midland man
Member
well maybe but people are poor back then at lest most were so some only had a pistol if they were lucky!
.44 black powder revolver load for black bear
- Thread starter maint1517
- Start date
- Status
Jackrabbit1957
Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2018
- Messages
- 2,903
Most likely a smooth bore of one size or another. I personally feel that a .44 Remmie is gonna be a little light for bear of any flavor. I do believe with the right powder charge one could take a bear but I wouldn't be real anxious to try it.
Jackrabbit1957
Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2018
- Messages
- 2,903
Back to the o p, your 30 30 and 357 are good choices. Keep in mind we all have to roll with the times and adapt at least a little.
midland man
Member
well I guess that was directed at me but my thinkin is whats wrong with tryin primitive arms our ancestors survived using these guns!
My guess is that if a person only had one firearm they were far more likely to have a long gun than a pistol. Poor people don't buy expensive special purpose items like pistols, they make do with inexpensive general purpose items like shotguns.
The evidence of those who are doing so these days. Like you I didn’t believe a patched ball could be very effective. What I understood for a good level of penetration was a combination of sectional density (weight/mass) and speed, and these just don’t have much of either. So when I don’t know things but would like to I read and ask those who do (and I don’t take a few people’s word for it, especially if I’m rather skeptical). I learned quite a bit. I’d venture to guess I’ve had a couple of score of people with scores of kills themselves to base this on, and what little there is to found elsewhere.
And sure we knew it worked 150 years ago but there’s not a lot for them and us to compare to as we’ve generally moved on with our technology.
I figure it’s frowned upon to post links to other forums. Maybe you’d like to search it out as you clearly don’t believe it. I didn’t either.
Most of the guys who are doing it frown on anything beyond 125 yds, and ballisticly it’s flat enough shooting for that easily excpet for the windage being they have such a low BC. But indeed some guys have successfully hunted beyond that, and it was done on the battlefield as well from much further, though that’s certainly a different story.
And some of those guys feel anything past 50-75 yds is unsportsmanlike.
Indeed. If one uses 3F Swiss, Olde Eynsford, or Triple 7 and a stout charge you can achieve what a rifle and ball does with 70-90 grns of common 2F at 100-125 yds. In essence a .454” ball betters the .45 cal rifle (.440” ball) and comes fairly close to equaling the .50 cal rifle (.490” ball) where it is traveling faster but doesn’t quite have the mass or caliber.
It’s whether or not you’d want to be that close. DRT isn’t exactly common with much of anything shooting the vitals.
Risky buisness
Member
It appears that some folks dont think a heavy loaded .44 black powder revolver would suffice to put a bear down. With a round ball I would tend to agree, however historically I'm quite sure it has been done.
That said, before I would attempt it, I believe that a good cast, slightly harder than straight lead bullet, not ball, should be tested in a medium that would approximate the size of the bears around your area. If satisfactory, why not? I presume these bears are hunted over bait? And if a tree stand was used, and the range made short, a little extra room for a heavy loaded .45 colt or other backup might be in order.
That said, before I would attempt it, I believe that a good cast, slightly harder than straight lead bullet, not ball, should be tested in a medium that would approximate the size of the bears around your area. If satisfactory, why not? I presume these bears are hunted over bait? And if a tree stand was used, and the range made short, a little extra room for a heavy loaded .45 colt or other backup might be in order.
Historically, cave man killed bears with spears, bows and arrows. Also historically, angry bears killed cave men, before expiring from arrow wounds. The thing is, not will a BP bullet kill, its about giving the animal a humane death as quickly as possible.
midland man
Member
AMEN!!!
And just like even mega megnums with modern whiz bang bullets game animals have been known to absorb tremendous amounts of damage and have a will to keep going despite good hits. Outside of a CNS hit nothing is guaranteed to quick. And then sometimes even a lowly arrow has dropped a deer DRT. And a ball is no different.
Please don't underestimate the recklessness of some people. They might actually try it despite the fact that it is a foolish reckless stunt that might have someone not coming home to their family.
This hunting with a revolver as being the norm in the old days fantasy is just that. People used rifles back then and my understanding is a lot of these rifles although not as flat shooting as modern rifles could use hefty charges and have a good amount of range in the hands of someone who used it often and knew it's characteristics.
The shotgun was one of the favorites among common people who needed a good firearm to rely on since it could be loaded with a variety of different projectiles (smooth large bore) for different requirements. They may have lacked todays modern technological knowledge but they sure were not stupid. I don't need a scientific study to prove that.
My understanding is revolvers were quite expensive at one time and hard to find. I would GUESS after the civil war there was plenty of surplus but my understanding is revolvers were generally used for close range personal defense rather than hunting.
Indians hunting buffalo with arrows again it's what they had, before they got their hands on firearms. My understanding is Indian hunts were not foolish quests to singlehandedly take down large dangerous animals with an arrow. Hunts such as buffalo hunts were well organized events that used team work with multiple tribe members on horseback practicing time proven techniques learned by experience taught and passed down to them from generation to generation along with well practiced skills.
Why ? because they needed to in order to eat and cloth themselves, they wasted nothing on the animal, it's what they needed to live.
Now days you have obese (I myself used to be obese and still consider myself a little too chubby) people driving SUVs a block to the corner store to buy cheap chemically treated beer and cold cuts that I would not call meat. destroying the land, atmosphere, and having a lack of respect for their own body and health. Boy we have come a long way haven't we.
Without any proof I believe anyone who lived in the old days off the land would trade in their muskets and cap and ball revolvers for a glock, remington 700, ar15, and a good pump shotgun in heartbeat had it been available or would make sure their kids were equipped with them it they found themselves too attached to their own guns.
I for one think we need a little bit of the positive aspects of the old to put things back in balance don't we. Avoiding recklessness seems to be coming close to being an extinct form of wisdom.
Last edited:
midland man
Member
yep we need a dose of common sense like not putting antigun people in office would be a sure good start to saving our guns!! thank god for trump at lest he isn't tryin to take our guns!!
From my Lyman BP Handbook a .445 RB at 1000fps has 22.4" of drop at 100 yards. A .495 RB has 21.8" of drop. To the best of my knowledge BP revolvers don't have 1000fps so there would be even more drop. Mid range for both is in the 6" area, so I guess someone could estimate the proper hold off, but shooting a pistol at 100 yards while standing, well, you better be one hell of a shot to get any kind of group. And what kind of group is a BP revolver capable of at 25yds - maybe 2," with a machine rest. What does that equate to at 100 yds, I don't know but guessing maybe 8" ? So someone is gonna try and hunt at 100yds with a BP revolver and expect to have a killing shot most of the time. Not me.
midland man
Member
yep i try and try to keep my shots with my 51' navy within 20-30 yrds as i feel is about right for this pistol...
Nice facitious post.
Jack, you might be off a little. A 45 RB at 1900fps [ 80grs of 3F ] drops 22" and has a MR of 7.2" at 150yds. At 200yds it has 48.5" of drop and a mid range of 16.5". Go back to a 100yds and it's more reasonable - 7.7" of drop and a MR of 2.3".
woodnbow
Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2007
- Messages
- 2,111
In terms of energy the AK is pretty close to the old .30-30, but it uses a much lighter bullet and if you’re using a good 150 grain soft point in the m94 you’re much better equipped to kill deer out to 200 yards. The lever gun is lighter, handier, more accurate, (take time to find a load it likes) has better sights, it’s just miles ahead of an AK47 or variant. It was designed to be used that way. The AK was designed to throw a lot of lead more ore less where it’s pointed, and do so with minimal care under combat conditions. It’s good enough at that...
Pete D.
Member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2010
- Messages
- 2,660
“Our ancestors did it....”
They did? You know that for a fact? Hunted Black bear with BP revolvers as a common practice?
That being said....there are a number of gel tests available online that show impressive penetration for the .44 revolver.https://www.guns.com/review/gun-rev...revolver-calibers-get-the-ballistic-gel-test/
Ballistics:
http://www.poconoshooting.com/blackpowderballistics.html
They did? You know that for a fact? Hunted Black bear with BP revolvers as a common practice?
That being said....there are a number of gel tests available online that show impressive penetration for the .44 revolver.https://www.guns.com/review/gun-rev...revolver-calibers-get-the-ballistic-gel-test/
Ballistics:
http://www.poconoshooting.com/blackpowderballistics.html
Eyrie G. Dogg
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2018
- Messages
- 403
I’m acquainted with several bow hunters who bag northwestern black bear and California black bear each fall. Some use compound bows and some use recurves and get clean kills. Although it’s not my game, I’m confident that the same could be done with a C&B .44 pistol and a proper conical.
Of course, a Dragoon or Walker would be optimal but I suspect an 1860 or a Remington et. al. would get the job done.
Of course, a Dragoon or Walker would be optimal but I suspect an 1860 or a Remington et. al. would get the job done.
Last edited:
woodnbow
Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2007
- Messages
- 2,111
I’m sure I’ve told some of this story here before... but a long time ago I was one of the first on scene where a woman had used a 1958 Remington replica against her abusive spouse. She knew how to place her shot, about an inch above a line drawn from nipple to nipple and about that much to his left of the sternum. Roundball, it was lodged under the skin next to his left shoulder blade. He didn’t even step out of his tracks and dropped right there. As the saying goes, he died so quick he probably thought he was still winning the fight.
I was certainly impressed.
Jackrabbit1957
Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2018
- Messages
- 2,903
I really don t pay much attention to the published ballistics, l prefer to go out and see what the gun/bullet is capable of in the field. As to hunting bear with a bp 44, l would not want to do it without backup. I do get tired of the attitude that a handgun is only good for close in work. Those who think a pistol is strictly a close range weapon should go watch a handgun silloutte shoot.
woodnbow
Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2007
- Messages
- 2,111
Ver
interesting stuff...
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
