Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Alaska Pros and Cons regarding Ruger Alaskan and/or S&W Backpacker

Yep I pretty much agree with all that is said. I do appreciate the input and am familiar/own handguns of sorts and size including 44 mag. I probably shoot 1500 to 2000 rounds conservatively out of them each year including a 20 something ounce Taurus Ultralite in 44 mag. Would shoot them a lot more but it would get in the way of all those rifles... And wouldn't have started the thread but the Taurus has some reliability questions at the moment.

Recoil has not been an issue up to and including a 44 mag. This is the primary reason that I have selected this caliber for a wilderness or backup depending on circumstances, in which I hope I never have to use. Plus the fact that I am already setup to load for it and have quite a bit of experience with the round.

My primary 44 is a SS Blackhawk with a 4 5/8 barrel. It has been to most of the western states and AK with me on hunts or other adventures. It pretty much stays in the tent unless I am packing meat or some other chore that makes sense not to carry my rifle.

With all this said I could have been a little clearer from outset.

I would like to try one of these two snub nose large framed revolvers in 44 mag. The reason I asked for pros and cons of each of these was in order to help me with my choice. Quite frankly I am leaning towards the Alaskan but didn't want to direct the conversation.

As for my wife she pretty tough but if she carries a pistol it will be loaded with a heavy bullet with lower velocity. I will make sure that it is manageable for her. And yes she probably put 4-500 rounds down range every year. That's the nice part of having a pistol range in your yard. Gives us country folk a little something to do.

And by the way it may provide camp meat as well but am going with shotshells for this chore.

There was an article/study done awhile back on DLP (defense of life or property" shootings of bears.Handguns won out over long guns by a wide margin as far as survivors of the attacks.I'll try to find the link,but,as a solo hunter,my 44 on my side is a lot closer than my 338 leaning against a tree while I'm cleaning my moose or caribou ..........

I'd pick the Smith for carry unless I was going to use the .44 as my primary weapon. I've been carrying a 3" Mod 629 for many years, it shoots just fine and handles 300 grain bullets OK.Before that I carried a 4" Mod 29 for several years. I don't normaly carry a handgun with rifle hunting and if fishing with bears it's on my hip but a 45-70 Guide Gun is very close by. Just my $.02. --- Mel

Black Bear.

Well I've never hunted alaska but carry a sidearm in the woods regularly hunting or not.I'm not a big guy so I chose the Smith 44 not just because its lighter but also somewhat less bulky than a comparable ruger IMO. Although I like rugers, I have a few, I think the smith is a little better quality. However they are Smith performance center revolvers, with 3" barrels I believe.

I understand the "need" to have a handgun of one brand/caliber at any given time. I've carried some big wheel guns in my years and am now back to my Smith 29. I don't load it hot and heavy as I have done with other handguns, seems like in my more quiet serene years the "need" for one just does not take place. I load 265's or 280 grain in it and keep it in my tent right beside the ole brain pan.

I have carried them strong side and cross draw and both are okay for a short jaunt packing. Of late I have seen some now carrying chest/frontal carry for the fisherman who feel it to be the best spot to have on. Now, that seems logical to me when I look back at packing many pounds of heavy meat quite aways back in my days.

The weight of either is impractical if you choose to do the chest carry as I believe it distributes the weight of the handgun of choice better than cross or strongside. If this holster selection is sound then I'd opt for the RUGER as its' strength in frame and ability to reliably handle/shoot heavy for caliber bullets is without question spot on!

I know of one instance where 2 grizzilies where on my buddies moose kill. His packer chose to leave his aught six at the boat and walk the mile back to kill site with pack frame. My buddy who is 65 chose not to leave his .32 Special 94 behind. They came close to where there kill was to only find one grizz on the pile of meat and the other of the twin moving in towards them kind of like doing the sneak thru the bushes.....he believed a fight was close and did not like him being the only one with the rifle so they both backed off. He now always carries his Ruger .338 WM.....

Dude, carry what you will but be good with it and have it handy ..... always!

I've had both, I like the Ruger Alaskan. I know of bears that were killed with both. Both bears are dead. Pick the one that feels more comfortable to you and points better.

Thanks for the comments. Kinda as I figured two good pieces basically designed for the same thing. I just wanted to make sure there wasn't something I was overlooking regarding either.

I agree with the idea of a 4 in barrel min if you want to hit what you are aiming at. Either gun is fine and easy to carry. A sidearm is handy in Alaska because it is always with you, not leaning against a tree when you are fishing or on the can or something. Seconds matter if you need it.

Longer barrels can take better advantage of the new hi-po ammo like Garrett and Buffalo, besides the better site radius. I just acquired a S&W 629 with a 6 1/2 in barrel which is my choice for carrying a .44 mag. Not nearly as clunky as the Ruger BH w/ the 7 1/2 in barrel. Bigger than your 2 guns, but a better shooter.

I Still carry the 6 1/2 629,very comfortable,and handy,the story of those that have a rifle "Handy" are fine,me ? I'd rather be less flamboyant and live to tell the tale the next day !!!

I own 2 44mag alaskans and 1 454 also in the alaskan. Put it in a chest holster and your fine and you wont wear it out with any loads. There build to last and as far as having a short barrel, chances are you will be using it at very close range which is why I see no worry about the 2.5 barrel.

Just buy a plain old Ruger Redhawk in .45colt with a 4" barrel. Then buy some Buffalo Bore ammo with a 325gr LBT cast bullet. That load will Penatrate 32" of lumber, & will work for bears if the SHTF.

My second choice would be my Ruger Blackhawk .44 mag with a 5.5" barrel & 320gr Buffalo Bore ammo. Or maybe my S&W .41mag Mountain Gun with the same type of ammo.

Last choice & the one I carry quite often in the lower 48 is my Glock 20 10mm with 15 rounds of Hornday 200 gr XTP'S going 1350 fps. Buffalo Bore also makes a 220gr heavy load. It Definately would not be my 1st choice for big bears, but I like the ideal of 15 rounds of ammo without a reload. Even though your probably not going to be able to get off but 1 or 2 rounds on a charging bear. If your Damn Lucky !

My Real 1st choice would be a 375 H&H mag if I was betting my Life.....

A .30-30 has worked fine for me the last 40 years here. Never had to shoot a bear, so, there - you see - it is perfectly adequate!!!!

Worked fine on my first moose, tho.

You guys with your bearanoi crack me up- tho I've been known to pack a Ruger Blackhawk in .44 Mag, a .338WM, or a .375 H&H on occaision - just for grins, you understand....

I am curious as to how many shots it took to put those 32 inches of charging pine board down for good, or even to turn them aside.

The 32" board test was done in one of Taffin's magazine articles. I started using that load after he recommend it.

329PD hands down.

If you feel the need to practice a lot buy a heavier gun like the redhawk or a 629.

We shoot so much year round that we generally don't shoot the 329 much, but have taken a deer and a caribou with the gun since owning.

The heavier guns just weigh you down, I packed a redhawk once... for 2 days and decided it was better off in the tent the rest of the trip.... the 329 you just dont' know its there, I run 270 hard cast gas checks in ours for larger game, and 240 mild loads for grouse/deer and such.

I agree with the 329PD guys. I have a S&W 29 and a Ruger Blackhawk in .44mag also I just like the 329 for my carry gun. I carry cross draw which works the best for a bow hunter/backpack hunter. I have fired about 150-200 rounds through it trying the most powerful loads you can think of. Including some 300g monster killer compressed loads. I found with the real hot loads that the gun is too light and recoil too heavy. It unseats the bullets in the cases when fired. I may not have got the crimp right when reloading but still found no real need to mess with it. My convetionaly loaded rounds have served me well.

I mainly carry my sidearm to make "Me" feel more confident. The S&W 329PD is a dream to carry compared to the other offerings. If you are just jumping on and off quads or in and out of a boat then by all means carry a longer barreled defense weapon but if you go more than five miles a day climbing - listen to my advice and you can thank me later.

For practice I pace off twenty paces and set somthing for a target about the size of a Gatoraid bottle and have someone holler go.

I then draw my weapon with dilberate action and fire as if my life depended on it. Just one round. Then I holster the weapon. Hit or miss. I repete this on almost every scouting or pleasure trip I make into the woods only firing one round a trip.

I have found that doing this makes me much more confident in my abilities and I am hitting the target almosty every time now.

No offense, fellows. But I think I'll just stick with my little 4" Redhawk that may be too heavy for y'all.
I don't mind the extra weight, as long as it functions flawlessly, if I'm bettin my ass on it.

I carried one of the Smith 329pd Ti .44 mag for nearly a year every day on the ranch, because it was light. I just got really tired of the bullet slipping the cases under recoil & locking up the cylinder... Didn't matter if I was using heavy or light loads, or reloads or factory ammo.
I just sincerely hope & pray you never have to use it to defend yourself or your family against a big ole Alaskan brown bear, or a grizzly or black bear in the Rockys here in the lower 48.

Cause when you miss with that first round while a big ass bear is bearing down on you at full speed at 50 yards, which, BTW they can cover in less than 4 seconds, and your knees are knocking like a poodle [bleep]' a peach seed from the huge adrenalin dump you will be feeling, I sure hope your cylinder is not locked up from heavy loads or from the recoil thats so heavy you can't recover in time to maybe get off 3 shots in 3 seconds or less, if your Really Lucky.... Your about to be "what's for dinner" & that handy little Ti .44mag Smith won't be of much use as a club...

My whole intent in my initial post was to warn other hunters of finding out to late, that the great feeling Lightweight S&W .44mag Ti, is NOT the idea packing gun if your headed to Alaska & loaded up with heavy loads that will bind up the cylinder at the exact time when they will need it most.

Nothing against the Pistol or your choice of what you choose to pack. I was simply trying to save some poor hunters life instead of him making the same poor choice in Packing Pistol that I did, & realize that they would have been much better served with a Ruger Redhawk