Which one and .45LC or .44mag for dangerous critters?
Which one and .45LC or .44mag for dangerous critters?
#RESIST
Depends on the critters, and how much carrying it will bother you. The Redhawks are big, heavy clunky guns compared to the Smiths, but if you want to shoot nuclear level loads they can take more.Originally Posted by LittleLebowski
The 45 Smith wont take as much heavy 45 Colt as the 44 mag or redhawk, but how much do you realistically need? Thats a question only you can answer.
Over time I find there less enthusiasm in general for full bore magnum loads in the 44 or bear level loads in 45 Colt, though i have some and carry them in the guns when in grizzly country. I think anything less than grizzlies Im OK with medium level loads in either.
Linebaugh had an article some years back on what the Smiths were comfortable with in 45 Colt, which seemed reasonably potent, just not quite the same level as Ruger SA or DA guns.
The Smiths are the goldilocks weight range for all day carry to me. the 24 is just a little nicer to carry than a 29 and ends up going for more rides and walks nowadays when not in prime grizzly range. Pretty sure the 24 and mountains guns are about identical weight.
“Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat.”
― Theodore Roosevelt
No real dangerous 4 legged critters here in Appalachia, but I’ve owned two Redhawks and two packing sized M-(6)29 S&W revolvers. The Redhawk is a very, accurate, well made, beastly strong LARGE revolver. The S&W is better in my paws for actually shooting standing on my feet and holding the gun up to shoot D/A. Of the four I owned only the M-629 Mountain Gun remains. I figure 6 well placed 250gr SWC at 1,100fps will do most of what needs doing with a handgun for me.
I own a redhawk 5 inch and several 629 models including a 5”. My preference is strongly for the 629, which feels sleek, well balanced and a joy to shoot. The redhawk feels enormous and heavy with an awkwardly narrow trigger profile. The redhawk is still a great 44 magnum but the 629 for me is where it’s at. Cannot really comment on 45LC as my loading and shooting experiences have been only with 44 magnum.
I’ve had a 629 5” Classic about 30 years. I’ve never shot a 4” 29/629. I briefly owned a 4” 44 Redhawk. I tried a few different grips and found it more painful to shoot than my 5” 629. Weight was similar as I recall. I figured if I needed to carry a 44 I’d get a good holster for the 629.
I have Bowen Alpine conversions of the RedHawk in .44 and .45, as well as a slew of S&W revolvers. I reserve the RedHawk in .44 for heavy Garrett loads. I prefer carrying the S&W revolvers, and they have better triggers.
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
There was a Linebaugh article on 45 Colt loads specifically for the Smith 25-5s, they were upgraded over standard level loads but were not in the Ruger only level. Unfortunately its not on his site any longer, and other links appear to be dead. I have it in print form somewhere, but no guarantee when it will turn up. It was loads in the 23K pressure level. He said he had shot hundreds of loads in the 30K pressure range in the Smiths, but mostly used the more moderate loads, even going up in grizzly range.
He reckoned, and had tested, loads in the various chamberings and guns and came to the conclusion the 45 Colt guns were 80% as strong as the same basic gun in 44 mag (cylinders tested to destruction etc), and worked his loads to that level, or below.
Last edited by Malamute; 10-08-2023 at 08:56 PM.
“Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat.”
― Theodore Roosevelt
Any Taurus tracker experience?
#RESIST
Ruger revolvers can be field stripped, and are robust to poor treatment. As well, they can typically handle heavier loads.
And, I'd choose a Super Redhawk.
“There is no growth in the comfort zone.”--Jocko Willink
"You can never have too many knives." --Joe Ambercrombie
I owned a Redhawk 5.5" 44mag and a 692 4" 44mag. Not much to add about strength and such, but one thing that hasn't been discussed is the grip shape/size. The Redhawk (original, not Super) gripframe is large and oddly shaped. I have average size hands (not quite "large" in glove size) and struggled to find grips that fit my hand and filled the palm well enough. I eventually found some Nill stocks cheap on Ebay that were about as good as I could find. The original grips were too small and Hogue's offerings didn't quite fit my hand with the Redhawk gripframe dictating the size. I also tried Pachmayer and even custom grips. Good luck finding the Nills at a reasonable price. Last time I looked they were all north of $200 when available.
Load-wise, I ran Cast Performance 300gr WFN bullets (and later 310gr home-cast slugs) at 1300fps out of the Redhawk but limited the S&W to 265gr SWC at 1200ish. As the shooter, both "felt" about the same due to the weight difference, but neither were "pleasant" to me.
Honestly, in this part of the country, either a 44mag or warmish 45 Colt will do the job, so get the gun that fits you from a biomechanical perspective. I no longer have either gun and carry either a 9mm or a S&W 625jm with 240gr SWCs at 950fps.
Chris
Reply With Quote