Tweaked Ruger = S&W?

[2ndAmendmentNut]

When it comes to double-action revolvers will a tweaked Ruger equal a S&W? Obviously the Smiths will still win the beauty contests, but when it comes to performance is there really a difference? In answer to my own questions I am inclined to say “yes” but I do not have a lot of experience with DA revolvers, so I am curious to hear what you all think.

[lathesmith]

I guess it depends on your viewpoint. A double-action Ruger Redhawk will always handle heavier loads than an N-frame Smith, no matter what you do to the N frame, so in this sense the S&W will never "equal" the Ruger. OTOH, the S&W will always have a smoother action than the Ruger, all other things being equal, no matter what you do to the Ruger. Can a Ruger action be made pretty darn smooth? Yes...Will an N frame handle some pretty stout loads? Yes, again. Choose what's important, and emphasize that.
lathesmith

[9.3X62AL]

Well put, Lathesmith.

I solved the dilemma by buying both makes in some numbers.

[targetshootr]

will a tweaked Ruger equal a S&W?

Nah, but a tweaked Smith won't equal a Ruger. In DA, it's hard to beat a Smith. But just for grins I'd love to have a 45 Redhawk with a 45 Anaconda barrel. And for more grins, a 44 spl Python.. but that one isn't feasible unless maybe it could be turned into a five shot.

[Dale53]

I have an S&W Model 29 (8 3/8" barrel) and a Red Hawk 7½" barrel. Teh Smith has a far better trigger. The Ruger has been tuned but will NEVER equal the Smith's single action trigger.

I have over 10,000 rounds thru the Smith. I have a serious number through the Red Hawk. My practice load with either is a Keith 250 gr bullet ahead of 23.0 grs of H110 and my hunting load is same bullet with 24.0 grs in both guns. 25.0 grs is max. I get 1300 fps with 24.0 grs. One grain below max is powerful enough for me and the guns are holding up extremely well (nearing thirty years with the pair).

My practice is to use the Smith in good weather. I grab the stainless Red Hawk when hunting in bad weather. Both are quite shootable and I have made one shot kills on deer with both.

This is an interesting topic but frankly, it means little. I don't care if the Ruger is stronger - the Smith is strong enough for my uses (I don't shoot pistol silhouette so I am not trying to knock down Rams at 200 meters). The Ruger's trigger is good enough that I have NO problem shooting it. So, while I recognize that there are differences, I really do not care...

Dale53

[Shiloh]

Ruger DA's can definitely be tuned and smoothed up quite nicely.

SHiloh

[big dale]

I have not owned a S&W N frame since the 70's. I stretched the action of all three of them I owned. The 357, the 41, and the 44. I never had that problem with either my Black Hawk, or either of my Superblack Hawks. or any of the three Redhawks I have owned. The Ruger's triggers are not as nice as the S&Ws, but the Rugers are more durable. I still don't think that I used any too hot loads in any of these handguns. If I buy any more of the Super Redhawks, I may have to start buying 3/4 ton pickups.

Big Dale

[anachronism]

Which Ruger & which Smith? Better in which area? Trigger pull? Longevity? Accuracy? You ask a really open-ended question that is impossible to answer without further quantification. What constitutes a winner, and what constitutes a loser, from your perspective? They both do the same things, in different ways.

[2ndAmendmentNut]

Which Ruger & which Smith? Better in which area? Trigger pull? Longevity? Accuracy? You ask a really open-ended question that is impossible to answer without further qunatification. What constitutes a winner, and what constitutes a loser, from your perspective? They both do the same things, in different ways.

I want a good trigger pull with good longevity. Accuracy is important, but I believe that when it comes to accuracy and revolvers the trigger pull really is the biggest factor. I have the 45Colt caliber in mind.

[jh45gun]

I have not owned a S&W N frame since the 70's. I stretched the action of all three of them I owned. The 357, the 41, and the 44. I never had that problem with either my Black Hawk, or either of my Superblack Hawks. or any of the three Redhawks I have owned. The Ruger's triggers are not as nice as the S&Ws, but the Rugers are more durable. I still don't think that I used any too hot loads in any of these handguns. If I buy any more of the Super Redhawks, I may have to start buying 3/4 ton pickups.

Big Dale

So who's fault is that I doubt its the gun. I stretched the frame on a cheap cap and ball gun too but it was my fault shooting too hot of loads in it which is one reason I do not load any load hot anymore.

[Rio Grande]

I never have my revolvers 'tweaked'. I'm too cheap I guess.
I just get used to what I have.
As far as smooth d/a pulls then, I can't say which one 'tweaked' would be better.
I like the pulls on both of them OK. And I shoot primarily double action.

I do know this however, that the Rugers are infinitely easier to take apart for cleaning and lubricating purposes, which could make a big difference.
And the Rugers seem stronger, more robust.
And I don't like that 'lock' that S&W is hell-bent on putting on all it's 'civilian' models.

[anachronism]

I want a good trigger pull with good longevity. Accuracy is important, but I believe that when it comes to accuracy and revolvers the trigger pull really is the biggest factor. I have the 45Colt caliber in mind.

As long as you don't try to make a 44 magnum out of it, the S&W is probably your best bet. Ruger only offers the 45 Colt in the Redhawk, and they can take a bit of effort to get a really nice trigger pull. You can also get a Super Red in 454 Casull & shoot 45 Colt in it. The Super Red is much easier to get a really good trigger pull on than the std model. If you plan to shoot single action most of the time, you could consider a Blackhawk instead. You can get a really nice trigger job done on a Blackhawk, and they're cheaper too.

[2ndAmendmentNut]

Thank you for all the excellent advice. Now I just wish those Super Redhawks were not so butt ugly. Is there anyway to improve a SRH’s looks?

[MakeMineA10mm]

A buddy and I once had a shoot-off. He thought I was getting too big for my britches, and he'd been practicing shooting a lot and wanted to take me down.

He was armed with his Ruger GP-100 (that he had been practicing a lot with and was very comfortable/reliable with) and I with my S&W 686 (which I had just gone through the academy with and shot two back-to-back perfect qualification scores).

We bought 100 rds of factory Federal 38 Spl. +P LRNs off the same shelf, so there'd be no difference in the ammo. (He thought I'd cheat and load up some handloads that I had tweaked for optimal performance in my revolver.)

We started off at 15 yards, moved back to 25, then 50, and finally 100 yards. In the end, I out-shot him by maybe a 5-10% margin, but it was neck-and-neck until we got back to 100 yards.

After the impromptu competition, we traded revolvers and shot them. I still beat him, but only by about a 15% margin. I shot his Ruger almost as well as I had shot my S&W. It impressed me fairly well. I think I still beat him because I have been shooting a variety of guns (both types, models, and manufacturers) for a long time, and I work the trigger and sights without much regard to what brand is typed on the side of the barrel. (Whereas he had been concentrating on developing skills with just his particular gun, so any foreign gun, while workable, it's not at the same skill level.)

As long as it is a well-made revolver, you should find little difference with any revolver you pick up. Between Ruger and S&W, get the one you like better. You're familiarity with it after a year or two will more than make up for any qualitative difference anyone tries to sell you on between the two brands you mention.

That said, I'm a S&W man. Just my preference. Doesn't mean it has to be yours.

[Bret4207]

I can tell you this much, Ruger never made a DA revolver in 44 or 45 that carried as nice as a Smith. The old Security-Six was a good carry gun, despite that rattling transfer bar and they were accurate. I never got into the HUGE GUN thing, just never interested me. Same with the 45-70 revolvers and Desert Eagle autos.

To each their own. The Rugers can be accurate, can have good triggers. They sure are stout.

[MakeMineA10mm]

I can tell you this much, Ruger never made a DA revolver in 44 or 45 that carried as nice as a Smith. The old Security-Six was a good carry gun, despite that rattling transfer bar and they were accurate. I never got into the HUGE GUN thing, just never interested me. Same with the 45-70 revolvers and Desert Eagle autos.

To each their own. The Rugers can be accurate, can have good triggers. They sure are stout.

Bret, ME TOO!!!! That is very well-said and matches my sentiments EXACTLY. The biggest gun I want to actually carry is a 4" or 5" S&W N-Frame (without the underlug).

With your limitation of comparing 44s and 45s, I think you're right on, but the Ruger GP-100 series is quite a nice revolver, and I think if auto-pistols hadn't supplanted the revolver, the Ruger may have given S&W a run for their money in the LE market.

There are some guys who have had their GPs converted to 41 Spl. and 10mm. They really like them, and I bet they're a handy-sized and weighted medium-power handgun.

[big dale]

jh45gun: I develop loads carefully and have never loaded any higher than a couple of grains below listed max by the powder man. The S&W's just were not up to the job. One of the Superblackhawks has digested over 50K loads and the only result has been that the trigger is much smoother than it was when I bought it.

Big Dale

[jh45gun]

But were they higher than factory? I shot some reloads in a 308 Encore that the powder manufacture said was lower than max and they would put my Encore pistol barrel in 308 smacking my hat brim. Way too hot for that pistol and they were below max too. Just wondering as I have never heard of anyone having any stretching problems before??? I shot a 38 smith model ten for years with some fairly stout 38 loads and it handled them beautifully. My Nephew reloads and all he shoots is S&W in 357 and 44 mag and he has never had an issue either.

[anachronism]

S&Ws from the late '70s & early 80s earned a reputation for short service life. I Bought a new nickel S&W M29 back in the early 80s that came unstrung way too quickly. This was a Lear Seigler era gun. It went out of time in under 500 rounds. Shortly after ridding myself of that toad, I started silhouette shooting. There were no S&Ws on the long range line, only Rugers & TCs. S&Ws quality shortfalls from that era were well documented, and lead to S&W developing their "magnum improvement" program. Changes were made to the locking notch configuration, the cylinder stop, and the hand to increase longevity in the N frames. The "improved" guns were much better, but still lost ground to the Rugers on durability. Ruger Redhawks are difficult to get a really good trigger pull on because of the funky trigger return mechanism. Anyone who has disassembled one knows what I'm talking about. The Super Reds & the GP100/SP101 use an entirely different trigger return method, and it is much, much easier to get a good trigger pull on them. The Super Reds are (ahem) visually challenged.

[Uncle R.]

The Super Reds are (ahem) visually challenged.

Heck - ALL the Ruger DAs are "visually challenged" as are their centerfire autos. The Redhawks and Super Redhawks are big and ugly and clumsy and often have seriously nasty triggers. The N-frame Smiths are ever so much nicer in every regard - except that they won't stand up as well to long-term use of magnum loads.
<
So - my solution?
<
N-Frame for carry gun. My friend has a 4" M29 that he packs when camping in bear country. Small, light and handy when compared to the Ruger DAs and rides in a pancake holster almost like a "concealment" gun. BIG punch in a convenient package. Sure it won't handle thousands of rounds of full-house 44s well - but who'd want to shoot thousands of rounds in that light gun? Not me!
<
Super Blackhawk for range, silhouette, or hunting. Much nicer looking gun than the Reds - much better trigger than the Reds - at least as strong as the Reds and good for tens of thousands of heavy loads. Who needs DA for those purposes anyway?
<GRIN>
And my own personal "bear country" gun is a Blackhawk .41 for the same reasons that my friend uses that 4" 29. It relatively small and light, doesn't make my pants fall down when I drop it into a holster, but packs a big punch. I've had it for years and I like it a lot - don't miss DA at all. But then those "cowboy guns" have felt just right to me since the days I was riding a broomstick horse and wearing a Roy Rogers holster.
<SMILE>

[Dale53]

I have a fairly early S&W Model 29 (8 3/8" barrel) and have shot probably 10,000 rounds through it. However, they have mostly been 250 gr Keith's ahead of 23.0 grs of H110 for practice and 24.0 grs for hunting (1200 fps for practice and 1300 fps for hunting). Max is reputed to be 25.0 grs with the same bullets. My take is that my practice gave me all the thump I needed for practice AND hunting and also didn't over stress the revolver. Mine is still as tight as the day I bought it. No endshake, in fact NO sign of wear.

The Silhouette shooters just flat over stressed those guns, in general - the Rugers, for the most part, took the abuse and the S&W's did not. However, a conservative feller might state that it was still ABUSE even if they did get away with it in the Rugers. Now, my one gun proves little but I know what I think...

I have two Ruger .44 mags and two Smith .44 mags and am happy with both. I just accept each one's warts and try to live with each. All of them perform quite well, all things considered. I am a "trigger man" so I REALLY appreciate the Smiths.

Dale53

[Heavy lead]

I have two N frame 45 Colts, and love them and heavy barrel 3" and a Mountain Gun. I also have three .41's. I do not hot rod the 45 Colts at all and find a 280 grain boolit with 10 grains of Unique accurate, easy to shoot and deadly on deer. I have shot N frame 44's, but never hot rodded them. I do have a Redhawk, and a Super. The Super is butt ugly, but a shooter and with work has a good trigger. My Redhawk is a 88 vintage and has THE best double action trigger pull I have on anything (I own at least 10 Smiths), but the single action pull is so so.
I must disagree with you on one thing. I just love the looks of a blued redhawk with a 5.5" barrel with faux ivory or stag grips. Also the Security Six revolvers as well.
I likes them both, for different applications, but if I'm pouring the coal to something it's that Redhawk, Super, Bisley or my BFR, not the Smith.