Bear country revolver

[tony454]

Living in bear country I always carry a gun with me when I'm out fishing or hiking. Two of my favorites are my Super Redhawk in .454 Casul or my Smith & Wesson Performance Center in .44 Mag. I have alot of faith in the .454 round on the big Grizzlies that live in Montana but I wonder how effective the .44 would be?

 

[thesensei]

Well, I've never lived in bear country, but I'd say a .44 would be decent to carry. Although the .454 would certainly be a better choice - the bigger the better! I know someone who carries a .357 hunting in Alaska, and says he'd trust it against a bear, but I don't think I'd be comfortable with anything less than a .44.

Just my .02!

 

[lklawson]

I know someone who carries a .357 hunting in Alaska, and says he'd trust it against a bear, but I don't think I'd be comfortable with anything less than a .44.

Some years back I went camping in the Ozarks with some friends of mine. They recommended I carry my .357. "Oh, for the Razorbacks" I asked?

I was laughed at.

According to them, the razorbacks would shrug off even a .357 Mag with hard cast SWC, never mind trying some sort of fancy expanding ammo.

"No," they said, "it's in case we stumble across somebody's 'patch'."



Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[theletch1]

A .50 is worthless without proper shot placement. That being said I don't see why the .44 wouldn't get the job done provided you were able to put the round somewhere vital. Just a personal observation... that Ruger is one of the ugliest pistols I've ever seen. I know, I know, you're not trying to impress 'em to death.

 

[50calray]

The .44 Magnum would be the minimum for Bears in my opinion. If I had the choice, I would either carry the 450 Casual or the 500 S&W. That 500 S&W is a nasty round to shoot but it would get the job done no questions.

 

[tony454]

Well, I've never lived in bear country, but I'd say a .44 would be decent to carry. Although the .454 would certainly be a better choice - the bigger the better! I know someone who carries a .357 hunting in Alaska, and says he'd trust it against a bear, but I don't think I'd be comfortable with anything less than a .44.

Just my .02!

I lived in southeast Alaska about 15 years ago and was able to hunt the big coastal brownies up there. I shot an 8 1/2 ' that took three solid hits from my .416 rigby round before before I killed it. I don't think a .357 is near enough gun in bear country. The Super Redhawk is beautiful to me in its functionality.:uhyeah:

 

[MA-Caver]

The .44 Magnum would be the minimum for Bears in my opinion. If I had the choice, I would either carry the 450 Casual or the 500 S&W. That 500 S&W is a nasty round to shoot but it would get the job done no questions.

Me thinks you double posted by accident... :asian:

From what I know... you'd need for your gun to have immediate stopping power. Shot placement is critical and hitting a vital (brain, heart) is crucial to stop a 700-2000 pound animal in it's tracks and NOT get back up again, even more pissed off because it's hurt badly.
This video shows a pissed off momma bear defending her cubs while trying to feed... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFtAEM7GkO4&feature=fvsr
This video is gut tightening... the camera guy drops his camera to bring his weapon to bear...(pardon the pun).

This is a better video... imagine the animal coming at you and you need to hit it with your big gun... can you? Look at the speed and how it'd dodging around the trees, imagine if there were no trees? Imagine it coming across the river big splashing which obscures your target...
Things to think about.
[yt]O6GcWhlGF3o&[/yt]

 

[searcher]

As much as I am a handgun nut, I trust no handgun to get the job done on a bear. I am not willing to stake my life on anything that will not penetrate a bear skull.

For me it is a rifle no smaller than a 375 H&H magnum.

 

[lklawson]

I am not willing to stake my life on anything that will not penetrate a bear skull.

7.62x25 in FMJ will do that, no problems. Whatsoever. Heck, it'll pen. a NIJ II and some NIJ IIa armour.

OTOH, a .30 cal hole is still a < 1/3" hole with no expansion.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Grenadier]

Penetration is important, but as lklawson wisely stated, a small hole is less desireable than a large hole.

The .44 magnum can certainly do the job, with a heavy load, and heavy bullet.

Also, don't forget about the .460 S&W and .480 Ruger.

 

[thardey]

The only thing I've killed with a handgun was a large porcupine.

I Put 5 rounds of .45 hollowpoint into the center of mass, and it still took several minutes for the thing to die. It was moving briskly for at least 45 seconds to a minute.

When it finally did die, I flipped it over, and all 5 shots had penetrated, expanded, and left nasty exit wounds through the chest cavity.

I put the 6th round into it's head, but it bounced off its skull, without even phasing the porcupine.

Now this was under no stress (I had to shoot it, or the dogs would go after it), I was in no personal danger. Shot placement was into vital areas, and the ammo performed as designed.

After that episode I seriously had to sit down and reconsider what would make me feel safe facing a grizzly. If a bear had half the constitution of that porcupine, I would be in a world of hurt.

I'm sure a .44 would eventually kill a griz, provided the right shots were made, and enough of them, but don't expect one to instantly drop when it realizes it's just been shot.

 

[tony454]

The brown bear I mentioned in an earlyer post was finaly killed when I put the third shot through it's neck, effectivley spineing it. The strength of these animals is amazing. The first shot was a perfectly placed heart lung shot that completly penetrated, exiting out the off shoulder. And let's not forget this was a .416 Rigby round out of my Ruger M77 rifle. The only chance you would have with any revolver round is to either brain it or spine it.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Personally I'd carry either my 12 gauge Mossberg Mariner with slugs or my AK-47 with FMJ.

Sorry, but while I really like handguns, a running charging brown bear would be a mighty hard thing to hit right with a pistol that kicks like a mule and holds only 5 or so shots (we DO miss now and then guys, even on the square range.)

So I'd get a light weight Mossie or AK.

Deaf

 

[50calray]

Me thinks you double posted by accident... :asian:

If you hadn't of said it I would have never known about it. I guess the old computer was lagging again.

Anyhow, the 500 SW is more than enough to stop a charging bear and the snub nose is fairly accurate inside 20yrds. The next handgun I would suggest if you don't mind it beating the crud out of you is a Magnum Research chambered in 45-70gov. This IS a really really nasty gun to shoot. I have to shoot the 500 SW snub nose one hand so the torque doesn't twist my wrist to hell. It actually makes shooting it a lot more pleasant. But this trick doesn't work on the 45-70 handgun. I'll need some band aides shooting it one handed. Heck, I've cut my self shooting it two handed. It just slams the trigger guard into your fingers no matter what and the wood grips feels like sand paper in you hands. The 500 SW will leave skid marks due to the rubber grips but that is about it.

Now this is just what I would use as a back up side arm. My primary weapon will be my 50 Beowulf w/10rds of 400grs

 

[MA-Caver]

The brown bear I mentioned in an earlyer post was finaly killed when I put the third shot through it's neck, effectivley spineing it. The strength of these animals is amazing. The first shot was a perfectly placed heart lung shot that completly penetrated, exiting out the off shoulder. And let's not forget this was a .416 Rigby round out of my Ruger M77 rifle. The only chance you would have with any revolver round is to either brain it or spine it.

That was my point earlier with the videos. To brain it or spine it you gotta HIT it.
If you can't hit either target the first couple of times, it's not going to matter what size gun you got.
Also consider this one more little fact about these animals... they're typically ambush predators if they see large prey that they're wanting. Sad for you if you're it.

 

[Hudson69]

I carry a .44 mag on backpacking excursions and hunt with one too. I have a Super Blackhawk and I feel that it is more than sufficient to deal with a bear (maybe not so much in my hands) when loaded with FMJ or something close.

I took down a mule deer with my first .44, an Uberti Cattleman and the gun I have now is much better. I agree with the fact that a .454 or something similar would be a better "bear stopper(?)" but I would not be able to shoot it comfortably enough, often enough to make it the gun the .44 mag is for me.

When I am camping I have it and my AR-15 with dual load AP/SJLN rounds. When I am hunting it is my backup for my .300 Savage Model 8. Over all if I really expected a bear I would either not go (bears are really big and have been known to eat people and my kids would say I shot Smokey) or simply hike in with the .44 and the AR-15 since even though it is a small round it the AP stuff will go through just about anything and I can effectively put a lot of rounds on a small moving target (and I dont own an SKS/AK) which is why I prefer this weapon when I have my family around or I am not hunting.

my .02 only.

 

[David43515]

I grew up in Ohio, which hasn`t been bear country for about 180 years, so take what I say with a grain of salt. I read an interview on this type of topic with several bear hunters from Alaska. The general consensus was that in order to stop a bear right now, you don`t shoot at vital organs like heart and lungs. You either take out the spinal colum or the hip joints, so a heavy hitting bullet and good placement are are paramount.

I`ve read of guys killing bears with headshots from a .44, but I`d rather have a 10 or 12 guage shotgun and several good dogs myself.

 

[Skpotamus]

I live in IN which has a decent number of bears.... in zoos and circuses.... so take this with a grain of salt.

One of my coworkers went bear hunting a few years back, the topic of carrying a pistol for defense against a bear came up, the consensus from his guides was that no handgun would really do the job adequately. They recommended at least a 12 gauge with 00 buck. They used much larger caliber hunting rifles and even then they didn't always do the job.

I wouldn't expect any caliber of handgun to do the job, especially some big bruiser that is hard to get follow up shots with. I'd probably look at a pistol gripped shotgun.

YMMV.

 

[lklawson]

I wouldn't expect any caliber of handgun to do the job, especially some big bruiser that is hard to get follow up shots with. I'd probably look at a pistol gripped shotgun.

This problem, and the various "solutions" aren't exactly new. It's the reason that Howdah pistols were invented.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk