I'm not familiar with any use/abuse-to-destruction tests, and based on my experiences with these guns, they are probably all pretty close. In real-life use, you're not going to "wear-out" a frame on these guns, nor is frame stretching an issue with large magnum Ruger revolvers. Finally, if unsafe-pressure ammunition is your concern, the cylinder and/or barrel is probably your weak spot for bursting strength instead of the frame.

If pressed for an answer, I'd say the Super Blackhawk due to the simpler machining and symmetrical geometry of the frame's shape.

I have a Redhawk that's 25+ years old and it has seen some idiot-fringe loads from an inexperienced-but-learning handloader (), and I still have all my fingers.

Both are 'over-built,' significantly, making them the best revolvers for developing hot hand loads.

If I had to guess, I would suggest that the single-action might be slightly more durable, because the cylinder is fixed in place, rather than having to swing out. But that's just a guess, and I doubt that it would ever make any difference, unless your goal was to abuse it in every possible way.

My brother in law has a super blackhawk, and he is envious of my redhawk. I was said best thY both are over built, but I personally don't like single action guns. And I do not like the loading and unloading of the cylinder. He hunts but doesn't have his ccw so every time he hops in his truck he has to unload it one by one then when he gets out, reload it one by one, whereas mine has a pop out cylinder (which double locks anyway, and I can pop a spedloader in it and away I go. so for user friendly is go with the redhawk, not to mention the redhawk is so over designed big bore heavy bullet companies use redhawks to test their big burly loads, (plus he has hogue rubber grips on his and the jist look goofy, on mine they for right in.