N frame vs Redhawk grip size and reach?

[westernrover]

I find on N frames, the grip size and reach to the trigger is a bit too much for my hand size. With a good grip, I can just get the pad of my trigger finger on the trigger and not the first joint around it like I'd want for a strong double-action pull. I have to roll my hand counterclockwise around the grip to get the finger farther through the trigger guard and that's not such a good grip. The K/L frame, on the other hand, seems just right.

So how does the Redhawk compare? Does it also have a big grip and reach to the trigger like the N frame or is it closer to the L frame? I realize the GP100 is Ruger's closer comparison in all-things, but I've never had the opportunity to handle a Redhawk. How does it compare in grip size and reach?

 

[627PCFan]

I don't have bear paw hands but my 627 feels "Normal" compared to my Redhawk with rubber hogues. I do have long fingers so neither is an issue for me but you absolutely do notice it, particularly to the diameter of the grip on the Redhawk. If you don't like the N Frame size, Id recommend against the Redhawk unless you invested in thin stocks.

 

[CraigC]

Everything about the Redhawk is bigger, which is good and bad. It's a bombproof sixgun but the grip frame is too in-between. It's large enough to be much more comfortable than a S&W with magnas but also too big for oversized Roper style stocks to fit anyone's hand but King Kong and Bill Jordan.

 

[243winxb]

The Ruger seems to have the shorter reach to the trigger. Having shot both M29 & Redhawk 44s, i didnt really measure the difference.

The S&W smaller factory grips from my m28 fit the m29. Both N frames. The reach would be almost the same from metal frame to trigger. The target grips are fatter.

 

[Hookeye]

N frame, Hogue rubber might be worth a try.
Had them on my last three 629's.

I dunno about the Hogues on a Redhawk.
Or on a Super Redhawk.
I know the factory grips on either suck.
But on the Super......sucks less.
The skinny factory Redhawk grips are mean with stout loads.
But work when a scope is added.
Better than change the grip, scope or not IMHO.

Pops had a 9.5" SRH and that thing had an OK trigger, crappy factory grips........and shot great.
Imaging what one could do if refined.
Yes............while I love a 629..............I might snag a SRH if one comes along at a decent price.
Idea is to put reflex sight in front ring slot. Slap Hogues on it and run it w 200gr as hot as I can

 

[The Evangelist Cowboy]

The Redhawk with the round butt has crap offerings for grip replacement. The stock grips allow me to do a reload without messing up my grip but they are horrible for shooting heavy loads or sustained fire, the hogues are great for shooting but they're too thick to the point of me having to move my have in an awkward position before I can reach the cylinder release. The best thing I've come up with is to use the standard stocks and order a Tyler t grip.

 

[CraigC]

I know the factory grips on either suck......But on the Super......sucks less......crappy factory grips.......Slap Hogues on it and run it w 200gr as hot as I can

Exactly the opposite for me. The factory insert grips are among the most comfortable factory DA grips available. Ten million times better than Hogue, which I regard as poorly designed garbage.

 

[RealGun]

The Redhawk with the round butt has crap offerings for grip replacement. The stock grips allow me to do a reload without messing up my grip but they are horrible for shooting heavy loads or sustained fire, the hogues are great for shooting but they're too thick to the point of me having to move my have in an awkward position before I can reach the cylinder release. The best thing I've come up with is to use the standard stocks and order a Tyler t grip.

That gun is better shooting 45 ACP than any 45 Colt above SAAMI spec or 44 Magnum. The grips should be adequate. One look at the grip shape, and you know the design has been compromised. The only reason to have a round butt grip is for concealment. Ruger offers Redhawk models better suited for controlling heavy loads without too much punishment. However, they no longer do it for 45 Colt.

 

[The Evangelist Cowboy]

That gun is better shooting 45 ACP than any 45 Colt above SAAMI spec or 44 Magnum. The grips should be adequate. One look at the grip shape, and you know the design has been compromised. The only reason to have a round butt grip is for concealment. Ruger offers Redhawk models better suited for controlling heavy loads without too much punishment. However, they no longer do it for 45 Colt.

The grips are not adequate for what I do which is shooting heavier loads and shooting quick consecutive shots. They only offered this configuration in the round butt so I have to deal with it. The gun doesn't see as much ACP as it does .45 Colt loads.

 

[RealGun]

The grips are not adequate for what I do which is shooting heavier loads and shooting quick consecutive shots. They only offered this configuration in the round butt so I have to deal with it. The gun doesn't see as much ACP as it does .45 Colt loads.

Can we agree that's not likely the usage intended and that grip makers are unlikely to respond.

 

[gotboostvr]

Can we agree that's not likely the usage intended and that grip makers are unlikely to respond.

I don't see why wooden or micarta grips couldn't be made in a round butt to square butt conversion. It's very common among the S&W crowd.

You might not be able to buy them off the shelf, but I'm sure one of the one-off custom would take on the job. Done in a utilitarian material and finish wouldn't be cheap, but I wouldn't call it unaffordable.

Or, grab a block of wood and a file and DIY.

 

[243winxb]

https://rugerforum.net/gun-stories/308929-got-head-shots-paper-target-ruger-redhawk.html
Post #4

But the Ruger Redhawk still retains a traditional grip frame with a trigger reach that is nearly identical to the S&W N frame, and both are too long for me to get enough leverage on the trigger for good DA trigger control.

What is a grip stub??

The SP 101, GP 100 and Super Redhawk all use a grip stub

 

[The Evangelist Cowboy]

Can we agree that's not likely the usage intended and that grip makers are unlikely to respond.

I would agree with that. If I truly wanted to I could spare no expense and send through grip frame along with a trace of my hand to get it truly custom fit. As is I believe my best course of action is to use the factory stocks and use Tyler T grips as an add-on.

 

[Walkalong]

I may be the only one in the world that likes shooting the standard wood grips on Redhawks.

I just checked my Redhawk with factory wood grips vs my Model 28 with "target" grips (Not Magnas) and while the reach is very, very close, the Redhawk is more comfortable. The N Frame with Magnas would be a closer reach. The Redhawk with grips that wrap around the back of the grip frame would be longer.

 

[The Evangelist Cowboy]

https://rugerforum.net/gun-stories/308929-got-head-shots-paper-target-ruger-redhawk.html
Post #4
What is a grip stub??

They don't have a full tang grip so to speak, it's just a bar or "stub" that the grips slip onto.

 

[243winxb]

Ok, ty. That refreshed my memory.

 

[RealGun]

I don't see why wooden or micarta grips couldn't be made in a round butt to square butt conversion. It's very common among the S&W crowd.

You might not be able to buy them off the shelf, but I'm sure one of the one-off custom would take on the job. Done in a utilitarian material and finish wouldn't be cheap, but I wouldn't call it unaffordable.

Or, grab a block of wood and a file and DIY.

My impression is that grip makers don't respond with development except for a gun selling in serious numbers and with significant demand for a grip change.