What handgun for general outdoors use...

.357 revolver is my choice....Personally, if I were backpacking I'd want light and less bulky. IMO, there isn't much finer of a pack around .357 than a Ruger SP101.

22 revolver. Take your pick of action, barrel length, etc.

If you are a group I would have one take a serious defense caliber in auto or revolver and another take a good 22lr in the same. The 22 will offer much more fun for plinking and will put food over the fire if need be plus each packer can take 100 rds without great burden. Take a couple reloads for your big gun and don't shoot it for fun.

Taurus Public Defender aka the Judge in .410. Perfect for snakes and such without worry of 'zinging' rounds out.

If you are a group I would have one take a serious defense caliber in auto or revolver and another take a good 22lr in the same. The 22 will offer much more fun for plinking and will put food over the fire if need be plus each packer can take 100 rds without great burden. Take a couple reloads for your big gun and don't shoot it for fun.

Click to expand...

I agree with this 100%.

I prefer a .357 while in the woods. A 686 or GP-100 are my favorites.

just out of currosity, what does SHTF stand for?

if i where in your shoes and i was going to buy a gun, id honestly buy a good serios caliber autoloader(not a 22) and keep a couple spare mags on hand, and buy one of thoose nagant revolvers as a back up, i dont think it is even possible to make a nagant revolver fail to fire

basically what i am saying is, take a good gun you are comfortable with, and has a fair amount of power, and take a gun that is going to be good enough for a few rounds, if the better gun fails

Smith and Wesson Model 60 Pro. Small and lightweight but still has the accuracy afforded by a 3 inch barrel and front night site. I wouldn't backpack without mine. I can carry snakeshot with my first shot or two for the rattleheadedcoppermoccasins and .357's in the rest for four or two legged predators.

'Stuff' hitting the fan= SHTF
something we generally don't talk about
as it's about as um, on message as the 'Zombie hoard' etc.

Any good gun will do, as for what you like, that's up to you, just realize that you will be lugging it.

if i where in your shoes and i was going to buy a gun, id honestly buy a good serios caliber autoloader(not a 22) and keep a couple spare mags on hand, and buy one of thoose nagant revolvers as a back up, i dont think it is even possible to make a nagant revolver fail to fire

Click to expand...

You'd carry all that hardware around on a 5 day packpacking trip?

I would take the Glock 21, but that's just me. Take what will make you feel comfortable when walking around, both security wise and actual walking comfort.

You'd carry all that hardware around on a 5 day packpacking trip?

Click to expand...

its only a 5 day trip, its not like adding a pound or two is going to make that much difference.

besides, why chance your fancy autoloader failing, and not having a backup?
the woods have away of making the most important equipment you have with you fail when you need it the most

besides, why chance your fancy autoloader failing, and not having a backup?

Click to expand...

Then, why not just leave the fancy autoloader and extra mags at home? When I pack, I don't want 2 lbs of extra gear that won't be needed. I'd rather save the weight and space for something else and wear a gun on my side.

For "general outdoors use", typically a moderately sized big bore revolver. Something with a ~4" barrel, single action or double action. No ultralights, no snubbies but also no long barrels or monsters. The "perfect packin' pistol" concept. This is usually a 4¾" Colt SAA replica, 4 5/8" Ruger Blackhawk or a 4" N-frame. Something accurate enough to cover a good 50yds or more. Powerful enough to handle anything encountered but without so much recoil that we don't like to shoot it....a lot. Make mine a .38Spl, .38-40, .41Mag, .44Colt, .44Spl, .44Mag, .45ACP or .45Colt, loaded with standard weight cast bullets around 1000fps.

For "general outdoors use", a good 1911 with a decent trigger will work fine if you are proficient with it but forget the Glock or any other service auto for that matter. Perfectly suited for self defense use but the trigger and sights are not conducive to fine shooting beyond 15yds. I guess it baffles me how folks want to spend time in The Great Outdoors and want an appropriate sidearm but arm themselves for a running firefight with street gangs.

why chance your fancy autoloader failing

Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't see the whole "autoloader failing" as a decent reason not to take one with you. How many police departments have a revolver as standard issue? Does our military have a revolver as its sidearm? Modern semi-automatic pistols are just not prone to jamming. If they were as unreliable as so many people try to make it seem then they would not be in the holsters of so many men and women worldwide...

My old S&W model 66 has been on many an adventure over the past 30+ years, backwoods camping, canoe trips, mushroom hunting, shed antler hunting, etc...

kingcheese said:

its only a 5 day trip, its not like adding a pound or two is going to make that much difference.

Click to expand...

First, that wasn't the question you were asked.

Second, if you had ever done such a hike you'd know that a pound or two makes a HUGE difference, and the difference only gets bigger the farther you walk. I’m guessing they aren’t driving out into the woods and spending five days milling around the campfire singing songs. Usually when someone says they’re going on a five day backpacking trip they mean they intend to walk all day until night, set up camp, and repeat four more times. For hikes like that people prefer not to bring anything that isn’t essential (sorry, the stats say a gun isn’t ‘essential’) or that doesn’t serve more than one purpose.

To the OP: You’re better off asking in a hiking forum as you’ll get a lot of armchair theorists in here trying to convince you you need a shotgun and a 55 shell bandoleer per person. Any of the choices you mention will work fine for what you intend to do. The .22 is a fun option if you want to plink while you’re out, but offers no real protection from two and four legged threats. Don’t worry about snakes, by the time you get your gun out the snake will have slithered away; they aren’t hunting you. I carry a G20SF here in Washington with 15 rounds, downloaded to ten for weight saving if going on a long multi-day trip. Seriously, the animals aren’t going to shoot back, so you don’t need suppressive fire to pin them down so your buddies can flank them. Remember, light is right. Also, cotton kills but that’s a different subject.

Honestly, I don't see the whole "autoloader failing" as a decent reason not to take one with you. How many police departments have a revolver as standard issue? Does our military have a revolver as its sidearm? Modern semi-automatic pistols are just not prone to jamming. If they were as unreliable as so many people try to make it seem then they would not be in the holsters of so many men and women worldwide...

Click to expand...

Not true at all. Pistols in austere environments require constant cleaning, as do M-4's for that matter, in order to function properly. The reason we carry autoloaders is for rate of fire and the ability to carry more ammunition in spare magazines on our person because it is easier to reload from magazines than from bulk ammo; not to mention it is easier to carry. Yes you do see autoloaders in the holsters of people worldwide...what you don't see is me and my buddies cleaning our guns two to four times a day to make sure they work when they need to. This is especially true in dry environments where sand and dust get into every nook and cranny of an autoloader and gum things up.

Autoloaders, including the wvunderGlock, don't work very well in austere environments unless they are properly maintained. The average person does not need 15 rounds of ammunition to suppress the chipmunks and rattlesnakes on the trail in order to enjoy the outdoors. If I felt that I needed that much ammunition then I would have a rifle with me. There is no reason to go backpacking with anything more than a .357 with at least a 3 inch barrel and the ability to fire single action if needed. I have friends that hike with baby Glocks and I have been out with a Smith and Wesson M&P Compact but you have to realize that, unless it is in a plastic bag, it is going to get dirty and you are going to have to clean it in order to ensure that will work if you need it; otherwise you have a one shot.

I agree with the above post by Mainsail with the only exception being the utility of the 22 as a secondary weapon if you are packing with a party as it sounds like you are. If forced to make a choice I would take a good 22 auto with a hundred rds. over most anything else unless I was in big bear country.
Mainsail is definitely correct when he advises against overload of weapons and ammo and those who have experience with multi day pack trips.
Heavy framed steel revolvers will take their toll and eat up weight you could use for food, water, or other items that could make your trip more enjoyable.
My personal choice for packing is a G32 or one of the S&W aluminum framed 22's or my Kimber Pro Raptor with the 22 conversion but many of the light weight alloy or polymer autos or revolvers would do.

I use a G-20 for those purposes. I get 357 mag power in a smaller lighter, more accurate, more reliable platform than a revolver with 16 rounds as a bonus.

Of the 2 choices you have I'd go G-19. Which is my choice if I'm hiking/camping in an area where there is zero chance of a bear encounter.

You'll find a Glock will hold up much better in woods,dirt and grit than any revolver.

My personal choice for packing is a G32 or one of the S&W aluminum framed 22's or my Kimber Pro Raptor with the 22 conversion but many of the light weight alloy or polymer autos or revolvers would do.

Click to expand...

As a last ditch protection tool. Completely unsuited for "general outdoors use".

As for weight, if I'm overly exhausted after walking in the woods all day, it's not because of the 2lbs of steel on my hip, it's because I'm out of shape and totin' more ass than necessary. Seriously, unless you're climbing the Himalayas, an extra pound of steel ain't gonna kill ya. Which will be far outweighed by the protection and piece of mind it affords. A rifle that weights 2-3lbs more than it has to makes a significant difference, a pistol worn on the hip does not.

PS, all you guys touting the Glock's weight must've never loaded one and put it on a scale. I sold my G21 several years ago but my Springfield XD is very similar in construction and weight. It's a lightweight 28oz unloaded but goes to 43oz loaded with 14rds of .45ACP. Compared to the above-pictured Ruger .44Spl, which is 37oz unloaded and 41oz loaded. Compare that to the little Kimber Ultra Carry, which is a scant 31oz loaded. So let us not pretend that Glocks are vastly lighter than a steel revolver. For they are not and you ARE trading capacity for something. That something is a heavy trigger, coarse sights and medicore accuracy. Like I said, not a big deal on a self defense gun but significant on a "general purpose outdoors" pistol.

For most areas I just carry a 9MM. If its in an area with larger predators. .357Mag or .45 Colt.

Craig I reread the op and I agree, packing in the SE USA is more like just "walking in the woods all day" The fat people in Denver breath thinner air and work harder climbing the stairs to their apartment.
Yes a packable handgun in the back country in my view is a last ditch protection tool.
If weight didn't matter in backpacking then you wouldn't see the obsessive counting of oz's. when choosing gear and the presence of scales when gear is sorted and packed, this isn't so important on a simple overnighter up to a fishing lake but when you intend to live on what you have for 5 days a pound does make a difference.

Daniel Boone's National Forest? You shouldn't even have to ask. A Kentucky rifle!