Handgun For Dangerous Game

[new57]

In territory where dangerous game is on 4 legs I would carry these - UDAP bear spray (primary defense), Super Redhawk Alaskan .454 Casull when in large dangerous game territory, Ruger Redhawk in .41 magnum when in medium and small dangerous game territory. One cannister of UDAP is on chest, second cannister of UDAP is on waist. Wheel gun also on chest.

 

[Ted100]

To preface this, yes… I know a long gun is always preferred to a handgun for the topic.

Secondly, the dangerous game in question is four legged, and occupies the N. American continent. Everything from S. MS hogs to Alaskan grizzly, moose, and etc.

I’ve always labored under the impulse that, regarding stuff that looks at me and think “Mmm… free lunch”, or can trample me on a bad day, good day, or drop of a hat; that I want the biggest, baddest cartridge I can lay hands to, with a hard cast flat nose bullet, in order to penetrate deeply and break bones//pulverize organs, etc. in order to stop the charge/attack/mauling. Something along the lines of a heavy for caliber .44 Magnum, hot-rod .45 Colt, .454 Casull, etc; w/ .357 Magnum or standard hard cast .45 Colt for… “milder” dangerous game. Your only getting one or two shots, if that; so they need to count.


I have a butcher friend who swears by his 9x19mm for everything, with the proper bullet… is there a snowball’s chance in Hell of any run-of-the-mill 9x19 competing with a hot rodded big bore ? Heck, can 10mm compare w/ a hot rodded big bore ?

Get a 15 shot 10mm. thats the best

 

[Palladan44]

Get a 15 shot 10mm. thats the best

***With proper loads, absolutely.
It must be noted that many of the 10mm offerings are middle-velocity (for caliber) jacketed hollow points that often are simply bullets that were designed for the 40 s&w and certain velocity envelopes and meeting the FBI Gel protocols, yatta, yatta......I'd strongly suggest avoiding these types of ammo for this purpose as penetration will be greatly compromised on dangerous game.
Ammo buyer beware. Buffalo Bore's high velocity hard cast bullets, or something wit dem monolithic metal Lehigh penetrators come highly recommended. Hard cast lead of a brinell hardness of 18 or greater has the best chance of holding up through tough tissue and bone, of any of your "common" bullets anyways.

 

[JFrank]

I find it interesting that most people focus on predators. Bears, lions, tigers, snakes… all over the world it’s the same. Here in the USA we have some nasty critters, but I can’t think of anything more dangerous that an injured and frightened moose. A close second would be an angry bison. Third probably comes down to Alaskan bears which are abnormally large, and then the list kinda trickles down.

So what’s going to stop an angry bison or a moose? I think a 460 or 500 revolver might, and a shotgun slug would do well, but a magnum rifle would do best.

Bro
The Moose in our area can be very aggressive and tags are by drawing only, I would probably back out very carefully and give the big guy plenty of room, if I absolutely had to shoot I would image my 45 sidearm should get it done but only as a last resort.

 

[swg1]

Either my EAA Witness 10mm or more often than not my S&W 329 PD 44 mag. 200 and 320 grain hardcast loads respectively.

 

[Anchorite]

To loosely quote @CraigC , the 10mm is **at best** a deer cartridge.
And the very best (boutique) 10mm loads are roughly equivalent to 44Spl energy levels, sans bullet diameter. Just having magazine capacity does not, cannot, and will never, make up for smaller bullet mass. Why folks can’t figure this out is beyond me.

This is empirically sound. Why folks continue to espouse the 10mm is baffling to me.

When it comes to scary beasts that can bite back, there is no replacement for displacement.

 

[JohnKSa]

And the very best (boutique) 10mm loads are roughly equivalent to 44Spl energy levels, sans bullet diameter.

.44Spl is 200grs @ ~900fps. You can get boutique 10mm loads that are 200grs @ ~1300fps.

.44Spl will drive 250grs about 760fps--10mm will push 230grs @ ~1120fps.

That puts .44Spl energies in the 300-400ft/lb range and the 10mm boutique energies in the 600-800ft/lb range.

We can argue about whether or not the energy differences are going to make a practical difference on game, but it's more than just a little stretch to say that a 2x difference makes them "roughly equivalent".

Even if you compare boutique .44Spl to boutique 10mm, there's still an energy difference of around 100ft/lbs favoring the 10mm.

 

[CraigC]

.44Spl is 200grs @ ~900fps. You can get boutique 10mm loads that are 200grs @ ~1300fps.

.44Spl will drive 250grs about 760fps--10mm will push 230grs @ ~1120fps.

That puts .44Spl energies in the 300-400ft/lb range and the 10mm boutique energies in the 600-800ft/lb range.

We can argue about whether or not the energy differences are going to make a practical difference on game, but it's more than just a little stretch to say that a 2x difference makes them "roughly equivalent".

Even if you compare boutique .44Spl to boutique 10mm, there's still an energy difference of around 100ft/lbs favoring the 10mm.

That's not the context of my comment. The context was:

10mm 220gr at 1200fps
.44Spl 250gr at 1200fps

Comparable sectional density at the same velocity. Which makes them exactly equivalent, except you get a much bigger meplat with the .44. The point being that the absolute best .44Spl load is never considered for anything bigger than deer sized game but magically, the 10mm is serious bear medicine. In other words, 10mm fans think they're special and the rules don't apply to them.

 

[JohnKSa]

The problem is that while the 10mm velocity you quote is realistic that isn't a realistic .44Spl velocity. Not even the boutiques are loading .44Spl to that kind of performance level.

That's effectively a comparison between a light .44Mag load and a heavy 10mm loading.

The point being that the absolute best .44Spl load is never considered for anything bigger than deer sized game but magically, the 10mm is serious bear medicine. In other words, 10mm fans think they're special and the rules don't apply to them.

I don't really care about that one way or the other. Just pointing out that a comparison between 10mm and .44Spl energy figures (whether or not that's a good way to predict performance on game) will favor the 10mm heavily.

The only way to make the .44Spl compare favorably with the 10mm in terms of energy is to push the .44Spl well beyond its accepted limits into light .44Mag territory.

And yes, I know Keith loaded the .44Spl to the kind of performance levels you quote. Well, really it would be more accurate to say that he created loads that would work in some .44Spl guns that provided that kind of performance.

But his efforts didn't redefine the official limits of the .44Spls--or even expand the caliber to include an official .44Spl+P definition. The .44Spl pressure limits still keep official performance well below what is achievable with standard pressure 10mm loadings. Keith's efforts resulted in an entirely new caliber--which very handily outperforms both the .44Spl and the 10mm.

 

[.38 Special]

It's long been accepted that 250@1200 is a safe load in full sized guns. I've done it myself, repeatedly, with no issues - other than unpleasant recoil.

Now that may not be perfectly fair to the 10mm, with which I don't have much experience. Perhaps the knowledgeable handloader can lean on it - though I note it already is a modern, high pressure cartridge.

 

[JohnKSa]

I'm not saying it's not safe. I'm saying it's not .44Spl.

You can create loads that are safe in full-sized .38Spl revolvers that will rival .357Mag performance--but that doesn't mean that the .38Spl is equivalent to the .357Mag. It just means that some .38Spl guns will take loads that are far beyond .38Spl performance.

Cartridge comparisons need to be cartridge comparisons.

The .38Spl has performance limits that are established by official pressure and COAL specifications. So does the .44Spl. Those limits don't change merely because it's possible to overload it in some guns without catastrophic incident.

 

[.38 Special]

I disagree. A .44 Special doesn't stop being a .44 Special just because it is loaded to its full potential, any more than does the .45 Colt. If the 10mm had been invented in the blackpowder era, it likely would still be thought of as a 14,000 psi cartridge - and handloaders, with modern guns, would be modernizing it to its full ability.

Beyond that, I think I get @CraigC and @Anchorite 's point, which isn't necessarily about whether the .44 Special is superior to the 10mm, but rather that a certain subset of the shooting fraternity is a little more excited about the 10mm than they really ought to be.

 

[JohnKSa]

I disagree. A .44 Special doesn't stop being a .44 Special just because it is loaded to its full potential...

If we are talking about .44Spl, its full potential is defined by a maximum pressure specification and a maximum COAL. If a load exceeds those limits then it is no longer a .44Spl load. That's how cartridge definitions work.

What you are talking about is loading to the maximum potential of some of the guns chambered in .44Spl. That is an entirely different thing.

 

[.38 Special]

In the Hodgdon manual, they still refer to "Ruger only" .45 Colt loads as .45 Colt.

At any rate, I do understand your point, but think it is splitting hairs a bit too finely and am ready enough for bed that I don't really want to argue about it any more. I hope you have a fine evening.

 

[JohnKSa]

I believe that. Doesn't mean anything--SAAMI, not Hodgdon is responsible for the official definition of .45 Colt and .44Spl.

Either official cartridge definitions mean something or they don't. If they don't, then there's no point in comparing cartridge performance at all because there's no agreement on what you're comparing.

I was at the range one time and the guy next to me was shooting something that sounded like a .357Mag. I looked around the divider and he was shooting a Ruger P89. He was achieving ridiculous velocities with his handloads. His willingness to overload his pistol and the pistol's ability to stand it without blowing up doesn't mean that the 9mm suddenly becomes a 1600fps cartridge, that 9mm is now equivalent to .357Mag. The 9mm cartridge has official standards and if those standards are not followed, the resulting performance is not 9mm performance.

Same thing goes here.

Imagine if I said:

"There's really no difference between 5 and 7.

Yes, I know that if you look at the official definitions of 5 and 7, that 5 is 2 less than 7, but I don't accept that those official definitions actually define the full potential of those numbers. I think that the full potential of 5 is actually 8 and the full potential of 7 is also 8. Therefore they're clearly the same."​

That's exactly what's going on here. If we're going to compare '5' and '7', we need to use their official definitions. Otherwise it's not a comparison of '5' and '7', it's a comparison of someone's opinion of what they believe '5' and '7' really mean which is virtually guaranteed to be unproductive.

 

[CraigC]

I really don't care what anyone else's view of my comment is. Those loads exist, they are in use, we know what guns they're safe in (no different from Ruger only .45Colt) and that is the context of my comment. To be fair, people also accuse the manufacturers of downloading the 10mm. My comparison is, in effect, both cartridges loaded to their fullest potential. What SAAMI says about it is irrelevant and really off topic. Are we talking about semantics or are we talking about handguns for dangerous game? The point was that Keith did not develop his heavy .44Spl load as a bear smasher. Nope. It was for general purpose use on deer sized game.

 

[JohnKSa]

Those loads exist, they are in use, we know what guns they're safe in (no different from Ruger only .45Colt) and that is the context of my comment.

None of that has any bearing on the point. .44Spl has an official definition, as does 10mm. Comparisons between the two should be done based on those official definitions or the comparison is not between 10mm and the .44Spl. It's between something else--someone's opinions of what they are, their opinion of what they should be, their opinion of the two cartridges full potential, whatever--but not actually the two cartridges in question.

My comparison is, in effect, both cartridges loaded to their fullest potential.

If you were to say that your comparison was, in effect, both cartridges loaded to what was, in your opinion, their fullest potential, that would be one thing. But the actual fullest potential of the two cartridges is inextricably tied to their official definitions and your comparison was clearly not based on those definitions.

I'm reminded of a joke. A guy sees someone advertising a cord of hardwood for $75. He drives to the address, and the guy waves him around back. He starts loading the wood into his truck and before he's loaded a full cord, the seller stops him. "That's not a cord of wood." says the guy. "It's what I call a cord of wood." says the seller. So the guy gets in his truck and hands the guy $50. "That's not $75." says the seller. "That's what I call $75." says the guy and he drives off.

There's a reason things have official definitions. If people make up their own, it causes problems.

The point was that Keith did not develop his heavy .44Spl load as a bear smasher. Nope. It was for general purpose use on deer sized game.

In your opinion, what handgun loading would Keith have recommended for bear defense before .44Mag existed?

 

[Iwsbull]

So I take it , that by your reasoning using saami specs only defines a cartridge, so a 500 Linebaugh doesn’t exist?

 

[JohnKSa]

That's not my reasoning--it's not even close to anything I've claimed.

If you want to compare a mile and a kilometer, you need to use the standard definitions or it's just going to cause confusion and trouble. You can't, for example, say that the mile and a kilometer are the same, because you feel like the "fullest potential" of the kilometer is really 5000 feet, not the official length of about 3280.84ft and the mile is over-rated and is really also only 5000feet, not the official definition of 5280. The kilometer and the mile have official definitions and personal opinions don't alter them.

Now, let's say you come up with a new measurement of length. You can call it what you like and define it how you want to. Is your new measurement non-existent because no standards organization has given it an official definition? No, of course not--it's just not mainstream. If it came into common enough usage, a standards organization might formalize the definition, and if that happened, then from then on that definition would be the official one.

Along the same lines, as with any "wildcat" cartridge, the .500 Linebaugh is what the inventor says it is. If it were to become standardized and SAAMI took it over, then they would set the official definition at that point.

The .44Spl and the 10mm have both had official SAAMI definitions for a very long time.

A person could, of course, argue that they never agreed to be bound by SAAMI and make up their own definition for the .44Spl or the 10mm--just like a person could argue that they have the authority to make up their own definitions for words that already exist. And the result would be just about the same.

 

[.38 Special]

So I take it , that by your reasoning using saami specs only defines a cartridge, so a 500 Linebaugh doesn’t exist?

The "boutique" .44 Specials are apparently mislabeled as well. Skeeter would have been surprised to learn that he wasn't actually a .44 Special fan.

And the guy whose maximum 9mm loads are right on the limit? Apparently half his magazine is not 9mm, but rather some kind of wildcat.

I'm not buying argument.

 

[.38 Special]

That's not my reasoning--it's not even close to anything I've claimed.

If you want to compare a mile and a kilometer, you need to use the standard definitions or it's just going to cause confusion and trouble. You can't, for example, say that the mile and a kilometer are the same, because you feel like the "fullest potential" of the kilometer is really 5000 feet, not the official length of about 3280.84ft and the mile is over-rated and is really also only 5000feet, not the official definition of 5280. The kilometer and the mile have official definitions and personal opinions don't alter them.

I think that saying a .44 Special is not a .44 Special if you put in too much powder is like saying a mile is not a mile if you cover it too fast.

 

[xphunter]

Loving it!

 

[Hesa Hard1]

That's not the context of my comment. The context was:
10mm 220gr at 1200fps
.44Spl 250gr at 1200fps
Comparable sectional density at the same velocity. Which makes them exactly equivalent, except you get a much bigger meplat with the .44. The point being that the absolute best .44Spl load is never considered for anything bigger than deer sized game but magically, the 10mm is serious bear medicine. In other words, 10mm fans think they're special and the rules don't apply to them.

That’s a b.s./fictional 44Spl velocity. But even if it wasn't, where can you get a 15+1 capacity 44Spl in a semi-auto of reasonable size and weight, ... hmmm?

Last I checked, the Glock 20 is factory chambered in 10mm, but you can get aftermarket drop-in barrels to shoot .40S&W, .357Sig, and 9x25 Dillon.

No barrels in .44Spl Ed. though.

 

[CraigC]

The .44Spl has always been a handloader's cartridge. 90% of its appeal lies in what it can do when handloaded. Both the classic Skeeter load and the Keith load are over-standard pressure. So when I compare the .44Spl to anything, that is the context of that comparison. When I compare the .44Spl to the .45Colt, I'm comparing it to Tier I and Tier II .45 loads. Just as when I compare the .45Colt to the .44Mag, I'm comparing Tier III "Ruger only" loads. Or maybe I'm comparing 50,000psi loads that are only applicable to certain guns like Redhawks. If you think that changes the definition of what a cartridge is 'supposed' to be, fine. Unless the OP specified "only standard pressure factory loads", then I really don't see how it's relevant but that's cool too. He didn't stipulate that, in fact he mentioned "hot rodded .45Colt".

Before the advent of the .44Mag, Keith would've suggested a heavy rifle with the .44Spl or a .45Colt on your hip. Those were the heaviest available at the time. It doesn't make them sufficient. How is that relevant?

 

[CraigC]

That’s a b.s./fictional 44Spl velocity. But even if it wasn't, where can you get a 15+1 capacity 44Spl in a semi-auto of reasonable size and weight, ... hmmm?

Last I checked, the Glock 20 is factory chambered in 10mm, but you can get aftermarket drop-in barrels to shoot .40S&W, .357Sig, and 9x25 Dillon.

No barrels in .44Spl Ed. though.

If you don't know, I guess you better ask somebody. 1200fps is the nominal velocity of the heavy Keith .44Spl load. It's only been in constant use for 90 friggin' years.

Magazine capacity is a false God. It's a foolish thing to rely on because you're not going to get the opportunity for it to become a factor. You're gonna get 2-3 shots at most, make them count. For me, I want more than a deer cartridge when a Volkswagen with teeth and six inch claws is going to eat me.