Redhawk for first handgun?

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

ewlyon

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
369
Location
East side of Wisconsin
OK so basically I am looking at buying a Ruger Redhawk that has come up for sale in my area. Normally if someone asked me about the idea of a 44 as a first handgun I would laugh in their faces but there are some circumstances that are making it seem like a good idea.
First, although this would be the first handgun that I own, I have fired a lot of pistols and some revolvers and single shots. So it is not as though I would be going straight to the 44. If i bought this I would still be doing plenty of practice with handguns ranging from 22 to 45acp.
Second, I have very little interest in adding another caliber to stock, and so I am mainly considering 22s and 44s, as those are both calibers that I own.
Third, I would be limiting myself to almost entirely lighter loads for awhile as I would be using this for target practice with the possibility for home defense.
Fourth, as this would likely be my only handgun purchase for several years, I do not want to limit myself to the 22 in terms of versatility.
Fifth, I am not yet 21 so I can only buy through private sales, although even at gunshops I often lust over appropriately priced Redhawks.
Last (finally), the price isnt bad. Its a stainless with a 6in barrel, grips appear to be non-factory, listed for 500 and I would hope i can either bargain that down or get some ammo thrown in.
Sorry for the long post, just looking for reasons why this is stupid, or why it makes sense.
 
You missed another point, the ruger redhawks are rock solid. As long as you know what you are getting into with a .44mag then I do not see the problem.
 
I understand that you don’t want a 22 which you already know is always a good choice for a first gun. However, unless you are a handloader, which I assume you’re not, and I don’t think you mentioned anything about deer hunting with it, you might consider a 357 instead. You could shoot 38’s through it which are cheaper and easier to obtain then factory 44 specials or light 44 mag loads. It would probably make an easier, more pleasant gun to target shoot with and you still can load 357 mags for circumstances where you might want more power. If you go ahead with the 44, especially since you said you already have a 44 rifle I’d seriously consider handloading for it and maybe even bullet casting.
 
It would not be a bad choice, but Bushpilot makes a good point about handloading. It will be pricy to feed and by handloading you can customize your rounds to your needs.

Overall, I would go ahead and get it, and plan on the next big purchase being a reloading press. I bought a press at Christmas and thought "I should have done this a LONG time ago."
 
They are very nice revolvers. Since you seem to be going into this with your eyes wide open, just be aware they are expensive to shoot. I've never owned a 44 mag and just didn't like the abuse of the recoil. I have shot many different 44 mags thru the years but never bought one, but that's just me. I like the big bore revolvers but I settled on the tamer 45 Colt and 45 acp revolvers. Good luck with your choice and let us know the out come.
 
I bought a Ruger Redhawk, stainless, 7 1/2" bbl, at least 20 years ago because the price was right and thought I might shoot it and hunt with it - even mounted a scope on it.

I recently cleaned out my safe and it was one of the ones I sold. I never fired it and I've shot thousands of rounds in competition and practice in that time period..and I'm reloading again.

Just another view - I'd buy something more practical OR get ready to start loading my own ammo fast. Good luck with your decision.
 
If you're already shooting .44, then you know all about ammo costs and/or reloading.

A big 6" .44 Mag revolver isn't exactly a "do-all" firearm in that it is harder to carry than most and will take a lot of effort to carry concealed. (Though if your state does not prohibit open carry, it would work well enough for that.)

Having said that, I do carry a 4" 629 as my primary competition and defensive revolver, so it isn't the craziest idea ever. The 6" barrel limits you though -- harder to carry/conceal and can't enter some competitions (IDPA & USPSA). For home defense and target shooting? Yeah it will work just fine!
 
Well, my first handgun that my parents bought me when I was 16 was a S&W 629 Classic 6.5" 44 Magnum. I was already reloading at the time so it seemed a natural choice for me.

Since you already have some 44 rifles I think it would be a great choice for a first handgun for you. Shooting light loads out of a gun that heavy will allow you to build your skills without having to worry about flinching. Then you can work up to full power loads and really have some fun.
 
Have you ever shot a Redhawk? At least held one? I own one and am a revolver man at heart, and it has to be my least favorite in my collection. I bought one as my first big(ger) bore early in my shooting "career" thinking it would become my do-all handgun. Their virtue is their strength, but otherwise it is a pretty ungainly, awkward gun in my opinion, and it possesses the worst trigger of any of my Rugers. Also very subjective, but for me it is considerably worse at handling recoil than other equivalent-caliber guns in my collection. If nothing else, the below-average trigger to me would be reason enough that it isn't your first gun. If you want to be a good shot, you need to master trigger work and control. The Redhawk trigger is more of an obstacle to be overcome rather than something to aid you on the path to proficiency. It's like trying to become a good race car driver, and you are practicing your stick-shift skills on a diesel F-350. I'd look at a Ruger Blackhawk/Bisley or a S&W (6)29 first.

Also I don't know if there is any benefit to trying to limit yourself to one caliber if the one caliber you shoot is prohibitively expensive. I understand not wanting to start with a .22 as I found it boring when I started and still do. If you want a revolver I'd start with a nice .357 which is about 1/3 cheaper to shoot than .44 mag, and a GP100 has a much better trigger out of the box.
 
You don't specifically say but I gather you have a .44Mag chambered rifle? So you're already reloading for that?

If you have a rifle in this chambering AND if you're set up for reloading already then I'd say that a Redhawk isn't a bad way to go at all. I got my own .44Redhawk recently and quite like it with a change of grips to some that fit my hand better.

Mind you if I had my druthers I'd go for a S&W 29 or 629. As much as I like my Rugers for what they are the triggers are simply not at all comparable to the S&W. The Rugers are smooth enough a draw but the trigger telegraphs when it's about ready to release the hammer when the cylinder stop snaps up into place during the DA pull. As someone used to S&W DA pulls I found this a little disconcerting when trying to distance myself from the upcoming fury of unleashing a magnum round. For lighter Special like loads it's handy though. Let's me stage and treat the rest of the pull as more like a SA pull.

Even with reloading they are NOT cheap rounds to shoot off in quantity. I'd suggest you still shop for a nice .22 handgun for much of your plinking and practicing even if you do reload to hold costs down.

If you don't reload then include the cost of a reloading setup with the cost of the gun. Otherwise the darn thing will eat you out of house and home if you have to feed it factory ammo. ANY of the big bore ammo is stupidly pricey for what it is compared to the cost of reloading.
 
Thanks everyone for the input. I thought about the reloading aspect of it and it works in my favor because I plan to begin reloading within the next month or two and already have access to a complete setup. Carry is not an issue as my home state does not allow it and the state that I spend the rest of my time in allows open carry (although i think i would quickly grow tired of this kind of weight on my hip). I think I am going to check out the revolver in person sometime in the next week, then decide from there.
 
I love mine. No, I would not want to CCW it. ;)

attachment.php
 
Redhawk

The 7 1/2" Redhawk was the first handgun I ever owned. I love it and enjoy shooting it a lot.

I just bought 1K bullets to reload.

I'll have to see if I can find the receipt. IIRC it was about $289 around either 82 or 85. I shot a deer with it 2 years ago. A one handed shot at about 40 yds. I can't compare it to other .44's since it's the only one I have.
 
I have a 5 1/2" Redhawk and it probably is one of my favorite guns.

The 5 1/2" barrel seems to strike the perfect balance between shootability and packability. Not small by any means but in the right rig, it does not carry that bad.

The trigger does take a bit of work to get right but it can be done. Just requires a bit more fiddling than a Super Redhawk or GP-100.
I don't think you would find anyone to argue that it can digest a steady diet of the heaviest loads and never get tired......although your wrist will.

One of the biggest shortcomings of the Redhawk is the grip. The factory grips really do nothing to help tame the recoil of the gun. While they were never painful for me to shoot, I never warmed up to them and have since replaced them with Nills Griffe wooden grips....much nicer.

All of that being said, I think that unless I needed the gun for bear protection or something like that I would probably opt for a Super Blackhawk over the Redhawk. I find that I can shoot my Blackhawk more accurately for a longer duration than I can with the Redhawk. Couple that with the 7 1/2" tube and it is quite accurate all the way out to 100 yards.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top