Defense Minister
Member
I used to carry a revlover in the woods, but I don't shoot revolvers well. So, I sold it and bought a Glock 29 10MM. Couldn't be happier.
Why Revolvers for woods carry but Autos for defense carry?
- Thread starter Mags
- Start date
- Status
oneounceload
member
For me, revolvers offer more choice - I can have anything from snakeshot to full bore magnum rounds in one cylinder - can't do that with a semi.
wheelgunslinger
Member
Meh. I think it's all basic anthropology.
We choose revolvers because of the social acceptance that pistols are danger and breakage prone, but revolvers are manly and outdoorsy, robust, and fire giant bullets that will actually save us from everything.
As with most everyone in the gun community, the outdoorsy and concealed carry people are no exception to the coolness index when choosing a sidearm.
What's the "right" one that's venue appropriate?
Aside from the fashion conscious, the internet based data munchers distill buying one to data points seeking to isolate any anthropological meaning to their choice and fall into the technogeek category where the social rules dictate that hard data be used for every possible choice.
It boils down to romance and geekdom, generally speaking.
I think hualing a gigantic revolver around for Grizzly is just ridonkulous, fwiw.
We choose revolvers because of the social acceptance that pistols are danger and breakage prone, but revolvers are manly and outdoorsy, robust, and fire giant bullets that will actually save us from everything.
As with most everyone in the gun community, the outdoorsy and concealed carry people are no exception to the coolness index when choosing a sidearm.
What's the "right" one that's venue appropriate?
Aside from the fashion conscious, the internet based data munchers distill buying one to data points seeking to isolate any anthropological meaning to their choice and fall into the technogeek category where the social rules dictate that hard data be used for every possible choice.
It boils down to romance and geekdom, generally speaking.
I think hualing a gigantic revolver around for Grizzly is just ridonkulous, fwiw.
The reason I carry a revolver in the deep woods is generally for hunting. I hunt deer and hog mainly with handguns, and have for years. Nothing hits as hard and as accurately for the buck as a revolver when the calibers get really stout.
As far as worry about parts failure, I've owned so many S&W revolvers. NONE have ever failed in any way, including during about ten years when I shot handgun competitions regularly and shot hundreds of practice rounds at a session.
No offense, but you aren't an experienced handgun hunter are you?
Here's my latest 8-point, taken with my tackdriving, hard-hitting S&W Model 29 on Nov. 4th. Caliber is .44 Magnum and it is stoked with hardcast, 300 grain flat-nose hunting bullets. These rounds will take down the toughest wild boar, Elk, etc. . . . and plant a deer with authority. Lots of deer have fallen to this combination through the years.
Below I'll also picture my left-handed holster I carry this handgun in. Super quiet, secure and fast to draw if necessary.
Now scouting in the woods in the off-season? Heck, sometimes it is a .22 pistol, also Holosight-topped in small game season. Hiking in the Appalachians where the biggest threat might be two-legged? It will probably be an aluminum-framed, short barreled Kimber .45ACP, due to the fact that it will keep the weight down.
axeman_g
Member
Now that is the way to hunt deer. Do you stalk?
Sometimes! It is so much fun when the wind is right, and you can get REAL close. Back when Georgia had so many "Buck Only" days, I got within 10 yards of a doe passing by . . . and she never knew!
Most times though, I hunt the deep Georgia woods . . . avoiding the food plots that some of our club members stake out hours before sunrise to shoot a doe . . . and place my stands in the trees near the bedding areas, several hundreds of yards away from the food plots . . . and catch 'em on their way in to the bedding areas in the morning. This way . . . I sleep in a little, hunt in areas less pressured . . . and take my shots between 8 and 9 AM generally (though sometimes as late as 10:30.
That's how I took a Piebald buck a few years ago, in an area so thick that a rifle is useless. I squeezed a round into the perfect spot in an area not 6" in diameter that was clear, about 35 yards away. Here's the M29 on the Piebald whitetail's hide. What a beautiful deer it was, I wish I'd had it mounted:
There are so many ways to hunt, but I prefer a handgun . . . and I take only the amount of deer each year my family eats. The rest of the time I enjoy watching them and learning more about their movements.
As long as I keep my mouth shut, the deer slayers on the club who shoot the spots off the fawns, and blast the buttons off the stupid 1/2 year old bucks, don't use my stands to add notches to their gun!
T.
BTW, I also generally take a .270 with me, for I will NOT EVER take a shot with the handgun I don't totally believe I can make. As a long-time handgun competitor, I know what I can do . . . and I will NOT wound a deer.
That being said, I once dropped a running doe in a clear-cut, broadside . . . and paced the distance at 60 yards. Then again, it was JUST cut and you could see for 300 yards in all directions. I was in the only tree standing on the clearcut!
She hit the ground instantly and didn't move. She was the second deer I shot in that amazing morning in that clear-cut . . . back to back (she took off when I shot the lead doe)! While reloading the revolver, I looked up and a buck had materialized (must have been bedding in the clear-cut, undetected) and had it's nose smelling the face of the FIRST deer I dropped. He fell nose-to-nose with the first one. He NEEDED to be culled . . . with a ratty, deformed little rack.
Ah the memories with this S&W M29!
Most times though, I hunt the deep Georgia woods . . . avoiding the food plots that some of our club members stake out hours before sunrise to shoot a doe . . . and place my stands in the trees near the bedding areas, several hundreds of yards away from the food plots . . . and catch 'em on their way in to the bedding areas in the morning. This way . . . I sleep in a little, hunt in areas less pressured . . . and take my shots between 8 and 9 AM generally (though sometimes as late as 10:30.
That's how I took a Piebald buck a few years ago, in an area so thick that a rifle is useless. I squeezed a round into the perfect spot in an area not 6" in diameter that was clear, about 35 yards away. Here's the M29 on the Piebald whitetail's hide. What a beautiful deer it was, I wish I'd had it mounted:
There are so many ways to hunt, but I prefer a handgun . . . and I take only the amount of deer each year my family eats. The rest of the time I enjoy watching them and learning more about their movements.
As long as I keep my mouth shut, the deer slayers on the club who shoot the spots off the fawns, and blast the buttons off the stupid 1/2 year old bucks, don't use my stands to add notches to their gun!
T.
BTW, I also generally take a .270 with me, for I will NOT EVER take a shot with the handgun I don't totally believe I can make. As a long-time handgun competitor, I know what I can do . . . and I will NOT wound a deer.
That being said, I once dropped a running doe in a clear-cut, broadside . . . and paced the distance at 60 yards. Then again, it was JUST cut and you could see for 300 yards in all directions. I was in the only tree standing on the clearcut!
She hit the ground instantly and didn't move. She was the second deer I shot in that amazing morning in that clear-cut . . . back to back (she took off when I shot the lead doe)! While reloading the revolver, I looked up and a buck had materialized (must have been bedding in the clear-cut, undetected) and had it's nose smelling the face of the FIRST deer I dropped. He fell nose-to-nose with the first one. He NEEDED to be culled . . . with a ratty, deformed little rack.
Ah the memories with this S&W M29!
Last edited:
Cosmoline quoted the Alaskan Forest Sevice recommendations about bears:
Defensive aerosol sprays which contain capsaicin (red pepper extract) have been used with some success for protection against bears. These sprays may be effective at a range of 6-8 yards. If discharged upwind or in a vehicle, they can disable the user. Take appropriate precautions. If you carry a spray can, keep it handy and know how to use it.
Please note the emphasized words.
Defensive aerosol sprays which contain capsaicin (red pepper extract) have been used with some success for protection against bears. These sprays may be effective at a range of 6-8 yards. If discharged upwind or in a vehicle, they can disable the user. Take appropriate precautions. If you carry a spray can, keep it handy and know how to use it.
Please note the emphasized words.
I could carry either weapon type either place around here, and feel fine about it. I started shooting both 1911 autopistols and S&W revolving pistols in 1983, so neither weapon type has more than a few month's seniority with me. Black bears, of the size that live in the South, and cougars, can both be dispatched with the same cartridges used to defend against erect bipedal varmints.
In an area with bigger bears, I would probably elect to carry a large-bore sixgun.
In an area with bigger bears, I would probably elect to carry a large-bore sixgun.
sheepdog
Member
Bears and Bad Guys...
...never knew a black bear to attack if you weren't messin' with her cubs...they're a lot smaller than a grizzly and anything .357/.45 or up would do...but I'd hate to go up to grizzly country without anything smaller than a 12 ga w/slugs or a .45/70 or other large rifle...if I could only carry one woods gun, it'd be a .45 for bad guys...with a coupla shotshells in my pocket for a snake...if I was goin' for something besides just hunting, I'd carry a 9-shot .22 LR revolver for snakes and the .45....and if I couldn't carry anything but Bear spray...I'd stay home...
...never knew a black bear to attack if you weren't messin' with her cubs...they're a lot smaller than a grizzly and anything .357/.45 or up would do...but I'd hate to go up to grizzly country without anything smaller than a 12 ga w/slugs or a .45/70 or other large rifle...if I could only carry one woods gun, it'd be a .45 for bad guys...with a coupla shotshells in my pocket for a snake...if I was goin' for something besides just hunting, I'd carry a 9-shot .22 LR revolver for snakes and the .45....and if I couldn't carry anything but Bear spray...I'd stay home...
trickyasafox
Member
guys its simple- revolvers for woods carry so you DONT LOSE YOUR BRASS.
autos for places where brass recovery is easy. No one likes looking in thick stuff for your empties.
sadly, this was a major in my decision to carry revolvers in the woods. I like to plink and walk at targets of opportunity on some private land- and I just wasn't getting anywhere with the autos. Spent darn near all my time trying to find the brass.
so it was either a 22 auto, or a revolver. I felt like leaving any empty brass is leaving the woods dirtier than I found it, so I use the revolver to ensure I leave as little / no mess behind.
Mind you- I'm in upstate NY. about the rowdiest thing I'll encounter on my walks is a uppity woodchuck. We have coyote, but you gotta look for em. The ones in my area have been hunted hard and are extremely wary of people.
As for tweekers and pot growers- the places I go aren't remote enough for them to move in.
thats probably why I'm so content to have a 4inch 38 or 357 on the hip and a heap of 158gr LSWC 38 specials in my pocket.
autos for places where brass recovery is easy. No one likes looking in thick stuff for your empties.
sadly, this was a major in my decision to carry revolvers in the woods. I like to plink and walk at targets of opportunity on some private land- and I just wasn't getting anywhere with the autos. Spent darn near all my time trying to find the brass.
so it was either a 22 auto, or a revolver. I felt like leaving any empty brass is leaving the woods dirtier than I found it, so I use the revolver to ensure I leave as little / no mess behind.
Mind you- I'm in upstate NY. about the rowdiest thing I'll encounter on my walks is a uppity woodchuck. We have coyote, but you gotta look for em. The ones in my area have been hunted hard and are extremely wary of people.
As for tweekers and pot growers- the places I go aren't remote enough for them to move in.
thats probably why I'm so content to have a 4inch 38 or 357 on the hip and a heap of 158gr LSWC 38 specials in my pocket.
Oh boy. Lots of good posts in this thread , and a fair bet of misinformation. Note that what I will follow with is based upon *direct* experience.
To those carrying a semi-auto in a woods environment for bear defense , it works out in the lower 48 in areas where you only have smaller black bears , and yes I *do* know , I have shot a number of hogs and 4 black bear over the years with .45 acp just to spite folks who said it was an impossibility , in point of fact it's more efficient for said task than .357 mag , which I've also utilised for the same purpose , again basically to prove it could be done.
Within the context of far northern bears and the same issues all I have to say is that there are much easier ways to commit suicide , NO handgun round is in reality really adequate for a brownie , yes they can be killed with a handgun and sometimes are , and yes I do carry a handgun for the purpose when in Alaska , either one of my Redhawks or a much beloved Blackhawk , all in .44 mag. My typical bear loadings for such use are a 300 grain Hornady XTP stacked over 21 plus grains of ww296 or H110. BUT said handguns are only an adjunct to a long gun , typically a Marlin 95 in .45-70 or a Browning BAR in .338 win mag , both opensighted. If you run into a stress situation with one of these bears a scope is completely USELESS, and a handgun is for when you have to put your long gun down i.e. field dressing an animal , going out to the outhouse at night , feeding the horses or dogs , woodcutting etc.etc.
For those claiming that a revolver *never* jams , they can most certainly jam and when they do it's quite often a more serious proposition than the typical stovepipe etc. in a semi auto , but given proper maintenance a revolver has overall in my personal experience proven to be more reliable and serviceable within the context of a woods environment.
This question really comes down to a horses for courses answer , for anti-personell functions a semi-auto is quite often the best answer for some folks ( though I do like the SP101 , my S&W model 24 3 inch , and the Charter Arms Bulldog Pug for this purpose too) which is why I own several 1911s , for woods work I will continue to most often stick to a revolver in .44 mag , though I do sometimes carry my Kimber (.45 acp) in small bear and hog country.
For those who insist on 9 x 19 ( 9mm parabellum) for bear defense , I hope that you're coolheaded under stres and really , really good with it , we recently had an incident here where a guy decided to start popping off at a bedded down hog with a 9mm , he is as I speak still in the hospital and quite likely may not ever walk normally again.
Horses for courses folks , the proper tool for the given task . You don't turn a nut with a hammer and you don't drive a nail with a box end wrench.
B.
To those carrying a semi-auto in a woods environment for bear defense , it works out in the lower 48 in areas where you only have smaller black bears , and yes I *do* know , I have shot a number of hogs and 4 black bear over the years with .45 acp just to spite folks who said it was an impossibility , in point of fact it's more efficient for said task than .357 mag , which I've also utilised for the same purpose , again basically to prove it could be done.
Within the context of far northern bears and the same issues all I have to say is that there are much easier ways to commit suicide , NO handgun round is in reality really adequate for a brownie , yes they can be killed with a handgun and sometimes are , and yes I do carry a handgun for the purpose when in Alaska , either one of my Redhawks or a much beloved Blackhawk , all in .44 mag. My typical bear loadings for such use are a 300 grain Hornady XTP stacked over 21 plus grains of ww296 or H110. BUT said handguns are only an adjunct to a long gun , typically a Marlin 95 in .45-70 or a Browning BAR in .338 win mag , both opensighted. If you run into a stress situation with one of these bears a scope is completely USELESS, and a handgun is for when you have to put your long gun down i.e. field dressing an animal , going out to the outhouse at night , feeding the horses or dogs , woodcutting etc.etc.
For those claiming that a revolver *never* jams , they can most certainly jam and when they do it's quite often a more serious proposition than the typical stovepipe etc. in a semi auto , but given proper maintenance a revolver has overall in my personal experience proven to be more reliable and serviceable within the context of a woods environment.
This question really comes down to a horses for courses answer , for anti-personell functions a semi-auto is quite often the best answer for some folks ( though I do like the SP101 , my S&W model 24 3 inch , and the Charter Arms Bulldog Pug for this purpose too) which is why I own several 1911s , for woods work I will continue to most often stick to a revolver in .44 mag , though I do sometimes carry my Kimber (.45 acp) in small bear and hog country.
For those who insist on 9 x 19 ( 9mm parabellum) for bear defense , I hope that you're coolheaded under stres and really , really good with it , we recently had an incident here where a guy decided to start popping off at a bedded down hog with a 9mm , he is as I speak still in the hospital and quite likely may not ever walk normally again.
Horses for courses folks , the proper tool for the given task . You don't turn a nut with a hammer and you don't drive a nail with a box end wrench.
B.
Guy de Loimbard
Member
Concealability and what's available to me are my main reasons. Except for the 1911 my autos are small. I do OC from time to time, but the majority of my carry is concealed. The smallest revolver I have is a .357 Security Six - it's almost as big as the 1911, and it's wider. Now that's to say that concealing large guns is impossible, because it isn't. I can conceal a .45 Blackhawk under a jacket. A P64 however is a lot more easier to conceal without looking odd in t-shirt weather.
Meh. I think it's all basic anthropology.
We choose revolvers because of the social acceptance that pistols are danger and breakage prone, but revolvers are manly and outdoorsy, robust, and fire giant bullets that will actually save us from everything.
As with most everyone in the gun community, the outdoorsy and concealed carry people are no exception to the coolness index when choosing a sidearm.
What's the "right" one that's venue appropriate?
Aside from the fashion conscious, the internet based data munchers distill buying one to data points seeking to isolate any anthropological meaning to their choice and fall into the technogeek category where the social rules dictate that hard data be used for every possible choice.
It boils down to romance and geekdom, generally speaking.
I think hualing a gigantic revolver around for Grizzly is just ridonkulous, fwiw.
*************
And you live in Tennesee where there are NO Grizzlies and a large black bear is 250 lbs , get back to me when you've lived where there actually ARE grizzlies , much less Brownies and where you've got to at sometime put your long gun down to accomplish your daily chores.
Kind of hard to split stovewood with a long gun in your hand , and you are not stopping a brownie with an autopistol , or ANY small caliber revolver. And don't bother with telling me tales about the natives in the far north and .22s , sure it's been done in the past , but the majority of them are carrying BIG rifles nowadays.
A lot of folks have all sorts of fanciful notions about the big bears , they are nothing to screw around with , the best thing to do is make tracks if at all possible , I've seen 'em hit squarely and fairly multiple times with large hardhitting rifle calibers and keep coming.
B.
We choose revolvers because of the social acceptance that pistols are danger and breakage prone, but revolvers are manly and outdoorsy, robust, and fire giant bullets that will actually save us from everything.
As with most everyone in the gun community, the outdoorsy and concealed carry people are no exception to the coolness index when choosing a sidearm.
What's the "right" one that's venue appropriate?
Aside from the fashion conscious, the internet based data munchers distill buying one to data points seeking to isolate any anthropological meaning to their choice and fall into the technogeek category where the social rules dictate that hard data be used for every possible choice.
It boils down to romance and geekdom, generally speaking.
I think hualing a gigantic revolver around for Grizzly is just ridonkulous, fwiw.
*************
And you live in Tennesee where there are NO Grizzlies and a large black bear is 250 lbs , get back to me when you've lived where there actually ARE grizzlies , much less Brownies and where you've got to at sometime put your long gun down to accomplish your daily chores.
Kind of hard to split stovewood with a long gun in your hand , and you are not stopping a brownie with an autopistol , or ANY small caliber revolver. And don't bother with telling me tales about the natives in the far north and .22s , sure it's been done in the past , but the majority of them are carrying BIG rifles nowadays.
A lot of folks have all sorts of fanciful notions about the big bears , they are nothing to screw around with , the best thing to do is make tracks if at all possible , I've seen 'em hit squarely and fairly multiple times with large hardhitting rifle calibers and keep coming.
B.
As far as worry about parts failure, I've owned so many S&W revolvers. NONE have ever failed in any way, including during about ten years when I shot handgun competitions regularly and shot hundreds of practice rounds at a session.
***************
I'm glad you have good luck with Model 29s , I thoroughly and completely detest them , not a single example I have owned has stood up to the same loads that my Redhawks , Blackhawk and Dan Wesson digested with impunity. I do however like the N frame .44 specials ( Model 24).
And yes I've owned quite a variety of model 29s , I kept trying with them for years.They didn't work out for me personally. YMMV.
B.
***************
I'm glad you have good luck with Model 29s , I thoroughly and completely detest them , not a single example I have owned has stood up to the same loads that my Redhawks , Blackhawk and Dan Wesson digested with impunity. I do however like the N frame .44 specials ( Model 24).
And yes I've owned quite a variety of model 29s , I kept trying with them for years.They didn't work out for me personally. YMMV.
B.
Crawford
Member
The primary push for use of bear spray seems to be driven by the Sierra Club. It wants the Forest Service to require everyone who enters a national forest in grizzly bear country to carry bear spray to “reduce human injuries caused by bears, reduce the number of grizzly bears killed in self defense, and help promote the recovery and survival of the grizzly bear."
There is a good, well balanced article on the net that covers both sides of this argument: Bear Spray Campaign Endangers Hunters, Grizzlies by David Smith at News West dot Net (http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/bear_spray_campaign_endangers_hunters_grizzlies/C41/L41/)
but also:
As in most things, it all depends on how you do the statistics.
There is a good, well balanced article on the net that covers both sides of this argument: Bear Spray Campaign Endangers Hunters, Grizzlies by David Smith at News West dot Net (http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/bear_spray_campaign_endangers_hunters_grizzlies/C41/L41/)
but also:
As in most things, it all depends on how you do the statistics.
The article sums up by saying: "Carry bear spray and know when to use it." and I will add: "carry a shot gun, rifle, or pistol if you can."
For me, I think, I would chose a revolver because of the animal attacks I've heard about, the animal was on the person almost with out warning. With the animal on top of them the revolver muzzle can be put against the animal and fired. I tend to believe that, unless you had an adapter, if you pushed the semi auto against the preditor, the slide would be moved out of battery and won't fire. JM$.02.
tactikel
Member
The primary reason that pistols were rarely carried in the woods was that until a few years ago the pistol shot cartridges intended for SD (.380, 9mm, .45 acp., .32 colt). The powerful rounds (.357, .45 colt, and .44 spl/mag) were only in revolvers. The perception was that only revolvers were powerful enough to stop dangerous game. Better quality bullets and more powerful rounds (10mm) have really evened the playing field. In bear country I'd still carry a .44 mag, but for anything else I'd be very comfortable with a 10mm or my .45 acp.
Legionnaire
Contributing Member
Personally opinion only: I carry a revolver in the woods because I prefer to shoot revolvers. I wouldn't make a strong argument that revolvers are "better" in the woods environment. I just like them better. Conversely, I mostly carry a semi-auto elsewhere because I think it has some advantages for CCW and utility versus two-legged threats (higher capacity, etc.). I still "like" revolvers more, and sometimes CCW an SP101 or a three-inch GP100.
winchester '97
Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2009
- Messages
- 306
Its simple, a revolver tends to be wider at the cylinder and less concealable, and a small .380 or 9mm concealed carry gun is a joke to a bear. And its an excuse to buy one more gun
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
