S&W .44 Vs. Ruger Alaskan

L

Les K.

Member
Joined
May 20, 2011
Messages
23
Reaction score
2
All,

Ok, I was at my LGS the other day because I'm looking for a .44 with a shorter barrel than what I currently have. They had the Ruger Super Red Hawk Alaskan and there was a Smith with a 3" barrel.

I noticed that the frame on the Alaskan had quite a bit more metal on it than the Smith and looked stronger. The guy behind the counter said that this isn't necessarily so and continued on to say that the Ruger frame is investment cast and then machined whereas the Smith and Wesson is forged then machined. He said the forging is stronger than cast and so even though it looks like less metal, they are pretty close in strength.

Does anyone know if what he says is true? The Ruger sure looks solid. I know they both have good warranties, but I'm using handloads (below maximum in the Speer book) which may void it. Would you have any reservations buying the Ruger vs. the Smith? ......TIA.....
 
Register to hide this ad
The clerk is taking his spiel from Ruger/S&W ads of the 1970's, and from less-than-knowlegeable people who don't know there's more than one way to skin a cat.

The Redhawk is a massive revolver, overbuilt and much stronger than the S&W, investment castings or not. If my main concern is light weight for comfortable carry, I'll take the S&W; if its brute strength, it's the Ruger every time.
 
Pisgah said:
The Redhawk is a massive revolver, overbuilt and much stronger than the S&W, investment castings or not. If my main concern is light weight for comfortable carry, I'll take the S&W; if its brute strength, it's the Ruger every time.
Click to expand...

X2

My Super Redhawk is a beast. Wouldn't hesitate to put really, really heavy loads though it. It's build like a tank, looks like a tank and weighs just a little less than a tank ;)

Nothing looks like a M29 IMHO, pure poetry in my eyes. I stick to 180 and 240gr loading in them. Not that I go over the max limits for those loadings either. No real need for a range gun.
 
The Ruger is stronger. If you are going to shoot a lot of hot ammo, or even a small amount of uber-super-duper-hot ammo (IE ruger only loads, guess why they got that name) The Ruger is the only game in town.

If however you plan on shooting standard stuff and occasionally something a little extra warm, the S&W will do fine. It will also make a nicer carry gun.
 
Les K. said:
All,

Does anyone know if what he says is true? The Ruger sure looks solid. I know they both have good warranties, but I'm using handloads (below maximum in the Speer book) which may void it. Would you have any reservations buying the Ruger vs. the Smith? ......TIA.....
Click to expand...


Actually the Ruger does not come with a warranty. They just take care of their customers. Here is the statement that comes with Ruger firearms:

WHY NO WARRANTY CARD HAS BEEN PACKED WITH THIS NEW RUGER FIREARM

The Magnuson-Moss Act (Public Law 93-637) does not require any seller or manufacturer of a consumer product to give a written warranty. It does provide that if a written warranty is given, it must be designated as “limited” or as “full” and sets minimum standards for a “full” warranty. Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc. has elected not to provide any written warranty, either “limited” or “full”, rather than to attempt to comply with the provisions of the Magnuson-Moss Act and the regulations issued thereunder. There are certain implied warranties under state law with respect to sales of consumer goods. As the extent and interpretation of these implied warranties varies from state to state, you should refer to your state statutes. Sturm, Ruger & Company wishes to assure its customers of its continued interest in providing service to owners of Ruger firearms.
 
I own both, so nobody can accuse me of any brand loyalty nonsense. For hard shooting and a high round count, I'll take the Rugers all day long.
 
Last edited:
I looked for a S&W 629 with a 2 1/2" or 3" barrel for a long time. The only one's I could find were overpriced I thought as they are a rarer item. One day I went to the LGS and there layed an Alaskan. It was beautiful and quite a bit less than any 629 I had found so I bought it. Haven't looked back. It is a great shooter and handles well. The score, S&W 10, Ruger 1!
 
i would take the S&W any day of the week...i have a 44&41 mag.in 3"barrel and they both shoot great...if you want some super hot load...jump up to the 460 or 500 mag.
 
i have both the 4" 29 and the .44 alaskan.
the ruger is way stronger just like everyone said. it also just has that look that did it for me the first time i saw one. think it is the massive polished muzzle crown that sucked me in.
the thing shoots very accurately for being such a short sight radius, and soaks up recoil well because of the weight.
thought the hearing aid cases were an apt base for the first photo. :)
 

Attachments

  • alaskan and 29.JPG
    alaskan and 29.JPG
    96.4 KB · Views: 1,904
  • ruger alaskan 1.JPG
    ruger alaskan 1.JPG
    71.1 KB · Views: 1,480
ralph7 said:
i have both the 4" 29 and the .44 alaskan.
the ruger is way stronger just like everyone said. it also just has that look that did it for me the first time i saw one. think it is the massive polished muzzle crown that sucked me in.
the thing shoots very accurately for being such a short sight radius, and soaks up recoil well because of the weight.
thought the hearing aid cases were an apt base for the first photo. :)
Click to expand...

Heavier construction means heavier on the belt. The main purpose for a short-barreled magnum is for self-defense in the woods (or evil streets), not blasting paper on the range. A Smith N frame is more than capable of handling the hottest factory loads.

A Ruger is heavier mainly because the founder's stated goal was to keep machining costs to the minimum. This means practically nothing is removed from surfaces whose main purpose is cosmetic. This is on top of the fact that forgings are inherently stronger than castings, and can be machined to lighter cross sections.

I doubt that I will ever wear out my 40 oz "Mountain Gun", and if I do, it would require enough ammunition to pay for it three times over. In the mean time, the weight savings might add up to a lot of pound-miles.
 
Sadly, Pisgah is a bit off plumb here. The question was about the 'Alaskan', which is a nearly barrel-less Super Redhawk - not a Redhawk. Actually, the Super Redhawk came about as an attempt to convince shooters that Ruger had a viable .44 Magnum revolver, early .44 Magnum Redhawks having suffered from a frame/barrel threading problem which would occasionally 'launch' a barrel downrange. The single spring lockwork of the Redhawk had it's problems, too, and the separate hammer & trigger return of the Super Redhawk is a great step forward there. If you want Ruger's best .44 Magnum, choose the SRH - not the RH. It also has a grip stud in place of the RH's large grip frame, meaning the SRH can sport different grips.

The SRH also benefited by a higher technology SS, as used in the .454 Casull and .480 Ruger SRH's. My .454 SRH was my all-time favorite Ruger; my .45 Colt RH was tied for least favorite! It - and it's bottom dweller sibling, an SP101, drove me away from my all-Ruger revolver collection to a much happier 'all-S&W' collection today. I have the opinion that if a given SAAMI spec'd caliber isn't enough for me, I'll go to a 'hotter' caliber rather than a '+P+' load in an existing caliber.

The hot Alaskan was the .480 Ruger caliber, only made for one run - the whole .480 Ruger, a .475 Linebaugh 'Special' loading, eventually being totally dropped by Ruger. I've shot them all - and was 'impressed' most by the .454 Alaskan. With it's barrel nub in that large snout, it produced a fireball with real .454 Casull rounds. My favorite round in my 7.5" .454 SRH was the Hornady 240gr XTP - 2,000 fps (2,130 ft-lb!). From the Alaskan - fireball! The .44 Magnum Alaskan seems unnecessary - plenty of good short barrel 629/329/29 variants exist. IMHO, of course.

If you need more oomph than a .44 Magnum... consider a .500 S&W Magnum!

Stainz
 
And....the Alaskans can be had in .454! To make the jump to a S&W X-frame, you have to go to a huge gun that isn't exactly easily packable.
 
I own a Ruger Alaskan 454 Casull short barrel and a 629. The 629 is tough to control but trust me the Ruger 454 will almost rip your hand off.
 
I own a 29-2 and am looking for a 3" or 4" stainless .44 to carry on a backpacking trip in Alaska. I tried out the 4" 629 and the Ruger Super Alaskan and the Super Alaskan had a much nicer trigger pull than the 629. When I get ready to buy, I'll go for the RSA, no question about it...
 
My hiking/backpacking/riding gun for black bear country is the 329NG. Here weight and compactness maters, and the Smith is a full pound lighter than the Ruger. I only shoot 'standard' power loads, like Hornady factory 240 gr XTP in this light frame gun. Anywhere else where weight doesn't matter, such as car camping or camping off the ATV's, I prefer the Ruger because it just shoots better than the Smith. Here the hotter loads are usual.

For really big bear/moose/bison country, my 'light' hiking gun is the Ruger Alaskan .454.

Got to say that the steel frame .44 Smiths just don't have a niche anywhere in my arsenal. They are to heavy for backpacking in black bear country, and to underpowered for grizzly country.
 
Last edited:
off road said:
My hiking/backpacking/riding gun for black bear country is the 329NG. Here weight maters, and the Smith is a full pound lighter than the Ruger.
Click to expand...

I checked out this gun and it seemed so light that I felt that it would be too painful to shoot in .44 Mag. It sure is light for carrying though. I guess that if you really needed to use it, you wouldn't mind the recoil!
 
If I need something more powerful than a 44 Magnum I'll get a S&W X-frame in 460 or 500. Someone else can have my share of Rugers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ddeanjohnson
  • Locked
WITHDRAWN -- Collection reduction: 40 guns (15 S&W + Colts, etc.)
2
Replies
26
Views
10K
ddeanjohnson
ddeanjohnson
ddeanjohnson
WTS: list of 22 guns that remain -- MORE PRICE REDUCTIONS -- collection liquidation
2
Replies
27
Views
14K
Rick Sanborn
Rick Sanborn
S
Starting a Gun Collection for SD (Polymers vs Metal, S&W vs Sig Sauer, New vs Old)
Replies
15
Views
2K
Shorty 45 MK2
Shorty 45 MK2
K
Heaviest loads for a 329PD, Night guard .44 mag, or 329PD back packer?
2 3
Replies
40
Views
39K
JustDan
J
R
Hunting with a scoped S&W 44 mag.?
Replies
16
Views
10K
Nemo288
Nemo288

Latest posts

Back
Top