• Possible Downtime Alert

    I am working to migrate THR from the current cluster to a new one. I would like to get this done before the weekend, but it's unclear what the timeframe will be, as testing is still ongoing. As I am writing this the new (rebuilt) host is doing a burn-in to ensure that everything will keep running under load.

    When the migration happens users will see a Cloudflare message indicatating it cannot connect to the server. This is expected, and depending on how the migration goes this may last from 30 minutes to 3 hours - I won't know more until testing the various migration options is complete and I have finalized the plan.

    More information is available in this thread.

    As always, thanks so much for your patience.

629 or Redhawk?

Depends on how you want to use it. I love my S&W's and this 4" model 29 was a recent purchase I'm very happy with. However, I treat them like slightly stronger .44Specials. They will never see a constant diet of heavy loads. If I wanna shoot monster masher loads, I use a Ruger.

1744264031641.jpeg
 
Colt Anaconda 4.25” is on the DOJ kosher list in Ca,, that might be another option.

The 629 is my favorite.44, both my 6.5” power port and mountain gun have worked for me for many years. (I also had a 5”, but it too was sold for some bill or another years ago.) I also have a 4” .41 model 57, which is close enough.
IMG_0658.jpeg IMG_0655.jpeg

IMG_0653.jpeg
I don’t shoot maxi loads in my .44 Mag N frames, my usual loads use 10.0 grains of Unique under a 240 gr SWC. This has enough ooomph for me without being abusive to the guns or my hands.

The Redhawk I have is a 7.5” .41. I wish it were 5.5”, but I got such a deal on it I can’t complain about 2” of extra barrel. The action is good, not great, and it is a bit heavier than the standard-barrel 629 which can help soak up some of the recoil generated with stouter loads. In this gun I don’t have any hesitation with feeding heavy loads, they are built awfully sturdy.

IMG_3362.jpeg

I had a 7.5” Super Redhawk .454, which had a decent DA trigger and a great SA trigger out of the box. The 5.5” is a tad shorter than the one I had, but any length .44 SRH is still a brute.

IMG_3359.jpeg

These are heavy, very large-framed revolvers, there is nothing svelte about one. Over the 10+ years I owned it I never seemed to fire this gun much, and I had a 6.5” 624 .44 Spl I hated, so I sent them off to consignment sale land last summer and used the money on a nice 1911.

One other Ca legal .44 you might want to check out is a 4.2” Model 69. Same size as the L frame in a 5-shot .44 Mag. Mine actually is nicer to shoot than my 629’s, and carries a bit easier, too. Because it’s an L frame it has 5 vs the N frames 6 shots, if that is an issue.

629 Mountain Gun on top, Model 69 below.
IMG_0196.jpeg

Good luck finding a revolver that fits your needs! :thumbup:

Stay safe.
 
My Dan Wesson 744 is built every bit as stout as a Ruger with a SA trigger as good as the best S&W SA trigger I have ever shot (considerably better than the average S&W SA triggers). I never could figure out which barrel length I wanted and I still don't know which barrel length is my favorite.

index.php


In the end I didn't have to choose between S&W and Ruger. The quick attach brake was just a bonus.
 
I had the older 629 for 44 Magnum, the 657 for 41 magnum in 7.5 and 4 5/8 barrel lengths, and a 5.5" Redhawk in 45 Colt. They are all gone because the Bisley grips on the Super Blackhawk and NMBH Flat Top grip conversion solved all the issues for shooting serious but not crazy loads under gas checks. I don't carry them though and I don't hunt. I speak form a target shooting perspective, not shying away from real magnum power with the slower burning powders

Note that the Redhawk has a longer reach to the trigger and may be best with hands of good size. Any custom grips would need to have exposed backstrap, no cushioning, or firing the gun could be strange. Mine worked best with the Hogues from the model 5044.
 
I'm a S&W fan, especially their N frame big bores. I like their weight to recoil ratio with 4" or 5" bbl's, and have found usable grips that handle recoil effectively in the various rubber models from Hogue, Pachmayr et. al. Granted they're ugly, but to date I have not found anything comparable in wood that comfortably handles truly heavy recoil.

So back to the Smith vs, Ruger DA handgun choice: A big part of my choice of a Smith has to do with their century old reputation for superb SA and DA trigger pull weights/lack of creep etc. Ruger aficionados will say their choice is comparable, but IMHO, that's only after some fancy gunsmithing.

As to the vaunted strength of a Ruger, yep, they're built like a brick outhouse, but ...there's that weight thing. And too, Smith handled the supposed fragility of their M29 years ago, but IMHO, the guns that suffered were subjected to heavy loads weekend after weekend back when handgun silhouette was still a viable short gun sport. Nowadays, Smith's are amply strong for 99% of us, and &(*((*_& lock or no lock, they're a pretty good revolver.

Another selling point, (without a scale nor a Ruger DA handy), IIRC, a Smith 629 with similar bbl. length is lighter than a Ruger. Yep, heavier means lighter recoil, but the 3-4 oz difference won't make a discernable difference in felt recoil, but will readily be felt when worn on the belt for a long day's trudging through KY thickets or Colorado mountain canyons. Just MHO, you need a chest holster rig for either one to be comfortable, and with ready access to the gun when needed.

Those're my opinions regarding the choice...but as others will advise, it's best to try both guns on the range, with a healthy regards for a long day's carry afield....Best regards, & I know YMMv, Rod Posted before, here's my 629 with 5" bbl. and a pair of Altamont "Ropers"...a great set of wooden grips suitable ONLY for target level recoil.....

1744318908918.png ​
 
Last edited:
1744331077374.png

I've got no experience with any of the three, so I won't actually endorse the Anaconda, but I will say it's worth looking at. There's a few different models. The matte 4 1/4" is $1200, which is a lot of money, but the 629 and Redhawk aren't much cheaper at $1,000. For the same price as the Mountain Gun ($1,500 on Grabagun at the moment) you can get the Kodiak or a polished Anaconda. If the DA trigger is like other Colts it'll probably be the best of the 3.

One of the reasons I went with the King Cobra Target over the 617 was that the KC was only marginally more expensive then the 617, and you don't have to deal with the various ills of modern S&W (although you may to deal with the ills of modern Colt, but they seem to have fewer as time goes on). Great trigger, solid barrel, no internal lock, etc.

The 4 1/4" Anaconda with a fluted cylinder is 42 oz, on par with the regular 629 and not that much more than Mountain Gun.
 
Right out of the box, I'm a fan of S&W revolvers.

Also, I do not have other much direct history with S&W Model 29 or 629 revolvers until the last 10 years or so. I had no need for a 44 Magnum until recently,

In the 1980's, I competed in IHMSA Handgun Silhouette competition. Until I cracked the forcing cone in my Model 19, I never had a problem with any S&W revolver. Folks I shot with who used Model 29s rarely, if any, had problems with their Model 29s. But, alot of the press at the time was poo-pooing the Model 29s as not being stout enough for the competition,

Ruger DA/SA revolvers have always looked frumpy to me. Their reputation for reliability has always been good, they just do not look too pretty enough for this shooter. Hey, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I do have two Redhawks, actually, a Redhawk in 45 Colt and a Super Redhawk in 22 Hornet. Both have performed excellently for me.

I also have a S&W Model 629-6 (6-1/2" barrel), a Model 29-3 (8-3/8" barrel) and a Colt Anaconda (6" barrel). All have performed flawlessly for me.

I do shoot some full power loads in my revolvers but I do not shoot a steady diet of them.

If you operate the gun above the limits of its design, it will not last and will require more frequent repairs, Your choice.

Choose the gun you like, operate it within design perameters and you will be handsomely rewarded with a reliable firearm.
 
Last edited:
Centella said:
Morning friends,
I'm currently searching for a good 44 mag DA revolver. The S&W 629 and Ruger Redhawk sound like goog options for me. The 629 sounds appealing because it is lighter, especially in it's 4" version. Rightnow I have a S&W 686 and a Ruger GP100 and I love them both...however after a couple of years I must admit I'm a little disppointed with the 686's build quality over time. While the GP100 remains strong and "in one piece" the 686 seems to be fallling apart. OK, not really falling apart but the screw on the cylinder release keeps getting loose and now the ejector rod keeps getting loose also. After 12 shots I have to stop and tighten the cylinder rod or it will come off (it happened once already). I know these issues can be fixed, but to me that says something about durability over time. Any advice on this?

Thanks!
Click to expand...

It all depends on what you want to shoot for ammo.

My dad had a 4" 629 Mountain Gun, and I a 7 1/2" Redhawk for our Moose hunt in 1991. (As back up/ Coup de Gras guns, we both had .300 Win. Mag. rifles) He worked up a fairly standard 240 gr. XTP load, I worked up a 300 gr. XTP load going about 1350 that he wanted nowhere near his Smith.
I actually had the Ruger in my hand when I saw the first moose of the hunt. I was walking a thick stand of tag alders, and had slung the rifle because it was that thick. A cow moose got up about 20 yards in front of me, and fortunately went the other way! I didn't fire, as the cover was so thick, I had no identifiable anatomy to shoot at.
Some time after that hunt, my dad had found some .44 Mag loads he'd made for a Ruger Deer Carbine he'd had. He gave them to me. The 240 gr bullets were seated so far out, I had to shave some lead off the top to get them to fit on the cylinder of the Redhawk. It took them with no complaints, nothing loosened. We have a Redhawk identical to that one sitting in the case at work, and I have to keep reconvincing myself I don't need it. I have a .45 Colt Smith 25-5 that fills my big revolver niche quite well now.



SDGlock23 said:
I can't get over the trigger on the Redhawk, it's not great. To me S&W has the best triggers hands , so I'd vote 629. Is the Redhawk stronger? Probably, but I'd get a Super Redhawk over a Redhawk any day. More pricey but the new Colt's have great triggers.
Click to expand...

A Wolff spring kit helps immensely by itself, having someone who knows what they are doing with a ceramic stone (or fine Arkansas) work the sear engagement a little does wonders!
 
Last edited:
d2wing said:
SRH for sure. After a few shots you will like the Ruger better. It is a little heavier to carry but is much sturdier and handles recoil better. I actually like a Raging Bull because it was ported for less recoil. The Smith is nice looking and maybe smoother. Looks great in a holster if you just want to carry it and not shoot much. Pretty face or long legs?
Click to expand...
I have a 4.25” Ruger Redhawk in 41 magnum and I changed the Hogue synthetic grips for a set of regular Redhawk wood grips. The wood grips feel better and rolls well with recoil.
 
Yes please :) I have several Redhawks... the 5.5 was my first .44 mag... I love em. I have a 4 inch 29 and a six inch model 57 .... I just had not found the right deals on more smith .44 mags :p
 
Mine came with the Hogue grips . I bought the old style wood grips , but I haven’t changed them yet . They look so much better with the wood grips , I’m just not sure about the recoil difference .

I didn’t like the wood target grips on my 686 . It looks better with them , but they are too big for my hands . I switched them out with Pachmayr grips and they improved my shooting and they are not as bad looking on my 686 as the Hogue’s are on my Redhawk IMO . The Hogue rubber grips are also pretty big .
 
I have a 629 Deluxe 3in---that's actually easy to carry but a little on the heavy side----traded out the wood for no finger groove Hogues

I haven't seen a Redhawk (not super) in the flesh in years, otherwise I might be tempted. It would have to be a 5in model.
 
Well. I'm a ruger man through and through. Who likes a good trigger. So Super Redhawk. That said, this 686 is the finest revolver I have or have ever fired.
RMK 686.jpg
It's been trued and tuned by a man who knew what he was doing.
cylinder gap.jpg
 
Lee Q. Loader said:
Me too! I bought some Pachmayr Grips, put them on, shot 6 full house rounds and put the factory wood back on. It just doesn't feel "right" to me with anything but the factory grips.
Click to expand...
Different strokes for different folks.

Wood grips look great on handguns but they do not fit my shooting style. Every center fire revolver I have and shoot regularly, SA and SA/DA, I have rubber grips on. Pachmayr Presentation grips are my favorite but many of the styles have been discontinued. Fortunately, gun shows and ebay have been a good source for what I want.

Most of my 22LR handguns have the origiinal plastic or wood grips installed them.

I'm not saying one grip material is bad and another good, or one grip shape is bad and another good, there is alot of personnel preference that gets added to the equation.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Ruger Redhawk vs. Ruger Super Redhawk
2
Replies
34
Views
8K
Peter M. Eick
P
rbernie
  • Locked
Ruger 'clunk'
Replies
7
Views
871
Josey
J
B
  • Locked
Your thoughts Super Redhawk vs S&W 629 Classic
Replies
16
Views
5K
Tony Mig
T
MCMXI
  • Locked
Value of a S&W 629 4"
Replies
8
Views
1K
243winxb
243winxb
S
  • Locked
Choice: 8 3/8" 629-1, or, 7.5" 657-6?
Replies
0
Views
497
Storm
S
Back
Top