There's a big difference between killing and stopping. I don't care if the bear is dead, only that he stops chewing on me...or preferably never starts. Wounds channels kill, broken bones stop. When it comes to stopping, as MaxP says, horsepower is your friend.
.44 special 255 gr hard cast enough for woods carry?
- Thread starter PA Revolver Guy
- Start date
- Status
There's a big difference between killing and stopping. I don't care if the bear is dead, only that he stops chewing on me...or preferably never starts. Wounds channels kill, broken bones stop. When it comes to stopping, as MaxP says, horsepower is your friend.
Sneakshot92
Member
I asked my buddy the other day what he would consider his "woods protection" gun. He promptly opened his safe and pulled out his GP100 with some hot loaded 180gr A-frames that he said I loaded for him.
Funny I don't recall that?
Then he said he was running low and asked me to load some more up.
Guess I gotta hit the reloading room this weekend...
Funny I don't recall that?
Then he said he was running low and asked me to load some more up.
Guess I gotta hit the reloading room this weekend...
SteadyD
Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2017
- Messages
- 1,747
What about the A Frame’s construction makes it so effective? That is rather amazing that in 357 it outperformed a 480.
tactikel
Member
For over 145 years a 44/45 caliber 240/250 grain bullet at 900 fps has been deemed ideal for the woods.
first, the bullet is like a bonded partition, but since it doesnt lose its lead it penetrates deeper. Also, the front is cut so that it opens the very very front fast and shallow so the hollow point only opens so far. Really, i have aframes shot fast into concrete and the dont deform much, swift uses hard copper and harder lead in them compared to other hollow points. They penetrate deeper than any expandable bullet while holding their shape. We have done many tests on frontal shots thru bovine skulls. True to form, they kill quicker than solids and hardcast of the same caliber, but are tougher too. Testing on skulls and neck bones shows them going deeper and keeping frontal shape and integrity better than the hardcasts we have tested. The 45’s are
Tougher than the 44’s but the 44’s hold up great at 44 mag carbine velocities and the 45’s hold up at 460 velocities but will open up at ruger 45 colt velocities.
So.....its a deep penetrating, non failing tough bullet that gives you more diameter to work with out of a given cartridge. For example, if a 357 is used as a woods gun, you get a bullet opening to just over 50 cal and that’s significantly larger than what a hardcast 357 is. More damage, more damage on a cns shot if one is getting charged. Theyre expensive but whats a hunt and stopping a chargi g dangerous animal worth to ya. On bovine skulls we get them thru the skull and thru 3-4 cervical vertebrae with a perfect mushroom and thats from a 357. Done just after a hardcast 480 failed to get thru the same skull due to nose
Deformation
Times change. 145 years ago that was a pretty wicked load. Didnt always Do the best in bears and large game. Did u ever wonder why we are still having to prove the effectiveness of handguns for hunting if they were so effective for those same 145 years.
SteadyD
Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2017
- Messages
- 1,747
Do any manufacturers offer a 357 a frame already loaded? I know buffalo bore offers some of the new stuff you guys have tested in larger calibers but I don’t see any 357.
wild willy
Member
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Messages
- 634
Are there any true cases of a uninjured really large bear attacking anyone.I tried to do a search a couple years most reports don't list the the weight but the ones that did almost all the bears were in the 150 lb to 200 lb range.A lot were second year cubs that the sow had run off and were starving.I'm not the best searcher its just something I'd like to know.One thing if a bear is too bold and aggressive there not making it to 500+ lbs..I think it may have happened but as rare as bear attacks are I think a large bear attack is really rare.
Sneakshot92
Member
Federal has a 180gr loading.
Swift probably does too.
Ideal, or adequate (sometimes)? That is a sweeping statement.
Flatbush Harry
Member
For everything but big bears and pissed off moose, it should be plenty. Moose are basically just big deer but, at up to 1,600 lbs with bad tempers and being a bit stupid, I still like my .44 mag. We have both big black bear and moose here in CO so that when I go fishing, my SS Mod. 629 with Federal 240gr JHP .44 Mag rides under my waders.
Buckeye63
Member
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2018
- Messages
- 2,268
https://www.underwoodammo.com/produ...7&_sid=6a4541ee5&_ss=r&variant=18786990030905
It would be hard to beat a 255gr gr hardcast out of a 44spl Black Bear protection ...
I wouldn’t feel underarmed with a 357mag with a 180gr Hardcast
It would be hard to beat a 255gr gr hardcast out of a 44spl Black Bear protection ...
I wouldn’t feel underarmed with a 357mag with a 180gr Hardcast
When they’re pumped up, horsepower is your friend. Those don’t offer a whole lot, nor do non-expanding bullets out of the smallish .357.
Sneakshot92
Member
My current 357 bear load is a 140gr FTX seated long in 38spl cases behind a stout (357mag) charge of 2400 with LOTS of squeeze on a tight crimp. It works pretty good. Never had a bullet shake loose from recoil.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
It works great and without much fanfare. I've killed more critters with comparable loads than anything but the .22LR.
This.
I always find these threads funny. It seems like some feel it's a badge of manliness to use less gun. It's kinda like the outdoorsman and using as small of a knife as possible.
Why use a round that only barely works? It doesn't mean we should all have 500s or anything but 44 mag is pretty standard and easy to find ammo and guns for.
I don't understand why it's a thing
frayluisfan
Member
MaxP, everything you say lines up with what I would think. I haven't hunted black bear, but I've seen a few, and lived in NC for several years near where you describe hunting. I know y'all get some whompin big bears in there.
What to suggest to the original poster? There are a lot of anecdotes here: like, "I shot one once and he..." or "my cousin shot one once and it..." There's also a lot of reasoning being thrown around without a whole lot of evidence, like "For big bears, you absolutely have to have the 450 Monster Magnum". Rather than base my decisions on one incident or two ("The plural of anecdote is not data."), I'd prefer to look at as many actual incidents as possible. The Ammoland article compiled reports on 37 separate incidents, including ones with grizzlies. Very surprising (to me at least) was that even the lowly 9mm turned out to be very effective at deterring bear attacks. Don't argue with *me*; argue with the data. And unless someone has better/more complete data, I think the 44 Spl with a hard heavy bullet in the range of 1000-1100 fps will do just fine, especially since you are already comfortable with it. Just my 2 cents...
What to suggest to the original poster? There are a lot of anecdotes here: like, "I shot one once and he..." or "my cousin shot one once and it..." There's also a lot of reasoning being thrown around without a whole lot of evidence, like "For big bears, you absolutely have to have the 450 Monster Magnum". Rather than base my decisions on one incident or two ("The plural of anecdote is not data."), I'd prefer to look at as many actual incidents as possible. The Ammoland article compiled reports on 37 separate incidents, including ones with grizzlies. Very surprising (to me at least) was that even the lowly 9mm turned out to be very effective at deterring bear attacks. Don't argue with *me*; argue with the data. And unless someone has better/more complete data, I think the 44 Spl with a hard heavy bullet in the range of 1000-1100 fps will do just fine, especially since you are already comfortable with it. Just my 2 cents...
35 Whelen
Member
I find these threads interesting too. I see the "badge of manliness" being linked to carrying gigantic revolvers and somehow equating the protection of ones self from black bears with shooting cattle on a ranch in Texas.
I also find it interesting that from the time this continent was settled until the early 20th century, when folks in the woods were far more likely to be attacked by bears (since there were more of them), they somehow survived carrying muzzleloaders and revolvers chambered "only" in 38-40, 44-40 and 45 Colt's.
And then there's the irony that some of todays manly handguns and their cartridges for which they are chambered, are the rough equivalent of some of the old black powder rifle/carbine cartridges, you know, those old cartridges that have been deemed obsolete for over a century?
A .40 caliber 190-200 gr. hard cast bullet @ 1200+ fps- a 10mm Auto or a 38 WCF loaded with black powder and fired from a 130+ year old rifle, take your pick.
A .45 caliber 300 gr. bullet @ 1600 fps can be had in the 454 Casull or the 45-70 Trapdoor, take your pick.
A .50 caliber 435 gr. bullet @ 1300 fps can be had in a .500 Linebaugh, or if you want to step up a bit in power, grab an old 1866 Springfield chambered in 50-70 whose BP load propelled a .50 caliber, 425 gr. bullet well over 1400 fps.
If a man shoots a .44 Special well, will another 200 fps from a magnum really help him when a bear is on top of him?
35W
I dunno. Some see what they wanna see. Ive seen waterbuffalo live for 13-14 minutes after being hit by solids out of a 44 mag and had the hunter act like it worked as well as the 460 round that killed the buff stone graveyard dead in less than 30 seconds. Heck, maxp has a great vid of a cape buff dying in seconds and as fast as ive seen a rifle kill one. To
See a bear, black or brown, in adrenalized attack mode is different than feeling comfortable in a tree cuz the dogs cant go up. Thing dies relatively quickly since it didnt know you could shoot it either. To compare that with an aggressive charge is stupid, yet many do so.
See a bear, black or brown, in adrenalized attack mode is different than feeling comfortable in a tree cuz the dogs cant go up. Thing dies relatively quickly since it didnt know you could shoot it either. To compare that with an aggressive charge is stupid, yet many do so.
I find these threads interesting too. I see the "badge of manliness" being linked to carrying gigantic revolvers and somehow equating the protection of ones self from black bears with shooting cattle on a ranch in Texas.
I also find it interesting that from the time this continent was settled until the early 20th century, when folks in the woods were far more likely to be attacked by bears (since there were more of them), they somehow survived carrying muzzleloaders and revolvers chambered "only" in 38-40, 44-40 and 45 Colt's.
And then there's the irony that some of todays manly handguns and their cartridges for which they are chambered, are the rough equivalent of some of the old black powder rifle/carbine cartridges, you know, those old cartridges that have been deemed obsolete for over a century?
A .40 caliber 190-200 gr. hard cast bullet @ 1200+ fps- a 10mm Auto or a 38 WCF loaded with black powder and fired from a 130+ year old rifle, take your pick.
A .45 caliber 300 gr. bullet @ 1600 fps can be had in the 454 Casull or the 45-70 Trapdoor, take your pick.
A .50 caliber 435 gr. bullet @ 1300 fps can be had in a .500 Linebaugh, or if you want to step up a bit in power, grab an old 1866 Springfield chambered in 50-70 whose BP load propelled a .50 caliber, 425 gr. bullet well over 1400 fps.
If a man shoots a .44 Special well, will another 200 fps from a magnum really help him when a bear is on top of him?
35W
Good point but interestingly enough it was
Only the rifles that were viewed as good stoppers of bears. Heck, many of those
Rounds listed didnt do well on people compared to modern rounds.
brutus51
Member
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 1,367
I'm a proponent of "Big & slow is the way to go" for self defense". If your hunting with a handgun then the big boomers make sense but I'll take a .240gr or .250gr bullet at 900/1000fps in an emergency do to the possible need for fast follow up shots.
I find these threads interesting too. I see the "badge of manliness" being linked to carrying gigantic revolvers and somehow equating the protection of ones self from black bears with shooting cattle on a ranch in Texas.
I also find it interesting that from the time this continent was settled until the early 20th century, when folks in the woods were far more likely to be attacked by bears (since there were more of them), they somehow survived carrying muzzleloaders and revolvers chambered "only" in 38-40, 44-40 and 45 Colt's.
And then there's the irony that some of todays manly handguns and their cartridges for which they are chambered, are the rough equivalent of some of the old black powder rifle/carbine cartridges, you know, those old cartridges that have been deemed obsolete for over a century?
A .40 caliber 190-200 gr. hard cast bullet @ 1200+ fps- a 10mm Auto or a 38 WCF loaded with black powder and fired from a 130+ year old rifle, take your pick.
A .45 caliber 300 gr. bullet @ 1600 fps can be had in the 454 Casull or the 45-70 Trapdoor, take your pick.
A .50 caliber 435 gr. bullet @ 1300 fps can be had in a .500 Linebaugh, or if you want to step up a bit in power, grab an old 1866 Springfield chambered in 50-70 whose BP load propelled a .50 caliber, 425 gr. bullet well over 1400 fps.
If a man shoots a .44 Special well, will another 200 fps from a magnum really help him when a bear is on top of him?
35W
It's not just 200fps though, it's 300-400fps, 50 grains heavier of a bullet and double the muzzle energy between 44 special and 44 magnum. This is using buffalo Bore heavy loads
That's pretty damn substantial
I'm a proponent of "Big & slow is the way to go" for self defense". If your hunting with a handgun then the big boomers make sense but I'll take a .240gr or .250gr bullet at 900/1000fps in an emergency do to the possible need for fast follow up shots.
This is the other thing I find funny.....the " fast follow up shots" thing. How far away and slow do you think a bear is? Because if it's far away and not threatening, you really don't need to shoot it to defend yourself.
Plus, it's not like the rounds energy stacks. It's basically using birdshot vs buckshot, lots of little ineffective shot doesn't do better than less more powerful shot
- Status
