Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Redhawk Scope Questions

Hello, I'm considering a 44 magnum purchase for pistol hunting, and am strongly considering the Ruger Redhawk Hunter (not super redhawk). I'm new to the pistol scope arena, and don't want to waste funds. I'm leaning toward Burris or Leupold, and am considering the fixed vs variable power. Opinions appreciated. Thx

I can only say what works well for me on my scoped revolvers (44 and 41 mags): leupold fixed 2x long eye relief handgun scopes.

Is there a difference between long eye relief and extended eye relief?

2X Leupold is what I'd get.
Wouldn't mind an old Burris 1X.

Any thoughts on a Burris 1-4? I think they are now discontinued.

I once bought a revolver that had one on it, don't think I even took the scope home. IIRC it seemed bulky and the optics didn't seem that good.

The Leupold fixed 2X works best for me, also.

I have had a Nikon Monarch 2x20 on my SBHHunter for ten years. It is in 41 mag, usually 210's at 1400 fps, but now I am working with 255's.

Bottom line, recoil is pretty darn close to your 44.

The Nikon has held up perfectly. And zero holds well with the Ruger rings after removing and replacing the scope multiple times.

Leupold's 2x is about as good as it gets. Even if you decide not to use it for hunting (IMHO it makes the gun awkwardly top-heavy) it is really useful for load development.

+ 1... There's a 2x Leupold on my 44 Mag. Redhawk and it's gonna stay there. It's perfect for a woods gun.

Pops had a Burris 1-4X on his SRH.
Hated that scope, I yanked it and ran the rig iron sighted.
If I ever have to scope another revolver, it'll get a Leupold 2x

Another vote for the 2X Leupold. I had one on a 7 1/2" Redhawk and I thought it was just about perfect. You can pick up a used one from time to time for a pretty good price. There was one in the Classifieds about a month ago for $160.
http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/10904786/2x_leupold_pistol_scope_FS

I had a 1-4 Burris on a T/C Contender with a 35 Remington barrel and I liked the 2X Leupold a lot better.

2X Leupold works fine for me.

^^^^ bottom picture: that is a FINE looking Redhawk. "Me like-y."

Anything above a 2X is pretty much useless unless on sand bags. Even on bags, it's a lot more difficult than you would think to keep a 4X on target and get a clean break on the trigger.

I prefer a red dot over a scope any day.

I had a Leupold 2X Extended ER on my 480 SRH for about 10 years. I thought it was a little difficult to see through, But I got used to it. The problem I had was that it won't work during the first 15 minutes of light and the last 15 minutes of light........



So I took it off and put a 30mm Ultra Red Dot on it. I love it. It has no magnification, but you really don't need it. What I've noticed with it is that you don't look through it, you look past it at the target and just focus on the red dot. I like it a lot better.

I own a Redhawk Hunter w/ Bowen sights and a LEU 2x pistol scope. It performs exceedingly well on boar and most mid sized game using the BH 240 load. Handles well bare, and with the pistol scope, It will slay bowling pins at a very quick pace out to around 135 yards for me. My last boar w/ this combo was flat out running left to right, and w/ the 2x, I was able to pan w/ both eyes open, and w/ my peripheral vision pick up on a gap ahead between two trees, so to break the shot at the gap and dump the boar. The gap was about 35 yards away, and the boar ran past the gap about 2 yards further back. I was worried the scope would give me issues, vs the fixed sights, on such shots, but the 2x proved a good balance between close and fast vs fairly long and precise.

I do believe the Redhawk to be far superior to the Super when measured in terms of beauty. But, it is a relatively heavy package that required for me to have a ton of trigger time to effectively master so to look easy. I ended up building a custom chest holster w/ a reinforced open top length to clear the scope. Most of the places I hunted were rugged requiring a walking stick as a third leg, and a free hand to clamber rocks when busting out boar. I can deploy the revolver relatively quick w/ strong hand, and then support w/ weak hand using the walking stick as a brace. Not as easy as a speed holster and a lighter and quicker pistol w/ fixed sights and/ or a red dot, but it works and it gives me the luxury of making much longer shots via the 2x optics.

My opinion, more magnification would hurt more than help. Even w/ 2x, such a revolver is now kinda like a dinasour, compared to the newer breed of micro optics and lighter pistol/revolver packages.

I'll be the loan dissenting opinion. I've had Leupold 2x, 4x and a Simmons gold medal 2.5-7 handgun scopes. I've been told the weaver 2-6 handgun is the same as the discontinued Simmons gold medal 2.5-7.

If you really want to stretch what you can do with a handgun and master shooting small groups, then I recommend a 2-6 variable. The Leupold 2x is really a 1.4 and you won't see the minute wobbles that cause a great revolver to shoot good groups. I could never shoot a great revolver to it's accuracy potential with 1.4x, but could at 7 and then just dialed it back to 2x for field use.