Plz help me decide which .44 mag to purchase
- Thread starter ph21
- Start date
- Status
AKElroy
Member
For bear, I would think a fairly light double action pull is required. The Ruger will be hard pressed to give that even with work. The Smith will be light & buttery smooth out of the box. I know it is light chambered for the OP's purpose, but my 686 would be my choice. 180 gr garetts, smooth as silk action & reasonable weight & I would feel well protected.
Of course, if you REALLY have bear challenges, I would go DRACO.
Of course, if you REALLY have bear challenges, I would go DRACO.
BCRider
Member
Don't fault how well a Ruger can be tuned. I still haven't gotten around to taking pictures of my recently acquired Super Redhawk so I haven't posted about it yet. But the smith that did the work on it also did a trigger job. The gun was intended for wilderness carry for the original owner so the mainspring was not reduced in power. But the DA trigger is as good as any STOCK SPRUNG S&W that I have shot. Which means that it's heavier than my Wolff kitted S&W's but smooth.
heavyshooter
Member
Critter and Marshall stole my thunder. I vote for the 4" Redhawk.
1) It's less cumbersome than the Alaskan because it is slimmer (less blocky) and has a longer bbl.
2) It is more durable than the Smiths. If I am in Alaska, I am carrying REDLINE loads, so I want a gun that has earned the right have ammo manufacturers stamp "Ruger only" on their boxes. I doubt that in a post-Grizzly moment you will find yourself saying, "You know, that trigger could be a little smoother."
Last edited:
AKElroy
Member
Agreed, assuming you can hit it. My Redhawk & SP 101 were so heavy DA that they might as well have been SA guns. I could not hit a truck at 10 yeards under pressure DA with either. My Smiths DA's are light enough for point & shoot accuracy. I doubt I would leave an encounter with a MISSED bear saying "I sure am glad I have this heavily overbuilt pistol capable of firing redline loads".
I have never heard of Redline Ammo. I will have to look into it. I am leaning towards the 4 inch Redhawk now. I still like the Smith & Wesson looks. But I want a damn good revolver. If I spend that much, it better be good.
New or used? Think people abuse theirs? I have a hard time buying used when I can not inspect it myself.
New or used? Think people abuse theirs? I have a hard time buying used when I can not inspect it myself.
AKElroy
Member
Redline is not a specific loading; it is just used to signify max loads.
230therapy
Member
I would think that a gunsmith can perform an action job to make it quite nice.
Grant Cunningham did great work in my S&W. Here's what he says about Rugers:
http://www.grantcunningham.com/ruger-gunsmithing.html
Grant Cunningham did great work in my S&W. Here's what he says about Rugers:
http://www.grantcunningham.com/ruger-gunsmithing.html
jgiehl
Member
They're both firearms that will get the job done if needed.
One thing you might want to check out also is a Diamond D holster. He makes one called the Guide's Choice Holster. It's spendy.....$189? I want to say, also includes shipping and a six round holder. http://www.diamonddcustomleather.com/Chest_Holsters.php
I bought one last year, and it's worth the money. 5 minutes later and you hardly notice you're carrying a .44. You still have full range of motion also. Great holster.
One thing you might want to check out also is a Diamond D holster. He makes one called the Guide's Choice Holster. It's spendy.....$189? I want to say, also includes shipping and a six round holder. http://www.diamonddcustomleather.com/Chest_Holsters.php
I bought one last year, and it's worth the money. 5 minutes later and you hardly notice you're carrying a .44. You still have full range of motion also. Great holster.
speedway
Member
29 or 629 pre-lock.
Tomcat47
Member
These are good options! I like the 629 smith
But I like the Ruger too! Definately go Longer Barrell! I even like 6" to be honest!
Depending on your budget I offer a Second Option!
Taurus Tracker 44 at around $450.00 in SS 4"
I Carry The Tracker 41 a lot out west in Montana.
It is a Great Gun and I Hand Load as Well and It will handle what you give it!
I prefer .41 over .44 for penetration reasons but that is "to each his on"!
Other thoughts would be Taurus .454 Casull ,Smith .500 (pricey)!, and The SW .460 which I just recently learned about here on THR. It can fire .460,.454, & .45 Long Colt. I like that alot! And the bullet option on .460 is awesome!
But I like the Ruger too! Definately go Longer Barrell! I even like 6" to be honest!
Depending on your budget I offer a Second Option!
Taurus Tracker 44 at around $450.00 in SS 4"
I Carry The Tracker 41 a lot out west in Montana.
It is a Great Gun and I Hand Load as Well and It will handle what you give it!
I prefer .41 over .44 for penetration reasons but that is "to each his on"!
Other thoughts would be Taurus .454 Casull ,Smith .500 (pricey)!, and The SW .460 which I just recently learned about here on THR. It can fire .460,.454, & .45 Long Colt. I like that alot! And the bullet option on .460 is awesome!
Attachments
I personally have, and carry the Super Red Hawk Alaskan in .44 Mag. VERY packable, and I sometimes carry mine as my CCW.
Longer barrels are always better, but I'm a bit unusual in that I actually shoot snubbies better then the longer barrel versions.
I carry my own handloads in it, but if I was to trek up in Alaska, or out west, I'd stuff it with some Garrett +P Hammerheads, and would not loose any sleep.
As for weight, it like recoil is subjective. I don't think the Alaskan is that heavy.
It doesn't weigh any more then my Govt 1911, but sure backs a much bigger punch. Some people look at pictures of the Alaskan, and the first thought are " it's huge".
Here is a comparison with a SP101. They are not as big as they look when viewed by itself.
[/IMG]
Longer barrels are always better, but I'm a bit unusual in that I actually shoot snubbies better then the longer barrel versions.
I carry my own handloads in it, but if I was to trek up in Alaska, or out west, I'd stuff it with some Garrett +P Hammerheads, and would not loose any sleep.
As for weight, it like recoil is subjective. I don't think the Alaskan is that heavy.
It doesn't weigh any more then my Govt 1911, but sure backs a much bigger punch. Some people look at pictures of the Alaskan, and the first thought are " it's huge".
Here is a comparison with a SP101. They are not as big as they look when viewed by itself.
The smith is a prettier gun, but the Ruger is a tank. If life saving from large brear is on the agenda, my money would go to the Redhawk with 4" barrel. The short barrel would make muzzle blast and recoil more of an issue, and the added velocity is something to welcome with the longer barrel. Good luck, and hopefully you never have to find out if you chose the right one.
Marshall
Member
I wouldn't worry too much about the trigger issues being discussed when deciding.
If a bear is so close that it gives you no time, removing the gun from it's holster quickly will be a more important issue than the trigger between these guns. Let's assume, and hope, you have time to do that. If so, cocking it at the end of that motion, but as part of the motion, should be second nature. Practice that and you'll be in business. That said, after practicing with the gun, if you feel you need a better trigger, DA or SA, then by all means do what you feel needs to be done.
If a bear is so close that it gives you no time, removing the gun from it's holster quickly will be a more important issue than the trigger between these guns. Let's assume, and hope, you have time to do that. If so, cocking it at the end of that motion, but as part of the motion, should be second nature. Practice that and you'll be in business. That said, after practicing with the gun, if you feel you need a better trigger, DA or SA, then by all means do what you feel needs to be done.
Having years of experience with both Smiths and Rugers I can tell you this.
Rugers will take anything you can throw at them w/o worry about frame stretch like a Smith.
The stock Ruger Redhawk can best be described as a single action that can be shot double action if you need to.
If I were in your position I would look for a used Redhawk in 4 inch and use the money I save to have a trigger job done on it.
Then after you've got the .44 bug go get yourself a couple of Smiths.
Rugers will take anything you can throw at them w/o worry about frame stretch like a Smith.
The stock Ruger Redhawk can best be described as a single action that can be shot double action if you need to.
If I were in your position I would look for a used Redhawk in 4 inch and use the money I save to have a trigger job done on it.
Then after you've got the .44 bug go get yourself a couple of Smiths.
Mr.Revolverguy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2007
- Messages
- 1,882
I love big bore revolvers and own a number of them. I own the 4inch redhawk, 629 and traded an Alaskan in for something different because I had the 4inch. I am not going to discuss the characteristics of each of them here, because I have written reviews on my website.
What I will comment on is all the talk about durability between Smith and Ruger. My opinion is either of these will last the average shooter a lifetime. What makes this complicated is that word lifetime it's subject to be challenged, what is a lifetime? To some it is 1000 rounds of 44, to others its 5000 rounds of 44, to some it may be 30 to 40,000 rounds. Though I don't know of or have any concrete data, the price tag of 44 Magnum may keep the average American from shooting it as often, maybe 10,000 rounds in a lifetime if you purchase or reload. Having said that here is a review of a 629 after 5000 rounds, which also includes a link to the initial review upon purchase here on my site. S&W 629 After 5k rounds
Yes there is no doubt the Ruger has a thicker cylinder and frame. But this is always mentioned along with the statement of I can load hotter rounds through a Ruger. Not bashing anyone but I have never understood that and yes I do reload have been for over 18 years and know about Ruger only loads. But If I wanted to go above SAAMI spec, risking my health and someone else's for that matter why not just be safe and go with a larger more capable caliber like the 454Casull, 460 or 500 all which are a hoot to shoot The additional gain in velocity is not worth my personal safety. Again just my opinion.
If interested here are some links of reviews for the ones you are considering.
Ruger RedHawk 4inch
Others not being considered but may help you gain more insight and make a better decision.
S&W Performance Center Model 29
Ruger Alaskan 454
Ruger 4inch 45 Colt
Also be aware changing the grips on my Redhawk 4inch was a pain as the plastic disk insert has been changed with this model and will not fit regular redhawk grips. To make standard Redhawk grips fit you need to call Ruger and tell them you need the large disk. They new exactly what I needed when I asked, but they were out of them. Though as soon as they produced more they shipped me one for free, took about 3 weeks.
Hope this helps and good luck.
What I will comment on is all the talk about durability between Smith and Ruger. My opinion is either of these will last the average shooter a lifetime. What makes this complicated is that word lifetime it's subject to be challenged, what is a lifetime? To some it is 1000 rounds of 44, to others its 5000 rounds of 44, to some it may be 30 to 40,000 rounds. Though I don't know of or have any concrete data, the price tag of 44 Magnum may keep the average American from shooting it as often, maybe 10,000 rounds in a lifetime if you purchase or reload. Having said that here is a review of a 629 after 5000 rounds, which also includes a link to the initial review upon purchase here on my site. S&W 629 After 5k rounds
Yes there is no doubt the Ruger has a thicker cylinder and frame. But this is always mentioned along with the statement of I can load hotter rounds through a Ruger. Not bashing anyone but I have never understood that and yes I do reload have been for over 18 years and know about Ruger only loads. But If I wanted to go above SAAMI spec, risking my health and someone else's for that matter why not just be safe and go with a larger more capable caliber like the 454Casull, 460 or 500 all which are a hoot to shoot
The additional gain in velocity is not worth my personal safety. Again just my opinion.If interested here are some links of reviews for the ones you are considering.
Ruger RedHawk 4inch
Others not being considered but may help you gain more insight and make a better decision.
S&W Performance Center Model 29
Ruger Alaskan 454
Ruger 4inch 45 Colt
Also be aware changing the grips on my Redhawk 4inch was a pain as the plastic disk insert has been changed with this model and will not fit regular redhawk grips. To make standard Redhawk grips fit you need to call Ruger and tell them you need the large disk. They new exactly what I needed when I asked, but they were out of them. Though as soon as they produced more they shipped me one for free, took about 3 weeks.
Hope this helps and good luck.
The reason people say they can load hotter rounds for their Ruger may be a bit misleading.
What people should say is they can load hotter loads and shoot more of them w/o problems in the Ruger.
Either gun should handle the same loads just fine as long as they fit the cylinder.
Where the Ruger and the Dan Wesson have an advantage over the Smith is when a steady diet of heavy bullets are fed the gun.
I am not talking about a 240 grain bullet at 1400fps but a 330 grain bullet at 1350fps.
Hammering a Smith like that will stretch the frame and can cause the cylinder to rotate backwards on older Smiths. That's why Smith started doing the "Endurance Package" on late 1989 and later model guns.
The silhouette shooters of the 1980s were shooting the Smiths so loose the cylinder would index backward and accuracy would go when the frame stretched.
That didn't happen with a Ruger or a DW.
What people should say is they can load hotter loads and shoot more of them w/o problems in the Ruger.
Either gun should handle the same loads just fine as long as they fit the cylinder.
Where the Ruger and the Dan Wesson have an advantage over the Smith is when a steady diet of heavy bullets are fed the gun.
I am not talking about a 240 grain bullet at 1400fps but a 330 grain bullet at 1350fps.
Hammering a Smith like that will stretch the frame and can cause the cylinder to rotate backwards on older Smiths. That's why Smith started doing the "Endurance Package" on late 1989 and later model guns.
The silhouette shooters of the 1980s were shooting the Smiths so loose the cylinder would index backward and accuracy would go when the frame stretched.
That didn't happen with a Ruger or a DW.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Except that it doesn't feel, shoot or recoil like one.
What should a single action that can be shot double action feel, shoot or recoil like ?
DM~
Member
Well, after living 25 years in Alaska, carrying my S&W 29 6", hunting and shooting some competition with it, i never wore it out. I'm still shooting it today with the same hunting/competition load i have since i bought it in the 70's. My cast 250 grain SWC over 23.0 of H-110. I've put a LOT of big game in my freezer with it, from moose on down, and it's still tight and shooting well.
All three of your choises are good guns, (i've owned the Rugers too) and you won't wear any of them out, so don't let the Ruger guys scare you away from the best one out of the box!
Make mine the 29 please!
DM
All three of your choises are good guns, (i've owned the Rugers too) and you won't wear any of them out, so don't let the Ruger guys scare you away from the best one out of the box!
Make mine the 29 please!
DM
Back in the days of hi-performance cars you could order a TRUE racing engine from the factory. 0ne common trait w/ALL these engines was FORGED internal parts. Cranks rods pistons. Most all other engines had CAST parts. Pound for pound. Part for Part. Forged IS stronger than cast.
Rugers are CAST. Smiths are FORGED.
Rugers are CAST. Smiths are FORGED.
Last edited:
Wow, I would say it is split even between S&W and Ruger. Lots of good information here and I thank you all. As soon as I sell my tires I will buy. Not sure yet on which one but I am leaning towards the 4 inch Redhawk. However, can I put these grips on the 4 inch Redhawk?
Attachments
Mr.Revolverguy
Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2007
- Messages
- 1,882
PH21 no you can't the redhawk does not share the gp100 grip size.
The gp100 and super redhawk share the grip size.
The gp100 and super redhawk share the grip size.
NMGonzo
Member
Alaskan
You can get a smaller grip for it if you want to conceal, you can shoot reduced loads, resale value is higher.
You can get a smaller grip for it if you want to conceal, you can shoot reduced loads, resale value is higher.
- Status
