I'm much more of a single-action fan than double-action. With that said, I find myself wanting a Ruger Redhawk or Super Redhawk in 44 Magnum. I am leaning towards the standard Redhawk with 7.5" barrel. I have fired thousands of rounds through an old no dash 629 but I would like to get into heavy cast bullets and would prefer to not beat the gun to death.

The other option, of course, is to buy a Bisley SBH but I have never owned a Redhawk so......

Anyway, for you fellas that use a Redhawk or Super Redhawk as a primary hunting revolver, tell me what's to like and not like about the two. This gun is going to be used for hunting so packing around a smaller, lighter revolvers isn't an issue.

So, which would you go with and why?

Thanks

Landrum,

For strictly hunting, with an optic, I would go with the Super Redhawk, no optic the Redhawk. The is a greater variety of aftermarket grips available for the the Super as opposed to the Redhawk (may / may not be an issue, depends on hand size). Both are stronger than necessary for even the hottest loads; and, the cylinders are long enough to seat bullets out farther or use a longer, heavier bullet.

Doc

If planning on running it hard with heavy slugs I would go with the Super, or Bisley. The Redhawk handle leaves something to be desired.

For aesthetics, looks, and feel, I prefer the Redhawk (with barrel scallops if scoping).

For utility..........the Super Redhawk.

I have used my Redhawk to take six does 8,11,35,25,40 and 75 yards using the open sights that came with the gun. Mine has a 5.5 inch barrel which balances very well. I really like it.

There is no doubt that the SRH is a rather large, utilitarian revolver. The RH is a slightly smaller, utilitarian revolver. That's about the only practical difference. In .44M, you'd be well served with either one. Handle (and if you can, shoot) both, and buy what appeals to you.

The standard SRH and RH Hunter feature the Ruger scope ring cut-outs. On my SRH, the corresponding Weigand base mounts VERY securely. I'd opine that if one were to shoot irons only, the RH is fine, but if you're planning on an optic, the SRH with a high-quality base might be a better choice.

I like SA's quite a lot as well and have more than a few. But in all honesty, I shoot DA revolvers much better, and as such I stick to those for hunting.

The SRH has better action and grip for me.

Ive owned a 44 redhawk and a 454 super redhawk.
To me the redhawk with scope scallops will do everything you need.
I didnt ike the feel of the super, felt front end heavy.
Tough as nails though.
Cant go wrong with either.

I prefer the Redhawk over the SRH mainly due to the size difference. I also like the scope mounted on the topstrap as opposed to being mounted on the barrel. I replaced the grips on my Redhawk with aftermarket Hogues and re-chambered from 44 magnum to 429 GNR; a 454 Casull necked down to .44. It will deliver a 240 grain bullet from the 7.5" barrel at 1720 fps.



I simply took a Hunter crossdraw holster and cut out a section for the scope base. Fits prefect.

There is no real size difference between the Redhawk and the Super Redhawk aside from the frame extension. Otherwise it is dimensionally the same size (ignoring the different grip frame). However, they (SRH) do appear like they are much bulkier.

Very true, Max. The Super gets a rap for being large but here my GP100 laying on top of my Super. Very little difference there.

For a utilitarian hunter, the SRH hands down.

The better choice in grips, better design action, easier tuning, and overall build quality make it a great choice.

For scoping, the scallops being a bit farther back helps with the balance of the gun rather than the RH and similarly SBH hunter which put the optic out over the barrel.

Not that there is anything wrong with a RH (I own one of those too) but looks aside, the SRH is a better revolver, not by much, but better none the less.

When the Redhawk came out I retired my Smith 29 8 3/8. The Smith is a beautiful piece but the Redhawk is a work horse. I have taken a few whitetails mule deer one elk and two bear not mention an aray of varmints with it. I carried places that my Smith was just to pretty to take. There is a couple gouges in the side of the 7.5 in barrel that brings back memories of a wreck on a horse that slipped on some ice covered rocks coming down a mountain. The horse went down on its side in a nano second with my leg in the stirrup. A jagged rock cut through the holster and gouged the barrel instead of my leg. I remember thinking how glad I had that Redhawk. The Smith to this day doesnt have a scratch! Redhawk still shoots like it was new. Good Stuff.

the SRH to me is an uggggggly gun compared to my Redhawk but the thing is ,it does the job and mine is in the .454 Casull chambering which is tied for 1st place with me ,the other being my .357 Blackhawk -as far as my favorite calibers,....like I said ,its(SRH) an ugly gun but its tough ,gets the job done-I went with Rugers years ago because of the strength that's built into them ,so I could have max loads
if I wanted to and not worry about shaking em apart.

Now I am considering a Super Redhawk in 480 Ruger. By the way, is the cylinder for the 480 made from the same steel that the 454 is made from? Just curious.

According to everything I read yes, but a phone call to Ruger will verify best.

Yes it is, Carpenter 465. Go for it, Landrum, you won't be disappointed!

That's something I didn't realize(480 cylinder),...interesting

What "Doc with the Glock" said. You can go wrong with a Ruger Redhawk.

johnwilliams, I may have asked you before if so I am sorry for repeating the question. What loud do you use in your 357 Blackhawk to hunt deer with? Thanks Michael

Ravenman,

Do those grips on your Redhawk bolt right on? They sure look nice.

Don

FA83ME: Both grips (Herrett Roper and Nill) on my Ruger Redhawks didn't need any fitting.

The Nills I have on my Redhawk needed just a touch of sanding to fit. I attribute that more to the inconsistency of the Ruger casting than the CNCing of the Nills grips...they are truly a work of functional art.

I vote for the Redhawk. After seeing all these cool grips you guys have I think I "need" a pair. Maybe a Bowen rear sight? After shooting the thing since the 80's. with no complaints with it box stock except having the action tuned. Double action is smooth as glass. Oh the power of suggestion! Thumbs up for the 7.5" .44

Just to make sure; the SRH in .480 will NOT fire the .475, correct?

Correct. Only .480 Ruger.