Ruger or S & W 44Mag.

[Sharrie*1 1]

Hello all,

 

I have an incoming pistol permit that I would like to use on a 44 magnum. I am looking for some advice on which one to purchase. What I do NOT want is a discussion of Ruger vs S & W. What I DO want is a discussion where facts are presented for or against one gun or the other. I have searched the forum and the internet in general and still have not made a decision.

 

These are my thoughts to this point:

 

This is going to be a gun that I carry any time I out and about in the backwoods of my property (black bear area). I will NOT be carrying it for any other reason even if I get a concealed carry permit (this property is not in NJ)...that is best left to a whole different gun.

 

Anyhow, I am looking at S & W 629 in 5" barrel and Ruger Redhawk in 5.5" barrel. Both are stainless and will not give me a problem with rusting. Both have what I would call a medium sized barrel. Both are double action, another of my preferences.

 

I have held both at the gun shop and the Ruger seems a bit larger in my hand than the S & W, but not so much that it is uncomfortable with my medium to large hands.

 

The ones I held had much larger barrels on them than I want, and the shorter barrels were not in stock at the store so I couldn't feel them.

 

The Ruger seemed to have a sight that had a nice outline on the rear sight, but I am not sure that the 5.5" model would be supplied with the same sight. BTW, I did like this outline, and the S & W did not have it.

 

I did pull the trigger on both but I was holding the hammer as I didn't want to disrespect the gun. So, I was not able to get a good feel for the trigger. I am told that the S & W has a nicer trigger, but again, I was not able to get a good feel with these guns in the store.

 

In the best case scenario, one of the members has one of each of these guns, and could tell me the idiosyncrasies of each.

 

I do realize both are excellent guns that have a long reputation. Also, they are within $100 of each other so, although money does matter, I would rather spend the extra $s now than be sorry later.

 

Any advice would be helpful.

 

Thanks!

[Shawnmoore81 623]

I have the s&w and it's a great gun. Very solid

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

I find your comment about the Smith's rear sight odd - most 29's/629's have the white outline rear sight - it was a feature that originated with Smith & Wesson, so I wouldn't make that a disqualifying factor. I'd vote for the Smith (big surprise) because of the lighter weight and easier maneuverability. Weight vs. recoil is something you have to balance carefully. I'd also recommend a 4" standard barrel (ejector rod shroud - not a full underlug), again for ease of carry.

 

I have no idea what your shooting experience is, but a .44 Mag is pretty potent - if you were using this for hunting, i'd say .44 all the way, but also a longer barrel. When hunting you choose the shot, which will most likely be taken single action. Your scenario is as an emergency gun where, speed, maneuverability and the ability to get off multiple accurate shots is of paramount importance. The point being, you may want to reconsider the caliber. An 8-shot (N-Frame) 627 may work better for you - less recoil, more rounds, still plenty potent.

 

Either revolver will need to have  trigger massaged for an acceptable double action pull. It is more about smoothing out the trigger than it is about lightening it - you want to make sure that it goes bang when you pull the trigger. In competition a "click" is frustrating. In an emergency situation a "click" is deadly. Don't let any schmoe do a trigger job on either gun.

 

Good luck with whatever you choose.

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

[Sharrie*1 1]

Shawnmoore81...Thanks for your input...Yes I agree the S & W is well put together, but then again, I think the Ruger is as well.

 

Pizza Bob...Hmm, is it possible that I am mistaken, and it was the S & W that had the white outline? I only handled these two revolvers once in the gun shop, so it is possible. I was sure tho that it was the Ruger with the white outline. The pics that Ruger and S & W have on line do not show both sights.

 

4" barrel huh...I was thinking for the balance and control of the 44mag. that 5" would be perfect, but I defiantly  do NOT want a long barrel in case of  an emergency draw.

 

I am no expert at 44mag. In fact, I do not currently own any pistols in this caliber. I have shot a S & W 629 with a longer barrel in the past, and did not have a problem with control, although I must confess, I don't think I would want to shoot it all day long. I do currently own a S & W model 27 in 357 magnum. I love the gun, but worry about rust, and it is a 6 shot model

 

As you pointed out, this is not going to be a hunting pistol for me. In fact, I may never have to use it on a bear. But, I want to be ready just in case due to the bear population where I will be. That said, I would probably be using the pistol in double action mode.

 

I have heard of people killing a bear with 357magnum, but I was thinking the more powerful 44 would be a better bear stopper than the 357.

 

As for the trigger job, if you know of a good place (no schmoe) I am all ears. If you would rather not post here, feel free to pm me. The last think I want is a gun that is not reliable; the reason I am looking at a revolver instead of a semi auto like the Desert Eagle in the first place.

 

Thanks for the thoughtful comments...I am def. going to have to look further into the sights.

[Bully 749]

I think the 44 is an awesome choice. If you load it down with specials, it's a fun gun to shoot. With mags... It'll get your attention. I had and sold a Colt Anaconda 6". It's a fun gun but I wouldn't have wanted to carry it in the woods. I think the 4" barrel is a better choice and a Ruger Alaskan would be my choice, however I am not recoil sensitive. So, YMMV.

 

Ruger vs. Smith =

Chevy vs. Ford =

Tom-8-o vs. Tom-ah-to.

 

It's all in who you talk to. I will say that should the need ever arise, Ruger's customer service is the best I have ever encountered.

 

Christopher

[Sharrie*1 1]

Tropher...I did look at the Ruger Alaskan but thought the extra barrel would help to balance the gun with the potent recoil. My logic is that if it is a little longer it wouldn't rise as much...I am not an expert, but that is my thought.

 

I am not into the Ruger vs Smith thing...I own both and they are both excellent guns. My must have is an American made gun, so they both qualify. In the end, I prolly cant go wrong either way, and it may come down to availability. But, if someone can give me some fact to choose one over the other, I would be all ears.

 

That is 2 guys that are suggesting the shorter barrel...perhaps I need to reassess..hmmm

 

Thanks for the response!

[fishnut 2,358]

I like and have shot both guns. the ruger is nice and reliable but the smith is nicer and just as reliable. If your scared to beat on a nice gun in the woods get the ruger you wont regret it. With that said im a S&W fanboy and I carry a model 19 or 649 when camping or hiking out of state for bear protection and I personally will choose smith over ruger anytime.

[Sharrie*1 1]

Due to all the responses that suggest a shorter barrel, I have looked a both Smith and Ruger again. I found that Smith has a 629 V-Comp. This is a 4.25" barrel so it is the shorter barrel with a comp. This may solve the length vs muzzle rise concerns. Additionally, it has a factory tuned action. It is a bit dear at $1300 but if this does the job, I would be willing to spend the extra dollars.

 

Your thoughts???

[Pizza Bob 1,488]

Not really conducive to carry

[Shawnmoore81 623]

 

 

Carry a .44 and make women think you're a tripod.

 

Btw I don't have this holster it appeared on my Facebook feed today

[Sharrie*1 1]

Hello all,

 

I just wanted to update this thread and take the time to once again thank those that made suggestions.

 

I decided to go for the S&W 629 in 4" barrel. I went with the Smith over the Ruger due to weight. After long discussions it was agreed that the Ruger would be heavier and not as fun to carry all day. The weight factor also played a part in me going down to the 4" barrel. I also feel now that I have been schooled that the 4" barrel will do the job while being easer to carry and have a lighter weight.

 

Just so you know, If Smith was out of business tomorrow, I would feel quite comfortable purchasing the Ruger instead. It just seems for the application the S&W nudged the Ruger out very slightly.

 

Also, I purchased the gun online from Kentucky Gun Company. I selected the check price and I am not sorry. I saved over $20 on the price by sending a check. It only delayed the shipment a couple of days. So, in the end, I picked up this gun for about $200 less than it was available locally (it was only in stock in one place that I could find), and that includes the $30 I paid for transfer.

 

 

Thanks again!

[Bully 749]

Congratulations. Please post a pic when you have time.

 

C

[tattooo 220]

Congratulations !