S&W .44 Vs. Ruger Alaskan

[Frizzman]

If you are going to load ammo that will substantially damage or stretch the S&W's frame, you are likely to give out before the gun does. I have a Redhawk and a 629. I have both because I like big bore revolvers. I load my own ammo except for that used in my carry guns. I live on the coast of Virgnia in the burbs (yuck) and there are no griz around here and I dont need a handgun to avoid the Hugh Glass Experience. If I felt a need to carry a .44 Mag or .454 with ammo loaded to frame stretching levels, it's time for a heavy rifle like my Ruger Number One Tropical in .458 Win Mag (no griz around here but an enraged jumbo might escape from the circus)...In my younger days of deer hunting in the mountains, I usually carried my old Security Six with some stout handloads...I find the idea of shooting full power .454 from a short barrelled revolver unappealing and really don't see the point except as a stunt maybe...At my age, I don't like pain and don't want to make my arthritic hands and wrists hurt more and my eyebrows have more hair than my head so I wanna keep em!

 

[CAJUNLAWYER]

S&W 44 or Ruger Alaskan ? Kinda like asking, Jenifer Lopez or Rosie Odonnel?

Well pardner, if it t'were me against a griz, I'd rather have Rosie O'Donnel to throw at it than Jennifer Lopez.....jest sayin......
If I'm in the lower 48, then Jennifer Lopez will do quite nicely

 

[long colt frazier]

Well pardner, if it t'were me against a griz, I'd rather have Rosie O'Donnel to throw at it than Jennifer Lopez.....jest sayin......
If I'm in the lower 48, then Jennifer Lopez will do quite nicely

I don't think you could throw Rosie.
Mark

 

[akmtnrunner]

I gotta say, with all this talk about pushing a revolver to it's maximum limit, perhaps just a bigger gun-designed for the intended power-is needed? Lots of ammo manufacturers load great bullets with moderate or even reduced loads of 454 or 480. Even better if you hand load.

And really, many a wise handgun hunters of bear will tell you that moderate speed is best. Big heavy bullet, yes; max powder underneath, nope. The thing about snubs though, is in order to get a moderate speed, you've got to use a max load. I guess you know where I stand on snubs. But you do you.

 

[bcc629]

 

[woudstra]

and .45 colt

 

[AR_Black]

I've got a Ruger Alaskan .454
Not much use around here, other than fun.


Powerhouse Handloads ::: 360-grain Cast WNFPGC with 22-grains Lil' Gun. Bear Stoppers. Head Turners. And a big Grin!

Pop Loads: 255-grain lead over Trailboss in the .454 case.

 

[Frank46]

Have a Redhawk 44 magnum with the 6" barrel. used to love to shoot it and once had a chance to shoot exactly 2 rounds of 454 Casul in a Super Redhawk. Well two rounds was quite plenty thank you very much. Unloaded the revolver and handed it back to it's owner. As I get older I find I have enough aches and pains so why should I get any more. 44 Special to the rescue. All the fun I used to have and no pain. Still have the 44 magnum Redhawk and she gets shot about once a year. Frank

 

[Mehutch]

"Buy a shotgun... buy a shotgun!" - Joe Biden

 

[WisconsinKen]

I own a shorty Ruger SR Alaskan in .44 mag.

In car comparisons, it is a 1970 Charger 440 with a blower sticking out of the hood - a real beast. The S&W is more like a corvette. All depends on what you want to do with it.

 

[Tom S.]

An old ad sums it up:

 

[at_liberty]

Alaskan is 45 ounces.
Ruger® Super Redhawk Alaskan® Double-Action Revolver Model 5303

The S&W 3" N-frame is 39 1/2.
Model 629 Deluxe | Smith & Wesson

The Redhawk cylinder is 3/32" larger in diameter, but the guns are pretty comparable in size.

Both are odd looking to me. I like the look of the barrel being longer than the ejector. 4" would get my vote.