I have been on the lookout for a .44mag DA revo for a while. I have previously fired a S&W model 29, 6 1/2" bbl, with the half underlug, & Remington 180gr .44mag pills.
This time, I rented a Ruger Redhawk .44mag with the 7 1/2" bbl & used the same factory ammo as the S&W 29. This particular Redhawk has seen a lot of use as a range gun. Despite that, it appeared to be good for many more years as a range mule for those poor souls who feel the need to rent a .44mag. It has the original rosewood grips and its trigger was the smoothest I have ever pressed on a Ruger revolver.
Subjective recoil and muzzle blast was pretty harsh. The felt recoil was nastier than the S&W 29 with factory target grips, IMO. (Heck, it was more harsh than the Taurus Raging Bull I rented & stoked with factory .454 Casull.) Those pretty, smooth, rosewood grips have some bite. While it bit the hand that shot it, it delivered wonderfully small groups on target. Better than those delivered by the S&W 29, my own S&W 686, or any other revolver I have shot. Even though recoil was painful, I was able to get off double-taps in respectable order. (Not as quickly as with my SW1911, however. The laws of physics still apply.)
Muzzle blast was so impressive, that management recieved complaints from shooters located in the next bay (separated from me by a hollow-core door and a cinder block wall). Maybe the double-taps were the culprit, as the range is one of those with smothering rules such as no "rapid fire." Double-taps were supposedly allowed, but maybe they expected my double-taps to have larger split times. Whatever. Their range, their rules.
The Redhawk was an impressive revolver, though I think not one I will buy (unless a wildly good price was found on a used model). It had more weight and harsher subjective recoil than the S&W 29.
I think the next stop on my leisurely .44mag test-shootings will be the S&W 629 Mountain Gun.
This time, I rented a Ruger Redhawk .44mag with the 7 1/2" bbl & used the same factory ammo as the S&W 29. This particular Redhawk has seen a lot of use as a range gun. Despite that, it appeared to be good for many more years as a range mule for those poor souls who feel the need to rent a .44mag. It has the original rosewood grips and its trigger was the smoothest I have ever pressed on a Ruger revolver.
Subjective recoil and muzzle blast was pretty harsh. The felt recoil was nastier than the S&W 29 with factory target grips, IMO. (Heck, it was more harsh than the Taurus Raging Bull I rented & stoked with factory .454 Casull.) Those pretty, smooth, rosewood grips have some bite. While it bit the hand that shot it, it delivered wonderfully small groups on target. Better than those delivered by the S&W 29, my own S&W 686, or any other revolver I have shot. Even though recoil was painful, I was able to get off double-taps in respectable order. (Not as quickly as with my SW1911, however. The laws of physics still apply.)
Muzzle blast was so impressive, that management recieved complaints from shooters located in the next bay (separated from me by a hollow-core door and a cinder block wall). Maybe the double-taps were the culprit, as the range is one of those with smothering rules such as no "rapid fire." Double-taps were supposedly allowed, but maybe they expected my double-taps to have larger split times. Whatever. Their range, their rules.
The Redhawk was an impressive revolver, though I think not one I will buy (unless a wildly good price was found on a used model). It had more weight and harsher subjective recoil than the S&W 29.
I think the next stop on my leisurely .44mag test-shootings will be the S&W 629 Mountain Gun.