I used to think all pistols were equal, i.e. all 357s of about the same size recoiled alike. Ditto for the 44s. All them recoiled like the next 44 and so on it went.

This idea changed in a hurry about 20 years ago when I bought a S&W .357 with 3" barrel and ROUND BUTT.

I've shot 38s and 357s all my shooting life and often with loads that should have blown the cylinder off the frames. No problem. But THIS little 357 I cannot stand to fire a cylinder full of full house loads with even 158 gr bullet.

I blame it on the round butt. With this design, there is nothing to stop the gun from rotating in your hand when fired and the only thing that stops this rotation is the web of flesh between your thumb and first finger. Hurts like hell!

I've still got the gun and love it like a brother. But I DON'T shoot heavy bullet/full house loads.

This has lead me to make a vow that I will never own another ROUND butt pistol.

My question is, "Do any other pistol shooters feel this way? Have they experienced the difference I'm talking about?"

As I look at the new style Rugers with the Vaquero and Bisley and Birdseye frames, I can't help but shudder and thing they must be miserable to shoot with hot loads.

Forget your personal attachments to your pistols and give me some straight feedback about this recoil vs design issue. Thanks.

In my experience, grip/fit is everything. I can't even stand to shoot a blackhawk in 30 carbine because of the way the "3-fingered" grip (for my hand at least) impacts my hand. In particular, the outer bevel cut of the grip on the gate-side rubs the lower inside of my palm in a very annoying way.

Now my redhawk (44) causes a similar problem, but to a much lesser degree because the design of the grip allows me choke-up a bit, if you will, thus preventing the problem.

I've shot, but do not own the 629, and I find it to be comfortable (in that is doesn't rub anywhere) but a bit narrow for long shooting sessions.

For my hand, the ruger bisley grip is a dream come true - it fits me as well or better than the FA grip. I wish I'd discovered the Bisley grip sooner...

The gp-100 and SRH grip I find quite comfortable as well, though the Bisley is still king (for me). Lots of heavy kicking custom revolvers are bult on Bisley frames - after using them myself, I can see why.

The wood grips on S&W do not feel as good under heavy recoil as redhawk grips. Redhawk does not feel as good as Bisley, Bisley does not feel as good as the Super Blackhawk with properly fitted and properly checkered grips. However with poorly fitted grips the SBH is no better than the Bisley. The thickness of the grips at the backstrap plays a crucial role in recoil management. The thinner the grips the worse it feels (just like in a rifle's butt plate/pad.)

The grips on my SBH (pictured elsewhere on this forum) are the best I have found. It allows the right amount of roll without hurting the web of my hand. The roll of the SBH prevents any jarring, also.
The standard blackhawk grip with heavy loads allows too much roll and does hurt the web of my hand if I do not lock my little finger under the grip. If I do lock my little finger under the grip, it gets sore.

I have shot 350 grain cast bullets out of my 44 at 1380 fps with no discomfort (chron'ed at ~5 yards from muzzle). I know this load was probably too hot and I do not shoot it anymore out of my ruger.

The Bisley does not allow enough roll and with heavy 45 loads tends to jar my hand and wrist after a long shooting session and my accuracy suffers as a result. I think the S&W and Redhawk are actually better than the Bisley if they have rubber grips on them.
But it is all personal prefernce and you have to try them yourself, as we all have differnt hand sizes, strength, and shapes and percieve recoil differently.
Also depends on the overall weight and weight distribution of the gun.

I can shoot the SBH all day long with hot loads.


David

David, the 357 I speak of above has hogue rubber grips which are very comfortable.....until the recoil is enough to start the pistol rolling back against the web of my hand. The problem is with the round butt smith, there is no way to stop it! There isn't anything down there to hook a finger on and slow things down as you describe. If my 357 wants to snap back and eat my hand, it's gonna do it.

I can shoot full house 110 or even 125 gr jacketed all day in this gun, but when I reach the 158 gr or heavier, there's no stopping it from beating my hand to a pulp.

So I'm thinking this is just the way several pistols are designed, like the Ruger models in question.

My first 44 was a standard Ruger 44, before they even built the SBH, and at first it hurt. But after 100 rounds or so, I just got where my hand and arm seemed to recoiled WITH the gun and the problem went away. I rarely even got whacked by the trigger guard. But I agree the SBH is a better design.

I'm anxious to get so feedback from some shooters with the "round butt" Rugers.

I think it depends on the shape of ones hand, and how the shooter prefers the recoil to be delivered. You also must differentiate between double action and single action frames. A double action in general is designed to deliver recoil in a more straight back fassion, hence your negative experience with that smith. A single action is designed to roll in your hand, especially with heavy loads. I've fired a 500 Linebaugh in both the standard blackhawk grip, and a bisley grip, and the bisley grip is definately superior when you are launching 440 gr bullets over 1200 fps. I shoot 200 gr bullets at over 1200 from my blackhawk, and don't mind the grip for that level of recoil, but for big bores and heavy recoil the bisley is where it's at, and personally I prefer them roundbutted.

To me one of the most comfortable grips was a roundbutted Freedom Arms Model 83, and that was a 454 casull. The most painful gun I've ever fired was the S&W titanium 357 mag, absolutely brutal. On my Ruger SRH 480, I've used both the factory grips and the Hogue grips. The hogue grip places your hand lower on the frame, and hence the gun rolls more, well, whips is a better description, and I didn't like it. I've learned how to grip the factory grips and not smash the knuckle on my second finger, nor draw blood from the knuckle on my thumb near the web of my hand.

Pecos, you mention 3" barrel and round butt. I have a S&W Model 13 with those same specs - I found that the grip was too skinny, so I put a Tyler T-grip to fatten the front a little. I still didn't like the feel, so I went with a Pachmayr Compac rubber grip. The recoil isn't too bad if I stay with 110 and 125gr bullets, like you say. But I do believe (just IMHO) that hot 158gr loads in a K-frame, 3" barreled Smith is too much for the gun/shooter combination, regardless of the grip frame. I put the hot 158's through the 6" GP-100. What is it Paul says? "Little guns will always be little guns", I think. I'm not downing your choice of revolver, just saying that each platform has its limits.

Sputster - No problem, Sput. I knew when I got the thing that a .357 was never going to be a .41 or 44. And like I said...I LOVE this gun. In fact, everyone who shoots it loves it and shoots it well. It's very well balanced, IMHO, and easy to shoot even for the short barrel.

Anyway, yes, you are exactly right that even a 38 can be loaded up hot enough to be obnoxious in the K frame Smith.

My point was with the rounded butt, this recoil is MUCH worse.

In fact, I notice Smith seems to have almost stopped making "round butt" revolvers...with a few exceptions. Years ago it seemed like everything they had could be bought with the RB.

Today I look at some of the grip designs on some of the Ruger models and it makes my hand hurt just to think about firing them.

I think a frame should be WIDE at the bottom so that there forms a good wedge in the shooters grip. Down at the "heel" or bottom of our hands is the thickest, most padded part of the hand. This is obviously where God intended us to take recoil from our pistols.

Huh?

Well, dang, David....if that don't make me look like a right raving idiot!
It looks like you're more right than me. Below is apparently about as close to a "square butt" as Smith makes anymore.



And down here is what I've been calling the "round butt" that can take your hand off on heavy recoil.
.


.
I'm amazed at this discovery and it makes me realize that so much about firearms that I USED TO KNOW has changed over the years. I'm starting to feel very old today. Maybe I should be scouting Nursing Homes instead of drooling on websites about guns.

<Sigh>

Pecos45, both guns are in reality round butts. The top gun just has coversion type grips to make it look/feel similar to a square butt.

I knew what you meant by the round butt ... you meant a round butt with a round butt grip.

And with all the changes S&W is makin or has made recently, they make everybody look like a "raving idiot" eventually (not that you looked like one, because you didn't). The only reason I knew is I did a lot of research recently before buying a S&W 44.

By the way that scandium frame 44 in the top picture kicks pretty good. It gives a new definition to the term "pistol whip"

David

Come to think of it, you're right. I remember a lot of the S&W's that I saw in the 80's and 90's had the 'Magna' stocks, and were flared to a degree at the bottom. Instead of hitting straight, the flare would hit the bottom of the hand first and 'roll up' somewhat. Not as much as a plowhandled SAA grip, but somewhat. The round butts just smack straight back into the center of the firing grip.

You're absolutely right, David. And this reality just boggles my mind. WHY would they do this? I'd rather have a gun that FEELS good when I fire it than one that LOOKS good in a holster.

Maybe that's why Smith is starting to put the rubber Uncle Mike's grips on everything...not that this is a cure all.

Pecos-- the redesign to the round butt frame and the move to rubber grips were a cost cutting move. I used to be a big Smith and Wesson collector-- but I quit buying them in the early 80's when they "cheapened" the manufacturing process. I would love to have a 500 S & W-- however I refuse to own a round butt gun. Even with the "conversion" grips. I feel like I am holding a toothpick instead of a gun. You would think that the marketing folks would offer the square butt frame out of the performance center,but they don't-- even at added cost!
If you want to see quality--- look at the S & W revolvers from the 50's to late 70's with the pinned and recessed cylinders, target stocks (the ones that fit me personally) and back then the N frame came new in a wood presentation case!

I briefly had a Ruger Super Redhawk in 454 casull before our 2003 laws came in,(and have found I may be able to get another due to a loophole.)

The problem was the handle seemed too small for my meaty paw.

My hands at 30 are still okay for stupid stuff like firing shotguns one handed, and boxing as a heavyweight incidentally.

So no problems in the wrists, but the handle on the Ruger really hurt some old bony injury in the middle of my palm and also the web of the thumb everytime I fired the heavy stuff.

Were I to ever own one again is there any options to alleviate this?


Karl.

I gotta go with sputster, get some Pachmayr Compacs, (not the "professional compacs" with the open backstrap). They aren't pretty, but they work. I had some on a 4" 686 CS-1 (Custom Service overrun) and I could shoot it all day long with full loads. I loved that sucker, but let it slip away, somehow.......... Neat gun, round butted 4" with .1" wide black front sight (no damned inserts) handy compact and a great shooter, too.

Lots of new factory S&Ws have square butt grips, but underneath, there is a round butt. It used to be quite an aftermarket modification among us S&W N frame concealed carry fans to pay some gunsmith to round butt our favorite 4 inch N frame to round butt K frame and put a set of K frame Pacmyers (sp) on it. I have S&W mountain revolvers in .44 Magnum, .45 Colt and .45 ACP. I don't shoot super heavy loads in any of them, seeing no point with 7 1/2" Ruger Redhawk and Blackhawks waiting for the call to duty. My short fingers grip N frame small Presentation grips best. These are rare but I still have one or two stuck back in case another "old" S&W N frame follows me home. On the new round butt 4" S&W revolvers, I use Compac Pacmyers on my 3" S&W K frames and round butt N frame grips on the others. The individual makes the right fit. I still want some small wraparound rubber grips for my 5 1/2" Redhawk, but no one seems to be listening