best trail round for autoloader handgun

Status
Not open for further replies.
Really if Brown Bears were an issue I'd be packing a revolver, but since you said autopistol than a .50 AE Desert Eagle would be a good choice.

Really, invest in some bear spray if you don't want to carry a revolver. I don't screw with brown bruins!
 
Really if Brown Bears were an issue I'd be packing a revolver, but since you said autopistol than a .50 AE Desert Eagle would be a good choice.
Click to expand...
Before he sold the company, Arne Boberg was toying with a micro-pistol in 460 Rowland (he claims it was actually borderline controllable/comfortable in that tiny gun, but I'd still want a glove and more than a shorty barrel to toss 44mag-equivalent out of)

TCB
 
I have owned an LAR Grizz for over 20 years. The .45 Win Mag. with the 300 grs. bullet is a powerful semi auto pistol. They are a great handgun. Too bad they are no longer made. Remington has bought the Utah plant.

IMG_0284.JPG
 
Some new news has emerged since this thread started about the relatively new Buffalo Bore 9mm hard cast +P Outdoorsman round.
https://www.americanhunter.org/arti...ishermen-from-raging-grizzly-with-9mm-pistol/
Before the incident, Phil Shoemaker had tested the round using a Glock 43 mini-nine and determined that he could reach the brain of a brown bear from any angle. He has written more about this round and the incident on other forums. Before the incident, he had written that he "wound [sic] not feel the least bit inadequate in grinning down any black bear with a magazine full of those."

A Glock 19 with 15 of these rounds weighs slightly more than 2 lbs.
 
I would say the big 10mm with buffalo bore rounds. What you give up in power compared to a revolver, you would make up in capacity with a double stacked Glock or similar pistol.
 
barnbwt said:
*not a comment on your comment, necessarily* It always kills me how this logic is rarely applied to human altercations (that you'll only likely get a couple shots off, regardless the outcome)

As far as big bears, no practical handgun is really much of an option. I mean, man-eating grizzlies are like maybe half a notch lower on the totem pole than legit monsters from Africa or South America. You simply need a rifle or powerful shotgun slug to have any kind of parity with them. A less-powerful 10mm or even 9mm has a much better chance of getting through one of the unarmored spots (eyes, for instance) and killing the beast in a flurry of shots than a much slower/heavier magnum firing powerful cartridges; are the increased number of lethal strike-points the more powerful round offers really that much of a game-changer given their still relatively-small size and the fact you're certain to get far fewer controlled shots off? Either way is a poor bet, by my estimation. When poking big bears, carry a big stick (long gun) ;)

TCB
Click to expand...
With very large bears size matters.
A spray and pray approach with a bullet that has comparative limited penetration is, in my opinion, a recipe for disaster.
Bears are very fast.
They can catch a quarter horse on a good track and rundown any horse that ever lived on rough ground.
A bear isn't going to charge from 50 yards away, he will most likely make the charge from less that 15.
I've seen several such charges from the air while flying in Alaska.
The few moose involved had no chance.
A bear will cover that 15 yards in about 3 seconds or less... 15+1 is moot.
Spraying the general face area with 5 or 6 unsighted rounds would give a very low chance of a very small moving target like an eye shot.
Its hard to hit a vital spot on a bear that is mauling you... It may finally go off and bleed to death from it's 10mm wounds, but where would that leave you?
However, a single heavy 454 bullet sighted to break a shoulder (A much larger target) could be a much better chance of redirecting the charge.
A followup shot to the heart lung area or preferably behind the ear would solve the problem.

I also agree that any handgun is a poor choice for big bear.

Enjoying the conversation.

Steve
 
With very large bears size matters.
A spray and pray approach with a bullet that has comparative limited penetration is, in my opinion, a recipe for disaster.
Bears are very fast.
Click to expand...
Precisely my point. If you only get, say, two seconds, no pistol is going to be capable of sufficient response no matter what it's chambered in. Let's a take a look at it strategically;
-If a big magnum (revolver or automatic) the size of the gun and recoil recovery will severely limit your number of 'tries' in the allotted timeframe before bear digestion. Assuming you aren't dazed by the concussion of shooting without earpro. Considering that even with magnum power that can defeat Panserbjorne (armored bears), the instant-stop vital shots needed to avoid mauling are still pretty small until the thing's on top of you.
-If a typical autoloader, the number of 'tries' that may be attempted will likely be higher (at least double over a 44mag, for instance), but the reduced power means that the usable target areas that would result in a stop are also greatly diminished. But still, in three seconds six aimed shots are easily doable for most folks (perhaps not calmly in the face of a bear charge) but even Miculek has to be focused to get six 44mag off in one second at a close target (and I don't think most folks are only half as slow as he is);

Linked only because this is the best 44mag rapid fire performance I've seen, and it's ice-age slow compared the man running 357 or weaker. Almost sounds deliberate. It also sounds like he's using 180gr ammo, which is extremely light/low recoiling for this cartridge. Also didn't look like it'd be much fun with my hands (which unlike Jerry's cannot palm a watermelon) or without ear protection. Would be cool to arrest a bear in mid-leap and force it backward with a wall of lead, though.

My point isn't that one is better than the other (obviously usable targets dwindle faster than the number of shots you could deliver in two seconds), but that these competing design constraints fundamentally make handguns a poor choice against such creatures. Deep wound/shallow wound, you're still talking a 1/2" or so wide path through the animal at each attempt to hit the vital spots; hitting the target itself is a tall order whether or not it reaches deep enough in any case. Like I said, big bears are a mere notch or two below large horned ungulates or big cats on the 'monster scale,' and no one in their right mind would think of tangling with a lion or wildebeest with only a revolver. It's kind of accepted that such a situation warrants a cry of "Rifle, Matumbo!" Because long guns can manage an order of magnitude more power while giving the shooter far greater control of the weapon for followup shots. Happy coincidence is that a decent pump shotgun is cheaper than any of these handgun solutions (and probably not that much heavier compared to the mondo-magnums)

For anything up to a grizzly/moose/buffalo in size (which would be black bears, cougars, and boar on this continent) the need for such tremendous power to punch through thick boney plate and tough tissue is moderated enough that slightly-more-powerful-than-service-round cartridges like 10mm (and 45WM; good taste, there, if a bit obscure) or 460 Rowland are fully up to the task. Heck, even 9mm would be for practically all needs (that said, there is a stupid Youtube video of some Bubba emptying a G17 into a charging hog with little effect until round seven or so, but aim likely had more to do with that than ballistics)

TCB
 
Well, I tend towards revolvers in 44 mag or 45 Colt, but,...someone living in AK mentioned that the current information indicates that handguns are slightly more effective at getting bears to leave you alone (call that whatever you wish) than rifles. The situation seems to be that bears simply don't like being shot, and often enough, shooting them with about anything, tends to make them go away. The dedicated, do or die level charges aren't always the case, despite what many would have us believe, nor are all bears 1000 lbs, and some also would have us believe.

Bears somehow tend to bring out incredible amounts of opinion about them, and whats required to survive being within a 1/4 mile of them, or survive the 1000 lb brutes impossible to stop charges. So, take the advice of people on the net with a ton of salt, and consider most probably don't live in grizzly country, havent lived or worked around them, and don't know anyone that's been charged or attacked, or killed them. Bear threads seem almost like gun forum crack. Its best to just say no.

One person I talked to shot a sow that had mugged him, he hit her twice with a 41 mag with factory 210 gr jhp loads. Complete pass throughs and bear DRT. I believe it was a 200-something lb sow with cubs.
 
Last edited:
In an autoloader you want to balance reliability, wieldability, and power. You can find a lot of guns that fit 2 of the 3 but few that truly meet the criteria of all 3. My personal choice would absolutely be 10mm auto. It's plenty powerful if your loading hot or buying from known hot companies like buffalo bore. Sure you can get more powerful rounds but to do so you quickly start jumping up in weight and you trade weight and weildability for power. You can go down in power too but your gaining very little while sacrificing power. What platform you choose to launch projectiles from is personal preference...but as a trail gun you want dead reliable, durable, and something you don't care if it gets a scratch or a scuff. That to me says Glock...even though I hate the things when you start considering weight vs round count, reliability, etc the full sized 10mm seems king of the hill....but I despise them enough to push me towards a EAA witness.
 
It's more about the bullet than the caliber, IMO.

For instance, an Underwood 200 grain hardcast .40SW would be far preferable to a 180 grain JHP 10mm.

I live in AZ, not AK. I have an old beater Glock 22 I keep loaded up with those Underwoods I mentioned above, and that's what I carry... above even my Super Blackhawk, Glock 41, and 1911s.

If I were going to buy a dedicated trail auto, it would be a 10mm Glock, loaded with heavy hardcast.
 
I didn't read the whole thread. But shooting Underwood ammo 45 super 255gr hardcast is a good option. I've put about 150 rds thru a FNX 45. Works great.
 
barnbwt said:
Precisely my point. If you only get, say, two seconds, no pistol is going to be capable of sufficient response no matter what it's chambered in. Let's a take a look at it strategically;
-If a big magnum (revolver or automatic) the size of the gun and recoil recovery will severely limit your number of 'tries' in the allotted timeframe before bear digestion. Assuming you aren't dazed by the concussion of shooting without earpro. Considering that even with magnum power that can defeat Panserbjorne (armored bears), the instant-stop vital shots needed to avoid mauling are still pretty small until the thing's on top of you.
-If a typical autoloader, the number of 'tries' that may be attempted will likely be higher (at least double over a 44mag, for instance), but the reduced power means that the usable target areas that would result in a stop are also greatly diminished. But still, in three seconds six aimed shots are easily doable for most folks (perhaps not calmly in the face of a bear charge) but even Miculek has to be focused to get six 44mag off in one second at a close target (and I don't think most folks are only half as slow as he is);
<<< SNIP>>>
Heck, even 9mm would be for practically all needs (that said, there is a stupid Youtube video of some Bubba emptying a G17 into a charging hog with little effect until round seven or so, but aim likely had more to do with that than ballistics)

TCB
Click to expand...
The only "Armored" bear I've ever seen was a character in The Golden Compass movie.
Big bears are just very big and very heavy muscled carnivores.

I feel that you still are missing my point.
Long gun bear defense is usually one "aimed" shot at a location that will stop or redirect a charge with enough power to be effective.
The same is true of a heavy magnum handgun... You get one "aimed" shot.
The IPSC spray and pray with a much lower power cartridge has, in my opinion, a much lower chance of success.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this.

Enjoying the exchange of ideas.

Steve
 
If I'm in an area with bears (the black kind) I carry my Glock 21 (45 ACP). Otherwise my beat up Glock 23 (40 S&W) because the worst thing I MAY see is a hog. Either of these pistols give me 13 chances to get it right. Bear hunting guides I hunted with last year in Maine all carried 45 pistols except 1 who carried a 9mm (and put down a wounded bear with it- and he's a former game warden) and another carried a 12 gauge riot gun of some kind with slugs cause he admitted to not being worth a flip with a handgun.
 
45 Super would be my first choice. HK-45 is a reliable pistol designed for the cartridge. I think Springfield has one also. 1100 fps and a 230 grain bullet....... that has to get a bears attention.
 
I feel that you still are missing my point.
Long gun bear defense is usually one "aimed" shot at a location that will stop or redirect a charge with enough power to be effective.
The same is true of a heavy magnum handgun... You get one "aimed" shot.
The IPSC spray and pray with a much lower power cartridge has, in my opinion, a much lower chance of success.
Click to expand...
No, I understand you loud & clear; I just disagree on the proposition that one must put *all* one's eggs in one basket, which is fundamentally what the Big Bear Magnum concept is fixated around. Not to mention how much more likely a given shooter with such a gun is to develop a terrible flinch during practice, or pull the gun off-target from a heavy DA revolver trigger. Certainly not insurmountable obstacles, but obstacles nonetheless.

You've also brought up 'spray and pray' for at least the second time, despite the fact that lighter-recoiling chamberings are far easier to shoot quickly as *aimed* fire. Not to mention the training/flinch aspects I already brought up. Lastly, if you only have a fraction of a second to line up a shot (which is the timeframe I assume we have to work with if there is truly only an opportunity for one discharge) a heavy steel N-frame S&W revolver is about the last weapon I'd want to have to rip up out of a holster in front of me & quickly align the sights --again, a lighter/handier weapon is faster in every way, therefore its effectiveness is positively augmented even if less powerful (whether that's ultimately enough to matter is another issue that needs a lot more real data on both sides of the argument to convince me either way).

So, to circle back around to the 'core' of my Devil's Advocacy, the notion that a shooter would be limited to the same "one shot" mentality offered by a big magnum revolver when considering hypotheticals, simply does not make sense. Which is why I submitted that there are very real advantages to having more 'chances' (follow up shots) even with a less powerful bullet, but that far more important are the unavoidable disadvantages of speed & power for either type, that fundamentally make all handguns ill-suited to this type of task. Just use something with a stock, that's more powerful than a big magnum, as fast as an autoloader for followups, and easier to aim than either (as well as use for a club if need be) :)

TCB
 
barnbwt said:
No, I understand you loud & clear; I just disagree on the proposition that one must put *all* one's eggs in one basket, which is fundamentally what the Big Bear Magnum concept is fixated around. Not to mention how much more likely a given shooter with such a gun is to develop a terrible flinch during practice, or pull the gun off-target from a heavy DA revolver trigger. Certainly not insurmountable obstacles, but obstacles nonetheless.

You've also brought up 'spray and pray' for at least the second time, despite the fact that lighter-recoiling chamberings are far easier to shoot quickly as *aimed* fire. Not to mention the training/flinch aspects I already brought up. Lastly, if you only have a fraction of a second to line up a shot (which is the timeframe I assume we have to work with if there is truly only an opportunity for one discharge) a heavy steel N-frame S&W revolver is about the last weapon I'd want to have to rip up out of a holster in front of me & quickly align the sights --again, a lighter/handier weapon is faster in every way, therefore its effectiveness is positively augmented even if less powerful (whether that's ultimately enough to matter is another issue that needs a lot more real data on both sides of the argument to convince me either way).

So, to circle back around to the 'core' of my Devil's Advocacy, the notion that a shooter would be limited to the same "one shot" mentality offered by a big magnum revolver when considering hypotheticals, simply does not make sense. Which is why I submitted that there are very real advantages to having more 'chances' (follow up shots) even with a less powerful bullet, but that far more important are the unavoidable disadvantages of speed & power for either type, that fundamentally make all handguns ill-suited to this type of task. Just use something with a stock, that's more powerful than a big magnum, as fast as an autoloader for followups, and easier to aim than either (as well as use for a club if need be) :)

TCB
Click to expand...
I doubt that you would be ambushed by a Grizzly requiring a panic draw.
A Grizzly will sander up toward you usually working his way down wind to get your scent.
You will have gun in hand when he comes for you.
In Alaska, until he actually charges, you don't have the right to shoot him.
Backing away, may only encourage him, so holding your ground makes you less of an easy target.
If he does charge, he will be on you in two or three bounds moving faster than you believe he can.
I saw a sow Grizzly take down a moose so fast that the moose hardly began to startle before the bear swiped its legs out form under it and broke its neck with one blow.
The moose was almost twice the body size of the bear.
It was over in very few seconds... Was impressive to watch.
One of the surveyors on board the helicopter got some great photographs.
I asked for a set of copies, but he didn't return the next season.

Hope neither one of us meets a Grizzly.... Again.

EagleStrip-BearinCamp001.jpg


In case I didn't mention it, I think a 10MM with the right bullets would be fine for anything smaller than a really big bear.

Steve
 
Last edited:
My woods gun used to be a Glock 20SF 3rd Gen 10mm loaded with 220 gr. Buffalo Bore or DoubleTap 200 gr. Hard cast. While we do have bears here in Texas it's rare to bump into one. When in the woods and camping or hiking with the family I'm more worried about hogs, feral dogs and meth heads than I am bears.

Even when I lived some place else where there were more bears and we spent a lot of time outdoors while they were on my radar as a threat they weren't the only thing on there. I dunno, some of the posts sound like their entire defense preparation revolves completely around Bruins. I should probably point out that an attack by almost anything else is more likely, so ignoring those threats completely in favor of a bear specific defense (large caliber 5 or 6 shot .44 Mag or .454 revolver) doesn't make much sense. Except for the guy who's carries the Glock 19 in his back pocket in addition to a large S&W or Ruger .44 mag the rest of the Big Ass Revolver guys would have a tough time responding if they stumbled across armed tweakers with a mobile meth-lab or pot growers who had a major problem with their presence.

I chose the Glock 10mm because it's 15 rds of a pretty hard hitting caliber and reloads are quick. For me it was more of a general purpose pistol and a hog hunting pistol rather than being a defense gun specifically for bears. I've always been more worried about that special breed of criminal who likes to operate in rural areas far from the urban areas where the response times are greater than I am wildlife out for blood. While it is performance on bears is greater than a 9mil or .40 it doesn't sacrifice its capacity or ability to be reloaded quickly for caliber.

Ended up trading the G20SF in for a G21 4th Gen .45 ACP which is supposed to be delivered to my FFL Monday and then I got one .40 barrel for it and I'll be buying a 10mm barrel for it. For me having the main pistol be in .45 makes more sense (I have 3,500 rds of .45 ACP vs 200 rds of 10mm and 800 rds of .40). Even if it wasn't capable of being converted to 10mm there are some hard hitting .45 loads capable of woods work.
 
Last edited:
A Coonan clasic.If you don’t want to carry a large for revolver as a safety measure then 357 mag in a flat sided 1911 is the best of both.You can load 180’s/158/125/110’s Out to 100yds your good.
 
I live in grizzly country and end up carrying a 10mm most of the time. 44 Mags are cute, but they way too damn much.
 
Just for kicks.....
Why not a short barreled, sig braced, reflex sighted, AR hanging from a single point sling (technically a pistol) in say 7.62x39fmj or .300blk fmj? Or .458socom?

I know it's not the classic "bear gun"...but I think if I were knee deep in Alaskan bear country ....I would feel fairly confident
. 14837996659751736258048.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
autoloaders vs black bears
Replies
23
Views
3K
roscoe
R
B
  • Locked
Autoloader choices for bear "deterrence"?
2 3
Replies
72
Views
6K
mgregg85
M
B
  • Locked
10mm autoloader with a red dot
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
GatorHunter
GatorHunter
T
  • Locked
Best penetrating round in .40sw
Replies
24
Views
4K
481
481
mljdeckard
  • Locked
10mm wildcat?
Replies
11
Views
1K
glocktoys
G
Back
Top