# 44mag Ruger Alaskan



## hideit (Oct 3, 2007)

So I've been thinking about a 44 for a while now. See my thread
"44mag barrel length"
I am presently in Anchorage and have been for 8 days now.
Went to Kincaid Park and was thinking about a hike and when we got to the main visitor house there was a listing of recent bear sightings in the park. That scared my wife off. My son who is stationed here mentioned he wants to get a CCW permit for his future hiking/biking adventures. I immediately thought of the 44 snubbies then moments later remembered the Alaskan Models. The second gun store I went to in anchorage had one in stock. IT WAS HEAVY but I thought that most of my shooting will be 44 specials. 
Really thinking about getting home to my LGS and ordering one.


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

With .44 Special ammo, it would be a pussycat, but with any full-powered .44 Mag ammo, it's gonna be a handful.


----------



## Nanuk (Oct 13, 2012)

Having gone the route of the 44 Mag snubbie, I love them, they are dead sexy..... Especially the Smiths. That being said, a 4" barrel is the way to go. The 4' carries, shoots better and give a smidgeon more velocity which is very important with thing trying to eat you. A Smith mountain revolver is on my short list.


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

I had a 629 Mountain Gun for about a year. Functioned perfectly, shot just fine, but was almost impossible to rapid-fire with full-power loads, and downright painful with some of them. Used it as a light- or medium-load gun most of the time with good results, then a buddy made me a decent offer, and away it went.

I'd like to try a Ruger Alaskan model 3" Super Redhawk with some heavy loads, to see if the extra weight out front makes a difference.

If not, I'd just put a set of compact GP-100 grips on it, load it with mid-range target loads, and keep/use it as a range toy.


----------



## sgms (Jun 2, 2010)

I agree with Nanuk, snub big bore revolvers are sexy as all get out, but don't drop under 4 inch if you plan on using full mag. loads, the extra weight and improved ballistics are a good thing when messing with bears. (As for me in bear country I carry a 6 inch .44 mag. in a shoulder holster and carry a .45-70 lever gun slung under the right arm, it is heavy by the end of the day, but very, very comforting when bears are in sight.)


----------



## DanP_from_AZ (May 8, 2009)

hideit said:


> . . . I immediately thought of the 44 snubbies then moments later remembered the Alaskan Models. The second gun store I went to in anchorage had one in stock. IT WAS HEAVY. . .


I have the Alaskan in .454 Casull. Mine is MagnaPorted.
Remember, with the 2.5" barrel, you lose a lot of "go-power burn". 
So, full-power loads are "sorta comparable" to full-power .44 Mag out of long barrels.

And, yes, it is heavy. 43 ounches unloaded. Recoil with full power .454 is "stout, but not nasty". The Hogue Monogrips work.
It's my mountain/wilderness hiking gun with a Galco holster and heavy cartridge belt.

And, analogous to the .44 Special/.44 Magnum deal you can also shoot .45 Long Colt. Makes it a pussycat for practice.
I also have an 1873 Colt clone and a 1866 Win. "Yellowboy" clone in .45 LC, so the .45 LC/.454 Casull combo makes sense for me.

_"EDIT": oops, sorry, redundacy alert. Already did this photo in your previous post. _:mrgreen:

Here's mine.


----------



## TheReaper (Nov 14, 2008)

A 4" barrel is a good choice and is not really that bad with magnum rounds.


----------



## hideit (Oct 3, 2007)

thanks for the replies.
I have been reading about everything i can find on the internet about the Alaskan.
The internals of the super redhawk are different than the regular redhawk and seems some think the super redhawk is better.
I presently do not own anything bigger than a .32 so I want a big bore and one that is very versitile.
I see a 44 in my future


----------

