9 replies [Last post]
Offline
Location: Sunny San Diego
Joined: 09/02/2003
Posts: 165
Which .44 is better?

Please help,

When I hunt now I use a scoped 30.06, but I'd like to start also carrying a .44 handgun. When I'm really good at stalking close and shooting the .44 I plan to start leaving the .06 in the truck.

But for at least a year or so I figure I'll carry BOTH my rifle on my back and the .44 in a shoulder holster (If nothing else, good backup).

Herein lies the dilema, Members of my local gunclub are selling these two guns:

1. Ruger Red Hawk 7 1/2 inch blued. Minor holster wear. $300
2. Ruger Super BlackHawk 10 1/2 inch Stainless. Close to new condition. $350

Pricewise, the SBH seems a better buy. And I prefer stainless. However, at 10 1/2" it is ONE HEAVY MOTHER!!! Which would you buy, and why?

Thanks for your time!

Jesse

Offline
Joined: 02/23/2004
Posts: 7
Which .44 is better?

i dont think that the SBH even with the 10" bbl is heavier than the SRH is it. I have the SBH in stainless and love it. I have been hunting with it for 6 yrs. It fits me better than the SRH as i have family members that have the SRH. with the 10" bbl it gives you a little more velocity. but that is just my 2 cents

Offline
Location: Colorado
Joined: 02/27/2003
Posts: 394
Which .44 is better?

They're two very different guns. The Red Hawk is double action. The Black Hawk is single action. Which action do you prefer?

The single action Black Hawk can probably handle hotter loads. The Red Hawk, however, can easily handle the hottest factory loads that you can buy, so this is only a factor if you load your own ammo.

The Red Hawk probably does weigh a little less, and having a shorter barrel will be a little easier to handle. These differences will be minimal in my opinion, but my opinion isn't the one that matters. Are the differences enough to matter to you? Only you can answer that.

I would recommend taking a look at each, handling them and, if possible, shooting each. Then decide.

Good luck!

Offline
Location: Sunny San Diego
Joined: 09/02/2003
Posts: 165
Which .44 is better?

I'm sorry, guys, I made a type-o. The post was late at night.

They're both Super Blackhawks. The one for $319 is a 7.5" blued and the one for $350 is a 10.5" stainless.

bitmasher's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: Colorado
Joined: 02/27/2002
Posts: 2973
Which .44 is better?

Hey Oz, are you planning on using the 44 on elk? Maybe my numbers are wrong, but it only generates around 900 ft*lb at the muzzle, which is pretty low for elk. Just something to consider.

Offline
Location: Sunny San Diego
Joined: 09/02/2003
Posts: 165
Which .44 is better?

The last time I checked there weren't too many elk in San Diego...

I'd be using it for Wild Boar and maybe a Black Bear in a couple of years if I get bored.

bitmasher's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: Colorado
Joined: 02/27/2002
Posts: 2973
Which .44 is better?

Ok, was just curious, since you asked in the elk forum. Wink

Offline
Location: Sunny San Diego
Joined: 09/02/2003
Posts: 165
Which .44 is better?

Yeah, I realized that after I had already posted. It was a mistake.

bitmasher's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: Colorado
Joined: 02/27/2002
Posts: 2973
Which .44 is better?

What did you end up deciding on OZ?

Offline
Location: Sunny San Diego
Joined: 09/02/2003
Posts: 165
Which .44 is better?

I ended up getting neither! I went with a stainless steel Super Blackhawk 4 3/8" barrel. This gun is going to be my backup and if I advance it to primary, I'll throw a scope on it so the length of the muzzle won't have a bearing on my ability to shoot 80 yards. It cost a little more than the 7.5" blued Black Hawk, but it's been used a LOT less, is stainless, includes a holster and better grips. It was worth it to me.

Thank all of you for taking the time and interest to answer my post!

Jesse