I want a Alaskan!

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lightsped

Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2003
Messages
1,241
Location
Kennesaw, Georgia
I currently have a 454 Ragin Bull with 6 7/8 inch barrel. This gun has the limited edition glossy stainless finish on it. I have never shot this gun. It looks scarey and ammo is very expensive.

I saw the Alaskan in a magazine the other day. This gun looks cool. I'd like to have one. Problem is, I probally would be scared of this gun too. Of course I could always go for the 44 Mag version.

Anyways, tell me about the Alaskan. Its looks really interest me. If I bought the 44 Mag would this gun be looked down upon by other big bore wheelgun owners? What is the price difference? Just tell me anything about the Alaskan.

Any good pics?
 
Anyways, tell me about the Alaskan. Its looks really interest me. If I bought the 44 Mag would this gun be looked down upon by other big bore wheelgun owners? What is the price difference? Just tell me anything about the Alaskan.
Click to expand...

I bought a NIB Alaskan (454/45) earlier this week and now, of course, I am an expert. Let me tell you my experiences so far. I put 20 rounds of Winchester 250 grain Cassul ammo through it and was surprised that the recoil was not that bad at all. Let me hasten to add that the 250 grain stuff is at the bottom of the "Cassul Scale" for pain and suffering but it really was not at all unpleasant. Accuracy was, for me, quite good. I put six rounds of the 250 grain Cassul ammo into a 9" paper plate with no problem at all. So, if I am charged by an enraged paper plate I am good to go.

As expected, the 45 Colt was a piece of cake to shoot and accuracy was as good (if not better) than the Cassul stuff. Very pleasant to shoot.

I need the 454 Cassul like I need another hole in my head. The Grizzly bear problem in western Oregon is really non existent - although we do have a really testy racoon to deal with from time to time - but a 454 is what I wanted and so that is what I bought.

Actually, the Alaskan in 44 mag makes a whole lot of sense. I suspect that it will be pretty easy to shoot from the Alaskan and if you want to really reach out - some of the Garrett Hammerhead ammo in 300+ grains will do the job quite well. And the Alaskan Super Red Hawk will take just about any kind of 44 mag stuff made. So, I think that the Alaskan in 44 mag is a good thing. Cost? I paid $629.00 for my Alaskan and that was the same price being asked for the .480 or the 44 mag. I still might get the 44 mag Alaskan but that will be another story.
 
Why have a gun that you don't shoot? That's pointless.
Click to expand...

Well, I must not make much sense then as I have just as many guns that have never been fired as I do guns that have been fired. That doesn't and won't stop me from buying more guns. Its a hobby of mine.

DairyCreek, do you have any good pics of your Alaskan? That was a nice write up.

Anyone else have any experiences with the Alaskan?
 
My only advice is this: don't buy (or customize) guns based on what you expect other people to think. Really, that's...just not a smart way to live your life. You only have one, live it YOUR way.

That said: these Alaskans and the Wild West Guns customs that spawned the concept are in my mind kinda cool. They're small enough to pack well, they shoot great, they can stomp critters when need be and if pressed into self defense use have intimidation factor for MILES :D.

I don't think I'd want one in 480 because the availability of downloaded rounds (45LC, 45LC+P, milder-spectrum 454s or of course 44Spl/milder44Mag in that caliber) isn't there in factory 480 loads.
 
I bought my .454Casull Alaskan almost exactly one year ago, it was the first one available in this area and I really like it! I handload for mine using 2400 and the 300 grain XTP. If you decide to handload for it and are going to push it to full 454 velocities, be aware that the jackets on most 45 cal bullets are thin and Hornady makes 2 different XTP's because of this.

The recoil on full-house loads is sharp, but not unmanageable. The grip is nicely designed and helps to spread out the force. Since the axis of the barrel is quite a bit higher than the wrist, muzzle flip is definitely the most of any handgun I own, but if you put a good crush hold on the grip as you fire it and let the elbow flex it's really not that bad. It's certainly not anything like my Magnum Research BFR revolver in .45-70 when I run 500 grain bullets out of it at 1550 fps. Don't believe everything you might have heard about the recoil. If you have quite a bit of experience shooting .44 Mag in Blackhawks or the like, you'll do fine.

The only problem I've had with mine is that I got caught out in the rain with it one time and even though I dried it off at the range, I saw some light surface corrosion on it when I got home a couple of hours later. I have about 500 rounds through it now.

One bit of advice I would have is that if you decide to shoot 45 Colts in it, please make sure that you thoroughly clean the chambers out before you put 454's in it. Because of the pressure of the 454, there's just not much margin for error and some residue left over from the shorter 45 cases could cause an increase in chamber pressure that would exceed design limits.

Good luck if you decide to purchase an Alaskan and let us know how it works for you!
 
"Matter of fact, the last gun I bought has been shot once and has been in the safe s"

Yes, but you have at least shot it once.
 
Marshall, the point is that the gun is in your safe because YOU WANT IT THERE, not because you predict that others might approve of it being there.

That, to me, is the difference. Has nothing to do with whether or not the gun gets shot much or if at all...lots of people own "unturned" safe queens.
 
A bit off track but I too have "pointless" guns I guess. Have bought a few (one each of the Acusport Ruger Bisleys) with all intentions of simply putting them away for my son when he's older. So are they still pointless? Not to me and proberly won't be to him either.
As for the Alaskan, I'm thinking that anything in this above the .44 mag wouldn't be too awfully pleasnt to have a hold of when it fires.
 
That's an Alaskan? Why is the Alaskan even built? The barrel is too short to allow full potential, (or even partial potential), of the round. Worthless! Now, I don't own a .454 anything. I have shot a long barrel Cassul. And I load my 300gn Sierra's in my SBH .44mag to the hilt, so I'm not imune to recoil. Even a 30-30 in a 12" contenter will wake most anyone up. Not that I'm afraid to shoot any particular hand gun, But I sure wouldn't own one that I was afraid to shoot. (although I'm pretty sure you could shoot 45LC in the Raging Bull all day long..)

It's like having a painting that you don't put on the wall. It's art that needs to be admired. Like owning a vintage street rod and never driving it. Letting a fine bottle of wine, or a bottle of Whiskey age to perfection... There comes a time when the art is to be admired, The car is to be driven, the liquer to be consumed. Just as a gun is to be shot. Do I have a couple safe queens? Yup, the family heirlooms. But they still get shot at least once in a while.

If you can't handle the pain. If you can't handle the excitement of the Raging Bull in .454, then get rid of it. Allow someone else the pleasure of shooting it. Comparing it to the Alaskan, well, if you're afraid of one, then you're going to be terrified of the other if you go with the big bore. I think the .44mag might be best for you.

-Steve
 
Marshall, the point is that the gun is in your safe because YOU WANT IT THERE, not because you predict that others might approve of it being there.

That, to me, is the difference. Has nothing to do with whether or not the gun gets shot much or if at all...lots of people own "unturned" safe queens.
Click to expand...

Hi Jim,

I understand. In Lightsped's place he needs a gun he can shoot. I was pointing out that owning guns you don't shoot is not necessarily pointless. I know lots of us have those. ;) Matter of fact, I wish I had back some of the guns that I have sold that were not used as shooters. :(
 
Very nice pic! Any others? Maybe a bigger photo?

I was debating on with which version to go with (44 Mag or 454 Casull). I think I'll just go with the 454 Casull since I can stil shoot 45LC in it. Plus I like the looks of the cylinder on the 454 Casull....
 
Aw, c'mon, Steve ( Jack of All ). He's just trying to figure out what to do next!
That ALASKAN is not a worthless piece at all. Short bbl. IS the design parameter and it will be effective at the distance it's designed to work at, which is TOO CLOSE FOR COMFORT...:what:

I've got a couple of...no, wait...ONE gun I'm hesitant to shoot, only 'cuz I've found excuses so far not to shoot it...( lack of balls? ) :D
Not really. Just a major case of procrastination.
I HAVE to shoot it soon --- for medical reasons. I won't be able to shoot it for a while after an upcoming 'procedure', so it's now or never!

Lightsped, I've shot a buddy's Raging Bull in .480 Ruger, and it was FUN with a Capital 'F' !
The .454 can't be that much worse, so don't hesitate to take that Queen out and give 'er a good bitch slappin'~! ;)
Whatever you decide, an ALASKAN in .454/.45 just has to be one of the most fun guns ever invented.
 
That's an Alaskan? Why is the Alaskan even built? The barrel is too short to allow full potential, (or even partial potential), of the round. Worthless! Now, I don't own a .454 anything. I have shot a long barrel Cassul. And I load my 300gn Sierra's in my SBH .44mag to the hilt, so I'm not imune to recoil. Even a 30-30 in a 12" contenter will wake most anyone up. Not that I'm afraid to shoot any particular hand gun, But I sure wouldn't own one that I was afraid to shoot.
Click to expand...

Jack,

Addressing your concern that the barrel is too short to allow full potential, when you start with more energy, you end up with more energy. You have to compare apples-to-apples and you have to start with the purpose you are carrying the firearm in the first place. The Alaskan, with the short barrel, is much more convenient to carry on the belt or in a shoulder holster while hiking and even if it was to be carried in a backpack it would still be much easier to bring to bear (no pun intended) than any other production firearm in .454 Casull. Remember that this weapon is intended for short-range defense, not 200-yard hunting shots.

Keeping that in mind, the .454 and the .44 Magnum would show comparable loss in velocity (and therefore energy) with a shorter barrel, but you have to draw the line somewhere to keep accessibility reasonably quick. Granted, a 24" barrel rifle will have more energy (with a given load) than an 18" carbine, so you have a decision to make as it's all a trade-off. But if I was out hiking in an area where contact with a dangerous animal was a possibility and weight, comfort and accessibility were a concern, I'd feel much more comfortable with a .454 Casull with a 2" barrel than a .44 magnum with a 7.5" barrel. I also have a Magnum Research BFR in .45-70 and .450 Marlin, but it has a 10.5" barrel and is not nearly as practical to carry as the Alaskan is. If I were actually out hunting and I was taking the fight to the dangerous animal rather than just protecting myself, it would be the other way around.
 
Keeping that in mind, the .454 and the .44 Magnum would show comparable loss in velocity (and therefore energy) with a shorter barrel
Click to expand...

No. The .454 suffers far greater loss. You are burning 40% more powder at nearly twice the pressure. This is true of any such cartridge comparo. Take a .308 Win. and a .300 RUM; The .300 RUM will lose substantially more velocity going from 26" to 20" than the .308 will.

I was hot after an .454 Alaskan until I did some research and found that the short barrel only affords a 5-10% gain over the top .44 mag loads in a 4" gun. I then decided that there were better choices in a packable .44 mag than the rather heavy Alaskan. 4" would have been a better design; It's not a CCW and does not need to be sooo short.
 
What's the point?
Well that's a valid question since I think some of you are missing the point entirely.

The Alaskan is designed for one thing. UP CLOSE and PERSONAL Self defense against a very large advasary that's is determined to KILL and EAT you. Or at least MANGLE and DISMEMBER you.

Forget about velocity loss., barrel length be dammed. It's meant to be used at muzzle contact range. Except for legalities a barrel isn't even necessary.
The shorter the barrel the less time the bullet is in the bore and therefore less muzzle flip. You want pointability and speed of fire. You want to make a big noise and create the largest opening possible for maximum blood escape.
You don't need any extra length slowing down a draw. You don't need the extra weight of a longer barrel. a 300fps loss of velocity is totally acceptable compared to a .300 second delay in presentation.

This ain't a going to the grocery with the wide and kids CCW.
This ain't a Saturday afternoon alphabet match gun.
This isn't a long range precision bullet delivery system.
This is a belly gun of the utmost.
It is a specialized tool.
It is what it is.
And it's certainly not for everybody.

If it's not for you, fine. So be it.

But don't badmouth it because you don't need it.
And if you can't understand it, perhaps that's a flaw in your design and not the gun's.
 
Thread hijack - sort of. I too want an Alaskan, I just can't decide between the .454 and the .480. I don't envision shooting .45LC and I can handload if I wish. My intended use is last chance bear protection. What would you get and why?
 
I don't know if an angry bear could tell the difference between a .454 and a .480.

If caliber interchangability was not an issue the .480 might be the choice.

But since you said you can handload I'd choose the .454. There is a plethora of bullets available and you should be able to get just a wee bit more penetration. And penetration is very important when up close and personal with a dangerous animal.

For those who already have a .44 Rifle and want ammo compatability then the new Alaskan .44 Magnum version could be used with Garrett or other heavy 300+gr loads.

I wonder why Ruger didn't go with the Dan Wesson .445 Supermag?
 
I tried to order an Alaskan in .454 around the first of this year. had a deposit in for around a month and the gun store finally admitted their wholesaler had not been able to get any Alaskans for months. I wonder if the Alaskans are more readily available now?
 
Up here in the Great Pacific Northwet™ all three chamberings seem to be readily available.

The .44 magnum models have only recentlly appeared but they seem to be numerous.

I see the .454 the least. I hear this is because they are the most in demand.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
Ruger Alaskan Pic Request.
Replies
6
Views
1K
Jhaislet
J
L
  • Locked
.44 mag Alaskan=silly
2 3 4
Replies
85
Views
9K
glocktoberfest
G
G
  • Locked
Is the .44 Magnum Alaskan worthy???
Replies
7
Views
969
Porter_Rockwell
P
P
  • Locked
Shooting Times Reviews the Ruger .454 Alaskan SRH
Replies
4
Views
2K
41mag
4
2
  • Locked
Ruger Redhawk Alaskan and Moonclips
Replies
9
Views
1K
DIRTMODE
D
Back
Top