Question about handguns for bear defense.... Maybe a little different.

Status
Not open for further replies.

BBQLS1

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2008
Messages
978
I know in general this has been beat to death, but I do have a question that I would like some serious thought on.

I've read a bunch of the bear defense threads and did quite a bit of research on the subject. Almost always it's said that if you have to shoot a charging bear, your only hope is for a good shot into the brain pan. This being the case, wouldn't .357 Mag be just as good as the larger .44 Mag and up calibers? Or, do the larger calibers offer some better effect in the case you miss the head?

I guess my train of thought is that .357 Mag would penetrate the skull fine (with a good hardcast load) and do the required damage and allow faster follow up shots (if you ever got any).

Now, if I was hunting bear, I would be looking to shoot other places and .44 Mag and up makes sense, but I'm thinking from a purely "I'm screwed and have no other choice" scenario.
 
Guess your bear is a blacky?? Better be. If grizzly country take someone you don't like , shot them if all you have is a 357. 180 or 200 gr hard cast hot loads DT or BB or Grizzly cartidge brand ammo. Buy the bear spray, if your screwed and have no other choice its to late. Most all blackies will look at you and bark maybe sniff and leave unless there all ready gone, just don't sneek around the woods unless hunting.
 
Guess your bear is a blacky?? Better be. If grizzly country take someone you don't like , shot them if all you have is a 357. 180 or 200 gr hard cast hot loads DT or BB or Grizzly cartidge brand ammo. Buy the bear spray, if your screwed and have no other choice its to late. Most all blackies will look at you and bark maybe sniff and leave unless there all ready gone, just don't sneek around the woods unless hunting.

Assume my bear is Grizzly.

When you have to shoot the brain, I'm wondering if there is much difference between .357 Mag and .44 Mag when it comes to stopping the bear.
 
Assume my bear is Grizzly.

When you have to shoot the brain, I'm wondering if there is much difference between .357 Mag and .44 Mag when it comes to stopping the bear.
I don't care that this is the. Um-hundredth bear defense thread, but you're probably better off reading them, then looking for new advice. The general consensus seems to be that there is no minimum caliber fork a grizzly bear. Don't bother playing that game with your life. Every caliber is insufficient.
 
I actually had one of these threads myself. When it comes to griz bring a large bore rifle or 12 gauge with slugs. Think 444 marlin or 45-70 loaded hot. If you want a pistol 44 mag or hot 45 LC or bigger.
 
The chances of getting any hit on a real charging bear with any handgun are remote. So whatever you bring you'd better be really fast and really good with it. And hope you don't get bushwhacked from the flanks or behind. On balance I'd say the first rule is speed, second accuracy, with caliber being third.
 
The heavier the bullet, the more the penetration at a given velocity. The .357 and the .44 maggies aren't all that much different in muzzle velocities.

Not true. Larger diameter bullets have more resistance to penetration because they displace more space, they create larger diameter holes, but not necessarily deeper penetration. Sometimes the greater weight means more penetration, but not always. 9mm bullets typically out penetrate 45 ACP.

The bullets sectional density and construction are very important factors to consider.

I own handguns in 44 mag, 357 mag and 10mm. If I were in grizzly country I'd just as soon carry the 10mm. 357 and 44 mag revolvers when fired from shorter barrels (4" or less) typically do not come close to published balliastics. The 10mm actualy beats 357, and comes closer to 44 mag than many want to admit unless the revolvers have 8" or so barrels on them. If I've got to carry a handgun that big, I'd just as soon carry a carbine in a MUCH better chambering. Between the 44 and 357, I'd still give a slight edge to the 44 because you will more than likely have to make a body shot anyway. None may stop a charge completely, but may hurt the animal enough to reduce the damage it does to you giving you a chance to survive.
 
id say if it has to be a pistol, then the biggest pistol that you can shoot the best.

a .500sw is worse to carry than a 9mm for bear if you cant shoot the 500
 
I carry a short barreled 38. I really don't believe that the benefit of a 4 or 5 pound handgun (500 Mag) outweighs the chance of having to fire while under attack.
 
The 10mm actualy beats 357, and comes closer to 44 mag than many want to admit unless the revolvers have 8" or so barrels on them

6.5" Blackhawk in .357 pushes a 180 XTP over 13.8 grains AA#9 to a tick over 1400 fps for 785 ft lbs. That's right there with any 10mm load from a 5" barrel. Check Buffalo Bore's site for verification if you don't believe me. .44 mag can make upwards of 1300 ft lbs in some heavy bullet loads, hand over fist more than any 10, nearly double the energy, and it can push bullets well over 300 grains (high sectional density).

I agree with you 100 percent on penetration, though. You are correct. :D It's a combination of bullet shape, sectional density, and velocity. Momentum really only matters in knocking over pepper poppers.

I carry a short barreled 38. I really don't believe that the benefit of a 4 or 5 pound handgun (500 Mag) outweighs the chance of having to fire while under attack.

Very good point. A .38 point blank on a bear is NOT going to miss and the strongest probabilities are that he'll be on you before you see him, I mean, if he attacks. The strongest probability is, of course, that it'll never happen. I've hiked many a mile unarmed in bear country. I never really concerned myself with it. I don't live on Kodiak island, though. I don't concern myself with griz as i don't hike in griz country. If I did, it'd probably be Idaho or something and I'd just take along my .45 Colt blackhawk with hot 300 grain loads.
 
Last edited:
And 300-grainers from my Redhawk ain't what you'd call shabby. :D

Regardless, I figure skill and adrenalin control is far more important than some particular gear. Ownership does not create expertise.
 
I own handguns in 44 mag, 357 mag and 10mm. If I were in grizzly country I'd just as soon carry the 10mm. 357 and 44 mag revolvers when fired from shorter barrels (4" or less) typically do not come close to published balliastics. The 10mm actualy beats 357, and comes closer to 44 mag than many want to admit unless the revolvers have 8" or so barrels on them. If I've got to carry a handgun that big, I'd just as soon carry a carbine in a MUCH better chambering. Between the 44 and 357, I'd still give a slight edge to the 44 because you will more than likely have to make a body shot anyway. None may stop a charge completely, but may hurt the animal enough to reduce the damage it does to you giving you a chance to survive.


Very good point. A .38 point blank on a bear is NOT going to miss and the strongest probabilities are that he'll be on you before you see him, I mean, if he attacks. The strongest probability is, of course, that it'll never happen. I've hiked many a mile unarmed in bear country. I never really concerned myself with it. I don't live on Kodiak island, though. I don't concern myself with griz as i don't hike in griz country. If I did, it'd probably be Idaho or something and I'd just take along my .45 Colt blackhawk with hot 300 grain loads.


And 300-grainers from my Redhawk ain't what you'd call shabby. :D

Regardless, I figure skill and adrenalin control is far more important than some particular gear. Ownership does not create expertise.





This is the kind of discussion I was looking for.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top