Ruger Alaskan experiences and recommendations

I keep on thinking about Ruger Alaskans and wonder which one is the best. I would love to hear your stories of one you have or had at one time. Also which ones do you recommend and why? What has been your experience? Right now I like the idea of a 454 casull but sell me on what you like. Thanks.

Do you have any experience with 454 Casull, particularly in a barrel that short? I shoot monster magnums pretty well, but I have a 4 5/8" Freedom Arms with a ported muzzle, and that thing is a serious handful. I'd think the 2.5" Redhawk Alaskan would be a bit terrifying. I also suspect the velocity loss would be substantial, and potentially bring the 2.5" Casull down into the same territory as a 6" 44 Mag.

There is this fellow on the Ruger Website though...




Talo Distributor Exclusive, so may be hard to come by, but it sure looks about perfect to me. I'd trade my FA for one in a heartbeat. 5" barrel would give you a better sight radius, less muzzle flip, concussion, and fireball, but still ought to be good for 1550 FPS with a 300 grain bullet.

The beautiful thing about "big bore" cartridges is, high velocity is not needed…..in fact can/will be detrimental to penetration. That lower velocity equates to a much more comfortable/tolerable handgun to shoot.

A heavy, lets say 300 grains or more, bullet at 1000 mv will likely "out penetrate" the same bullet pushed at a higher velocity. Read some of John Linebaugh's findings, you may be surprised!

In a handgun, higher velocities will help flatten trajectories for longer shots…..but are actually "counterproductive" at point blank range! I love the S&W 460 XVR, which is too heavy/large for backpack use, if I were to carry mine solely for defensive purposes…..it would be loaded with my 300 grain, light load (around 1000 mv), wide metplat, cast bullets!

So, get your 454, and enjoy the Hell out of it with loads that are very effective but not brutal to the shooter!

memtb

I don't have any experience yet, hence the questions. I would love to try it before buying though so I might have to see if one of my friends has one. I know a guy that has a 500 S&W so maybe I should check with him.

As to the opening question - the Ruger Alaskan - I told a story here about my Alberta Bear trip a while back. My rifle was a Ruger Alaskan - the first unit they ever shipped in Cal 375 Ruger. 3 Shot sight-in, proof round in camp to check zero after the flight and trip in - dead center. Last night of hunt, last 15 minutes of light - 1 round/1bear. Bingo. I was thoroughly impressed with both the rifle and the cartridge. It was tailor-made for the conditions of the North. I had total confidence in it.

memtb said:

The beautiful thing about "big bore" cartridges is, high velocity is not needed…..in fact can/will be detrimental to penetration. That lower velocity equates to a much more comfortable/tolerable handgun to shoot.

A heavy, lets say 300 grains or more, bullet at 1000 mv will likely "out penetrate" the same bullet pushed at a higher velocity. Read some of John Linebaugh's findings, you may be surprised!

In a handgun, higher velocities will help flatten trajectories for longer shots…..but are actually "counterproductive" at point blank range! I love the S&W 460 XVR, which is too heavy/large for backpack use, if I were to carry mine solely for defensive purposes…..it would be loaded with my 300 grain, light load (around 1000 mv), wide metplat, cast bullets!

So, get your 454, and enjoy the Hell out of it with loads that are very effective but not brutal to the shooter!

memtb

Click to expand...

I saw where they were testing big bore rifles for penitraition in wet newspaper. They found that a 45/70 430gr. hardcast at 1500 fps would penitrait deeper than the same bullet at 2300 fps. They were trying to prove that faster isn't always better. That changed my thinking on the subject and guess the experts really do know best

I have the Super Redhawk Alaskan in .44 Mag with the 2.5" barrel. Using the Buffulo Bore reduced recoil hardcast loads it is no problem drawing and shooting one handed should the need arise.

I am curious what the velocity is on those reduced recoil loads.

quandary said:

I have the Super Redhawk Alaskan in .44 Mag with the 2.5" barrel. Using the Buffulo Bore reduced recoil hardcast loads it is no problem drawing and shooting one handed should the need arise.

Click to expand...

Vortex! said:

I don't have any experience yet, hence the questions. I would love to try it before buying though so I might have to see if one of my friends has one. I know a guy that has a 500 S&W so maybe I should check with him.

Click to expand...

That S&W is "HEAVY"…..but that helps tame it some. When I'm carrying my 460, the rifle is at home and visa-versa. It's just too big, bulky, and heavy to carry plus my daypack and rifle. So, I determine what kind of day it will be…..and "dress accordingly"!

That said…..your Ruger is a better "back-up" than my Smith! memtb

bdlesh said:

I saw where they were testing big bore rifles for penitraition in wet newspaper. They found that a 45/70 430gr. hardcast at 1500 fps would penitrait deeper than the same bullet at 2300 fps. They were trying to prove that faster isn't always better. That changed my thinking on the subject and guess the experts really do know best

Click to expand...

I'm pushing my 430's from my Marlin GG a bit faster than that…..but don't expect to have the muzzle up against my target when I "touch it off"! memtb

Vortex! said:

I don't have any experience yet, hence the questions. I would love to try it before buying though so I might have to see if one of my friends has one. I know a guy that has a 500 S&W so maybe I should check with him.

Click to expand...

That's a good idea for sure. The 454C is in a whole other league from 44 mag. For perspective, the muzzle energy is roughly the same as a 44 mag plus a 357 mag...

FYI, The X-Frame Smiths (500SW and 460SW) are GINORMOUS handguns, so they "hide" some of the tremendous recoil compared to the "44 Mag" sized guns in 454 Casull. The "Snubby" version of the 500 is 57 oz vs 44 oz for the Ruger Alaskan. My FA is harder to shoot fast than my buddies 8" S&W500.

As @memtb mentioned, velocity isn't always your friend, but I've fired a pile of bullets into wet paper and milk jugs, and at "handgun" velocities with flat nosed, hard cast bullets, more is generally better until the bullet starts to deform. Full power, hard cast 300 grain 454C (1500 fps) will penetrate quite a bit further than 300 grain 44 mag (1100 fps), and it leaves more of mess in it's wake too.



That video appears to show what I'm talking about. The longer barrel penetrated further in both cases, though in the longer barreled guns, the 454 didn't penetrate quite as far as the 44 mag, perhaps due to the higher velocity and subsequent deformation. Remember though, the 44 mag is smaller diameter, so it has significantly higher sectional density in the same weight bullet compared to the 454.

All 4 tests still penetrated >29 inches with expanding bullets, so if you are using non-expanding hard cast bullets, you can add quite a bit to that (25-33% perhaps?).

Vortex! said:

I am curious what the velocity is on those reduced recoil loads.

Click to expand...

1,350fps

Having shot a 7.5" Ruger in Casull on several range trips whe a buddy had one I have ZERO desire for a 2.5" barrel one.
Very cool round in a large enough handgun though

I like the S&W 460 with the 3.5 inch barrel. It gives you options to shoot .45LC, 454C, and 460. The 454C and LC are pretty tame out of the pistol because of the weight. The 460 is a handful. I can't help it, I love the 460, even at 70 years old. I prefer the 460 over the 500 because it shoots much flatter. In the longer barrels like the 14 inch monster, it's a good 200 yard pistol.

May God grant me another 30 years of enjoying this fantastic sport.