• You are using the old High Contrast theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

4" Redhawk or 5" 629 Classic?

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

The Wiry Irishman

Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
1,178
Location
West Lafayette, Indiana
I bought my girlfriend a GP100 for valentines day. Its such a sweet little gun, and it turned me from having little interest for revolvers to dying for one in about a day and a half.

It would be kind of silly for me (in my opinion, anyway) to get an identical gun, as she'll let me shoot hers whenever. I don't want a different .357, because the GP100 is my favorite that I've shot or handled, so I'm looking at .44s.

I love the look and feel of the GP100, so I was hoping that Ruger made a .44 that looked pretty much the same. I looked around online and thought all their .44s were pretty fugly. However, the 5" 629 classic looks beautiful, so I started getting interested in that.

I went out to Sportsman's Warehouse to see if they had a 629 I could handle, and they had the exact gun I was looking for, and I was impressed. They also had a 4" Redhawk, too, and in person, they're not fugly at all, so I handled that, too. Now I'm torn. They're both really sweet guns and I have no idea at all which one I prefer. The Ruger's double-action trigger is far smoother, but the Smith's single is far crisper. The Smith's grip is a little to narrow for me, but the Ruger's is a little too long front to back. They both balance and point really well. The 629's design is prettier, but the Ruger has a better looking finish.... I just don't know.

So I thought I'd come on here and see if anyone could share their experiences with both guns. This will just be a range gun, so SD/HD issues aren't relevant, and I don't care about the lock. Enjoyable shooting is my priority here. I'm also not concerned with the price difference. If you could tell me which gun you enjoy shooting more and why, that would be great. Comments from people that own both would be especially appreciated.
 
The RUGER is the stronger of the two but the Smith can have a somewhat better trigger. It really comes down to personal preference.
 
I got the Ruger and love it. Accurate, Smooth, and built like the proverbial brick @#$%house.
 
I have had both, but prefer the Ruger for several reasons

1. +P+ heavy ammo can be fired in Ruger, but not the Smith
2. The Ruger has a more neutral balance with just a slight muzzle heavy feel, whereas the 5" Smith has a very muzzle heavy feel (which I don't like).
3. The Ruger is more comfortable to shoot with full power loads.
4. The Ruger is less expensive.
5. The Ruger will last longer under heavy use.
6. The trigger, sights and grips are just as good on the Ruger as on the Smith (taking away what were once the Smith's advantages)
7. The Ruger is easier to carry and conceal on the hip.
8. The Ruger looks better (IMHO)
9. The Ruger is easier to work on and customize

Hope this helps

Shooter429
 
You like the Ruger GP100, and the Redhawk is a close match in trigger and cylinder mechanism. 'Course, try both in your hands to determine which feels better.

I love the GP100 grip and the Redhawk gripframe IS different from the GP100.
 
Redhawk

The Wiry Irishman: Sir; from a Ruger owner: Redhawk will last your lifetime and your greatgrandchildren will thank you.
Ruger Rehawk triggers have been vastly improved. This new design will serve you well right out of the box.

Rugers Service is second to none. People will talk to you should you ever have a problem.
 
Any Ruger Vs. An S&W

Please note, this is not an invite for a flame war... I have owned several of each gun, in several calibers and these are my opinions, if you disagree, I really don't mind at all.

1. If anyone has a post GP Ruger with a better trigger than a S&W, I'd do my best to eat it.
2. I've never met a modern DA Ruger as accurate as a comparable S&W.
3. S&W's have extremely easy triggers to work on easy to work on, but if you define easy as replacing a spring, we can't talk.
4. No pistol competition for speed or accuracy has been won by a Ruiger, S&W dominates for a reason.
5. IMO, nothing balances like a S&W, Rugers are heavy, caliber / frame size compared.
6. If Ed McGivern were alive today there's no way he's be in history books using ANY Ruger.

Ruger may outlast a S&W with very heavy loads, but then again anyone shooting those really heavy loads has by now a terrible flinch, see #2 above.

Of course, guns are like religion, I'd sooner try to convert a person from one religion to another before trying to convince them I'm in a better position. :)

Seriously, what are you doing with the gun has a LOT to do which is "BEST" If I were in a position that I may need to bring down big game with it, then a Ruger is by far and away a better choice. For two reasons, one they ARE stronger with heavy loads, AND their heavier weight (46.6 oz. 4" Ruger vs. 41.5 oz. 4" mountain gun) attenuates recoil a bit better. THey also get heavy on the hip in the woods on long walks believe me... I owned BOTH.

By the same token, if I WERE predisposed to use VERY heavy loads, again a Ruger is a better choice.

Finally, if I ran out of ammo and needed to crush someone's head in with the gun... Ruger gets the nod again!!!


Regards,

Gary
 
I agree with what is said in the post immediately above. I own both (longer barrel versions) and would add that in my opinion the recoil is much more desirable in the S&W. The Ruger's tend to recoil straight back, the S&W seem to roll back and up. One could argue this makes it harder to get back on target but there are sure a lot of really good shooters using Smith's. I've always felt the Ruger's grip is to short in my palm. The Ruger is a little more heavy duty but I've never shot a Smith out yet.
 
Majic...

Don't assume the the Smith's trigger is going to be better than the RedHawk. Gunblast did two reviews on this gun in the last year. In the .44 review, they said that the DA trigger pull on the RedHawk was the best that they seen on a stock revolver in many years. I dry fired one a few days ago and found that the RedHawk trigger was as good as advertised.
 
1. If anyone has a post GP Ruger with a better trigger than a S&W, I'd do my best to eat it.
2. I've never met a modern DA Ruger as accurate as a comparable S&W.
Click to expand...

The "trigger advantage" of the S&W can no longer be assumed. I've handled a couple of new N-frame S&Ws recently that had truly horrible triggers. The Ruger Redhawk I recently bought had a decent trigger.

On average the S&W triggers are probably still better than the average Ruger. But, you can no longer assume that will be true for any given specimen.
 
Gnappi...

Here you go:

Iowegan from the Ruger forum is a retired gunsmith. This is the most unbiased, accurate observations that I've read about the differences between the two types of revolvers.

http://www.rugerforum.net/showthread.php?t=6179

Grant Cunningham is one of the best revolversmiths in the country.
http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog_files/448400adaed4f0a82d4961b5b2d91d8b-116.html

Oh, by the way, a 4" 686 is 40 ounces and a 4" GP100 is 41 ounces. Do you actually consider a difference of one ounce to be heavy?

Don't get me wrong, I don't dislike Smiths, I just don't think that Smiths are better than Rugers. A Ruger DA can be everything that a Smith can be, and more. A good Smith and Wesson on the other hand, will never be as durable or reliable as a good Ruger. You'd be hard pressed to find a single mention of a Ruger DA going out of time, nor will you ever hear of bent ejector rods on Rugers.
 
I gotta again reiterate

The Ruger's action stock is as good as the standard Smith's. With a little work, it can almost match a PC gun. This applies to the new 4" We are not talking about bygone years here though. But current 4" Redhawks Rock in every way! and are easily a better value and arguably a better gun than a stock 629, not that I am knocking the 629, cuz I have actually had many more of the Smiths than the Rugers, but Ruger has done an about face in action quality that deserves mention and serious consideration, IMHO.

Shooter429
 
This has a really nice DA trigger. The S & W's in the showcase did not "feel" any better.

IMG_0291.jpg
 
Hey, Wolfgang...

I am green with envy. I want a 4" Redhawk in the worst way. Don't feel shy about posting more pics!! Awesome gun, awesome pic. ;)
 
Thanks, for the kind words. I'm not a very good picture taker, but I'll post the other side and one more.

IMG_0290.jpg

IMG_0283.jpg
 
Majic...
Don't assume the the Smith's trigger is going to be better than the RedHawk. Gunblast did two reviews on this gun in the last year.
Click to expand...
Sorry but I don't put much faith in what's printed in magazines. They have their opinions and agendas and I have mine. IMO even though both would do better with an action job the Smith still has the better trigger out the box so it's not an assumption but what I have noticed.
 
The best group I ever shot with a revolver in my life was with a 4" GP 357 in target Grey. 11/16ths of an inch outside to outside. Six shot group at 25 yds and the load was a Hornady 140JHP with a load of 296 under it, all lit up with a CCI Mag primer. The Tart Grey finish was on the internal parts and aided smoothness.

I packed S&Ws for a living for 33 years and have never been able to do that.

In all fairness it was the first year I retired and I was on the range every day with at least 2 to 4 handguns. And the GP was always one that went. The GP has a reduced power spring kit from Wolff in it and it helped.:cool:

S&Ws are very accurate but Ruger can pull right alongside with a little homework and effort on the shooters part.
 
The Redhawk is a great shooter. Feels really good in the hand.

Of course, so is the 629.

Personally, I like longer barreled revolvers, so I'd lean towards the 5" or 6" Smith or the 5 1/2" Ruger. I'd probably prefer the 7 1/2" as a shooter, though not necessarily to carry in a holster.
 
DougDubya, thanks, I think :)

The only other 44 I had ever shot was an older 629 with a longer, 8" maybe, barrel. I wasn't too fond of it so I was hesitant on buying one. I looked at a S&W Mountain gun 4 in, a Ruger blue 5.5 in, and the one I bought. After fondling them about 3 weeks (off and on) the Ruger felt better to me.

I was pleasantly surprised at the way it shot. I'm glad I got it!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Ruger Redhawk vs. Ruger Super Redhawk
2
Replies
34
Views
8K
Peter M. Eick
P
B
  • Locked
Your thoughts Super Redhawk vs S&W 629 Classic
Replies
16
Views
5K
Tony Mig
T
W
  • Locked
Smith or Redhawk??
Replies
14
Views
1K
Gabe
G
T
  • Locked
S&W 629 or 629 Classic...?
Replies
8
Views
3K
SteelyDan
S
A
  • Locked
629 or super redhawk grips with a lanyard loop?
Replies
6
Views
935
Sharps Shooter
S
Back
Top