Ruger SRH Alaskan?

N

Nick_C_S

New member
So I poked my head into my LGS today - just to see what for sale on consignment. I look at a lot of used guns. Have never bought one though.

In the case today was a Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan. Being a S&W guy, I've never even heard of one (the SRH part, yes; the Alaskan part, no). 2.5" barrel.

Big burly gun. Trigger felt good. Cylinder lockup was excellent. Nice gun. I rather liked it. I didn't ask how much the buyer was asking; and if I did know, I wouldn't mention it here because this is California. And good used guns in Ca have prices that bear no resemblance to the remainder of the country. So that's not what this post is about.

Anyway, I didn't ask how much it was because at the time I was just looking and was not really interested. But I keep thinking about it. It needed cleaning, but appeared to be in excellent condition. Looked like new (except for the powder residue thing). Sorry, no pics. Like I said - at the time I wasn't that interested.

I guess my question is (finally!): Are these guns any good? Can someone with experience with these Alaskans tell me what they think of them?
 
IMHO, it is great revolver. The SRH Alaskan is built like a tank and they are very popular, almost like a cult-like following. They are brutally strong and well made. They are not as smooth as your average Smith & Wesson L or N Frame but can be made pretty close or just as smooth. The Ruger's hammer and trigger pull is longer than a S&W's but I grew to love it. It was designed for bear defense in Alaska. The 454 Casull is a beast to shoot. The 44 mag version is still a handful. They are large, heavy, and bulky but also very cool.

I have a 7.5 inch SRH in 454 Casull. It kicks like a beast, more than my 460 XVR. I fired a friends 480 Ruger Alaskan and it was not as bad as my Casull. Then again, recoil is relative to the shooter.

What caliber was in the cabinet? Why do you want it.? If the want is the cool factor, go for it. Lots of inmates on TFL have firearms for the cool factor. If you are going into bear country, it is a viable option.

I recently went into my LGS to look at buying an Alaskan. They had a Talo Dist Redhawk in .44 Mag in the cabinet. It was a 2.75 inch barreled Redhawk. It had a smaller, rounded grip than the regular Redhawk frame and was actually concealable. I knew it was a limited run so I bought it instead. I still plan on getting a 454 Casull Alaskan.
 
Last edited:
Im getting the SRH full size after.xmas....EVERYONE i talk to says ruger builds revolvers like tanks! And EVERYONE i talk to says they love theres no matter what the caliber was. I have yet to hear a single bad opinion about the SRH or SBH.
 
I picked up a 2 1/2" Super Redhawk Alaskan, .480 Ruger, in late August.

The following was copied from my notes.

September 9, 2014

Cumulative round count: 227

LOAD DATA FOR REFERENCE ONLY -- NOT A RECOMMENDATION

Chronographed again – new Starline cases and different lot of H110 (this lot and old lot shot within 20 fps of each other when previously tested in .44 Mag & .475LB)

385gr FNHP (Powder Coated) Dual Crimp Grove-Seated in Bottom Cr Gr at 1.694”
22.4gr H110 (Dillon 550 - 8lb)
Win WLP
New Starline .480 Ruger
Actual Velocity: 1,054 avg fps (ES 28), five shots at five paces and 75 Deg F
Note-Velocity 1,250 fps from a 6" Freedom Arms M83

LOAD DATA FOR REFERENCE ONLY -- NOT A RECOMMENDATION

Shot the following 25 yd group (top) from a rest while chrographing. Moved windage right and shot lower right group offhand from 12 yards – pulled the first shot a bit low and left. First time shooting for accy at paper.
.
IMG_0636_zps083f1882.jpg

.
First 6 rounds offhand at 9 yds with different bullet weight to determine POI.
.
P8270003_zpse32f0371.jpg

.
The gun weighs right at 42 oz (empty) on my digital food scale. Loaded with 6ea 400gr rounds, it goes 50 oz.
.
For a big bore snubby, it is amazingly easy to shoot.
.
FWIW,

Paul
 
Thanks guys.

I didn't realize they come in different calibers. This one was a 44 Mag.

This Alaskan has been dancing around in my head since yesterday because I only have one 44 Mag and I'm not real fond of shooting it. It's a S&W 629 8-3/8" bbl. I bought it back in '84 when I was new to shooting and all about long barrels (the "Dirty Harry" franchise probably nudged my decision too). These days, I find it awkward to shoot. The barrel is too long for 10 yard shooting, and my vision and steadiness aren't good enough for 25 yards. It's a beautiful gun and a blast (no pun) to shoot.

I much prefer shorter barrels and so my 44 Mag has fallen squarely in the "safe queen" category because of its barrel length. Another 44 Mag with a shorter barrel (thinking 629 dlx 5") has been on my short list for a few years now; but has never risen high enough on the list to make a purchase - I think most of us have a gun or two in mind like that.
 
Last edited:
Well recoil be subjective, I find my Alaskan to be the mildest in recoil of the four .44 mag I own.
Second best is my Blackhawk, followed by my Redhawk, and lastly the Contender.
My primary load is a 240 gr Hornady XTP on top of 24 grs of IMR 4227.
Out of The Blackhawk that's about 1395 fps. Fairly stout load.
And don't let the short barrel fool you the fps loss is not as great as you would think.
Especially if you use a faster burning powder. The IMR 4227 is not a good powder for the shorter barrel.
 
It never made much sense to me to have a barrel the same length s (or not much longer than) the cartridge. You lose too much velocity potential.

My SRHs sport 7.5" barrels. 44, 454 and 480

True, it is quicker to clear the holster with a short barrel (and I know of two people who owe their lives (or at least uninjured status) to that fact. So you "pays yer money and takes yer choice."

The SRH Alaskans also do not have the scope ring scallops that the standard SRHs do. If I were to go short, I would have a good gunsmith bob the barrel, and keep the scope rings. The 454 Casull SRH can also have the cylinder cut for moon clips to shoot 45 ACP. And, of course it chambers and shoots 45 Colt perfectly well.

Lost Sheep
 
I have same gun in .454. Can also shoot .45 Long Colts also but need to give a good cleaning after or cases stick when you go back to .454.

The Redhawk line (including Alaskan) has had some firing pin problems with certain ammo. See the article from Bowen Classic Arms http://www.bowenclassicarms.com/about.html

I had a couple of FTF with Buffalo Bore ammo and discovered the firing pin issue. I have an new firing pin which is slightly longer for a deeper strike yet to be installe which is supposed to fix the issue.

The gun is a beast in size. I am a pretty proficient shooter so I don't find it a problem to shoot but ammo is expensive. The .45s are easy to shoot but you have to hang on with the heavy .454 loads.

I bought mine to take along for fishing in Alaska since I like to always have a handgun close at hand. I bought mine (like new) for about $500 3 years ago.

You will probably hear a lot of chatter about velocity etc out of a short barrel, which is true. However, I was not buying it to go hunting. This was a last ditch in the event something wanted to eat me, and my fishing partner could run faster than me. :D A close quarters shot would probably also cook the meat as well.....a bit of a flame thrower! :eek:

I also liked the relative concealability of the short barrel and ability to switch to .45 when in bars or other public places where two legged threats were the concern.
 
Get an Alaskan .44

Useful for everything from brown bear with some hot Garrett cartridges to personal defense with Buffalo Bore .44 magnum anti-personell loads, or even Gold Dot .44 specials if you can't handle that kind of power.
 
I am going to go against the crowd here... For 44 mag, get a 5 inch barrel at minimum, and 6 is better. Given the size of the SRH frame and grips, the difference between a 2 1/2 inch and a 6 inch barrel has little impact on carriability or weight. But wow, you really loose a lot of velocity and power by going down to a 2 1/2 inch barrel. I can only imagine the muzzle blast.

I just checked the ruger website, and current production is 7.5 and 9.5 inch. But used ones are available in 5.5 inch and 6.5 inch.

I love my SRH with a 9 inch barrel. Recoil is mild even with 1300 ft-lb 300 grain loads. And it is spooky accurate.
 
colbad said:
The Redhawk line (including Alaskan) has had some firing pin problems with certain ammo.
Click to expand...
Readers should note that the Redhawk and Super Redhawk are different. Different lockwork, different frame.
colbad said:
The gun is a beast in size.
Click to expand...
But both the Redhawk and Super Redhawk fit the same holster (in leather or nylon, but I have not tested kydex). The Super fits noticeably tighter, but will fit. SRH is nly slightly heavier than the RH.
colbad said:
The .45s are easy to shoot but you have to hang on with the heavy .454 loads.
Click to expand...
Very true. Wear a glove unless you are filled with adrenaline.

Lost Sheep
 
A real strong revolver with the frame extending all the way to the end of the barrel.

I have the 454 version and really like it. Mine is loaded with 45 Colt and sits on my nightstand. A little on the heavy side at 44 ounces, but the balance is really good.
Here is a pic....


Alaskan3_zpsa4a51359.jpg
 
Last edited:
I just checked the ruger website, and current production is 7.5 and 9.5 inch. But used ones are available in 5.5 inch and 6.5 inch.
Click to expand...

Since the introduction of the Super Redhawk 28 years ago in .44mag and later on in .454 and .480 it has only come in two different barrel lengths, 7.5" and 9.5". If you find one with a shorter barrel its because someone had it cut down which is actually pretty common but not from the factory.
 
With the recoil of my Freedom Arms 7 1/2" .454, I can't help but wonder what its like in the short barreled guns in .454 Casull.
 
And don't let the short barrel fool you the fps loss is not as great as you would think.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know there are diminishing returns as barrel length increases. I have a chronograph and have tested ammo side-by-side with S&W 686's with 3", 4", & 8-3/8" bbl's as I own them all. So I have a good feel for how barrel length does help with velocity; but not as much as one might think. 2.5" is still awfully short, however.

Especially if you use a faster burning powder. The IMR 4227 is not a good powder for the shorter barrel.
Click to expand...

I agree. I roll my own (my handle is seen a lot more in the handloading section, than here). I'm a big fan of tailoring your powder selection for the barrel length. Aside, If I got this gun (leaning against it right now), I'd shoot mostly Specials; a few Mags with Speer's 200g GDHP SB, with a fast powder like W231; and only a few powerful rounds just for the novelty of it.

I'm not an outdoorsman. I shoot for fun at a range. This piece would see no hunting or SD duty if it were mine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top