S&W 629 versus Super Red Hawk Hunter

I have been wanting a 44 mag for a while and the stars may just align in the next month or so to make it happen. The original eye catcher was a S&W 629-6. I originally thought it was a classic with the full underlug but it just had the standard underlug. Relizing it balanced well without the full underlug has me relookimg at Red Hawk Hunter model (the non Hunter models with short underlug and round barrels just don't do it for me). I still have to get some more hand time but hoping you guys can share the good the bad or the ugly with either. I will more then likely feed it a main diet of moderate Keith style semi-wadcutters and the occasional box of full bore ammo to take hunting. If price was the same which is going is one better(more accurate) then the other or is it mainly just personal preference? Thanks for the help sorry for the novel!

With the diet you will be feeding them it will all boil down to personal preference. Both will do an excellent job however I think I could get the better trigger out of the Smith. If you are considering hot rodding them at anytime I would lean towards the Ruger.

Or if you have my particular disease get both:drinks:

BHIll ...both that idea is good on paper until my wife uses one on me. Lol. The Smith I was looking at did have a really nice stock trigger already.

I think it boils down to how much you will pack it. You can wear the Redhawk out if you are a determined individual who thinks reloading data is only a suggestion. The Smith will shoot loose with a continued diet of warm loads. Will you have it on your hip in rough country for 5 miles a day? 629 wins all the time, only at a range and tree stand the Ruger does it for that, IMO.

I've had 2 629's and a SRH. I'm Ruger fan first, but the Smith does have a superior trigger IMO. I shot 300 gr. boolits at IHMSA matches and the SRH is a joy to shoot, at the end of the day your shooting hand shoes no wear. If packing, the 629 would be my first choice.

I have both a Redhawk and a S&W Mtn Gun in 44 Magnum. F-250 4x4 vs. Mustang GT. I don't push Lyman #429421 or #429244 past 1200 FPS in any S&W 44 Magnum. In the RH or SRH, those loads are almost docile. Gianni above was right on the money.

What are you setup to reload?
Do you plan on buying more 44cal firearms in the future?

ruger ='s .432"
s&w ='s .430"

Years ago I owned a marlin 1895 & a ruger sbh (excellent combo), both in 44cal. They both ate .432" cast bullets. Bought a s&w 624 and it also shot .432" bullets. Later on I ended up with different contender bbl's and a 629 and they were extremely accurate with .430" bullets. Add to the mix I've always owned ca bulldogs and the 1's I've owned preferred .430" bullets. Slowly thinned the herd and now I only cast/size .430" bullets for the 44cal's (down to 3 of them).

Kind of a dumb way to decide which firearm to buy/choose. But you have to feed them after you buy them.

Currently on the same fence. Looking at another 44 magnum. The 629 has a great trigger and shoots accurately. I personally am not a Ruger fan simply because I don't like the looks or the trigger pull. Sure the Ruger is stronger but then again who shoots full house 44 mag loads every time out? To me the S&W is a highly tuned watch and the Ruger is a pocket watch. If the Ruger had a decent trigger pull I would probably purchase one but until then I'm aiming at the 629 or a decent 29.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Forrest r

What are you setup to reload?
Do you plan on buying more 44cal firearms in the future?

ruger ='s .432"
s&w ='s .430"

Years ago I owned a marlin 1895 & a ruger sbh (excellent combo), both in 44cal. They both ate .432" cast bullets. Bought a s&w 624 and it also shot .432" bullets. Later on I ended up with different contender bbl's and a 629 and they were extremely accurate with .430" bullets. Add to the mix I've always owned ca bulldogs and the 1's I've owned preferred .430" bullets. Slowly thinned the herd and now I only cast/size .430" bullets for the 44cal's (down to 3 of them).

Kind of a dumb way to decide which firearm to buy/choose. But you have to feed them after you buy them.

---

Interesting. I'll have to contact my brother who owns a Red Hawk Ruger 44 mag and see how his bullet diameter is getting along. I think he purchases .430 for his Ruger and his Beasley.

Smith based on your criteria. And it's prettier with a superior trigger. The first .44 Magnum set the bar for "Classic".

The S&W is typically more refined out of the box and less weight. If 240 grain bullets suite your needs I would go with the Smith. If you want to use heavy for caliber bullets I would go with Ruger. A trigger job on the Ruger won't set you back far.

I have a 29-3, a 629-(8 ?), a Redhawk and a super Redhawk. All of which are excellent shooters. If you plan on going to bear country and carrying this gun I would go with the Super Redhawk. I have put some very high pressure rounds through mine without any ill effect. If it is just going to be a range gun for fun and pleasure, get the one you can afford. The S&W will always bring more money in a resale then the Ruger.

Thanks for all the insight. Most of the hunting I do is WI whitetail and I stand hunt about 80% of the time and probably walk close to a mile at max other times, so weight doesn't make much of a difference. This would be my first .44 magnum so .430/.432" is not to big of a deal. At this point I do not have a lot of doubles in calibers so there is a good chance this would remain my only .44 magnum.

Gianni when you say it shoots loose, this is my concern with the 629, how much and how hot of loads would it take to be noticeable? My guess is its main diet would be 180-240 bullets with CFE Pistol, Win 231, Unique ect for powder. Plus maybe 100-250 "full power" H110/240 bullets to practice for hunting season and actually hunting. If I go to the range to shoot it for fun I would probably go through 2-300 rounds each trip a couple times a month.

On a side note I have a GP100 that I polished and swapped springs and it has a pretty good trigger... but that Smith's was beautiful.

Being that the Smith I am looking at is a -6 how hard is it to pull the internal lock and fill the Clinton hole?

I have a 686-6 with the lock. It has no effect on anything in my opinion the trigger is fantastic. I don't see a need to do anything with it. The 629-6's that I have tried were great and NO different trugger wise than the 29 I shot.

As far as shooting loose, my 6 inch M29 no dash has been pushing lead (240-250 grain) for many years with no degredation. I bought it used many years ago so can't say what the first owner did to it but I have not hot roded it. The critters I have shot with it stayed shot so, for me, it has plenty power with standard loads. The trigger and action are superlative and in a class not to be achieved by a Ruger. Decide if you want a fine handgu or a piece of field artillery.

06
I have a m29 and shoot it all the time I do not believe that a Smith will
shoot loose with normal shooting
I don't shoot heavy boolits though ,over 260 or so grains
if you try and shoot a day at the range with full packed to the top case full of h110 out of it
your gun will not be the only thing complaining
buy what you like but for me Ruger has not had a good track record

I don't care for the Super Redhawk--It's too heavy to suit me. I have a 29-2 8 3/8 and a 7.5 Redhawk that I hunt with. The 629 will most likely have a better trigger. If you are concerned about Buffalo roaming in your home, the the SRH can withstand loads that will beat the smith up. Personally, I'd go with the Smith.

Some years back, I read a quote by the late Elmer Keith concerning the use of his #429421 in the Model 29-series S&W revolvers--"1200 FPS is all you need". He was not real happy that the original ammunition loaded at the time of the caliber's intro in the mid-1950s claimed 1450 FPS. Even with his 240 grain x 1200 FPS loads, he limited himself to about 500 rounds per year to save wear and tear on his hands.

Most folks that buy Ruger large-caliber revolvers celebrate the acquisition in Ruger fashion--by assembling Mastodon Flattener loadings and running them gleefully through their RHs and SRHs. That was fun in my late 20s and into my 30s when I was still immortal and impervious to pain and good sense. And it IS FUN. No doubt about it.

But as I dodder on into my early 60s, it occurs to me that the most-blooded game rifle I own is my great-grand-dad's ranch gun--an 1873 Winchester carbine in 44/40 WCF. In its service years, it accounted for several dozen deer and at least 2 black bears that my grandmother saw getting whacked on our mountain ranch. Any critter stealing her fresh-baked pie from a cabin window sill got his karma leveled mui pronto. Depression years were hard times.

That carbine runs a 200 grain flatnose about 1100 FPS, and that might be optimistic with factory ammo. Still, it made venison and rehabbed bears quite effectively if you respected its range limitations and basketball trajectory. Assessing those Keith-level 44 Magnum loads in THAT light, today's SAAMI-level 44 Magnum ammo at 36K PSI is very close to what Keith sought originally in the caliber. That power level exceeds my old 44/40s specs by roughly 20%-25%. Just sayin'.

90% of my 44 Magnum shooting these days gets done with #429421 running 900-1000 FPS, 8.2 to 9.0 grains of Unique or 9.0-10.0 grains of Herco. The Mtn Gun goes afield about 5x as often as the boat anchor Redhawk, and the RH may be headed to my youngest daughter in AK as a bear dissuader. She is much like her father at age 27--young, strong, full of resolve but perhaps a mite light on caution. The RH would be a good fit for her. Fortuna favorat fortis (Pliny).

I am not really in a position to say but friends that wanted to push 300 grainers at book maximum needed a rebuild inside of two years. Some hand and shim work. I do believe that a Smith wears much faster shot DA than SA. I also think if you keep your loads less than 100 fps than book maximum it will last many years. If you have other concerns ball powders seem to promote throat erosion faster than flake or stick but I shoot a lot of ball.
FWIW, my 5.5" Redhawk, standard not Super has 0.4295" throats.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MT Gianni

[...] The Smith will shoot loose with a continued diet of warm loads.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MT Gianni

I am not really in a position to say but friends that wanted to push 300 grainers at book maximum needed a rebuild inside of two years. Some hand and shim work. I do believe that a Smith wears much faster shot DA than SA. I also think if you keep your loads less than 100 fps than book maximum it will last many years. [...]

---

Unsure as to your definition of 'warm' loads - to me, it appears that you are describing hot loads ??

I don't believe that the 629's will shoot loose with 'warm' loads (any moreso than typical revolver wear&tear), but perhaps we are thinking of different levels.

My father's pre-M29 (~1959??) was a little loose & did need a timing job, but 50 years in the Alaskan bush with zero maintenance can do that. :)
I am also thinking that Smith has improved their alloys since then as well.

Kestrel, all is hypothetical and subject to change according to the guns preference but right now I plan to load a ~240 grain swc about 1000fps something a hair warmer then a 44 special but we'll below a full case of h110. Next question what is a fair price for used but like new 629-6 or a used Redhawk(not a super red hawk)? I think the LGS was asking $750 for the 629 I like.

There is always the plain ole Redhawk if you don't want quite as much bulk. I am setup for .432" bullets and I like to run some hot loads and 300gr+ bullets fairly regular so I have the Redhawk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guywitha3006

Kestrel, all is hypothetical and subject to change according to the guns preference but right now I plan to load a ~240 grain swc about 1000fps something a hair warmer then a 44 special but we'll below a full case of h110. Next question what is a fair price for used but like new 629-6 or a used Redhawk(not a super red hawk)? I think the LGS was asking $750 for the 629 I like.

---

$750 seems a bit high but I have not been following the market on these revolvers. I would think $650 would be plenty. $750 is about right for a super clean and tight pinned and recessed 29.

I should have mentioned with my first post here that my mind was really already made up to purchase a 29 or 629 and I'm not worried about the Clinton lock on it either because the lock doesn't deter for the guns function and or performance. I'm not worried about the gun shooting loose and if there is a problem I will ship it back to S&W to be freshened up. I personally will probably never shoot full house loads in it and if I feel a need to shoot something nasty I will simply pull out my Desert Eagle 44 magnum with full power loads and blast away.

I would get the Ruger and have it tuned, aka action job, and have Doug work over the cylinder. Once it is tuned, it will be sweet in the field or the range. The trigger on the S&Ws may be better, but everyone I have owned is OK, but lesser compared to my tuned Rugers. I like the look of the Ruger better, I like the design of the Ruger better, and adding the action job puts them in the same ball park $$$ wise. To each their own. You should be happy either way.

The plain vanilla Redhawk is PLENTY of gun for what the OP and also the other shopper in this thread want to use them for. The SRH is heavy and rather large any which way you look at carrying it. the Smith *MAY* have a nicer trigger, and may play well with cast boolits sized .430" but if you have other 44 caliber arms or plan on getting more 44 caliber arms, I think sizing to .432" may be a better universal fit and the Ruger works very well with .4325" throats.

Either gun will put Bambi in the freezer, it's really 6 of one, half dozen of the other to choose between the S&W and the RH. I think the SRH is overkill to compare with the Smith.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kestrel4k

Unsure as to your definition of 'warm' loads - to me, it appears that you are describing hot loads ??

I don't believe that the 629's will shoot loose with 'warm' loads (any moreso than typical revolver wear&tear), but perhaps we are thinking of different levels.

My father's pre-M29 (~1959??) was a little loose & did need a timing job, but 50 years in the Alaskan bush with zero maintenance can do that. :)
I am also thinking that Smith has improved their alloys since then as well.

---

I define warm as the top of the data chart and Hot as outside the data chart.

Hey guys thanks again for all the information. I did realize I actually made a mistake with the post title I meant a regular red hawk originally not the super red hawk. I believe the model I was comparing was the Red hawk Hunter. The silohette is similar to the 629. If the super red hawk had a more traditional looking under lug rather the the frame extension I would like it a lot more, but I just can't get over how the super red hawk looks with the frame extension.

why buy a new gun only to send it out to have it tuned ?
I may be way off base here but when I spend money on a good revo
I do not want to or should have to send it out to have tuned
but that is just me

I send every revolver out to be tuned. Well, I have not touched my Freedom Arms 97. The factory just does not do it right. Typically

Premium Action Job: Includes Parts & Labor

Hone all internal parts and replace springs
Rework sear and hammer for crisp 2 1/2lb. trigger pull
Open forcing cone and polish
Square barrel face
Check cylinder gap and head space
Correct timing and set for application
(optional) Available on standard hammers only and upon customer request. Relieve hammer .007" on each side to reduce drag marks. Then the hammer is machine jeweled or plain polished per customer request.

And I have a lot, a whole lot of cylinders for Doug to hone.

Why not get the best performance??? Leave your revolvers stock. But mine all shoot crazy nice.

Lots of Internet rumors about rebuilding Smiths that are shot a lot with warm loads but I yet to have met anyone who actually had to send one back to Smith.
Besides, if you did, who cares? The newer models are warranted for life.

I own and shoot both brands. But I have never seen an out of the box Ruger that could come to a the trigger pull and smoothness of the Smiths

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snowwolfe

Lots of Internet rumors about rebuilding Smiths that are shot a lot with warm loads but I yet to have met anyone who actually had to send one back to Smith.
Besides, if you did, who cares? The newer models are warranted for life.

I own and shoot both brands. But I have never seen an out of the box Ruger that could come to a the trigger pull and smoothness of the Smiths

---

Ain't that the truth!!!^^^^

Owned the same 629-4 classic for years & shot countless 1000's of rounds in it using anything from mild to wild with 310gr to 162gr bullets and anything from clays to 296. It's nothing more than a beater truck gun, no mods/tweaks/bubba trigger jobs/replacement parts/nada. Showed this picture before, was looking for a plinking load that would do mgb (minute of golfball/1 1/2"/x-ring) @ 25yds. The old beat to death shaken apart 629-4 some how managed to find a couple different bullet/powder combo's that would hold the x-ring @25yds.
[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/BAyAIIY.jpg[/IMG]

I'm sure I could find more x-ring loads but it got boring after finding 13 of them in 2 days. I guess I got lucky and the 629 didn't fall apart in my hands.

So far the box stock 629-4 classic (20+ years/made in 1995) it has provided me with excellent quality range time/x-ring accuracy. Countless plinking sessions, hunted with it & actually still hunt with it to this day using a 1300fps/265gr bullet load using home swaged bullets. I only shoot 400/500 full house hunting loads a year for sighting in, hunting, silhouettes and have for the last 20 years (8000 full house loads minimum and the 629-4 still holds the x-ring).
[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/x6NbstN.jpg[/IMG]
Over the decades I've used that 629-4 for bowling pin shoots, ocassional silhouettes, nra bullseye & hunting and still do to this day. Not only has that 629-4 allowed me to compete in those different shooting sports, that 629-4 have given me the opportunity to be extremely competitive.

Anyway, if you plan on doing some hunting loads to sight your 629 in then hunting with it. The 629 is up to the task. The rest of the year you use the box stock 629 for nra bullseye, bowling pins, plinking, silhouettes or anything else you have a mind to use the 629 for. Shoot the 629 then shoot it some more, after that wash/rinse/repeat.

Sure would be nice if someone would actually say how "THEY" wore a 629 out and what round count it took to do so.

Myself, I have over 8000 full house loads (255gr/265gr bullet with 2400/296) along with 20,000+ rounds of different grades of blammo ammo thru my box stock 1995 629-4 and it will still hold the x-ring on the nra 25yd targets to this day.

Forrest, Thanks for the experience!

There is a gun show that starts tonight so I will be bringing home a 29 or 629 S&W and I just pray to God that it won't fall apart on the way back to my house. Post 32 has done its job on me completely making up my mind and sticking with a S&W. I guess if I wanted something I could also pound nails with if I happened to loose my hammer I would go with the Ruger. Unfortunately for me they look like a industrial *** masquerading as a revolver. To each his own.

" I guess if I wanted something I could also pound nails with if I happened to loose my hammer I would go with the Ruger."

What can you say about "constructive" comments like this? What is ironic is that this directly reflects on the wit of the poster.

I have a SRH an like to practice with what I'll be hunting with. Now that I'm not young anymore and don't hunt I'll just kill my targets with what I have loaded up and start over again.

As I'll probably be buying a S& W model 25 soon I know I'll have to revamp my younger habits of hot loads. It was fun, but now things have changed......


Get the Smith for looks. It doesn't take a whole lot of flying lead to kill a deer.

My SRH didn't have the interchangeable front sight. Odd since Ruger offered the SRH after their RH.

I have a m629-1 with 8-3/8 inch tube purchased NIB back in '87. I won't waste time telling the round count or exactly what all has been run through it except to say it's NEVER EVER Been BABIED or a SAFE QUEEN. Besides the real world numbers would just bring out the ANTI-S&W trolls lol. The trigger return spring has been replaced 3 times, the extractor spring rusted into two pieces, had to replace the extractor rod at that time because damaged it lol that loctite held stout for 20years. It spent most of its life with rear sight bottomed out and it being a leaf spring basically finally cracked between the screws so replaced it. Forcing cone is well etched from heavy loads of slow burning powders and there is a tiny wiggle in cylinder after all these years.
But last time I took it out to play it still averages around 1 to 1-1/2 inch groups @50yds when I do my part and just like it always has since day one it delivers noticeably higher velocities than any revolver have ever tested in its barrel length class

On another note after shooting ,collecting various big bore revolvers and gunsmithing on them all until I retired last year for a new career will make this statement 99.9% of all the QUALITY revolvers that have ever examined with serious wear & tear damage came from neglect and abuse by shooters that shouldn't really be allowed to own guns

As far as strength of the gun is concerned, it sounds like you're going to be shooting softball loads. You're probably LESS likely to break a Ruger, but you really aren't likely to break either one.

Much is made of the Smith trigger over the Ruger, but I've found that if you simply break in the Ruger DA's with a lot of dry firing with a lot of CLP in the guts, you'll have no cause to whine that it isn't a Colt Python.

The Smiths seem to come down out of harder kicking loads a little easier, but for toasty Special loads, you probably won't notice the difference.

My philosophy on the Smith-Clinton locks is this: Won't buy 'em; will always discourage others from buying them; will tell the salespeople why I'm leaving them to rust in their case and hanging out at the "used" section of the counter, and in all other ways that I can discourage manufacture of a product with a mindset of thinking you can make something designed to be inherently dangerous "safe". With any luck, they'll eventually smell the coffee and realize that their top competitor is the gun they made 30+ years ago. Your mileage may vary, but as political battles go, spending your money elsewhere (or not at all) is one of the easier ones we can fight.