The Firing Line Forums

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

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old October 23, 2013, 09:04 PM   #26
Senior Member
Join Date: April 27, 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 932
Great find at a great price.

I think you'll love it. Here's the first 10 I fired through mine:

Yah, that's a flyer down below.

Show me the data
psyfly is offline  
Old October 23, 2013, 09:19 PM   #27
Join Date: December 11, 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 96
I agree with the others that say the S&W is more refined. I've owned several S&W revolvers & shoot a 686 in comp. Several other shooters at our club also shoot various models S&W revolvers in comp. I don't see any Rugers. I find Rugers are stout, but the S&W's are stout enough.
Several years ago I purchased a S&W 629 & went to the range. The shooter next to me had a new Redhawk. We tried each others guns. He said he should of gotten a S&W. I agree.
2rott is offline  
Old October 25, 2013, 12:03 AM   #28
Senior Member
Join Date: August 14, 2001
Posts: 1,088
I have a Super Redhawk for my +P+ reloads but enjoy my S&W 629's for their more refined trigger characteristics.

If you get only one.44 Magnum revolver, my recommendation is for the S&W 29/629.
PzGren is offline  
Old October 25, 2013, 01:37 AM   #29
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 2,049
I had the same dilemma last year. I wanted another 44 Mag snubby and it was between the Alaskan and the PC 629. For $100 more I got the S&W. I will not be shooting super heavy bullets, mostly 180's loaded fast so i have no need for the longer cylinder. If it was just a plinking gun I would look hard at a Super Black Hawk I have a Bisley with a 7 1/2" barrel that is a pleasure to shoot.
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old October 25, 2013, 08:27 PM   #30
Senior Member
Join Date: May 27, 2009
Posts: 3,968
Redhawk all the way!
Sic Semper Tyrannis
EdInk is offline  
Old October 25, 2013, 11:05 PM   #31
Senior Member
Join Date: January 19, 2009
Location: Wherever I may roam
Posts: 1,492
The S&W is more refined, better trigger, better machine work, however is not as overbuilt, won't handle some of the really hot loads well.

The Ruger won't be as smooth, won't have as clean a trigger, will probably have some edges, etc from the factory you want to work on. It will, however be tougher and handle hot loads better.

The S&W is a lowered pickup truck; it has some utility however in the end won't handle the rough as well. The Ruger is a full on stock overbuilt truck.
l've heard police work is dangerous. Yes, that's why l carry a big gun. Couldn't it go off accidentally? l used to have that problem. What did you do about it?
l just think about baseball. -Leslie Nielsen
riggins_83 is offline  
Old October 26, 2013, 05:03 AM   #32
Senior Member
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near Ohio, Indiana.
Posts: 5,043
Am curious what you consider the disadvantage to be (when shooting SA)?
I have a tendency to look at things as to how there are capable of being used optimally. For instance, a skilled Cowboy Action shooter can fire his single-action rapidly and accurately because he takes advantage of the grip rolling up into his hand, under his thumb. Given the hump on a double-action, that will not happen. However, if a person with a double-action just slow-fires his gun in single-action mode, the hump then would not be any great hindrance. My mind-set is, if I am going to do something (like shoot single-action), I want to become really good at it. Unless someone (like yourself, with your question), suggests someone elses way of thinking, it generally does not occur to me.

As for non-sporting uses of double-actions (self-defense), I cannot imagine any realistic use of single-action shooting using a double-action revolver and have removed or purchased guns without hammer spurs. I have never heard a logical, realistic rationale for using a D.A. in S.A. in a self-defense situation.
dahermit is offline  
Old October 26, 2013, 07:51 AM   #33
Airman Basic
Senior Member
Join Date: April 12, 2013
Location: South of Interstate 20
Posts: 214
Assuming this is mostly a play gun, a Super Blackhawk with a Poor Boy's Trigger Job is an option.
Result's are amazing and the freeness of it appeals. Super Blackhawks are easy to find, also.
Airman Basic is offline  
Old October 26, 2013, 08:40 AM   #34
Senior Member
Join Date: May 12, 2002
Location: MO
Posts: 5,206
Just as an aside, I owned both a 4" nickel 29-2 and a blue 5 1/2" blue Redhawk for several years. Both of them were 44's. I was in my Hot Loads/Heavy Bullets phase and both guns saw hundreds of them. I had refined the SA trigger on the Redhawk to the point where it rivaled the Smith. I had also installed an over-travel stop. Either would do 4" at 100 yards, once around the cylinder, back when my eyes were capable of it.

Anyhow I decided I was going to move one on and because the 29 had some sentimental value, the Redhawk went. This was a mistake. The Smith was a fine example of the breed, but needed a 2nd trip back to the factory the following year and its rear sight got so loose that it couldn't be trusted to hold a setting.

Long story short- if you want a really nice revolver to shoot a few head of game with and admire for its refinement, the S&W will serve you well. But the Redhawk will do anything the Smith will do and handle abuse like a T33 tank.

Show horse or work horse; either will get you there. Take your pick.
May a person who is relocating out-of-State move firearms with other household goods? Yes.
Sarge is offline  
Old October 27, 2013, 08:31 PM   #35
Join Date: May 2, 2012
Location: upstate New York
Posts: 84
Both are good guns(the best revolvers on the market)While the Smith is prettier, the Ruger is more durable and I think the best for hunting.
magnum777 is offline  
Old October 28, 2013, 07:03 PM   #36
Senior Member
Join Date: February 12, 2005
Location: North central Ohio
Posts: 6,525
Had both, kept the Smith.
Me too, but I kept the Redhawk-and I have the best reason of all for doing so: it was a Father's Day gift from my wife (the only firearm she's ever given me) a few decades ago. I had a Model 629 for a while and there's many things I prefer about it over the big Ruger, including a better trigger pull (especially in sa); a more compact configuration and (subjectively) it's a much better looking revolver. But the Redhawk is tough in the extreme and is much simpler to field-strip should the occasion arise.
No wrong choice here. If you plan on shooting a lot of hot reloads and like the simplicity of the Ruger build, get the Redhawk. On the other hand, if you appreciate a superb trigger pull and are justifyily enamored by the Model 629's svelte looks and feel, get the Smith. If you're so lucky as to receive one of the two from your wife as a gift-keep it.
NRA Benefactor Life Member
dgludwig is offline  
Old October 30, 2013, 09:00 PM   #37
Join Date: December 22, 2009
Location: NW Georgia
Posts: 62
Had both traded what a MISTAKE!

I too had both 6" 629 and 7.5 SRH. In a moment of weakness I let a friend trade me out of the SRH. Big mistake for me as I used it to hunt with. The 629 is a good gun just preferred the SHR for my use.
My Favorite Toys: SIG 220, Kimber Ultra SPII, Colt Snubbie, Browning Hi-Power, Browning BLR, Mini 14, M1A1 & AR-10.
Glen-Bob is offline  
Old November 9, 2013, 06:57 PM   #38
Senior Member
Join Date: August 12, 2006
Posts: 345
Today while opening some old mail ran across a mailing from Gun Tests. At some point they tested a 629 and a Redhawk. The 629 they tested, presumably new, unlocked the cylinder when it fired "leaving the chamber out of alignment".
Am I correct that Smith guarantees their firearms "forever"? But returning them can be a hassle and involve some expense. And with a new one, the emotions involved would not be positive.
The only S&W I have ever owned is a Model 36, with added Tyler T-Grip. I loaned it to my son for a week and he immediately shopped for one for himself.
Opinated is offline  
Old November 9, 2013, 11:21 PM   #39
Senior Member
Join Date: September 29, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,153
Ruger Redhawk VS. S&W629

I don't think that example is typical of N-frame quality, just as barrels falling off Redhawks was not typical, just during that period of use of that cutting oil. I would buy either without hesitation.
NWPilgrim is offline  
Old November 10, 2013, 10:17 AM   #40
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 4,397
Kept the 629-1.

Does anyone here wonder why?

“To you who call yourselves ‘men of peace,’ I say, you are not safe without men of action by your side” Thucydides
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old November 13, 2013, 08:41 PM   #41
Join Date: July 25, 2013
Posts: 99
I recently went through a similar process of choosing my first (and then second!) revolver. Looked at Smiths (PC), and Rugers and even some Colt snakes.
I rejected the Colts because I planned on shooting the gun and didn't want to feel like I had to baby it to get my money out of it should I choose to some time down the road.
Between the Smith and Ruger, I really fell hard for the PC V Comp design. Heavy, interestingly modern lines and shapes and configurable to keep the muzzle well positioned after a shot. And just a much more sleek and attractive design with a better trigger in DA and marginally better in SA.
So I ended up with a pair of S&W PC V Comps - in 357 and 44.
Unlike that fellow mentioned in one of the earlier posts, I don't think I'll ever wish that I bought a Ruger.
BingoFuel is offline  
Old November 14, 2013, 01:14 AM   #42
Senior Member
Join Date: April 2, 2012
Posts: 114
29/629 vs the Redhawk is comparing the prom queen to a biker chick. The prom queen is pretty and refined. The biker chick will get it done no matter what.

It all comes down to why someone wants a .44 Mag. I wanted the most out of a .44 Mag, so I went Redhawk.

Do you want pretty gun that works but will in time whine and break down or get a biker chick that always does the job; AKA:Redhawk..

It comes down to refinement vs strength and reliability..
codefour is offline  
Old November 14, 2013, 11:28 AM   #43
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 2,049
Do you want pretty gun that works but will in time whine and break down or get a biker chick that always does the job; AKA:Redhawk..


I chose the prom queen.

I have never had a steel S&W shoot out of time, I have seen it with both but more often with Rugers. Ruger's have to be built heavily, pound for pound investment cast is not as strong as forged steel, that is a fact.
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old November 14, 2013, 11:40 AM   #44
Senior Member
Join Date: December 29, 2008
Location: Ft.Worth, Texas
Posts: 1,522
I have owned S&W 29's and 629's and the Ruger Red Hawks have always lasted and performed better than the S&W under heavy abuse.
Back in the day I abused the 44mag platform.
I loaded the biggest bullets I could find with WAY over max loadings of 2400 and my Rugers never failed.
I can't say that about the S&W's I owned.
Texas - Not just a state but an attitude!
For monthly shooting events in DFW visit
madmo44mag 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 01:06 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2017 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent:
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09674 seconds with 8 queries