David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
I presume you hike barefoot, then?
My point is, some things shouldn't be compromised. Life-saving gear, to me, is one of those things.
Hiking and Backpacking Guns
- Thread starter Mainsail
- Start date
- Status
I presume you hike barefoot, then?
My point is, some things shouldn't be compromised. Life-saving gear, to me, is one of those things.
OP
OP
Mainsail
Member
I think the point he’s making is that there is a finite limit on how much weight you can carry for a distance. The heavier you go, the less distance you can travel. That is itself somewhat simplistic because it doesn’t account for elevation gain or loss. The weight of your 46 rounds, the need of which is statistically zero, will affect how far you can travel, how high you can climb, and what other gear you have to displace. Now, if your definition of hiking is to drive your truck into the woods, set up camp, and wander around a bit, then weight becomes less significant. Also, if you live in one of the flatter states, you will probably not have an appreciation of how even little weight increases can bog you down in really steep terrain.
For example, to reach Lake 3995 in the Wonder Mountain Wilderness you have to plan your gear choices very carefully. The hike in takes about nine hours, there are no trails to follow, and you have to climb up a very steep ridge (all day) and find a small saddle; then through the saddle and down the other side of the ridge to the lake. You have to carry everything you need (food, water, map & compass, water filter, shelter, etc) plus whatever you want (fishing gear, GPS, camera, ham radio, etc.). Your pack only has a certain volume, and your muscles can only carry a certain weight- those are fixed. So when you’re deciding what to bring, you operate on the bean-count principle; for *this* to go, *that* has to stay. Yes, I could carry a combat load-out of ammunition, but then something (probably from the WANT category) is going to have to stay home. Now, looking at it objectively, I note that emergencies that would require any ammunition are so rare as to be statistically zero. The trip to Lake 3995 where I took these pictures I went solo and stayed three days, so gear choices become even more critical; you are all you have. Nobody is going to come get you (until you’re well past your planned return time) and it’s not just a quick run back to the truck- it’s a whole day of travel under a heavy pack. So I make the most logical choice which is to forego the combat gear and bring my camera instead.
For example, to reach Lake 3995 in the Wonder Mountain Wilderness you have to plan your gear choices very carefully. The hike in takes about nine hours, there are no trails to follow, and you have to climb up a very steep ridge (all day) and find a small saddle; then through the saddle and down the other side of the ridge to the lake. You have to carry everything you need (food, water, map & compass, water filter, shelter, etc) plus whatever you want (fishing gear, GPS, camera, ham radio, etc.). Your pack only has a certain volume, and your muscles can only carry a certain weight- those are fixed. So when you’re deciding what to bring, you operate on the bean-count principle; for *this* to go, *that* has to stay. Yes, I could carry a combat load-out of ammunition, but then something (probably from the WANT category) is going to have to stay home. Now, looking at it objectively, I note that emergencies that would require any ammunition are so rare as to be statistically zero. The trip to Lake 3995 where I took these pictures I went solo and stayed three days, so gear choices become even more critical; you are all you have. Nobody is going to come get you (until you’re well past your planned return time) and it’s not just a quick run back to the truck- it’s a whole day of travel under a heavy pack. So I make the most logical choice which is to forego the combat gear and bring my camera instead.
Last edited:
RatherNotSay
Member
I don't get how your sarcastic and ignorant comment is relevant to the conversation. My point is until YOU get out and ACTUALLY do these things you won't understand. If you RELY on a weapon out there...then (A.) you're missing the point and (B.) your putting yourself at risk.
RatherNotSay
Member
Your "point" holds no water in these situations. There isn't a mob hiding in the woods somewhere that your going to need a full hi cap magazine. Just what thoughts do you have in this situation where you NEED hi cap rounds in the wilderness? Are there a gang of robbers in the forest where you live?
As far as footwear I've been in some wet forest where we had to switch to some tough expensive hiking sandals. YES SANDALS because wearing wet shoes and socks for 3 wet days is going to put a pain on you.
Again get out and try it.
Cosmoline
Member
It's a little too light for a .44 Mag for me. But certainly there are plenty of light weight handguns that aren't a problem to tote. My point was simply a long gun is not impossible, and doesn't weigh you down too much if it's rigged properly. Whether or not you want or need to take it is another matter.
kimbershot
Member
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2008
- Messages
- 340
i was
gonna go hiking but i stayed in a holiday inn express instead.
gonna go hiking but i stayed in a holiday inn express instead.
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Then you don't understand my point. I could rephrase it, but I don't think it'll matter.
Carry a single round in a stripped barrel, using a scrounged rock to fire it to save even more weight for all I care. It's your choice.
OP
OP
Mainsail
Member
I think what you are failing to understand is that 46 rounds in three magazines are not life saving gear, it’s dead-weight. Dead-weight displaces other potentially life saving gear. In other words, to carry the extra weight/volume of your combat load-out, you will have to forego some other pieces of equipment; think zero-sum game.
As I have said a couple of times in this thread and other similar threads already, problems that could be solved with a firearm are extremely rare. You’re so focused on perceiving the forest as a combat zone that it’s preventing you from seeing that. The forest is moderately dangerous, but that has nothing to do with getting attacked or eaten by animals. When I’m nine hours deep into the forest, alone, it’s comforting to have it along, but I’m rational enough to know it will probably never get used. In fact, if I came upon a bear on the trail I would be grabbing for my camera, not my gun. As mentioned, if you’re able-bodied, go out and do some real hiking. It may change your misperception of what it’s like out there.
DC Plumber
Member
Mainsail,
I just gotta say, you are one lucky guy to be able to actaully go do the things that most of us only dream about. Beautiful scenery. Three days camping on a lake like that? Awesome.
Thanks for sharing some real life experience about what works and doesn't work. I have hiked for short distances with my 4" 586 in a hip holster, just about pulled my pants down, same with my Kimber 45auto. When I hike in the local state park with the kids, I hide my LCP in a pocket. Better than nothing. I think a good holster is more than half the battle.
Also, thanks for the cool pictures.
I just gotta say, you are one lucky guy to be able to actaully go do the things that most of us only dream about. Beautiful scenery. Three days camping on a lake like that? Awesome.
Thanks for sharing some real life experience about what works and doesn't work. I have hiked for short distances with my 4" 586 in a hip holster, just about pulled my pants down, same with my Kimber 45auto. When I hike in the local state park with the kids, I hide my LCP in a pocket. Better than nothing. I think a good holster is more than half the battle.
Also, thanks for the cool pictures.
JustinJ
Member
I don't understand your point either. What situation do you think one would realistically encounter while hiking in which 10 rounds will not be sufficient?
RatherNotSay
Member
I'm actually interested to hear this. Please explain how you preparing for urban combat carrying so much ammunition will help you when there are VERY LIMITED threats in these situations that actually require them. In fact in the case of preservation I would rather reach for my bear pepper spray than kill the animal. That firearm is going to be a last resort.
If you can't/won't "rephrase" your thoughts than at least be man enough to admit you were wrong so we can move on with this conversation instead of wasting it on someone who doesn't get off the couch and computer criticizing those of us who have experience in the matter.
OP, What kind of knife do you carry with you on your strap
If you can't/won't "rephrase" your thoughts than at least be man enough to admit you were wrong so we can move on with this conversation instead of wasting it on someone who doesn't get off the couch and computer criticizing those of us who have experience in the matter.
OP, What kind of knife do you carry with you on your strap
Last edited:
OP
OP
Mainsail
Member
The knife in that picture is a SOG Tsunami, which I carried since it was free (AF issue). I now carry an ESEE 3MIL, a 4, or a 6. Sometimes I carry just the Leatherman Skeletool if I need to go light.
OP
OP
Mainsail
Member
DC, my odometer just rolled past 48, so it's a struggle at times.
EVIL
Member
Main Sail - Excellent pics, and good trail advice. I would love to go on a hike like that; I am in good shape but don't have much experience at altitude so I'm sure your are not kidding about every once of gear counting on a summit like that.
To me on the list of critical back country gear - i.e. the "10 scout essentials" a firearm is way down the list. Anecdotally, A good sleeping bag has probably saved more lives from cold exposure than a handgun has in the back country.
I would probably go lightest duty possible - my GLOCK 27 (9rds .40 S&W) or Ruger SR9c (10rds) for any area in lower 48 CONUS. Just a small insurance policy against an unpleasant back country encounter. I value the packed weight and I am not even hiking at elevation.
I think some folks get to the point that they fret over the gun gear more than actually enjoying the beauty of the outdoors.
Thanks for the great photos.
To me on the list of critical back country gear - i.e. the "10 scout essentials" a firearm is way down the list. Anecdotally, A good sleeping bag has probably saved more lives from cold exposure than a handgun has in the back country.
I would probably go lightest duty possible - my GLOCK 27 (9rds .40 S&W) or Ruger SR9c (10rds) for any area in lower 48 CONUS. Just a small insurance policy against an unpleasant back country encounter. I value the packed weight and I am not even hiking at elevation.
I think some folks get to the point that they fret over the gun gear more than actually enjoying the beauty of the outdoors.
Thanks for the great photos.
OP
OP
Mainsail
Member
This is my hiking page. I started it two years ago and I haven't gotten around to writing up the hikes before that. There are pictures in the TRs which are clickable.
Maybe the 'problem' is that firearms is only one of my hobbies, along with hiking, geocaching, photography, ham radio, etc etc...
Maybe the 'problem' is that firearms is only one of my hobbies, along with hiking, geocaching, photography, ham radio, etc etc...
I think folks are forgetting the variety of what gets called 'hiking'.
The more you carry the slower you move.
At one extreme, I've done climbs where you pray like heck that a storm doesn't hit because you're not carrying enough clothes to survive a storm, and I've shivered through the night on ledges with only a polypro shirt and rain jacket because that's all we could carry and we didn't finish the climb before running out of daylight. A couple of years ago we ran into a PCT thru hiker who had averaged 37 miles per day from the Mexican to Canadian border. His pack, excluding food, weighed 18 lbs or something like that. A 7 pound rifle wouldn't be light by his standards. In fact, a 10 oz J frame wouldn't be either.
Even in more normal backpacking, the only things I carry that aren't potentially life critical are a digital camera (4 oz?), sometimes a paper back (2 oz?), a water purifier (8 oz? - not immediately life critical, but can save some nasty trots), and perhaps the stove (although it's sure been welcome a time or two). I really sweat whether to take 6 ounces of mittens or an 8 oz extra pile jacket - and if you're in the Wind Rivers and a late Aug storm dumps two feet of snow and drops the temps to 10 degrees, those can be pretty important. I have come close to dying twice in the wilderness, and both times it was from hypothermia.
I'm going light because I like to be traveling up and down off trail at 10 to 12 thousand feet, and cover a lot of ground - every doggone ounce matters.
At the other end of the spectrum, if you're hiking in 5 miles on a flat trail to spend the weekend at a lake, there is a different set of tradeoffs. By all means, take the air mattress, Super Redhawk, and a bottle of wine.
Lastly, I carry only the six rounds - I'm expecting at most one bear attack, and no one is growing dope above treeline. But if you did run into a grow op somewhere and the people there didn't want you to make it back to the trailhead, it might be nice to have rather more than six rounds.
Horses for courses and all that. Some people saw their toothbrush in half but still carry the espresso maker. Some people figure 'why carry toilet paper when leaves are available'. There aren't any right answers; only right answers for you.
The more you carry the slower you move.
At one extreme, I've done climbs where you pray like heck that a storm doesn't hit because you're not carrying enough clothes to survive a storm, and I've shivered through the night on ledges with only a polypro shirt and rain jacket because that's all we could carry and we didn't finish the climb before running out of daylight. A couple of years ago we ran into a PCT thru hiker who had averaged 37 miles per day from the Mexican to Canadian border. His pack, excluding food, weighed 18 lbs or something like that. A 7 pound rifle wouldn't be light by his standards. In fact, a 10 oz J frame wouldn't be either.
Even in more normal backpacking, the only things I carry that aren't potentially life critical are a digital camera (4 oz?), sometimes a paper back (2 oz?), a water purifier (8 oz? - not immediately life critical, but can save some nasty trots), and perhaps the stove (although it's sure been welcome a time or two). I really sweat whether to take 6 ounces of mittens or an 8 oz extra pile jacket - and if you're in the Wind Rivers and a late Aug storm dumps two feet of snow and drops the temps to 10 degrees, those can be pretty important. I have come close to dying twice in the wilderness, and both times it was from hypothermia.
I'm going light because I like to be traveling up and down off trail at 10 to 12 thousand feet, and cover a lot of ground - every doggone ounce matters.
At the other end of the spectrum, if you're hiking in 5 miles on a flat trail to spend the weekend at a lake, there is a different set of tradeoffs. By all means, take the air mattress, Super Redhawk, and a bottle of wine
.Lastly, I carry only the six rounds - I'm expecting at most one bear attack, and no one is growing dope above treeline. But if you did run into a grow op somewhere and the people there didn't want you to make it back to the trailhead, it might be nice to have rather more than six rounds.
Horses for courses and all that. Some people saw their toothbrush in half but still carry the espresso maker. Some people figure 'why carry toilet paper when leaves are available'. There aren't any right answers; only right answers for you.
PedalBiker
Member
When I'm going light more often than not the gun stays home. If it's a day trip over 12,000 feet I go very light.
My lightweight carry gun is a Smith Airweight 38 with 135g Gold Dots. I carry one speed strip, for a total of 10 rounds. Otherwise it's either a Ruger P345 or an SR9c. I often skip the extra magazine and I'll use 185's in the P345 to save weight. For extra penetration I'll go with truncated cone solids instead of HP.
Above 12,000' everything gets heavier.
I'd keep a flashlight and small knife over a gun. And a flint and steel plus lighter never stays home, same with a compass.
We lose a lot of hikers in Colorado every year, exposure and falls claim most of them. On my list of life saving gear a firearm is not in the top 5. Pound for pound I tend to opt for water over anything else. Many places I frequent don't even have enough water to filter.
My lightweight carry gun is a Smith Airweight 38 with 135g Gold Dots. I carry one speed strip, for a total of 10 rounds. Otherwise it's either a Ruger P345 or an SR9c. I often skip the extra magazine and I'll use 185's in the P345 to save weight. For extra penetration I'll go with truncated cone solids instead of HP.
Above 12,000' everything gets heavier.
I'd keep a flashlight and small knife over a gun. And a flint and steel plus lighter never stays home, same with a compass.
We lose a lot of hikers in Colorado every year, exposure and falls claim most of them. On my list of life saving gear a firearm is not in the top 5. Pound for pound I tend to opt for water over anything else. Many places I frequent don't even have enough water to filter.
JustinJ
Member
I agree. And the fact that many refuse to accept is that bear spray has been shown to much more effective than firearms in protecting the user from injury/death.
I've been unable to find a single incident of this. Cops warn about this but honesty in the war on drugs isn't exactly the norm.
OP
OP
Mainsail
Member
While I've always liked the idea of pepper spray for bears, I don't currently own any for several reasons. First, the bear doesn't care which way the wind is blowing, but you'll need to. In fact, on my last hike the wind was blowing too hard to successfully deploy pepper spray. Second, while it has a high success rate, the canister can only be fired once, after which the pepper smell becomes an attractant. This means the hike is over, as I would want to pack it out and not hurl it into the woods. Third, because of the first two reasons, it's likely I'll be carrying the gun anyway, so why bother. As an aside, we have very few bear incidents around here anyway (the last bear attack was in a suburban neighborhood, not in the forests), and the bears we do have aren't aggressive as a rule, so if one is attacking hikers, it's either been urbanized to expect a food handout, or it's plum loco. In either case, it might be best to put it down, vs spraying it, before it encounters a child or unarmed hiker.
The most recent wildlife death that I can recall was due to an aggressive mountain goat. The goats crave salt, and hikers on popular trails have conditioned the goats to expect salt by urinating along those trails. What happened was a small group was lunching on a ridge while some goats stood by watching. When they got up to leave, a goat that had been previously reported to the NPS as aggressive, charged and head-butted one of the hikers. I believe one of the horns severed his femoral artery. His companions tried to help him, but the goat stood by, almost guarding the injured man, and he bled out. Had any of the group had so much as a .38 they could have dispatched the goat and attended to his injuries. I don’t know how effective pepper would have been on a goat, especially since it would perceive your advance towards him (to get close enough) as a sign of aggression. You would also be spraying your injured companion as well, so there’s that to consider. Optimally, a sidearm and a portable ham radio would be a lifesaving combination (much more so than just the sidearm and four-dozen rounds of ammunition).
The only worry I have, and had even more when I was toting the .44 magnum, is the hearing damage and ear pain I might experience. So as the bear is charging me, I have to decide to either shoot and have a headache, or just take my mauling like a man.
The most recent wildlife death that I can recall was due to an aggressive mountain goat. The goats crave salt, and hikers on popular trails have conditioned the goats to expect salt by urinating along those trails. What happened was a small group was lunching on a ridge while some goats stood by watching. When they got up to leave, a goat that had been previously reported to the NPS as aggressive, charged and head-butted one of the hikers. I believe one of the horns severed his femoral artery. His companions tried to help him, but the goat stood by, almost guarding the injured man, and he bled out. Had any of the group had so much as a .38 they could have dispatched the goat and attended to his injuries. I don’t know how effective pepper would have been on a goat, especially since it would perceive your advance towards him (to get close enough) as a sign of aggression. You would also be spraying your injured companion as well, so there’s that to consider. Optimally, a sidearm and a portable ham radio would be a lifesaving combination (much more so than just the sidearm and four-dozen rounds of ammunition).
The only worry I have, and had even more when I was toting the .44 magnum, is the hearing damage and ear pain I might experience. So as the bear is charging me, I have to decide to either shoot and have a headache, or just take my mauling like a man.
That mountain goat attack happened in Olympic National Park in WA.
This has been a very informative thread. Thanks for the pictures and the words of wisdom. Usually these threads turn into a my gun is better than your gun....no, a shotgun is better...no, you need a rifle...endless discussion.
This has been a very informative thread. Thanks for the pictures and the words of wisdom. Usually these threads turn into a my gun is better than your gun....no, a shotgun is better...no, you need a rifle...endless discussion.
RatherNotSay
Member
A lot of people don't expect it but DEER can kick some ass. They can mess you up almost as bad as a curious bear.
mjackson
Member
Thanks for the post, backed up with real experience. You gave me some better ideas for holster rigs. Keep it up and let everyone else think that 48 is one foot in the grave!
- Status
