Is This a Big Bear Round?

[d2wing]

What is your opinion on this:






GR

Good post. Confirms DNR results. And what many others say.

 

[d2wing]

WD Bell Concluded the 7X57 was enough for elephant and the majority of the 1100 he killed was with a 7X57 and some with 6.5X55. I don't think he ever used anything larger than 30 caliber. Late in his life, after the 308 was developed, he is quoted as saying that he would have used it if it had been available when he was hunting. The key is penetration and shot placement. Forget energy, bullet weight alone or diameter alone. If the bullet penetrates deep enough to reach vitals it will work. Sectional density and bullet construction is what determines penetration.

The original 30-06 load was 220 gr and those bullets have always had enough sectional density to get the job done. There have been multiple gun writers who have tested the therory. Finn Aagard was a noted African guide and writer who determined the heavy for caliber bullets in 30 caliber were more effective than anything else short of 375. Those results have been duplicated by other writers.

The Alaskan study might be almost 40 years old. But the same technology that has allowed 45-70 to catch up to the 30 calibers, can also be applied to smaller calibers. I owned several 45-70's going back to the 1970's. The recoil is simply far out of proportion to performance. With the loads capable of MATCHING 30-06 you get recoil from a Marlin lever gun that EXCEEDS 458 WM recoil from traditional guns.

The 270 is usually not used with bullets with enough sectional density or tough enough construction to be considered viable. But I wouldn't hesitate to use a 270/140 ttsx, or 150 Partition on big bear. Just as soon have one as a hot rodded 45-70. I have a preference for 30-06 for this. But if 270 was what I had and I wanted to hunt big bear I'd take it. And I'm not a 270 fan. But I do recognize that it will work. Basically every thing from 26 caliber to 35 caliber in bottle necked cartridges is designed for all the same stuff. If you choose the projectile carefully.

Excellent post.

 

[Random 8]

Now that I've read more of the OPs comments, it seems we're talking western grisly, and western hunting. Long ranges on the hunting, some good stopping power and penetration needed on the other.
If I hunted in that scenario, a 30-06 or 7rem magnum would absolutely be my go-to. 180 in the 30-06, 175 in the 7RM. I'd probably personally favor the '06 just because I like old things that get the job done, and I could stoke it with some 220RN cruise missiles around camp and pack horses.
Some extremely nice 30-06 rifles can be found built on Springfield, M17 and Mauser actions in the used market with amazing wood, tuned triggers and actions and quality bedding and bores for very reasonable prices with the current trend towards super calibers, super light and synthetic stocks. I would recommend the OP shop a rifle such as this or one of the inexpensive modern options for the specific application of hunting where Griz may hunt you back.

You might also consider this bullet. It's well proven in the European 6.5s and 7mms in Africa, I suspect the .270 version would hold up well. I've used the 156 7mm version on Minnesota moose from my .280 to great effect. https://www.grafs.com/retail/catalog/product/productId/29141

 

[DM~]

What is your opinion on this:
GR

On what Phil said???

If you read many of my post on big bears, I've said many times that a properly loaded 30-06 was plenty to kill any big bear, even in a charge.

I've also always said, properly loaded meant 200NP's...

DM

 

[Garandimal]

On what Phil said???

If you read many of my post on big bears, I've said many times that a properly loaded 30-06 was plenty to kill any big bear, even in a charge.

I've also always said, properly loaded meant 200NP's...

DM

Found the post very interesting.

Was just circulating it to clarify opinion.

What is your opinion on the 30-06/168 gr.TSX/2800 fps in this application?




GR

 

[Garandimal]

Now that I've read more of the OPs comments, it seems we're talking western grisly, and western hunting. Long ranges on the hunting, some good stopping power and penetration needed on the other.
If I hunted in that scenario, a 30-06 or 7rem magnum would absolutely be my go-to. 180 in the 30-06, 175 in the 7RM. I'd probably personally favor the '06 just because I like old things that get the job done, and I could stoke it with some 220RN cruise missiles around camp and pack horses.
Some extremely nice 30-06 rifles can be found built on Springfield, M17 and Mauser actions in the used market with amazing wood, tuned triggers and actions and quality bedding and bores for very reasonable prices with the current trend towards super calibers, super light and synthetic stocks. I would recommend the OP shop a rifle such as this or one of the inexpensive modern options for the specific application of hunting where Griz may hunt you back.

You might also consider this bullet. It's well proven in the European 6.5s and 7mms in Africa, I suspect the .270 version would hold up well. I've used the 156 7mm version on Minnesota moose from my .280 to great effect. https://www.grafs.com/retail/catalog/product/productId/29141

Yes, mainly Western fields.

But not really interested in hunting Bear, so long range isn't really an issue.

Just the ability to drop one if need be, while hunting other game, w/ reasonable reliability given good marksmanship.

But don't have a 30-06 any more - replaced it w/ a M70 EW/SS in .270 Win and am trying to figure out a fix.

Might be, as you point out, another 30-06, from the used market.




GR

 

[Nature Boy]

JUST SAY NO, to bear threads.

We have one as a sticky in the hunting forum for just such pondering

 

[CraigC]

WD Bell Concluded the 7X57 was enough for elephant and the majority of the 1100 he killed was with a 7X57 and some with 6.5X55. I don't think he ever used anything larger than 30 caliber. Late in his life, after the 308 was developed, he is quoted as saying that he would have used it if it had been available when he was hunting. The key is penetration and shot placement. Forget energy, bullet weight alone or diameter alone. If the bullet penetrates deep enough to reach vitals it will work. Sectional density and bullet construction is what determines penetration.

The original 30-06 load was 220 gr and those bullets have always had enough sectional density to get the job done. There have been multiple gun writers who have tested the theory. Finn Aagard was a noted African guide and writer who determined the heavy for caliber bullets in 30 caliber were more effective than anything else short of 375. Those results have been duplicated by other writers.

The Alaskan study might be almost 40 years old. But the same technology that has allowed 45-70 to catch up to the 30 calibers, can also be applied to smaller calibers. I owned several 45-70's going back to the 1970's. The recoil is simply far out of proportion to performance. With the loads capable of MATCHING 30-06 you get recoil from a Marlin lever gun that EXCEEDS 458 WM recoil from traditional guns.

The 270 is usually not used with bullets with enough sectional density or tough enough construction to be considered viable. But I wouldn't hesitate to use a 270/140 ttsx, or 150 Partition on big bear. Just as soon have one as a hot rodded 45-70. I have a preference for 30-06 for this. But if 270 was what I had and I wanted to hunt big bear I'd take it. And I'm not a 270 fan. But I do recognize that it will work. Basically every thing from 26 caliber to 35 caliber in bottle necked cartridges is designed for all the same stuff. If you choose the projectile carefully.

That's because Bell was drilling holes in elephants' brains with very high SD solids. Unfortunately for your argument, that is a very, very narrow application.

It's comical that you're still parroting this nonsense that the .45-70 is ineffective. I'm fairly certain that hard cast bullets do not represent cutting edge technology. Bottom line is that the bullet is the single most important factor here. The USFS study chose many of the wrong bullets and a lot of folks who don't know any better judge the cartridge by the bullets they used. A heavy controlled expansion bullet in the `06 is highly effective but will never come close to what the good penetrators will do in the .45-70.

Good post. Confirms DNR results. And what many others say.

Phil Shoemaker recommending a 200-220gr Partition confirms the DNR results with a 220gr Remington, how exactly? Since the `06 was judged relative to the performance of other cartridges and those other cartridges used piss-poor bullets, how is it even relevant?

You don't have to answer, I'm about to embark on a massive penetration test and the `06 is high on the list. We'll put the USFS tests in proper perspective.

 

[LoonWulf]

I'm about to embark on a massive penetration test and the `06 is high on the list.

I WANNA SEE!!!!!!

I like those kindsa tests.

 

[Nature Boy]

I WANNA SEE!!!!!!

I like those kindsa tests.

Me too. I'm a fan of seeing things shot with bullets, be it paper, ballistics gel, steel, or game animals. Less words, more pics!

PS.

I shot this mild steel with a .30-06 using 168g Berger VLDs at 500 yards. I think it would probably penetrate most animal hides

 

[DM~]

Found the post very interesting.

Was just circulating it to clarify opinion.

What is your opinion on the 30-06/168 gr.TSX/2800 fps in this application?
GR

OK, I want to make two comments here... On the TSX...

My experience has been, to really kick azz on big game, a bullet needs to do two things... It needs to expand fast, imparting a LOT of initial tissue damage, but it also HAS TO drive in VERY deep. NP's do that, TSX's, not so much. They may dive in deep, but that's it!

As for 30cal. 220's... I personally have seen them not give what I would call DEEP penetration! Unless they are an 220 NP, I don't trust them!

I once put a cup/core 220 in the center chest of a caribou that was up hill and was facing me. The bullet hit dead center, hitting the breast bone and literally came apart only penetrating about 10" in... I saw something similar another time, so I went back to the tried and true NP's...

Anyway, std. 220's aren't what I would call good DG medicine!! NOT for me anyway!

DM

 

[Garandimal]

OK, I want to make two comments here... On the TSX...

My experience has been, to really kick azz on big game, a bullet needs to do two things... It needs to expand fast, imparting a LOT of initial tissue damage, but it also HAS TO drive in VERY deep. NP's do that, TSX's, not so much. They may dive in deep, but that's it!

As for 30cal. 220's... I personally have seen them not give what I would call DEEP penetration! Unless they are an 220 NP, I don't trust them!

I once put a cup/core 220 in the center chest of a caribou that was up hill and was facing me. The bullet hit dead center, hitting the breast bone and literally came apart only penetrating about 10" in... I saw something similar another time, so I went back to the tried and true NP's...

Anyway, std. 220's aren't what I would call good DG medicine!! NOT for me anyway!

DM

In any event, would stay in the 180-200 gr. bullet range for the 30-06, unless hunting thickets where shots were sure to be close, and still would probably go w/ the 200 gr.

Think that an SD of 0.300, with higher velocity/energy/BC, would do the work and still be flat enough to hunt other game with.

Been an interesting thread.

Peace-of-mind dictates that a 20% increase in mono-copper bullet weight for 100 fps of velocity (140 gr. -> 168 gr.), or a 33% increase in NP bullet weight for 250 fps of velocity (150 gr. -> 200 gr.) is significant w/r/t a large carnivorous problem.

On the other hand - 150 gr. at 2800 fps? Is M2 Ball spec - no slouch of a killing round.




GR

 

[Garandimal]

We have one as a sticky in the hunting forum for just such pondering

Thanks.

Saw that, but didn't really think it appropriate.

As this is not about hunting Big Bears... but rather, about not being hunted by them.






GR

 

[d2wing]

Depending on where you plan on hunting the odds of being charged by a Grizzly bear if you are hunting something else are pretty slim. If I were concerned I would use a 7MM Mag. I bought one for hunting out West or a 30-06 and be done with it. But if you prefer the .270 you could still hunt with it ( I would not use a 270 anyway) but be aware of your surroundings at all times and the positions you put yourself In. No the .270 is not a bear rifle in my opinion, It's not my first or second choice for anything. But in a pinch it would be a lot better than a sharp stick and Grizzly's were almost wiped out with black powder rifles. Use premium bullets and learn to shoot straight when you are startled.

 

[LRDGCO]

A bolt rifle is not a great choice for big bear defense. A .27 caliber rifle is not a good choice for big bear defense. A firearm that can rapidly put a number of big holes in vital parts is the best choice for the worst case. I would prefer a lever gun with six rounds throwing .45 cal 400+ grs well constructed bullets over a 30-06 bolt rifle throwing 220s - and I'm a 30-06 partisan. A 30-06 Browning BAR might be nice. Maybe a Remington 7600. If I were hunting with a .270 and was worried about big bears, I would also have my Ruger BH 45 with Grizzly 45 Colt +P 300 grs BCPF, and extra underclothes.

 

[Garandimal]

A bolt rifle is not a great choice for big bear defense. A .27 caliber rifle is not a good choice for big bear defense. A firearm that can rapidly put a number of big holes in vital parts is the best choice for the worst case. I would prefer a lever gun with six rounds throwing .45 cal 400+ grs well constructed bullets over a 30-06 bolt rifle throwing 220s - and I'm a 30-06 partisan. A 30-06 Browning BAR might be nice. Maybe a Remington 7600. If I were hunting with a .270 and was worried about big bears, I would also have my Ruger BH 45 with Grizzly 45 Colt +P 300 grs BCPF, and extra underclothes.

Need to be able to hit at 3-400 yards - otherwise, all I'll be doin' Is hunting Big Bear up close.

Big Bear Country rifle:

​

GR

 

[LRDGCO]

Need to be able to hit at 3-400 yards - otherwise, all I'll be doin' Is hunting Big Bear up close.

Big Bear Country rifle:

View attachment 833139
​

GR

Now that you mention it a Garand might be rather nice, but bullet selection might be tricky.

 

[Garandimal]

Now that you mention it a Garand might be rather nice, but bullet selection might be tricky.

Yep, just a tad heavy is all.

Handles and shoots great. No problem at all w/ < 4 MOA from field positions.

I have a Ported Gas Plug for it, and use it for 165 gr. NP and 168 gr. TSX loads

Should be fine for 200 gr. NP loads as well, as long as the Powder is not too slow.




GR.

 

[d2wing]

I recently read a study where people have attempted stopping bear attacks with pistols, High success rates with .357 and .44 mag. I do not recall full results or where I found it. I think some one was successful with a 9 MM. Maybe it is in a thread on here.

 

[Garandimal]

I recently read a study where people have attempted stopping bear attacks with pistols, High success rates with .357 and .44 mag. I do not recall full results or where I found it. I think some one was successful with a 9 MM. Maybe it is in a thread on here.

Maybe if they were comin' up a tree after me...






GR

 

[d2wing]

I found the thread, it is in the handgun section in this forum, the thread is Moving to Alaska .40 or .44. There are two reports linked about successful defense against bear attacks with pistols. Most pistols 9 mm and up can stop a bear if you hit them in the right spot and don't miss. In the instances listed, bear spray was not reliable, .45 ACP took a lot of shots and not recommended. .44 mag was most commonly used and was 100% successful.

 

[Llama Bob]

TA heavy controlled expansion bullet in the `06 is highly effective but will never come close to what the good penetrators will do in the .45-70.

This is certainly correct. A .400+gr .458 solid with a wide, flat, sharp meplat is leagues beyond anything you can use in .308. Penetration is deeper, the wound channel is wider and less prone to sealing up, and the ability to track straight through hide and bone is better.

Grizzly Cartridge offers an appropriate load using the 400gr punch bullet.

About the only thing you'll do better with is a .50AK or .50-110 loaded with an analogous 500gr+ bullet. I've shot mine through 50" of oak rounds - it will easily punch through a big bear at any angle, bone or no bone, zero question. The entrance holes are .50 and won't close even for fat bears. The exit holes are the size of a softball.

A .30-06 is nice - if that's what you happen to have. But as a first choice?

 

[LoonWulf]

This is certainly correct. A .400+gr .458 solid with a wide, flat, sharp meplat is leagues beyond anything you can use in .308. Penetration is deeper, the wound channel is wider and less prone to sealing up, and the ability to track straight through hide and bone is better.

Grizzly Cartridge offers an appropriate load using the 400gr punch bullet.

About the only thing you'll do better with is a .50AK or .50-110 loaded with an analogous 500gr+ bullet. I've shot mine through 50" of oak rounds - it will easily punch through a big bear at any angle, bone or no bone, zero question. The entrance holes are .50 and won't close even for fat bears. The exit holes are the size of a softball.

A .30-06 is nice - if that's what you happen to have. But as a first choice?

But can the OP make 3-400yd shots on game with it?

(Lemme preface this a bit. Never even seen a bear irl, so take my musings for what they are worth)

The dual purpose of being mid range a hunting rifle first, and a bear deterrent (if necessary) second, makes for an interesting, and dicey proposition IMO....or imi (in my imaginings)

Refusing to step up in recoil to the fast(ish) medium bores, which do offer ranging capabilities, while also offering some of advantages as a stopping rifle, limits the effectiveness of the cartridges available.

Personally I've got a great deal of respect for the fast 7mm loaded with 175s, a .30-06 with good 180-200s, or a .300 loaded with 200-220s.

I still wouldn't want to carry any of them were I going where I might need to defend myself against something like a pissed off kodiak, but I think they might be closer to what the OPs trying to achieve, without the range limitations, or extra recoil.

In a pinch, if I had a .270 loaded with those TSX, is probably empty that before going for my sidearm, but again I'm much better with a rifle.

 

[Llama Bob]

But can the OP make 3-400yd shots on game with it?

Not reasonably, no. Windage is too big. My point was simply about what you use if you want to stop a bear.

If you're looking for a bear protection/long range crossover round, I would look hard at any of the big .375s and use the 260gr Accubond for reach and the 300gr Weldcore for stopping. Alternately you could use something like the .325WSM with 220gr Weldcores for both applications. The .30-06 would be way down my list but barely viable. The .270 would not make the list.

 

[LoonWulf]

325WSM with 220gr Weldcores

Thats a good idea, and one I hadn't even thought about.
it might actually be as close to "ideal" as possible, working within the confines of the original supposition.
Or possibly a .338, but the only ones I've shot we're a very light Lapua, and an ultra, neither of which I ever wanna do again.

I'm not sure why exactly, but the .325s now been added to my list of wanna tries. Right up there with a .350 remington on a 3" action.