Moving to alaska, keep my .40 or buy a .44?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think a .40 may not be enough for a brown bear. For bears that weigh up to 1,300 pounds or even more I'd think penetration would be very important. I wouldn't even use hollow points. I could see someone hitting a thousand pound bear with a .40 and really pissing that bear off. A rifle would be best.
What he said.....get a rifle or shotgun...(.but keep the 40 and 357. for carry and home defense.)
 
I'd take semi over revolver for capacity, speed of shots, easier to shoot accurately.
One might assume that if attacked by an animal (human) there might be missed shots, poor hits and/or hits that don't stop it.
Glock 20SF with 15 + 1 rounds 10mm would be my 1st pick.
This seems to be a recurring theme. If the Glock's capacity ever comes into play, you're already dead. The idea that you can spray & pray your way out of a bear attack is absurd.
 
If you stick with. 40 that's fine but use a fmj. Shoot what's comfortable and RELIABLE.
Want a revolver but a revolver.
Either way both will feel very small and insignificant when in need.
 
I'm planning to buy a kimber talkeetna .375 hh for the long gun I think. I dont see myself carrying a long gun unless I'm hunting though. Have 5 different .308 rifles (3x m14, larue obr, r700) and an 870 shotgun already. I feel like my 18.5" barreled LRB m14 would be a pretty good trail gun at 8 lbs unloaded and great iron sights, but a bit underpowered even if it does carry 20-25 rounds .308.

I'm leaning toward a s&w 629 honestly, I'm a S&W fan even though ive though ive had some problems with the other n frame ive owned (a 327 R8 giving me light primer strikes and the barrel coming loose, but they fixed it). I just need to decide if I want the 5" full lug or 4" half lug model.
 
Last edited:
FMJ's deflect easily. A hard cast or monolithic bullet is a better option.
I agree. People put way too much faith in handgun hardball. It's not the penetrator folks think it is. It's practice ammo, the jackets are thin and the core is soft. They deform and deflect and roundnose is terrible at tracking straight. You'll get way better penetration and a larger wound channel with a good hardcast.
 
I knew a guy who lived in AK for many years. He hiked and fished a lot. He carried a 6" Anaconda 44 mag. in a shoulder holster.

I also know a guy who was a surveyor for the ADT for about 20 years. Bear encounters were common. They didn't carry sidearms but he had his personal 30-06 rifle in the truck which the dept. signed off on. He watched 10K worth of surveying equipment destroyed by a bear and nobody had a problem with it. They just replaced it.

A bear attack is serious. Don't underestimate the potential of a 500 lb carnivor.
 
460shooter
CraigC

No idea if this will tag or whatever it's called here.

Tell that to the guy in Denali Park a handful of years ago who killed a grizzly, one shot, with a .45 acp shooting standard 230 grain ball.
And a fmj from a .40 caliber is far better than going in the woods with a .40 caliber and a hollow point.
But yes if we wanna get picky we should all have a good double action revolver in .44 Casull launching a nice Cast Performance 300 grain over some H-110.
But he has his .40 and it would still work.
 
If it were me I would go with a Glock 29 mainly because there would be a MUCH higher chance of it being on me when I need it but wasn't expecting to need it. A .44mag revolver is a great gun to have around for protection but it wouldn't be my first or second choice of guns to lug all over he!! and back with me... just too bulky and heavy... too easy to leave in the truck when I step out for a second to write my name in the snow.

P.S. I am not a Glock fan.... I don't really like them. I think I saw something about a Springfield XDM in 10mm recently announced or coming out soon.

If you are into reloading you might consider a .460 Rowland plastic gun. A .460 Rowland FNX would be 16 rounds of pretty darn near .44 mag power with an additional 15 rounds reloaded really quickly.

I would still go for a Glock 29 if it were me though... good power in a small lite package... easy to carry and forget you are carrying it.
 
Last edited:
If it were me I would go with a Glock 29 mainly because there would be a MUCH higher chance of it being on me when I need it but wasn't expecting to need it. A .44mag revolver is a great gun to have around for protection but it wouldn't be my first or second choice of guns to lug all over he!! and back with me... just too bulky and heavy... too easy to leave in the truck when I step out for a second to write my name in the snow.

P.S. I am not a Glock fan.... I don't really like them. I think I saw something about a Springfield XDM in 10mm recently announced or coming out soon.

If you are into reloading you might consider a .460 Rowland plastic gun. A .460 Rowland FNX would be 16 rounds of pretty darn near .44 mag power with an additional 15 rounds reloaded really quickly.

I would still go for a Glock 29 if it were me though... good power in a small lite package... easy to carry and forget you are carrying it.
My 629MG is 40oz, same as a loaded G20/21 or XD. A 329 is even lighter than your Glock.

There is a disturbing trend of auto shooters trying really hard to convince themselves that a 10mm Glock is not only "just as good" as a big bore revolver for encounters with large predators but even better because they have 15rd magazines. If capacity ever comes into play, you're already dead. If you know anything about dangerous game hunting, it is typically done with double rifles. Not AK47's. Ponder that for five minutes.

The 10mm and .460Rowland are very capable but still very limited. They only come close with standard weight bullets and simply do not have the capacity for the heavy bullets that are so effective on big critters.

IMG_0631.jpg
 
This seems to be a recurring theme. If the Glock's capacity ever comes into play, you're already dead. The idea that you can spray & pray your way out of a bear attack is absurd.

I did not insinuate spray & pray.
I have a Glock 20SF and shoot it well. I also have a Delta Elite 10mm - shot (killed) a deer with it last fall.
No longer have revolvers above 357 Mag, use to have 44 Mag (couple) did not like them nor do I like the 357 & 38 revolvers I own.
However, thank God I have someone on the internet that thinks they know what is better for me than I do.
 
Bear threads are always interesting, up to a point, but I take it your question is not "which handgun is best for brown bears" but more like a request for ideas on whether one of your .40 S&Ws should be converted into something stouter. Yes.

I can see adding a large-bore revolver -- the Rugers are probably the best value for the money. Many folks in Alaska keep such a gun around, in belt or shoulder holsters, or in the truck.

A 9mm or .40 S&W pistol -- something concealable -- is still a good weapon to own for everyday carry, particularly in suburban areas.

But if you intend to spend a lot of time fishing, camping, hiking, etc., a 12 gauge pump or a .45-70 Henry or Marlin lever action rifle would provide an order of magnitude better protection -- at a reasonable cost. I'd sell one or two of the other pistols to get one.
 
There's some curious logic going on here. Just because a pistol happens to have more rounds on tap than the 6 that most revolvers have does not mean that those shooters don't aim.

Having only 6 rds also doesn't mean that a revolver shooter will magically hit something vital (I.E. brain, spinal cord, heart, lung(s) etc).

Ran across this. It's somewhat interesting.
https://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2016/10/where-are-bear-attack-pistol-failures.html?m=1
 
I've pretty much settled on a S&W 629 I think, just having a real debate on the 4" half lug vs 5" full lug. Since the S&W is not recommended for the super hot loads and I don't reload anyway, I'm thinking the moderate .44 mag factory ammo will not lose that much velocity in the 4" instead of the 5", but I could be wrong.

I've course I will ship at least a few semi autos to myself although I will probably gravtate to my .40's more than my 9mm given the wildlife and heavy winter clothing in AK. My .40's can shoot 9mm with just a barrel and mag swap anyway.
 
I've pretty much settled on a S&W 629 I think, just having a real debate on the 4" half lug vs 5" full lug. Since the S&W is not recommended for the super hot loads and I don't reload anyway, I'm thinking the moderate .44 mag factory ammo will not lose that much velocity in the 4" instead of the 5", but I could be wrong.

My understanding is you won't lose too much. Maybe 50-75fps at a guess. Others will likely know more. But the difference in weight will be of benefit; one way for carrying, and the other for shooting.

A Ruger Super Blackhawk with a Bisley grip frame is a very comfortable gun to shoot .44 mag from. I converted my plow handle SBH a little while back, and it made a huge difference. Just food for thought.
 
The other real question is finding a comfortable holster, which will accommodate you, and your new
revolver. That big new gun won't do you any good, if you can't find a comfortable way to carry it.
 
Also, while we're on the subject, I understand I can ship firearms from myself to myself in AK. If I maintain an address in the lower 48 at my parents' house, could I simply UPS them to myself the day before I fly up and take delivery of them upon my arrival in AK? Or is it still necessary to ship them to "c/o" an FFL in my name?

Could I ship 4 or 5 handguns in one box or do they need to be individually shipped?
 
Last edited:
460shooter
CraigC

No idea if this will tag or whatever it's called here.

Tell that to the guy in Denali Park a handful of years ago who killed a grizzly, one shot, with a .45 acp shooting standard 230 grain ball.
And a fmj from a .40 caliber is far better than going in the woods with a .40 caliber and a hollow point.
But yes if we wanna get picky we should all have a good double action revolver in .44 Casull launching a nice Cast Performance 300 grain over some H-110.
But he has his .40 and it would still work.
Edited for enhanced civility:

One incident where someone got lucky is a good reason to follow suit? Well if you want to base your decisions on single event anecdotes, who am I to argue.

Whether or not a FMJ is "better" than a hollow point is irrelevant. I never advocated a hollow point as a good choice. I stated that a hardcasts or monolithic slug is a better choice than a FMJ.

I'm not a hunter, but I can read, and I've never heard any big game handgun hunters advocate using a FMJ or a HP. They actually use handguns to kill big animals, and what I've learned from reading their insights and asking them questions is that in nearly every case, they report better wounding characteristics in a hard cast or monolithic bullet because they tend to have a wide flat meplate, track straight through, and penetrate well.

By the way, quoting someone or tagging them by placing an @ symbol in front of their name will trigger a notification so they know you are trying to get their attention.

The OP asked about a 40 cal or 44 mag. I gave my answer. Sorry to the OP, not trying to derail or get off topic.
 
Last edited:
I have hunted many years with only a revolver and usually at most used only 3 rounds . Usually the 3 was for the final shot. A 10 or more magazine is useless. At our home range I find 45 and 10 hardball in the first tire backstop.
 
If you need a holster contact Diamond D holsters. They're just outside of Anchorage. Guides choice holster is slick. 5 minutes offer wearing it and you'll forget you're wearing it.
 
I think I would do a 10mm 1911 myself loaded hot with a 200 grain hard cast, reason being that’s what I would be comfortable and proficient with. If I did a double action revolver I would definitely need some springs and some practice in double action.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top