Pros & Cons for a Ruger Redhawk 5.5" BBL, .44 Mag R

[LJ Barrero]

I've just saw a couple of nice Ruger Redhawk revolvers: one in 45 Colt and the other in 44 mag.  The 45 Colt is used (probably fired very little) and the asking price is $399.  The other one is new; but in 44 mag, and the price is $499.  I like the way this gun looks and the way it feels in the hand.  However, when I try the trigger, it feels creeppy and heavy.

My question is:

How accurate are these type of revolvers?

I also heard how strong this action is as opposed to S&W 629.  How much truth to this is?  If you would have to choose between the Redhawk 44 mag, 5.5" bbl and the S&W 629, 6.5" bbl, Which one of the two you would choose and not feel that you made a mistake?

Is there any scope mounts for this gun available?

Thanks.

LJB

[Mikey]

LJ:  Ruger triggers are known for being creepy and heavy, so is their 2 ton hammer fall but not to worry, there are plenty of spring kits available to help lighten up the trigger pull.  The hammer fall you will just have to deal with.  Either of the two revolvers you identified are very accurate with all types of loads and bullets and are preferred by many of the shooters who frequent this web-site.  

As mentioned, both revolvers, the 45 Colt and the 44 magnum are very accurate.  They are both redhawks and scope mounts are readily available for that model.  

The ruger is supposed to be a stronger action than the Smith and Wesson however, not too awful long ago Smith and Wesson refined their Model 29 (44 magnum) revolvers internally to handle a more continued diet of heavy magnum loads and are supposed to be able to shoot them all day long.  Some of the older S&Ws do not carry these internal refinements and may not hold up to that kind of battering but the newer ones are supposed to.  

With that in mind, and preferring the feel and handling of the S&W over that of the ruger, my particular preference would be for the Smith and Wesson - but, since I've already sent one 6.5 incher back to S&W for 'shortening', I would probably buy the S&W, then send it back to have the barrel cut back to 5 or 5.5 inches and then shoot the darn thing until I die.  HTH.  Mikey.

[Gregory]

LJB
I had a blue Redhawk 5.5" bbl 44Mag for many years.  The trigger is not as nice as a S&W, but tolerable.  It was accurate enough for my needs.
I traded mine off for a S&W 624 44 Special.

The Redhawk comes in a 7.5" bbl version with integral scope mounts, I wouldn't bother scoping the shorter barrel.  My Redhawk was a heavy gun and wore Pachmayer grips, which made target shooting comfortable.  I've always been partial to a S&W trigger so I opted to trade.

[redial]

My walk-around-among-the-beasties gun is a 5.5" Redhawk in 44. The 45 will work as well if you handload. The Redhawk is built like a bridge and makes a suitable bludgeon should the need arise!

I don't hunt or target shoot with it so I don't worry whether the trigger is Camp Perry capable. I want it to send a half-dozen 300 XTPs to full effect right damn NOW!

For the prices you quoted, I'd buy the 45 and some dies!

Redial

[Jim Stacy]

Go to the search engine and put in Mike Cumpston and you will be able to pull up a article he wrote on the 5.5/44/RH. Good and bad --Very accurate . kicks like a mule probably can never wear one out and usually wear in and smooth up a bunch over time . A spring kit from Wilson and a little stoning and high quality gun lube will help a lot. My opinion , and I like S&W's , the Ruger is much stonger by sheer mass of frame and cylinder dimensions.

[LJ Barrero]

With that in mind, and preferring the feel and handling of the S&W over that of the ruger, my particular preference would be for the Smith and Wesson - but, since I've already sent one 6.5 incher back to S&W for 'shortening', I would probably buy the S&W, then send it back to have the barrel cut back to 5 or 5.5 inches and then shoot the darn thing until I die. HTH. Mikey.

Mikey,

How much does it cost to get the bbl shortened by S&W?

Thank you for the responses.

LJB

[Mikey]

LJ:  They actually did not shorten the barrel, they replaced it with one in the length I wanted and they also worked the innards over in the performance shop.  Overall I think it was a couple of hundred dollars with all the extra work.  However, if you are looking at a NIB revolver, save yourself some $ and have the dealer order one with the barrel length you want.  When I sent mine back to S&W, the final $ was less than I would have had to pay for a new one, even with a trade.  The dealers in this area don't kick back much for used revolvers but sure price them up after you walk out.

The 'send it back for factory work' route was preferrable for me because I did not then have to go through the business, and nonsense, of permit changes, et. al., and dealing with a new gun.  If I had been in the market for a new one like I have now I would have ordered that up front.  HTH.  Mikey.

[LJ Barrero]

Update:

I am the new owner of a "zero" miles S&W 629, 5" bbl.  It fits great in my hands and I like the looks of it too.  My other S&W 629, 6.5" bbl gun will be traded in for a new Ruger SBH Hunter in .44 mag as well.  That way, I will have the SBH with a scope for hunting only and the S&W for everything else.  BTW, I paid for this S&W 629 Classic, 5" bbl only $539 NIB.  The cylinder feels tight when the hammer is cocked.

LJB

[Jim n Iowa]

I have owned a couple of smiths in 44 mag and they were great guns but someone always wanted them more than me so I traded. I now own a Redhawk 5.5" and this is a keeper. I may trade in my sbh 7.5" for a longer barrel Redhawk. I use this as my carry gun in the field. I have large hands so I have decelerator Pach grips on it, local smith worked the trigger with new springs and some stone to give a great double pull. I can't say enough about the Redhawk.
Jim

[mec]

This is the good news about the .44 redhawk:


It will do the same at 25 yards with a bunch of heavy loads.  It particularly likes anything with the hornady 300 xtp and high end loads with the 312 grain gascheck sold by Dry Creek.   The immediate bad news is the awful pain and blood from shooting with these factory grips.  It is relatively comfortable with rubber pachmeyrs though.  

Other bad news is that the firing pin is short and sometimes caused double action ignition failures.  Mine would crack factory loads reliably but not loads using cci large pistol primers.  Hamilton Bowen makes a longer firing pin to fix this.  I wouldn't know where to begin to install it.


The Trigger on this one had a five pound pull.  Surprisingly enough, this worked out very well on the heavy revolver and I was able to keep my NRA slow fire shots in the black at 25 yards.

[hans g./UpS]

The neat thing about the Redhawk[and SuperRedhawk]=longer than standard cylinder:it allows one to use/cycle 320gr projectiles[seated to 1.800"].For those of us with large hands,the Hogue rubber grip works well, plus you can have a lanyard loop on it.
The 45Colt feels like more fun in the Redhawk,than the 44Mag.  
Unlike some of the other folks,I had BAD luck with the S&W 629[and other mdls]-wouldn't go off in single action,etc..I'm really wary of S&W.

[Jim Stacy]

I have all three guns mentioned here 5" /629 , 5.5/44 mag&5.5/45 Colt . The S&W is very accurate but kicks as much as the Rugers with 22/2400/245 Gr cast . I also feel the 629 will not take a consistent diet of this load and not loosen up . The 44 Rh will shoot this load until you wear out , not the gun and it is quitre accurate out of mine. My 5.5/45 Colt RH shot terrible until I had the .449 chamber mouths milled out to .452 now it shoots great. Ruger seems to have a problem getting their 45 Colt chamber mouths right in all of their factory 45 Colt  cylinders. I have had two Ruger 45 Colts that were correct and they shot great . The undersized ones usually will not shoot good . I have never seen this problem in their 44 guns. You pay the money you make the choice . 629--good gun but not for heavy loads . Good medium load gun IMHO , 44 RH tough accurate and will smooth up in a thousand rounds or so for everyone else there's a trigger job & 5.5 45 Colt RH --had two and both had to have their chambers opened . Read the article from last year in
American Handgunner by John Taffin interesting piece of work . Read Mikes article on the 5.5 44 RH faint hearted need not apply when shooting the 300+ grain loads ,either real men or peple who seem to enjoy pain?

[Old Griz]

I had a 5.5 Redhawk and loved it, however, I had to wear gloves to shoot it. It cut the web of my thumb. I tried the rubber grips, but I didn't like the feel of the gun with those on it. It felt higher in my hand, and just didn't feel right unless I had the wood grips on it. Super accurate, and I really thought the gold bead/V-notch sight combination was the best set of sights I've ever lined up. Built like a tank (like most Rugers.) Can't imagine anyone ever wearing one out. Traded it for a .44 Bisley. Addicted to SA revolvers now.  Old guns for the old guy. I'd like to try one of those Smith & Wessons someday. I hear that Mountain Gun is pretty nice to shoot.
:cb2:

[LJ Barrero]

I hunted with the S&W 629, 5" bbl in Iowa during the late muzzle loader and a special late season.  I was not able to get anything with it yet, exept to help put a cripled deer out of its missery.  I put a red dot sight to it and it seem to shoot really well with it to.  I can pick tin cans of the ground at 30 to 40 yds in a shooting pit, open sights.  That to me is great for off hand shooting.

I am still visiting the local shops to handle the Ruger SBH-Hunter in Bisley and the regular grip type.  I can't tell which one will be best.  I am also looking at the Ruger GP-100 in 6" bbl as a second caliber for everything, including deer.  I have to admit that I am still thinking about that RH 5.5"bbl in .44 Mag.

I heard so many good things about the Ruger RH 5.5" that I am almost convinced to get it.  Please, help me make up my mind.  

Thanks.

LJB

[1911crazy]

I own two Ruger Redhawks stainless both in 44mag one 5 1/2" barrel  and one 7 1/2" barrel.  I put pachmeyer grips on both and they feel great.  Now I haven't them shot in quite some time and just recently I went shooting.  With magnum reloads 200 JHP or with 240 SWC  the 7 1/2" barrel was more accurate and easier for me to shoot with the extra add weight on the barrel (2").   I like the 7 1/2" barrel better its heavier.  The 5 1/2" barrel seemed  to have more recoil.                BigBill

But I do wear the 5 1/2" barreled 44mag in a shoulder holster at night while I'm on my bike. I do have a shoulder holster for my 7 1/2"  that I do wear sometimes but the 5 1/2" barrel feels better on my bike.  I wear a dress shirt out of my pants with my leather so the holster doesn't stick below my clothes and is seen the gun is under my dress shirt.
I'd love to have a Redhawk with a 10" barrel.