Ideal backpacking revolver?

[gjm551]

Hello all, I am looking to buy a gun (pistol/or revolver) that can take a beating in harsh climates. I am a hiker and would like to have a weapon that would be able to stand up against the elements (with proper care of course) and be able to protect me from lions, tigers and bears (oh my). What caliber, finish, and specific gun would you recommend?

I am leaning toward the Taurus 444 titanium stainless steel but am open to other choices.

Side note: I don't care if it's "pretty" or not, I would like it to be lightweight (relatively), and reliable.

Thanks in advance.

 

[kanook]

Welcome to THR

I carry a stainless steel 357mag revolver with a 2 3/4 barrel and 180grain ammo.

I'm very confident with my choice. The lighter the firearm the more felt recoil and may be harder for a follow up shot.

The 44 is a great choice as you can use specials in it as well.

I believe that the ammo should be hardcast as well. The reason is you want to make holes. Sometimes HPs get klogged and fail. So why not start out with a flatpoint to begin with.

You didn't mention on wether yo will be open or concealed carry. That can make a big diff. also

 

[NMGonzo]

.44 magnum

6 in the chamber and 20 in a pouch.

Never wish for something bigger.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Before picking a revolver, decide on what you want to use it for.

Here in Arkansas, hunting is legal along the Buffalo National River trails, so a .22 pistol is a natural -- you can always collect a squirrel or two (and squirrel season in Arkansas runs from early September to the end of February, with spring squirrel season from mid-May to mid-June.)

If you envision a defensive situation, a light .38 Special is ideal -- no one needs to tell an experienced backpacker that every ounce counts.

If you're just wandering through the woods and don't care how much mileage you rack up (or how little) then something a bit heavier might be tolerable.

 

[belus]

Black bears or grizzlies?

I've heard that in black bear or mountain lion/cougar country a .357mag is the general minimum. 10mm in an auto would be fairly equivalent.

If you're worried about encountering something larger (moose, grizzly) a 44mag or hot 45LC are frequently recommended.

I think you want to look for at least 180grs moving at 1200fps+.

 

[Bula]

Smith 329pd, lightweight, versatile, can be loaded from mild .44 special to heavy magnum loads (although painfully so). Can be used for small game to deer sized game. 200gr's to 700 fps to 255gr's to 1000 fps ( and above if needed)

 

[rcmodel]

lions, tigers and bears

Lets be realistic and find out what the real dangers are where you live & hike.

If it's the swamps of the gulf coast, or the desert southwest, a light .38 Spc loaded with snake-shot for poisonous snakes would perfectly fit your needs.

Mountainous regions of the eastern U.S. might have coyotes and small black bears.
In that case, a .357 Mag would be a better choice.

Moving on to Alaska, with brown bears, moose, and elk, a .44 Mag would be a better choice.

If you really have to worry about lions & tigers, either the circus is in town, or you hike in Africa & India a lot.

In either case, a 12 ga shotgun loaded with Brenneke slugs would be your best choice.

rc

 

[Brian Williams]

In Pennsylvania this is what I would carry in the woods.

The Stainless steel S&W 65 has a pencil barrel from a S&W 64 installed and the S&W 13 is stock.

 

[22-rimfire]

For me, I would choose one of three guns depending on where I was going that day: 3" Ruger GP100 357 mag, S&W Model 57 Mountain Gun (4") in 41 mag, or a S&W Model 18 (4") 22LR. Stainless gives the gun a bit more protection from rain, but I prefer blued finish and I'd take a oily rag and RemOil in a baggie with me. I used to carry a 4" Colt Diamonback as my 22, but I keep them protected now.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I've heard that in black bear or mountain lion/cougar country a .357mag is the general minimum.

There are black bears and cougars in Arkansas -- in fact, I've seen both on my property. And I usually carry a Colt Woodsman in the woods.

 

[RidgwayCO]

This is what I carry for bumming around the woods, a S&W Model 396 Mountain Lite in .44 Special. It weighs 18 oz empty, has a 3-3/8" barrel, and can shoot lead bullets, jacketed hollow points, or home-made shot shells. It's been discontinued by S&W, but is usually available on either Gunsamerica or Gunbroker. When carrying this thing, I usually forget it's there on my hip. Loaded with five rounds, plus another five in a speedloader in my pocket, and I'm reasonably prepared for just about anything.

 

[gjm551]

Thank you for all the replies.

I should have been more specific in my post, I plan to be hiking in the mountains where grizzlies might be found. I'm not looking to go on the offensive, but a last ditch save my butt gun. I would like to keep the gun under wraps when on the trial or in a pouch.

Thanks all

 

[22-rimfire]

If buying a gun special, look at the air weight 44 mags (or 41 mag) made by Smith. (Always carried and little shot.) Otherwise, the Ruger Alaskan would work. It is probably about the same weight as the centerfires I mentioned.

 

[BCRider]

If a big animal comes at you on the attack things are going to happen quick. Whatever method you choose you need to be able to access it without having to dig through a pack. Remember that if you need it then the adrenaline will already be flowing HARD and make finer motor skills, like finding a zip dangle and opening it, really hard. Far better you have a proper snap down flap gun holster that you just need to wedge your hand under the flap to snap open. From there you could choose a side or shoulder holster. The shoulder holster would look a trifle less obvioius than one on your hip.

And if grizzlies are a potential risk out your way I think you're going to find that most of the replies will now suggest that .44 Mag is the way to go. Although there may be a few that still suggest .357Mag.

 

[gjm551]

Thank you all for the great advice.

 

[22-rimfire]

After you make your decision, you can play around with holster choices. Easiest approach is to attach to your pack and then slip it off out of sight when you are in populated areas.

If they were available, I really like the Ruger Alaskan in 480 Ruger. Big Punch!! Not as fast as the 454 or quite the recoil either. But it is quite stout to shoot even in a large revolver. I doubt you would enjoy shooting it much, but it would be about business and some familiarity is important. The recoil on the airweights is also quite stout. Few enjoy shooting them. The 44 Mag Alaskan would be more versatile overall; just heavier.

 

[Balrog]

Are you day hiking or doing a multi day trip?

Lots of people here are giving advice without thinking about how much gear you are carrying. How much does your pack weigh?

 

[roaddog28]

I would say look for a Ruger New model blackhawk in either 357 or 44 magnum with 4 5/8 in barrel. Stainless Steel would make the revolver hold up better in weather. You can't go wrong with a blackhawk. A blackhawk will take any type of ammo you put in it. Its simple and easy to field strip if you need to. They are single action only but out in the woods a experience shooter won't have a problem if the time comes. Second choice would be a Ruger GP100 Stainless Steel in the 4 inch barrel. Only limits on the GP is caliber is a 357 magnum.

Good luck,
roaddog28

 

[c919]

I"m also in the market for a new woods gun. At this point I've basically decided that the Ruger Redhawk .44 4" is the way to go for me. It's a heavy SOB, but I'd like the assurance of the .44mag. I know I can get a S&W alloy .44, but I'd actually like to do some remotely comfortable practicing.

Most of the trips I do are one or two nighters with my wife, so the extra weight won't be too bad. We usually don't go to any extremes as far as lengthy hikes are concerned.

 

[gjm551]

I would like to do multiple day hikes, but weight of a "small" .44 sounds like it would be well worth it.

 

[jmr40]

Stainless Ruger or Smith in 357. In 44 I would say Smith. While the Ruger 44's are great hunting guns they are just a little bigger and heavier than I like for a backpacking gun.

I know you said revolver, but my personal choice is a Glock 20 in 10mm. Lighter and easier to pack and about equal in power to the best 357 loads. I also have 357 and 44 revolvers to choose from, but the more you pack the more you learn that a few ounces here and there add up quickly.

 

[MCgunner]

I consider a .357 magnum medium frame stainless gun the hiker's perfect companion. light, weather resistant, accurate, powerful, versatile. A Tracker is certainly an option. I'd like a .41 magnum titanium tracker, but they're a mght expensive. I have settled for now on a nickel Taurus M66, most accurate medium frame .357 with both .38 and .357 rounds I've owned. I had a Ruger Security six, a stainless M971 Rossi (really light and pretty accurate), a Smith M19 (blued steel), and the Taurus. I kept the Taurus. A Smith and Wesson M66 (stainless K frame) would be a good choice. I'd shy away from the heavyish L frames and GP100s for back packing. After some miles, you'll know the difference. There's a lot of good used guns out there that would work really well. I gave 200 bucks used for that Taurus and it's a keeper, very accurate, rugged gun and lighter than the L frames and GP100s for hiking.

Those trackers are neat, I just don't do enough hiking anymore to justify one. I kinda think a 24 ounce titanium .41 would also be an awesome IWB carry, though. You'd better be used to heavy recoil with heavy loads in such a gun, though. I am, been shooting hand cannons for a while. I'd down load that .41 for carry, carry the hot stuff in bear country.

If I thought I needed a .44 like the Mountain Gun, I'd carry my blackhawk in .45 colt with hot 300 grain handloads. It'll do anything the .44 can do and that gun is awesome accurate, too. I love single actions, too, for outdoor work. I have two blackhawks (one in .357) and an Old Army. The Blackhawks are as heavy as a mountain gun, though. The Taurus .357 is noticeably lighter on the hip and ammo packs tighter.

 

[Oro]

My choice for this is alot like what Mcgunner said - a 2.5" S&W 66 stainless steel. Can handle powerful .357 loads and it won't make your hand go numb after a shot or two. The ss wears well and provides strenght and weight where you need it. Both Double Tap and Buffalo Bore make excellent cartridges for your application. A comparable Ruger would also be a good choice.

I have multiple guns I use in bear country, but this is the "go to" one with the smallest size/weight profile practical for a heavy round.

 

[22-rimfire]

A short barreled single action like the Ruger Blackhawk is not a bad idea. They are still pretty handy, but you need to remember to thumb the hammer back in a pinch.

 

[MCgunner]

If Ruger would just offer the 3" SP101 with an adjustable sight, I'd jump all over one. The SP101 is 28 ounces, strong as an L frame Smith, and accurate. I had a 2" version for a while. I'd want the 3" for woods carry, better sight radius, though I could put 5 rounds into 2" off the bench with that snubby at 25 yards. The 3" would also give the round a little more zip. A field gun, one that might shoot small game one day and do defense duty or even deer hunting the next, needs an adjustable sight IMHO. I will NOT own a fixed sight .357 for field use.

Which brings to mind the 5" Smith and Wesson M60 Stainless .357 magnum which looks ideal, too, if a bit pricey for my meager budget. The J frame doesn't do much for me for strength of design in a magnum caliber, though, to be frank. The SP101 is twice the gun for strength and not much, if any, bigger. If those 5" 60s weren't so pricey and didn't have a lock (I hate that lock) I'd probably consider one, though. It's a great size for a back packer's friend. I'd limit the hot rounds I fired in it, though. Hell, I fired full on 180 fire breathers in that SP101 and they didn't seem to faze that little thing. It fired 'em at 662 ft lbs from a 2" barrel. A 3" would be icing on the cake. But, it needs an adjustable sight, I mean really......