2 inch .357 magnum for wood carry?

[Certaindeaf]

So we gotta shoot up in the air and run now?

 

[Guillermo]

They strike from concealment and can be on you before you knew that you were being attacked

while this is usually the case, it is not always the case.

I remember hearing an interview of a hiker who was a attacked. She saw the cat and described the horrible feeling of seeing it spring.

In addition, if you are hiking with someone else, or a dog, you might not be the victim, thus a sidearm can be of assistance, perhaps only as a noise maker.

That said, I do not carry, even in knowing a mountain lion is about, concerned about the mountain lion. Getting struck by lightening is more likely.

 

[jon86]

We all like to feel that we are the masters of our own destiny, but we are not.

Well crap. I'm gonna stop carrying altogether now. Matter'o'fact, I'm not gonna wear a seat belt either.

 

[Certaindeaf]

I'm gonna kick a can of Meow-Mix down the road. That's just the way I roll. the can. down the road

 

[jmr40]

I'd leave the 2" gun at home. With 357's below 4" you would be better off with a 9mm.

http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/357mag.html

 

[jon86]

I'd leave the 2" gun at home. With 357's below 4" you would be better off with a 9mm.

I disagree. With the BBTI website, the 2 inch barrel does not include the entire cylinder length of the revolver. Therefore, a more accurate measurement would be to look at the 3 inch measurements when considering a 2 inch revolver.

Also, loaded with buffalo bore 180 grain lead flat nose, a 2 inch gun would PROBABLY get about 1200 fps. (A three inch gun is listed at 1302 fps.)

I am not aware of any 9mm round that is a lead flat nose 180 grain @ 1200 fps for 575 ft/lbs of energy.

Note: I have not chronographed the buffalo bore 180's out of a 2 inch gun. I am simply guesstimating.

 

[Alaska444]

If a mountain lion wanted to kill you you are dead. They strike from concealment and can be on you before you knew that you were being attacked. Your sidearm would never leave the holster. The only purpose to carrying is to make you feel better, and possibly to end your misery. We all like to feel that we are the masters of our own destiny, but we are not.

Hmm, I know folks who have shot and killed mountain lions that were stalking them up here in Idaho. Yes, very scary beast, in many ways more so than a bear, but a good .357 is all you need for a mountain lion. Better yet, go with a friend so armed to serve as your own protection and vice versa. More than one way to skin a cat.

 

[Propforce]

Do you feel well armed against the most dangerous animals in the woods with it?

Two dudes in wife-beater T-Shirts tending a "crop" are more likely to be a danger to you then all the bears and cougers in the "south", wherever that is.

rc

1. Is that a likely scenario in your neck of the woods?

I don't go wonder off in the woods that is either far away from town or I am not somewhat familiar with, just as I don't go take a casual walk in the bad part of town just to enjoy the scenary.

2. In your scenario, what in your opinion, should you be packing? Keep in mind that I am not DEA who's go seek out these "crop" growers.

 

[Propforce]

I like to practice shooting with a handgun pointed behind me while running wide open and screaming like a little girl. You can't beat proper training!

It actually happened to a friend back in California who hired a guide to hunt black bear. Somehow both of them missed with their rifles, ran out of ammo, running back to their car with an angry bear right behind them while squealing like little girls and shooting their handguns over their shoulders.

Believe me, it was hard to get the story out of him. He was surprising quiet after the trip compared to boasting to everyone that he was going bear-hunting before the trip.

 

[Deaf Smith]

I have a 2 inch model 19 that I am considering for occassional carry in the woods. I know it is plenty adequate against 2-legged varmints, but how is it against 4-legged creatures? Here in the south, I don't expect grizzly but occassional black bears, mountain lions, etc. are possible. I plan to use 158 or 180 gr LSWC.

I also have a 4-inch 686 but the 2-inch is more comfortable to carry.

It will do quite well on any critters like hogs, bobcats, coyotes, snakes, gerbils, and even an occasional horny toad (but keep in mind horny toads are a protected species now.)

I use a 4 inch Security Six all the time and I don't even use top loads. Your 2 1/2 combat magnum will do fine.

Deaf

 

[SullyVols]

A 2" .357 won't have any more muzzle energy than a .40 S&W or 9mm +P out of a full size service weapon. The revolver cartridges are a lot more sensitive to barrel length from what I've looked at online.

That being said most things you'll find out in the woods in the US aren't going to take much to bring down and the sound of the .357 is a weapon in and of itself.

 

[outerlimit]

In response to the thread title, "Unequivocally, no."

 

[sixgunner455]

Energy isn't all there is to this. .358" 160-180gr WFN lead bullets at 1100 fps + do all kinds of neat things to critters, regardless of what the calculated energy figures may say. Fairly easy to get a load to do this (or hotter) in a .357 Magnum revolver, even in a short barrel. Pretty challenging to get a .40 S&W to do anything like that ball park, though the 10mm can potentially do it, with some careful work. Pretty impossible with a 9mm - heavy bullets don't break 1k fps in 9mm pistols.

 

[340PD]

If accuracy and knockdown power is required for what you think will be needed, carry the 4" 686 and learn to live with a little more weight. One extra round may come in handy also.

 

[mdauben]

I have a 2 inch model 19 that I am considering for occassional carry in the woods.

If I was out buying a gun for this purpose, I would probably look for a 3 or 4 inch barrel, but if the 2 inch is what you have I don't think you are giving up all that much.