There is some confussion here...a brand new SBH sells for about $380 in my area, at the cheapest store in town, upto $425 at the others. A blued Redhawk, I don't know the price as I was pricing stainles ones, which are at $430-475. So, judging by that, a blued one is $400-450.
So, the RH is priced $25-50 BELOW what it is worth, and the SBH is priced about right, if not high.
So, The Redhawk is the deal, not the SBH. I have a 7.5" SBH on lay-away, and it is $300. When I saw it, I was prepped to drop the money on a SRH, ($480) in fact minutes away, but I asked if they had any used .44's and they had the one I've got on lay away.
Now, about 20 years ago I read a test in Guns & Ammo on .44 mags. They test fps and accuracy in a variety of bbl lengths, and the results were surprising. The highest fps and accuracy was in guns that had ABOUT a 4" or 6" bbl. Now, the fps winner also had the tightest B-C gap...no surprise there, but it overcame 2-4 inches of bbl length. So, I'd say that the dif in length is NOT going to show up in fps, TO A NOTICABLE DEGREE, maybe a few fps, but not 100, past 6" or so. In otherwords, 7" or 10.5, who cares, as far as fps goes, there are other factors that a LOT more important.
I shoot pistols competiviely, and what I'm fixing to say is based on shooting 2, 4 and 6 inch guns and watching the national champs do the same. Their scores don't drop off w/shorter guns, shooting the same matches. What you and I (and 99.9% of the shooters)will notice is the extra length in your sighting radius. The gun is NOT more accurate. That can be easily proven w/a Ransom Rest, or w/a Super shooter (the champs shoot better than a R-Rest). But, there are damn few guys in the US that you can prove the theory with. The others will readily shoot the longer one better(just like the last post said) As an example, last year at the OK champs, in the 6" Distinguished Auto match, the winner shot his 4" stock auto (w/fixed sights!!!) He dropped either 8 or 4 points, at both 25 and 50 yards, total. I dropped 18. He can shoot the smaller gun as well (BTW, he had a 6" gun, but he sold it as it didn't shoot as well as the 4"...again, he's a walking talking Ransom Rest, and he KNOWS the differance) I'm a Master Class shooter, and I can't prove it, but I know guys that can. So, the guns are just as accurate as the other one, IF MADE RIGHT. But, you'll shoot the longer barrelled one better, almost always, because of the longer sight radius, and this is what people mean to say. They are more accurate when shot by the average Joe (longer ones). You'll also shoot the HEAVIER one better.
I bought 7.5 SBH, because it is plenty heavy, I can put ONE shot where I want it if I concentrate and I figured that it was a good balance between a firing-range gun and one to tote over hill and dale, for days on end.
Are you going to put a scope on it? If so, then pay attention to what I said about shorter guns are just as accurate, and that the advantage is in increased sight radius (which doesn't matter to a scoped gun).
If you are going to the range, buy the heavist longest bbl gun that you can get. You haven't said, so we're guessing on what you are going to do with it, but I can tell you right now, that a 14" 4# gun is not practical for your hip. So, the longest, heaviest, best shooting gun may not be the one to get. But, I know guys that carry Contenders, for elk that are that big. So, we're being general here as we don't know if you want it for a charging bear or a 175 yards elk of the 100 yard buck. I've pretty much written for the 100 yard shot. BTW, I bought a 7.5" SBH to knock elk down, w/one shot at 150 yards.
If you want it for charging bears, then get a 4" Double Action Gun. But, the 7" would be OK, just OK.
BTW, depending on the shooter, double action is often just as good as SA at far distances. When I started shooting pistols, it was proven to me, and 19 years later, I now shoot Double Action better (Wehn I started, SA was better). I shot about 200 rounds of ammo, in 4 postions testing this, on myself. Out of four postions, I believe that I shot weak-handed better w/SA, all other DA was more accurate. This was with repeated 12 shot groups.
Now, the 7" bbl is long enough for hunting. But, LONGER IS BETTER (ask your wife). How far are you going to shoot? 25 yards, then who cares, 50 yards, it MAY matter (for a six shot group yes, but to hit a 6" circle, probably not), at 100 yards then longer is better. The RH is strong enough (It is a Ruger, the strongest gun made) and if not stronger than the SBH. I've been told, by guys that SEEM to know, that a SRH is stronger than a SBH. You'll never wear either gun out by shooting ammo off the shelf and being as you are not a pistol shooter, you should not be pushing the envelope w/hot handloads. So, if you are going to shoot 50 yards 7" is just fine...100 yards and farther, longer is definitly more better (the technical term for it...more better).
D-Action is an asset. I was going to buy one, but when the price was right, I didn't hesitate on the SA gun. Neither should you.
SO, here's my recommendation. DON'T BUY EITHER GUN. The blued gun is by far the better deal and if you really want one, then get it. But, I'd buy a Stainless gun and that is the only reason that I say hold off. The two guns are plenty strong, and there ain't a nickles worth of dif in the strength and 7.5 is plenty long, for ONE shot. So, if blued is fine w/you, then get it.
Something you should do, being as you know the owners, shoot both guns. Go out, buy a box of .44's, shoot 25 shots in each gun. Shoot them at the range you want to be able to shoot...if you are going to hunt w/it. Shoot a couple of 6 shot groups at 25, 50 and 75 yards
