Redhawk or Super Redhawk... that is the question

[Jon_E]

Posed with a new problem....


Weighing it out.... which one to have and to hold... and of course shoot alot.

It is to be in .44 magnum  

[longwalker]

All I can tell you when I had the 44 magnum bug I chose the Super. I knew I would shoot it often and I would hunt with it. I really like the gun and have used it in several bowling pin matchs and have killed my fair share of deer with it.  I remember the RH had just a little more muzzel rise than the Super. But as I didn't shoot them side by side it's kind of selective memory. I like the Super redhawk.


longwalker

[Bullseye]

Super Redhawk.  After owning both I prefer the butt ugly Super, it was always just more comfortable for me to shoot.  I think is is easier to change the trigger pull also because of the way the trigger group is made and it has a seperate trigger and mainspring where the Redhawk somehow has them combined.  If you are ever going to scope it I prefer the scope mounted on the frame like the Super rather than on the barrel like the Redhawk.

Having said all that and after owning both, I would also go look at a S&W.  I have gotten rid of both Rugers and switched to Smiths.  I like them much better than either Redhawk, but that is just me.

[DWTim]

Super. I think it looks better than the regular. If you reload, get it. Can't kill 'em.

[Jim n Iowa]

I have 2 Redhawks, a 5.5" and a 7.5" scoped model. They both came with decent triggers out of the box. I have had a 629, which has a large grip and feel, but I don't think it is in the running with a RH if your a handloader using warm hunting loads. I never considered the Super, mainly for its looks and its a tad lighter in weight.
Jim

[Jon_E]

I came home with the 7 1/2" Super Redhawk in stainless  :lol:  My wife wants to know, when this is going to stop  :roll:

I haven't told her what scope I want for it yet  :-D

[Bullseye]

That is a good choice in my opinion of the two Rugers.  When I first got mine I thought it was butt ugly, but like a fungus it grew on me after a while.  Looking back on it, I do not even remember why I sold it.  Now I remember, it was not as accurate as my Contenders (nothing against Rugers, other than Freedom Arms few revolvers are as accurate as Contenders) and I was into accuracy at the time and sold all my revolvers.  My how times change, that was 1 1/2 years ago and I now have 3 revolvers again! :-D

I do not know if I am lucky or unlucky.  My wife does not care what guns and scopes I buy which sometimes leads to me buying things I really do not need.  I might be better if she cared a little more, that is a fine line.

[dougk]

My  Redhawk had a very rough trigger pull, I contacted the factory (they were great) and they redid the trigger.  After that it was smooth...  I liked the looks of the Redhawk but that is a personal opinion.

I recently traded the Redhawk for a Dan Wesson .44 mag, because I wanted a .44 mag that the wife can also shoot. 

Doug

[Old Griz]

Both would last forever, but I think you made a good choice. I love the looks of the Redhawk, but it was the only .44 mag I have ever owned that hurt my hand to shoot. I really like the grips on the Super Redhawk. It handles the .44 and more powerful calibers very well. Think you're gonna be real happy with that one!

Good shootin'!

[ruger and me]

Everybody has their own view regarding looks and they differ.  The Super Redhawk can be tuned to a lighter double action and single action pull due to having both a trigger return spring and mainspring which are seperate.  The grip of the SRH encloses the frame stud so cushions recoil better.  Also, this allows a greater latitude in size and shape of grips if going aftermarket.  If one wants to spend the money the frame extension on the SRH can be removed and a Redhawk barrel fitted.  Over at the Ruger Forum Denis Prisbrey (DPris) did such and there is a picture of the result.  H. Bowen does this work.  Here is a link:

http://www.rugerforum.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/009948.html

[Odinbreaker]

I have a44 mag  Super Red hawk great gun I did put on a Hogue grip better control and soften recoil.  I have a 2x7 x32 scope

[Old Griz]

Wow, that Bowen Super GP44 is a fine looking gun. Can't imagine all the work involved. Of course, now Ruger has come out with the Alaskan in .44, but I like the Bowen better. I'd be scared to ask how much it costs!

[DWTim]

I love this quote from the thread:

Unfortunately, along the way, the warning disappeared from the barrel, but I'll just have to live with that.

Gee, what a shame.

Seriously though, I'm not big on the regular Redhawks, but that one looks like mighty fine.

[ruger and me]

Wow, that Bowen Super GP44 is a fine looking gun. Can't imagine all the work involved. Of course, now Ruger has come out with the Alaskan in .44, but I like the Bowen better. I'd be scared to ask how much it costs!

Interestingly, per the thread Bowen started with an Alaskan.  In the past he used Super Redhawks but with the Alaskan did not need to weld in the cuts for the scope rings.  From what I gather he removes the barrel, mills the frame extension off and a Redhawk barrel will fit on.  In the past Bowen had a hard time getting off the barrels on .454s and .480s but must have found a way probably due to the thread sealant Ruger uses.  Now that the Alaskan comes in .44 mag one could save a lot of work.  I have a hunch the cost is a lot less than a custom 1911 would be.  With my luck, though, if I had it done next week Ruger would come out with a factory version.  Of course, one could also do this with a .454 or .480 (hmmmm).

[Fiveshooter]

My vote is for the 5.5" barreled Redhawk because the SRH is just too damned UGLY to be seen with 
Although I will admit to owning a SRH I mostly keep it hidden in the safe in shame. It rests on the same shelf as my seldom seen or fired S&W 500