Choosing a .44, would it be the Ruger or the Smith Wesson ?   And any major differences, thanks

That's a tough call.  I have both and this is what I'll tell you about each.  The Ruger is bigger and "beefier" and accepts optics better, but the S&W is a "finer" weapon if you know what I mean.  I would compare them like this:  The Ruger is a good, milled AK while the S&W is a nice AR.  Make sense?  Either way I think you'll be pleased.

Are they priced about the same?

My dad has a M29 with a trigger job, smooth as glass.

I have a Redhawk with a trigger job, it's decent.

Same gunsmith worked on both.

I like them both alot.

As jtw2 states, the S&W seems to be "finer", the Ruger is a beast. The beast suits me just fine.

S&W make a high quality weapon, I own and shoot many handguns including Ruger and Smith & Wesson brands. From my view each is on top of the market in individual guns.

Ruger is absolutely on top of the auto loading rim fire rifle market.

Smith & Wesson is on top of the double action revolver market including the powerful 44 Remington Magnum chambering.

Quoted: Are they priced about the same?

No.  Smiths are more expensive.  Mine is a Super Redhawk and they can generally be had for about $100 or so cheaper than 29's.

As someone else said, tough call. The Smiths are a little smoother than comparable Rugers and I'd go so far as to say that they're the best out-of-the-box revolvers anywhere.

The Ruger is more of a modular design and can be rather easily broken down into sub-assemblies for cleaning and maintenance. I'm also of the mind that the Ruger DAs lend themselves to customization better than any other revolvers (check out Hamilton Bowen's custom Rugers sometime).

I'd get the one on which you can get the best deal. When you're able to afford it, buy the other.

just the fact that bowen will not use the smith to do a 475 linebaugh conversion tells which is the stronger of the 2 handguns.  i have a super redhawk with a trigger job done by a local gunsmith that will give any handgun a run for the money.  it is smooth.   a 29 or 629 (i owned a 629) is a great gun,  i just find the redhawk to be better overall and its cheaper

If you don't plan on hunting a lot with it or maybe shooting 300gr ammo every weekend, I'd suggest the Smith.

The Smith has a MUCH better trigger right out of the box than the Ruger. That means better accuracy as well.

The Ruger is built like a tank so if you want to hunt a good bit, that's the better choice.

Dodge,

I recently went through the exact same investigation on my own.  This is what I came up with.  For strength, Ruger definitely has the upper hand.  SW is no light duty gun, but it has been noted to me that serious damage has been done by hot handloads, (which is hard on any gun, just some guns can take it).  Smith has a nice grip that feels good to me (medium to small hands) but I can't say I like them BETTER than Ruger's inlayed rubber.  And even at that, it's just a hogue grip.  A cheap upgrade for the Ruger at about $17.  Triggers, It can definitely be said that SW trigger is smoother than the Redhawks.  BUT, let me tell you, I had the chance to run a few dry fires (protected of course) with a used Redhawk from a local gunshop.  It had a trigger job and it was silk.  So, here is what I decided.

I like the smith, but let me tell you what I thought.  I could get a smith, and out of box have a crisp trigger, and a good feel.  BUT, for about 100 bucks less (105 at that shop) I could buy a Ruger, get any grip I liked (not just what hogue carries), have a smith whip up a trigger made from butter.  Then, for about the same money.  Have an equally, if not more comfortable gun, with a indestructable frame.  Not to mention a no B.S. warranty that Ruger has.  (I don't know if a trigger job complicates that or not)  At the same token, after handling them side to side, the Smith is much more civilized (as other's have pointed out) in it's overall feel, balance, and appearance.  But hey, what's civilized about a .44 mag.  

Anyway, just what I've found and I think you see what I decided.  Actually, it was the Super Redhawk, but you are looking at the same rationale.  Just thought I'd let you know what I found, not necessarily what you would want.

Gundraw

Edit To Add
JTW2 - Comparing a Ruger to and AK In the presence of an AR, Ouch... heheh

A Ruger Story....

A guy I work with told me this.  His brother purchased a Ruger Redhawk and was told he couldn't shoot enought to wear out this gun.  His brother has a reloader(OK you know where I'm going with this).  He loaded a 44 Mag with engough powder so the bullet would barely seat.(No the guy's not inbreed just stupid)  Took it out to a field Put on gloves, a helmet, and safety glasses and turned his heas and fired.  The gun went hurling up into the air about twenty feet, he went to the hospital with a badly sprang wrist.  The gun was blackened badly where the barrel meets the cylinder.  He took the gun to a gunsmith, was told the gun was OK but called a crazy MF.

above responses pretty well cover it.

if you want a sweetheart, get the Smith.

if you want a bull, get the Ruger.

i have some of both and love them both for different reasons.  

IMO, if i could have only one, it would be neither.  would be my SnW 657 in .41. don't overlook this fine cartridge in either Smith or Redhawk.  

I shot a model 29 for quite a few years.  My brother in law had a redhawk.  The redhawk is by far the better gun, stronger, much better balance.
I sold my 29 a while back.  If I ever buy another .44, it will be a redhawk hands down.