The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Revolver Forum

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old February 20, 2013, 01:18 AM   #26
Senior Member
Join Date: June 4, 2012
Location: NV
Posts: 743

44 AMP

The 29s have great sights and great triggers, The Rugers are good, but not quite as good in this as the S&W.
If that's the case, those S&W are absolutely magic. I'd put my Ruger Redhawk against just about any gun out there including my two S&W Performance Center .357s at three time the cost each.
Redhawk5.5+P+ is offline  
Old February 20, 2013, 09:48 AM   #27
Join Date: February 5, 2013
Posts: 38
I've owned a number of each. The Redhawk is a good gun, but I find the 629 more refined with a better trigger.
Pharm is offline  
Old February 22, 2013, 08:29 PM   #28
Senior Member
Join Date: May 30, 2007
Posts: 753
I own and love both, so there's you solution! If durability is important, also consider the Colt Anaconda. It is reputed to be at least as tough as the Ruger.

jad0110 is offline  
Old February 22, 2013, 11:32 PM   #29
Senior Member
Join Date: September 19, 2012
Location: Near Gainesville Fl.
Posts: 224
Smith & Wesson Model 29

First handgun I ever shot was the Model 29 .44 magnum, quite a start. It has a smooth trigger pull on the single action, and a pretty nice double action. The 6 inch barrel on the one I shot was perfect. I love the Model 29, it is a great gun and I highly recommend it. Doesn't kick too bad when you get the hang of it. Plus it is the Dirty Harry gun! How could you pass that up!?
Mauser8mm is offline  
Old February 23, 2013, 04:16 PM   #30
Join Date: January 1, 2012
Location: Wyoming - Texas
Posts: 69
Other than the caliber being the same, the S&W 29/629 and the Ruger Redhawk are two different guns. IMHO, the S&W, especially a 4" bbl. 29 in blue, is one of the best looking guns ever built and the 6" version is Dirty Harry's. What more can you ask for in a handgun. With reasonable use of standard 44 mag loads and the enjoyment of 44 specials (Dirty Harry's favorite load), this gun will last a life time or two, and look good doing it.

The Redhawk on the other hand is the M1 Tank of handguns. I'm sure you could destroy it with atomic loads, but I suspect you would give up before the gun will. With the 4" bbl., the Redhawk is reasonable to carry. With standard magnum loads the gun for me is easier to handle than the S&W, with 44 specials the Redhawk acts like a .38 special. The 5.5" gun is not quite as handy and trim as the 6" S&W, but both the 4" and the 5.5" guns give a feeling of quality and something substantial that gives confidence. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but for me the Redhawk comes in second to the S&W, but only in looks.

If I were picking a gun for limited magnum use and for great esthetics and a smooth trigger, I would always go for the S&W. If I am picking a gun with the durability to handle a diet of magnums and last, I would pick the 4" Redhawk. Only you know how the gun will be used, but most who own .44 mags get the most enjoyment from them with loads well below full magnum. Enjoy whatever you choose. Personally I couldn't live with just one, so I have both.
All it takes for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing.
Meeteetse is offline  
Old February 25, 2013, 09:40 PM   #31
Join Date: May 2, 2012
Location: upstate New York
Posts: 86
The model 29 has a smoother trigger pull, but the Red hawk is more durable.
magnum777 is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:30 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent:
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.07092 seconds with 9 queries