Field and Stream's top 25 list: handguns for hunting

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
672
Location
Lexington, KY
Okay, here's the list in simple form. To read the whole article, including rationale, go here.

01. Smith & Wesson Model 317 Kit Gun .22 LR
02. Thompson/Center Larry Weishuhn Signature Encore Pro Hunter in .308 Winchester
03. The Colt Woodsman .22 LR
04. Ruger New Super Blackhawk Bisley Hunter .44 Remington Magnum
05. The Freedom Arms Premier Grade Model 83 .500 Wyoming Express
06. Remington Model XP 100 Centerfire Long Range Pistol in .221 Remington Fireball
07. The Thompson/Center G2 Contender .223 Remington
08. The Ruger Mark III Hunter .22 LR
09. Browning Buck Mark Hunter .22 LR
10. The Browning Buck Mark Lite Green .22 LR
11. The Walther P22 Target Military Pistol .22 LR
12. Smith & Wesson Model 386 XL Hunter .357 Magnum
13. The Ruger 22 Charger .22 LR
14. The Magnum Research BFR .45/70 Gov't Revolver
15. The Kimber Rimfire Target .22 LR
16. The Smith & Wesson Model 28 Highway Patrolman .357 Magnum
17. Ruger New Bearcat .22 LR
18. The Taurus Model 444 Ultralite in Titanium Blue .44 Remington Magnum
19. Smith & Wesson Model 57 Classic .41 Remington Magnum
20. Ruger Super Redhawk .44 Remington Magnum
21. Taurus Model 991 Tracker .22 Winchester Magnum Rimfire
22. Smith & Wesson Model 617 .22 LR
23. Taurus Raging Bull Model 454 .454 Casull
24. Smith & Wesson Model 629 Stealth Hunter .44 Remington Magnum
25. Linebaugh Alaskan Model .500 Linebaugh


I can't believe they sacrificed the Model 29 S&W for some of these others.

I also think they went overboard on the inclusion of .22LRs, so I'd ditch the Kimber in favor of the model 29.

What would you delete and add?
(You have to delete one pistol for every one that you add, so the list stays at 25.)

KR
 
I really like some of the selections and don't like some others. The model 29 not being included is inexcusable. Especially since they included it as number 5 in their top 50 hunting guns.
 
The list is garbage...

For hunting, Freedom arms firearms should top the list in rimfire and centerfire. Period.

Ruger Bearcat ahead of a .22lr/.22mag Ruger Single Six Hunter?

The Bearcat has fixed sites and around a 4" barrel. It is also only chambered in .22 lr. What a joke. It's a nice little trail gun, but it is not a hunting gun. The worse joke is the 317 kit gun as the #1 hunting handgun. I laughed when I saw that.

The Single Six hunter is a better hunting gun than either of those two guns in every way. It has integral scope mounts and comes with scope rings. It fires .22 lr and .22 mag. It has a 7.5" barrel. Heck the velocities that you get out of the .22 mag, in this gun, are faster than what you'd get out of a .22lr *rifle*. The only .22 that should be ahead of this would be the freedom arms rimfire.
 
You're going to push .22s and you leave the Mk2/3 or Buckmarks to 8 and 9 for a friggin' KIT GUN in number ONE? ...... or a BEARCAT at all? Morons.....

IMHO, the Contender is all I'd ever need for hunting anything. Between the supremely accurate .22LR 10" scoped barrel, the .30-30 scoped barrel, and the .410/.45 Colt barrel, there ain't much I can't hunt. If I hunted anything tougher than hogs, I'd get a .45/70 barrel. I don't need no stinking freedom arms. Sure, they're okay as revolvers go, but that .30-30 barrel on that Contender is accurate enough and powerful enough to kill deer at a full 200 yards. 3" high at 100, hits dead on at 200. The .308 Encore is a good call, though, even more power and range.

This is only my opinion, but everyone has their own definition for a "handgun". Some figure it's anything that doesn't have a butt stock on it. Some feel the Contender isn't a handgun, only revolvers and autos are. Well, I figure it's anything I can stuff in a holster of some kind, shoulder holster in my case with the Contender. I consider the XP100 more of a hand rifle than a hand gun. I've I'm going to carry something that awkward, I'll just take my M7. But, that's just me. Everyone has their ideas on the subject.

I just don't know what they're thinking calling a Bearcat and a Kit Gun a "hunting hangdun. I've never seen either with a scope mounted on it. A hunting handgun worthy of that name should at least have that capability.

Oh, BTW, they put the 629 on the list for all you M29 guys.
 
Agreed, there are several .22s too many and the Ruger and Buckmark should certainly be at the top for .22s. I do like the Charger though, it is very accurate.

I don't understand why there are no .32s or .38s.... Personally I think these are much better suited to some forms of small game hunting espcially anything bigger than a rabbit and smaller than a coyote.

HB

PS, WALTHER P22... REALLY!
 
I just don't know what they're thinking calling a Bearcat and a Kit Gun a "hunting hangdun. I've never seen either with a scope mounted on it.
You mean all those rabbits, squirrels, coyotes, and deer I have killed with iron sighted handguns over the last 50+ years don't count as "hunting"?

Contrary to modern internet BS, a handgun most certainly does not have to have a scope in the way to make it a "hunting" handgun.

BTW: I would bet you that S&W Kit Guns & Ruger Bearcats have killed more actual game over the years then all the scope sighted Loudenboomers combined.

rc
 
People still read Field and Stream? Go figure.

I quit reading it about ten years ago due to an article that blamed ranchers out west of the numbers of elk or mule deer dropping off. I feel ranchers and hunters have enough common enemies to fight with and don't need to go after each other. I don't remember very much about ti but it was awhile ago.
 
You mean all those rabbits, squirrels, coyotes, and deer I have killed with iron sighted handguns over the last 50+ years don't count as "hunting"?

Contrary to modern internet BS, a handgun most certainly does not have to have a scope in the way to make it a "hunting" handgun.

BTW: I would bet you that S&W Kit Guns & Ruger Bearcats have killed more actual game over the years then all the scope sighted Loudenboomers combined.

rc

I've killed a bit of game over the years with iron sights, but my eyes never were that great and ain't worth a crud at age 57. I think any hunting handgun worthy of the name should be optics compatible whether you put one on it or not. JMHO I mean, hell, I've taken rabbits with my 1 5/8" NAA mini revolver. Does that make it a hunting handgun?
 
A discombobulated list if I ever saw one -- looks like all the writers just listed every gun they had ever hunted with.
 
I would think a Thompson-Conteder would be at the top also followed closely by something in 44 mag then a MK II followed by a Buckmark Then maybe a 686
 
This list really feels like it should have the caveat of "if you're already carrying a medium/large calibre hunting rifle". Then the number of .22's would make sense. Their choices within the .22 genre are hardly stellar though.
 
A poor list. You would think it would have been more diverse.

F&S are behind the times, their gun guy is a little to opinionated also.
 
I would bet you that S&W Kit Guns & Ruger Bearcats have killed more actual game over the years then all the scope sighted Loudenboomers combined.

This actually made me laugh out loud.

Then I realized I'm planning to go to the gunshow tomorrow and trade one of my Ruger mk IIs into a Beretta Buck Rogers .22 and then scope it.

KR
 
I was reading that two days ago. I second many of the criticism here - it was an incoherent list with a ridiculous level of duplication, especially among the .22s.

I also realized I had to question the author's knowledge of firearms when he described #17, his own S&W 6" 28 as having a "Partridge" front sight. It doesn't, it has a Baughman front sight - the two don't even look similar. And of course, there's no such thing as a "Partridge" front sight. It's "Patridge" - the inventor's last name, not a bird.

That was in fact the only entry I read fully; I wonder how many other errors there were in the ones I skipped or skimmed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top