Best Caliber for Bear - VOTE !

[munk]

Not even a laugh from you Jim March?

I got two boxes of 20 rounds for 19 dollars a box. Gave it to a friend. I reload. Honestly, though, I can't see 475 calibre stuff being any where near as cheap as 451 or 452 diameter projectiles. I doubt the 500 ammo or components are cheap either.

I'd consider casting for the 480

munk

 

[Ardent]

I will never understand what one fellow I respect called "bearanoia". I live on the west coast of Canada in the province bordering Alaska and the Yukon. In short we have big bears, same genus of grizzly as Alaska, and there are lots of them. I have NEVER had a problem with a bear in all my time hunting, fishing, and camping- grizzly or black- other than a trashed campsite. Neither have my friends, my dad was chased by a grizzly when he worked for the forest service, though he was lucky and the bear gave up chase. Mind you, at the time they were trying to herd the grizzly and her cub out of a campsite and the bear was understandibly stressed. Not a normal scenario. It seems to me like a lot of folks want to arm themselves against a threat that for the most part doesn't exist or is minimal, and can be avoided by smart bush practise, funny thing that. Seems like an excuse really. I usually only carry a gun in the woods if I'm hunting, rarely for defense. I've had close brushes with bears on many occassions, and not once did I have a scenario where a gun would have helped. It's kinda like wearing a helmet when driving your car, sure, it might help save you, but do you REALLY need it? Just my small change.

Ardent

 

[treeprof]

I've had close brushes with bears on many occassions, and not once did I have a scenario where a gun would have helped.

Now, don't go spoiling a good thread with a dose of reality like that.

I've worked in Interior Alaska off and on for the past 12 years, and have too seldom seen bears to seriously worry much about it. My experience both hunting and working has been that bears tend to just "appear", often VERY close, and usually with no ill intent. Truth is, bears are so fast, often so quiet, and so good at ambushing that a lot of actual attacks are such that the person had, or would have had, little or no time to use a gun. I believe Keith Rogan's case as related on TFL was like that.

I've never been charged, but a number of ppl I know have, and it was always a surprise. One fellow's been bluff charged twice, and on neither occasion did he have time to get his gun into action. One bear came out of alder as he as pulling a boat in to tie it off, chased him backwards onto his back in the boat and left just as quick. His brother sat there in the boat mouth-agape; the whole thing lasted but a few seconds. The other bear, a sow with a couple cubs, waded into the river as they were float fishing downstream, and charged at them as they frantically tried to get the boat ashore. Between oars and poles there were neither free hands nor sufficient time to bring their guns into play. And if they had the time, to do what with their guns? There was no legitimate cause to shoot that sow.

No offense to anyone, but planning on head shots is perhaps the greatest folly of all, as the actual frontal kill zone on a bear is ridiculously small, and nigh on impossible to hit on a charging bear whose head is likely to be swaying or bobbing, jaws "popping", prior to or during a for-real charge. Some serious study of bear anatomy, esp. the skull, should be required of anyone thinks they might need to plug one in self defense, just so that one realizes just what they're up against. Practicing on a tangerine swinging wildly on the end of a rope, as it advances on you at 20+ mph while you pee yourself as you haul a$$ in reverse might just replicate a head shot, if one's practice range permits such things.

If you really need a gun, you're likely to already be on your back in the process of being consumed, or in a fetal position trying to cover your neck and melon. In that case, caliber is not your biggest concern. OTOH, bringing a long bbl revolver into play may just be. Or trying to work a single action with one hand as you fight for your life with the other.

 

[SteelyDan]

I'm really not trying to be cranky, but I don't think you can just ask what is the best caliber for "bear." There are black bears, and there are brown (and I suppose polar) bears. The two are NOT the same.

Second, it makes a big difference if you're talking about a hunting round (where you have the advantage) or a self-defense round (where the attacking bear has the advantage).

Just don't underestimate the bears. Bigger is better, especially if they're brown bears, or attacking bears, or both.

 

[Ardent]

I agree with you treeprof, I kinda hit this thread like a rainy day . I pretty much nodded my head through your entire post, couldn't be said better.

Ardent

 

[munk]

So, we have two wise and educated folks from areas of vast wilderness telling us about Bearanoia. I agree with them. It's true most people in the lower 48 have little use for a 'bear load'. However, in Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho, the 'vast wilderness' is rather small, and bear people contact not as benign. How many people live in the remote sections of Canada and Alaska? ARe the bears under the same pressure as the ones in more populated areas? I doubt this very much, and think this counts for everything.
Further, there's a National Park in Alaska that permits firearms for Bear Defense, they wouldn't do that if uneccesary. It goes against every political tenet of the Federal Govt.
One of the leading Bear Experts in the World was just killed by the cousin to the Grizzly in Russia. His can of empy pepper spray beside him.

I guess it's rather like lightening. I've little chance of being struck. I take precautions none the less. Same with Bears or Mt Lions or automobiles.

The point about hunting vs self defense is absolutely correct.

munk

 

[Marshall]

Come on you guys, maybe Newton was going to bear country for 2 weeks. He might have all three pistols and didn't know which one to take?

I chose a .480 Ruger.

 

[treeprof]

I should clarify that in spite of my post, there are some areas in AK where I pretty much always went armed (e.g. in more populated Coastal areas or the time I was on Kodiak) where the chance of contact was higher or where there's more history of bear-ppl encounters. In the Interior, I just usually didn't bother, in spite of the fact that some of my research equipment was repeatedly damaged by a persistant grizz in one area. Nowadays, I always try to be armed whether its bear country or not, but that's more an evolution in my overall thinking than anything else.

Re a handgun choice, I agee that bigger is better; no question abt that. And, I think that even if the chance of using a firearm (justifiably!) before you are physically attacked may be small, it's still a good idea to be armed in general. I believe, tho, that the best defensive gun is going to be shorter bbl'd rather than longer, dbl action rather than single, and something carried in a manner such that you can access and use it in the middle of a scuffle if you have to. I don't think of long bbl'd stuff like the Super Redhawks as being especially practical in that sense because they are more unwieldy and your carry options are more limited.

In considering how I might respond to a deadly threat from a 2-legged critter, I assume that when it sufficiently sucks to be me that it becomes necessary to deploy a firearm, my luck from that point onward is not likely to improve. Consequently, I assume that I'll be wounded, perhaps limited to one/weak hand shooting, that it''ll be dark, that I'll be moving in retreat or for cover, and that my accuracy will stink relative to my shooting nice groups at the range. If I'm attacked by a 4 legged critter, I assume the conditions and my luck will similarly stink. Many of us prepare and train accordingly for such 2-legged threats, and I just think the same thought and prep ought to be given to 4-legged threats, rather than the ideal situation.

Edit: Good pt Marshall. Newton, I think you should buy a 5 1/2" stainless Ruger Redhawk in .44, or a S&W 629 in 4" or shorter config.

 

[smithandwesson]

The .44 Magnum has my vote.

 

[JOE MACK]

I chose the .454Casull since the .475Linebaugh wasn't listed. It can be had in a more packable firearm than the .480SRH or .500S&W. If it's handy, you'll carry it. It can be loaded to the gills or auxillary cylinders can be had for .45Colt and even .45ACP or auto rim.

That being said, I've taken over 20 black bears with the .41Magnum. With careful shooting they all went down without a fuss. For the grizz, I prefer to have my .475. I've also been charged twice. Once in "the Bob" while fishing and run off an elk carcass outside Wapiti, Wyoming. First time I had a 4" S&W in .41Magnum pointed at the bruin. It took the fish, creel and all after running three bluffs. The second charged to run us off the elk. I was a little more confidant that day as I had my .475LB and my partner had his .416Rigby Ruger (he likes overkill). When we returned the next day, there was precious little to recover.

That said, if you must use a handgun on bear, use the largest caliber you can shoot accurately repeatedly.

 

[munk]

41 fan- what bullet did you use for black bear? A long time ago I read that before Canadian guides were forbidden handguns they liked the Blackhawk Ruger- quick shots and penetration.


Personally, I'd be a lot more reassured by my friend's 416 Rigby than any 475 handgun.



munk

 

[Newton]

I have never looked upon having no hope in a life or death situation as being a good reason to deprive yourself of having a slim chance.

As for Cooperisms about swinging tangerines and bouncing ping pong balls, there is a thread doing the rounds at the moment about a hiker who was carrying a .38 Special in Brown Bear country, he managed to put 4 solid hits into the 1600lb bear that attacked him, and not surprisingly, it made no difference whatsoever, so he became lunch. The .38 slugs were recovered after the bear was killed with a .338 Win Mag (or a 7mm Rem Mag depending on which version of the story you read). There are photos, some grizzly (no pun intended).

I clearly recall many stories about handguns being used in defence against bear attacks, a SiG P239 in .40S&W was all that was required to stop one aggressive Black Bear, the sixth round from a .38 Special (Canadian Mountie) was enough to stop another, and yet a third that springs to mind was the use of a .44Mag 3 inch "Trailboss" that was used to kill a wounded grizzly that had circled around behind a hunter on a brush trail. So it does happen.

The hiker that is the unfortunate focus of the current bear attack story had the time to draw, aim, shoot, and hit 4 times, if he had one of the guns listed in this poll, maybe he would be here to contribute to the discussion, maybe not, but that's the point of the question.


Newton

 

[treeprof]

Newton - Can you provide a link for that thread? It sounds very much like one more perversion of the Hitchebrook bear story, where the bear was actually killed by a hunter with a .338 w/out any of the drama or myth that's become attached to it as it makes its way around the net. There's often a pic of a guy with his guts gone and ribcage exposed that goes along with it.

Statments about plans to make head shoots on an attacking bear demonstrate profound ignorance of bears and bear anatomy, and unrealistic confidence in one's abilities, no matter how good one is on paper targets or while hunting. No serious person plans on, or recommends, head shots on human attackers as a first line of defense. Yet, that kind of stuff shows up all the time in bear discussions.

Re your choices, I suggested a .44 because it is most easily obtained in a compact form. Hunting and self defense are not the same thing, and I think that the configuration of one's sidearm ought to reflect that; it oughta be the biggest you can obtain and shoot from a defensive posture.

I think ppl should be armed whenever possible, indoors or out. My concerns abt the responses I see in bear threads are 1) that too many ppl fear that a bear looms behind every bush, 2) that too many bears are needlessly killed in supposed defensive shootings (not that I'm a bear hugger; I have hunted and much less frequently killed bear), and 3) that too much concern is given to caliber and not nearly enuf to the probable circumstances surrounding an actual attack and in which a gun may actually be needed.

 

[pauli]

i have now repeatedly heard that it's silly (or worse) to plan on going for headshots on a bear. therefore i have to ask, where the heck are you SUPPOSED to aim?

 

[munk]

Where in the heck? We're informed all you will see is a blurred image of rushing Grizzly- aim at the center of the image, or the chest shoulder region. The bear's skull is shaped so a frontal shot on it would almost be impossible- the bullet would skirt along the hard bone and exit harmlessly out the skin on the back top.

If you were down and one was chewing on you, I'd think a shot into his throat, down his mouth, eye, or if possible, at the side of his skull near the ear might be OK.

Chances are you're going to shoot him where you can, and not have a lot of choice in the matter. A black bear could be different- as their stalking is classically much slower. They sort of march behind you.

This is just what I've read. I have no experience shooting charging Grizzlies.


munk

munk

 

[treeprof]

shoot him where you can

I've already said that I've never been charged (nor, by implication, attacked), but IMO there's no answer more sensible than that one. Try to put more than one somewhere in the vitals.

There's some good info in these TFL threads from ppl w/experience"

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1698&page=3&pp=25

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1600

Here's some of a post by Keith Rogan:

"Some of you probably know that I got pretty badly mauled about a year ago. I've thought a lot about bears and guns since then, and talked to a number of other mauling victims, guides and bear biologists here in Alaska."

"As for handguns and bears - theres 200 pound black bears, 500 pound grizzlies and 1500 pound brownies. Whats good "medicine" for one, isn't necessarily a good choice for another.

I live on Kodiak and tend to think in terms of the really big bears and... I've been toting a Marlin 45/70 all summer on my fishing trips. I don't think any handgun is a good first line of defense for the brown bears. Given a choice to ONLY carry a handgun or pepper spray and I think I'd opt for the spray.
Given a choice of longarm, and I'll stick with my 45/70, though a shotgun with slugs/buck would also be a comforting choice.

With grizzlies and black bears I think a handgun might be just the ticket. It leaves your hands free, is portable and is most likely adequate for the job. I would carry a double action revolver. In my mauling and those of several other people I've talked to, things just happened too fast and the attack was too violent to consider a thumb-cocking revolver. You might get a double action into play, a single action, highly doubtful. While down on the ground, I swung my fist at the bears nose and got the big pad of muscle below my thumb swiped off for my trouble. Picture sticking a revolver in his face and asking him to wait while you cock it. It would be found 30 yards away in the brush with your hand still attached.

These things happen so fast that the victims, who often are toting a rifle, never get a shot off. That was certainly the case with me."


More details from Keith on the 4th page of that thread.

 

[Newton]

Only link I could find:

http://glocktalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=239299&highlight=bear+magnum


Newton

 

[tex_n_cal]

I voted .480 because it's the largest caliber 6 shot, DA revo. The Casull and .500 may have more energy, but all three can shoot through big animals, with hard cast bullets.

 

[treeprof]

Newton - Yup, that's the one; thanks. I see a more accurate story from the ANC paper was posted below the opening myth. I can't believe the fairy-tale version is still floating around like that.

 

[Gary H]

I voted for and bought a .480 Ruger. Heavy/large diameter bullet, reasonable second shot. That said, you better have a fast holster rigged and fast reflexes. I just came back from a long run in the forested hills behind my house. I was listening to a radio interview of an author who wrote a book about Mountain Lyon attacks. He was describing recent mullings in Orange County and Colorado. I beat my best time up the hill by seven minutes.