Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Ruger SRH vs RH trigger reach?

Hey fellas, for those that have shot either and/or current own either is the trigger reach the same assuming same grip handles.

I have medium sized hands/digits and shoot a G20/21SF pretty comfortably.

Looking to move up to 44Mag when heading out to AK and/or grizzly country.

From what I have read so far, the SRH has a potential better trigger albeit ugly as heck.

Thoughts?

Thanks!

A regular Redhawk has as good a trigger as your tuning ability can make it. Most need a little work. I’ve never owned or even shot a Super Redhawk, but I own three RedHawks. All three have as nice a trigger as one could ask for, but all three have been tuned. Reach is fine when fired either single or double action.

The Super Redhawk uses a grip stud as opposed to the Redhawk's grip frame, so there's no way they're going to have the same grips.

The Super Redhawk's grip stud provides distinct advantages. One, you can go all the way down to the small GP-100 grip module. Two. there is no backstrap which requires extra grip thickness to cover.

Another thing I like about the Super Redhawk is that it uses a dual spring mechanism (again like the GP-100) as opposed to the Redhawk's single spring that powers both the hammer and trigger return. This is probably moot. If you don't dick with the springs on either of them. they'll work.

Yes, the SRH is fugly as uck. No matter. For your uses I would grab a Ruger Alaskan, in the caliber of your choice, and never look back.

Thanks for the info fellas!