General Geoff
Member
Sectional density? What's that?
On handguns and bears
- Thread starter KodiakBeer
- Start date
- Status
Sectional density? What's that?
Evidently you never heard of Sectional Density.
Energy is the capability of doing work...speed kills...period....momentum proponents conveniently forget the frontal area drag equation.
Comparing a hard cast bullet to a jacketed bullet, even fired from a high powered rifle is comparing apples to oranges...
Have you ever seen how far a 170 gr. 30-30 partition bullet penetrate?? I did.....
The TKO factor it's just a theory..never proven and no ballistic manual ever mention it.
Fire a 170 gr. solid pill from a 30-30 and a solid (hardcast or whatever) 300+ gr. from a 44 Mag and see who penetrates more....apples to apples
Shadow 7D
Member
Wow, not again.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
encounters with a bear..........
Bear spray, survivable, mostly
pistol survivable, maybe
shotgun/rifle survivable mostly
Not walking around oblivious in bear country, helps, but, realize this guy was walking to a heli, which probably was already spinning up the engines (not blades) so hearing is shot, as for why a bear would be there
Sometimes it's just not your day.
encounters with a bear..........
Bear spray, survivable, mostly
pistol survivable, maybe
shotgun/rifle survivable mostly
Not walking around oblivious in bear country, helps, but, realize this guy was walking to a heli, which probably was already spinning up the engines (not blades) so hearing is shot, as for why a bear would be there
Sometimes it's just not your day.
speaksoftly
Member
There's only one defense that I can think of for bears. This is the only secret weapon I'd trust my life with in bear or beet country.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Fighting bears with beets using skills learned form Battlestar Galactica!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Fighting bears with beets using skills learned form Battlestar Galactica!
KodiakBeer
member
It is that "where shots were placed" that is the key so many people keep missing. The only guaranteed stop is a hit on the nose. What's the best tool for hitting a small object (a nose) approaching at 40mph - a handgun or a long arm?
Go back to this link Sonier posted: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMbnmLLnsfw
That is what a grizzly attack looks like. These people were luckier than most because they saw the cubs first and had a moment to ready themselves for trouble. That's usually not the case. This bear turned because of the noise of the warning shot, but that also is not always the case.
Your best option is that nose shot. Your second best option (a very distant second best) is a missed nose shot with something very heavy. I won't argue penetration of a heavy .45 Colt vs a .30/30 - you may well be right about the penetration, but that's missing the point because only hits count.
I've been shooting handguns for 35 years. I've got a very nice 5" Ruger Bisley in .45 Colt and I shoot it quite well, but it wouldn't be my first choice for shooting running rabbits because getting a hit would be mere chance. I'd use a shotgun. And for taking a bear running directly at me I'll also choose a shotgun. My second choice would be a long gun like a Marlin .45/70. My very last choice would be a handgun.
What if I've actually successfully dealt with hundreds of bears? What if I've shot attacking bears? What if I've been mauled by a bear? Would that make me competent enough to have an opinion?
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Exactly! I was referring directly to statements made by the OP that "A .44 mag has about 2/3rds the muzzle energy of a .30/30 and 1/3rd the energy of a .45/70. Carrying a .44 for bears is comparable to carrying a .22 for protection against people." which is only a viable position if you believe that energy is everything. More and more, we are coming out of that cloud.
Sectional density, yeah, I think I've heard of that. I went round and round in the previous thread about the importance of sectional density, especially with regards to 12ga slugs. Sectional density is one of the most important factors, along with bullet construction and weight. Fact is, the OP stated unequivocably that a 170gr .30-30 is superior to ANY .44Mag. This is nonsense. Yes, the 170gr has a high sectional density (.256) but it is also designed to expand. So once your 170gr bullet contacts flesh your SD changes, it decreases rapidly. Now you have the momentum of a 170gr pill pushing a half inch expanded mushroom. So no, it is NOT going to penetrate anywhere near as much as a heavyweight cast solid of equal or higher SD. Regardless of velocity. This is well proven. The big bore punches a large hole without penetration-robbing expansion. This is why they work and work they do.
Energy and velocity do not kill. Blood loss and CNS damage kills, period. Conventional bottlenecked rifle cartridges kill differently than big and slow, this is a given that should not need to be repeated. Big and slow obviously lacks speed but makes up for it in bullet diameter and momentum. Energy, while widely accepted as a measure of a cartridge's effectiveness, is a highly overrated and vastly overused number. It looks good in gun books and armchair ballisticians use it to tout their personal favorite but in the real world it really has no place. In the realm of big and slow, it is completely meaningless. If you believe in energy, then a .22-250 would be a better cartridge than the .44Mag for any game in town. Problem is it obviously is not. You would have no problem booking a hunt in Africa to take the big six with a heavy sixgun but no PH will take you after them with a rifle lighter than the .375H&H.
The results might surprise you. Not only will the .44 penetrate just as far or further but it will also leave a larger hole. You can't have it both ways with a bottlenecked rifle cartridge. You either get deep penetration at the expense of expansion or you get expansion at the expense of penetration. The big bore does not need to expand so penetration is all we need or want. Range and a shoulder stock (the importance of which cannot be discounted) is what is given up.
The TKO factor was developed by John Taylor while in Africa. He needed a way to compare the effectiveness of big bore rifle cartridges in their ability to render an elephant unconscious with one shot because muzzle energy was severely lacking. These big rifles sport the same advantages our heavy sixguns do, bullet diameter and mass, without the advantages of small bore rifle cartridges. Namely, velocity. TKO places importance where it is needed, diameter and mass. No, it ain't perfect but it's the best we have because muzzle energy is inherently useless in comparing the big and slow sixgun cartridges to each other. I emphasize "to each other" because it is just as silly to compare the .44Mag to the .22-250 using TKO as it is using energy.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
Have you?
This is not and never has been in question. However, as I said before, the handgun is a weapon of convenience. Stake your life on a rifle and a rifle alone and you better never lean it against a tree to take a dump, cut firewood, go fishing, put up your tent, or any myriad of things one would do in the bush that would be difficult to impossible to do with a rifle in your hands or slung over your shoulder. The sidearm is ALWAYS there.
Mine too, as it should be. That is, of course, unless you are hunting said bear with a handgun. I might point out Dustin Linebaugh's 175yd shot on a grizzly as discussion material. But also as I said before, hunting and stopping a charging bear are two different things.
The "up the nose" shot is commonly pushed in African circles as the best way to put down a charging Cape buffalo because they charge with it held high. With the horn boss protecting the brain. However, it is an exceedingly difficult shot to pull off and requires icewater in the veins on the part of the shooter. Busting a shoulder is a far easier shot to make and proven effective. Point being, pushing the nose shot as the only solution lowers your credibility considerably. Not to mention that a bear's nose is a much smaller and narrower target than a big Cape buffalo's.
Craig
I let you read one scientific study conducted by the US Forest Service about cartridge effectiveness on Big Beras..the results may surprise you...
http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr152.pdf
We did talk about here
http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=485872&highlight=forest+service
They kill the same...they disrupt tissue and penetrate
The 170 gr. pill fired from a 30-30 will always outpenetrate a 300 gr. 44 Mag slug fired from a revolver assuming same bullet construction
Actually a 300 gr. 44 Mag slug has a much higher SD than a typical 55 gr. centerfire 22 cal bullet and the 22-250 is a ~1500 ft/lb cartridge...not far from a full power 44 Mag cartridge fired from a long barreled revolver (~1200-1300 ft/lb)....bullet diameter alone, has nothing to do with the capability to penetrate..on top of that I never heard, AFAIK, od 22 cal. solid (means non deformable) bullets.
They will let you hunt even an elephant with a bow or a revolver backed by an army of PH with heavy rifles behind you....that means nothing....between a 44 Mag (revolver or rifle doesn't matter) shooting solids and a 30-06 rifle shooting heavy solids against an Elephant, the -06 is the vastly superior weapon...period.
I never tried a 30-30 shooting solids but we compared a 303 British shooting 150 gr. FMJ against a 44 Mag revolver firing 300 gr hardcast (Buffalo Bore).
It wasn't even a context, the 303 bullet vastly outpenetrated the 44 Mag (the medium was wood)
That is true but remain to be seen how important in that particular situation the larger diameter matter is, how much difference does it really make....however I admit that a large meplat in a flat nosed bullet may inflict a much worse wounding profile than even a round nosed one....but, again, this has nothing to do with weight, energy or caliber....
Elephant guns have yes large caliber but they fire very heavy for caliber bullets and very high level of energy
You cannot consider a 44 Magnum or a 45-70 to be an elephant cartridge because of its caliber....again, elephant cartridges fire big pills at high energy
You may bring as an example many Cape Buffaloes thunderstruck by 45-70 hardcast....I can bring the same Cape Buffalo example thunderstruck by 240 gr. Woodleigh bullet fired from a 30-06....
In some African countries when they set the limit they do not only establish the minimum caliber but they establish the minimum energy as well (H&Hhunter, correct me if I'm wrong...)
Ask to H&Hhunter, which has been in Africa quite often, how adequate a 45-70 is against Dumbo and see the answer....
I let you read one scientific study conducted by the US Forest Service about cartridge effectiveness on Big Beras..the results may surprise you...
http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr152.pdf
We did talk about here
http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=485872&highlight=forest+service
They kill the same...they disrupt tissue and penetrate
The 170 gr. pill fired from a 30-30 will always outpenetrate a 300 gr. 44 Mag slug fired from a revolver assuming same bullet construction
Actually a 300 gr. 44 Mag slug has a much higher SD than a typical 55 gr. centerfire 22 cal bullet and the 22-250 is a ~1500 ft/lb cartridge...not far from a full power 44 Mag cartridge fired from a long barreled revolver (~1200-1300 ft/lb)....bullet diameter alone, has nothing to do with the capability to penetrate..on top of that I never heard, AFAIK, od 22 cal. solid (means non deformable) bullets.
They will let you hunt even an elephant with a bow or a revolver backed by an army of PH with heavy rifles behind you....that means nothing....between a 44 Mag (revolver or rifle doesn't matter) shooting solids and a 30-06 rifle shooting heavy solids against an Elephant, the -06 is the vastly superior weapon...period.
I never tried a 30-30 shooting solids but we compared a 303 British shooting 150 gr. FMJ against a 44 Mag revolver firing 300 gr hardcast (Buffalo Bore).
It wasn't even a context, the 303 bullet vastly outpenetrated the 44 Mag (the medium was wood)
That is true but remain to be seen how important in that particular situation the larger diameter matter is, how much difference does it really make....however I admit that a large meplat in a flat nosed bullet may inflict a much worse wounding profile than even a round nosed one....but, again, this has nothing to do with weight, energy or caliber....
Elephant guns have yes large caliber but they fire very heavy for caliber bullets and very high level of energy
You cannot consider a 44 Magnum or a 45-70 to be an elephant cartridge because of its caliber....again, elephant cartridges fire big pills at high energy
You may bring as an example many Cape Buffaloes thunderstruck by 45-70 hardcast....I can bring the same Cape Buffalo example thunderstruck by 240 gr. Woodleigh bullet fired from a 30-06....
In some African countries when they set the limit they do not only establish the minimum caliber but they establish the minimum energy as well (H&Hhunter, correct me if I'm wrong...)
Ask to H&Hhunter, which has been in Africa quite often, how adequate a 45-70 is against Dumbo and see the answer....
Last edited:
KodiakBeer
member
Yes.
It's the only question.
See picture:
What shoulder? This thing is a blur coming at you at high speed. The reality is you've got one or two seconds to make a shot and the nose is the center of mass - you're probably going to aim at the center of the face no matter what you've thought about in advance.
If you ever come up and actually confront a grizzly, I think your next stop will be at the sporting goods store to buy a shotgun. And considering the density of bears in many areas here, you won't find it too inconvenient to carry that shotgun with you at all times in the bush.
Turns out that the subject geologist may have grazed the bear when he fired his single shot. My money is on him having missed by a mile.
Even a 9 mm Luger is a good enough round for bear defense, provided that the shooter actually hits the target.
ETA: The following from THR's archives...
Even a 9 mm Luger is a good enough round for bear defense, provided that the shooter actually hits the target.
ETA: The following from THR's archives...
I've done quite a bit of research on bear attacks in Alaska.
It appears that there are a number of traits common in the successful repulsion of surprise bear attacks with a firearm:
1. The person had a gun.. Seriously, the most important factor in surviving the attack was that the person had a gun they could reach instantly, i.e., in a holster, not propped up against a nearby tree, in the truck, in the cabin, etc.
2. The person had a handgun. Some of the attacks were repelled by one buddy with a handgun when the other buddy could not raise his longgun fast enough. This occurs more often than you would think.
3. Smaller calibers are effective. This is the one that shocked me. Although some of the successful folks used .44 mags or .45 LC's, a number of them used 9mm's and .40 cals (and some were using ball ammo). In one account in particular, two buddies were fishing. A brown bear charged one buddy so fast, he couldn't raise his shotgun to fire, so he through it at the bear and dove into the water. His companion shot the bear with a 9mm pistol (ball ammo), and one of the shots broke the bear's shoulder. Once the bear was disabled, other fishermen joined in with their handguns and killed the bear.
4. The handgun appears to be effective because it is always there. The hunter/fisherman draws and shoots in an instant. The handgun might night kill the bear, but it often disables the bear sufficiently for the hunter/his companion to procure another handgun/long gun and then the bear is killed. Some local's have said "use the handgun to fight your way back to your rifle".
5. One last surprise. Urban legends aside, I found no documented evidence where an outdoorsman was able to shoot the bear (regardless of caliber) but was unable to repel the attack. There were some close calls, but nobody who got off a shot died. Not saying it hasn't happened, just saying I haven't seen it.
6. Final recommendation. If it were me, I'd bring something like a Glock/XD etc that is light enought to carry with me everywhere I go. I'd load something hot and non-hollow point.
Last edited:
KodiakBeer
member
Geologist describes double attack by grizzly
By MARY PEMBERTON
The Associated Press
(06/24/10 13:58:26)
The bearded, sandy-haired geologist was on a job in the remote Alaska wilderness when a grizzly bear suddenly emerged from the brush just yards away.
So Robert Miller did what he was trained to do -- he fell to the ground, clasped his hands around his neck to protect it and played dead.
The bear wandered away and Miller thought he was in the clear. Pulling himself to his knees, he found out how wrong he was.
The bear charged again, and "this time he didn't want me to move. He was really thrashing me around," the 54-year-old said Wednesday from his hospital bed, his right arm and leg swathed in bandages, his left ear criss-crossed by stitches.
Miller had been out scoping possible mining projects Sunday for his employer, Millrock Resources Inc., in a remote valley of the Alaska Range mountains near the Iditarod Trail. He'd finished for the day and was waiting for a helicopter to pick him up.
Miller was clearing brush with a handsaw so the helicopter could land, when the bear appeared about 25 feet away.
"When he stepped into the clearing he didn't snarl and stand up and show me how big he was. He just came for me," Miller said.
Miller managed to pull out his .357 Magnum revolver and squeeze off a single shot, possibly grazing the animal. Then his survival training kicked in: He fell onto his stomach, dug his face into the dirt and covered his neck with his hands to protect it from the grizzly's claws and teeth.
The bear went for his exposed right arm, gnawing and clawing it and chipping the bone off the tip of his elbow. The attack lasted 10-15 seconds, then the animal lumbered away.
"I thought it was over, I thought he was gone," Miller said.
He rolled over and was getting to his knees when the bear, which was only about 40 yards away, came at him again.
"As soon as I turned, he was running already. It was shoot, shoot and roll back over," Miller said.
He managed to fire two more shots, but with his right arm badly injured he thinks he missed the bear. Then he lay still as the animal gnawed and clawed at him.
"It was no problem to lay there with my neck covered and let him chew. It was actually painless at that point," Miller said.
After the second attack, Miller played dead again, lying still for three to five minutes as thoughts raced through his mind. Was the bear still around? How bad was he bleeding? Where was his gun?
He tried to move and realized he couldn't. He was too badly injured.
"I was just hoping my radio was still in my vest pocket and it was," he said. "I got it out and started radioing mayday, which nobody answered."
He tried calling for help about every 20 seconds; about 20 minutes passed before a voice came over the radio.
It was the helicopter pilot. Not knowing there had been a bear attack, he was calling in to let Miller know he was within five miles and needed to know the exact pickup spot.
"I told him what had happened. So he came in low, just doing outwardly expanding circles to make sure there was no bear around," Miller said.
Reassured the grizzly was gone, the pilot flew to the next valley and picked up geologist Ryan Campbell, who was trained as a wilderness medic.
Campbell cleaned Miller's wounds and applied pressure bandages to stem the bleeding. That's when Miller really began hurting.
"When he was cleaning out the wounds with this spray bottle ... it was a mixture of fire and electricity," Miller said.
He was flown to a nearby air strip where an emergency medical technician was waiting, then taken by medical helicopter on the more than hour-long trip to Providence Alaska Medical Center in Anchorage.
Miller was fortunate to have survived, said Rick Sinnott, an Alaska Department of Fish and Game biologist.
He should have been packing a more powerful gun, Sinnott said. "You have to be a very good shot or very lucky to stop a brown bear with a .357 Magnum."
Miller did the right thing to play dead with the grizzly, Sinnott said.
"Most of the time they just want to neutralize you and if you are playing dead after they swat you or hit you, you are pretty much neutralized. But if you try to run or stand right up or are screaming or waving your arms around, then they think you are still a danger," he said.
Propped up in his hospital bed Wednesday, Miller gingerly touched what he thought were bite marks just above his buttocks on his left side. His right arm was heavily bandaged from bicep to wrist; another bulky bandage encased his right thigh, which the bear had chewed from the back of his leg to the front.
Miller's face was unscathed except for a few scratches, but the bear nearly ripped off his left ear. Using his finger, he traced where it had been reattached with two rows of stitches.
Still, the geologist, who until five years ago worked as a roofer, said he holds no grudge against the bear.
"The bear was just doing what bears do," Miller said.
Copyright © Thu Jun 24 2010 14:47:44 GMT-0800 (Alaskan Daylight Time)1900
By MARY PEMBERTON
The Associated Press
(06/24/10 13:58:26)
The bearded, sandy-haired geologist was on a job in the remote Alaska wilderness when a grizzly bear suddenly emerged from the brush just yards away.
So Robert Miller did what he was trained to do -- he fell to the ground, clasped his hands around his neck to protect it and played dead.
The bear wandered away and Miller thought he was in the clear. Pulling himself to his knees, he found out how wrong he was.
The bear charged again, and "this time he didn't want me to move. He was really thrashing me around," the 54-year-old said Wednesday from his hospital bed, his right arm and leg swathed in bandages, his left ear criss-crossed by stitches.
Miller had been out scoping possible mining projects Sunday for his employer, Millrock Resources Inc., in a remote valley of the Alaska Range mountains near the Iditarod Trail. He'd finished for the day and was waiting for a helicopter to pick him up.
Miller was clearing brush with a handsaw so the helicopter could land, when the bear appeared about 25 feet away.
"When he stepped into the clearing he didn't snarl and stand up and show me how big he was. He just came for me," Miller said.
Miller managed to pull out his .357 Magnum revolver and squeeze off a single shot, possibly grazing the animal. Then his survival training kicked in: He fell onto his stomach, dug his face into the dirt and covered his neck with his hands to protect it from the grizzly's claws and teeth.
The bear went for his exposed right arm, gnawing and clawing it and chipping the bone off the tip of his elbow. The attack lasted 10-15 seconds, then the animal lumbered away.
"I thought it was over, I thought he was gone," Miller said.
He rolled over and was getting to his knees when the bear, which was only about 40 yards away, came at him again.
"As soon as I turned, he was running already. It was shoot, shoot and roll back over," Miller said.
He managed to fire two more shots, but with his right arm badly injured he thinks he missed the bear. Then he lay still as the animal gnawed and clawed at him.
"It was no problem to lay there with my neck covered and let him chew. It was actually painless at that point," Miller said.
After the second attack, Miller played dead again, lying still for three to five minutes as thoughts raced through his mind. Was the bear still around? How bad was he bleeding? Where was his gun?
He tried to move and realized he couldn't. He was too badly injured.
"I was just hoping my radio was still in my vest pocket and it was," he said. "I got it out and started radioing mayday, which nobody answered."
He tried calling for help about every 20 seconds; about 20 minutes passed before a voice came over the radio.
It was the helicopter pilot. Not knowing there had been a bear attack, he was calling in to let Miller know he was within five miles and needed to know the exact pickup spot.
"I told him what had happened. So he came in low, just doing outwardly expanding circles to make sure there was no bear around," Miller said.
Reassured the grizzly was gone, the pilot flew to the next valley and picked up geologist Ryan Campbell, who was trained as a wilderness medic.
Campbell cleaned Miller's wounds and applied pressure bandages to stem the bleeding. That's when Miller really began hurting.
"When he was cleaning out the wounds with this spray bottle ... it was a mixture of fire and electricity," Miller said.
He was flown to a nearby air strip where an emergency medical technician was waiting, then taken by medical helicopter on the more than hour-long trip to Providence Alaska Medical Center in Anchorage.
Miller was fortunate to have survived, said Rick Sinnott, an Alaska Department of Fish and Game biologist.
He should have been packing a more powerful gun, Sinnott said. "You have to be a very good shot or very lucky to stop a brown bear with a .357 Magnum."
Miller did the right thing to play dead with the grizzly, Sinnott said.
"Most of the time they just want to neutralize you and if you are playing dead after they swat you or hit you, you are pretty much neutralized. But if you try to run or stand right up or are screaming or waving your arms around, then they think you are still a danger," he said.
Propped up in his hospital bed Wednesday, Miller gingerly touched what he thought were bite marks just above his buttocks on his left side. His right arm was heavily bandaged from bicep to wrist; another bulky bandage encased his right thigh, which the bear had chewed from the back of his leg to the front.
Miller's face was unscathed except for a few scratches, but the bear nearly ripped off his left ear. Using his finger, he traced where it had been reattached with two rows of stitches.
Still, the geologist, who until five years ago worked as a roofer, said he holds no grudge against the bear.
"The bear was just doing what bears do," Miller said.
Copyright © Thu Jun 24 2010 14:47:44 GMT-0800 (Alaskan Daylight Time)1900
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
The Forest Service site is down for maintenance at present but I would like to read the results. I am highly interested in what bullets were tested for which cartridges.
Here's a better article comparing our big sixguns and cartridges with many rifle cartridges. The results are interseting to say the least.
http://www.handloads.com/misc/Linebaugh.Penetration.Tests.asp?Order=5
No, they do not. Small bore rifle cartridges depend heavily on velocity for expansion to produce their broad wound channels. Big bores depend on their weight and diameter for penetration and large wound channels. Two very different schools of thought.
Moving right along from above, one cannot assume same bullet construction, it is not fair to either. For a deep penetrator the rifle cartridge must utilize a non-expanding bullet which pretty much nullifies its effectiveness on game. Two different schools of thought, two different bullet designs. So yes, I would expect your 150gr FMJ to penetrate deeper. I also expect it to leave a very small wound channel. Useless. HUGE difference in effectiveness on game.
Wrong. PH's typically have minimum requirements for their clients. The PH with a heavy rifle is intended as backup for when the client fails, not as a secondary shooter for the client to use an underpowered weapon.
"May"? It certainly does and to be so neck-deep in this discussion you should already know that.
Weight/diameter (sectional density) determines how deeply it will penetrate. The wide diameter with a wide meplat determines the amount of tissue destruction as it penetrates.
Here's a better article comparing our big sixguns and cartridges with many rifle cartridges. The results are interseting to say the least.
http://www.handloads.com/misc/Linebaugh.Penetration.Tests.asp?Order=5
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
It is absolutely NOT in question for all the reasons I described. A rifle is a better tool but I'd love to see a picture of how one flyfishes with a rifle in your hands. Your credibility dwindles with every post.
Is there something magical about bears that when they charge their shoulders disappear??? Something that differentiates bears from every other critter that bites back, that EVERY authority on the subject will tell you to break a shoulder??? No. Break the shoulder and he will at last change direction, if not change zip codes. Break the shoulder and you have hindered his ability to move. Break the shoulder on the first shot and you have a chance. Break the shoulder and he will die in short order. Break his jaw because you went for his nose and missed and you will have a bear on top of you. He still weighs 800lbs and still has claws several inches long. You have hindered only his ability to bite and have not inflicted an immediately fatal wound. No sir, as with anything, head shots are beyond stupid.
We've been through this and I think you know that I'll not put my faith in a projectile with as poor a sectional density as a patched round ball. Shotguns are plentiful and cheap but far from the best stoppers. Regardless of what legends indicate.
Cosmoline
Member
Who can reliably nail the shoulder on a charging bear? Aim at the center of the furry blur. If you have time to aim.
The run-ins I've had fishing and hiking haven't involved a bear slowly and methodically approaching. They pop out of tunnels and are RIGHT THERE. Smack dab in front of me. Thankfully none so far have opted to tackle me and hopefully none ever will. But the suckers fly around in there like huge furry torpedoes. They're lower to the ground than some seem to imagine, and pretty hard to see. In fact other than once or twice on a Susitna tributary (where the water is noisy) I've always heard them before I've seen them. The bears make a distinctly different kind of sound than moose. Sometimes all I've ever done is hear them, they remain hidden in the undergrowth. Couple that reality with an animal that can out sprint Jesse Owens, and the arguments about head vs. shoulders vs. nose become moot in a hurry. Heck even spray vs. guns may become moot. It's lucky they're not really predatory against people except in extreme situations. Most of the time they're amiable and tolerate the trail monkeys well.
For carrying when things are really closing in, I use a quick release:
The run-ins I've had fishing and hiking haven't involved a bear slowly and methodically approaching. They pop out of tunnels and are RIGHT THERE. Smack dab in front of me. Thankfully none so far have opted to tackle me and hopefully none ever will. But the suckers fly around in there like huge furry torpedoes. They're lower to the ground than some seem to imagine, and pretty hard to see. In fact other than once or twice on a Susitna tributary (where the water is noisy) I've always heard them before I've seen them. The bears make a distinctly different kind of sound than moose. Sometimes all I've ever done is hear them, they remain hidden in the undergrowth. Couple that reality with an animal that can out sprint Jesse Owens, and the arguments about head vs. shoulders vs. nose become moot in a hurry. Heck even spray vs. guns may become moot. It's lucky they're not really predatory against people except in extreme situations. Most of the time they're amiable and tolerate the trail monkeys well.
For carrying when things are really closing in, I use a quick release:
Last edited:
I bet the rifles were firing expandable bullets...
PHs back ypu up regardless of the rifle you are using yes...but I bet that if you show up with a 44 Mag you will have even more backing and at closer distance....the fact that I cannot hunt lions, legally, in some African countries with a 30-06 but I can hunt elephant with a 44 Mag revolver (or a bow) it's plain stupid...I know but it is still stupid...however I suspect that where caliber and cartridge limitations are in place (for example minimum of 375 H&H for the big 5) you cannot hunt an elephant or a cape buffalo with an handgun....I wait for the expert's report on this...
So you really tell me with a straight face that a 44 Mag revolver is the better choice against an elephant than a 30-06 rifle??? (assuming solids for both)
I would LOVE to hear H&Hhunter comment on that....
They still disrupt tissue and penetrate....that is the work of a bullet...if one expand and the other doesn't it's a different story..
Why is not fair?? it is, and here the entire bullet weight/momentum argument for penetration collapses like a house of cards....yes the larger wound channel may make a difference or it may not....if a smaller caliber solid "nullify" its effectiveness on game why companies sell hunting solids as little as .243 cal?? Evidently they do work and they have a purpose....you know that a 6.5x55 Swedish cartridge firing a partition bullet (so it does partially expand) can almost pass through a Moose from brisket to butt?? Because of the fenomenal SD (even with a partially expanded bullet) of the 160 gr. bullet used to the task.
Randy Garrett claims in its website (Garrett Cartridges) that their 44 Magnum Hammerheads bullet provides more penetration than a 300 gr. 375 H&H partition bullet...again, apples to oranges..comparing an expandable bullet with a solid....
Last edited:
KodiakBeer
member
Perhaps you're unfamiliar with what we in the gun world refer to as a "sling". This is a leather or nylon strap which connects to the stock and forearm of a rifle or shotgun. One can use this device to hang a long arm from the shoulder.
Again - you have to hit the target no matter the projectile used. The target is moving and incredibly fast. A shotgun is designed for quick point shooting.
SharpsDressedMan
member
Gosh, guys! The issues I see presented in this topic, and the older ones, are 1) There ARE better guns to hunt or ward off bears; i.e. shotguns with appropriate slugs, big bore & fast handling rifles. The question always presented, which often acknowledges those facts, asks 2) what HANDGUN might be adequate to have on oneself when just IN bear country, just in case/as a last resort. Not looking to shoot or piss off a bear, but better than nothing, or better than a knife or big stick. It is often not PRACTICAL to lug a shotgun or rifle when fishing, exploring, working, etc. It sometimes isn't even practical to have a handgun, but...... I think many good ideas have been presented, especially the effectiveness of pepper spray, etc. I think one would not be TOO burdened to have spray at the ready, and a big bore, powerful handgun ALSO at the ready. Still collectively lighter and more compact than any rifle or shotgun, and gives the trekker options. It may even enable the person carrying spray AND a handgun to effectively arm anyone else on the scene, so that the bear has two people to worry about, and whom MAY be able to mount a defense. As much as any bear acting out towards me would scare the crap out of me, I think I'd now (after all the info on this site) attempt to dust the bear with pepper first, if possible, and use a gun as a the very last resort. I'm also thinking a reinforced, kevlar covered jumpsuit with a catcher's mask might be good, too, but could get warm in the summer.
KodiakBeer
member
I'm sure with your vast grizzly experience in west Tennessee and uncanny ability to hit a 40 mph running animal anywhere you choose with your revolver in 2 seconds time, you'll have no problems. Us mere mortal men will aim at the center of his face and blast away with shotguns or rifles.
Karl Hungus
Member
Like I've said in many other Handguns & Bears threads: The best handgun to carry in bear country is whatever you can stick in your mouth the fastest.
K-Beer's posts are dead-on. Carry a Stinger missile if you want - you still have to hit an enraged killmachine charging you at 40 mph while simultaineously crapping your pants. Maybe all you guys can explain your in-depth knowledge of ballistics while the bear's chewing on you.
K-Beer's posts are dead-on. Carry a Stinger missile if you want - you still have to hit an enraged killmachine charging you at 40 mph while simultaineously crapping your pants. Maybe all you guys can explain your in-depth knowledge of ballistics while the bear's chewing on you.
I hunt Alaska . Last sept. jet boat hunt on Chinsana River. Have shot a couple growly bears...... with rifles. It is one thing to HUNT bears with a handgun.. another to have one for bear protection. My advise would be to file off the front sight .... so when the bear shoves it up your ass it doesn't hurt as much.The fun thing is sleeping inna tent in bear country. Barren ground grizz in the Brooks range are about the worst.... they are always very hungry.
Chuck
Chuck
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
The report tells exactly what bullets were utilized and at what velocity.
Only a fool would argue that with proper projectiles, a handgun is better than a rifle. Although a .44Mag on the hip is a hell of a lot better than any rifle 20' away leaned up against a tree. My ONLY point in comparing rifles to handguns is to rebutt KodiakBeer's assertation that the .30-30 is vastly superior to the .44Mag based on muzzle energy.
Can you really with a straight face say that the size of the hole is unimportant??? The fact that component manufacturers sell .243 solids somehow indicates that a .243 solid is better than a .44 solid???
What is it exactly you're telling me that I'm not supposed to already know?
You should assume very little based on a person's current location. Although it is interesting that you would use this as a personal attack.
So how exactly did you conclude from my posts that I just fell off the turnip truck???
So you choose a platform based on this??? In that case, I'll bring along my little 5lb Merkel 28ga because it swings so beautifully. Uh, yeah.
Again, I don't know where this comes from, nobody is saying that a handgun is better than a rifle for anything but portability. I'm saying that your assessment of the two cartridges in question based on muzzle energy is bogus.
You may "blast away" as you wish but I would choose to actually stop the critter, as untold numbers of dangerous game hunters have preached about for years.
Hawthorne2k
Member
Speaking of handguns and wildlife, I saw a news report today that said a mountain lion had been spotted near my suburban Arizona home.
Would 124gr 9mm Speer Gold Dots be enough to dissuade a mountain lion for making me (or my children) his next entree?
Would 124gr 9mm Speer Gold Dots be enough to dissuade a mountain lion for making me (or my children) his next entree?
I have something to add to this never ending debate...
I know a hunter who I respect a lot. He's very experienced and knows his stuff. He was hunting boar in Georgia with a Marlin 1894 using Hornady 44 mag 270 grain Leverution (however they spell it) ammo. His target wound up being a 500 pound boar, which I think might represent the construction of the average grizzly. It took five rounds to dispatch the boar, some of those rounds were well placed.
-----------
Quote from friend:
He decided to make a left turn and walked the edge of the swamp off my right shoulder at maybe 45-50 yards. As he passed behind two good-sized trees, I made my move, standing, turning right and cocking the hammer on my Marlin .44 carbine. As he passed behind yet another tree, I raised the rifle and as he came out the right side, I placed the crosshairs square on his neck, just behind his right ear. The crosshairs settled and I pulled the trigger. He immediately went down, but was thrashing and chomping his jaws as the shot echoed through the woods.
I quickly fired again, with the crosshairs on his right shoulder, but he continued his wild thrashing and chomping. A third shot to his exposed belly seemed to have little effect, so my fourth shot was very slow and deliberate. I aimed mid-body as he thrashed, his right side on the ground and his belly now facing me, having turned a full 180 degrees. That seemed to do the trick and soon he was quiet. It had been over 20 minutes since sunset, so although there was still enough light to see, there was no time to spare.
I sat for maybe half a minute calming myself and then climbed down from my stand. I had already loaded three more 270 grain Speer Gold Dot soft points before descending and now I was ready to claim my big boar. I approached slowly. Just before prodding him with my gun barrel, I stopped and whistled. There was no reaction. Then I picked up a small stick and tossed it, hitting him in the ribs.
The chomping and thrashing immediately began again. I raised my rifle and shot him one more time in the neck at 10-15 feet. His thrashing continued for perhaps another 20 seconds or so, but after seeing that last SP plow through his big neck, I held fire, listening to those jaws snapping and very glad I had decided to toss that stick. His commotion finally ceased and I figured that he was completely spent. If not, he would be when we got back in 30 minutes or so to get him out.
------------
I was mistaken - he used Gold Dot 270 grain.
Regardless of all the talk on here, I would feel adequate, defended by a 44 mag.
I know a hunter who I respect a lot. He's very experienced and knows his stuff. He was hunting boar in Georgia with a Marlin 1894 using Hornady 44 mag 270 grain Leverution (however they spell it) ammo. His target wound up being a 500 pound boar, which I think might represent the construction of the average grizzly. It took five rounds to dispatch the boar, some of those rounds were well placed.
-----------
Quote from friend:
He decided to make a left turn and walked the edge of the swamp off my right shoulder at maybe 45-50 yards. As he passed behind two good-sized trees, I made my move, standing, turning right and cocking the hammer on my Marlin .44 carbine. As he passed behind yet another tree, I raised the rifle and as he came out the right side, I placed the crosshairs square on his neck, just behind his right ear. The crosshairs settled and I pulled the trigger. He immediately went down, but was thrashing and chomping his jaws as the shot echoed through the woods.
I quickly fired again, with the crosshairs on his right shoulder, but he continued his wild thrashing and chomping. A third shot to his exposed belly seemed to have little effect, so my fourth shot was very slow and deliberate. I aimed mid-body as he thrashed, his right side on the ground and his belly now facing me, having turned a full 180 degrees. That seemed to do the trick and soon he was quiet. It had been over 20 minutes since sunset, so although there was still enough light to see, there was no time to spare.
I sat for maybe half a minute calming myself and then climbed down from my stand. I had already loaded three more 270 grain Speer Gold Dot soft points before descending and now I was ready to claim my big boar. I approached slowly. Just before prodding him with my gun barrel, I stopped and whistled. There was no reaction. Then I picked up a small stick and tossed it, hitting him in the ribs.
The chomping and thrashing immediately began again. I raised my rifle and shot him one more time in the neck at 10-15 feet. His thrashing continued for perhaps another 20 seconds or so, but after seeing that last SP plow through his big neck, I held fire, listening to those jaws snapping and very glad I had decided to toss that stick. His commotion finally ceased and I figured that he was completely spent. If not, he would be when we got back in 30 minutes or so to get him out.
------------
I was mistaken - he used Gold Dot 270 grain.
Regardless of all the talk on here, I would feel adequate, defended by a 44 mag.
Attachments
Shadow 7D
Member
Vastly different animals, and Vastly different tactics
The funny thing for me is how people who's only experience with bears, let alone brown bear, is the TV or maybe the zoo as a kid, want to jump on people who live in bear country, work in bear country, and hunt in bear country.
So, Alaska guys, what type of pocket pistols do you use to pop feral hogs, I was thinking a .25 bauer behind the left ear, the trick is quickly side step and give them your walking stick on the charge to line up the shot......
about as silly, should we start talking out crocodile hunting, maybe even mountain lion...
The funny thing for me is how people who's only experience with bears, let alone brown bear, is the TV or maybe the zoo as a kid, want to jump on people who live in bear country, work in bear country, and hunt in bear country.
So, Alaska guys, what type of pocket pistols do you use to pop feral hogs, I was thinking a .25 bauer behind the left ear, the trick is quickly side step and give them your walking stick on the charge to line up the shot......
about as silly, should we start talking out crocodile hunting, maybe even mountain lion...
- Status