Best Ruger .44 years?

fishwishin · February 15, 2013, 03:43 AM

So these comparisons between the Smith 29 and the Ruger Redhawk got me to thinking. I really want to find and buy a nice, preferably unfired, 29-2. The durability issues got me to think about the Ruger though. In the Redhawk/Super Redhawk line are there better years than others and how does Ruger differentiate slight modifications, if any. I know Smith uses the dash system (29-*). Truth be told I will probably still migrate towards Smith, but I want to weigh everything out. The usage of the gun will be for range work and occasional field/trail companion. It won't be a hunter.

black mamba · February 15, 2013, 12:47 PM

The model 29-5 and later versions had real improvements in the locking system, making them stronger. I know pinned barrel and recessed cylinder are "nice" but I prefer the strength of lockup of the 29-5 and later revolvers.

A good article on the different versions found here:

http://www.sixguns.com/range/SmithWesson44Mag.htm

I believe the SBH has been virtually unchanged for the length of it's existence, with the exception of integral scope mounts on the Hunter models. If you want to scope your handgun, I'd look for one of those.

kahrguy · February 15, 2013, 01:39 PM

Any ruger RH or SRH will do well. Also may watch for a Dan Wesson 44mag.

Ozzieman · February 15, 2013, 09:09 PM

Dan Wesson would be a great choice except for the number of 0’s after the 1$. Prices have become abnormal.
Personally I don’t shoot that much magnum in my 29’s so the lockup issue is not anything that would concern me. I would be curious how much stronger the lock up is.
I have one of the new -5 and other S&W N frames and I would always take the older guns over the new. For one single reason, Triggers. A S&W trigger made in the 50’s and 60’s is a work of art.

Rifleman1776 · February 16, 2013, 10:42 AM

I'm not sure I understand what you are asking.
The Redhawk I shoot simply cannot be compared with a Smith. Or visa/versa. The R'hawk frame is notably stronger. The cylinders are bored at the meatiest portion between the flutes. The lock-up system is much-much stronger, and the list goes on.
Mine is smooth as butter on the action. Beautiful. I shot it competitvely for years. Tens of thousands of rounds. Except for coloring on the stainless it is a no different gun than the day it was new.
There is no comparision. But the choice is yours. If you go for the Smith and do any real amount of shooting, I'll betcha you will be trading off for a Ruger in short order.

skidder · February 16, 2013, 12:16 PM

Quote:

If you go for the Smith and do any real amount of shooting, I'll betcha you will be trading off for a Ruger in short order.

Exactly!
That is why my Redhawk remains, and my 629 is no longer around.

February 15, 2013, 03:43 AM	#1
fishwishin Junior Member Join Date: January 27, 2013 Posts: 4	Best Ruger .44 years? So these comparisons between the Smith 29 and the Ruger Redhawk got me to thinking. I really want to find and buy a nice, preferably unfired, 29-2. The durability issues got me to think about the Ruger though. In the Redhawk/Super Redhawk line are there better years than others and how does Ruger differentiate slight modifications, if any. I know Smith uses the dash system (29-*). Truth be told I will probably still migrate towards Smith, but I want to weigh everything out. The usage of the gun will be for range work and occasional field/trail companion. It won't be a hunter.

February 15, 2013, 09:09 PM	#4
Ozzieman Senior Member Join Date: December 14, 2004 Location: Northern Indiana Posts: 4,326	Dan Wesson would be a great choice except for the number of 0’s after the 1$. Prices have become abnormal. Personally I don’t shoot that much magnum in my 29’s so the lockup issue is not anything that would concern me. I would be curious how much stronger the lock up is. I have one of the new -5 and other S&W N frames and I would always take the older guns over the new. For one single reason, Triggers. A S&W trigger made in the 50’s and 60’s is a work of art. __________________ “Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading.” – Thomas Jefferson. If you carry a gun, people call you paranoid, NONSENSE! If you have a gun, what do you have to be paranoid about? Guns have only two enemies: Rust and Politicians.

February 15, 2013, 12:47 PM	#2
black mamba Senior Member Join Date: September 13, 2011 Location: O'Fallon, MO Posts: 481	The model 29-5 and later versions had real improvements in the locking system, making them stronger. I know pinned barrel and recessed cylinder are "nice" but I prefer the strength of lockup of the 29-5 and later revolvers. A good article on the different versions found here: http://www.sixguns.com/range/SmithWesson44Mag.htm I believe the SBH has been virtually unchanged for the length of it's existence, with the exception of integral scope mounts on the Hunter models. If you want to scope your handgun, I'd look for one of those.

February 15, 2013, 01:39 PM	#3
kahrguy Senior Member Join Date: October 1, 2012 Posts: 356	Any ruger RH or SRH will do well. Also may watch for a Dan Wesson 44mag.

February 16, 2013, 10:42 AM	#5
Rifleman1776 Senior Member Join Date: April 25, 2010 Location: Arkansas Posts: 2,841	I'm not sure I understand what you are asking. The Redhawk I shoot simply cannot be compared with a Smith. Or visa/versa. The R'hawk frame is notably stronger. The cylinders are bored at the meatiest portion between the flutes. The lock-up system is much-much stronger, and the list goes on. Mine is smooth as butter on the action. Beautiful. I shot it competitvely for years. Tens of thousands of rounds. Except for coloring on the stainless it is a no different gun than the day it was new. There is no comparision. But the choice is yours. If you go for the Smith and do any real amount of shooting, I'll betcha you will be trading off for a Ruger in short order.