- Aug 10, 2012
Ok so I am not sure this forum deals with shooting long range pistols...which to me is about 100 yards, but I figure there are people on here who shoot pistols long range. I went to our local shop and he currently has two used 44 mags...one is a super red hawk and the other is a red hawk. Both excellent condition. The redhawk is actually 75 dollars more, I asked why and they said ruger has no plan on making new ones at the moment so the price goes up. Either way I dont care. What I care about is which is the better pistol. Now better means different things to people. From what I have read, the super hawk is pretty much supior in most ways...i.e. the trigger is smoother, the frame is a bit beafier so MAY be able to handle even harsher loads than the regular redhawk, and the scope mounts are on the frame as opposed to the barrel(not exactly sure why this might matter or not). Now the one thing I think the regular redhawk has over the super redhawk is looks...to me the redhawk looks great. I really love smith and wessons but even used ones around here are too much and I do like the ability to shoot stouter loads in these redhawks, but seriously...the regular redhawk looks great to me but the super redhawk kind of looks funny to me and I am not sure if i can get over it haha but ultimately, I would want the better shooting pistol. If they both would shoot "about" the same then I would probably opt for the redhawk, but if the super redhawk really is that much better maybe id go for that. Suggestions/thoughts?