.44 Magnum DA/SA

[InkEd]

Which one do you own and suggest?

 

[DMZ]

I own a Model 29-3. If I was going to get a NIB .44 Mag, it would be a 4" Redhawk.

 

[Sport45]

I'd buy the 629. But then, I've already got a 5-1/2" Redhawk in .45 Colt. The Redhawk has a good balance and shoots well. But the trigger isn't anything like my K-frame S&W so I'd look at the 629 for it's DA trigger.

 

[788Ham]

I have a 629-1, like the tar out of it! If I were to buy NIB, I'm afraid I have to get the Ruger RedHawk in 6" bbl. My reasoning, the 629 I have doesn't have the beefed up top strap the Ruger does, the frame is heavier on the Ruger, cylinder is beefier too. The newer S&W's have, what is referred to as having heavier recoil components in the cylinder, crane and frame. I'd loaded some 300 gr. Hornady's to shoot in my 629, I wrote S&W and ask about shooting them, "NO, Don't shoot them, not a lot of them anyway!!" Endurance Package is what I was thinking about earlier, mine won't handle the heavier loads, the 240 gr. bullets yes. Hope this helps you.

 

[mes227]

I have both the S&W 629 and SRH. Both are excellent but I prefer the 629. Better balance, smoother trigger pull. Though because it's lighter the felt recoil is a bit more. But they are for different purposes; the 629 is a Mountain Gun, 4" brl, that i carry when I hike or snow shoe. The SRH has a 6-1/2" brl and I recently installed a red dot scope (no magnification). Very accurate to at least 50 yards.

And while not part of this question....I recently picked up an S&W 657 Lew Horton 41Mag w/ 6-1/2" brl -- fantastic revolver! Might be my favorite, but need a little more range time before I confidently proclaim that. Excellent balance, very smooth trigger, love the grips (rounded rosewood), it comes closer to aiming itself then any of my other dozen revolvers.

 

[CraigC]

For my purposes, I greatly prefer the N-frames. For reasons of comfort, I don't run my DA .44's full-tilt so the strength level of the S&W works just fine. For that, I have a pair of .44Magnums in the form of a 629MG and a 6" 29-3. Both fine shooting sixguns with moderate loads. As is an equally fine 6½" model 24 .44Spl.

I only run the heavyweights through Ruger Bisleys, which are more comfortable with 355's@1200fps than a double action with 250's@1400fps.

 

[357_]

When hand loading books show loads as "RUGER ONLY" ... well I think you see where I am going.

But if it's a show piece and will spend it's time in a safe, Smith wins the cosmetics every time.

 

[fastbolt]

I own a S&W 629-4 Classic 6 1/2" and a Ruger Redhawk 5 1/2".

Both required repair when I bought them. Go figure. The Ruger had to go back to the factory and received new parts (hammer, trigger & cylinder), but the former S&W revolver armorer was able to replace and fit the 629's hammer & trigger ("push off" was noted and the original parts were out-of-spec and couldn't be used). Go figure. It happens.

Both have since been fine revolvers. Both have been bead blasted and received some attention. The 629 has been MagNaPorted. Both are round-butt (the Ruger's frame having been modified).

The S&W has a better "feel" to the trigger (typical when comparing S&W and Ruger revolvers), but the Redhawk shoots as accurately as the S&W when being run through courses-of-fire for service handguns, using Magnum ammunition. The MagNaPorting helps reduce the muzzle whip with the S&W, but the heft and balance of the Redhawk (which isn't ported) exhibits a similar level of controllability in my hands.

Although my 629-4 Classic came with the Endurance Package improvements, I tend to save the heavier Magnum loads for the Ruger.

I like both, but if limited to just one of them it would likely be the Redhawk.

 

[mnhntr]

have owned a 629 but now prefer my Super Blackhawk 4 5/8in ss

 

[shooter_from_show-me]

Ruger SBH here...but if I could locate a 4" Redhawk I'd sell the SBH.

 

[hemiram]

I have a Dan Wesson 44, "Barneyed" (purple) frame, in near mint condition. Got it for $405 plus $20 shipping. Huge gun.

 

[madcratebuilder]

Depending on intended purpose would dictate my vote. The RH or a SRH excels at hunting and target work, the 629 HD and CC.

 

[hardluk1]

If your buying one for a heavy backup then the ruger red hawk , if for hunting then the super red hawk is it. I own a Dan Wesson 44 mag. If you just want pretty then a old as new s&w

 

[243winxb]

The newer S&W has a bolt stop/block , better than the much older models.

 

[glockman19]

I have a S&W 629 Classic 5". Love teh S&W trigger and the perfectly balanced 5" barrel.

 

[Nico Malo]

Hello,

My .44 Magnum is a "6 Taurus Raging Bull. I love this gun. Big, Solid, and Ported. It shoots sweet. Even with Full Magnum Loads the recoil is mild because of its weight 53oz and porting. It is so mild I Double Tap it and hit center mass at 10 meters. I'm not technically sure, but I think its the strongest of the .44 Magnum DA Revolvers.

 

[critter]

Mine is a 'none of the above'. I have a Ruger Blackhawk Hunter model with the Bisley grip frame. It is strictly a hunting handgun-WAY too big and heavy for cc. I don't need a DA while hunting and even if it were DA capable, I'm not sure my second shot (and following) would be very quick after the recoil.

Something like a S&W N-frame .44 mag with a short barrel might be a good use for a DA mode, but it's not something I'm familiar with. To each his own.

 

[deacon8]

I own a S&W 629 with a 6.5" barrel. It is my favorite and most versatile pistol that I have ever owned. Out of the three choices, I believe that the S&W is the best built. Not that it is the strongest, but I don't plan on loading (I handload almost everything for it) any +p+.44 mag "super-loads." I am a little tired this morning, so my vocabulary is more limited than normal. With that said, I can only describe it as the "finest" firearm of the three. The Ruger and the Taurus just seem like big clunkers. The S&W is a S&W. To me, only Colt, with their Python and Anaconda, make a finer revolver (even though they are no longer). People will argue that the Ruger is smooth, has a good trigger, is accurate, has great fit and finish. However, I think the S&W is better in all of these catagories. The only thing the Ruger has on it is more brute strength. However, they make them stronger by "bulking" them up. And it shows. As I said before, I can load up loads for the S&W as strong as I would ever want them and thus far, have never even tryed to come close to its limits. Though I have loaded up some thumpers. Well, there's my opinion....

 

[NMGonzo]

I would go for the smith since it holds it's value better.

But I want an alaskan.

 

[Steve H]

Anaconda

 

[zombie44]

I have a 629-1 and a SRH Alaskan and both are great guns. The 629 appears to be a magnaport conversion (2.5" ported barrel, K-frame grips) and it shoots mostly 44 specials. The Alaskan is a joy to shoot even with stout loads.

 

[DM~]

I've has several Redhawks to go with these,



But, they are all gone now... Make mine the 629 please...

DM

 

[Wolfeye]

I used to prefer the 629 over all else until I saw one at a gun shop sitting side-by-side with a Redhawk. I now feel that the 629 has its place as a carry gun that shoots .44 special most of the time/.44 magnum some of the time. By comparison, the Redhawk is better for hunting (or backup to a rifle) & can handle .44 magnum most of the time/.44 magnum+p some of the time.

The RH also strikes me as better for shooting modern .45 colt loads, while the n-frame falls short. I just wish Ruger still offered it in that caliber with longer barrels.

 

[NMGonzo]

Alaskan.

Because you can walk to any gun shop and find anything used but an alaskan.

At 25 meters is not going all that much.

 

[ClemY]

I have a few .44s: a 5 1/2" Redhawk, a 6" Super Redhawk, a 5 1/2" SBH, a 6" DW744 and a 4" 629 MT. The DW is the most accurate. I like all of them for different reasons.