Do I need a Redhawk?

[hittman]

Everybody needs a Redhawk .... or three.

But ..... everybodys already got a .44 Magnum. Why not treat yourself to the wild side and go with a .357 or .41 Magnum?

 

[mill428]

Everybody needs a Redhawk .... or three.

But ..... everybodys already got a .44 Magnum. Why not treat yourself to the wild side and go with a .357 or .41 Magnum?

Very nice, hittman! You know, up until about a couple months ago, I never even gave the .41 Magnum a second thought. My dad and I were talking guns and he mentioned he always wanted a buntline .41 mag. I told him he was crazy because he would never find ammo for it - especially now! But in the time since that conversation, I have seen and heard more positive comments dealing with that caliber. I had to go back to him last week and tell him I was sorry for judging his choice so quickly - I was wrong. To top it all off, the last gun show I went to the only Bisley I saw (I was looking for a .45 Bisley) was a .41 magnum. What makes it worse is they were only wanting $400 for it. Sad to say, but I didn't even consider it at the time. Now I think it will be my next purchase. I guess I need to see what the fuss is all about.

Now as you say, if I could find a .41 mag RH - that would be something! Thanks for the additional reminder.

Craig

 

[Corbi]

When I was shopping for a 44mag I went with the 4" Redhawk.

It is heavier than the 629. The weight is a double edged sword. It tames the recoil but you have to haul it around.

The trigger on my gun is pretty stiff. The 629 will have a much better trigger.

I thought the rubber grips were ugly so I replaced them with factory wood grips.

The Ruger can handle heavier loads than the 629 as the cylinder is longer. You can seat the bullet our further and have greater powder capacity.

Another + for the Ruger is the ease of care. YOu can easily remove the trigger group for deep cleaning.

Personnaly I am done with ported guns. The blast seems amplified by the porting. I am not going to carry or use a ported gun in the field (anymore).

Corbi

 

[BIgMuddy]

I can't add much to what has already been mentioned. I have both but my RH's are 5.5" guns. When the 4" became available I jumped on it....and sold it almost as quickly. I found the extra weight over my 29 made it no easier to carry than the 5.5" I already had.

So for me, carrying on a separate belt in hunting or "serious" carrying conditions I take the Big Red. If I want a light but powerful sidearm on a pants belt the Smith gets the nod.

I like to keep my loads for the Smith in the 1100 to 1200 fps range, usually with a lead WFN 260gr. bullet. This range is easier on both me and the gun. In fact I load almost all of my big bore handguns in this same range. When I want more power I move up in bullet weight (and diameter) and not velocity. The Redhawk handles these same loads easily and if I want to go to 300 gr. bullets and beyond this is my gun of choice.

I agree with the thought that if you are going to go out and get a Redhawk by all means I would suggest a 45.

I am now going to go mourn the fact that I did not see that 41 for $400....

Dan

 

[savit260]

I recently picked up this 5 1/2" Redhawk and it's really winning me over! Owned a number of Colt and S&W double actions, but this is my first Ruger D/A. I'm liking it an awful lot.

 

[Roger in NC]

Keep the 629 as a tribute to ol' Elmer. Be on the look-out for a Redhawk. It can be loaded from mild to wild to cover any requirements.
This one is a 45 Colt.

 

[mill428]

A very large revolver, but I don't mind the feel of a quality chunk of Pittsburgh steel. They are well built and handle the recoil better than most. I predict you will not be disappointed.

exlogger, the first "real" handgun I ever handled was a RH. I was 14 at the time and I was amazed at the weight! A friend of mine had just got it and kept it in a rug in his truck. I couldn't imagine carrying that around with you - neither could he, which explains the gun rug. We were both skinny little kids at that point (my, how things change) but were so enamored with the heft and bulk of the thing. Of course the fact that it was a .44 lent to the mystic of it all back then.

Savit260 and Roger in NC, beautiful RH's! Roger, I love the rig. I am being swayed by this thread to, one, keep my 629, and two, look beyond the .44 mag and seriously look for a RH in .41 mag or .45 Colt. I realize the .41 will be harder to find but a RH in either caliber would scratch an itch I didn't know I had - until now. You guys are becoming a bad influence

I like to keep my loads for the Smith in the 1100 to 1200 fps range, usually with a lead WFN 260gr. bullet. This range is easier on both me and the gun. In fact I load almost all of my big bore handguns in this same range. When I want more power I move up in bullet weight (and diameter) and not velocity. The Redhawk handles these same loads easily and if I want to go to 300 gr. bullets and beyond this is my gun of choice.

Dan, loads in this range are about the top of anything I do with my 629. I'll admit I haven't gone overboard experimenting. I have a better place now to reload so I am gathering information and components to build loads that have interested me over time. As I said above, the idea of having a .45 RH is becoming VERY appealing. I already have a .45 BH convertible and love it. A Redhawk of the same caliber would definitely add to the fun!

Oh BTW BigMuddy, the .41 was in the far corner, last table

Craig

 

[deac45]

If only they put the GP/SRH action in the Redhawk......sigh.

+100! I've been wishing for that for years. One day maybe.


Deac45

 

[427mach1]

If only they put the GP/SRH action in the Redhawk......sigh.

+100! I've been wishing for that for years. One day maybe.


Deac45

I've never handled a SRH. What is the difference between the SRH and RH actions? Trigger pull, smoothness, or ??? My RH requires 9 lb 9 oz in DA, 6 lb 7 oz in SA. My SBH and BH have trigger pulls of 4 lb 10 oz and 4 lbs 6 oz, respectively. I'd like the RH to have a little lighter pull but...... Anyone have data on the SRH?

 

[mill428]

If only they put the GP/SRH action in the Redhawk......sigh.

+100! I've been wishing for that for years. One day maybe.


Deac45

I've never handled a SRH. What is the difference between the SRH and RH actions? Trigger pull, smoothness, or ??? My RH requires 9 lb 9 oz in DA, 6 lb 7 oz in SA. My SBH and BH have trigger pulls of 4 lb 10 oz and 4 lbs 6 oz, respectively. I'd like the RH to have a little lighter pull but...... Anyone have data on the SRH?

Is the trigger assembly completely different, then? I have never paid that much attention to the differences. I know I like the looks of a 4 or 5.5" RH much better than the SRH. I just assumed the actions were the same for some reason. I guess I need to educate myself a little more.

Craig

 

[exlogger]

Is the trigger assembly completely different, then? I have never paid that much attention to the differences. I know I like the looks of a 4 or 5.5" RH much better than the SRH. I just assumed the actions were the same for some reason. I guess I need to educate myself a little more.

Craig

Good question. There is a big difference in the action. The Redhawk as one main spring that runs the hammer and trigger return, while all the others have two springs; one for the hammer and one for the trigger return.

For Big Game Hunting, Think Big Bore Revolvers. The Ruger® Redhawk® revolver was Ruger's first double-action revolver specifically designed for the powerful 44 Magnum cartridge. It embodies many advanced features such as a "triple-locking" cylinder, a unique "single spring" mechanism for relatively lighter trigger pull, replaceable front sights and adjustable rear sights, with an all-stainless steel construction.

^quote from Ruger website^... Some disagree with this statement, but I've found it to be true.

I have 5 Ruger DA revolvers with the double spring design, and my Redhawk, with it's single spring, has the lightest/smoothes DA pull at 8.5 lbs.

 

[Thel]

Supposedly, the SRH having 2 springs would allow a lighter single action if tuning the gun. Bowen does conversions of SRHs into RH look alikes by milling off the front frame extension and fitting a RH barrel. Here is a link to this:

http://www.bowenclassicarms.com/workshop.html#TheRealRugerRedhawk

Denis Prisbey on one of the Ruger Forums has one and I think he may have had a picture of it.

 

[exlogger]

Supposedly, the SRH having 2 springs would allow a lighter single action if tuning the gun.

I agree. The SA on my Redhawk is not the best, but not too far behind.

 

[Desertdog]

Call me a heretic, but I just don't see the need for a DA .44 mag....the SBH does everything I could ask a big bore to do. I got rid of two that I had....29 and 629 over the years...and heavier loads did loosen up the Smiths....no knocking them at all....great pieces...but I just like SA revolvers a lot more. Guess I am just an old desertrat fuddy duddy...hehehe

 

[thetrio_94043]

I have a Redhawk and a Model 29 and I would say keep the S&W and buy a Redhawk.

I like shooting the S&W with lighter loads and plinking, but when loading the heavy stuff... the extra weight and strength of the Redhawk are comforting.

I also agree that having ports on a handgun are not worth the cost vs. the benefit. I will never get ports on a handgun again.

 

[427mach1]

Call me a heretic, but I just don't see the need for a DA .44 mag....the SBH does everything I could ask a big bore to do. I got rid of two that I had....29 and 629 over the years...and heavier loads did loosen up the Smiths....no knocking them at all....great pieces...but I just like SA revolvers a lot more. Guess I am just an old desertrat fuddy duddy...hehehe

I do a lot of hiking so I bought my Redhawk for woods carry. If I should come up against an aggressive bear, I want to be able to squeeze off as many rounds as possible without having to work the hammer.

 

[savit260]

Savit260 and Roger in NC, beautiful RH's!

Thanks! It really caught my eye in the used case at the local shop. Had to have it.

 

[Bear Paw Jack]

I've had several Smiths over the years and I like them. I'm still kicking myself for having sold a 629-4 I had. I had another, that I had fixed after it didn't hold up to some loads I'd been shooting through it, that still surprise me the gun didn't hold up. The guy I sold it to, still has it and shoots and and won't sell it back. Not sure of the issue but the Smiths seem to be harder on people, as far as recoil goes I see lots of comments on that and have noticed it myself. I agree with the others that have said I will NEVER have a ported handgun, as I get up in years find my hearing has enough issues that I don't need to risk any more to ports. Don't believe for an instant anything is gained respective of the price paid by the noise, and muzzle blast. Frankly I'll probably pick up the next reasonably priced 629-4 I come across but not sure why, except I just like the looks especially the firing pin on the hammer.

Redhawks.... They are my "go to" gun. I don't believe I will ever be without one or two (or at this time 3) of them. The 4" Redhawk just captures the epitimy of that a stout 44 mag, or 45 Colt should look like. Plus they handle the recoil better. As long as I can go into the woods I'll have a couple. I think everyone needs at least one.

Good thread, thanks for starting it.

 

[gramps]

I also have had a couple of Redhawks and a 629-3. I sold the 7.5 inch barreled RH and the 629-3 (bought both as project guns then needed money). I kept the 4 inch barreled RH, and a couple SBH in 4 5/8 inch barrels. I prefer the RH. Very smooth trigger out of the box, getting smoother with every pull of the trigger. I'll bet Kansas has some big bovine bulls run amuck once in awhile. So yeah you NEED a RH in .44 mag/.45 colt (had to placate the other guys). Ha ha.
gramps

 

[Yermo]

I think Redhawks are nice home defense and carry pieces.

I had the grips changed on the .45 Colt (left), and changed nothing with the .44 Mag (right) because it's already perfect.
The triggers weren't bad out of the box, and they improved ever since.