Model 29 for a Ruger Redhawk???

[kid44]

I have a 4" Model 29-3, very nice gun. Considering trading for a new 4" Redhawk. The Redhawk would be my fishing in bear country, hiking/camping gun. I like the Redhawk because heavy loads can be run through it, it is stainless steel and well, Ruger just builds a good gun. I already have a Super Blackhawk and am wondering if trading the M-29 is really a good idea. If I were to trade I would have the Redhawk worked on a bit by a gunsmith, action job, fiber optic front sight, and all sharp corners rounded off
but probably not ported.

Anyone care to offer their thoughts regarding my trade idea?

 

[Kindo]

So, I've had (maybe have?) both. I honestly can't recall if I did ever end up selling my redhawk or not but I know I was considering it for a period of time. I did like the idea of a more robust gun in the ruger, but there was a significant weight difference between the two and/or the S&W just sat in my hand better. I do know for a fact, that my 4" 29 is still sitting in the safe. I reload/shoot somewhat often in the warmer months and can't say that I feel like I'm ever wearing out my 29.

I'd see which feels best for you and points naturally and go with that. Both will be a fine shooting iron.

 

[kid44]

So, I've had (maybe have?) both. I honestly can't recall if I did ever end up selling my redhawk or not but I know I was considering it for a period of time. I did like the idea of a more robust gun in the ruger, but there was a significant weight difference between the two and/or the S&W just sat in my hand better. I do know for a fact, that my 4" 29 is still sitting in the safe. I reload/shoot somewhat often in the warmer months and can't say that I feel like I'm ever wearing out my 29.

I'd see which feels best for you and points naturally and go with that. Both will be a fine shooting iron.

I am looking at the Ruger for (here we go) bear loads. Not that I will ever need them, but the motto of an old boys organization that is currently in deep shit is "be prepared". The organization may not be around much longer but the motto will be.

 

[Kindo]

I am looking at the Ruger for (here we go) bear loads. Not that I will ever need them, but the motto of an old boys organization that is currently in deep shit is "be prepared". The organization may not be around much longer but the motto will be.

I hear ya. I should have acknowledged that in my initial post. I meant to say that firing occasional bear loads through a 19 wouldn't put too much stress on it to make much difference. Shoot some to know what it'll handle like and to practice getting back on target then carry them. It's not like you'll go to the range and go through a box of bear loads.

 

[kid44]

I hear ya. I should have acknowledged that in my initial post. I meant to say that firing occasional bear loads through a 19 wouldn't put too much stress on it to make much difference. Shoot some to know what it'll handle like and to practice getting back on target then carry them. It's not like you'll go to the range and go through a box of bear loads.

Any recommendations for a good hard cast bear load that won't destroy a M29. You are correct, will be shot for practice/handling and hopefully never used for the original intent, that being against a bear.

 

[Crghss]

I would not sell a S&W 29.

I’d just buy another revolver.

 

[Mackay Sagebrush]

So the .44 magnum is a subject matter that I have spent a considerable amount of years, energy, resources, and carpal tunnel development into.


More to follow..

I have spent a considerable amount of time and resources developing my carpal tunnel, shooting the .44 mag. I Have shot it in high volume for more then 25 years now. In fact the last time I ordered, I ordered 2,000 cases to supplement the supply I had developed over the last couple of decades.

For a number of years my only .44 was a Model 29-2 6.5" which saw untold thousands of rounds, and to this days is still in service.

This included a significant number of heavy loads that would absolutely be suitable for bears. The fact is that the very vast majority of people commenting on the strength or fragility of S&W N Frame .44s are simply regurgitating information that they have read on the internet, and it is not personal first hand knowledge gain through personal experience. Most read an article, penned by an author, who themselves is only offering an opinion that is not based on experience.

I have shot many tens of thousands of rounds through S&W N Frames, Ruger Redhawks, Blackhawks, etc in .44 caliber, and can attest that the N frames can stand up to substantially more punishment than what many think.

I routinely hunt small game (mostly jackrabbits) in the winter, after big game season is over. I do so using .44 magnums, just to add to the challenge. I have killed literally thousands of them this way over the years.

More to follow...

 

[BAKPAKR]

Any recommendations for a good hard cast bear load that won't destroy a M29. You are correct, will be shot for practice/handling and hopefully never used for the original intent, that being against a bear.

A long, long time ago, I shot a couple of elk with a 4” 629 using hardcast 245 gr Keith type SWCs over a max load of Unique. The bullets exited on broadside shots. Most of my practice was with 8.0 gr of Unique, and I did quite a bit of practice back then.

My theory behind using Unique was that it would be more efficient in the relatively short barrel than the H110 I used in longer barreled 44s. When I was doing that, I didn’t have a chronograph so I don’t know if I was right or wrong. The load worked though.

 

[Mackay Sagebrush]

We also do a bit of long range revolver shooting with the .44.

Here is the target board. It is 780 yards from the bench at my cabin.

And some shooting on a dry lakebed a few years back. As I recall, we went out to about 500 or so yards that day. I was using a Model 29 and a coffee can that held 550 rounds of ammo for that trip.

You can just see the targets lined up.

 

[Mackay Sagebrush]

While these days I specifically relegate certain guns to certain loads, such as a Redhawk to a 300 grain XTP, and a 5" M29, to a 240 grain hardcast, I would not hesitate to use a Model 29 for everything.

The fact is that you don't need to use maximum loads for bears, and in fact it is ill advised, as your shot-to shot recovery times are going to be slower. A good 300 grain hardcast at 1,000 FPS instead of 1300 FPS is going to right through any bear and be considerably more manageable.

I get together with some people from the firearms industry semi frequently at an individuals place and at least once or twice a year during revolver shoots, we do "bear drills". The guys with the ridiculous loads, and single actions, pretty much never complete the drill in the very short time frame. The .45 Colt and .44 Mags loaded to more reasonable levels, shot through double action guns, tend to be the better options (for revolvers).

 

[Mackay Sagebrush]

To further answer your question, as one who has both Redhawks in multiple barrel lengths (including a 4" and Model 29s (including 4"), if I had to choose just one for use in the mountains, and packing, I would opt for S&W.

While the Ruger is a rock solid, TANK of a revolver, it is a heavy gun, and I find that I don't carry it as much.

For me, the 5" Model 29 has shown it will handle everything large and small.

Just by proper ammo selection.

 

[eLightfoot]

To further answer your question, as one who has both Redhawks in multiple barrel lengths (including a 4" and Model 29s (including 4"), if I had to choose just one for use in the mountains, and packing, I would opt for S&W.

While the Ruger is a rock solid, TANK of a revolver, it is a heavy gun, and I find that I don't carry it as much.

For me, the 5" Model 29 has shown it will handle everything large and small.

Just by proper ammo selection.

your're really making me want to shoot my minty 6.5" Pre 29. Nice work sir

 

[kid44]

While these days I specifically relegate certain guns to certain loads, such as a Redhawk to a 300 grain XTP, and a 5" M29, to a 240 grain hardcast, I would not hesitate to use a Model 29 for everything.

The fact is that you don't need to use maximum loads for bears, and in fact it is ill advised, as your shot-to shot recovery times are going to be slower. A good 300 grain hardcast at 1,000 FPS instead of 1300 FPS is going to right through any bear and be considerably more manageable.

I get together with some people from the firearms industry semi frequently at an individuals place and at least once or twice a year during revolver shoots, we do "bear drills". The guys with the ridiculous loads, and single actions, pretty much never complete the drill in the very short time frame. The .45 Colt and .44 Mags loaded to more reasonable levels, shot through double action guns, tend to be the better options (for revolvers).

I have heard, and read that by increasing velocity once you get to a certain point all you are really doing
is increasing muzzle blast and recoil with no real gain kin killing power. Is 300 grain the minimum bullet size recommended for bear?

 

[Mackay Sagebrush]

Part of this depends on what kind of bears we are talking about here.

If you are thinking black bears, I would have no issues with 240 grain hard cast SWCs.

For Ursus HolyShitus (Grizzly) I would opt for a 300/300+. That being said, I would not feel poorly armed, if all I had were my standard 240/250 grain SWCs. Hard cast bullets penetrate extremely well, and break bone well.

The elk pictured above was killed at just slightly over 100 yards with a single 300 or 320 (I cant recall now off the top of my head) hardcast bullet. I got complete penetration, with the round exiting the offside (double lung shot) of the bull.

The projectile on the far right is a heavy hardcast that would work well, and be suitable, pushed by 10 grain of Unique. It will not be particularly punishing to shoot, and be suitable for your S&W.

 

[Mackay Sagebrush]

As an example of penetration capabilities (and I will note I rarely hunt pigs) it is advised not to shoot boars in the shoulder due to their rather thick subcutaneous layer of tissue, commonly referred to as the shield or shoulder plate.

That is precisely where I popped this one with a 240 SWC pushed by 10 grains of Unique, and it zipped right through, dropping the boar his tracks.

I wiped away the snow and you could see the grey smear of the bullet where it entered.

 

[Marbles]

I use Garrett Hammerheads in my 44 mag M29 mountain gun. I have a Ruger Super Redhawk Toklat in 454 (also load Garrett's in it). The workmanship of the S&W is very nice. I literally used a screw driver to scrape burs off the Ruger's frame the first time I removed the grips.

I would keep the M29, the only reason for a Ruger is if you want something bigger than 44 as the X frames are larger and heavier than I would want to carry.

I have thought about getting a 44 Redhawk, but that would only be to have Bowen convert it to a 500 Linebaugh (don't want the recoil of the 475).

Keep the S&W.

 

[Capman]

I have a 4" Model 29-3, very nice gun. Considering trading for a new 4" Redhawk. The Redhawk would be my fishing in bear country, hiking/camping gun. I like the Redhawk because heavy loads can be run through it, it is stainless steel and well, Ruger just builds a good gun. I already have a Super Blackhawk and am wondering if trading the M-29 is really a good idea. If I were to trade I would have the Redhawk worked on a bit by a gunsmith, action job, fiber optic front sight, and all sharp corners rounded off
but probably not ported.

Anyone care to offer their thoughts regarding my trade idea?

Both are good guns, can't trade either. I'll just have both. But personally i prefer the Redhawk.

 

[thinhorn_AK]

I have a 4" redhawk, I dont carry it around much anymore but it does make a good woods gun.

 

[kid44]

I use Garrett Hammerheads in my 44 mag M29 mountain gun. I have a Ruger Super Redhawk Toklat in 454 (also load Garrett's in it). The workmanship of the S&W is very nice. I literally used a screw driver to scrape burs off the Ruger's frame the first time I removed the grips.

I would keep the M29, the only reason for a Ruger is if you want something bigger than 44 as the X frames are larger and heavier than I would want to carry.

I have thought about getting a 44 Redhawk, but that would only be to have Bowen convert it to a 500 Linebaugh (don't want the recoil of the 475).

Keep the S&W.

Looking at Garrett ammo and have had a conversation or two with Ashley Emerson, owner of Garrett Cartridges now. Leaning towards the 250 gr. Defender lineup, I think they would do just fine in the lower 48. I too have a Toklat, nice gun but brutal recoil.