Camping/Backpacking Pistols

[Revolver Ocelot]

given the area yo intend to carry and that your primary concern would probablly be humans with a posibility of ? (nothing as big a s a bear i'd imagine) I'd say a 357, my advice would be any one of the ruger offerings in this caliber and pick based on whether you want sa or da and where you'd like to carry it

 

[langenc]

Whatever you have with you is better than a howitzer in the safe at home.

 

[David E]

Whatever you have with you is better than a howitzer in the safe at home.

No kidding.

But that doesn't mean that a tiny NAA in .22 Short is just as effective as a .44 magnum.

Go with as large as you'll carry.

I find it amusing that people suggest or carry a Kel-Tec .32/.380 for trail defense because it's light.

Talk about misplaced priorities.

For me, I carry for defense, most likely against people. The last thing I want to do is choose my defense gun based solely on weight. I'll cut the couple extra ounces somewhere else that won't matter. If the added ounce or two is still too much, then I'd hit the gym to get stronger enough to carry the burden of 2-3 more ounces.....

.

 

[amd6547]

When you are backpacking 30+miles with a 40-50lb pack, a few ounces makes a big difference. The heaviest pistol I have packed which wasn't a burden was the Glock 23, but that was on a short weekend trip with about a 10 mile hike in.
If you think "a few ounces extra" don't mean much, I suggest you load a pack with 5 days of food, two quarts of water, a tent, sleeping bag, ground pad, water purifier, stove, flashlight, etc,etc,etc.
Take it to an area with rough terrain...lots of up and down. Hike 10 miles. Do it when it is 90 degrees out and 90% humidity. See what you think about carrying a 40 ounce handgun and 100 rounds of ammo at the end of that day.
It always amuses me to read these backpacking pistol threads and the responses from folks who have never carried a handgun farther then the distance from their car to the firing line at the range.

 

[Redneck with a 40]

I just carry my XD-40 out here in the woods of Colorado. I'm more concerned about 2 legged predators, than I am about 4 legged ones. I load 180 grain XTP's in it, this pistol has been very reliable, through 4000 rounds.

 

[REDEYE]

I like a .357 mag wheelgun for protection, but I'd also like a Ruger Mark II for fun.

 

[ArmedBear]

My choice would be a .357 magnum revolver loaded with full throttle 140gr JHPs (which you can load yourself). The choice is based on the foundation of my convictions that the .357 mag is the best overall revolver for almost everything.

My second choice would be a 125gr JHP .357 mag.

Why carry the .357 with these reduced-weight bullets, though?

I agree with your assessment of the .357 as a great all-around gun. But good velocity with bullets weighing 158 grains and up is what makes it so.

...and that said, the 629 Mountain Gun in .44 Magnum is less than two ounces heavier than a 620 in .357, and 1.5 oz. heavier than a 4" 686. So I figure 240 grains going 1400 fps isn't a bad thing...

 

[full metal]

Nothing beats a good old fashened 4 inch 357 magnum for the field.

 

[REDEYE]

If I had a .22lr auto rifle, it would come with me on every camping and hiking trip.

 

[jggonzalez357]

My choice is a Ruger SP101 in .357 magnum with a few speedloaders or speedstrips. Its pretty compact and hits hard. Buffalo Bore has some nice loads for it.

 

[stana]

I don't back pack, but I do spend alot of time in the mountains walking, 3 or 4times a week when it's not muddy. I, for reasons beyond my control, I'm a glock person. And want to stayed tuned up.

In the hills I always carry a G23 frame with a advantage arms 22 conversion unit and a centerfire glock most often a G30 or G21 loaded with 230 gr cast bullets. 22 bullets in my right pocket and 45's in my left.

I generaly go places where I can shoot alot and I do. The "22RF" glock weights next to nothing. No white rock, jackrabbit or sheep turd is safe.

I almost never see another person, no 2 legged predators. There are bears, but I've never seen one, only sign. Coyotes, rattle snakes, bobcats foxes and mountaion lions. They are all there, but seldom seen. I wouldn't want to shoot at them anyway. (well maybe snakes maybe)

I take the same two handguns when I camp.

 

[David E]

When you are backpacking 30+miles with a 40-50lb pack, a few ounces makes a big difference.
If you think "a few ounces extra" don't mean much, I suggest you load a pack with 5 days of food, two quarts of water, a tent, sleeping bag, ground pad, water purifier, stove, flashlight, etc,etc,etc.

A) Save the weight somewhere ELSE

B) Get stronger so that another ounce or two ain't gonna be the straw that breaks your back.

See what you think about carrying a 40 ounce handgun and 100 rounds of ammo at the end of that day.

Who said anything about a 40 oz gun with 100 rds of ammo? I had mentioned a hicap 9mm, such as the Glock 17/19 with two spare mags. I'll cut the weight elsewhere if I missed a couple workouts.

It always amuses me to read these backpacking pistol threads and the responses from folks who have never carried a handgun farther then (sp) the distance from their car to the firing line at the range.

It always amuses me how people with a different opinion jump to false conclusions in order to make their own point.

 

[dmazur]

I backpack with a Ruger SBH. I think the darn thing weighs 52 oz or something, loaded. .44 Mag is heavy, so I only carry 1 reload...

Yes, it's like carrying a brick. It's a comforting brick, however.

 

[David E]

I backpack with a Ruger SBH. I think the darn thing weighs 52 oz or something, loaded. .44 Mag is heavy, so I only carry 1 reload...

Yes, it's like carrying a brick. It's a comforting brick, however.

Now HERE'S a guy that knows why he's carrying a gun in the first place !!!

 

[amd6547]

I have mentioned my own experiences backpacking long distances which have always included a firearm. I speak from the reality of the trail.
A Glock 17 or 19 would be suitable weight-wise.
Still, a 17 ounce 38 beats them in both weight and size. Still has enough power, and can be kept ready in a pocket with your hand on the grip without the need to brandish, and can be fired from the pocket without jamming.
I am strong enough to carry a heavier weapon, but my backpack trips are not about beating myself up to prove that I can carry a more powerful weapon on the slim chance that I may need it. If I were backpacking in country where defense against large predators was a possibility, than my choice would change, as it did when I packed a six-inch 44mag.
As I said, in my 30+ years of backpacking, I have only had a couple times where I was glad to be armed, yet I never had to draw my weapon.
Instead, I have had great trips in the outdoors, traveling long distances with a great companion, and carrying what I consider to be the minimum of items needed to have a safe and comfortable trip.
I load my pack with everything I want to bring. Usually, when I finish, I heft it on to my shoulders, adjust the straps, and walk up and down the steps a few times. Then, I start pulling out things I don't need.
Backpacking newbies often bring too much stuff, and as they mature in their sport, they learn what to leave behind.
Some veteran backpackers are adherents of the ultra-light movement, trimming their load down to 20lbs where everybody around them carries 40.
As in all self defense and weapon/caliber discussions on these sites, everybody has their opinion they are sure of and which causes them to dismiss the choices of others. I won't dismiss your choices, But I doubt I will see you on day three of a long distance backpack trip after my pal and I top the 15th ridge we have crossed. By the way, carrying a heavy pack downhill is as hard, or harder than carrying it up the other side.
The danger areas in backpack trips are road crossings and trailheads...anywhere that isn't too far for a loser to walk to.
Oh, and thanks for pointing out my spelling error...I never use spell check, and occasionally, one gets past.

 

[David E]

I have mentioned my own experiences backpacking long distances which have always included a firearm. I speak from the reality of the trail.

Not everyone goes to groomed hiking paths/trails. Maybe you don't either, but the trails vs. woods may very well dictate a different gun choice.

A Glock 17 or 19 would be suitable weight-wise.
Still, a 17 ounce 38 beats them in both weight and size. Still has enough power...

Enough power for what? Enough accuracy for what? Enough capacity for what? If everything goes your way, then it just might work ! Then again, if everything goes your way, you wouldn't need it at all.

If I were backpacking in country where defense against large predators was a possibility, than (SP) my choice would change, as it did when I packed a six-inch 44mag.

I suppose this is where everyone goes off into their own scenario and/or experience about what is necessary. I worry more about people than I do about animals, but when I found out that the black bear population is exploding in the woods I frequent, I reevaluated my pistol selection.

My point was, and remains, it's misplaced priorities to put weight above all else when it comes to choosing a hiking/camping/trail gun.

It's good to have a variety to choose from, as you can match the anticipated task to the gun.

 

[mbr]

Part of why I enjoy spending time in the woods is the very fact that one can't prepare for every contingency. I am a reasonable and cautious hiker, always leave word where I am going, take a first aid kit, plenty of water, a survival kit, and usually a small firearm, but if I feel the need to take two or three different firearms, including one for "Long range shots," I'll just stay home in the bunker. Though I did hear of an Al-Quaeda trained sleeper cell of black bears out there...

 

[David E]

but if I feel the need to take two or three different firearms, including one for "Long range shots," I'll just stay home in the bunker.

Perhaps you misread my last post where I said: It's good to have a variety to choose from, as you can match the anticipated task to the gun.

I do not mean that you take 3 different guns with you backpacking/hiking.

I meant that if you have a variety to choose from BEFORE LEAVING THE HOUSE, that you can select the one that best fits the anticipated tasks.

For example, neither the .38 Scandium snubby or the .500 Magnum is the best choice for all circumstances or outings.

 

[amd6547]

What nonsense.

 

[David E]

Most of us realize that different tasks require different tools.

Maybe all you have is a hammer, so every problem looks like a nail. Good luck with that.



.

 

[amd6547]

Blather

 

[David E]

I see now why you always find yourself hiking alone !



.

 

[amd6547]

That I hike alone would be your assumption. Incorrect, as it turns out.
Whether you hike long distance with a backpack, I haven't a clue. I have at least described my level of experience. All I know about you, is your opinion that a 38 snub is too low powered for self defense, doesn't hold enough ammo, and is inaccurate, all three of which I consider incorrect.
YOUR opinion of the weapon I choose for MY needs is utterly irrelevant. If you feel you need a Glock 17 and two spare mags, have at it, I would not presume to second guess your choice as you see fit to second guess mine.
The fact is, I know many backpackers. Virtually none carry a firearm, other than my longtime pack partner.

 

[David E]

What nonsense and blather.......

 

[amd6547]

Which confirms for me that you have probably never carried a firearm on a long, multi-day trip through rough terrain, and really have no foundation for your opinion.
A mere poseur only too ready to advise those who have, what they should carry. Pathetic.