What's better in .44 magnum, Ruger or S&W? - Page 6

rockdoc · June 11, 2015, 05:29 AM

Most recent puppy that followed me home is the S&W Mountain Gun in 45 Colt; next is probably going to be a Ruger BH 5 1/2" in 45 too. It is great that we have choices like this!

By the way, I find it odd that in all my years of guns, I haven't seen many modern Colt revolvers at all. I know they are very expensive; is this the main reason?

Texgun · June 11, 2015, 06:22 AM

Smiths are for showing and carrying and Rugers are for shootin'.

Real Gun · June 11, 2015, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Smiths are for showing and carrying and Rugers are for shootin'.

Funny, but I like to shoot something that is good looking, and there Smith definitely gets the prize among 44 Magnums.

Duster340 · June 11, 2015, 04:21 PM

I own and shoot the snot out of both. The age old smith vs ruger debate is only rivaled by the old Ford vs Chevy debate...though to me cool cars are cool cars regardless of brand. Same for handguns, a good shooting gun is a good shooting gun whatever yhe brand may be. Just my 2 cents

sixgunluv · June 17, 2015, 08:01 PM

"How is the balance with that barrel? Pretty steady shooting offhand? BenP"

The 10.5 is perfection IMO. Perfect balance and feel. Took a buck at 80yds year before last, offhand.
The "Super 16".....not so much, more of a novelty. 13in. would prolly be the max. for me before good balance was affected.

David R · June 18, 2015, 06:08 AM

Ruger Super Redhawk purchased used for three hundred something, I traded an Italialn blue and wood Beretta 9mm and a few bucks for something I could actually use.

I shoot hunter shilouette with this gun every year at least a few matches. I shot a deer with it last year and decided 44 mag is plenty for deer.
I do not load over Sammi specs for this gun. It has fired a few thousand hand loads, no factory loads ever because I am too cheap. It shoots my cast gas check bullets far better than in the picture.

I also have a Smith model 25-7 (45 colt) with the unfluted cylinder. I shoot this gun in the Silhouette match as my iron sight gun. It has a 5" barrel and I do fine.

I bought the smith long before the Ruger, so it was my hunting gun that wore the scope pictured above. I loaded and shot ruger only loads in that smith for a few years until I finally bought the Super Redhawk.

Now I only shoot 9 grains Unique and a cast 255 grain bullet out of the Smith even for silhouette.

Both guns show no wear. Both fit the application perfectly.

If I load the Ruger light like with 44 specials, it leads the bore. Full house loads never lead. I don't shoot reduced loads in this gun. I do have 2 44 specials, a smith and a bulldog.

David

darkgael · June 18, 2015, 07:07 AM

For target shooting....if I want to work on a distinguished revolver badge...its a Smith, a S&W 686.
For hunting....a Ruger SBH 5.5" barrel in .44.
Pete

SaxonPig · June 18, 2015, 08:08 AM

Opinions and cowboy hats...

Which is better, Ford or Chevy?

To me, all Ruger DA revolvers are ugly in the extreme. They are big and blocky because they are cast rather than forged and that requires thicker metal to achieve the same strength. Owners seem to love them. Having one in the house would give me nightmares.

Years ago when Colt was still making guns I traded for an Anaconda. I hate stainless and the gun seemed cheap compared to the Python. I traded it for a Ruger #1.

I've had 5 S&W Model 29-2s. All 3 of the common barrel lengths. Sold the 8 and the 4, kept the 6.5 but it was stolen in 1985 and I bought another. Couple years back I picked up another 4".

I don't know why I have two 44 Magnums. I don't enjoy shooting them. Too much recoil for me.

coolbreezy · June 18, 2015, 04:36 PM

I have both, a 1983 vintage redhawk with a 7.5 bbl and 629-1 with a 3" bbl. The smith is a real nice gun and a great shooter but I'm gentle with it using mid power factory loads. The redhawk, however will eat anything I throw at it, definitely beats the smith in the strength department. The smith has a way nicer trigger. I prefer the smith imo.

codefour · June 18, 2015, 05:33 PM

I have both S&W and Ruger revolvers. All my .357 revolvers are S&W L and N Frames, with the exception of a SP-101 for CCW. I like S&W revolvers a lot. I always open them up and stone the internals. I replace the springs with Wolfes.

All of my .44 Mag revolvers are Ruger. I love the Redhawk design. Bill Ruger claims his investment casting is stronger than S&W forged frames. He took a sledge hammer to both to see which was stronger. The investment cast was found to be much stronger.

A Redhawk and SRH can be smoothed out quite nicely. The trigger and hammer pull is longer on Rugers, but they can be made quite smooth. My last Redhawk, the 2.75 inch round butt, had a horrible trigger from the factory! The internals were rather rough and needed a lot of stoning and finesse to get it almost as smooth as the older Redhawks.

I have a SBH Hunter in .44 mag. It is a Bisley frame. I HATE plow handles and I hate the "Roll" of the grip when firing.

I was never a big fan of the N-Frame 29/629 I love my 686's, 627, and 27 though.

Nanuk · June 18, 2015, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Well then you don't need anything stronger than a Smith, but just cause the Smith is strong enough to do your self imposed limit doesn't make it as strong as the Ruger is

My impression is that the cylinder length was the main issue.

June 11, 2015, 06:22 AM	#127
Texgun Member Join Date: June 12, 2005 Posts: 32	44 Smiths are for showing and carrying and Rugers are for shootin'.

June 17, 2015, 08:01 PM	#130
sixgunluv Senior Member Join Date: February 4, 2008 Posts: 200	"How is the balance with that barrel? Pretty steady shooting offhand? BenP" The 10.5 is perfection IMO. Perfect balance and feel. Took a buck at 80yds year before last, offhand. The "Super 16".....not so much, more of a novelty. 13in. would prolly be the max. for me before good balance was affected. Last edited by sixgunluv; June 17, 2015 at 08:11 PM.

June 18, 2015, 06:08 AM	#131
David R Senior Member Join Date: January 2, 2015 Location: The swamps of WNY Posts: 753	I have both Ruger Super Redhawk purchased used for three hundred something, I traded an Italialn blue and wood Beretta 9mm and a few bucks for something I could actually use. I shoot hunter shilouette with this gun every year at least a few matches. I shot a deer with it last year and decided 44 mag is plenty for deer. I do not load over Sammi specs for this gun. It has fired a few thousand hand loads, no factory loads ever because I am too cheap. It shoots my cast gas check bullets far better than in the picture. I also have a Smith model 25-7 (45 colt) with the unfluted cylinder. I shoot this gun in the Silhouette match as my iron sight gun. It has a 5" barrel and I do fine. I bought the smith long before the Ruger, so it was my hunting gun that wore the scope pictured above. I loaded and shot ruger only loads in that smith for a few years until I finally bought the Super Redhawk. Now I only shoot 9 grains Unique and a cast 255 grain bullet out of the Smith even for silhouette. Both guns show no wear. Both fit the application perfectly. If I load the Ruger light like with 44 specials, it leads the bore. Full house loads never lead. I don't shoot reduced loads in this gun. I do have 2 44 specials, a smith and a bulldog. David

June 18, 2015, 07:07 AM	#132
darkgael Senior Member Join Date: February 9, 2006 Location: Homes in Brooklyn, NY and in Pennsylvania. Posts: 5,473	guns For target shooting....if I want to work on a distinguished revolver badge...its a Smith, a S&W 686. For hunting....a Ruger SBH 5.5" barrel in .44. Pete __________________ “Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports ... all others are games.” Ernest Hemingway ... NRA Life Member

June 18, 2015, 04:36 PM	#134
coolbreezy Senior Member Join Date: May 22, 2010 Posts: 271	I have both, a 1983 vintage redhawk with a 7.5 bbl and 629-1 with a 3" bbl. The smith is a real nice gun and a great shooter but I'm gentle with it using mid power factory loads. The redhawk, however will eat anything I throw at it, definitely beats the smith in the strength department. The smith has a way nicer trigger. I prefer the smith imo. __________________ S&W highway patrolman 28-2/ Springfield mil spec 1911 (semi custom)/ Sig P220 match elite .45 acp/Kimber micro 9 stainless/ Remington 870 tac14/ Taurus pt22/ S&W 629-1 3" .44 mag/ S&W 629 PC V-Comp/ Beretta M9/ Stevens/Savage 311A 12 ga double bbl/ Magnum research Desert Eagle XIX .44 mag/ S&W 460 xvr/ Glock g40 10mm longslide/ H&K usp compact .45 acp/ Ruger SuperBlackhawk Lipsey Edition/ S&W 686+ 3-5-7 talo edition

June 11, 2015, 05:29 AM	#126
rockdoc Junior Member Join Date: December 6, 2013 Posts: 7	Most recent puppy that followed me home is the S&W Mountain Gun in 45 Colt; next is probably going to be a Ruger BH 5 1/2" in 45 too. It is great that we have choices like this! By the way, I find it odd that in all my years of guns, I haven't seen many modern Colt revolvers at all. I know they are very expensive; is this the main reason?

June 11, 2015, 04:21 PM	#129
Duster340 Member Join Date: December 27, 2014 Location: Illinois Posts: 92	I own and shoot the snot out of both. The age old smith vs ruger debate is only rivaled by the old Ford vs Chevy debate...though to me cool cars are cool cars regardless of brand. Same for handguns, a good shooting gun is a good shooting gun whatever yhe brand may be. Just my 2 cents

June 18, 2015, 08:08 AM	#133
SaxonPig Senior Member Join Date: April 24, 2006 Posts: 1,900	Opinions and cowboy hats... Which is better, Ford or Chevy? To me, all Ruger DA revolvers are ugly in the extreme. They are big and blocky because they are cast rather than forged and that requires thicker metal to achieve the same strength. Owners seem to love them. Having one in the house would give me nightmares. Years ago when Colt was still making guns I traded for an Anaconda. I hate stainless and the gun seemed cheap compared to the Python. I traded it for a Ruger #1. I've had 5 S&W Model 29-2s. All 3 of the common barrel lengths. Sold the 8 and the 4, kept the 6.5 but it was stolen in 1985 and I bought another. Couple years back I picked up another 4". I don't know why I have two 44 Magnums. I don't enjoy shooting them. Too much recoil for me.

June 18, 2015, 05:33 PM	#135
codefour Senior Member Join Date: April 2, 2012 Posts: 114	I have both S&W and Ruger revolvers. All my .357 revolvers are S&W L and N Frames, with the exception of a SP-101 for CCW. I like S&W revolvers a lot. I always open them up and stone the internals. I replace the springs with Wolfes. All of my .44 Mag revolvers are Ruger. I love the Redhawk design. Bill Ruger claims his investment casting is stronger than S&W forged frames. He took a sledge hammer to both to see which was stronger. The investment cast was found to be much stronger. A Redhawk and SRH can be smoothed out quite nicely. The trigger and hammer pull is longer on Rugers, but they can be made quite smooth. My last Redhawk, the 2.75 inch round butt, had a horrible trigger from the factory! The internals were rather rough and needed a lot of stoning and finesse to get it almost as smooth as the older Redhawks. I have a SBH Hunter in .44 mag. It is a Bisley frame. I HATE plow handles and I hate the "Roll" of the grip when firing. I was never a big fan of the N-Frame 29/629 I love my 686's, 627, and 27 though.