44 mag? 629 or redhawk?

[sc870]

Hey guys, looking at some .44 mag revolvers. Reading that the 629 has a great trigger but the redhawk is a tank. I'm asking because most likely I'll be reloading. I've read that 629 won't take loads like the redhawk. Now Im wondering will the 629 take some high pressure 300gr rounds some what? Or not at all? I don't want a barrel longer that 6" btw. I'd like to take it hunting, but that doesn't seem to be happening anytime soon. Do I even need those type of heavy high pressure rounds? Sorry if it's been brought up before. Really interested in a 44 mag revolver and I'm torn between the 2.

[John Browning]

I have owned both. If you plan to feed it 300gr, or any really hot loads, you want the Redhawk. It locks up better than the S&W and has a much stronger frame and cylinder. The 629 can digest hot stuff, but not often, and it has a habit of coming unlocked during heavy, heavy recoil. My 629 internal lock also broke under heavy recoil, another super crap invention by S&W.

There is no doubt that the S&W has the better trigger. However, you can get the best of both worlds if you send your Ruger to Hamilton Bowen.

[Barbarosa]

Yes the 629 will take some higher pressure but the Redhawk will do it all day long. If you plan on reloading hot rounds I would choose the Ruger; for day-to-day target I would choose the Smith. You really can't go wrong either way.

[RR.44]

As has already been said, if you're gonna load heavy 300grnrs you should go with the Redhawk


Rich

[1911Luvr]

I have the even heavier Super Redhawk and it is definitely a tank. I've run heavy 300gr hard cast loads through it and it can take them all day long, but I however, cannot.

[sc870]

What's the highest load the 629 can take? Looking at the classic 5". I'm starting to think I don't need High p rounds. But I keep thinking it'd be great to have that option.

[chrometip78]

The standard Redhawk has a really nice stock double action trigger unlike other Ruger revolvers. Best of the stock DOUBLE action 44's IMO.

I have the 4" Redhawk and love it for doing exactly what you want to do, 300grs over 1,200fps. Your hand will mind more than the Redhawk.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[Fishslayer]

If you wanna throw 300+ gr of lead at a time step up to .454 Casull.

[Kurgan]

The 629 but only if it's a pre-lock.

[Bill Steele]

What's the highest load the 629 can take? Looking at the classic 5". I'm starting to think I don't need High p rounds. But I keep thinking it'd be great to have that option.

If hunting with max velocity 300gr slugs is your aim, the Redhawk is a hands down better choice.

If admiring is your aim, shooting 240gr LSWC's at 44 Special velocities is hard to be beat with the Smith.

[BluNorthern]

,

It's already been said, Redhawk if you want the stronger of the 2.

[pacmule]

Not sure if they are still made that way, but Rugers used to have longer cylinders. You can seat bullets longer than SAMMI specs to have more powder room. That's how I get 300gr XTP's over 1300 out of my SBH

[AKexpat]

I'm long in the tooth, so my post comes from back in the day.

You folks seem to be the high horsepower handgun addicts. My son has a fairly NIB Ruger .454 Casull and was up here to visit me this weekend and brought it with him. It has maybe 200 rounds through it, but he is having a problem with the cylinder latch wherein one must smack the cylinder from the right side to get the cylinder to disengage. We oiled the heck out of it and worked the latch/cylinder interface for about 15 minutes and it has loosened up fairly nicely. He just needs to do more "exercising" with oil.

Anyone else had a similar problem?

IMO, the Redhawk/Super Redhawk are huge ungainly pistols, and you folks that think you need to shoot 300 grain slugs (especially in California? And at what?) is just fantasy. Why do you need a double-action revolver for hunting? If you are using it for SD/HD, there are much better guns for that purpose.

I lived in Alaska for 34 years and was comfortable carrying a Ruger Super Blackhawk 3-screw with handloaded 240 gr Speer jacketed semi-wadcutters with a max powder charge of H110. Carried it in a Bianchi shoulder holster under a jacket and killed a bull moose with one shot to the head at 25 yards in 1983.

It worked then and it will work now on anything CA has to offer.

I apologize that I live a few miles north of you folks. And I will close with the caveat that you folks don't "need" those guns but want them and that is plus in my book because Hillary and all the other gun control/citizen control freaks are starting to come after your guns AGAIN.

Stay safe and stock up.

Jim

[robert101]

I do not own the Ruger Redhawk. I have owned the S&W 629-1 for over 30 years and it is still the fine firearm that it was when it left the factory. It has gotten a good diet of upper tier rounds like in the 240 grain weight. My opinion is that if you want more than the gun can offer, yes upgrade to maybe the 460 or 454. I do hear that the Ruger Redhawk is a fine weapon as well. Maybe you want more than the 44 Magnum cartridge has to offer.

[-hanko]

What's the highest load the 629 can take?.

Whatever SAAMI max pressure happens to be.

IMO, the Redhawk/Super Redhawk are huge ungainly pistols, and you folks that think you need to shoot 300 grain slugs (especially in California? And at what?) is just fantasy. Why do you need a double-action revolver for hunting?

You've apparently not seen a good "which gun should I hike with" thread that quickly and often stupidly morphs into a grizzly bear thread.