SP101 or Glock 29 for bear defense

[goon]

I also wondered if one of the really light .44 Magnums might be a "good" choice. I'd think that you could come up with a load that keeps a lot of power, probably beating the heavy .357 loads, but that can be controlled. This is just conjecture - I don't know if this can be done or not. But the handloader in me says I think it could.
When I can, I'd love to add a Ruger Redhawk to my collection, but that is obviously a different animal than a S&W 329.

 

[CraigC]

It's really six of one and up to 16 of the other.

No, like I said, you'll be lucky to get off 2-3 shots. I'm fairly certain that a bear is not going to stand still for you to shoot at him 16 times. So reload speed and capacity are completely irrelevant. That "huge edge" you referred to, it only exists in your mind. So I repeat, take the one you're most comfortable and proficient with. Proficiency trumps all other factors, including magazine capacity, every time.

You guys that rely so heavily on capacity must have little confidence in your marksmanship??? My guess is that most who do so are not hunters.

 

[fastest45ever]

Go here:
http://www.udap.com/video.htm

Click on real bear attack. You would have to be one of the world's fastest
guys at getting a gun out of leather, and shooting. Wouldn't be using sites.

Bears that attack generally are female with cubs, who you get to close to the cubs for her. Problem with running is you can get closer to the bear without knowing it, and that leads to an attack.

The other type is males that are old, have some sort of defect in claw or tooth, and they find humans relatively easy prey. THEY are hunting you, and generally
they will succeed. Brown bears have been known to take the head off a black bear with one paw swipe.

Realistically about the limit for most people out of a scandium frame 329 is going to be a 300 grain LFN at around 1400 fps. Still, with proper grips that's a bear load. A lot better then anything you can put out of a
SP 101 or a Glock 29. Recoil would be close to, but faster then full house .475 Linebaugh loads in a 3.2 oz gun.

 

[fastest45ever]

Go here:

 

[BLB68]

Brown bears have been known to take the head off a black bear with one paw swipe.

I'd love to see pics of this.

 

[fastest45ever]

Just for size perspective: Doug Seus is a big guy, well over 6':
http://www.bartthebear.com/bears/images/Bigbartstanding.jpg
http://aerolaskaoutfitters.com/Neil.paw.jpg

I think we tend to forget how big brown bears really are.

 

[AKMtnRunner]

I have a similar problem.

I'd suggest trying one of these holsters:
http://www.pistolwear.com/

It might expand your options.

Can you use a shoulder rig while running?

I can't help but think something like a S&W scandium would be a better fit, due to it's lighter weight.

I find the Glock loaded to be 32-34 oz loaded.
SP 101 25 oz unloaded, with a short barrel. Add 5 rounds, maybe an once or two?

I'd probably go with a 329 if I was going into brown bear territory:
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...57770_757767_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y

It's big, but lighter then both you are considering. Also I'm sure you can find one used in Alaska, after someone has touched off full power 44 mag loads out of it, and realize recoil is at a whole nother speed.

I'd first figure out what holster I was going to run with, and then decide on the weight I can carry.

What holster setup are you planning to use?

Your question is fascinating, since I haven't come up with a real good answer for my own needs. I don't have brown bear in the mix, and tend to settle on a S&W 360PD for carry in the holster linked to above, or a PM9 Kahr.

http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...57768_757767_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y

The Kahr PM9 loaded weighs 18 oz. Another possibility might be the PM 40.
It would get you within 200 fps of the 10MM, in a package the size of the Kahr PM9, and 18 oz.

Kahr has come out with a .45 ACP version of their line, the PM45
http://www.kahr.com/Pistols/Kahr-PM45-Black.asp

The flat, concealable gun, 6 shot capacity, light weight, under 23 oz. loaded,
and the power of .45 ACP in a flat nosed, non-expanding bullet, +P as well, make it a possible solution for your problem.

Hand size is important as well. Do you have small or large hands? Does a Glock 29 feel comfortable?
If you have to death grip the SP 101 it's going to be difficult to shoot it well. Likewise if the Glock is too big for your hands.

The good news on the revolver is you can change the grip size.

Good luck with this.

Let us know what you decide on, and why.

I plan on taking a hip holster and either attaching it to or fitting the fire arm inside the top pocket of a waist pack like this one:
http://www.ultimatedirection.com/p-586-solitaire-hhs.aspx?category=waist-packs

I'm not too concerned about weight, as long as it has a fairly compact frame like the g29 and sp101 do. I've held both and they each feel fine and I think I'd have a better chance holding onto these than a larger frame.

The 329pd looks interesting and I'll give it some thought. I have to confess though that I've been turned off of .44 mag.

A couple years ago I bought a ruger super redhawk "Alaskan" .44 mag with 2.5" barrel. I found that with the short barrel's blast and HEAVY (45 oz) weight, I rarely wanted to take it out with me. What sent me over the edge was when I came across the Ballistics By The Inch website that showed me how ballistically poor it was with a short barrel. If that website is correct, that 44 mag isn't much better than my .40 s&w with 5.25 barrel.

The prospects of the glock 29 and sp101, though, have gotten me excited again. Both are really compact, a lot lighter than my .44 mag, and powerful enough to enter the CNS provided good shot placement. And that brings me to a question:

In the scenario of having to use the fire arm, the bear will have gotten so close already that it is clear that my spray did not deter it. At most, i'd have time to get off 2-3 shots but more likely maybe just one before contact. Then whatever time I have left of my functions while being mauled. Not a lot of time. In this scenario, a CNS shot is the only kind that would probably count. So I have to wonder, is any cartridge as good as another as long as it does sufficient damage to the CNS? By some accounts, brown and polar bears have been killed by much less than 357/10mm because of good shot placement. Of course, a larger caliber is preferred with the same shot placement, but how much weight and size (and likelyhood that it would be carried!) needs to be sacrificed when skill and luck are most important?

I don't mean to digress into the "right caliber for bear" answerless riddle, but I suppose that this is my reasoning why a G29 or SP101 would be good choices for me.


I appreciate all of the responses! This is a good group to be in.

 

[357 Terms]

What sent me over the edge was when I came across the Ballistics By The Inch website that showed me how ballistically poor it was with a short barrel. If that website is correct, that 44 mag isn't much better than my .40 s&w with 5.25 barrel.

BBI measures the COAL into the overall length of the barrel, unless you saw data from an actual Alaskan, then you got incorrect data from that website, at least when it comes to what #'s you really get from your revolver.

 

[CraigC]

If that website is correct, that 44 mag isn't much better than my .40 s&w with 5.25 barrel.

Uh yeah, right. I hope you're not looking at energy figures. Even though lots of poor souls depend on them, they're entirely meaningless.

 

[JShirley]

We're talking about a RUGER here, not some antique Colt. You could run it over with a truck and it would still work.

I very much doubt it. Glocks, on the other hand, have been torture tested extensively, especially when they were first introduced to people dubious of "plastic guns". We know Glocks work after being run over because Glocks have demonstrated function after being run over. If the OP has both, I would say, rather like CraigC, to see what he shoots best, if both carry about equally well.

John

 

[Cosmoline]

The problem is, nobody is willing to have their Ruger run over. While in contrast virtually every Glock owner has no problem with throwing their sidearm under a bus.

 

[mavracer]

Kahr has come out with a .45 ACP version of their line, the PM45

That's something I thought of too I have a CW45 that's lighter than my SP and loaded with a 230gr FMJ flat point or SWC would work at least as well as the SP or G29 would.

In the scenario of having to use the fire arm, the bear will have gotten so close already that it is clear that my spray did not deter it. At most, i'd have time to get off 2-3 shots but more likely maybe just one before contact. Then whatever time I have left of my functions while being mauled. Not a lot of time. In this scenario, a CNS shot is the only kind that would probably count.

I agree, I've seen too many critters take 15-20 seconds before they actually stop from a double lung/heart shot to thing anything but a CNS is gonna keep you alive. I'd even concider a last ditch of stuffing my gun hand and all in the bears mouth and putting one through the roof of it's mouth.
Reconstructive surgery beat's being bear poop right?

 

[JShirley]

Cute, Cosmo.

 

[Cycletroll]

Another Glock to consider is a 36. Slim single stack .45 (6+1)
I handload 250gr and 275gr wide flat nose loads for all my Glock 45's. Can only get about 900 fps for the 275gr out of the G36 (1100 out of G21 with fully supported aftermarket barrel). Big fat heavy hard cast slugs penetrate very well! In a gun as light as the G36 the recoil is crazy though.
A Scandium .44 mag would work well too but also is unpleasant to shoot with heavy loads.
I think you need to work backwards; figure out the max size/weight you'll actually be happy carrying and then shoot some high energy/momentum rounds from that size platform and decide which one works better. One can get pretty good with anything you practice with but some platforms are easier than others.
Also, don't know if you hand load but if you do, the performance range for almost any caliber can be significantly improved over factory ammunition and can be tailored to maximize your specific carry choice.

 

[fastest45ever]

In this case we should be doing a torture test:
Which gun the brown bear has the hardest time digesting, and is likely to give him gas.

I made suggestions, but, if you have a .44 Alaskan:
load with 340 grain Buffalobore @ nearly 1500 fps, and get used to running with an extra pound.
That load will DOUBLE the length of the wound channel, giving you around 40 inches of bear penetration, smash anything it hits, and give you a better chance of getting to the spine. The other stuff we are talking about would be lucky to get 20" in a bear.

"The problem is, nobody is willing to have their Ruger run over. While in contrast virtually every Glock owner has no problem with throwing their sidearm under a bus."
VERY good!
:wink:

 

[fastest45ever]

Seems to me I remember the Glock 30 guys running .45 Super out of their 30's with a spring change on one of the glock forums.

That would give you 10mm ballistics, with the potential for much heavier bullets.
IIRC 260's at about 1050 fps are doable, and 230's at 1100 fps.

The .460 Rowland would be a BIG jump, and might be something to consider.
Still, brass is hard to find, and expensive. Essentially a .45 Magnum with a compensator.

None of these are half as good as your Alaskan with 340 grains at between 1200-1400 fps.

 

[RalphS]

You aren't going to get 1400 or 1500 fps out of an Alaskan with the BB load. The barrel is too short.

Buffalobore advertises 1401 fps with a 5.5 inch Redhawk. You might get 1200 fps with an Alaskan. Maybe.

You should, however, get a big enough muzzleblast to set the bear on fire

On top of that, the BB ammo costs $2 per round. Who is going to practice with $2 per round ammo?

 

[goon]

Plus the OP already has that gun and it doesn't fit the role he is trying to fill here. If it did, why would he be asking this question and not just carrying what he has?

Really, luck and common sense can save a person from a lot of wildlife problems. The handgun is just there for those relative few situations where it somehow doesn't. Big bears have been killed with guns that "shouldn't" be able to do it. Hell, compared to a great many rifle cartridges or hard cast 12 gauge slug, any handgun cartridge is pathetic. Even if you are carrying the romping stomping .44 Ruger Alaskan, it's possible that you could be surprised and not have time to draw or that in the panic one may reasonably feel when a bear is coming at you, you may flinch and miss or deliver a non-fatal wound.
About a thousand things can go wrong and sometimes you can't make everything just perfect.

I'd pack either the Glock or the Ruger with the best ammo I could find (probably the Ruger because I already have one and some BB ammo on hand for it), knowing that either is underpowered but better than brass knuckles, practice as much as possible, and go on about my life as best I could with the knowledge that bears have been killed with spears (which are definitely outclassed by a .357) and with faith that all is as God wills it.

Just my $.02.

 

[CraigC]

Buffalobore advertises 1401 fps with a 5.5 inch Redhawk. You might get 1200 fps with an Alaskan. Maybe.

That's what I'm thinking.

 

[fastest45ever]

Bullet weighs 340 grains. When they get up around there they start staying in place long enough for you to get more velocity then you would expect.

Even 1200 fps with a 340 grain bullet is at least twice the power of the two guns he's considering.

I guess you might jog with the Glock in one hand and the SP101 in the other. That might give you a chance to get a few shots off, and it sure would be great for working your arms.
The Alaskans do make great hand weights as well.

 

[Manny]

Stopped and browsed a local gun emporium today and got a chance to check out S&W's Nite Guard series, specifically the 327 which is an 8 shot Nframe 2.5" snubby that weighs about the same as the SP101. I came away VERY impressed, fantastic sights, extremely rugged with a tritium front, very fast & easy to pick up on target. Jeff Quinn over at Gunblast tested one with the BB load you wish to carry and got an honest 1165 fps with it.

I'm normally fairly sour on S&W's as I hate the lock, but I was really impressed with the Nite Guard, if you can check one out I think you might be also.

http://www.gunblast.com/SW-Nightguards.htm

 

[mavracer]

That load will DOUBLE the length of the wound channel, giving you around 40 inches of bear penetration, smash anything it hits, and give you a better chance of getting to the spine.

You planning on making a bank shot, because if the bear is charging you your probably gonna need to shoot through it's head to hit spine

 

[Armored farmer]

I would carry my .357 mod627 Tracker. No self respecting griz would risk being killed with a Taurus.

 

[PabloJ]

You aren't going to get 1400 or 1500 fps out of an Alaskan with the BB load. The barrel is too short.

Buffalobore advertises 1401 fps with a 5.5 inch Redhawk. You might get 1200 fps with an Alaskan. Maybe.

You should, however, get a big enough muzzleblast to set the bear on fire

On top of that, the BB ammo costs $2 per round. Who is going to practice with $2 per round ammo?

He said he would not carry a "steel brick".

The Glock 29 comes standard with 10round mag with possibility for 15 round mag reloads PLUS all important LANYARD HOLE. Quite honestly Ruger mentioned in original question simply can't compete with that.

 

[RalphS]

PabloJ,

I was just replying to the exagerration made about the velocity of the 340 gr BB ammo in a 44 Alaskan. I'm not recommending an Alaskan. I don't shoot short barrel revolvers accurately enough to trust my life to it.

Now, as to your statement, are you implying that someone is going to shoot 10 rounds into a bear, then reload and shoot another 15 rounds into it?

Since you claim that Ruger can't compete with 15 round mags and a lanyard hole, can you provide one case where someone defended themselves against a bear attack with a 10mm? There are lots of cases of using 44M, 45LC, even 357 with either S&W or Ruger revolvers. I provided a link above to a case where the guy used a 41 Mag. Greg Brush used a 454 Alaskan in Soldotna Alaska. Those guys didn't worry about 15 round mags and probably not even a lanyard hole. They just made accurate shots and got the job done with 3 shots or less.