I debated about which revolver I wanted as well. I chose the double action for one reason. It is easy to unload when I leave the stand and get to the road. I hunted wildlife management areas mostly and must unload my gun as soon as I reach the road. I like being able to push one button and dumping six rounds into my hand versus turning a cylinder and pushing one out at a time. When you go in and out the woods as much as I do I liked the convenience. I only shoot it as single action. One down fall is there is no good hip holster for a super redhawk. I use a shoulder holster. I enjoying shooting my revolver and hunting with it. I put a scope on it but took it off because I like iron sights in heavy cover. I will recommend the ghost sights. I tried it this weekend and wow it was amazing.

I agree and not really a good one for the Redhawk. I've always found both to be too heavy for comfy carry on a belt...

That's one reason I love a SA gun. Like Taffin's quest for the perfect packing pistol.

My Redhawk isn't heavier than my FA83 and both carry well on the belt, but neither has a really long barrel and both have open sights. One of the keys to comfortable belt carry is a good belt that can support a revolver well. I have a Galco holster for my Redhawk that is pretty nice. When you cut the barrel back on a Super Redhawk they also become much easier to carry but definitely more cumbersome with a 7 1/2-inch tube.

I didn't figure I would use a belt holster anyway. I plan to put some kind of optic on it and I figured that would make it too heavy. I'm not a fan of pulling my pants up every few seconds. I figured I would have to have some sort of shoulder holster.

I can see a little size difference in the SRH vs. SBH. But mine literally weight within a couple of ounces of each other.