Ruger Alaskan now in 44 mag??


PDA






SAKOHUNTER
November 27, 2006, 11:17 PM
That's got to be pretty exciting for hand loaders....sounds like a guy can now really push the envelope on monster loads.

Would be nice to see some load #ís.

http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/FAProdView?model=5303

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger Alaskan now in 44 mag??" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Ralph Bryant
November 28, 2006, 01:05 AM
"NOW" ? These have been on the market for months. For some reason, Ruger has put the .480s and .454s on the back-burner and gone full steam ahead with .44 mag production in the Alaskans. Hasn't been unusual to see several of the .44s for sale at area gun shops and shows, but the other two are pretty sparce.

Nice guns though. A real handfull of steel, but not quite as bad as the S&W "Bear Specials".......

bigmike45
November 28, 2006, 01:40 PM
That is true. I got my 44mag back in August of this year. I saw it on the shelf since July.

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f43/mike_seale/Gun1.jpg

AnthonyRSS
November 28, 2006, 01:44 PM
We've got one in and I think it feels great, and recoil probably isn't all that bad, whilst still being big enough to take on the bruins.

Anthony

SAKOHUNTER
November 28, 2006, 02:12 PM
Well I guess it's obvious I don't keep up with Ruger.:o

I just read an article on it in the January '07 issue of Guns magazine and just assumed it was coming out this next year. I also noticed they were not in the 2006 Ruger catalog.

Still should be fun for a hand loader.

eastwood44mag
November 28, 2006, 04:06 PM
My SRH is painful to shoot with hot loads. I don't know how you guys can shoot that snubby.

counterman6
November 28, 2006, 11:05 PM
I love my Alaskan .44 mag. It's easy to shoot, no, pleasurable to shoot even with the stiffest of magnum loads. Yes, hand-loading for this snubbie is cool, you can toy around with the largest and mildest of both special and magnum loads.
The other thing about the Alaskan is the range envy one can incite. Everybody popping off nineteen rounds of nine and there you are, a lone man or woman with six big hard-casts and a two and a half inch barrel. The "shock and awe" we all strive for. Do I need one? No. Do I have one? Hell yes.

GunNut
November 28, 2006, 11:11 PM
The nice thing about the Ruger Alaskan is the grips they've put on the gun. I believe they are the same Hogue grips that are on the S&W .500 and .460. The backstrap is covered, taking away quite a bit of the sharpness from the gun recoiling.

Steve

cslinger
November 28, 2006, 11:14 PM
I find myself really wanting an Alaskan, for no reason at all. It doesn't fill an empty need, it probably wouldn't get shot all that much but I am drawn to that big honkin piece of steel. The .500 Smith does nothing for me, the Rugers do for some reason.

Ralph Bryant
November 29, 2006, 12:15 AM
"The .500 Smith does nothing for me, the Rugers do for some reason."

Ditto here. There is just something about the more compact size of the Alaskan, and the style of the design that makes the Smith seem a little "blah" for lack of a better word.

There is really no "backstrap" to speak of on the Alaskan. More of a "stud" type grip-frame like the GPs. Actually, the Alaskan looks much better with a set of GP grips IMO. I wish the .454 was more available because of it's ability to fire .45 colt rounds and still capable of some very hot .454 loads. It doesn't give up much to the .500 mag.

joneb
November 29, 2006, 02:21 AM
Well the AR comes 1st, but already reloading for a S&W 696 ,the 44 Alaskan sounds intrigueing. I think 300 gr HC @ 1,100 fps are doable :) but I would tone it down to 1025 fps

bigmike45
December 3, 2006, 09:58 PM
eastwood,

Try some 44 specials in the Alaskan till you find one that shoots to the same point of impact the 44 mags do and you will have a practice and plinking round that you will enjoy immensely in this gun.

tex

.45&TKD
December 3, 2006, 10:25 PM
Is it me, or does Ruger need to make a 44 mag in a 4 inch?

Something in between 2.5 and 5.5 inches. I would not care if it was a RH of SRH, as long as it was 4 inches, I'd buy it.

Cosmoline
December 4, 2006, 12:32 AM
Ruger has put the .480s and .454s on the back-burner and gone full steam ahead with .44 mag production in the Alaskans.

The .44 mag on that platform is sane and practical.

rtl
December 4, 2006, 01:34 AM
"Is it me, or does Ruger need to make a 44 mag in a 4 inch?

Something in between 2.5 and 5.5 inches. I would not care if it was a RH of SRH, as long as it was 4 inches, I'd buy it." .45&TKD

Better start saving for it now. About a month ago Ruger announced they will be coming out with a 4" Redhawk, there's been a few range session write-ups on it already as well. I WILL own one. Now when does that '07 catalog come out...?

.45&TKD
December 4, 2006, 02:19 AM
Ruger announced they will be coming out with a 4" Redhawk

Great!

rtl
December 5, 2006, 12:40 AM
Official word:
http://www.chuckhawks.com/ruger_4-inch_redhawk_press_release.htm

oscarswanson
April 21, 2007, 09:06 AM
The .454 Casull Ruger Alaskan is my first large bore revolver. I have lot's of .357 Mags. .40 and .45 Cal hand guns.
The Alskan was sligtly used and came with a box & 1/2 of Hornandy 240 Grain that say on the box I believe close to 2,000 FPS.
I would not want to go to the range and shoot 50 rounds because of the recoil, but it was not designed for that. I can get through a dozen or so rounds and that's enough practice to let me know if I can hit what I'm aiming at.
It was designed to shot a large animal at close range. I hope to get a second round off if that ever happens.
I really only bought it because it is the coolest looking revolver I had ever seen. And it came with bullets and a Holster and was only $500.00/ No tax of transferfees.
Now how could pass that up?
Oscar
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y267/oscarswanson/guns051.jpg

Sundles
April 21, 2007, 10:26 AM
The AK is a neat version of the Red Hawk, but after owning several Red Hawks over the years, I would prefer to have the 4 inch Red Hawk myself.

Now if only Ruger would make the 4 inch Red Hawk in 45 colt/454 and the 480 Ruger. I would buy both.

camacho
April 21, 2007, 10:49 AM
There is write up in the latest issue (June) of Combat Handguns on the new Redhawk .44 Mag in 4 inches.

sw686plus
April 22, 2007, 09:17 PM
Man, the 44 Alaskan is expensive though! I saw one at Gander Mt and it was something like $860.

EVIL1
April 23, 2007, 07:41 PM
I just got a new Alaskan .44 Mag on gunbroker for $550

Surefire
April 23, 2007, 08:58 PM
The Alaskan seems to be my ticket to getting the Ruger .44 special 3" barrel I want--its the closest gun Ruger makes.

True, its not quiet 3" (2.5" barrel), and its chambered in .44 magnum. However, I can shoot mostly .44 specials and occasionally magnums.

I handled one a couple weeks ago and like the way it fits. The grips are comfortable even with the finger grooves, and its a reasonbable size for a big bore full framed gun.

I would love to see Ruger introduce a .44 Special on the GP 100 frame size, but until they do the Alaskan will be an alternative.

kludge
April 24, 2007, 11:21 AM
Another vote for a 4" Redhawk in .45 Colt.

I'd even take a 5"

johndoe1027
April 24, 2007, 12:01 PM
I would love to see Ruger introduce a .44 Special on the GP 100 frame size, but until they do the Alaskan will be an alternative.
While we are wishing, I'd like a "six series" sized 45 colt (5 shot would be fine) that could handle the Cor-Bon DPX 245 gr at 1100 fps.... :p

I have bee lusting over the Alaskans for awhile, just can't seem to whiddle (sp?) down my wish list so that it is at the top... :mad:

sw686plus
April 24, 2007, 08:47 PM
I saw the MSRP in the Ruger magazine. Gander Mt is just charging the full suggested price. I'd doubt any serious buyer will get one from them.

azredhawk44
April 24, 2007, 08:52 PM
Is it me, or does Ruger need to make a 44 mag in a 4 inch?

Something in between 2.5 and 5.5 inches. I would not care if it was a RH of SRH, as long as it was 4 inches, I'd buy it.

Like mine that I got a couple weeks ago?:neener:

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p17/azredhawk44/IMG_0939.jpg

boomstik45
November 29, 2007, 03:27 PM
AZRedhawk,

Just got one of those myself little over a week ago! I haven't gotten to the range with it yet, though:(. How does it shoot? I get the feeling I'm going to want to trade out those Hogues for a set of Pachmayr grips. Only reason being that the Pachmayr grips will cover the steel back strap. The Hogues don't , and that may be an issue once I get into more than a box or two of .44 magnum rounds. With the .44 specials in it, there wouldn't be an issue whatsoever, I imagine. I intend to carry it from time to time for anti-two footed critter (mostly Blazer Gold Dot .44special 200 grainers, or Hornady XTP 180 grainers) and occasionally 4-footed critter duty (.44 mags...Corbon or otherwise).

Mr.Revolverguy
November 29, 2007, 08:28 PM
The 4 inch redhawk has been available for a long time now. I got one back in Feb of this year.


02-24-2007, 09:10 PM
My First Impressions with a Ruger Firearm
This 44magnum is surely built like a tank, but the 4inch ruger balances well and points very easy and natural, to me it does not feel as heavy as it looks. It is very easy to get your sight alignment and sight picture with this weapon even though the barrel length is only 4inches. The trigger pull is just right for my big hands but seems to be a bit long in DA, even in SA there is a bit of take up that is longer than any other revolver I have shot. For reference I have been shooting for about 15 years and during this time I have owned and shot these big bore revolvers of 44magnum and greater, Colt Anaconda44, Raging Bull44, S&W629, S&W29, S&W460, S&W500. The recoil of the Ruger seems to be more of a flip than a straight push back to the palm of your hand like the S&W629 exhibits. The Ruger seems to flip back and torques left but with that being said it is not uncomfortable to shoot. For a 44 exiting a 4 inch barrel I was able to aquire sight alignment and sight picture very quickly to return the weapon back on target. Tonight I only put 60 rounds through it as there were a bunch of women on the range and every time I pulled the trigger or went in my lane with this weapon they would stop shooting and watch me. Though I love my big bore revolvers I hate spoiling others time on the range so I shot in between them taking breaks or reloading.

Ammo Used
The local shop where I purchased the firearm threw in two boxes of Magtech JSP 240 grain projectiles. The photo attached to this thread shows the first 5 shots I took. The Ruger seems to shoot high out of the box. Now before you all question the ammo, I reload 44 as well and tonight I used 200grain HornadyXTP on top of 16.3gr of BlueDot with large pistol primer and those shot high as well. I had a friend tag along as he had a brand new Kimber 9mm to to break in as well, he tried it and thought it shot left and high for him, once again for me it was just a tad bit high. The distance we were using was 15 yards. And of course there were no malfuctions.

Overall Thoughts
I love this firearm but is it perfect NO! When pulling the trigger as the cylinder spins you can feel a slight clunk in the palm of your hand as it locks up, but it does lock up very tight. I noticed with me it caused a slight jerk of the trigger a few times, this will take some getting used to for me. Though my friend that tagged along said he could feel it and knew what I was talking about it did not bother him one bit. Is this weapon a keeper it sure is and I suspect I will have it a very long time as I do not purchase weapons to resale, I want to keep them for life unless I buy a lemon and knock on wood that has not happened yet. After all these years for my very first ruger I think I made a good purchase. And note to Ruger you should have had this out years ago!

If you enjoyed reading about "Ruger Alaskan now in 44 mag??" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!