ruger super redhawk vs taurus raging bull?

smokin' barrels · August 26, 2012, 07:22 PM

im looking onto buying a .44 magnum revolver, i like the long barrels but i cant afford to spend the s&w price tag

in terms of muzzle climb (obviously it will be pretty rough) durability and overall value, if taurus has really stepped up their quality control or do their cylinders still lock up after 50 rnds? if i can get away with spending $500 on a taurus raging bull rather than $750 on a super redhawk, i'd be a happy camper

Kreyzhorse · August 26, 2012, 07:55 PM

You will get a lot of opinions on Taurus, most will admit they are hit and miss with their QA and mostly miss with their customer service. Ruger on the other hand, most will recommend their products and their customer service is highly rated.

In my book, if you can swing the extra money, the extra value you will get with the Ruger is worth more than the $250 you will spend.

On a side note, if you ever sell the gun, you'll make most of that $250 back as Ruger's have pretty good resale value. Taurus, not so much.

feets · August 26, 2012, 08:04 PM

A Redhawk or Super Redhawk would be my choice.
In fact, it was my choice.

I picked up a SRH in 454 and don't regret it one bit. It's a bit heavier than necessary for a 44 so a Redhawk may be a bit better depending on what you're going to do with it.

skidder · August 26, 2012, 08:09 PM

I'm one of those who missed with Taurus quality and CS. With that being said I've heard far less complaints with their large frame revolvers.

Ruger is still a better choice. Like Kreyzhorse said, they are well worth the extra money spent.

sgms · August 26, 2012, 08:10 PM

Taurus is not a bad gun nor a great gun very middle of the road.
The Rugers are built like a tank and worth the extra money. They can handle hotter loads and after 25 years of hauling a Super Blackhawk around as a hunting and bear gun when camping and fishing she's been rode hard and never failed me.

Boatme98 · August 26, 2012, 08:18 PM

Surely you jest.
I try not to bash any gunmaker (exc. maybe Lorcin, jennings, etc.), but there is no comparison between a Ruger and a Taurus. If you are seriously comparing the two, I assume you have the money to go to the Ruger. Do it and don't look back.
Just my $200.

pete2 · August 26, 2012, 08:49 PM

I you go with the Taurus you may or may not get a serviceable gun. With Ruger you are almost guaranteed to get a good one. Don't waste your money on the Taurus.

Gdown · August 26, 2012, 09:03 PM

I would go with the Ruger. The jump isn't very bad, and the quality is consistently good.

Shadi Khalil · August 26, 2012, 09:46 PM

I avoid Taurus completely because of my past experiences. I certainly would not want one in a heavy caliber like the .44 considering how poorly my Taurus steel .38's held up.

James K · August 26, 2012, 09:51 PM

It may not be entirely fair to Taurus, but their trade in/resale value is low for the simple reason that folks look at sites like this and assume that a used Taurus was traded in because there is something wrong with it. The only way to get around that is for the dealer to price them low, which means a low trade in value.

Jim

QuarterHorse · August 26, 2012, 10:03 PM

I'm a huge Ruger fan but wish they'd come out with a full underlug revolver for the big bore stuff.

rambilt · August 27, 2012, 05:33 AM

I have two Taurus Raging Bulls, a 44mag in 61/2" and a 454 in 5" (I prefer the 5" it's lighter). I did the revolver test pasted at the very beginning of this forum before I bought them. Thanks to the OP. I find the Raging Bull to pass every requirements of that test. Both of my Raging Bulls shoots with amazing accuracy and it really looks nice. I haven't experienced any problems with either one. It shoots just fine everytime. The casings comes out of the cylinder easily, no shavings whatsoever when shooting different types of bullets...

Perform the revolver test before you buy... Whicever one you choose should be fine.. Good luck!!!

regards,

RL

CajunBass · August 27, 2012, 06:27 AM

Of the two you mentioned, I'd pop the extra and get the Ruger. I think the Super Redhawk is just plain ugly, but the Redhawk, especially with a 5" barrel ain't too bad. It's not a Model 29, but it'll do. No question about how well it will hold up, or it's resale value. You might get a good Taurus. You probably will. But with a Ruger, that's not even a serious concern.

On the other hand. You mentioned that you can't/don't want to spend the money to get a Smith & Wesson. I've got two Model 29-2's that I've bought THIS year. A 4" and a 6", both in near new condition. I paid $750.00 for each of them. So if you WANT a Smith, don't let the price scare you off. You CAN find them in your price range. I admit they were both private sales, but they are out there.

rodfac · August 27, 2012, 03:58 PM

Forget Taurus...Ruger all the way, better quality out of the box, hell for strong, and real world customer service...Rod

Shadi Khalil · August 27, 2012, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rodfac

Forget Taurus...Ruger all the way, better quality out of the box, hell for strong, and real world customer service...Rod

^^^^What I meant to say about Ruger. Thanks Rod

rodfac · August 27, 2012, 06:43 PM

No worries, Shadi...Rod

old bear · August 27, 2012, 06:49 PM

The Ruger over the Taurus every time. Why not save a little more money and get the Smith and Wesson you really want? Life is just to short to settle...

big al hunter · August 27, 2012, 09:35 PM

If you are putting a scope on it, super red hawk. No scope, red hawk. I have a red hawk in 44 mag and a super red hawk in 454 cassul. No problems in 10 years, several hundred rounds a year. Except that the cheap scope I bought lost its reticle about 150 rounds in. Quality matters with heavy recoil. Ruger all the way.

Deaf Smith · August 27, 2012, 09:41 PM

Kind of biased... SRH.

But then my two S&W 629s would be ok to. I find the SRH though can take just about anything I stuff in it. Way ahead of my .44 magnums.

Deaf

warnerwh · August 28, 2012, 01:04 AM

The Ruger is a known quantity. I have not had the two in front of me but I'd bet the Ruger is the nicer and better made gun. You don't have to worry about weird things happening and then hit and miss CS. Don't even think about it. Personally I'd get the Dan Wesson .44.

akguy1985 · August 28, 2012, 05:35 AM

I'd go with the ruger if it was me. I'd love to have a super redhawk alaskan 2.5 inch in .454 casull.

nicknitro71 · August 28, 2012, 07:29 AM

I've owned a S&W in .357 subnose, I still own a Taurus 608 9" (same frame as the .44 but .357 with 8 shots), and I have three Ruger revolvers all in stainless: Super Redhawk in .44 9.5", Super Blackhawk .44 10.5", and Blackhawk .357 6.5".

The Taurus is a copy of the S&W designs and they are good revolvers, don't buy in the 'junk' horse crap. Great stock trigger and super accurate.

Said that, other than Freedom Arms, I'm a huge Ruger sucker when it comes to their Revolvers. I will never again buy another Revolver other than a Ruger. It's a superior design in terms of sheer engineering. I've never liked the cassette type receiver of the S&W and their clones.

Ruger triggers are so so, like 99% of the guns out there, but with a bit of polishing and spring replacement you get some of the best triggers out there.

All my Rugers break like glass at 2.5 lbs with zero creep.

Nothing wrong with the Raging Bull, but money for money get the SRH!

rickyjames · August 28, 2012, 08:29 AM

i have a number of ruger products in different calibers, so i guess you could say i am a ruger fan. i own a 7 1/2" ruger redhawk in 44 mag. it is a great gun with no problems. i like it very much.

i also have a taurus model 44. it has a ported 4" barrel in 44 mag of course. the taurus shoots as accuratly as my 7 1/2" redhawk. the recoil of the 4" taurus is less than the 7 1/2" redhawk, probably due to the ported barrel.

i would like to scope the bigger redhawk and try hunting with it. the taurus is my go to trail or carry gun because of its more convienent size. the redhawk sits in my safe, waiting to be scoped.

coop2564 · August 28, 2012, 09:18 AM

Can speak for the red hawk don't have one, but I have a 6.5" raging bull in .41 mag and its a great gun. I've had it about 11yrs and had no problems. Killed quite a few deer and hogs with it.

Wyosmith · August 28, 2012, 09:19 AM

I can give you only 3 pieces of advice.
#1 Buy the Ruger
#2 Buy the Ruger
#3 Buy the Ruger

August 26, 2012, 08:09 PM	#4
skidder Senior Member Join Date: August 17, 2008 Location: Montana Posts: 640	I'm one of those who missed with Taurus quality and CS. With that being said I've heard far less complaints with their large frame revolvers. Ruger is still a better choice. Like Kreyzhorse said, they are well worth the extra money spent. __________________ Gun permit?? A bread crumb tossed to a sleeping society awoken by the sound of complacency. "They are for your own good", and "you will understand when you see all the lives they save". Yes master, what else will you toss me from your bag of infringements?? Do you want me to roll over and play dead? I do that very well. --skidder

August 26, 2012, 08:18 PM	#6
Boatme98 Senior Member Join Date: April 5, 2008 Location: Mid Tennessee Posts: 357	Surely you jest. I try not to bash any gunmaker (exc. maybe Lorcin, jennings, etc.), but there is no comparison between a Ruger and a Taurus. If you are seriously comparing the two, I assume you have the money to go to the Ruger. Do it and don't look back. Just my $200. __________________ It's good to be the king.

August 26, 2012, 10:03 PM	#11
QuarterHorse Senior Member Join Date: June 13, 2010 Location: Des Moines, Iowa Posts: 421	I'm a huge Ruger fan but wish they'd come out with a full underlug revolver for the big bore stuff. __________________ Never enough toys

August 27, 2012, 05:33 AM	#12
rambilt Senior Member Join Date: December 5, 2009 Posts: 156	Raging Bull I have two Taurus Raging Bulls, a 44mag in 61/2" and a 454 in 5" (I prefer the 5" it's lighter). I did the revolver test pasted at the very beginning of this forum before I bought them. Thanks to the OP. I find the Raging Bull to pass every requirements of that test. Both of my Raging Bulls shoots with amazing accuracy and it really looks nice. I haven't experienced any problems with either one. It shoots just fine everytime. The casings comes out of the cylinder easily, no shavings whatsoever when shooting different types of bullets... Perform the revolver test before you buy... Whicever one you choose should be fine.. Good luck!!! regards, RL

August 27, 2012, 06:27 AM	#13
CajunBass Senior Member Join Date: May 6, 2005 Location: North Chesterfield, Virginia Posts: 4,767	Of the two you mentioned, I'd pop the extra and get the Ruger. I think the Super Redhawk is just plain ugly, but the Redhawk, especially with a 5" barrel ain't too bad. It's not a Model 29, but it'll do. No question about how well it will hold up, or it's resale value. You might get a good Taurus. You probably will. But with a Ruger, that's not even a serious concern. On the other hand. You mentioned that you can't/don't want to spend the money to get a Smith & Wesson. I've got two Model 29-2's that I've bought THIS year. A 4" and a 6", both in near new condition. I paid $750.00 for each of them. So if you WANT a Smith, don't let the price scare you off. You CAN find them in your price range. I admit they were both private sales, but they are out there. __________________ For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16 (NKJV)

August 26, 2012, 07:22 PM	#1
smokin' barrels Member Join Date: May 7, 2012 Posts: 27	ruger super redhawk vs taurus raging bull? im looking onto buying a .44 magnum revolver, i like the long barrels but i cant afford to spend the s&w price tag in terms of muzzle climb (obviously it will be pretty rough) durability and overall value, if taurus has really stepped up their quality control or do their cylinders still lock up after 50 rnds? if i can get away with spending $500 on a taurus raging bull rather than $750 on a super redhawk, i'd be a happy camper

August 26, 2012, 07:55 PM	#2
Kreyzhorse Senior Member Join Date: April 12, 2006 Location: NKY Posts: 12,463	You will get a lot of opinions on Taurus, most will admit they are hit and miss with their QA and mostly miss with their customer service. Ruger on the other hand, most will recommend their products and their customer service is highly rated. In my book, if you can swing the extra money, the extra value you will get with the Ruger is worth more than the $250 you will spend. On a side note, if you ever sell the gun, you'll make most of that $250 back as Ruger's have pretty good resale value. Taurus, not so much. __________________ "He who laughs last, laughs dead." Homer Simpson

August 26, 2012, 08:04 PM	#3
feets Senior Member Join Date: April 28, 2008 Posts: 560	A Redhawk or Super Redhawk would be my choice. In fact, it was my choice. I picked up a SRH in 454 and don't regret it one bit. It's a bit heavier than necessary for a 44 so a Redhawk may be a bit better depending on what you're going to do with it.

August 26, 2012, 08:10 PM	#5
sgms Senior Member Join Date: May 30, 2010 Location: Arizona or Ohio depending Posts: 1,021	Taurus is not a bad gun nor a great gun very middle of the road. The Rugers are built like a tank and worth the extra money. They can handle hotter loads and after 25 years of hauling a Super Blackhawk around as a hunting and bear gun when camping and fishing she's been rode hard and never failed me.

August 26, 2012, 08:49 PM	#7
pete2 Senior Member Join Date: May 15, 2012 Location: Texas Posts: 2,566	I you go with the Taurus you may or may not get a serviceable gun. With Ruger you are almost guaranteed to get a good one. Don't waste your money on the Taurus.

August 26, 2012, 09:03 PM	#8
Gdown Junior Member Join Date: August 12, 2012 Posts: 5	I would go with the Ruger. The jump isn't very bad, and the quality is consistently good.

August 26, 2012, 09:46 PM	#9
Shadi Khalil Senior Member Join Date: September 23, 2006 Location: Alexandria, VA Posts: 5,210	I avoid Taurus completely because of my past experiences. I certainly would not want one in a heavy caliber like the .44 considering how poorly my Taurus steel .38's held up.

August 26, 2012, 09:51 PM	#10
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	It may not be entirely fair to Taurus, but their trade in/resale value is low for the simple reason that folks look at sites like this and assume that a used Taurus was traded in because there is something wrong with it. The only way to get around that is for the dealer to price them low, which means a low trade in value. Jim

August 27, 2012, 03:58 PM	#14
rodfac Senior Member Join Date: January 22, 2005 Location: Kentucky Posts: 3,623	Forget Taurus...Ruger all the way, better quality out of the box, hell for strong, and real world customer service...Rod __________________ Cherish our flag, honor it, defend it in word and deed, or get the hell out. Our Bill of Rights has been paid for by heros in uniform and shall not be diluted by misguided governmental social experiments. We owe this to our children, anything less is cowardice. USAF FAC, 5th Spl Forces, Vietnam Vet '69-'73.

August 27, 2012, 06:43 PM	#16
rodfac Senior Member Join Date: January 22, 2005 Location: Kentucky Posts: 3,623	No worries, Shadi...Rod __________________ Cherish our flag, honor it, defend it in word and deed, or get the hell out. Our Bill of Rights has been paid for by heros in uniform and shall not be diluted by misguided governmental social experiments. We owe this to our children, anything less is cowardice. USAF FAC, 5th Spl Forces, Vietnam Vet '69-'73.

August 27, 2012, 06:49 PM	#17
old bear Senior Member Join Date: November 3, 2009 Location: Not close enough to the beach Posts: 1,477	The Ruger over the Taurus every time. Why not save a little more money and get the Smith and Wesson you really want? Life is just to short to settle...

August 27, 2012, 09:35 PM	#18
big al hunter Senior Member Join Date: March 12, 2011 Location: Washington state Posts: 1,558	If you are putting a scope on it, super red hawk. No scope, red hawk. I have a red hawk in 44 mag and a super red hawk in 454 cassul. No problems in 10 years, several hundred rounds a year. Except that the cheap scope I bought lost its reticle about 150 rounds in. Quality matters with heavy recoil. Ruger all the way. __________________ You can't fix stupid....however ignorance can be cured through education!

August 28, 2012, 01:04 AM	#20
warnerwh Senior Member Join Date: February 11, 2009 Posts: 329	The Ruger is a known quantity. I have not had the two in front of me but I'd bet the Ruger is the nicer and better made gun. You don't have to worry about weird things happening and then hit and miss CS. Don't even think about it. Personally I'd get the Dan Wesson .44. __________________ Portland, Or

August 28, 2012, 05:35 AM	#21
akguy1985 Senior Member Join Date: May 17, 2012 Location: Claremore, Oklahoma Posts: 179	I'd go with the ruger if it was me. I'd love to have a super redhawk alaskan 2.5 inch in .454 casull. __________________ Marksman of the mezzanine

August 28, 2012, 07:29 AM	#22
nicknitro71 Senior Member Join Date: February 5, 2008 Location: DeLand, FL Posts: 110	I've owned a S&W in .357 subnose, I still own a Taurus 608 9" (same frame as the .44 but .357 with 8 shots), and I have three Ruger revolvers all in stainless: Super Redhawk in .44 9.5", Super Blackhawk .44 10.5", and Blackhawk .357 6.5". The Taurus is a copy of the S&W designs and they are good revolvers, don't buy in the 'junk' horse crap. Great stock trigger and super accurate. Said that, other than Freedom Arms, I'm a huge Ruger sucker when it comes to their Revolvers. I will never again buy another Revolver other than a Ruger. It's a superior design in terms of sheer engineering. I've never liked the cassette type receiver of the S&W and their clones. Ruger triggers are so so, like 99% of the guns out there, but with a bit of polishing and spring replacement you get some of the best triggers out there. All my Rugers break like glass at 2.5 lbs with zero creep. Nothing wrong with the Raging Bull, but money for money get the SRH!

August 28, 2012, 08:29 AM	#23
rickyjames Senior Member Join Date: July 5, 2009 Posts: 558	i have a number of ruger products in different calibers, so i guess you could say i am a ruger fan. i own a 7 1/2" ruger redhawk in 44 mag. it is a great gun with no problems. i like it very much. i also have a taurus model 44. it has a ported 4" barrel in 44 mag of course. the taurus shoots as accuratly as my 7 1/2" redhawk. the recoil of the 4" taurus is less than the 7 1/2" redhawk, probably due to the ported barrel. i would like to scope the bigger redhawk and try hunting with it. the taurus is my go to trail or carry gun because of its more convienent size. the redhawk sits in my safe, waiting to be scoped. __________________ ya only got 1 arm and ya carry 3 guns for Christs sake. Well I don't want to get killed for lack of shooting back.

August 28, 2012, 09:18 AM	#24
coop2564 Senior Member Join Date: March 4, 2011 Location: Frisco, TX Posts: 330	Can speak for the red hawk don't have one, but I have a 6.5" raging bull in .41 mag and its a great gun. I've had it about 11yrs and had no problems. Killed quite a few deer and hogs with it.

August 28, 2012, 09:19 AM	#25
Wyosmith Senior Member Join Date: December 29, 2010 Location: Shoshoni Wyoming Posts: 2,713	I can give you only 3 pieces of advice. #1 Buy the Ruger #2 Buy the Ruger #3 Buy the Ruger