[TXplt]

I have a friend (really !) who was looking into getting an Alaskan in 44 mag. I suggested he look into a Glock 20 SF (my carry gun). Since I value your opinions greatly I would like to hear YOUR thoughts on the subject. The gun would be used for general trail use in Alaska, and might have to be a bear defense gun.

The G20 is somewhat longer--not much--but less bulky and flatter. It weighs a little less loaded with 15 rounds than the Alaskan does empty. The Glock is an autoloader (maybe a liability, but Glocks are reliable--so I think the reliablity factor a wash). The G20 has a longer sight radius and more shots which to me increases the probability of hits. So for me it comes down to ballistics.

I see the full bbl of the glock to be better than the snubby 44 mag in this respect. The main detraction is the snubby barrel and the magnum loading IMHO.

The Buffalo Bore 220 hard cast in 10mm gives an honest 1100 FPS from the Glock so with a 240 gr .44 mag doing about the same out of the short barrel of the Alaskan I see this as a wash. You COULD, though, get hotter or heavier .44 Mags--then again with standard magnums out of short bbls the muzzle blast is to me is horrible (having shot the snubby .357s)--so I don`t see that much of a gain here (am I wrong ?). The weight of the Alaskan would make it comfortable to shoot--but the blast would still be there (with much of the power going out as blast).

On the other hand, the Glock is comfortable to shoot even with full house loads. There IS muzzle blast, but not too bad.

The Glock is cheaper also.

How about the 454 casull in a snubby ? Would you guys see this as any different ?

Thanks for the opinions

 

[Para Cassatt]

If I went with the Ruger Alaskan the 454 Casull would be my choice. If I were a 44 Mag. fan then a ultra lite weight 26 oz. S&W 329 PD would be my choice. However the higher capacity 10mm would most likely be what I may choose. Our late friend SwedeSteve also if I remember correctly liked the 10mm for a kicking around gun.

 

[practical]

I keep a G20 at the bedside loaded with 165gr JHP's from doubletapammo.com. I have never carried the G20 due to it's size, but it is unbeatable for the amount of firepower in a single magazine.

A snub nose 44M seems kinda pointless to me. It is too small to fully develop the power of the cartridge and too big to conceal. If I were dead set on the bigger bore, a 45ACP or 45GAP would see like a better choice.

 

[TheWall]

10mm vs. 44 mag. Hmm? Let me think! Bear? Hmm? Let me see! Semi-auto vs. revolver in the field? Hmm? Okay, it's got to be the revolver in .44mag in my opinion. I also would probably go with the 454 casull giving me the option of also using .45 LC. I think you will probably see that the people in the know will agree. People that have actually shot bear using the .44mag handgun. I'm just relating what I have read on the subject, and not real life experience.
You know the old grain of salt metaphor.

 

[High Noon]

I am a huge 10mm fan but if it's big, brown, stinky and has big claws and teeth, i'm trusting the first shot out of the short ruger. I'm just going off of the numbers here and also have no real world experience battling the big, scarry beasts.

 

[DudeInMT]

Talk him out of the Alaskan, and into a full sized .44mag or .454 casull. A good trail gun in bear country is worth it's weight in gold. I've got a cousin who found himself between an angry grizzly and her cubs. He walked out with a sprained ankle & dislocated shoulder, and 2 less rounds in his Ruger, but he walked out.

 

[cjleete]

A 4 or 5.5 inch standard Redhawk is pretty well balanced and certainly not anymore unwieldy than a snubby Alaskan. I have the 5.5 inch model. I have shot full-size .454 Casull revolvers. It was not fun by any stretch of my imagination.

I wouldn't feel too awful about carrying a G20 on the trail there, but I already own a Redhawk, and a S&W in 45 Colt. Here's an idea: A loaded G20 doesn't weigh much more than a box of .44 cartridges, so instead of carrying a bunch of reloads for a revolver, just carry both. After all, you have a fair chance of encountering 2-legged predators on the trail too.

 

[Palladin8]

For up there in Alaska for a field gun I would look at the S&W 629, S&W 625 mountain guns, or the Ruger Redhawks in .44mag or 45LC in the 4" barrel length as well. Being a big fan of the 10mm myself I don't know that even with my heavy loads I would feel safe with it around big bears.

 

[UrbanCombat45]

Ruger Alaskan....hot ammo...the 10mm has factory mild loaded ammo mostly...except Buffalo Bore.

 

[Browning]

Ok here is another idea. Doesn't S&W make a 10mm revolver? You get the best of both worlds. Or why not a Desert Eagle? In a good shoulder holster the desert eagle shouldn't be too uncomfortable.

 

[UrbanCombat45]

Desert Eagle 44mag

 

[TXplt]

Ok here is another idea. Doesn't S&W make a 10mm revolver? You get the best of both worlds. Or why not a Desert Eagle? In a good shoulder holster the desert eagle shouldn't be too uncomfortable.

I don`t think so for a smith 10mm revolver--and thank all so far for their responses. A G20 would be infinitely reliable--so the action (revolver vs. glock) to me isn`t an issue (and I am a wheelgun lover)--but I am just thinking of the difference in power. The 10mm BB and DT ammo from a 4.5 " G20 bbl seem to give rough parity with a 44 mag from a 2.5" bbl but maybe I have been missing something.

Not really interested in Desert Eagle 10mm--the Glock is better IMHO for the task at hand--I own a G20 and really like it so far so the choice I am looking to make would be between the Alaskan and a G20.

 

[Junction15]

Maybe that Glock 20 can be converted to magazine feed about ten 12 gauge rifled slugs?

(just kiddin' but imagine what you could do with it)

 

[Palladin8]

he could try to do a 460 Rowland. Semi auto on par with 44mag

 

[texnmidwest]

Quite frankly, I think you have gotten a lot of good ideas and opinions. However, I agree with the ones that say full sized revolver. The extra barrel length gives better control with out sacrificing speed. Plus, it will make range work a lot more comfortable and enjoyable. At last as much as can be in a heavy recoiling pistol. I agree with teh 454 Casull. With that caliber one can shoot 45LC for practice and be able to practice comfortably. Then field load the Casull.

I love Glocks. The 10mm is a fantastic round with above average capabilities for hunting. BUT, if I had a grizly 10 feet away and closing I would appreciate the extra stopping power. However, I would be carrying a shotgun. That's just me though. Well, actually, I would be carrying both.

 

[Stephen Bosworth]

A 4 or 5.5 inch standard Redhawk is pretty well balanced and certainly not anymore unwieldy than a snubby Alaskan. I have the 5.5 inch model. I have shot full-size .454 Casull revolvers. It was not fun by any stretch of my imagination.

I wouldn't feel too awful about carrying a G20 on the trail there, but I already own a Redhawk, and a S&W in 45 Colt. Here's an idea: A loaded G20 doesn't weigh much more than a box of .44 cartridges, so instead of carrying a bunch of reloads for a revolver, just carry both. After all, you have a fair chance of encountering 2-legged predators on the trail too.

 

[Stephen Bosworth]

A 4 or 5.5 inch standard Redhawk is pretty well balanced and certainly not anymore unwieldy than a snubby Alaskan. I have the 5.5 inch model. I have shot full-size .454 Casull revolvers. It was not fun by any stretch of my imagination.

I wouldn't feel too awful about carrying a G20 on the trail there, but I already own a Redhawk, and a S&W in 45 Colt. Here's an idea: A loaded G20 doesn't weigh much more than a box of .44 cartridges, so instead of carrying a bunch of reloads for a revolver, just carry both. After all, you have a fair chance of encountering 2-legged predators on the trail too.

I don`t think so for a smith 10mm revolver--and thank all so far for their responses. A G20 would be infinitely reliable--so the action (revolver vs. glock) to me isn`t an issue (and I am a wheelgun lover)--but I am just thinking of the difference in power. The 10mm BB and DT ammo from a 4.5 " G20 bbl seem to give rough parity with a 44 mag from a 2.5" bbl but maybe I have been missing something.

Not really interested in Desert Eagle 10mm--the Glock is better IMHO for the task at hand--I own a G20 and really like it so far so the choice I am looking to make would be between the Alaskan and a G20
Yes Smith and Wesson makes a 10mm revolver. The 610.

 

[neophyte]

Stephen Bosworth: Sir; stop by Introduction

share a few words about yourself

Thanks,
Craig

 

[Captain O]

Ok here is another idea. Doesn't S&W make a 10mm revolver? You get the best of both worlds. Or why not a Desert Eagle? In a good shoulder holster the desert eagle shouldn't be too uncomfortable.

I have an early Model 610 with a 6 1/2" barrel. You can either load it to the gunwales with hot 10mm loads, or you can ream out the cylinder and stuff it full of 10mm Magnum fodder. (I know this has been don't because some of the boys at S&W did this and the revolver ran without a hitch).

 

[animalspooker]

Ruger for me. The G20SF is too big in the hand. Every time I grab it and put it on target, my sight are in a different place. My $0.02 worth.