P. Plainsman
Member
It's in ST's "Special Collector's Edition Guide to Ruger Firearms 2005." While this publication smacks somewhat of a Ruger ad, it is rather interesting -- collects the major Ruger reviews in ST over the past 30-odd years, plus reviews of the rash of new guns Ruger is introducing in '05.
Dick Metcalf reviews the Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan in .454 Casull. It is basically a positive review, given the gun's mission. Felt recoil is clearly massive. Metcalf calls the SRH Alaskan "a bear"; says the Hogue monogrip is an absolute necessity (the stock SRH/GP100 grip is way out of its league), and notes that Ruger has plans to ship the Hogues with the production guns. Metcalf also regrets the absence of porting, though the Alaskan's barrel is only 2.5 inches. He recommends practicing with .45 Colt and using the .454 Casull only enough to sight in, then carry the gun in the field.
Power loss from the short barrel compared to the 7.5-inch barrel, standard .454 SRH is: a 14.1% reduction in average velocity and a 26.2% reduction in average energy. That is significant, but Metcalf says the short .454 Alaskan still comes up with a 40% energy advantage over top-shelf 240 gr .44 Magnum fired from a full-length barrel -- a more than marginal incentive to carry the Alaskan.
I'd like to know how the ballistics from the .480 Ruger Alaskan shake out. Surely it will be at least comparable to a full-house, 7.5" barrel .44 Mag, which ain't bad. As the more shootable gun, the .480 Alaskan will probably appeal to many.
One last note: the Alaskan looks really mean. There's a nearly barrel-on close up shot of Metcalf pointing the thing with hammer cocked, and the massive stainless frame in his hands, gaping snubby maw, and big ol' hollowpoints pointing out the cylinder exemplify the phrase "intimidation value." Wow.
I am hopeful that we'll see this gun cameo in some action flicks in the next few years.
Dick Metcalf reviews the Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan in .454 Casull. It is basically a positive review, given the gun's mission. Felt recoil is clearly massive. Metcalf calls the SRH Alaskan "a bear"; says the Hogue monogrip is an absolute necessity (the stock SRH/GP100 grip is way out of its league), and notes that Ruger has plans to ship the Hogues with the production guns. Metcalf also regrets the absence of porting, though the Alaskan's barrel is only 2.5 inches. He recommends practicing with .45 Colt and using the .454 Casull only enough to sight in, then carry the gun in the field.
Power loss from the short barrel compared to the 7.5-inch barrel, standard .454 SRH is: a 14.1% reduction in average velocity and a 26.2% reduction in average energy. That is significant, but Metcalf says the short .454 Alaskan still comes up with a 40% energy advantage over top-shelf 240 gr .44 Magnum fired from a full-length barrel -- a more than marginal incentive to carry the Alaskan.
I'd like to know how the ballistics from the .480 Ruger Alaskan shake out. Surely it will be at least comparable to a full-house, 7.5" barrel .44 Mag, which ain't bad. As the more shootable gun, the .480 Alaskan will probably appeal to many.
One last note: the Alaskan looks really mean. There's a nearly barrel-on close up shot of Metcalf pointing the thing with hammer cocked, and the massive stainless frame in his hands, gaping snubby maw, and big ol' hollowpoints pointing out the cylinder exemplify the phrase "intimidation value." Wow.
I am hopeful that we'll see this gun cameo in some action flicks in the next few years.
