Thinking about swapping my Henry for handgun

[Johnnyjr]

I'm thinking about swapping my Henry b b stainless 44 in on a handgun also in 44 cal. What do you guys think would be better,a Smith or a Ruger. Long barrel. Thanks..

[JEBar]

for a 44 Mag, my personal preference is for a Ruger Redhawk .... for me, recoil makes firing magnum loads from a hand gun no where near as much fun as doing so with a Henry .... consequently, I find I spend much more time shooting our Henry than I do our Redhawk

[Johnnyjr]

Appreciate your thoughts

[Shakey Jake]

Depends on what you're going to use it for. The Redhawk with a 7.5" barrel is a great shooter and recoil is tolerable. I've got one and really love it BUT it's not going to be a good everyday carry gun. I'd go with the Smith if you want a EDC and load it with 44 spcl's. The Blackhawk would also be a good choice as a general purpose woods gun.
Jake

[Vaquero]

Well, I own both a Henry 44 BBB and a pair of Rugers, a 4 5/8" barreled Vaquero, & a 7.5" SBH that is scoped.
Like Jim I find myself shooting the Henry much more.
Funny though I've killed deer with both of the Rugers, and not with the rifle.

RP

[TheBackyardRange]

In single action, I got a 44 Super Blackhawk Buntline 10.5” I converted to a Bisley grip frame. My oldest boy loves that gun. It was a knuckle buster and a bit rough on the fingers before that. As for double action, my brother is partial to the Super Redhawk, I’m partial to the S&W.

I just ordered a Taurus 8-3/8” model 44 but I can’t comment on it yet. It was half the price of the Smith and I figured I’d play around with the finish and it wouldn’t break my heart if I screwed it up. If cost is a concern that’s got you wanting to trade instead of just buy another, Taurus makes a pretty decent revolver if you’re ok with the matte stainless finish.

The Ruger

BC611019-FA20-41D3-AC53-1EA918BC4315.jpeg

The Taurus

1D35C2C1-0211-4D0E-9F01-2567C8E9F7A4.jpeg

[Johnnyjr]

Taurus are good revolvers..I love my s+w 686 in 357..goes with my roosi 92..

[North Country Gal]

I've owned every Ruger 44 mag revolver Ruger has ever made as well as most of the Smith 29/629 versions.

On the basis of ease of handling recoil and comfortable to shoot with standard 44 mag loads, but still as accurate as any 44 I've owned, it would be that big ugly Ruger Super Redhawk 7 12" ... and it is ugly. No kidding, though, given the cost of shooting 44 mag factory ammo, it was almost too easy to shoot. Have owned 3 off the SRHs over the years and all were very accurate, not to mention as durable as a 44 mag revolver can get.

Have owned Redhawks, too, but not as comfy for me to shoot and the SA pull out of the box is nowhere near as nice as the SRH.

And then there is the Super Blackhawk, my first ever centerfire handgun. Still my sentimental favorite over all these years. It will let you know in a hurry, though, that you are shooting a 44 mag. You get sloppy with your grip on one of the Dragoon trigger guard versions and you'll pay for it.

[BigAl52]

Smith and Wesson resale and looks are its strong points. Rugers are tanks and will take any 44 mag diet you can feed them and keep on ticking. Ive owned 2 Taurus revolvers and had issues with both. There customer service is horrible. Never again for me. YMMV

[Johnnyjr]

Well you all talked me into not swapping it. Gonna scope it a hang on to it.. appreciate your replies..

[daytime dave]

I would keep the Henry and add a Smith and Wesson 629. I find the pair a very fine set. I have taken the 629 hunting for deer on it's own and I have taken them both out for deer (or bear if I happened to see one) in the brassy area that I have hunted in the Adirondacks. The shots would be very close, under 50 yards.
I just prefer Smiths. There is nothing wrong with Rugers, I just never took a shine to them like I did Smith and Wesson double actions.

[fortyshooter]

Or you could find the 4.2 inch S&W M69 which is a great size for easy field carry L frame and will handle whatever 44 round you shoot in your Henry 44 Mag. I have the good ol' Ruger SBH and the M69.

[Hatchdog]

Well you all talked me into not swapping it. Gonna scope it a hang on to it.. appreciate your replies..

Great decision. Right now 44 mag revolvers are more plentiful that Henry 44’s.

[Steve51]

I have to agree with some others - I would never swap my .44 rifle for a handgun.
I have two Henry .44 magnums (one rifle & one carbine). I also have two .44 magnum revolvers - both Ruger Super Blackhawks (5.5" bbl & 7.5" bbl)
As much as I like the revolvers, I would never swap my dear .44 Henrys for a handgun.

[Johnnyjr]

That's why I'm going to hold on to it. Appreciate your reply.. The only draw back I have found is that some ammo is to long to feed through it. But I can load them in 44 special..

[Nam Vet]

I think you made the right choice.

[John E Davies]

The main thing about a handgun is that you can carry it loaded most places, but the long gun may not be legal to carry loaded (by law in WA). I would rather have a loaded revolver than an empty Henry..
John Davies
Spokane WA

[Hatchdog]

Well you all talked me into not swapping it. Gonna scope it a hang on to it.. appreciate your replies..

A decision that is unlikely you will regret. Thumbs up!