629 VS Redhawk

[sixshot]

  Yup, the 480 in a 5 shot Ruger Bisley would be the ideal gun......whoops, I have one. Alan Harton built this beauty a few years ago for me & in my opinion (doesn't mean much) is about as close to perfect as it gets. 5 1/2" Douglas barrel, belt mountain base pin, line bored, cylinder frame opened up, oversize 5 shot cylinder, Bowen rear sight, Harton front sight with one gold bar, action job, trigger slightly straightend & Holly stocks. Shoots as good as it looks. It has one bull moose to its credit using a 370 gr softnose cast.
  Still, a good 44 or 45 could keep me happy for the rest of my days. 
 
Dick
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

[rick59]

SW629............FTW

[Redhawk1]

the 480/475 have allways been a favorite of mine. They are a step up in power from a 44/45 thats noticeable unlike to me at least the differnce between a 44 ad 45. The 480 is probably the most ballanced big bore round ever designed. If it werent for rugers blinders being on it would have been brought out in a single action gun and would have been a 100 percent more popular.

Lloyd you got that right. I think a lot of people missed the boat on the 480 Ruger.  I think it is one of the best hunting handgun rounds out there!
 

[Redhawk1]

  Yup, the 480 in a 5 shot Ruger Bisley would be the ideal gun......whoops, I have one. Alan Harton built this beauty a few years ago for me & in my opinion (doesn't mean much) is about as close to perfect as it gets. 5 1/2" Douglas barrel, belt mountain base pin, line bored, cylinder frame opened up, oversize 5 shot cylinder, Bowen rear sight, Harton front sight with one gold bar, action job, trigger slightly straightend & Holly stocks. Shoots as good as it looks. It has one bull moose to its credit using a 370 gr softnose cast.
  Still, a good 44 or 45 could keep me happy for the rest of my days. 
 
Dick

Nice gun you got there.. I also have a 475 Linebaugh in a Super Blackhawk that is a 5 shot. I mostly shoot my 480 Ruger loads in it. Same as my Custom Redhawk in 475 Linebaugh. Both were done by Gary Reeder.

[ratgunner]

The .44 is a Clint Eastwood thing.  No other encouragement is needed.  A Hollywood lie, at best.  I ain't stupid.  I know that a .44 Magnum will take whatever game you go after, and it will do it with class and style and with no effort put into reloading.  Plenty of factory loadings give the .44 shooter/hunter unlimited choices.  BUT STILL, (and I cannnot understan why this simple fact bounces off people's brain), the 45 Colt is bigger and better if you reload.  The reason reasonable factory loadings are not available is because of the Colts and replicas that can't stand the pressure.  Do you have a single-action Colt .44 Magnum?  No, you do not.  Ruger and fixed that.  Now you can have a stronger, tougher, and more powerful                                       

I guess it's about as good to argue the .270 vs .280 

[buck460XVR]

 

629 VS Redhawk

Both are fine guns. Pick the one that fits your hand the best or tickles your fancy. There is no wrong choice.

[Lloyd Smale]

Fact is Clint used a 41 mag in alot of the scenes in his movies. Story went the 29s were in such high demand that couldnt get one. So i guess if 44s are a clint thing then we will have to say that 45s are a duke thing. Personaly i could give a rats ass what anyone else uses be they famous or not.

The .44 is a Clint Eastwood thing.  No other encouragement is needed.  A Hollywood lie, at best.  I ain't stupid.  I know that a .44 Magnum will take whatever game you go after, and it will do it with class and style and with no effort put into reloading.  Plenty of factory loadings give the .44 shooter/hunter unlimited choices.  BUT STILL, (and I cannnot understan why this simple fact bounces off people's brain), the 45 Colt is bigger and better if you reload.  The reason reasonable factory loadings are not available is because of the Colts and replicas that can't stand the pressure.  Do you have a single-action Colt .44 Magnum?  No, you do not.  Ruger and fixed that.  Now you can have a stronger, tougher, and more powerful hunting cartridge than ever before.  Clint's statement that he had "the most powerful gun in the world," means nothing at all now except to those afraid to move higher, or who refuse to reload, or who live in a fantasy realm. 
A .45 Colt loaded to it's maximum safe potential is no where near as week as the stoutest load you can either buy or build for a .44 Magnum.  I firmly believe that shooters cannot see that simple fact because of the hype that comes with a .44 Magnum. 
But I still say a .44 Magnum is enough, it just simply is inferior in terms of power and accuracy as the .45C.  Someone above said that an accurate .45C is the luck of the draw.  Bogus, bogus, bogus.  I've had a lot of 'em, and never had one that couldn't be hand fed an accurate load. 
A lively discussion, and I appreciate all the remarks on both sides.

[alan in ga]

OK, the facts determine the outcome: Do you prefer to watch John Wayne movies or Clint Eastwood movies? : )
I had 4 [or was it 5?] Super Blackhawks [44Mag], one Blackhawk in .45 Colt [nice gun] and an early .44 Mag. Redhawk [waited for 2 years to find and then quickly go get it]. I shot a LOT of hot loads for a while in the Redhawk and then started loading lighter loads, 8 to 10 grains of Unique under whatever bullets [max 250 lead cast] I had left. Just about wore out a 250 Keith mold and hundreds of pounds of wheel weights and linotype. Best thing that ever happened was to find not one but TWO friends that liked 44s too. AND they liked to cast, something that got old with me. I did not mind at all loaning my molds out and getting bullets in return for the favor.
After I started loading milder loads I started thinking that I might be just as well off with a light S&W 29 w/6" barrel. I thought it would be nice to have a LIGHTER pistol and a shorter barrel for a gun that would be whereever I would be [6" barrel vs. 7.5" barrels]. Never did buy a Smith but shot a lot of friend's Smiths and they always seemed to have nice trigger pulls. My Rugers had nice triggers but only after working on them, none came that way from Ruger factory!
The old 3/4 jacketed Speer bullets, 225 and 240 grains, shot extremely accurate with 10 gr. of Unique, usually one ragged hole at 25 yards back when my eyes could focus better.
I also burned a lot of 2400 powder, 22 gr of it under the cast Keith 250 SWC, Elmer's load. Shot very well and even though it left a good many unburnt [yellow] powder flakes in the bore, it still was accurate.
I played with 10" bull and 14" Contender barrels in 44 mag for a while and preferred the 10" bull for deer hunting for the time I was 'into' Contenders.
After shooting a nice buck with the Redhawk and a hard cast keith 250 SWC, I went back to rifles for deer hunting. Just did not want to pass up a longer range shot than my eyes could handle with open sights.
Today I hunt only with bows since I hunt in an 'archery only' county for deer. If I had a chance to pistol hunt for deer in another county, I wouldn't mind having ANY of the pistols you all listed. Just make sure you practise a LOT before you go punching a hole in a deer. It's fun anyway you do it.
PS- don't care a wit about the 4" barrels.....too much flash and noise, and they don't 'feel' right in my hand.

[backwoodshunter]

Unless you reload, the .45 Colt is not even close to the same power level as the .44 Magnum!  Check out buffalobore.com.  Look at the .44 Mag +P+ load and you'll see what I mean.  340 grain bullet at 1478 fps from 7.5 inch super redhawk.  That equals 1649 ft. lbs. of energy!  They are nearly $40/box, though.

[Mike in Virginia]

You got that right, backwoodshunter!  A .44M has lots more energy if you don't reload.  But "Unless you reload . . ." is a very narrow look at shooting.  Why would a person not reload?  I hate to think of all the wasted brass hidden in the weeds and woods where a non-reloader just let them fall, never to be used again.  I reckon some folks can afford to shoot a lot of factory stuff.  I sure can't.  Even if I could, I wouldn't.  But that's just me.     

[phoneman7]

i'd go with a super redhawk in 454. Then you can shoot plinker 45 colts, stouter 45 colts and mastadon killers if you are so inclined.   I sent mine off to have the moonclip conversion so i will be able to shoot 45acp as well.

[Lloyd Smale]

I had a 454 alaskan done up like that. It was kind of cool. It would shoot 454s or 45 colts with or without moon clips and 45 acps with smith 25 clips. Only thing at least with mine is accuracy wasnt outstanding with acps and the 45/454 moon clips were thin and frajile but it sure made a neat setup. A buddy just had to have it and talked me out of it. Ill say one more thing about it. It was handsdown the easiest recoiling 454 ive ever shot.

i'd go with a super redhawk in 454. Then you can shoot plinker 45 colts, stouter 45 colts and mastadon killers if you are so inclined.   I sent mine off to have the moonclip conversion so i will be able to shoot 45acp as well.

[backwoodshunter]

Mike in Virginia, just out of curiosity, how do your 45 Colt handloads compare to the 340 gr Buffalo Bore 44 Mag load?
 

[Lloyd Smale]

Ill says this in defense of the 45. If max velocity is what you looking for with a heavy bullet. My top load in a 44 mag is a 340 lfn at 1200 fps. In a blackhawk thats right on the ragged edge. Even another half grain of powder and case extraction is sticky. Ive pushed 350s to 1300 in a 45 blackhawk without any trama and have pushed 300s to 1500 in a 6 shot gun and cases still extracted just fine. Now to be honest that 45 was shot loose after a couple thousand rounds of that level and the 44 that i use for the 340 load has held up great. bottom line though is a 45 will push the same weight bullet easily another 100 fps and probably even a bit more. Bottom line though is ive learned after kiling a truck load of deer with both that that 100 fps buys you nothing in the real world. A 300 grain bullet out of either at a 1100 fps will do all the killing a guy ever needs on ANY big game animal. So my take on it is that sure the 45 has an edge but the edge is so small that in the field it isnt noticed. Step up to a 480 or 475 and you will see the difference. they just tend to slap down animals faster.

Mike in Virginia, just out of curiosity, how do your 45 Colt handloads compare to the 340 gr Buffalo Bore 44 Mag load?

[Mike in Virginia]

backwoodshunter, I have to admit my favorite 45C load is much diminished from the Buffalo Bore round you mention.  I'm not sure I'd even want to touch one of those off.  My preference for the .45 and all it's potential sort of goes down the drain when you know I shoot a 400 grain hardcast under a dose of 2400.  I hesitate to state the amount of powder; don't want anyone trying it on my say so.  I like because it will shoot through a whitetail longways and I've never had one go more than a few steps when struck.  But still, it certainly is not the .340 grain grizzly killer by Buffalo Bore. 
I'm beginnin to see I might be losing my argument.  Well, I hope it wasn't an argument.  Perhaps the point I was so firm on is losing steam in light of all the knowledge and experience here about the .44.
 
 

[sixshot]

  Mike, I think this has been a very good discussion & no one has been arguing, each has just given their own experiences. I mentioned earlier that I'd taken 4 elk with my Ruger 45's but didn't give loads, etc. On 3 of them I used a 325 gr LBT slug using a 22 grs of H110, all 3 bullets exited & were one shot kills. The other was with my old 260 gr Keith over 24 grs of H110 (mag primers) this was also a one shot kill at 168 yds, complete pnetration. I love my 45's & they might be a better caliber but I just have a "thing" for my 44's.
 I've taken 5 elk with them over the years, mostly using the old Keith #429421, 250 gr cast, always getting complete penetration using 21 grs of 2400, never did care for Elmer's load of 22 grs for some reason, although I have taken some game with it including my last bear.
  I've also taken 2 elk with the 41 maggie, one with a 230 gr Keith & the other with a 250 gr LBT, same results, complete penetration & one shot kills. The strange thing about these 11 kills is, the fastest 2 came with the 41 maggie. Two kills isn't enough to really form an opinion, just telling it the way it happened. All 3 work, I'll pick my 44's first, but thats just me.
 
Dick

[Lloyd Smale]

Like dick said. theres no looser in this argument. Both rounds are great. Its about like comparing the 280 to the 06. both will kill well. I prefer the 44 mag but not because its superior to the 45. I like it just because i like it. the 06/280 call is even tougher for me as i love them both. Bottom line is were spliting hairs here. Its kind of the reason i like my 44s and come to there defense. Seems like everyone that has access to the internet heres how great the 45 is and thinks they have something majical when they buy one. I dont care if its a large or small framed ruger or a colt or colt copy. Me, ive taken enough game with both to know there aint a pinch of differce when there loaded to the same level. Ive yet to see any game animal shot with a 44 and run away that would have fell if the bullet was 45 cal. The 44 to me is just a bit easier to work with. Brass and bullet molds are everywhere and there usually a lot easier to work with if accuracy is your goal. Even at colt level velocitys the smaller case of the 44 lends itself to lighter loads a bit eaiser then the 45. Again though im the first to admit im spliting hairs. Buy the one you like as you cant go wrong. But keep in mind that like i said you didnt buy a majic wand with either.