Also, I like the extra barrel to use the cartridge better. Short 44s have a LOT of flash.
 
5.5 or 7.5. I had a 5.5 and I wished it was longer. The 6.5 on my S&W 629 is just right I think.
 
With a heavy big bore revolver like the Redhawk I prefer longer barrels. I find the balance suits me better and the extra barrel length helps with recoil. But I have a buddy who prefers a 4 inch barrel with more of the weight in his hand. Usual advice: buy what suits you.

Jeff
 
I purchased a Ruger Redhawk for defense in forests. So, that dictated the 5.5" barrel for me since large animals could be around. In that gun, I can select ammo performance from standard to bottom-end .454 Casul levels.

It does balance well. Changed the grips to beefier Eaglegrips rosewood grips to reduce slipping during recoil.

Had it for over a decade and very pleased with it.

ruger_redhawk.jpg
 
Nice rig.
I purchased a Ruger Redhawk for defense in forests. So, that dictated the 5.5" barrel for me since large animals could be around. In that gun, I can select ammo performance from standard to bottom-end .454 Casul levels.

It does balance well. Changed the grips to beefier Eaglegrips rosewood grips to reduce slipping during recoil.

Had it for over a decade and very pleased with it.

View attachment 835845
 
I purchased a Ruger Redhawk for defense in forests. So, that dictated the 5.5" barrel for me since large animals could be around. In that gun, I can select ammo performance from standard to bottom-end .454 Casul levels.

It does balance well. Changed the grips to beefier Eaglegrips rosewood grips to reduce slipping during recoil.

Had it for over a decade and very pleased with it.

View attachment 835845
May one ask the maker name of that holster?
 
If SA is an option, I really like my Ruger Bisley Blackhawk .45 Colt for anti-armor (Ruger Only) loads. They 5.5" bbl is just right; they gun rolls with authority, and a 4.6" bbl would probably be unpleasantly snappy.
 
My brother had a Redhawk in .44 Magnum with a 5.5" barrel when he lived in Alaska. I had the gun for awhile before he went there and then again after he got back and I really liked the balance and the way it handled with that length barrel. I have had a couple of Super Blackhawks with a 7.5" barrel and a S&W Model 629 with a 6" barrel and I much prefer the slightly shorter barrel of the Redhawk.
 
I don't have a Redhawk (yet) but I would go 5.5.

I have a 6 inch S&W 20 and passed on a 4 inch version. I've come to realize magnum revolvers need the corresponding longer barrel to realize their full potential. I have 3 short barrel 357's and although they are aesthetically pleasing I am sure they are in no way reaching their ballistic potential.
 
Last edited:
There’s no significant difference in the external ballistic performance between the 4.2” and the 5.5”. The opportunity for round butt vs. square in the 4.2” is really more substantial than the barrel length. The balance is slightly different, but with the same grip frame, unless you’re holding them side by side, the Average Joe would never be able to tell the difference in a blindfolded test - “pick this ONE up and tell me which length it is.”

For me, for a Redhawk playing the role of belt gun, I prefer the 4.2” Redhawk. For hunting or field shooting, I want 7.5”. The 5.5” kind of falls into a no man’s land for me.
 
I have a 1989 blued 5.5 44 mag. Best big bore I own. Will last many lifetimes. Perfect for the forest, mountains. Great for big game 100yrd in.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top