Hi there, I’m Dennis and I’m a very proud owner of a new .44mag Ruger Super Red Hawk Hunter edition 7 1/2” barrel. I just bought it last month from collecting Bass Pro Shop gift cards over the years from family and friends. As a big gift From my wife this Christmas, she gave me a plain gift card and said I can pay for the remaining balance with cash. My gun cost me a whopping $1,019! I have shot over a 150 rounds already and I love it. I really enjoy hearing the different reviews by other owners. Your review was great. Thank you
My first gun was a super 7 1/2. I bought it for $600 used about 20 years ago and I put thousands of rounds through it with no problems. Loved that gun, everyone loved it. Got stolen. Now I'm on the fence about replacing with 629 because I always thought S&W revolvers were better quality. Both are the same price now and I only have enough for one.
Definitely the Smith. It can still handle the 305gr hard cast according to underwood and never have any issues. That load is a 305gr long nose hard cast rated at 1325fps and is standard pressure, not +p or higher.
Excellent overview of both revolvers. I agree with your assessment of the builds of each. I own two 629's. A 629 Classic 5" and a Performance Center 629 Stealth Hunter 7.5". I also own two Ruger GP100's and they are built like tanks. Great guns one and all. Thanks for sharing your impressions of two fine revolvers. I just found your channel - subbed! Scott
I bougjt my 629 for 350.00 gun sale in.the late 80's. Still had factory goop in the workings. Cleaned it thoroughly and at 25 yards it shot 2 in groups. I love the 44 smith mag By the way, its a six incher.
They’re both equally top-of-the-line revolvers. Some people will prefer the Smith and Wesson. Because it’s a lot lighter. Easier to carry. Me I’m a Ruger fan. So I prefer the heavier revolver. And you can fire a lot heavier loads through them,
The Ruger Super Redhawk .44mag comes 71/2 and 91/2 barrel. The frame is heavier built on the Ruger,but has smaller grips,ejection rod. I thought it was harder to hold shooting with the small grips. I actually bent the ejector rod slightly on a swelled case trying to get it out. Put the best of the 2 together and would have the perfect. 44mag.
The super Redhawk was made so that you could fire super hot loads through them with a 460 grain bullet for dangerous game on teen. You can still hunt dangerous game with a Smith and Wesson. But you can’t fire the big loads do them like you can the Ruger.
I remember talking with my gun dealer just after he got back from the SHOT show in the mid 80's that Ruger displayed the first SRH's. I remember "massive" and "bank vault" being used to describe the beast. I had a 6" 686 and a Smith 45 acp N frame at the time along with a single action 8 3/8" single action Virginian Dragoon already and didn't think I needed this, buy within a few years I bought one. I remember Ruger had a cash back program running, due to slowing sales of revolvers, and I picked up a new 7 1/2" one for around $400 and got $50 back from Ruger. Came with the rings too. Still have it, currently with some Hogues on it and the V notch sights. I've used it for hunting rabbits all the way up to deer, and never had a problem with it.
I have lever guns in 44 mag, but only 357's revolvers of my own. Anyway,... I shot a Ruger Super Redhawk hunter with a scope on it from a friend at the range a couple of weeks ago, and I am slowly learning that "I" handle fixed barrel handguns better than I do semi autos. To ME,..semi's flip, like they are trying to get out of my hand. While revolvers (Even the 44 mag, which I MAY purchase from him), throw most of the recoil back at my body, which I REALLY enjoy! It is more like shooting a rifle to me. Long live the revolvers!!! (lol)
Excellent, interesting, informative, and highly entertaining. A true pleasure. Two excellent top notch staple revolvers and made in USA. Fun too!!! Just awesome.
I do shoot the Buffalo Bore 305 grain Heavy Outdoorsman out of my 5 inch S&W 629 regularly. And Buffalo Bore says on their website that will not damage the gun. They do have an even heavier load, I forget what its called, that can be shot in the Redhawk, but not the S&W. The 305 grains that I shoot are bad ass! There are grizzlies where I live and hunt. I like it over the Redhawk because it is easier to carry . Thanks for a great video!
Something to consider with them is the intended use. If you plan to put bearload such as Buffalo Bore +p+, then the S&W is not an option. Buffalo Bore strongly recommends against putting their hot loads in a Smith; in fact they said they'd stop making the ammo if Smith users continued to do so. They recommend both the Super Redhawk and the Anaconda. I like the look and feel of the newer Anaconda but the Super Redhawk was stronger, so I went with that.
I have the same Smith, and love it. Have the same Ruger on order. Impressed with the 100 fps increase with the 7-1/2" barrel. I have 4 ports cut near the muzzle end of my Smith. I will be interested to test the muzzle rise difference between the 2 firearms. Thanks for the interesting comparison. I have some 300 grain XTP Hornady cartridges. Shot a few of them in the Smith, but after what you said, I think I will stick to the 255 grain bullets and less for the Smith. The 255 grain Keith (Elmer Keith) bullet, a hard cast semi-wadcutter, is supposed to be the greatest hunting bullet ever made. Elmer used it at a super hot 1200fps in his 44 Special revolver to take elk and moose. Now imagine that same bullet at near 1400 fps in a 44 Magnum cartridge! Elmer is responsible for the 44 Magnum evolution from the 44 Special. Most 44 Special revolvers are designed to fire bullets from 800 to 1000 fps. Note: the semi-wadcutter design is perhaps the fastest bullet design there is from what I have gathered reading reloading/handloading data charts, and it has deep penetration through tough hides.
I had a 7 and 1/2 in Ruger Super Blackhawk and a Smith & Wesson 629 deluxe and I moved the Ruger because it had the square trigger guard and busted my knuckles but the Smith shoots real nice for me
I own both the Model 29 and the Ruger SRH in 44 and they're neck in neck for accuracy. However the SW has a smoother trigger and is THE one that nails it dead on everytime. I load my own 44 mag with a 240gr JSP with Ramshot Enforcer....best reloads ever
You're right between those two revolvers it is definitely refinement versus ruggedness although the Smith & Wesson is not what I would call a weak revolver but you definitely between the two more rugged with the Ruger
Did u mean the Smith and Wesson can't shoot 300 grain. Xtp or was that 340 grain . I was confused. I just picked up xtp 300 grain. For Smith and Wesson. Is that ok or will it beaut up the Smith and Wesson .44
I had a regular Ruger Redhawk years ago. Sold it like a fool to a fellow police officer I worked patrol with. Now I have a scoped 7 in long barrel Ruger Blackhawk .357 magnum. I'm definitely going to buy a super Redhawk with 7 in bbl pretty soon so I can scope it. I'm usually a rifle hunter but I do like to handgun hunt on occasion. I love my Smith revolvers but these Rugers are off the chain strong. The huge revolvers chambered in 454 casull , S&W 500 and like rounds with the short bbls are more like guide guns for bear country in my opinion. See a lot of them in Alaska. I'm in SC so I dont have to worry too much about Polar bears lol. Plenty of black bears and big cats here though!
give me the SRH... and NO the bbl length is NOT the biggest difference, nor the cylinder release mechanism... the increased strength of the ruger is the biggest difference and less felt recoil along with higher velocity is good too... thumbs up
If you’re just looking at appeal! Just buy the Ruger Redhawk instead of the Super! It’s sleek, but still out performs the Smith! Ruger is win win in both categories..... Just my opinion!
Now I am not hating on Ruger I, I have trying to buy a Redhawk but can’t find any locally. But the only reason the Ruger only 44 magnum loads exist is because rugers have longer cylinders than s&w revolvers and you can’t close the cylinder on the s&w revolver with the Ruger only loads because they are too long for s&w revolvers, and the smith is foraged metal and Ruger is cast, foraged is stronger than cast metal, so the Ruger requires more metal to handle the same pressures that, the s&w revolver is built to handle, Anyways that was cool video keep up great work.
I own a standard redhawk 5.5in and used to own a 629 6in. I liked the redhawk much more, seemed to handle recoil better, double action trigger better on redhawk, single action better on the 629. The thinner trigger on the redhawk also seemed easier to manipulate and control.
The Ruger just didn't really cut it for me. The ejection rod, hammer pull, and trigger had too stiff of an action. Hated how the hammer would scrape along the frame. The S&W just got smoother the more I shot it.
My 629-3 smith was made in the early 90's with a hammer spur the new 29's all have transfer bars like the Ruger. To be honest there is no difference that I notice. I do enjoy not seeing the look on the older Smith.
The main difference is the manufacturing Process; Ruger is Cast Iron and Smith is a forged Steel - thats why the Ruger is beefier and with little bigger Tolerances and a bit heavyier. BTW Dirty Harry's Gun from the 1971 Movie is a Smith 23-2 ;-)
Excellent ,insightful review! Have you ever fired the Ruger Redhawk 7.5 inch? I prefer the Ruger Redhawk Hunter over the Ruger Super Redhawk. Reason being the grip and balance for me the Redhawk is a better fit than the Super Red Hawk. I also like the S&W M29 especially with the 8/38 inch barrel. The 41 Magnum in Redhawk 7.5 and S&W 57 in 6 and 8 3/8 inch barrel lengths are also an excellent choice for hunting handguns. It would be good for Ruger to offer 8 and 8.25 inch barrel revolvers. BTW, yes indeed, Lithuanian girls are some hot magnums!
Underwood says that they're 305 grain long nose hardcast is perfectly fine in the Smith & Wesson 629 so that would probably be about as high as I want to go anyways but definitely in that Ruger I would not hesitate to use that 340 +p+ because that would be seriously you don't need a 454 casull. I will say that 305 grain hardcast from Underwood is plenty for anything you would want to kill even the 1200 lb elk or moose
IMHO have shot both Redhawk (5.5") and 629 (6.5") also S&W model 29 (shoots like manure). I prefer weight/build of Redhawk, thick cylinder walls handle hottest loads (easy when reloading). To me weight = less recoil. Redhawk shoots like 357/9mm easy to keep on target. Also the heavy Redhawk frame can be had in .357, .41, and .45 colt. Great backup gun when hunting.
It's true. Yet they are still stronger, despite the cast material (which isn't cheap material and neither is the process cheap). The SRH cylinder is carpenter steel, withstands 90,000+psi test pressures just fine. The frame is cast, but the real weakness with the Smith is not the frame, it's the lack of cylinder lockup points and will be the first place it fails.
The Smith is softer shooting because of the full underlug and full grip frame. The Ruger has a lighter barrel and a small "hidden tang" style grip frame. All of the Rugers weight is around the cylinder for strength and the Smith is evenly distributed for comfort.
I have a Ruger with the 9 1/2 in barrel, I had a 629 with a 8 3/8 full lug barrel. I prefer the Ruger, the S&W felt nose heavy. they both worked great for deer hunting. I have killed a lot of bowling pins at 100 yds with open sights with both guns
lol awesome intro, when your video starts music is playing, then you start talking and it seemed you were about to rap and it was pretty good!! Maybe you should do that! thanks for the video, learned much
It's not a double, single action revolver; it's a double action (meaning you can cock the hammer manually, or just pull the trigger. 2 ways of shooting ergo double action.)
Yeah, I tend to sigh when I hear someone say "double/single action". The actual actions that make it "double" are cocking and firing. I get that some people think it necessary to separate it from 'double action only' revolvers, but really that is the distinction. Dbl action only or hammerless, a standard action capable of double and single action should be called simply double action.
THANK YOU! It drive me insane when they call double action revolvers for ''This is a double action single action revolver'' And that is usually the moment I stop watching.
Hey Big Ed really enjoy your videos I have the same two 44 Magnums you have I love them both I was over at my cousin's house one evening and he drug out and old Sierra reloading manual it was the 2nd addition I could not believe the maximum 44 magnum load of 25.8 of h110 that was printed in that book I could not believe it when I saw
Got a Ruger SRH in 480 Ruger. Couldn't sell it because the receiver got cracks in it. ("We don't support that model.") Also its failure to eject with heavier loads was notorious. I have Ruger SBH in 45 Colt, 41 Magnum, and a 4.5 inch 44 Mag. The 45 handles heavy loads pretty well. I run the 41 with 210 grain lloads. The little 44 is nice after I got a wide Hogue grip to spread the plow grip recoil over my hand. The other two Rugers have Bisley grips and are quite comfortable. I wont buy another 480 from Ruger -- I hear their support for any of those is less than stellar. It's a shame, because 480 is a great round for me. It's hard for me to get back on target with a 475 Linebaugh.
I understand that, a .38 or .44 special snubby are difficult to shoot and master. I would think a 2" 454, 460 or 500 are close to impossible just saying a smaller .44 mag ext.... with a 3"+ barrel might be a better option because you have a much higher probability of hitting your target.
@@biged7175 maybe it's a get off me mr short face bear? I'd be curious to see how penetration is out of a 3~" .44 Special with hard cast at typical slow .44 Special speeds.
Well, i have a Super Blackhawk 44 mag and am looking around for either a super redhawk or a 629. I like the addition of double action. I do a lot of reloading (nothing hot) and am leaning toward a SBH. Still thinking abot which it will be
Rugers have a reputation as being built like a tank. I believe they shoot proof rounds 200% over standard pressure - a full cylinder - before they’re released for sale. I saw a Ruger GP100 in 357 Mag on display side-by-side with a S&W model 29 (44 Mag) the other day. The Ruger was priced ~ $835 and the Smith was tagged at ~ $950. I bring this up because the GP was easily heavier, thicker steel barrels and thicker cylinder steel = all characteristics you mentioned with the Super RedHawk; the Smith, while it shoots a more powerful cartridge, looked anemic next to the Ruger. Yes, the Smith does have a “classic look of revolvers” but the steel in the barrel looked about 1/2 the thickness of the Ruger. I know many people put a premium on the classic look of Smiths - as they do for Colts and reproduction models - but I was practically raised on Ruger. My dad is a huge Ruger fan and has nearly at least one model of every revolver Ruger has produced including caliber and barrel length. Personally, my go to Ruger is my Security Six in 357 Mag. Stainless finish, 4” barrel and trigger as slick as glass - I do believe the previous owner did a trigger job on it before trading it in and I couldn’t be happier. But it will shoot hot loads all day long and you would be shocked at the incredibly light recoil. Anyway, great presentation and I subscribed after watching this one.
Great comment I'm also a big Ruger fan and own many of them. S&W 686+ in 357 L frame will hands down beat any Ruger 357 mag in every category. I've owned one for years great if you can only own one handgun.
Rugers are cast and Smiths are forged. Rugers are still a little stronger because they are bricks but the difference in size doesn't directly translate to strength.
Remember to research the ring size lower medium The front is a high greenmount and the rear is low it tapers off Ruger have a strange way to do these rings four on the front three in the back for example
Once again! Ruger frames are made in a cast. Smith frames are forged. Ruger frames need to be as thick as a brick to handle the same stress as a Smith frame that is thinner. If a Smith frame was as thick as that Ruger Super Red Hawk, you could probably fire a Howitzer 105mm round out of it.
May I ask then why some max loads are not recommend shooting out of SW even stated in their owners manual. Some 200 gr and 240gr. This is why I must find out for myself, I saw some pics of 629 brown top on reloading accident at my range plus internet I take it with a grain of salt but always cautious dealing with 10mm and 44 magnum
@Kevin the Duck I heard good news about Smith improvements specially their performance center pieces and comp 357mag lines. I only shoots buddies pieces, mine are older designs 686, 625, 610, 19 held up as it should for the last 30+ years took some buck and hogs in my younger year but bruised meat that was my lack of understanding on bullet component selection. Massive exit wound bruised shoulder shot with 357 magnum. This video reminding me I need to get back to building the finally hunting loads using NOS hunting 240gr HP. 200 counts on hand life is indeed short these days my elders reloaders checked out due to Covid very few close wise men left to bounce off informations with
My opinon of both: S&W has a better trigger but is more complicated and harder to maintain in field conditions. Drop it in a mud puddle in the middle of nowhere and it's basically ruined. Ruger is less elegant. Has a rougher, slower trigger. But, it is tougher and can be completely disassembled and cleaned in field conditions. Barrel length doesn't make that much difference. Difference in individual guns and chamber tolerance will make more difference.
I agree an inch of barrel does not make much difference but more than that does. Interesting about field stripping a revolver never thought of that. Makes me wanna buy better holsters, Lol.
@@ap9793 I know. I was saying IF it could it would be perfect. Bit the 454 is very powerful and adequate for any North amer game and even brown bears. Its rds are $$$$$ expensive.
Love my 9.5" Super RedHawk with a Leupold 2x scope milk jugs buster way out. Stop those hogs. I like mine longer gaining fps is an advantage in hunting application. A solidly well built massive on the Ruger. Inner guts rough machining though needs polishing SW sexy smooth lines. Recoil softer shooting is because of Ruger angle of gripping awkward not allowing that target purchase feel so follow up shots not as efficient as SW.
why do you gun ''review people'' always make the mistake, ''this is a double single action revolver '' It is a DOUBLE ACTION REVOLVER. PERIOD ! Pulling the hammer back and fire the gun or pulling only the trigger to pull back the hammer to fire the gun only mean it is TWO = 2 = DOUBLE ways to fire the gun. SINGLE ACTION mean it is only ONE way to fire the gun. 1= ONE = SINGLE. Ahhh, I got it out.....
@@biged7175 It is even more important to teach these people correct terminology. Like, treat every gun as if it was loaded. Hate that term, NO, every gun IS loaded. If we teach people to ''treat'' a gun as if it is unloaded we create a false ''safe'' and they end up shooting their best friend,, because ''I thought the gun was unloaded''
Thats incorrect, the 'double' refers to means the trigger performs two functions: cocking, and then firing the gun. Not two ways to fire the gun. In a single action, the hammer rotates the cylinder, in a double, only the trigger can rotate the cylinder.
Ed, on the classic 629s from s&w the front sights are removable. Place thumb and index fingers on the front sight and gently pull backwards. Then the front of the front sight should lift up. I explored this for the 629-4 I recently came into and was looking into the same idea of changing the standard iron sights without the bulk of a full on scope :) Glad to see this video, keep it up man.
I prefer the SRH. Less felt recoil when using hot loads. Also, unlike the Smith you can load that cartridge with 26.5 grains of 110 and not have any worries. With the 9.5 " barrel I get a little over 1625 fps using a 240 gr. JHP bullet.
@@biged7175 not really. The lighter frame allows more energy to transfer to your hand. As for the hot loads, you should check out the Buffalo Bore 340 gr.+P+ Awesome for wild hogs. One shot and it knocks them down. No getting back up. They don't even lay there and twitch.
@@samueladams1775 Yes the Ruger is heavier but the S&W just has a better shape so its a nicer shooter and yes I've read about those .44 +P+ basically loaded to 454 Casul specs lol. Once i see a box for sale I'll but them and test them in my SRH.
Good video. Surprised that the SRH had that much more velocity. Expected 50-70 FPS. I have the same629 and same length barrel. I hunt with a Ruger Super Blackhawk with a 10 1/2 inch barrel. i can actually tell the difference when shooting out to 100 yards. The longer barrel has more felt recoil. It has something to do with getting full burn inside the barrel, making the energy at the muzzle a bit higher. Higher energy creates more felt recoil.
I think your comments of the velocity comparison between the two revolvers was a bit off base. Differences in velocity can be the result of multiple factors which include 1. Barrel length the only factor you addressed but also: 2. The throat diameter of each of the six chambers 3. Barrel cylinder gap 4. Throating of the barrel 5. Actual diameter, bore and grove, of the barrel. 6. Not to mention changes in powder or components. The thing about 2 thru 5 above is these can change in every production gun and the next two samples may have the exact opposite velocity figures, Velocity between these two revolvers is a function of the push time the powder has on the bullet (barrel length) and the pressure developed by the burning of the powder and the tighter the tolerances in items 2-5 above will increase pressure and velocity and again these will vary from one gun to the next off the same production line. That is why every reloading manual has the disclaimer that these loads were safe in our test gun but may be different in yours start out 10% low and work up.
I agree with all of your points, i need to condense these video for my time and of the audience. So I try and keep it simple with barrel length but yes not all guys are created equal. Like my Kimber (new) 1911 10mm won't cycle 10mm.......
Both good guns for sure but i remember when Smith and Wesson sold out the others and capitulated to the states attorneys bogus lawsuits in the 90s. Many people boycotted Smith after that...I still do. That and the fact that they're made in Massachusetts. That doesn't fly for this Texan.
I have the super Redhawk 44 mag I love it mostly revolves I shot the super Redhawk 44 magnom and the mine has the ruber and would grips and I don't it has that much recoile I can one hand it without that much musal rise
Also will shoot 44 Russian ! Nice target load smaller than 44Special ! Nice Video . I have shot 320 grain loads out of the Ruger max loads. But the Smith has a nicer trigger and will also blow your head clean off - not your head but some of the punks running around these days ! They wouldn't feel " LUCKY" !
Nonsense, the S W 629-5 or higher has an enhanced frame and yoke in order to handle higher pressure rounds. Does anyone really think S W will stand by and have their guns berated and not eventually level the playing field?
Hi there, I’m Dennis and I’m a very proud owner of a new .44mag Ruger Super Red Hawk Hunter edition 7 1/2” barrel. I just bought it last month from collecting Bass Pro Shop gift cards over the years from family and friends. As a big gift From my wife this Christmas, she gave me a plain gift card and said I can pay for the remaining balance with cash. My gun cost me a whopping $1,019! I have shot over a 150 rounds already and I love it. I really enjoy hearing the different reviews by other owners. Your review was great. Thank you
Paid 1k for mine last year jus took a big do with it last week I love it.
If I’m not mistaken, the S&W is forged steel and the Ruger is investments cast steel. Might be why the Ruger has “more metal”!
You are correct.
Didn't know Randy Savage did gun reviews! I keep expecting to hear, "Oooh yeah!". Lol
Lol never been compared to Randy before.
My first gun was a super 7 1/2. I bought it for $600 used about 20 years ago and I put thousands of rounds through it with no problems. Loved that gun, everyone loved it. Got stolen. Now I'm on the fence about replacing with 629 because I always thought S&W revolvers were better quality. Both are the same price now and I only have enough for one.
Unless your hunting Gizzlies, Polars or the largest Elk id buy the S&W.
SRH
Definitely the Smith. It can still handle the 305gr hard cast according to underwood and never have any issues. That load is a 305gr long nose hard cast rated at 1325fps and is standard pressure, not +p or higher.
Also that 305gr will take care of anything in North America and most things in Africa!!!
I like them both. I lean towards the Smiths, though. Unless you plan on shooting the atomic loads. Then Ruger is the choice.
Excellent overview of both revolvers. I agree with your assessment of the builds of each. I own two 629's. A 629 Classic 5" and a Performance Center 629 Stealth Hunter 7.5". I also own two Ruger GP100's and they are built like tanks. Great guns one and all. Thanks for sharing your impressions of two fine revolvers. I just found your channel - subbed!
Scott
Thank you.
I own both and there really isn't much different in power. both excellent guns.
Something about a big revolver that just screams
No Nonsense!
Watching this video cleaning my sw 500 and my ruger RB 454 casull
Ruger is a cast frame and the smith is a forged frame so the ruger has to have more metal to have the same strength.
I bougjt my 629 for 350.00 gun sale in.the late 80's. Still had factory goop in the workings. Cleaned it thoroughly and at 25 yards it shot 2 in groups. I love the 44 smith mag
By the way, its a six incher.
They’re both equally top-of-the-line revolvers. Some people will prefer the Smith and Wesson. Because it’s a lot lighter. Easier to carry. Me I’m a Ruger fan. So I prefer the heavier revolver. And you can fire a lot heavier loads through them,
I would say, the Ruger is just as finally machined as the Smith and Wesson.
The Ruger Super Redhawk .44mag comes 71/2 and 91/2 barrel. The frame is heavier built on the Ruger,but has smaller grips,ejection rod. I thought it was harder to hold shooting with the small grips. I actually bent the ejector rod slightly on a swelled case trying to get it out. Put the best of the 2 together and would have the perfect. 44mag.
I love that old standard grip on the super Redhawks, and I have big ass hands. You definitely felt it after shooting awhile though.
The super Redhawk was made so that you could fire super hot loads through them with a 460 grain bullet for dangerous game on teen. You can still hunt dangerous game with a Smith and Wesson. But you can’t fire the big loads do them like you can the Ruger.
I remember talking with my gun dealer just after he got back from the SHOT show in the mid 80's that Ruger displayed the first SRH's. I remember "massive" and "bank vault" being used to describe the beast. I had a 6" 686 and a Smith 45 acp N frame at the time along with a single action 8 3/8" single action Virginian Dragoon already and didn't think I needed this, buy within a few years I bought one. I remember Ruger had a cash back program running, due to slowing sales of revolvers, and I picked up a new 7 1/2" one for around $400 and got $50 back from Ruger. Came with the rings too. Still have it, currently with some Hogues on it and the V notch sights. I've used it for hunting rabbits all the way up to deer, and never had a problem with it.
Stephen thank you for sharing great story, and I still have mine or both SRH and 629 and will never part with either one.
With a slower burning powder like H110/296, the extra inch of barrel length does indeed make a difference.
It really did i was surprised how much 1" made. I also love H110 and reload all my magnums with it.
I have a 629-1. The trigger is simply divine. By far the best trigger of any firearm I own. That includes my Weatherby Vanguard deluxe.
I bet so is this 629 check out my Smith model 10 video I just threw up another great trigger.
I have lever guns in 44 mag, but only 357's revolvers of my own.
Anyway,... I shot a Ruger Super Redhawk hunter with a scope on it from a friend at the range a couple of weeks ago, and I am slowly learning that "I" handle fixed barrel handguns better than I do semi autos. To ME,..semi's flip, like they are trying to get out of my hand. While revolvers (Even the 44 mag, which I MAY purchase from him), throw most of the recoil back at my body, which I REALLY enjoy! It is more like shooting a rifle to me.
Long live the revolvers!!! (lol)
Those long very heavy barrels help them not flip and push back.
Excellent, interesting, informative, and highly entertaining. A true pleasure. Two excellent top notch staple revolvers and made in USA. Fun too!!! Just awesome.
Thank you!
Been hunting for years with my SRH 7.5 44mag. Changed the front sight to green fiber optic and smoothed up the trigger with a spring kit.
That sounds like great upgrades.
I did the same thing and it's perfect
Generally, the heavier gun has less recoil than the light one. It’s always that way.
I do shoot the Buffalo Bore 305 grain Heavy Outdoorsman out of my 5 inch S&W 629 regularly. And Buffalo Bore says on their website that will not damage the gun. They do have an even heavier load, I forget what its called, that can be shot in the Redhawk, but not the S&W. The 305 grains that I shoot are bad ass! There are grizzlies where I live and hunt. I like it over the Redhawk because it is easier to carry . Thanks for a great video!
Something to consider with them is the intended use. If you plan to put bearload such as Buffalo Bore +p+, then the S&W is not an option. Buffalo Bore strongly recommends against putting their hot loads in a Smith; in fact they said they'd stop making the ammo if Smith users continued to do so. They recommend both the Super Redhawk and the Anaconda. I like the look and feel of the newer Anaconda but the Super Redhawk was stronger, so I went with that.
Where did you hear that nonsense? 🤣
I own the ruger super redhawk and want a S&W 629 and I agree with everything you said. Rugers are tanks and S&W are so much more refined.
I have the same Smith, and love it. Have the same Ruger on order. Impressed with the 100 fps increase with the 7-1/2" barrel. I have 4 ports cut near the muzzle end of my Smith. I will be interested to test the muzzle rise difference between the 2 firearms. Thanks for the interesting comparison. I have some 300 grain XTP Hornady cartridges. Shot a few of them in the Smith, but after what you said, I think I will stick to the 255 grain bullets and less for the Smith. The 255 grain Keith (Elmer Keith) bullet, a hard cast semi-wadcutter, is supposed to be the greatest hunting bullet ever made. Elmer used it at a super hot 1200fps in his 44 Special revolver to take elk and moose. Now imagine that same bullet at near 1400 fps in a 44 Magnum cartridge! Elmer is responsible for the 44 Magnum evolution from the 44 Special. Most 44 Special revolvers are designed to fire bullets from 800 to 1000 fps. Note: the semi-wadcutter design is perhaps the fastest bullet design there is from what I have gathered reading reloading/handloading data charts, and it has deep penetration through tough hides.
Great comment Eric thank you, I'm also a big Elmer fan and love hard cast bullets.
480 Ruger is a respectable cartridge but gun writers killed it off.
Rugers are built like tanks! good show Ed!
Yeah Redhawks are so Bad Ass!!
I had a 7 and 1/2 in Ruger Super Blackhawk and a Smith & Wesson 629 deluxe and I moved the Ruger because it had the square trigger guard and busted my knuckles but the Smith shoots real nice for me
Love my super red hawk with 9.5 barrel. Another great video making a little snow art with the red 2 liters!
Too long.
@@PDIcomics not for some people. I might be looking into a .454 Casull in a 9 1/2 barrel.
Sounds like a hunting platform mostly. Take advantage of a stupid-hot magnum.
I own both the Model 29 and the Ruger SRH in 44 and they're neck in neck for accuracy. However the SW has a smoother trigger and is THE one that nails it dead on everytime. I load my own 44 mag with a 240gr JSP with Ramshot Enforcer....best reloads ever
Great comment I agree.
my go to powder for the 44 Magnum is 2400
@@norseman5041 good choice, have you looked at H110 or Ramshot Enforcer? highly recommended
Ammo companies that load +P 44 mag ammo warn to not use +P 44 mag ammo in S&W revolvers. They say to use the +P 44 mags in Ruger and Taurus revolvers.
Both great guns thanks for the video
You're right between those two revolvers it is definitely refinement versus ruggedness although the Smith & Wesson is not what I would call a weak revolver but you definitely between the two more rugged with the Ruger
Did u mean the Smith and Wesson can't shoot 300 grain. Xtp or was that 340 grain . I was confused. I just picked up xtp 300 grain. For Smith and Wesson. Is that ok or will it beaut up the Smith and Wesson .44
I would not think a few boxes of factory ammo will hurt but I would not shoot hot 300+ grainers.
I had a regular Ruger Redhawk years ago. Sold it like a fool to a fellow police officer I worked patrol with. Now I have a scoped 7 in long barrel Ruger Blackhawk .357 magnum. I'm definitely going to buy a super Redhawk with 7 in bbl pretty soon so I can scope it. I'm usually a rifle hunter but I do like to handgun hunt on occasion. I love my Smith revolvers but these Rugers are off the chain strong. The huge revolvers chambered in 454 casull , S&W 500 and like rounds with the short bbls are more like guide guns for bear country in my opinion. See a lot of them in Alaska. I'm in SC so I dont have to worry too much about Polar bears lol. Plenty of black bears and big cats here though!
I see Rugers SRH are just north of 1K$ there great investments.
@@biged7175 they are really fantastic revolvers. I would agree, a great investment.
give me the SRH... and NO the bbl length is NOT the biggest difference, nor the cylinder release mechanism... the increased strength of the ruger is the biggest difference and less felt recoil along with higher velocity is good too... thumbs up
Good comment, both of these guns come in many different barrel lengths, both are excellent.
Very informative, good video. I have that same ruger the only thing I don't like about it is. The rattle from the transfer bar, it drives me crazy!
Send it back to Ruger they will fix it for free, call them first.
Great video Sir! Love the Smith and Wesson!
If you’re just looking at appeal! Just buy the Ruger Redhawk instead of the Super! It’s sleek, but still out performs the Smith! Ruger is win win in both categories..... Just my opinion!
Now I am not hating on Ruger I, I have trying to buy a Redhawk but can’t find any locally. But the only reason the Ruger only 44 magnum loads exist is because rugers have longer cylinders than s&w revolvers and you can’t close the cylinder on the s&w revolver with the Ruger only loads because they are too long for s&w revolvers, and the smith is foraged metal and Ruger is cast, foraged is stronger than cast metal, so the Ruger requires more metal to handle the same pressures that, the s&w revolver is built to handle, Anyways that was cool video keep up great work.
Great comment I'd order one online if there's nothing local.
Super Redhawks with action job and magnaported, crowned and jeweled trigger and hammer, nice!
I own a standard redhawk 5.5in and used to own a 629 6in. I liked the redhawk much more, seemed to handle recoil better, double action trigger better on redhawk, single action better on the 629. The thinner trigger on the redhawk also seemed easier to manipulate and control.
Interesting I think the Ruger is a great gun but prefer my 629 all the way.
The Ruger just didn't really cut it for me. The ejection rod, hammer pull, and trigger had too stiff of an action. Hated how the hammer would scrape along the frame. The S&W just got smoother the more I shot it.
I notice the Smith has the firing pin on the hammer, while the ruger has the whole transfer bar system. Thoughts on that?
My 629-3 smith was made in the early 90's with a hammer spur the new 29's all have transfer bars like the Ruger. To be honest there is no difference that I notice. I do enjoy not seeing the look on the older Smith.
Thank you!
Yeah. Sure is different.
Because he has an older Smith. The ones made for about the last 20 years also have the firing pin on the transfer bar. Older Smiths are awesome.
The main difference is the manufacturing Process; Ruger is Cast Iron and Smith is a forged Steel - thats why the Ruger is beefier and with little bigger Tolerances and a bit heavyier. BTW Dirty Harry's Gun from the 1971 Movie is a Smith 23-2 ;-)
Excellent ,insightful review! Have you ever fired the Ruger Redhawk 7.5 inch? I prefer the Ruger Redhawk Hunter over the Ruger Super Redhawk. Reason being the grip and balance for me the Redhawk is a better fit than the Super Red Hawk. I also like the S&W M29 especially with the 8/38 inch barrel. The 41 Magnum in Redhawk 7.5 and S&W 57 in 6 and 8 3/8 inch barrel lengths are also an excellent choice for hunting handguns. It would be good for Ruger to offer 8 and 8.25 inch barrel revolvers. BTW, yes indeed, Lithuanian girls are some hot magnums!
Underwood says that they're 305 grain long nose hardcast is perfectly fine in the Smith & Wesson 629 so that would probably be about as high as I want to go anyways but definitely in that Ruger I would not hesitate to use that 340 +p+ because that would be seriously you don't need a 454 casull. I will say that 305 grain hardcast from Underwood is plenty for anything you would want to kill even the 1200 lb elk or moose
IMHO have shot both Redhawk (5.5") and 629 (6.5") also S&W model 29 (shoots like manure). I prefer weight/build of Redhawk, thick cylinder walls handle hottest loads (easy when reloading). To me weight = less recoil. Redhawk shoots like 357/9mm easy to keep on target. Also the heavy Redhawk frame can be had in .357, .41, and .45 colt. Great backup gun when hunting.
I own both of these fine revolvers, the smith kicks just a bit less.
My RSRH came with a 9.5 inch barrel. That's why I ordered and purchased it.
They are both really good guns. The Ruger will stand up better to heavy loads.
Not that looks matter as far as the reliability of a firearm, but that S&W is so much sexier than the Ruger.
Yes I agree the Smith looks better.
Rugers are cast steel...they have to,be beef'er to withstand the pressures.
It's true. Yet they are still stronger, despite the cast material (which isn't cheap material and neither is the process cheap). The SRH cylinder is carpenter steel, withstands 90,000+psi test pressures just fine. The frame is cast, but the real weakness with the Smith is not the frame, it's the lack of cylinder lockup points and will be the first place it fails.
The Smith is softer shooting because of the full underlug and full grip frame. The Ruger has a lighter barrel and a small "hidden tang" style grip frame. All of the Rugers weight is around the cylinder for strength and the Smith is evenly distributed for comfort.
Great response I learned something
I have a Ruger with the 9 1/2 in barrel, I had a 629 with a 8 3/8 full lug barrel. I prefer the Ruger, the S&W felt nose heavy. they both worked great for deer hunting. I have killed a lot of bowling pins at 100 yds with open sights with both guns
Good stuff!
Just ordered a 629 classic and I'm so excited to get it
Sweat gun, 6.5 barrel in wood case?
lol awesome intro, when your video starts music is playing, then you start talking and it seemed you were about to rap and it was pretty good!! Maybe you should do that! thanks for the video, learned much
Thank you.
That red Super Redhawk in a 10 inch barrel is wild
Great video!
Thank you P K
It's not a double, single action revolver; it's a double action (meaning you can cock the hammer manually, or just pull the trigger. 2 ways of shooting ergo double action.)
Yeah, I tend to sigh when I hear someone say "double/single action".
The actual actions that make it "double" are cocking and firing.
I get that some people think it necessary to separate it from 'double action only' revolvers, but really that is the distinction. Dbl action only or hammerless, a standard action capable of double and single action should be called simply double action.
True. But that's splitting hairs.
THANK YOU! It drive me insane when they call double action revolvers for ''This is a double action single action revolver'' And that is usually the moment I stop watching.
Hey Big Ed really enjoy your videos I have the same two 44 Magnums you have I love them both I was over at my cousin's house one evening and he drug out and old Sierra reloading manual it was the 2nd addition I could not believe the maximum 44 magnum load of 25.8 of h110 that was printed in that book I could not believe it when I saw
Thank you Tracy, I'll have to check mine and see what the max loads are, it's been a few years Lol
I took a picture of the page. Wish I could send it to you. No wonder they had problems with forcing cones back then with that much powder
Got a Ruger SRH in 480 Ruger. Couldn't sell it because the receiver got cracks in it. ("We don't support that model.") Also its failure to eject with heavier loads was notorious. I have Ruger SBH in 45 Colt, 41 Magnum, and a 4.5 inch 44 Mag. The 45 handles heavy loads pretty well. I run the 41 with 210 grain lloads. The little 44 is nice after I got a wide Hogue grip to spread the plow grip recoil over my hand. The other two Rugers have Bisley grips and are quite comfortable. I wont buy another 480 from Ruger -- I hear their support for any of those is less than stellar. It's a shame, because 480 is a great round for me. It's hard for me to get back on target with a 475 Linebaugh.
Interesting might wanna take a look a S&W in a 460 if you like the monster bore stuff.
I think the use case of the snubby big bores is a "get off me mr. bear".
I understand that, a .38 or .44 special snubby are difficult to shoot and master. I would think a 2" 454, 460 or 500 are close to impossible just saying a smaller .44 mag ext.... with a 3"+ barrel might be a better option because you have a much higher probability of hitting your target.
@@biged7175 maybe it's a get off me mr short face bear?
I'd be curious to see how penetration is out of a 3~" .44 Special with hard cast at typical slow .44 Special speeds.
Or as a carry. Or because they are cool. Or just because this is America and there doesn't need to be a case for a gun.
I think the cylinder length is a little different between the two as well.
I believe your right, you can hand load I bigger bullet in the redhawk.
Well, i have a Super Blackhawk 44 mag and am looking around for either a super redhawk or a 629. I like the addition of double action. I do a lot of reloading (nothing hot) and am leaning toward a SBH. Still thinking abot which it will be
Either one is a great choice, if nothing hot I'd go with S&W
I like my Ruger super redhawk, 9.5" 44 mag! I shoot Garret cartridges which Garret warns to not shoot in the S&W 44 mag. Redhawk all the way!
That's a huge gun probably bigger than some rifles.
@Tony Gutierrez That was a great buy, those revolververs are just about $1K now.
I wish Garrett ammo made loads for the 41 magnum I’d love to put some through my ruger blackhawk
If you buy the Super Redhawk brand new it comes with the rings from the factory
Dirty Harry had a model 29 not a 629
Yes blued steel compared with stainless.
500 mag is like adding a 44 mag and 454 Casull together
I love those two revolver. They are so beautiful. So beautiful make a man want to cry🥲🫵👍👍👍👍👍👍
Rugers have a reputation as being built like a tank. I believe they shoot proof rounds 200% over standard pressure - a full cylinder - before they’re released for sale. I saw a Ruger GP100 in 357 Mag on display side-by-side with a S&W model 29 (44 Mag) the other day. The Ruger was priced ~ $835 and the Smith was tagged at ~ $950. I bring this up because the GP was easily heavier, thicker steel barrels and thicker cylinder steel = all characteristics you mentioned with the Super RedHawk; the Smith, while it shoots a more powerful cartridge, looked anemic next to the Ruger. Yes, the Smith does have a “classic look of revolvers” but the steel in the barrel looked about 1/2 the thickness of the Ruger. I know many people put a premium on the classic look of Smiths - as they do for Colts and reproduction models - but I was practically raised on Ruger. My dad is a huge Ruger fan and has nearly at least one model of every revolver Ruger has produced including caliber and barrel length. Personally, my go to Ruger is my Security Six in 357 Mag. Stainless finish, 4” barrel and trigger as slick as glass - I do believe the previous owner did a trigger job on it before trading it in and I couldn’t be happier. But it will shoot hot loads all day long and you would be shocked at the incredibly light recoil. Anyway, great presentation and I subscribed after watching this one.
Great comment I'm also a big Ruger fan and own many of them. S&W 686+ in 357 L frame will hands down beat any Ruger 357 mag in every category. I've owned one for years great if you can only own one handgun.
Rugers are cast and Smiths are forged. Rugers are still a little stronger because they are bricks but the difference in size doesn't directly translate to strength.
You could always get a Smith & Wesson 629 with an 8 and 3/8 inch barrel
Remember to research the ring size lower medium The front is a high greenmount and the rear is low it tapers off Ruger have a strange way to do these rings four on the front three in the back for example
Once again! Ruger frames are made in a cast. Smith frames are forged. Ruger frames need to be as thick as a brick to handle the same stress as a Smith frame that is thinner. If a Smith frame was as thick as that Ruger Super Red Hawk, you could probably fire a Howitzer 105mm round out of it.
Yes that is correct, I prefer the Smith myself.
ProfessorX45ACP love my smith the Ruger is a clunk of steel The smith is sleek as lighting
@wee bastard78 Please apply critical Thinking skills to my comment.
May I ask then why some max loads are not recommend shooting out of SW even stated in their owners manual. Some 200 gr and 240gr. This is why I must find out for myself, I saw some pics of 629 brown top on reloading accident at my range plus internet I take it with a grain of salt but always cautious dealing with 10mm and 44 magnum
@Kevin the Duck I heard good news about Smith improvements specially their performance center pieces and comp 357mag lines. I only shoots buddies pieces, mine are older designs 686, 625, 610, 19 held up as it should for the last 30+ years took some buck and hogs in my younger year but bruised meat that was my lack of understanding on bullet component selection. Massive exit wound bruised shoulder shot with 357 magnum. This video reminding me I need to get back to building the finally hunting loads using NOS hunting 240gr HP. 200 counts on hand life is indeed short these days my elders reloaders checked out due to Covid very few close wise men left to bounce off informations with
My opinon of both:
S&W has a better trigger but is more complicated and harder to maintain in field conditions. Drop it in a mud puddle in the middle of nowhere and it's basically ruined.
Ruger is less elegant. Has a rougher, slower trigger. But, it is tougher and can be completely disassembled and cleaned in field conditions.
Barrel length doesn't make that much difference. Difference in individual guns and chamber tolerance will make more difference.
I agree an inch of barrel does not make much difference but more than that does. Interesting about field stripping a revolver never thought of that. Makes me wanna buy better holsters, Lol.
Excellent video and opinion is the same as mine on both.
Thank you.
My Ruger came with scope rings. I got the 480.
Good choice.
That's why they make the 460/500 mag. I think the 460 is the ultimate weapon if it also shot the 44 mag as well as the cusuall and 460
I'll pick up a 460 at some point, its better than the 500 you can run 45 colt and 454 threw it.
Can’t shoot 44 mag out of the 460, only 454 and 45LC
@@ap9793
I know. I was saying IF it could it would be perfect. Bit the 454 is very powerful and adequate for any North amer game and even brown bears.
Its rds are $$$$$ expensive.
@@Eddy-gc2vx True! I'm debating between the 460 and the 44 mag Hunter or PC 44 mag right now
Great review I like my Super Redhawk but I hear ya personal preference
I have used H110 and got 1,500 FPS in my reloads Ruger Redhawk
Excellent video
Love my 9.5" Super RedHawk with a Leupold 2x scope milk jugs buster way out. Stop those hogs. I like mine longer gaining fps is an advantage in hunting application. A solidly well built massive on the Ruger. Inner guts rough machining though needs polishing SW sexy smooth lines. Recoil softer shooting is because of Ruger angle of gripping awkward not allowing that target purchase feel so follow up shots not as efficient as SW.
9.5 barrel that's nuts and a real thumper I bet. The Smith is a nicer revolver.
I prefer the heavily built gun that is made to handle hot loads. I would hate to pay a high price only to kill the gun with high pressure rounds.
I have the Super Redhawk and the 4" 629. The Ruger is for hunting and the Smith is for combat.
Good call, Lol on a Smith 629 for combat.
Good job!
why do you gun ''review people'' always make the mistake, ''this is a double single action revolver '' It is a DOUBLE ACTION REVOLVER. PERIOD ! Pulling the hammer back and fire the gun or pulling only the trigger to pull back the hammer to fire the gun only mean it is TWO = 2 = DOUBLE ways to fire the gun. SINGLE ACTION mean it is only ONE way to fire the gun. 1= ONE = SINGLE. Ahhh, I got it out.....
Lol, I'll give you that but many of my videos are ment for newbies that have no idea so I try to explain it will do both.
@@biged7175 It is even more important to teach these people correct terminology. Like, treat every gun as if it was loaded. Hate that term, NO, every gun IS loaded. If we teach people to ''treat'' a gun as if it is unloaded we create a false ''safe'' and they end up shooting their best friend,, because ''I thought the gun was unloaded''
Thats incorrect, the 'double' refers to
means the trigger performs two functions: cocking, and then firing the gun. Not two ways to fire the gun. In a single action, the hammer rotates the cylinder, in a double, only the trigger can rotate the cylinder.
@@int0thew1nd Wrong!
Ed, on the classic 629s from s&w the front sights are removable. Place thumb and index fingers on the front sight and gently pull backwards. Then the front of the front sight should lift up.
I explored this for the 629-4 I recently came into and was looking into the same idea of changing the standard iron sights without the bulk of a full on scope :)
Glad to see this video, keep it up man.
Thank you will do.
I have them both. Prefer the Redhawk as it handles the recoil better.
Super redhawk makes the 629 seem weak. The strength isnt needed but it makes me feel secure when the reloads start getting a bit nuclear.
Yes lol, the Ruger srh also gets chambered for the 454 so I have not problem loading +P 44 mags up.
I prefer the SRH. Less felt recoil when using hot loads. Also, unlike the Smith you can load that cartridge with 26.5 grains of 110 and not have any worries. With the 9.5 " barrel I get a little over 1625 fps using a 240 gr. JHP bullet.
1625 FPS is Wow! But the Smith recoils less with equal barrel lengths.
@@biged7175 not really. The lighter frame allows more energy to transfer to your hand.
As for the hot loads, you should check out the Buffalo Bore 340 gr.+P+ Awesome for wild hogs. One shot and it knocks them down. No getting back up. They don't even lay there and twitch.
@@samueladams1775 Yes the Ruger is heavier but the S&W just has a better shape so its a nicer shooter and yes I've read about those .44 +P+ basically loaded to 454 Casul specs lol. Once i see a box for sale I'll but them and test them in my SRH.
@@biged7175 you can order them directly from Buffalo Bore
@@samueladams1775 But I can't have the shipped to NY I do have a house rented all winter in VT lol.
There's no comparison.
Ruger wins. Hands down.
I'll take the Ruger every day of the week. And twice on Sunday!
I disagree I'm guessing you only own Rugers and never a Smith.
@@biged7175 You guessed wrong. Wanna try again pal?
Ruger every time
Videos is not playing for me just black screen with sound.
It's playing just fine on my desktop, just leave in 1080p
Good video. Surprised that the SRH had that much more velocity. Expected 50-70 FPS. I have the same629 and same length barrel. I hunt with a Ruger Super Blackhawk with a 10 1/2 inch barrel. i can actually tell the difference when shooting out to 100 yards. The longer barrel has more felt recoil. It has something to do with getting full burn inside the barrel, making the energy at the muzzle a bit higher. Higher energy creates more felt recoil.
Yes I agree with you, but the Smith soaks up more recoil that the Ruger I thinks is grips and grip angle.
Bigger difference than barrel length is leaf spring Smith and coil spring Ruger!!!
I think your comments of the velocity comparison between the two revolvers was a bit off base. Differences in velocity can be the result of multiple factors which include 1. Barrel length the only factor you addressed but also:
2. The throat diameter of each of the six chambers
3. Barrel cylinder gap
4. Throating of the barrel
5. Actual diameter, bore and grove, of the barrel.
6. Not to mention changes in powder or components.
The thing about 2 thru 5 above is these can change in every production gun and the next two samples may have the exact opposite velocity figures, Velocity between these two revolvers is a function of the push time the powder has on the bullet (barrel length) and the pressure developed by the burning of the powder and the tighter the tolerances in items 2-5 above will increase pressure and velocity and again these will vary from one gun to the next off the same production line. That is why every reloading manual has the disclaimer that these loads were safe in our test gun but may be different in yours start out 10% low and work up.
I agree with all of your points, i need to condense these video for my time and of the audience. So I try and keep it simple with barrel length but yes not all guys are created equal. Like my Kimber (new) 1911 10mm won't cycle 10mm.......
Both good guns for sure but i remember when Smith and Wesson sold out the others and capitulated to the states attorneys bogus lawsuits in the 90s. Many people boycotted Smith after that...I still do. That and the fact that they're made in Massachusetts. That doesn't fly for this Texan.
I can't argue with that.
I have the super Redhawk 44 mag I love it mostly revolves I shot the super Redhawk 44 magnom and the mine has the ruber and would grips and I don't it has that much recoile I can one hand it without that much musal rise
Also will shoot 44 Russian ! Nice target load smaller than 44Special ! Nice Video . I have shot 320 grain loads out of the Ruger max loads. But the Smith has a nicer trigger and will also blow your head clean off - not your head but some of the punks running around these days ! They wouldn't feel " LUCKY" !
Lol Brain
How did you get a Smith without a Hillary Hole?
Hilary hole that's a first time I've heard that Lol. I bought it used it's a 629-3
The Ruger super redhawk is built like a tank you can shoot heavyweight bullet where you can't shoot them in the Smith Wesson
Nonsense, the S W 629-5 or higher has an enhanced frame and yoke in order to handle higher pressure rounds. Does anyone really think S W will stand by and have their guns berated and not eventually level the playing field?
especially for the cost of the ammo
I like them both 👍🏽