Redhawk, or Super Redhawk?

[rabid wombat]

Mine...I am open to grip recommendations....

 

[Sneakshot92]

Mine...I am open to grip recommendations....

View attachment 917277

She looks nice the way she is.
But maybe some Altamonts.

 

[AustinTX]

I've had a Redhawk for 35 years or so. Always thought it to be the finest looking .44 mag on the planet, which actually was the reason I bought it. That may have been overshadowed by the Colt Anaconda, still not sure.

Definitely not, in my opinion. The Anaconda is among the very ugliest modern revolvers to my eyes. The proportions look all wrong.

 

[Frulk]

I stopped just short of the SUPER RH. Primarily because the RH was available in the calibers I wanted (44. Mag and .45 Colt) and it would do what I needed getting done. I suppose, if I ever decide to go larger than .45 Colt one could end up being curated by me. If I based the decision purely on aesthetics that probably wouldn't happen.

.44 Mag RH top center and bottom left.....45 Colt bottom right

 

[cosh]

I went Redhawk 4.2 45 Colt because it is the caliber I started with and reload for it. I had read somewhere about draw time in OWB holster and past 5 inches is a limiting factor. 4.2 inch is reportedly a good option when in a saddle on horseback if I ever do that while hunting.

If I was using a chest rig would maybe leaned Super RH with a longer barrel.

 

[joneb]

I have a Ruger Red Hawk, I think a BFR from Magnum Research would be the best choice.

 

[Varminterror]

Two spring action, optic mounting options, more adaptable grip (RH grip necks are way too small for me), and better forward balance = reasons I favor the SRH over the RH.

 

[KYamateur]

You need to handle both, I originally had a Red Hawk. I loved the looks of a gun, but had trouble gripping it comfortably. It has a long Length of pull similar to the security six revolvers. If you don’t have a large hand that can be punishing in a 44 mag. Later, I purchased a Super Red Hawk and it has a much more comfortable grip for smaller medium sized hands. Aesthetically, the Red Hawk is one of the most attractive guns I have ever seen, but they just don’t fit my hand. The Super Redhawk shoots like a dream. The Alaskan models are very attractive, but the looks of the longer barreled models look a bit unfinished. I wish they would make a slab sided version like they do in .45 colt. Both guns are outstanding pieces. In the end, I would just get what handled the best in your hand.

 

[EIB0879]

For my hands, the original-pattern GP100 grip is the nest handgun grip I have ever used. This same grip fits the SRH, so, that is how I “voted.”

I had a .41 Mag Redhawk, in the Nineties. Nice enough gun, but the grip was not really good for my hands.

Obviously, this is an individual thing. One should select the weapon, based upon one’s own hand fit and experience.

i found a Redhawk in .41 Magnum that already had Hougue grips installed and it made a heck of a difference.

 

[Rexster]

i found a Redhawk in .41 Magnum that already had Hougue grips installed and it made a heck of a difference.

Hogue grips, with finger grooves, have never nearly worked for me, and back in those days, that was the only choice. For big-bore revolving, I moved to single-actions, in the Nineties, and and added a Super Redhawk Alaskan several years ago. (I installed an original-pattern GP100 grip on the SRH.)

My problem is long hands, but relatively short, slender fingers and thumbs. A huge grip, like N-Frame or Redhawk, will “feel” right, but getting enough finger on the trigger, for a DA pull, require me to shift my grip a bit, which them concentrates the recoil into the base joint of the thumb. I am so glad I discovered the GP100, by 1989 or 1990