I was wondering if the .454 raging bull would recoil more than a .35 remington contender pistol?

I can't answer that but I can tell you with the loads I've tried in my Raging Bull my wife will shoot it ( actually asks ot shoot it). She won't ask to shoot my Smith 29 6 in barrel .44 mag.
It's not as bad as I thought it would be.

I have no experience with the .35 remington but the .454 is like trying to hold a cannon. In the news just recently a 12 year old boy who had an adult help him hold it was killed by the recoil of a .454 casul as the gun came back and struck him in the head. Thats all I know. The 44 mag is enough for me!

I'm pretty used to hard recoiling revolvers, so take this with a grain of salt...

I've not shot the .454Cassul in a contender, only in a Ruger Super Blackhawk...Mine wasn't that bad, it was on par with my BFR .45-70, but I think that had more to do with the size of the BFR and the hogue grips on it....I've shot a .45-70 contender, and it did kick a bit more than the revolver, but I don't think the .454 would be as bad.

Neither of them are going to be hard recoilers...I traded my .454 off for a Dan Wesson .445 Supermag. I've also ran a .475Line, .45-70BFR, and a Desert Eagle .50ae (ok, not as powerful as the others, but about on par with the .454), so the .454 isn't really much gun standing beside those hitters, but it's still a pretty potent gun.

I've shot both and the felt recoil is different. Both recoil pretty well, but the 454 has more of a "snappy" recoil with more muzzle-flip, while the longer barreled Contender has more of a push back toward you. As stated above, it all depends on the load being used, but I'd have to say the 454 has more because of the way it recoils. just my .02