Super Redhawk Alaskan .454 Casull among other things...

[MCMXI]

Back in 2010 I bought a Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan chambered in .454 Casull. I've been living in Montana for the past four years and have been alternating between a pair of Ruger KLCR revolvers (.357 Mag) for concealed carry and when out hiking or hunting. I also have a Redhawk in. 45 Colt but recently decided that I want to carry the Alaskan when out in the back country so I ordered a Simply Rugged holster and Chesty Puller suspension system. I'll confess that I haven't shot the Alaskan much but that will change starting today. I have eight or nine boxes of Winchester 260gr Partition Gold ammo so figured I'd shoot a few rounds which to be honest was not a particularly pleasant experience. I didn't chrono the ammo but one writer got 1,787 fps from a 7-1/2" Super Redhawk.

If I'm going to carry a firearm for serious use I practice with it to make sure that I can be effective in the event that I need to use it. To that end I want to change the front sight to something from XS or Trueglow (or similar) and work up a handload using hard cast bullets or possibly Barnes XPB bullets. I can probably drive a 250gr Barnes XPB to somewhere around 1,400 fps out of the 2-1/2" barrel, but to reduce cost and use the same load for practice and carry I'll most likely be using gas checked hard cast bullets from Montana Bullet Works (not sure on weight but maybe 300gr). I did slug the chamber throats and barrel this morning and it looks like the throats are .455" and the bore is. 452". I have a ways to go before I have all this figured out and will be using the Barnes VOR-TX 200gr XPB HP load until I have a good hand load worked up. I'll be packing the Alaskan three to four times a week and I'm excited at the prospect of using this great revolver on a regular basis. I ordered a Simply Rugged holster for the Redhawk too but that's a different can of worms that will have to wait.

 

[maxxhavoc]

I run the 300gr Hornady XTP mags over 296. They look a lot cheaper than the XPB's. You might be able to use them for both training and carry.

 

[MCMXI]

I run the 300gr Hornady XTP mags over 296. They look a lot cheaper than the XPB's. You might be able to use them for both training and carry.

Thanks very much.... what velocity are you getting and what barrel length? I just went out back and shot 6 rounds of the Barnes .45 Colt VOR-TX 200gr XPB load and it's really pleasant and easy to shoot fast from the Alaskan. I think I want something midway between the Barnes 200gr and Winchester 260gr loads that will stop a grizzly. When I say midway I mean in terms of recoil, at least that's where I want to start. If I need to back it down I will but all shooting will be double action and I won't feel confident unless I can put all 6 rounds inside 8" at 15 yards in less than 4 seconds (not that fast I know).

 

[maxxhavoc]

I am using the minimum load of 28.5gr of 296 out of an 8" ported barrel (so more like 7".)

Should be around 1,600 FPS, but have not run it over the chrono. I have also run the 240gr over a max load of 38gr of 296 which was a bit stouter recoil-wise. That chronied at 1950-ish.

All based on Hodgdon data from the website...so just go there for load data. Either way, the XTP Mag should handle any speed that the snubby can run them at. Just make sure they are XTP MAGs, not XTPs in a .454.

 

[MCMXI]

Just make sure they are XTP MAGs, not XTPs in a .454.

I did some checking into the XTP MAG bullets and they get excellent reviews on Midway. I want a tough bullet for bears and that's why I'm looking at the hard cast and solid copper offerings, but reading the reviews this may be the best option in terms of cost, ease of use and terminal performance. One reviewer stated....

"Used to shoot hard cast LBT out of my 454 until I did my own little ballistic test with these bullets. They had 5% more weight retention than my LBT through dry telephone books. These suckers are TOUGH."

another said...

"This is a VERY tough bullet... In actual use on moose, however, a recovered close range bullet failed to expand. This bullet may be too tough for most practical uses unless the impact velocities are high and/ or the target is very challenging (heavy bone)."

I'll order some of these bullets along with some 335gr WFN-GC bullets and work up loads for both and see which is more accurate and easier/more pleasant to shoot. I have a .450 Bushmaster so these bullets will work well in that rifle if I decide to use hard cast in the Ruger.

Thanks.

 

[gotboostvr]

The XTP line is fantastic with the caveat that you stay within their handy little chart.

Super accurate bullet for handguns. Works great for me in 357 & 44mag. Stick to their suggested velocity range and you'll be golden. I've laid a few deer quickly to rest with a well placed 240gr XTP.

 

[NorthBorder]

MCMXI,
We live in the same neck of the woods. I have a 4.5" bbl Redhawk in 45. I load a 250 or 255 hard cast in front of W296. I don't chrony but I know it is pretty stout. I get the bullets at a store in Whitefish and they are pretty cheap. There is no brand on the box so I don't know the manufacturer.

 

[MCMXI]

NorthBorder,
Yes we are! Is the store Sportsman & Ski Haus? Odd that there's no manufacturer name on the box. I have a Redhawk chambered in. 45 Colt with the 4.2" barrel but I prefer the grip and balance of the Alaskan. I'm going to order XS sights on Monday for the Alaskan. I have them on both KLCRs and really llike them. The Alaskan sights come with a replacement rear blade sight too.

 

[Mr.Revolverguy]

Here is some chronograph data for the Alaskan with a 360gr pill which was much cheaper than what you are using today. The chart was to big to post here.
http://www.dayattherange.com/?p=5045

 

[NorthBorder]

NorthBorder,
Yes we are! Is the store Sportsman & Ski Haus? Odd that there's no manufacturer name on the box. I have a Redhawk chambered in. 45 Colt with the 4.2" barrel but I prefer the grip and balance of the Alaskan. I'm going to order XS sights on Monday for the Alaskan. I have them on both KLCRs and really llike them. The Alaskan sights come with a replacement rear blade sight too.

Peddler's Post in the same shopping center

 

[CraigC]

I never cared too much for XTP's, or any other cup & core bullet for that matter. That goes triple for anything bigger than deer. The 335-360gr WFN's are going to be more effective, more efficient and more reliable. Get them up to 1200fps and they'll do the job without breaking your wrists or making your ears bleed.

 

[Varminterror]

I'm a big fan of the XTP's for deer hunting, but I'll second @CraigC's comment about finding a better bullet suited for potential bear defense. The solids, whether hardcast Pb or monolithic Cu, are both a better choice than the XTP.

The Swift A-Frame is a jacketed bullet I hold near and dear for penetrating with handguns, but it's an expensive beast, and not always the easiest from which to coax precision.

 

[MCMXI]

Here is some chronograph data for the Alaskan with a 360gr pill which was much cheaper than what you are using today. The chart was to big to post here.

Mr.Revolverguy, thanks for link. After reading your data I decided to put together two loads this morning and shoot both over my CED M2 along with the brutal Winchester 260gr Partition Gold and Barnes VOR-TX .45 Colt 200gr XPB HP. I had the chrono set at 15 feet from the muzzle and targets at 25 yards. The data is listed in the order the ammuition was shot. I figured that some accuracy data might be useful too and will post targets tomorrow. The Barnes ammunition was so bad out of the Alaskan (12"+ group) that I shot six rounds through my RedhawK with the 4.2" barrel and was pleased to see that it performed considerably better in that revolver.

The DA trigger pull is on the heavy side but I think I have some Wolff springs for the Alaskan somewhere. Recoil shooting the Barnes is negligible, the 300gr load is a little more snappy than the 360gr load and the Winchester load is still on the wrong side of brutal, but boy is it accurate! The 300gr load was accurate too.

Barnes VOR-TX .45 Colt 200gr XPB HP (SRH Alaskan)
FPS: 920.3, 867.6, 832.1, 907.8, 867.9, 859.4
ES: 88.2, AVG: 875.9, SD: 29.8

Barnes VOR-TX .45 Colt 200gr XPB HP (RH 4.2")
FPS: 990.3, 961.7, 924.5, 956.5, 981.3, 979.1
ES: 65.8, AVG: 965.6, SD: 21.7

Oregon Trail 300gr FP (.453)
New Starline brass
H110 29.0gr
CCI 450 SRM primer
COAL 1.755"
FPS: 1096, 1100, 1136, 1164, 1113, 1115
ES: 68.0, AVG: 1120, SD: 23.2

Oregon Trail Trueshot 360gr WNFP GC (.453)
New Starline brass
H110 22.5gr
CCI 450 SRM primer
COAL 1.760"
FPS: 935.1, 964.3, 944.2, 895.0, 941.9, 965.7
ES: 70.7, AVG: 941.0, SD: 23.5

Winchester 260gr PARTITION GOLD (SPG454)
FPS: 1491, 1514, 1553, 1499, 1500, 1524
ES: 62.0, AVG: 1513, SD: 20.7

 

[MCMXI]

I never cared too much for XTP's, or any other cup & core bullet for that matter. That goes triple for anything bigger than deer. The 335-360gr WFN's are going to be more effective, more efficient and more reliable. Get them up to 1200fps

I'm a big fan of the XTP's for deer hunting, but I'll second @CraigC's comment about finding a better bullet suited for potential bear defense. The solids, whether hardcast Pb or monolithic Cu, are both a better choice than the XTP.

I use Barnes TTSX bullets in all my hunting rifle handloads and have taken a nice mule deer using Federal Trophy Copper so I'm with you on the desire for a tough, monolithic bullet if possible. However, I get a bit lost when it comes to hard cast and handguns due to lack of experience, but I've read a great deal about the merits of hard cast lead in terms of terminal performance on tough animals. I think I'll order some 340gr WFN-GC bullets from MBW and maybe some 300gr WFN-GC and see which one shoots best. Those bullets are heat treated and have a BHN of 22. The price is basically the same as the XTP Mag 300gr bullets so I might order some of those too since they'll work in my .450 BM.

I've uploaded the targets from today. I don't do a lot of handgun "target" shooting so these results most likely reflect my lack of practice when it comes to precision with a revolver. A better trigger and sights will surely help. The revolver is clearly shooting left for me so I'll fix that when the XS sights come in.

Barnes VOR-TX .45 Colt 200gr XPB HP (SRH Alaskan) ~ 7-1/16"

Barnes VOR-TX .45 Colt 200gr XPB HP (RH 4.2") ~ 4-1/8"

Oregon Trail 300gr FP (.453) ~ 2-13/16"

Oregon Trail Trueshot 360gr WNFP GC (.453) ~ 5-1/8"

Winchester 260gr PARTITION GOLD (SPG454) ~ 4-13/16"

 

[MaxP]

My focus would be heavy solids be they hardcast or mono-metal. Your emphasis should be deep straight-line penetration and light expandables are not the way to go. I love the XPB, and used it on a mountain lion at the start of this year. Perfect cat medicine, but even on a thin-skinned animal like that, the bullets didn't exit. They didn't need to as they were just about perfect cat medicine. Penetration -- straight-line penetration, is your friend in this application.

 

[MCMXI]

MaxP,
Thanks for the insight. I'll be ordering hard cast bullets tomorrow. Looks like I need .455" bullets to work best with the .455" cylinder throats. I just installed a hammer and trigger spring from a Wilson Combat kit that I bought a few years ago and the trigger is a lot better. Next up are the sights.

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/888178/wilson-combat-custom-tune-spring-kit-ruger-super-redhawk

 

[RecoilRob]

Watch with the hammer springs in the Redhawk's....especially if you want it to function DA with the 454's being as they use rifle primers to handle the pressures and at least in my case with a Super Redhawk it wouldn't light them reliably with ANY hammer reduction. SA was fine, as were any 45 Colt but it needed every erg of hammer-fall to light those rifle caps so I just live with the trigger weight...which to be honest isn't bad and considering the swat when it goes off...seems OK.

 

[MCMXI]

Watch with the hammer springs in the Redhawk's....especially if you want it to function DA with the 454's being as they use rifle primers to handle the pressures

I'll definitely keep a lookout for any ignition related issues as I work up loads. I installed the 10lb trigger and 10lb hammer springs from the kit so could go to 12lb and 12lb if there's a problem. Worst case is that I end up with the factory springs.

I ordered 200 340gr WFN GC and 100 300gr WFN GC bullets from Montana Bullet Works this morning in addition to the XS DXW standard dot sights from XS. Here are some random photos of the Alaskan, my handloads and some factory fodder. The Simply Rugged holster and harness should show up in a couple of weeks. It's kind of obvious that I'm really excited about this SRH thing. I haven't worked up a load for a revolver in years, and the idea of putting such a great revolver to regular use rather than have it sit in the safe is awesome.

 

[Varminterror]

The spring issues for the Redhawk's and especially Super Redhawk's are largely exaggerated. Unless there's a fitment issue in the action, neither design actually needs all of the spring force with which they leave the factory. A few quick clean ups here and there and all is right in the world, even with a reduced power spring.

 

[RecoilRob]

The spring issues for the Redhawk's and especially Super Redhawk's are largely exaggerated. Unless there's a fitment issue in the action, neither design actually needs all of the spring force with which they leave the factory. A few quick clean ups here and there and all is right in the world, even with a reduced power spring.

Have you had good luck with lighting rifle primers DA with one? My 7.5" SRH just won't reliably light the harder primers DA with anything but the factory weight spring and it is well smoothed inside. Any normal pistol primers are no sweat for it...even with reduced spring pressure, so thinking about it....building some 'mid-level' 454's with pistol primers might be an option. Stouter than hot-rodded Colt's...but not quite the maximum effort available in the cartridge, which even through the long barrel aren't a ton of fun to shoot. My Alaskan is in 44 Mag...and is all I'd want in the smaller platform with the full power handloads.

 

[MCMXI]

RecoilRob,
What brand of primers are you using? I use CCI 450 primers. When I first bought the Alaskan back in 2010 I put together some handloads for the inaugural range trip using Starline brass, CCI 450 primers and the 300gr bullet that I used this past weekend. Of the 40 rounds I shot that day I had four failures to fire with a 30.0gr load with factory springs. Back then I used to prime cases using the press but around six years ago started using an RCBS dedicated priming tool that makes it much easier to seat primers. In a post from 2010 I stated that the primer pockets of new Starline brass were tight, but this past weekend I found the pockets of new brass from the same lot to be somewhat loose. Basically, I'm not sure if the FTFs were due to improperly seated primers, burrs inside a new revolver causing the hammer to drag, bad primers or something else.

 

[Varminterror]

Have you had good luck with lighting rifle primers DA with one? My 7.5" SRH just won't reliably light the harder primers DA with anything but the factory weight spring and it is well smoothed inside. Any normal pistol primers are no sweat for it...even with reduced spring pressure, so thinking about it....building some 'mid-level' 454's with pistol primers might be an option. Stouter than hot-rodded Colt's...but not quite the maximum effort available in the cartridge, which even through the long barrel aren't a ton of fun to shoot. My Alaskan is in 44 Mag...and is all I'd want in the smaller platform with the full power handloads.

I've never gone out of my way to use CCI41's or anything so drastic, but no, I have never had any trouble getting SRH's to punch SRP's, or even converted Redhawk's, using reduced power springs.

 

[dvnv]

They don't make the 260 gr partition anymore, so you might think twice before just shooting them up as they were/are a good bullet.

I wouldn't trust a Barnes XPB to penetrate like their rifle bullets, so second the thoughts on hard cast or A-Frame for g-bear protection.
fwiw, dvnv

 

[MCMXI]

They don't make the 260 gr partition anymore, so you might think twice before just shooting them up as they were/are a good bullet.

I'm not going to shoot any more of the Partitions using the Alaskan. I shot enough to figure out that the recoil is brutal and enough to check velocity and "accuracy". I'd love to have a lever action in .454 Casull so will save those loads for the day that I get one.

 

[MCMXI]

The 335-360gr WFN's are going to be more effective, more efficient and more reliable. Get them up to 1200fps and they'll do the job without breaking your wrists or making your ears bleed.

I've been playing around with QuickLOAD and very much doubt that I'll be able to push a 340gr bullet to 1,200 fps with a 2.5" barrel. At near max pressure I might only get 1,100 fps. In theory, I might be able to push the 340gr bullet to 1,225 fps (48ksi) in a .45 Colt load from my Redhawk with the 4.2" barrel ... kind of ironic really. That same load would only produce 990 fps from a 2.5" barrel. I'm not going to be a happy camper if I discover that the 4.2" RH, which is only 2oz heavier (unloaded) than the 2.5" Alaskan, shoots a 340gr bullet from a 50ksi .45 Colt load 120+ fps faster than a 340gr bullet from a 65 ksi .454 Casull load from the Alaskan.