Marshall
Member
Absolutely!
- Status
I think you're best friend for hiking/backpacking woulkd be a Ruger service/security six witha 4" tube, if you can find one. After that a 3" GP-100, 686,66,19, or a 3" Sp-101 would be good choices.
I would NOT recommend a scandium anything in a magnum chambering. Fired one ONCE, never again.
I would NOT recommend a scandium anything in a magnum chambering. Fired one ONCE, never again.
OP
OP
Logistar
Guest
WOW! Looks like I have a few more guns to consider! This has really helped. I can't thank you guys enough!
Now I just have to make a decision! -But at least I know it will be a good one now!
Thanks AGAIN!
Now I just have to make a decision! -But at least I know it will be a good one now!
Thanks AGAIN!
Cosmoline
Member
I live and hike in Really Big Bear country, and I like to pack a small .357. An SP-101 is fine, and that's what I've been carrying lately. The simple fact is if a really big brownie wants to kill you, he's going to kill you. You'll have a second or two to react. If I don't have a long gun chambered and at the ready, I want a handgun that I can draw and empty as fast as possible. The 180 and 200 grain hardcast slugs will penetrate through even a large brown bear and stand as good a chance of stopping it as any handgun this side of a Casull, plus you can fire the rounds much more rapidly. Anyway, I've never had anything like a problem with a brownie. I give them a wide berth fishing and they tend to do the same. In areas where they've become used to people and muscle up to them, I just don't go fishing. If I see monster prints on the trail, I turn around and go back. If I hear bones cracking in the woods or little bear cub mews, I run away like a little girl
The problem customers in my experience are the crafty little black bears. They're not on the top of the chain up here, so they tend to be more wicked and clever. I've had them barrel out of the undergrowth a few feet away from me while hiking, look me over then decide I'm not on the menu for today. When the touristas leave food out they can become a real menace, and unlike the brownies they'll turn predatory on people.
Drifter721
Member
"If I see monster prints on the trail, I turn around and go back. If I hear bones cracking in the woods or little bear cub mews, I run away like a little girl "
Oh, that made me laugh! Best to move along in this case and live to fight those fish another day. Good one, and I know the feeling!
I hunt and fish in areas where the black bears are record book size (some 500 pounders are documented in the B&C book from this area in the Sierra Mountains near Bridgeport, CA), mainly because the mule deer population is high, and these bears are too far off the beaten path, or in too steep a canyon to get them back to a pack trail.
I've had them wuffing at me face to face literally a few feet away. Each time, I've had a rifle or pistol drawn with a bead on their head, tag in my pocket. They like to bluff a lot, but If you stand your ground and don't show fear, THEY get scared and tear out of there "like a little girl." I've never had to shoot one, despite four "uncomfortable" confrontations.
Once, while hunting up in British Columbia for moose, about 100 miles from the nearest civilization, a Grizz came into our spike camp growling, wuffing, and snapping his teeth at us. There went our damn horses! On this occasion, a .375 H&H in hand and a Grizz tag in pocket I almost took this one out, but just as I made that decision, he squirreled off into the black of night like he'd seen a ghost. Must have been we hadn't had a shower in about seven days.
Anymore, I've got an S&W Model 629 Mountain gun or a 4" model 500 in a bandolier holster when I hunt or fish in remote areas.
The .44 Magnum with some 300 grain Hornady XTP hollow points, I feel is minimum protection for a lifesaving BLACK bear attack situation. Grizzlies and browns are whole 'nother story.
I've seen huge wild hogs drop in their tracks when hit with the 500 S&W.
You don't see that often even with magnum rifle shots. With a Hornady 500 grain XTP 'expanding' bullet, with the large frontal area, the shear weight of the bullet, and overall astounding energy of the 500 - it is a "Thor's Hammer" combo for dangerous, adrenaline charged game. I would not feel under gunned anywhere in North America with it.
"Oh, that made me laugh! Best to move along in this case and live to fight those fish another day. Good one, and I know the feeling!
I hunt and fish in areas where the black bears are record book size (some 500 pounders are documented in the B&C book from this area in the Sierra Mountains near Bridgeport, CA), mainly because the mule deer population is high, and these bears are too far off the beaten path, or in too steep a canyon to get them back to a pack trail.
I've had them wuffing at me face to face literally a few feet away. Each time, I've had a rifle or pistol drawn with a bead on their head, tag in my pocket. They like to bluff a lot, but If you stand your ground and don't show fear, THEY get scared and tear out of there "like a little girl." I've never had to shoot one, despite four "uncomfortable" confrontations.
Once, while hunting up in British Columbia for moose, about 100 miles from the nearest civilization, a Grizz came into our spike camp growling, wuffing, and snapping his teeth at us. There went our damn horses! On this occasion, a .375 H&H in hand and a Grizz tag in pocket I almost took this one out, but just as I made that decision, he squirreled off into the black of night like he'd seen a ghost. Must have been we hadn't had a shower in about seven days.
Anymore, I've got an S&W Model 629 Mountain gun or a 4" model 500 in a bandolier holster when I hunt or fish in remote areas.
The .44 Magnum with some 300 grain Hornady XTP hollow points, I feel is minimum protection for a lifesaving BLACK bear attack situation. Grizzlies and browns are whole 'nother story.
I've seen huge wild hogs drop in their tracks when hit with the 500 S&W.
You don't see that often even with magnum rifle shots. With a Hornady 500 grain XTP 'expanding' bullet, with the large frontal area, the shear weight of the bullet, and overall astounding energy of the 500 - it is a "Thor's Hammer" combo for dangerous, adrenaline charged game. I would not feel under gunned anywhere in North America with it.
I have to strongly disagree with brother plainsman. We are talking about a gun for hiking, not hunting... and it was specified .357 Magnum. To me, given those parameters, you're looking for compact size, lightweight frame, and capacity, capacity, capacity. To be able to put 8 shots in the fur at close range with a big bark and a blinding muzzle flash is going to be plenty of stopping power. And the somewhat lower velocity is always a reasonable tradeoff for a short barrel. You didn't specify which load got the unimpressive reading, but as you probably know, fps is only part of the equation. Slower bullets, if they have enough mass and expansion can still tear big gaping wounds in tissue. Considering you're probably going to go with a higher than 125 grain bullet anyway to maximize damage, you'll have more than enough firepower for close range defense. The 327 is an N-Frame you can carry comfortably in your cargo shorts. It's a revolver for hiking, when hiking --rather than killing-- is why you're packing. 8 at close range will stop or scare away all but the biggest and nastiest critters. If you have a bit of distance, and two or three seconds to reload, clips of 8 allow you to bring quite a bit of firepower to, uh, bear on target. All in a package that's quick to draw (fixed sights don't get tangled up), easy and fast to load even under duress.
Hiking in Grizzly country? Then you're right, forget that gun. Forget that caliber. Then the .357 magnum is the wrong tool for the job. That's when you'd want at least a .44 Magnum, .45, .454 Casull (Ruger Redhawk Alaskan), or that short X-Frame .500 magnum. Then you may feel safer if you are carrying a cannon. It just won't be light.
But again, if hiking is the most important thing, and you feel fairly certain that you won't be encountering murderous man-eaters... I'd find a very light, carryable revolver that used fullmoonclips. I also carry the 325PD (that's a .45 ACP). It's another firearm that will protect you while you're doing something ELSE, like flyfishing in (black) bear country. That one also won't win any velocity contests, but it will shoot big enough, messy enough holes in god's creatures in order to save your life. I think it's fine to carry a bit less gun, a bit less barrel, if you decrease weight while increasing the capacity to put more shots on target and/or increase the ease of reloading.
Hiking is a totally different agenda than hunting. You're not stalking, you're not trying to drop cleanly from afar, and punch a nice, neat hole and save edible meat. It's more about hitting a vital area at close range with as many bullets as you can fire during a charge whether you can keep your composure or not. If the choice is between five, six, and eight shots... I'll take the eight every time. And if I have to reload? Dropping in a moonclip wins over fiddling with individual rounds, speed loaders or strips. Another hundred fps is not going to make any penetration difference in this application, at the ranges you'll be shooting. I think when picking a good trail gun, it's more about comfort first, then capacity. Followed by choosing the biggest heaviest hollow-pointiest bullets at the greatest power you can control. Trust me, even at 900fps, it's not going to bounce off.
Hiking in Grizzly country? Then you're right, forget that gun. Forget that caliber. Then the .357 magnum is the wrong tool for the job. That's when you'd want at least a .44 Magnum, .45, .454 Casull (Ruger Redhawk Alaskan), or that short X-Frame .500 magnum. Then you may feel safer if you are carrying a cannon. It just won't be light.
But again, if hiking is the most important thing, and you feel fairly certain that you won't be encountering murderous man-eaters... I'd find a very light, carryable revolver that used fullmoonclips. I also carry the 325PD (that's a .45 ACP). It's another firearm that will protect you while you're doing something ELSE, like flyfishing in (black) bear country. That one also won't win any velocity contests, but it will shoot big enough, messy enough holes in god's creatures in order to save your life. I think it's fine to carry a bit less gun, a bit less barrel, if you decrease weight while increasing the capacity to put more shots on target and/or increase the ease of reloading.
Hiking is a totally different agenda than hunting. You're not stalking, you're not trying to drop cleanly from afar, and punch a nice, neat hole and save edible meat. It's more about hitting a vital area at close range with as many bullets as you can fire during a charge whether you can keep your composure or not. If the choice is between five, six, and eight shots... I'll take the eight every time. And if I have to reload? Dropping in a moonclip wins over fiddling with individual rounds, speed loaders or strips. Another hundred fps is not going to make any penetration difference in this application, at the ranges you'll be shooting. I think when picking a good trail gun, it's more about comfort first, then capacity. Followed by choosing the biggest heaviest hollow-pointiest bullets at the greatest power you can control. Trust me, even at 900fps, it's not going to bounce off.
reload4me2
Member
Decision
Lots of opinions - so will you let us know what you decide?
Lots of opinions - so will you let us know what you decide?
Drifter, you have some good points, but it just seems silly to carry that large of a frame .357 with a 2" barrel. A lightweight 4" .38 will probably beat it velocity wise.
I have an old Colt Cobra lightweight .38 with a 4" barrel. Only six shots, but a lot smaller than an N frame.
My personal dream gun for this purpose would still be a 4" fixed sight Scandium in .44 mag or .45 Colt, with a skinny barrel. Probably will never happen though, as folks think they need adjustable sights on anything bigger than a 2".
BTW, For this purpose, get yourself a hardcast lead round, or a fully jacketed bullet instead of a hollow point. If you can't get a skull shot, you'll need all the penetration you can get.
I have an old Colt Cobra lightweight .38 with a 4" barrel. Only six shots, but a lot smaller than an N frame.
My personal dream gun for this purpose would still be a 4" fixed sight Scandium in .44 mag or .45 Colt, with a skinny barrel. Probably will never happen though, as folks think they need adjustable sights on anything bigger than a 2".
BTW, For this purpose, get yourself a hardcast lead round, or a fully jacketed bullet instead of a hollow point. If you can't get a skull shot, you'll need all the penetration you can get.
Drifter721
Member
I would not consider the .357 Magnum a good choice for anything larger than a raccoon, coyote, or man. If that's all you might possibly encounter on your hike, then the .357 Magnum is fine.
I always like to plan for the worst case scenario. I don't think any professional that has experience with black bear hunting or eradication would recommend anything less than a .44 Magnum caliber. The Hollow point bullet choice is also preferred over round nose or FMJ styles becasue it imparts it's energy into the animal. A lead round nose or FMJ is next to useless because they sail right through and don't disrupt tissue much. Elmer Keith observed this and came up with the wad cutter styles for hunting, later improved upon with the hollow point designs. Bears are not thick skinned. A .44 magnum hollow point is going to penetrate plenty enough and even break heavy joints if need be, due to it's mass.
Brown bears and grizzly are in their own class and require some prudence in caliber/energy choices.
I always like to plan for the worst case scenario. I don't think any professional that has experience with black bear hunting or eradication would recommend anything less than a .44 Magnum caliber. The Hollow point bullet choice is also preferred over round nose or FMJ styles becasue it imparts it's energy into the animal. A lead round nose or FMJ is next to useless because they sail right through and don't disrupt tissue much. Elmer Keith observed this and came up with the wad cutter styles for hunting, later improved upon with the hollow point designs. Bears are not thick skinned. A .44 magnum hollow point is going to penetrate plenty enough and even break heavy joints if need be, due to it's mass.
Brown bears and grizzly are in their own class and require some prudence in caliber/energy choices.
Sam
Member
4" Model 19 tops them all in this application.
The rest are too short or too heavy.
Sam
The rest are too short or too heavy.
Sam
rwc
Member
+1 on the Mtn. Lite.
My mother-in-law in MT wanted a pistol for camping, etc. We spent a morning at an indoor range trying out a lot of pistols and it was the pistol that suited her. No complaints since.
Buy what shoots well for you.
My mother-in-law in MT wanted a pistol for camping, etc. We spent a morning at an indoor range trying out a lot of pistols and it was the pistol that suited her. No complaints since.
Buy what shoots well for you.
Sorry, Elmer was a smart feller, (Hey, that's me!), but he didn't come up with the wadcutter or SWC bullet.
And the hollow point is not an improvement for dangerous game. Even a smaller bear has more fat than most humans, and many hollow points won't penetrate enough for reliable stops in people.
I stand by a hard cast SWC for woods protection.
BTW, when I said a hardcast lead round, I didn't mean a lead round nose....
SnWnMe
Member
Are we talking about hiking as in roughing it for days HIKING? Where every ounce saved counts?
If so then one of those uberlight 360s will probably work great. Light and powerful. Too bad you find the the L frame (and therefore the K) grip too big because the 386 is very light too.
For that short traipse in the woods, you're probably better off with the 5" 60 with bigger grips. I know there's alot of love for the 3" 60 but for just a little more weight, you get better ballistics and shootability.
If so then one of those uberlight 360s will probably work great. Light and powerful. Too bad you find the the L frame (and therefore the K) grip too big because the 386 is very light too.
For that short traipse in the woods, you're probably better off with the 5" 60 with bigger grips. I know there's alot of love for the 3" 60 but for just a little more weight, you get better ballistics and shootability.
Drifter721
Member
Elmer,
My good friend has killed more bears than you and I could hope to ever see in our lifetime on a commercial lumber company depredation permit. I've personally killed over 350 wild Russian hogs on a agricultural depredation permit.
Heavy for caliber hollow points in large bore magnum calibers are by far the most effective. Not only do they expand, but they penetrate plenty enough too.
You did say above, and I quote you: "BTW, For this purpose, get yourself a hardcast lead round, or a fully jacketed bullet instead of a hollow point. If you can't get a skull shot, you'll need all the penetration you can get."
FYI: A "fully jacketed bullet" is probably the worst possible choice for a defensive or hunting round. It does not expand, and does very little in the way of tissue disruption. It is also illegal in most places to hunt with.
Elmer, you also said: "And the hollow point is not an improvement for dangerous game. Even a smaller bear has more fat than most humans, and many hollow points won't penetrate enough for reliable stops in people."
FYI: I don't know any law enforcement agency that doesn't use hollow points for 'people.' The hollow points have the highest one-stop-shots on humans.
As for your namesake Elmer Keith and the Semi-wadcutter? Here's some reading for you to do:
http://www.gsgroup.co.za/faqdesign.html
http://www.pennbullets.com/thunderheads.html
My good friend has killed more bears than you and I could hope to ever see in our lifetime on a commercial lumber company depredation permit. I've personally killed over 350 wild Russian hogs on a agricultural depredation permit.
Heavy for caliber hollow points in large bore magnum calibers are by far the most effective. Not only do they expand, but they penetrate plenty enough too.
You did say above, and I quote you: "BTW, For this purpose, get yourself a hardcast lead round, or a fully jacketed bullet instead of a hollow point. If you can't get a skull shot, you'll need all the penetration you can get."
FYI: A "fully jacketed bullet" is probably the worst possible choice for a defensive or hunting round. It does not expand, and does very little in the way of tissue disruption. It is also illegal in most places to hunt with.
Elmer, you also said: "And the hollow point is not an improvement for dangerous game. Even a smaller bear has more fat than most humans, and many hollow points won't penetrate enough for reliable stops in people."
FYI: I don't know any law enforcement agency that doesn't use hollow points for 'people.' The hollow points have the highest one-stop-shots on humans.
As for your namesake Elmer Keith and the Semi-wadcutter? Here's some reading for you to do:
http://www.gsgroup.co.za/faqdesign.html
http://www.pennbullets.com/thunderheads.html
- Status
