|
Post by mike454 on Sept 12, 2016 12:50:11 GMT -5
Apart from the video does anyone remember Elmer Keith writing that the S&W 29 would take loads that would blow a flattop ruger 44 mag, or am I just remembering incorrectly?
|
|
|
Post by taffin on Sept 12, 2016 18:45:10 GMT -5
Apart from the video does anyone remember Elmer Keith writing that the S&W 29 would take loads that would blow a flattop ruger 44 mag, or am I just remembering incorrectly? YOU ARE CORRECT. HE REPORTED THE SUPER BLACKHAWK BLEW AND THE SMITH STRETCHED WITH THE SAME PROOF LOADS.
|
|
|
Post by Quick Draw McGraw on Sept 12, 2016 18:59:29 GMT -5
I do believe it. My understanding is the flat tops aren't as strong. And like I said, Smith makes strong guns. But i wonder if you compare a Redhawk or Super Redhawk to 29 what the comparison would be like.
|
|
|
Post by taffin on Sept 12, 2016 20:39:51 GMT -5
I do believe it. My understanding is the flat tops aren't as strong. And like I said, Smith makes strong guns. But i wonder if you compare a Redhawk or Super Redhawk to 29 what the comparison would be like. NO CONTEST. REDHAWK ALL THE WAY.
|
|
|
Post by tek4260 on Sept 13, 2016 11:52:43 GMT -5
I don't know if the Ruger SBH or Redhawk/SRH is any stronger than the N frame Smith as far as PSI before catastrophic failure, but I do feel pretty confident that the Smith will beat itself to pieces at least 2x faster than the Ruger.
|
|
aciera
.375 Atomic
Posts: 2,076
Member is Online
|
Post by aciera on Sept 15, 2016 2:27:53 GMT -5
Apart from the video does anyone remember Elmer Keith writing that the S&W 29 would take loads that would blow a flattop ruger 44 mag, or am I just remembering incorrectly? YOU ARE CORRECT. HE REPORTED THE SUPER BLACKHAWK BLEW AND THE SMITH STRETCHED WITH THE SAME PROOF LOADS. Doesn't make it stronger in all ways...... If a 70,000cip load did that, it doesn't mean 500 "Ruger Only Loads" wouldn't not phase the SBH and stretch the Smith&Wesson........ Spend a few years in R&D with Destructive Testing and there are many sides to a story For constant heavy loads I'll stick with the Blackhawk........you don't see many 5 shots built on a Smith 29 frame
|
|
|
Post by Thunderjet on Sept 15, 2016 10:12:40 GMT -5
Which one is stronger? Good question. I never shot either brand "loose" and I bought my first .44 mag in 1975. Ruger certainty wins the war when it comes to having to send new revolvers back to the factory to be fixed.
|
|
|
Post by jeffer on Sept 15, 2016 19:50:16 GMT -5
What Taffin said. One should be able to discern the difference between a tank and a Corvette.
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on Sept 15, 2016 19:50:20 GMT -5
Federal Cartridge Corporation asked for input on developing .44 Mag loads for IHMSA silhouette. Neither the record setting Ruger SBH Silhouette Super nor the Dan Wesson Arms M44 existed at that time. I was In Texas, armed with----among other things----the S&W M-29 8-3/8-inch which had gained a bit of respect in the sixgun battle raging at that time. One afternoon, laying Creedmoor on the outskirts of Austin, my Model 29 fairly cratered a mild 1/2" steel pig @ 100 meters. Cratered the mother with the Sierra .4295" 220 FPJ (Full Profile Jacket). These were beaucoup ROCKS & DYNAMITE. Holding where the front leg joins the body----a 6 o'clock hold----you could stick your thumb into the craters four and five inches above sighted POI (Point of Aim) and the steel was warmer than the Texas sun when you got there.
Hugh Reed calls back from Federal. "We blew up a Marlin with that load," he says. (The load Federal settled on, code #44C, is good for two inches @ 100 yards, probably tighter.) To this day I do not understand beyond venting at the cylinder gap. There was no straighter shooter in the industry than Hugh Reed. I did not press for details, the battle raged in silhouette, no one gave an inch, top revolver artists barely dreamed a perfect score could be shot. Hell, the REVOLVER WARRIORS didn't even have a category of their own, there miserable single-shot-only crowd perfectly content to pick us off one by one. Great shooting is done on the firing line, not behind it.
A raft of shooters ran up on the M-29 and Super Blackhawk trying to nail those full foot rams @ 200 meters. Of course, heavy bullets and non-frangible bullets with more DWELL TIME push a target LONGER. Back on subject, this shooter is forced to confess the vintage M-29 cylinder indeed carries good hardware sweetly heat treated. For the adventurous soul who cannot pay attention to detail, the Ruger Super Blackhawk and S&W M-29 blow equally fast. Once you step over the line into freefall, might as well kiss your butt goodbye.
That blue 8-3/8" remains to this day ferociously accurate, overhauled by all time master Al Plaas at Smith & Wesson.
A hard corps sixgunner learns WHAT HIS or HER REVOLVER WANTS. That its why there is not time for plinking. Bury the bullet or get out. David Bradshaw
|
|
|
Post by rkcohen on Oct 8, 2016 22:33:32 GMT -5
..........some people buy apples, some people buy oranges.....
|
|
|
Post by valley28 on Nov 3, 2016 22:13:27 GMT -5
When it comes to burgers and shakes...
|
|
4597
.30 Stingray
Posts: 182
|
Post by 4597 on Nov 4, 2016 21:09:35 GMT -5
I will say I'm sorry because I did not read every post. But are we comparing Singles to Double actions or apples to apples?
|
|
|
Post by zac0419 on Nov 5, 2016 5:29:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by flattopdan on Nov 5, 2016 9:46:13 GMT -5
One of the big name six gun guys said that 45 Colt S&W 25s would take ruger only loads with no issues, I shot a few boxes in my model 25 and it didn't blow up. I don't think I'd head to the range every week with 50 rounds but for hunting and woods carry I'd say it can be done. I don't have my M25 any lonager and the guy i sold it to never shot anything hotter than factory. I'd bet those loads would beat the smith to death over time.
|
|
|
Post by Quick Draw McGraw on Nov 5, 2016 12:35:28 GMT -5
I will say I'm sorry because I did not read every post. But are we comparing Singles to Double actions or apples to apples? This video us kind of all over the place. Personally, I think the only way to fairly compare the two is double actions. From my research it's still not an apples-to-apples as the designs are dramatically different. However, comparing an N-Frame to a Redhawk frame, you're comparing a frame designed around the .44 Special to a frame specifically designed around the .44 Magnum. The stronger frame is obvious. I still think for the average shooter an N-Frame will hold up just fine and provide a lifetime of service. But, in speaking to Jack Huntington, who used to work for Smith & Wesson, Smith uses softer metal. So again, Ruger is going to take more abuse and show less strain. Now comparing the X-Frame to the Super Redhawk... The SRH is a smaller firearm that can handle a 6-shot cylinder of the hottest .454 Casull made. The X-Frame can too, but it has to go to a very large size and maxes out at a 5-shot cylinder. Is the SRH stronger? I don't know. But 6 shots of .454 Casull or .480 Ruger in a smaller, lighter, easier to carry package gets my endorsement over 5 shots of .460 S&W or .500 S&W any day of the week and twice on Sundays.
|
|