Howdy all.
Great forum.
I'm looking at a Redhawk in a .44 mag to eventually become my primary hunting weapon for deer and a back up for bear. Until it does become my primary weapon, I would like to use it as a pack-along when I hunt with my rifle. Can I buy the redhawk in a 5.5 inch barrel and be ok? Is there a big difference in accuracy and recoil? I will be primarilly hunting in northern california and would want to have the redhawk in a side holster while I use my rifle. thanks. Any input is good.

So far as accuracy is concerned, that is an individual thing for the specific gun. You cannot make a general statement that longer barrels are more accurate, because they aren't. Barrel length has nothing to do with accuracy. Aiming precision can be a little better with a longer barrel due to the greater distance between sights (sight radius). Recoil will be a little more noticeable with a shorter barrel as it will have a tendency to recoil somewhat higher, and the gun will be a little lighter. The difference between a 5 1/2 " and a 7 1/2 " won't really be too great, though. The greatest diffference will be velocity, but like accuracy this is an individual thing with the specific gun. A specific 5 1/2" gun may be faster than another specific 7 1/2" gun.

Alk8944s' comments are true in my mind. A Redhawk is a heavy revolver in either barrel length. I would choose 5 1/2" to carry as a secondary hunting arm to carry on my hip for it's portability. As a primary arm, I would go with the 7 1/5" in a "cross chest" holster for ease of carry and increased sight radius.

Cheezywan

Thanks for the input. This helps.

I've had long barreled .44mags in a Ruger SBH and a scoped Colt Anaconda. I traded for shorter barreled revolvers to carry. If I need a scoped revolver, I'll use a short barreled lever rifle. I have a 18" 45-70 and a 16" .32Win. If I didn't have a 5 1/2" .45 Colt Ruger Bisley and a 4 5/8" .41 BH, I would go for the 5 1/2" RH. Now I'm looking forward to the 4" RH. Good luck.

George

A 5.5" barrel is a whole lot easier to pack around than a 7.5" barrel.

I own a 5.5" Redhawk and frankly have gotten away from hunting with the rest of my 7.5" Blackhawks just because they are more of a pain to drag around. Haven't used a shoulder or chest holster though.

thanks gentlemen.. Experience is the best teacher. sounds like a 5.5 barrel is
not so bad.

Did you guys see a big difference in how far you could shoot with a 5 1/2 inch barrel as apposed to a 7 1/2 barrel? I am thinking that I will probably be shooting within 30-50 yards. I'm I off my rocker, is this too far for a handgun?

No. It doesn't make any difference to me at that range, and personally, that's about as far as I try to shoot with an open-sighted handgun, of any barrel length.

No. It doesn't make any difference to me at that range, and personally, that's about as far as I try to shoot with an open-sighted handgun, of any barrel length.


"The hog whisperer". I love it! :D

Mike G is right for range. 75 yards would be "my outer limit" for a game animal with open sights. 50 or less would be better!

A "comfortable" holster is very important here. "Hip" holsters" make you wider than you are? They catch on "stuff" and put the weight of the firearm on one side of your body. Your firearm will get "dinged". It will "feel good" to take it off at the end of a day!
A cross-chest holster puts the weight of the gun near your "center of gravity". If worn under a jacket(if the law allows), it protects the firearm. Your hands remain free and the firearm is "right in front of you"!

A 3.5lb. Redhawk will "still feel good" to take off at the end of the day!

Cheezywan

Having fun with the admin tool... may promote kdub if he gets to 10,000 posts, think he is next closest that total :D

Cali-newb, I'm in the same boat as you. Trust me you're not the first to ask this question. In fact, I've asked this question before on these very forums last year.

To go along with what every one else has said, I agree to go with the 5.5" Redhawk. While the 7.5" is indeed nice for longer range shooting, the point of handguns is for them to be easily carried and out of the way. I never understood handgun hunters who try to shoot 100yards.

I only have ONE handgun with a 7.5" barrel and that's the Colt Single Action Army .45. I only got the longer barrel for looks and historical purposes. Yes, it shoots nice, but it's also quite muzzle heavy. Many of my off hand shots are low. There is a reason the US Army cut the barrels down to 5.5" when they arsenal refinished them in the 1890s.

While longer barrels for magnum handguns help to tame recoil...they really won't help THAT much. A .44 Magnum is a .44 Magnum and there isn't much difference between a 5" and a 7.5" in a Redhawk. You're going to pay a price either way just by the nature of that caliber.

In my personal opinion, 4" is starting to get a little short for magnums, but that's another discussion. I don't even like 4" 9mm or .45 AUTO.

In closing, I'd say go with the 5.5" Redhawk. I'm getting the blued model in that length myself. And the 5.5" redhawk is by no means a small gun! It's still 2.5" longer than a 1911!

I've got a 7.5" redhawk that is really good. but those that advocate carrying the 5.5" inch barrel do have a valid point in the easier to carry department.

Don't get me wrong, gentlemen. I like the 7.5" barrel. It makes a very nice range gun. All you do is pick it up from the shooting bench and shoot. But when in the field, it all of a sudden gets too big.

thanks all.
I'm going with the 5.5 inch barrel. Being new to hunting (cali-NEWBIE) it will be a while
before I get up to that ability to hunt with a handgun.
Forums like this are invaluable and can save you from making some costly mistakes.

I have 5 1/2" Redhawks in both .44 and .45. I much prefer 5 1/2 to 7 1/2, but it is a matter of personal preference. The only potential problem I see is the Cali hunting regs. Check to see what their regs are for handgun hunting. Where I am, they have a 6" minimum barrel length.

Don't get me wrong. I have a Colt SAA in 7.5" and it's beautiful. I think it's one of the few designs that are elegant enough to have such a long barrel and still look balanced.

The Redhawks and other modern DA revolvers just look unweildy with barrels longer than 5"

Thanks for the regs tips. I'll have to check them out. didn't think about what the regs say..

The 5.5" Redhawk is heavy enough to tote around in a hip holster. I hope they don't make you go to the 7.5". The balance with the 5.5" is pretty good.

Good choice on the 5.5" RH.A fellow LE friend carries a 7mm mag rifle and went seeking a 45lc revolver, the store clerk convinced him to buy a BH with a 4 5/8" barrel.He also bought a box of Buffalo Bore 325gr Speer UniCore ammo which he used to drop a fleeing cow elk with a head shot at 65 yards,he now wants a shoulder holster for his BH to get it off of his hip.

Not much more to add. I have had both lengths in Redhawks. I have let three of the longer barrels go and the the 5 1/2" is still here. I agree with the "center of chest" holster ideas but also like the feel of one on my hip.

Try a Bianchi 111 Cyclone. They make one that says it fits the 6 to 6 1/2" Smith. Obviouosly it is a tad longer than needed for the RH, but fits the gun great. The best thing I think is it can be worn strong side OR cross draw. When carrying a rifle on a sling, a cross draw is nice. I still have a rifle with the "dings" it got from a sidearm in a hip holster.

I just bought a 4" Redhawk yesterday BTW.

In all actuality, I find that the 5.5" Redhawk points more naturally than the 7.5" Colt SAA that I own. I'm holding them both right now :)

Yep, while the Colt is way lighter than the bulky redhawk, it is also barrel heavy. It helps with recoil with full BP .45 LC loads though.

The Redhawk points with little effort, while I have to "zero in" the front sight of the Colt SAA. Though the Colt SAA is more accurate for me because the sights sort of hangs on target.

Not an easy answer.

But essencially it all boils down to this:

If you're a sportsman, a handgun hunter, or a range junkie, the 7.5" barrel is the best choice. If all you want is a packable magnum, the 5.5" is a better choice; though the 7.5" barrel can be worked with in that situation. Most people just take the easy route and use the 5.5" barrel for packability.

A 5.5 inch barrel shouldn't be any less accurate the the 7.5 inch that I've got. The 5.5 will pack a little easier, but I dont see why it would have any noticeable difference in accuray.

Sight radius is shorter so divergence downrange is likely greater. It doesn't matter if you have a gun vice, but in the hands of someone who is under stress, it will matter.

Also, there is always the question of power. 850fps vs 1000fps is a big loss when it comes to handgun cartridges.