Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns 44 Rem. Mag.

I plan on purchasing a 44 revolver. I have a marlin 1894P in 44 and want to have a compatible side arm. I have decided that I want a Ruger, but don�t know if I want to get the Red hawk or the black hawk. I am not planning to put a scope on this pistol. So, I guess the question boils down to: double action or single action?

go with the redhawk, you can shoot it single action if you want to. and it gives you the option of double action. if you never plan on putting a scope on the redhawk is fine. if might ever think about getting a scope go with the super redhawk because it comes ready with the mounts.<P>------------------<BR>"and I ain't got no money but I damn sure got it mad cause I ain't askin nobody for nothing if I can't get it on my own. If you don't like the way I'm livin you just leave this long haired country boy alone"<BR>Charlie Daniels<P>"I got a shotgun a rifle and a 4 wheel drive and a country boy can survive" Hank jr.

I gotta shotgun, a Redhawk, and a 2 wheel drive, will that work? Lonerider

yeah lonerider, you should probably be ok with that. the rifle is nice for longer range shots. and it depends on how you use your vehicle, I need the 4wheel drive with the snow and I take mine off road quite a bit. I'm not real familiar with the terrain down in the carolinas so I don't know if 4x4 is neccessary or not. I can't find any problem with the redhaw because I have one myself and it has been good to me.<P>------------------<BR>"and I ain't got no money but I damn sure got it mad cause I ain't askin nobody for nothing if I can't get it on my own. If you don't like the way I'm livin you just leave this long haired country boy alone"<BR>Charlie Daniels<P>"I got a shotgun a rifle and a 4 wheel drive and a country boy can survive" Hank jr.

Hey Rock everybody in the carolins has a 4wd truck or SUV and we don't get no snow. And most everybody has a rifle but only a .270 or a 30-06. Not a lot of handgun hunters around here. My 2wd truck I use to get around on my 33 acres and I don't have any trouble unless it rains and the clay gets slick. I like that Hank Jr. tune used to sing it a lot when I was singing in a band.That Redhawk is great,but I have other handguns for the longrange work. Been in your area lots of times before I moved here from western N.Y. state. Stay clear of the wire, Pard Lonerider

LoneRider, I lived 45 min outside Charlotte,NC while going to college. Seemed to me that everyone had a low rider and a 7 Rem Mag for those monster deer down there. Sean<p>[This message has been edited by LoneEagle (edited February 14, 2001).]

Yea them younguns all got them lowriders and da big guns, it's us older more suffistacated fellers wif da suv's and 4wd's. But we alls gots duels stickin' out da back of 'em. Racin' country down here, ya know. Them yougsters can take them 7maggies, I'll stick with my handguns. Lots easier to tote around. And you are right about them BIGGGGGG deer down here. Man I saw a monster the other day and he was almost as big as the jackrabbit naxt to him. Lonerider

Ah yes, .44 Magnum revolvers � my favorite. They must be, I�ve owned upwards of a dozen.<P>Super Blackhawk � the long grip absorbs recoil well. Maybe absorb is the wrong word, controls recoil is a better description. Some folks get whacked on the knuckle by the square guard, but I�ve never had that problem. The 7 �� barrel makes hitting fairly easy. It is not too heavy, but heavy enough. Beware the 5 �� or 4 5/8� versions. They tote real nice and kick like freaking mules. Remember the .44 operates at about 40,000 psi, that much hot gas out of a 5 �� barrel or shorter makes things, shall we say, interesting. Well, I�ll write interesting, if I said it you wouldn�t hear it . That extra 2� of barrel really domesticates the .44. The Blackhawk line comes with real average triggers, but install a Wolff 30 oz. trigger return spring for about 7 bucks and have a decent smith stone the trigger/hammer and the trigger pull can get downright respectable.<P>Redhawk � this is heavier than the Super Blackhawk so it weighs on your belt more. I have had three over the last 18 years or so, one 7 �� and two 5 �� models, and always sold them because that grip shape really punished the web of my hand. All three were accurate, one very accurate. When Ruger created this model they came up with a really nice way of handling the double action pull. Okay, that�s nice. But on a .44? Most people will shoot this thing single action most of the time. The pull can be lightened on this one as well, but I seem to recall my Blackhawks always responded a little better to a trigger job. Again though, that grip will not roll up, all the recoil of that .44 is placed squarely into the web of your hand. Pachmayer makes a replacement grip, but it is very big and round. It helps recoil a lot, but unless you have really big hands it feels awkward. I had an N-frame Smith Model 629 and it was much less punishing than the Redhawks.<P>Super Redhawk � very heavy. Very, very accurate, at least mine was with a 7 �� barrel. The barrel is much thicker and heavier than the Redhawk which puts the weight out front where you want it. Too much to call it a general �packin� gun�. The straighter shape of the rubber grip combined with the weight really tames the .44�s recoil. This is kind of a specialized hunting rig. It is so dang big to carry in a holster that you might as well scope it. If you don�t plan on carrying your handgun in a holster I�d recommend this as the one to take if you really want to hit what you�re aiming at. It can be had with a 9 �� barrel, that should be a real shooter.<P>Well, that�s my pros and cons. I would recommend the Super Blackhawk over the Redhawk, mostly because of the recoil handling. Either model will likely be as accurate as the other, that would be more a factor of the individual gun. If you don�t mind a huge handgun, get the Super Redhawk. I really liked mine, but felt that if I was going to put up with that much gun just as soon to get a carbine, which you already have. Hmmm, now that you mention it, it�s been over three years since I sold my last Super Blackhawk�<P><BR>Need to add a P.S. Look at the Bisley .44 Blackhawk as an alternative to the Super Blackhawk. Can be hard to find depending on where you are and it will cost a bit more, but it handles the recoil even better than the Super Blackhawk. Some folks like it's sort of oddball look and some are turned off by it, personal choice. But, if I were in the market for another .44 revolver this is the one I'd get.<P>Another P.S. I keep talking about recoil for a reason. One thing the .44 has is rearward inertia. Full power loads get your attention no matter which handgun you choose. I imagine you've fired one before, but recoil level is a decided factor in my enjoyment of a handgun. Today we have .454 Casulls, Linebaughs and such so folks tend to look down and pooh-pooh the .44 as a pussycat in comparison. Right, and compared with Mike Tyson's left hook Roberto Duran's punches are love pats. Still wouldn't care to receive either of them. So I'll reiterate - if you want to really tame recoil get the Super Redhawk. If you can stand some blasting and bucking but want it re-directed somewhat get the Super Blackhawk and better the Bisley. That Redhawk, while a fine revolver, just never did like me nor I it.<p>[This message has been edited by Jim in Idaho (edited February 14, 2001).]

Jim,<P>A good synopsis of the 44's. I really like my sbh, but thats kind of a misnomer, as I shortened it to 4 5/8", modified a Herret grip to resemble the bisley, and rounded out the trigger guard. Unfortunately ruger doesn't make what many of us refer to as the six gun, and thats a 5 1/2" bisley, preferably in stainless. You can get a 5 1/2" bisley vaquero and have adjustable sights added, or get a 5 1/2" super blackhawk and swap grips, but despite lots of folks wanting this combo, Ruger has yet to introduce it. <P>As far as barrel length on the blackhawks, here is my personal view, the 7 1/2" barrels are too long to carry on the hip, and they are too heavy for off hand shooting, though from a rest, the extra sight radius is nice. The 5 1/2" is perhaps the ideal length for offhand shooting, and is also short enough the carry on the hip. The 4 5/8" barrels pack the best, and look great, but the balance is neutral as opposed to slightly barrel heavy for the 5 1/2, and so they are a little harder to shoot well offhand. It really comes down to how you see a revolver being used. I carry a revolver as generally a backup to a rifle, so I want something light and compact, and find the shorter barreled gun fits my needs better. If I were taking shots at 100 yds, I'd want the longer barrel, inside 50, I want the shorter barrel.<P>As far as velocity, you loose ~30 fps/inch, so only 100 fps going from the 7 1/2 down to the 4 5/8" So don't worry about loosing a bit of speed with a shorter barrel, it'll shoot clear through anything you'll use it on with proper bullets.<P>You make an interesting point regarding recoil. Even from my short tube I've pushed 300 gr bullets 1300 fps, and while no 454, that is substantial power and recoil. That is with cast bullets, you can't push jacketed bullets nearly that fast. <BR>

Yes, I have shot a 44. It was a superblack hawk with the 7 1/2-inch barrel. I think I will probably go with a shorter barrel (as this will primarily be a back up gun) and I don't want to lug around any more than I have to. I am probably going to get the bisley with the short barrel and have Ashley express sights and a big dot front sight added. Thanks for all of the help, as I truly am a "new guy" to all of this hunting stuff.<p>[This message has been edited by Newguy (edited February 14, 2001).]

Newguy,<P>If I were to do it right, I'd get the 5 1/2" stainless bisley vaquero, but go with the patridge sights. The ghost ring and dots work well on rifles, but handguns work better with the partridge sights. If you had a barrelband front sight fit, it would really slick, and even add a tad more barrel weight. <P>Check out Monte's sight for some interesting six guns <P><A HREF="http://community-2.webtv.net/lneta/WelcomeToTheAlaska/index.html" TARGET=_blank>http://community-2.webtv.net/lneta/WelcomeToTheAlaska/index.html</A> <P>I've fired the aptly named Thor's hammer, 3 3/4" 500 linebaugh, and even though they were only 400 gr 1200 fps loads, it was vicous!<P>

458 Lott,<P>The sight I was thinking of is a V (big vee) with a line down the middle. I have never used one or seen one "in real life", I have just read about them. They have a line down the middle at the point of the V and you line up the front sight (the base of the dot with the top of the line). It is supposed to be very fast for close range shooting.<P>Greg<BR>

458 Lott,<P>You and I are definitely on the same wavelength. I've given up the .44 in favor of the .45. Nothing at all against the .44, but just wanted something that operated at a little lower pressure. The .45 will rear up a bit with heavy loads, but the muzzle blast is not quite as bad. Seems to me that blast was bothering me more than the physical recoil.<P>Anyway, I've settled on a 5 1/2" Blackhawk as my main handgun. I think that length is just right for carry-ability and shoot-ability. And I too wish Ruger would come out with a 5 1/2" Bisley with adjustable sights. That would be about the perfect sixgun.<P>Newguy, not trying to put you off of a shorter barrel. As stated above, I concur fully that for a "packin'" gun that is just right. I usually loaded 9 grains of Winchester 231 over a 250 grain cast bullet for right at 1000 fps from my .44's. Made a good field load without too much blast. But load Elmer's classic 22 grains of 2400 over a 255 cast semi-wadcutter and watch out, Martha! When I wanted to get serious I'd load it to 21 grains or 18.5 grains, depending on how I was feeling that day.<P>Not to get too wordy again, but my philosophy has changed a bit over the years. Lower velocity but heavier bullets. Keeps that muzzle blast down and lessens that real fast, whippy recoil. Makes it more shovey, if that's a word. All Elmer Keith was originally aiming for in his heavy .44 Special experiments was a 250 grain slug at 1250 fps.<P>Sure those .454 level loads are good for most dinosaurs, but I think a good heavy slug at 1200 fps or so is about all you need for most anything you'd use a handgun on. Hell, the original Colt blackpowder load of a 250 RNFP at 950 fps was considered just the ticket for dropping your horse if your foot got caught in the saddle and the horse was about to drag you to death.<P>I think you're on the right track with a 5 1/2" .44, though. At least you can get a lot wider variety of heavy factory loads than a .45, like Federals Cast Core, they load that to right around 1250 fps. Also you can get Nosler Partitions for the .44, those should be pretty awesome.<P><BR>

Newguy, I've owned a Ruger SuperRedhawk 9.5in barrel UNBELIEVABLE accuracy recoil like a 38 k frame. Went to a 6.5 in Smith and Wesson. Good accuracy more recoil. Next stop a Redhawk 5.5in with the express sights. Good accuracy less recoil than the smith built like a tank. Fastest on target. Now I have a 4in Colt. Balanced like the Smith, more accurate than everything except the Super Redhawk, recoil like the Redhawk. Notice a trend? Shorter barrels. Get the Redhawk with 5.5 or the shortest SuperBlackhawk.<P>------------------<BR>ABM!

If I could make one suggestion: Be especially choosy about barrel length. I have not read all the posts on this topic but I have seen 9.5", or 7.5". I owned a Bisley .41 Mag. Great Gun very accurate but even though I am 6'4" I did not really like the barrel length. I always had mine on my belt. Very hard to sit in a truck like that. A couple years ago I bought a SS SBH w/the 5.5" barrel. I was living in NC at the time and then (don't know about now) they had a minimum 5.5" barrel for big game hunting. In Vt no minimum length but I don't think I would go any shorter. I can sit in my truck with it on my belt and I doesn't try to prop me up. Just my $.02 worth, good luck. Sean

I had a 7 1/2 Super Blackhawk but that long barrel was just too much to pack in a hip holster. I sold it and bought a 4 5/8 Super Blackhawk which is a lot easier to pack. Jim in Idaho is right about the recoil of the shorter barrels being worse than the longer ones. Mine has the round Blackhawk trigger guard grip frame which is a little shorter than the square SBH grip frame and that make the recoil seem worse. Most of my shooting is done with lighter loads and I save the heavier loads for hunting. I just bought a Bisley grip frame, trigger, and hammer to help with the recoil but I haven't got it yet so I can't say how much it helps. Even though the recoil is a little worse I like the shorter 4 5/8 barrel a lot better than the longer 7 1/2. I've handled a couple 5 1/2 inchers but I like my 4 5/8 inch model better.

Both the Redhawk and the Super RH have scope models available last time I checked.<BR>I debated the same issue some years back, and bought a stainless SBH 44 mag, with a 5.5 inch barrel, rounded trigger housing. Fine revolver, but it was awkward... the barrel was too long to be short, and too short to be long. The 5.5 inch compromise-length didn't fit my desires, so I sold it and bought a stainless BH 45LC with 7.5 inch barrel. I wanted all the velocity I could get. And it carries on my hip just fine. <BR>The advantage with a double action, is one can reload the cylinder faster. ~~~Suluuq