|
|
Post by geauxfish on Mar 18, 2013 17:32:06 GMT -7
I'm watching my local stores for a .44 Mag revolver. I shot a friend's SuperRedhawk last week. I really liked it but I don't think that I need or want a double action. So, I'm looking for a Super Blackhawk. I'd like to have the option to hunt hogs and possibly white tail with it. But, it will probably be more of a companion piece to a 44 carbine or lever rifle.
Ruger makes the Super Blackhawk in a 4-5/8" and 7-1/2". I think that I would be more likely to carry it if it were the 4-5/8" but I still would like the option to hunt with it solo if I wanted. What experience do you have hunting with the 4-5/8? Any other thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by angelhelp on Mar 18, 2013 18:25:27 GMT -7
I just read your query aloud as Ceorlmann feeds his face (he just came home from German class).
He suggests that you go with the longer barrel because it means mroe weight on the overall gun which means less recoil.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2013 19:00:18 GMT -7
Here in Ohio 5" would be min for hunting and they mean it 5". I have had the 71/2 inch ruger and the 10 inch both did just fine. I now hand gun hunt with a 6 inch Smith modle 29 topped with a 4x Nikon ((When I get the chance}} which I fine works great for me. I have a 6 inch 454 and wish I would have gone for the longer bbl every time I pull that trigger.
So I would vote for a 6'' or longer and one of those shoulder/chest type riggs for carry.
|
|
|
|
Post by thywar on Mar 18, 2013 20:13:08 GMT -7
I'd always go with a longer barrel if it was for me.. less recoil and probably more accurate I think. When you get into those calibers anything to lessen the recoil I like. However, having said that I've only owned a 41 magnum back in the day.. younger and dumber.. but it would shoot and kick like a mule.. Big ol blue S&W
|
|
|
|
Post by Cwi555 on Mar 19, 2013 2:42:21 GMT -7
If it's for hunting, go with the 7.5". I would also say that I wouldn't dismiss the redhawk. It doesn't take long to tire of shucking rounds the old way.
|
|
|
|
Post by geauxfish on Mar 19, 2013 15:50:58 GMT -7
Just went to a gunshop and held several different revolvers. There was a S&W 629 and several S.redhawks. I decided that the 7-1/2" is going to be too long to carry. I need to look into state uniting laws to find out if there are any restrictions in La. I did really like the SBlackhawk with the standard barrel (it was a 357 though).
|
|
|
|
Post by Cwi555 on Mar 19, 2013 16:12:48 GMT -7
Just went to a gunshop and held several different revolvers. There was a S&W 629 and several S.redhawks. I decided that the 7-1/2" is going to be too long to carry. I need to look into state uniting laws to find out if there are any restrictions in La. I did really like the SBlackhawk with the standard barrel (it was a 357 though). Don't knock a 357, if it felt right in your hand. |
|
|
|
Post by thywar on Mar 19, 2013 17:41:44 GMT -7
I agree with CWI about the .357 unless you're absolutely set on a .44 mag. By the time you realize the cost of ammo and availability (plus .38 ammo too) and if it fits right.. it's worth the consideration definitely. Although... I have to admit there is something about a .44 mag especially if you can pair it with a lever action rifle or carbine.. that's the only way I'd want one.. both rifle/pistol
|
|
|
|
Post by geauxfish on Mar 19, 2013 18:25:03 GMT -7
:-) I agree about the .357. But, already have that covered by a Taurus Tracker.
|
|
|
|
Post by geauxfish on Mar 19, 2013 21:32:05 GMT -7
...and, yea, I would like to pair it with a lever or carbine in the future (.44 cal).
|
|
|
|
Post by hunter63 on Mar 20, 2013 9:48:46 GMT -7
I agree with CWI about the .357 unless you're absolutely set on a .44 mag. By the time you realize the cost of ammo and availability (plus .38 ammo too) and if it fits right.. it's worth the consideration definitely. Although... I have to admit there is something about a .44 mag especially if you can pair it with a lever action rifle or carbine.. that's the only way I'd want one.. both rifle/pistol Not trying to be a smart azz....just curious. I guess I have to ask "Why"?....is it just the same ammo for both? Never understood this line of thinking.... Have hunted with a Ruger "Deerslayer' .44 carbine.....and found it OK for heavy brush, but if I came upon an open spot, not real good over 100 yds....but never carried the .44 Super Black hawk at the same time. If I carry the 7 mag, I might consider a .357 or .44 side arm (always carried the .44 in Colorado and Wyoming)....but not two of the same caliber at the same time? PS I would opt for the longer barrel...... |
|
|
|
Post by thywar on Mar 20, 2013 10:00:01 GMT -7
Hunter, mostly it is because of the same ammo. I've always considered having a pistol/rifle in the same cartridge a plus.. only carrying one type of ammo. Where I live if it's a 100 yard shot it's rare. I suppose there are some areas where that could happen but not often enough. .22 rifle/pistol, .357/.38 rifle/pistol, 9mm rifle/pistol. But I'm a little quirky and I don't think of the question as being a smart azz question.. anytime. I do agree on the longer barrel too.
|
|
|
|
Post by hunter63 on Mar 20, 2013 10:31:18 GMT -7
If I'm carrying a firearm, generally it game specific......exception is a .22 or .22 mag around "The Place' for ground hogs and what-ever's.
So shotgun for turkeys, ducks, pheasants, bunnies.....
Rifles for deer, elk, antelope....and maybe some day ...Hogs.
I don't hunt squirrels or bear so don't shoot at them unless they mess with me first.
If I was carrying a .44 carbine, or .357, had a shot at a deer, I'm not gonna put down the carbine to pull out a pistol.....although I have just carried a pistol when "driving deer"....we do that around here.
Have killed a few with the .44 doing that.
Bunch of guys spread out a push deer to standers, and is generally done thru thick areas, so pistols are kinda the way to go.
Mostly just more weight to carry around...to me.
I have heard this rifle/ pistol combo brought up often, but never made sense to me for these reasons....but my thinking is strictly a hunter point of view.
I do realize that a lot of states do not allow a large rifle, so .357's, .44's and such are real popular in a carbine.......we don't have that problem in Wisconsin...yet.
I want to be able to reach out and knock down anything I can see....so it's the 7 mag or lately the .270.
Thanks for the serious response.
|
|
|
|
Post by thywar on Mar 20, 2013 10:55:30 GMT -7
I love 7mm mag.. but I went the .270 route and have a couple of those.. I like that round.. flat shooting and enough punch for anything I'll kill around here.
|
|
|
|
Post by hunter63 on Mar 20, 2013 11:00:53 GMT -7
I agree, ballistics of the .270 and 7 mag are about the same, just a lighter bullet in the 270....
Lately the .270 Handi Rifle is the go-to....now I may consider carrying the .357 S&W as the Handi is a single shot....LOL
|
|
