rcmodel
Member in memoriam
Thankya! Thankya!
And yes, I have shot one.
Just not very much.
Kinda like picking up a hot horseshoe to look at it in the blacksmith shop when I was a kid.
It didn't take me very long to satisfy my curiosity!
rc
RUGER ALASKAN 44 V. Smith 329 Air Lite
- Thread starter lobo9er
- Start date
- Status
And yes, I have shot one.
Just not very much.
Kinda like picking up a hot horseshoe to look at it in the blacksmith shop when I was a kid.
It didn't take me very long to satisfy my curiosity!
rc
Kayaker 1960
Member
.44 mag bite
The only .44 mag I've ever fired is my 4" 629, so my opinion comes from limited experience. Factory 240 grain .44 mag loads are manageable but I'd be hard pressed to shoot a box of 50 without a break as my hand gets a bit sore. I fired a few Buffalo Bore 305 grain and though still fairly manageable it's a bit of a beast. I have no interest at all in EVER shooting .44 mag loads from a lighter gun.
I recently bought a Galco Combat Master holster for my 629, It holds the gun nice and tight to my side and is very comfortable.
The only .44 mag I've ever fired is my 4" 629, so my opinion comes from limited experience. Factory 240 grain .44 mag loads are manageable but I'd be hard pressed to shoot a box of 50 without a break as my hand gets a bit sore. I fired a few Buffalo Bore 305 grain and though still fairly manageable it's a bit of a beast. I have no interest at all in EVER shooting .44 mag loads from a lighter gun.
I recently bought a Galco Combat Master holster for my 629, It holds the gun nice and tight to my side and is very comfortable.
tomrkba
Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2010
- Messages
- 2,370
"I have a feeling some of those who are claiming the M329 bites hard have never shot one."
All I know is when I can feel the nerves running through my wrist the recoil is too much for me. The 329 was not fun; the Alaskan was not as much "not fun" with the same loads.
All I know is when I can feel the nerves running through my wrist the recoil is too much for me. The 329 was not fun; the Alaskan was not as much "not fun" with the same loads.
Lucky Derby
Member
The 329 is the hardest kicking, full size .44 Special revolver you will ever shoot. .44 Magnum? Are you nuts?
I had a 4" 629 Mountain Gun. I hated shooting that with Magnums.
Get the Alaskan ora Standard 29/629 4" or a 4" Redhawk. One of the last two are probably the best options.
I had a 4" 629 Mountain Gun. I hated shooting that with Magnums.
Get the Alaskan ora Standard 29/629 4" or a 4" Redhawk. One of the last two are probably the best options.
I was about to make the same suggestion. 329 is downright painful to shoot, Rugers are a bit utilitarian (some like it, some don't) and a pencil-barreled 4" Smith is a great compromise between just carrying a revolver and actually shooting it.
bikemutt
Member
I agree the 329PD is suitable for the purpose you state, and I agree the 2.5" Alaskan at twice the weight may be less inherently accurate owing to it's shorter barrel.
For consideration though is that the 329 may also suffer accuracy issues owing to it's violent muzzle rise and recoil. If the dynamics can be managed by the shooter then yes, it really is a great gun for the purpose.
I shot at least a couple hundred rounds through mine and eventually I did figure out how to control the gun enough to achieve some decent accuracy. However it always took a few cylinders each time to get there. In other words, the first cylinder for me produced borderline pathetic accuracy, it improved as I moved on. Since the first rounds are the one I felt I'd need the most in a nasty woods situation I finally decided to part ways with it. My decision was made easier when I moved back to suburbia with my deep woods days sadly behind me.
For me the perfect gun for the woods I see these days is the S&W TRR8, a scandium 8-shot .357 magnum, if only they offered one with a 4" barrel
i own both and love to shoot them both. they each have their good points. i do not mind the recoil from the 329 (my 340pd is worse), but i would not want to make long shooting sessions out of it. the Ruger is much more comfortable. you can always change over and use the grips from the X frame Smith if you want to feel less recoil. and i like the sights better on the Ruger as i don't care for the rear v notch on the Smith. the Smith is very comfortable to carry and do not notice it even after a day stomping around the woods. the Smith mat even be more concealable if that is needed.
I have one of the .454 Ruger Alaskans. I wouldn't say it is too bad with .45 Colt H-110 reloads in the 250-260gr range. I can shoot 50 or so before my nerves start getting a bit frayed and flinching rears its head. With standard .45 Colt, you could probably shoot it all day. I think the .44 magnum/.44 Special situation would be very similar.
If you get the 329, you can install one of the X-frame Hogue Tamer grips on it that has the sorbothane insert in the web area of the grip. It is the same thing the Alaskan has. It would probably help a good bit.
I really wanted a 329 for awhile, but I read Jeff Quinn's review, and he mentioned it being painful a number of times, even using the word "brutal". That guy shoots guns by choice that I don't want anything to do with, so I probably would not get much enjoyment out of it with .44 mags. It probably is the better carry piece between the two though.
http://www.gunblast.com/SW329PD.htm
If you get the 329, you can install one of the X-frame Hogue Tamer grips on it that has the sorbothane insert in the web area of the grip. It is the same thing the Alaskan has. It would probably help a good bit.
I really wanted a 329 for awhile, but I read Jeff Quinn's review, and he mentioned it being painful a number of times, even using the word "brutal". That guy shoots guns by choice that I don't want anything to do with, so I probably would not get much enjoyment out of it with .44 mags. It probably is the better carry piece between the two though.
http://www.gunblast.com/SW329PD.htm
I have a 329pd a couple of 629's,air-weight 357's , and hunt with a 500. The 329pd has the most severe recoil. Not only does it have a lot of push like most 44mags that put you off target but it also has a lot of bite. To me it stings about the same as slamming my hand down on a table. It does put a smile on my face when i shoot it. But can only put a dozen or so full house loads through it before i start to flinch so bad i miss the target.
aHFo3
Member
The S&W Nightguard in 44 magnum may be a good option. It is heavier than the 329, and it has night sights with a cylinder & slide rear sight. I'm not sure if they're still being made. My lgs had the NG and the 329 recently and the NG felt much better to me. The lightest 44 I've fired is a 629 mountain gun. I'm not interested in shooting the 329, but I'd give the NG a whirl.
TrueTexan
Member
You own the SRH, get the Alaskan. It is the same gun only short barrel. Feels the same and can shoot the same ammo heavy weight if you want. I have the SRH and the Alaskan and they make a great team.
With arthritis settling into my right wrist, I will not voluntarily shoot a lightweight alloy .44, ever. I carried standard-weight and Mountain Revolver 629s, and a Model 58 .41 Magnum, in the 1980s. I am more of a lefty, but tended to shoot long-stroke DA better with my right hand, and am relatively certain all those Magnums really made things worse for my right wrist.
I bought a .454/.45 Colt SRH Alaskan, and a lefty Simply Rugged holster, and installed a pre-Hogue GP100 factory grip. I think I will stick with .45 Colt ammo.
I bought a .454/.45 Colt SRH Alaskan, and a lefty Simply Rugged holster, and installed a pre-Hogue GP100 factory grip. I think I will stick with .45 Colt ammo.
98Redline
Member
I would have to agree with a couple of the other posters, either a 629 Mountain gun or a 4" Redhawk would be my suggestion.
Don't get me wrong, I think the Alaskan is an awesome gun, it is just that short 2.5" barrel makes it a very close in weapon at best. A 4" barrel only adds 1.5" to the length but gets you a little more velocity, sight radius and weight to tame the recoil.
I have a 5 1/2" Redhawk that I shoot top end 44Mag loads out of (320gr @ 1250fps). While the recoil will get your attention it is nothing that I would term as brutal, not fun, or punishing. The 4" gun will be a little more energetic compared to the 5 1/2, but nothing compared to a 329 PD.
Don't get me wrong, I think the Alaskan is an awesome gun, it is just that short 2.5" barrel makes it a very close in weapon at best. A 4" barrel only adds 1.5" to the length but gets you a little more velocity, sight radius and weight to tame the recoil.
I have a 5 1/2" Redhawk that I shoot top end 44Mag loads out of (320gr @ 1250fps). While the recoil will get your attention it is nothing that I would term as brutal, not fun, or punishing. The 4" gun will be a little more energetic compared to the 5 1/2, but nothing compared to a 329 PD.
98Redline said:
I've found with my Alaskan chambered for the .454 Casull that consistent hits on an 8" paper plate at 25 yards are fairly easy ... even when shooting double action. One could argue that the shorter barrel time with the Alaskan helps with accuracy.
Gordon
Member
I've found this to be the optimum for .44 mag protection. I have made 4" 100 yard groups with it SA from sand bags with 240 grain ammo. 1989 Mountain revolver
[/URL]
[/URL]codefour
Member
Why not look into a 4.20 inch Rehawk..? I have one. It's great a great protection gun and a blast to shoot. It's my favorite .44 Mag. Very versatile. Yet brute strong. Stronger than any S&W .44 by far..!!
OP: It depends
I have a 329PD and wouldn't be without it.
It's not fun to shoot. It's okay w/ powder puff loads, but not fun at all with full house loads. It shoots to a very different point of aim with powder puff loads, so the practice-with-mild-carry-full-house strategy doean't work as well as with other revolvers I have.
If I was travelling by boat or horseback, or fishing for the afternoon, I'd carry a steel gun. But I backpack, for ten days or two weeks trips, all summer long in a good year. I'm the cut-your-toothbrush-handle-to-save-weight kind of hiker. I never carried before the 329. Heck, 6 cartridges are a third of a pound, and I agonize over whether I really need to carry a full cylinder.
For that mode of travel, the 329 is the bee's knees - because I'd leave anything heavier at home. But it's not fun to shoot.
(and, of course, bear defense is a difficult marksmanship problem, so you have to practice. In the spring I practice up with a 629, and then shoot a dozen rounds of Garrett's through the 329 to remind myself how bad it is, then carry it all summer)
I have a 329PD and wouldn't be without it.
It's not fun to shoot. It's okay w/ powder puff loads, but not fun at all with full house loads. It shoots to a very different point of aim with powder puff loads, so the practice-with-mild-carry-full-house strategy doean't work as well as with other revolvers I have.
If I was travelling by boat or horseback, or fishing for the afternoon, I'd carry a steel gun. But I backpack, for ten days or two weeks trips, all summer long in a good year. I'm the cut-your-toothbrush-handle-to-save-weight kind of hiker. I never carried before the 329. Heck, 6 cartridges are a third of a pound, and I agonize over whether I really need to carry a full cylinder
.For that mode of travel, the 329 is the bee's knees - because I'd leave anything heavier at home. But it's not fun to shoot.
(and, of course, bear defense is a difficult marksmanship problem, so you have to practice. In the spring I practice up with a 629, and then shoot a dozen rounds of Garrett's through the 329 to remind myself how bad it is, then carry it all summer)
farm23
Member
My 3" 629 weights 45oz loaded with 6 240gr 44 spl. I have shot all of the above guns and I will take the extra weight of my 629 because I can control it. If I were to get another short 44mag it would probably be a 4.75 or 3.75 Blackhawk. If I were to get a 44spl it would be a Charter Arms. OP of the choices you gave it would be the Ruger.
Rick R
Member
I love my .44 Mag Mountain Gun and my 4" .45 Redhawk. I had a 325 NG and found the finish to be fragile. I also didn't like the proclivity to pull bullets out of the case under recoil.
I bought a Simply Rugged holster for the Redhawk and while it's not a backpacker gun it is a comforting chunk of artillery.
A friend has the Alaskan and I've shot it. I'd find a .44 SRH and get it cut down to 4" since the Redhawks are made of unobtainium.
I bought a Simply Rugged holster for the Redhawk and while it's not a backpacker gun it is a comforting chunk of artillery.
A friend has the Alaskan and I've shot it. I'd find a .44 SRH and get it cut down to 4" since the Redhawks are made of unobtainium.
I am not a fan of the lock or the MIM parts. I have taken a vow in protest not to buy a new S&W revolver in hopes this will bring back the guns of old. I may be pissin in the wind well so be it.
I would rather live with the extra weight and get the Alaskan.
I would rather live with the extra weight and get the Alaskan.
dickydalton
Member
I love my '89 44 Mountain Revolver and have shot/ carried it more than any other gun since 1990. Lately I keep it loaded with Specials a lot but am not afraid to shoot 300 grain Mags. I dropped a deer with it in Nov. Most of my 44 ammo is 250 grain Keith hard cast at 1300 fps. Or I plink with the same bullets at 900fps in the Specials. Does it kick? Yup. Is it controllable? Yup. I can still enjoy shooting a hundred rounds at a time, no problem.
SharpsDressedMan
member
The 329PD can be managed better with the use of grips intended for the S&W 500, which have extra absorption around the web of the hand. Just that little extra makes a difference.
- Status
