44 alaskan super redhawk

[woods]

I purchased this gun in a 44 because I have alot of brass and bullets and molds for this caliber rather than start from scratch with a 480 or 454. Now for my
problem I can find alot of load data on the 44 magnum (of course), but nothing is listed with the 2 1/2 barrel for best loads. All I really want is some velocity and powder type but there just isn't any I can find. I can always just keep loading different loads till I find one I like but I don't own a chronograph
to check velocity. Light loads are no problem I shoot alot of bullseye for practice with lead bullets 240 gr and 210 gr. So I was hoping for some load data on factory jacket bullets maybe a 240 gr or heavier  bullets. So I put the question to you any shooters with some data or a  source.

woods

[Lloyd Smale]

barrel length in a handgun has very little to do with which powders are optimum. what works in a long barrel usually works as well in a short. You will just get less velocity

[safetysheriff]

woods'

why not try alliant 2400, or go with hodgdon's 4227 or their H-110/Win 296.   use standard primers with the 2400 and the 4227; use magnum primers with the H-110 or Winchester 296.

no insult intended, but why buy a .44 mag' with the strength of a super redhawk's cylinder and then hamstring it with a 2.5" barrel?   why did ruger build one? 

the redhawk and super redhawk cry out for at least a 4" barrel (if not a little more) as a minimum!   why?   because you want to be able to harness/take-advantage-of the tremendous pressure that those revolvers will handle!    paco kelly wrote that he's loaded his .44 with that stout redhawk cylinder to 50,000 psi (and less) in his article Mega Magnum Part V.   you may be able to e-mail paco for a copy of that article.   the greater velocity helps to get a 'flatter' shooting trajectory, and oftentimes can help with increasing the depth of the permanent wound channel if a proper bullet is used.   

if you ever want to 'talk' to a bad animal, to 'negotiate' with a bad animal, do it with Power !   do it with a bullet that won't fracture or fail, and do it with a bullet that has enough velocity to penetrate.   you want to hit the vitals and to break anything that gets in the way getting there.

i'd recommend a new barrel, 5" in length, with Win' 296 as your propellant, with an un-jacketed bullet if going after dangerous game ever comes up on the menu.   otherwise a good, heavy-for-caliber Hornady XTP out of a 5" barrel will take deer, black bear, caribou, boar, etc. 

take care,

ss'   

[woods]

Thanks for the info, I currently have all the powders you listed above and planned on trying blue dot also. 2400 has always been a good powder with most of my hand guns so my last purchase was one of the larger containers (4 lbs I believe is the size). I will start with it.

I know the short barrel is a big issue with alot of people but I hunt with a  ruger 44 mag lever carbine. The handload I settle on I am hopeing will work well with either gun for deer. Most likely the handgun will see little use for hunting. Another reason I settled on the short barrel I work on a farm and often carrry a handgun with me the short barrel doesn't get in the way as much as a longer one. I had a redhawlk 5" barrel for about 5 years and traded it in for this revolver. One thing I can say about rugers they can take a beating and still preform. I know the redhawlk I traded had probably 5000 rds or so put through it, most of them lead 240 gr. I practice regularly.

woods

[safetysheriff]

woods'

with your discussion of the lever-action i somewhat better understand your choice.   

if you want to handle a real powerhouse, all things considered, in a small package, pick up a ruger 4 5/8" barrel'd blackhawk in .357 caliber.   the one with the anodized aluminum grip frame.   it has great balance, excellent balance; and it is very packable with the factory wooden grip panels.   because of its being made on a .44 mag' frame/cylinder/barrel, it is STOUT.   but, the short length and the aluminum grip frame help with the weight and the balance.    because of all the metal that surrounds the cartridge, and is in the barrel, it can be loaded to very heavy pressures.   paco kellly wrote about how they'll take a beating.   in stainless steel they'll probably take more of a beating, but might have the heavier grip frame.   i don't know.   what i do know is that it is one powerhouse in a handy package.    with a handloaded hardcast bullet of 180 grains the .357 magn' should get respect even from a boar or a black bear.    up close, in a stand, it would do for elk, though certainly not as my first choice.   

it's not as versatile as having a .44 mag' lever-gun and revolver.   but it's the next best thing.

take care,

ss'   

[Lloyd Smale]

guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one. A short barrel hamstrings you alot less then you thinki. Ive got 3 inch 44s that shoot faster then some of my 5.5 inch guns and personaly wouldnt have a barrel longer then 5.5 inch on a hunting handgun unless it was a scoped gun and if i go that route ill just take a tc. I had a 454 alaskan and it was nothing to push 350s to 1300 out of it and believe me that load will kill anything. granted some people, especially inexperienced handgunners do better with a long barrel but ive allways shot my best with about a 4 inch barrel off hand.  I like my handguns on my hip and handy not in some albatrous of a shoulder holster. If you can shoot that 44 alakan well it would make a great woods and hunting gun. Probably even better then the 454 as one thing that i do have to admit is 454s in 2.5 inch barrels bark. I just had built what i consider the alitmate redhawk for me. Its a 3.5 inch gun. Yes the 1/2 makes a differnce to me. It may not to you but it changes the feel of the gun. Its also roundbutted and alothough still pretty heavy is easy to conseal.  it will push 330 grain bullets to over 1300 fps and that my friends is plenty for about anything that walks in the US. When these old eys fail to the point that i cant see open sights good enough to handgun hunt while walking i will just switch to a lever gun. Scoped guns just dont work well for fast shots. To me a 44 mag with a barrel 4 inch or shorter is about the alitimate hunting handgun.

woods'

why not try alliant 2400, or go with hodgdon's 4227 or their H-110/Win 296.   use standard primers with the 2400 and the 4227; use magnum primers with the H-110 or Winchester 296.

no insult intended, but why buy a .44 mag' with the strength of a super redhawk's cylinder and then hamstring it with a 2.5" barrel?   why did ruger build one? 

the redhawk and super redhawk cry out for at least a 4" barrel (if not a little more) as a minimum!   why?   because you want to be able to harness/take-advantage-of the tremendous pressure that those revolvers will handle!    paco kelly wrote that he's loaded his .44 with that stout redhawk cylinder to 50,000 psi (and less) in his article Mega Magnum Part V.   you may be able to e-mail paco for a copy of that article.   the greater velocity helps to get a 'flatter' shooting trajectory, and oftentimes can help with increasing the depth of the permanent wound channel if a proper bullet is used.   

if you ever want to 'talk' to a bad animal, to 'negotiate' with a bad animal, do it with Power !   do it with a bullet that won't fracture or fail, and do it with a bullet that has enough velocity to penetrate.   you want to hit the vitals and to break anything that gets in the way getting there.

i'd recommend a new barrel, 5" in length, with Win' 296 as your propellant, with an un-jacketed bullet if going after dangerous game ever comes up on the menu.   otherwise a good, heavy-for-caliber Hornady XTP out of a 5" barrel will take deer, black bear, caribou, boar, etc. 

take care,

ss'   

[teddy12b]

I've taken long looks at the ruger 44 alaskan and the redhawk series.  I like all of those a lot.  Have you had a chance to fire any hard cast ammo through you Alaskan?

[safetysheriff]

Lloyd'

i can't get away from the fact that with the .44 mag' being used so successfully in silhouette shooting, for example, we see those participants having gone to barrels as long as 10 1/2".   sure, many of them use 7 1/2" barrels, but that is also part of the point - when dealing with a .44 mag'.   the extra barrel length makes a big difference in power with the .44.   some of what those people want is a longer sight radius, but they all want the extra power of a barrel at least 7 1/2" long. 

i'd suggest a 4" barrel as a minimum, and really prefer my super blackhawk's length that is 5 1/2".    the balance is great, the sight radius is fine, and the power is definitely there.   

www.beartoothbullets.com/tech_notes/archive_tech_notes.htm/14  should take you to the technical archive of beartooth bullets wherein you can see Bill McConnell's article on the effect of barrel length, bullet weight, and powder selection in the .44 mag'.   i found it very interesting to think about the factors at work.

take care,

ss'   

[Lloyd Smale]

I guess i have to ask what to think your gaining with that extra 200 fps that is about the most your going to gain. those figures are from my own chronograph not somebody elses storys. What they gain with long barrels in competition is sight radius that allows for precision shooting. A necessity at 300 yards but surely  not at normal hunting distances. Ive done a bit of testing with 44s. You gain little in pentration by going up that 200 fps and about nothing in the abiltity to kill an animal. Animals shot with handguns are killed by bleading not by shock. the ability to provide enough momentum to allow your bullet to penetrate to the vitals and put a caliber sized hole in them is how they work. Handgun power is increased by increasing bullet weight and caliber not by velocity. At least no once you get by about 1100 fps. quoting mathimatical figures doesnt mean crap in the real world of hunting. If you can shoot a 44 mag with a 3inch barrel well enough to put the bullet in the vitals of about any game animal that animal is going to die. If you need more barrel lenght to be able to shoot well then i wont argue with it but otherwise it doesnt mean squat. You can quote me articles from all kinds of sources that might argue with me but id like you to ask them how many animals theyve actually killed with a 44 mag and then aske them how many times the bullet bounced off. I may not have all the answers but the ones i have are mine. I would about bet i shoot as much 44 mag as near anyone thats writing those articles. If you want to read an article on hangun hunting from a guy that isnt advertising or has even a smidge of bs in his body read this one http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/common_sense_handgun_hunting.htm

[woods]

Thanks for the interesting articles to read. I use to shoot 300gr sierra flat points for game but am giving some serious thought to switching to cast bullets for hunting and may purchase molds for the 290 gr in 44 mag.
      I own a 41 smith and Wesson 7 1/2" hunter I hunted last deer season with it love the trigger on this smith I did a little stoning on this handgun with an Arkansan stone to remove a few burs and smooth things out.. I am currently looking at a bullet mold for it also.

[safetysheriff]

woods' 

i'm glad that you like our articles.    they offer room for comparisons.   

Lloyd'

i believe that the 200 fps' gain in velocity imparts enough momentum to a bullet that it makes a difference.    the difference may be in hitting the vitals, or it may be in producing an exit wound.   either way i see it as a distinct advantage, particularly if a shot must be made at a bad angle.    because additional barrel length is one way of picking up velocity (as is a tight barrel to cylinder gap) without unduly raising pressure, i'll consider it a cheap way to get velocity without putting further strain on the forcing cone, etc.    

your short-barrel'd firearms may have tighter barrel/cylinder gaps than the longer barrel'd items that Don't produce the greater velocities.   that's no secret to an experienced revolver shooter like yourself, i don't think.  

no surprise with the idea that 'shock' is not generated by a handgun.   i have never said, i don't think, that it is.   but i don't believe for one minute that bullet weight and caliber are the only ways to pick up power.   i believe all three of those factors play an important part in terminal ballistics.    elmer keith's hot-rodded .44 specials did approx' 1,200 fps'with his 250 gr' bullet, and the .44 mag's started out much higher than that (at approx' 1,600 with a 240 gr' bullet, i believe).    and, if you remember, keith went down in caliber from .45 colt to pick up the additional velocity from the stronger .44 special revolvers of his day.    that in itself is noteworthy. 

j.d. jones has written that his 320 gr' bullet for the .44 mag' can be driven to almost 1,400 fps' in a 7 1/2" barrel'd revolver with safe pressures.   he said that it has been demonstrated to kill an elephant.   i'm not sure it would work at 1,000 fps' out of a 3" barrel (or whatever...)

iyour 'link' looks like something from john linebaugh's site.  i've read his articles.   he's a tremendous gunsmith, reputedly a good Christian, and a somewhat accomplished hunter.    but he is neither a physics nor a math teacher.    and he doesn't always compare apples to apples in his writing.   at least in my opinion.   and i've read his stuff through more than once.    there's more to the .44 mag' vs' .45 colt comparisons than what he seems to understand.    

good shooting to you all,

ss'  

[Lloyd Smale]

Ive shot enough game with them to know for myself that that extra 2-300 fps does slap an animail harder. But there is a spot in velocity and i find it at about 1300 fps where it doesnt seem to help to go faster with a cast bullet and it can actually hurt penetration to go faster. My sweet spot for hunting ammo in a 44 or 45 or even a 475 or 500 is about 11-1200. But 900 will do alot of killing. Its about like saying a 257 weatherby will smack a deer but a 257 roberts will kill i just as dead without near the fanfair. I dont agree with everything John has written either but i know that at least his writings come from his field experience. You have to face the fact that if two guys shoot 10 differnt deer with 10 different guns there going to get different results every time. As to John not being good at the math i applaud that. Ive never seen where any of those mathimatical ways to rate power in a gun made a pinch of @@@

[safetysheriff]

woods'

if we get back to your issues for a moment, in ohio, for example, we're required by law to use a minimum 5" barrel length for our deer hunting, in calibers from .357 mag' on up (using straight-walled cartridges only).    so, in ohio the 2 1/2" barrel would be illegal.   is it legal where you hunt?    that simple fact, which i forgot until now, puts a whole different light on things.   

Lloyd'

i think we are on the same page now.    i know that your example of 2 people harvesting those 10 deer is applicable.   people don't always see things the same.   and sometimes people don't understand the full impact.   i fall back to a small piece of advice that was long-ago stated by jack o'connor: carry a firearm and cartridge that will capably handle even your worst-case scenario.     no matter what we're after, that paraphrase of his advice makes sense to me.   

talk to you later, lightning is right now coming across n.e. ohio.   i unplug the computer.

ss'   

[woods]

     I live in pa. so I can hunt with the Alaskan, going to need a summer of practice with the piece first.  I have a nephew going to an gun estate auction center county towmarow afternoon, they have a 325 gr fp listed in the molds section if the price is right it will be mine. (hope). Right now I have a 250 gr gas check fp bullet mold and some 210 gr masterblaster bullets I purchased a while back. It will be a week or so till I can give this hand gun a good test out target shooting for accuracy.

     woods

[safetysheriff]

woods'

i hope it works for you.   there's not too much in life that beats a good deer hunt.    i've never taken a black bear yet.   that is somewhat of interest to me, but only peripherally to hunting deer. 

take care,

ss'   

[corbanzo]

If you are planning on using it for deer and black bear, the barrel length isn't gonna make any difference with a .44 mag. 

That bullet coming out of the cylinder could knock a deer down. 

[SharonAnne]

Cobanzo "could knock a deer down"   sorry, basic physics, if it didn't knock you down, it cannot knock the deer down.

[woods]

     I took the Alaskan to the range today. I'm pretty happy with the results the gun shoots pretty good for a snubby. I took two loads to the range 200 gr. and 325 gr both lead bullets cast by me. The 200's shot about a 4" circle at 25 yrds that was my sight in load off sand bags. Cofortable enough to shoot. Wow! the 325's were a whole different story torques your wrist to the left hard and up. Have to make sure you have a firm grip. Didn't have enough time or shells to really fine tune things yet but I have know doubt it will have enough punch at say 40 yrds or less to cleanly take deer. I resized and primed 200 44's tonight for practice loads, got to learn to crawl before you can walk. I would still like to run my loads over a cronograph to check velocity and spread. Thanks for the info everyone.
     
     woods

[Bob C]

I also have a .44 Alaskan, and after replacing the Hogue grips with the standard Ruger Super Redhawk grips it one of my favorite revolvers. I also did quite a lot of polishing on the internals of mine.

I previously had a 3" 629, and I prefer the Ruger.

For 250 grain and lighter bullets I prefer Unique for midrange loads and Blue Dot for loads closer to factory level.  For 300 grain bullets I prefer H-110.