Hey cal45 - welcome to the forum. Since nobody had yet replied I didn't want you think we were a bunch of snobs ignoring the new guy.

I don't own an Alaskan so I can't speak as an owner from any experience. I really like 44 magnum handguns and own several but the only Ruger I have in 44 mag is a Super Blackhawk. The rest are S&W and I confess to loving my S&W big bore handguns dearly. My impression of the Alaskan from handling in a LGS is they are very robust and beefy which would be a good thing for recoil but tougher to conceal if that's what you mean by carrying. I have a 629 with a 3" barrel that would be easier to conceal as it is much slimmer and lighter than an Alaskan. My assumption is the Alaskan is meant as an open carry hiker/hunter/woods gun in bear country. The 629 is meant as more of a conventional general purpose revolver - easier to conceal if you want. I would assume the Alaskan would have a milder recoil due to the Houge grip and heavier frame. I don't mind the recoil on my 3" 629 but some have commented differently over on the S&W forum.

Hopefully some Alaskan owners will be along to add some owner-insights to help you make an informed decision.

 

Welcome to the forum!! Same as Waveform already said I do not own an Alaskan however either choice you make will be a good one! Maybe provide us with more details on what you are using it for and I'm sure someone here will be able to in detail help you with your question.

 

Hello from Alaska. I have a 629 classic and carry it on a chest holster while chasing reds. It's nice, not too heavy, and crazy accurate. However, if i had to start over again, i would probably go with the Alaskan. It's recognized as the more robust out of the two and handles hotter loads (Such as bear rounds). The 629 will handle factory bear rounds, but the Alaskan goeas above and beyond.

 

The alaskan as the 329 is the only gun I sold due thonrecoil.

 

I have an Alaskan in 454 and I love it.

 

I don't own an Alaskan, I don't like that short of a barrel but I do like the .44 magnum revolvers. My particular .44 is a S&W 629 V-Comp .44 magnum with a 4" barrel without the compensator attached (which tames the recoil so much everyone who's shot it have been amazed). It's a Performance Center gun and, holy cow, is it an awesome shooter! I love Ruger revolvers but they are not near as nice as a S&W PC gun unless modified.

I don't like short barrel magnums because they lose too much energy with full power loads. I've tried shooting "bear loads" out of my 3" GP100 (which I love) but all I got were big flashes, low recoil and unburned powder everywhere. That's with a 3" barrel so I can't see how an even shorter barrel is going to provide the oomph needed for traveling in scary bear country. Obviously the Alaskan manages to put out a lot of energy, I don't know how, I'm no ballistician. However, if it were me out there I'd have my 626 V-Comp because I know she's got plenty of barrel to use up all the powder and gain all the energy available.

I'm not bashing the Alaskan, I love how they look and if it had a 4" barrel I'd buy a couple of them, I've just not had much luck getting short barrel guns to shoot high power ammo.

 

Appreciate the responses so far. I do not hunt but here in central FL, we do have wild boar, gators, and yes, the occassional Bear will wander into neighborhoods seeking food as this appears on the local news more than a few times a yr thanks to folks security cameras catching them. Since I do not have a large collection, I want to have a carry gun that will be able to run the gammit from 4 to 2 legged threats. Right now I have a .45ACP but looking at the .44mag for better animal stopping power.

 

I have had both 44Mag and 454 Alaskan and they are great guns. I have several 629's and love them so for me the 629 is the clear winner. I don't think the Alaskan's recoil as much as the 629's but they fit me much better and are much easier to carry. I am now thinking about a 2" 329 since I have a 4" 329 that I carry hunting but the RECOIL is brisk. Hope this helps

Doyle

 

I have a 44 Mag Alaskan and I think it's great. Well made, well balanced and accurate!

 

Welcome to the forum cal45. I own Alaskans in 44 and 454 and they are a hoot to shoot. I'm not a hunter but have shot mine considerably at the range. They are heavy guns but handle recoil extremely well. They have found a permanent home with me. I do own a 629 but in a 6" barrel. Nothing wrong with the Smith but I do like the heft of the Ruger. I do own a 657 with a 2 1/2" and it also is a dandy. I had to swop the wood grips for Pachmayr for extended shooting. The factory grips tend to slap the little finger of my shooting hand. For a couple cylinders the factory grips are OK but the Pachmayr are best for extended use. I still like the Alaskans better than the Smiths and they feel like they could take more punishment than the Smiths. You can't go wrong with either but the Alaskan gets my 1st choice.

 

Another big time fan of my Alaskan 44. Get it and you may as well get rid of any of the 'use to be' favorites. I've shot Blazer through it with hardly any kick at 240gr and was out at the range last week with some Remington 180 that were like trying to hold lightning. Big kick with those but bearable and really tight shot patterns, sometimes on top of each other. It was cool to see the wall of flame that came out with each shot. Guess it was a little unfair to customers in the store since the staff was watching my baby go boom!

 

The 44 Alaskan is my edc. Love it! You need a good belt and holster if you plan to carry it for any length of time. The weight mitigates some of the recoil...but if you reload you can reduce the recoil to your liking. Here's my rig.

 

Great pic of your Alaskan and carry rig. If I do decide to go with the Alaskan, I will order a holster (Grizzly Bear snub) from Bell Charter Oak BELL CHARTER OAK CUSTOM HOLSTERS INSIDE WAISTBAND (607) 783-2483

 

I don't CC since I live in SoCal, but my Alaskan is my goto revolver.
It is my home defense revolver and is very comfortable to fire.
You cannot go wrong with SRH Alaskan in .44 or .454.
Good luck with your choice.

 

I have both.....get the Alaskan

I mainly use my PC 629 2" as a .44 Special with magnum capability. Its a sweet shooter but no where near as tough as the Alaskan.

 

I've had the Alaskan 454 and a Talo 629 and my vote would be for the Alskan.
The Smith is a fine gun but the Ruger is going to handle anything you feed it all day long.

 

cal45-> That Bell Charter holster might not fit the Alaskan...it's pretty chunky (unless they can make one for you special), I had my holster custom made by a local holster maker and there are holsters out there for sale specific to the Alaskan...been a while since I searched around though . I've never tried to carry it IWB.....probably need pants 3X bigger than you'd normally wear!!!

 

Agreed - I would have to call them first to see if they can make one.


Great pics, folks.

ExArmy11b - that is the exact model 629 I'm comparing against the Alaskan.

Markbo - I did consider the 4" Redhawk as I like that model too (but would put on the wood grips that are on the 5.5" versionj)

 

CAL45, the Alaskan 44 is a lot of beef to be hauling around. The only time i would consider carrying it would be for wild animal protection.



I FORGOT TO MENTION - it's a great well built fun to shoot gun that's built to last 10 lifetimes.
RME

 

Get the Alaskan! You won't be sorry!!!

 

Ruger Alaskan...tougher'in nails...reliable...accurate...grip peg will accept any SRH or GP100 grip...XS Sight Systems - Home makes a very nice Tritium front night sight for it...etc. Hope you enjoy for many years to come!

 

What's not to love here, tough, reliable and made in the USA by Ruger

 

This is my Smith PC 629, I prefer my .44 Alaskan and I see no difference in usable accuracy. My Alaskans DA action is slick and the gun is accurate so it meets any need I would have for a snub .44��

 

If I wanted to use a 44 mag for a CCW this is what I would carry:



I have often carried my 6" 629 as a sidearm when hunting and it's very accurate with the longer sight radius.

Nothing against the SRH Alaskan, I just already have the bases covered and have been really happy with my 629s.

 

Seeing as I see no practicle benefit from a .44 Mag snub nose and several drawbacks, I'd probably opt for a 4" Redhawk personally. Then again I am just a big RH fan.

 

That rig was custom made by a local holster maker. Carrying the Alaskan around town I load it with 44spl Hornady critical defense rounds (ammo in the pic), when headed for the woods I load 44mag. Usually a 240gr nosler jhp.

 

Markbo - the main advantage of the 44mag snub is for "close in" work, and the barrel doesn't hang too low and poke out from under my shirt...since I carry this OWB. Although 50 yd 4"groups are easily doable with practice. When I pull the Alaskan to show someone the first thing they notice is the HUGE openning that is on the end of the barrel. It always makes an impression. In the field it is a backup to my rifle.