The Race for the Best Wilderness Gun

Status
Not open for further replies.

munk

Member
Joined
May 12, 2003
Messages
539
Location
Montana
I've a few thoughts on this subject, and with modern firearm introductions changing the market- like the Smith 500 and 460, proprietary 475 Linebaugh, thought I'd air this out and see what other's think.

First, my own personal prejudices are that a handgun is never going to be a rifle. It should be carryable, and rely upon bullet weight and large diameter at relatively moderate velocities. This allows quick repeat shots.
Efforts to go beyond 'typical' handgun power levels always introduce tradeoffs, usually in weight and bulk of the arm, but in recoil and handability as well.

The 454 was the first widely available of the new breed, though the Action Express 50 is in there too. I never liked the extra pressure level of the Casul- a cheap fix in my opinion. A handloader could correct for this, load the round in the same SAMMI pressure specs as the traditional mags like the 44 and 41. The argument usually goes you can load up when you have to- like when you're extra paranoid about Bear.
The funny thing about 'Bear Loads" is everyone in the lower 48 has to have one- even if they live in Ohio. !!

As wrist slamming as the Casul is, foregoing the 'fast' followup shot, it at least does not give in to the second trade-off departure from the traditional, and that is weight. You can buy a Casul that weighs perfectly within the range that is carryable with comfort. That's important. If you don't have it with you 20 miles from the road in your campsite because it weighed too much to carry, all it's power does you no good. I never used to mind weight that much- I carried a Wesson Supermag for awhile, and that's as big as the Current Smith 500, but at age 48 with a couple mashed disks, I like the N frame and the Redhawk's as the outside limit today.

The Smith big frame weighs 72 OZ unloaded with the standard long barrel. The DE weighs, I believe, 70.2 oz. That's actually what motivated me to write this thread today- pondering the differences between the two.
The Smith is big and powerful. Despite it's muzzle brake, it is not described by many as easily shootable. I'd say by no one-but there are bound to be people in denial who claim they love the smack of metal against the bridge of the forefinger and thumb, and I won't argue with that. I'll just say by any fair appraisel of MOST shooters it is not an arm to pleasently shoot full power loads from all day long.

How fast one could get this arm into battery, or how much slower than an N frame Smith, is a question.


The DE 50 is far less powerfull, not even loaded to the same pressure as revolver specs. But it does pack a wallop significantly above the 44, and does it with an ability to shoot fast. It is not that bad; I've shot them and they feel about like a 44 in a revolver of traditional weight. But it is heavy and bulky; so we see in this the trade off is size only.

What do you Ladies and Gentlemen think about this?

For pure fun, I think the DE would be the Cat's pajama's, but at 1000 plus bucks I'm out of the ball game. I'll probably save for the 480 Ruger. I know that's panzy class to many of you here. But it does what the traditional wilderness gun is supposed to do and does it better than any of the 41's, 44's, and 45 Colt's. LArge diameter, heavy projectlie at around 1350 fps. You can shoot it fast enough, and it's lighter than the comparable 44 Super Redhawk. If you've not fired a 480 Ruger you're missing something- it feels 'right'. It has the same balance as a hot 45 Colt or 41. It just has the feel.

I doubt the Casul or 500 have that feel, (and I've only fired the Casul) but for the most sincere caution about bear attack, these mega power rounds offer what typical handguns cannot- rifle power. The 500 and 460 are about like the 45/70. That's something, I just don't want to carry it. I rather think a short carbine would be a better choice at that point.

I think the first maker to put out a gas operated 460 and 500 carbine is going to make millions.

Thanks for listening. I hope Someone could explain what is 'most best' in this field. It sure has changed in 20 years, hasn't it?

Edit: All of the new weapons are fine hunters. I've been looking at this from my usual- what do I do if attacked? perspective. A guy who wants to carry the big Smith for hunting and defense gets no static from me.
munk
 
Last edited:
At age 56 I don't see getting 20 miles to a wilderness campsight without my truck. I used to hike a lot in California when I was in my twenties and carried a T/C .44 Mag or Ruger Security Six .357 or both. What I learned then was that an ounce in the morning weighs a pound in the late afternoon. That was then. Now that ounce ends up feeling like a kilogram to me.

If I was going into the back country for the long term I'd carry my old H&R revolver with the .22 WMR cylinder. Not my lightest gun but I could tote a lot more ammo. Any .22 is a game getter even if I have to use shotshell. I've eaten chipmunk before. If I end up eaten by a bear it won't give me much consolation that I'd mortally wounded him with a .44 Mag before I died.
 
I have to admire anyone who has eaten a chipmunk. Dedication or hunger or both. There's a chipmunk in Montana about the size of a skinny mouse.
Where in Calif did you hike?





munk
 
Excellent points, I recently "upgraded" from the Casul field grade .454 ,4 1/2 inch barrel to the new S&W 500 4 inch. I live, hike and hunt right in the middle of the Yaak/Cabinet wilderness area which is all prime Grizzly Country.
While I have been very fortunate and NEVER have had a griz encounter several of my neighbors and hunting partners have and they were all really shaken after the ordeal. So I carry this gun whenever I am out of the truck.
FOR ME it is the best combination of stopping power, portability and firepower. Those five 440 gr solids in a double action revolver are about as good as it gets. I have many years experience and training with smith double actions so it is a platform much more familiar to me than is the single action .454 .
Yes it is heavy but it is much more portable than my guide gun (it is always on my side) it has more rounds (5 vs4) and greater penetration than the 45-70.
It is not for recreational shooting but it is about the perfect gun for my particular needs and in my opinion it has less of a sharp recoil than my .454.

I'll continue to carry it daily and hope that I never have to use it!
 
Munk. Hiked in Sierra's(East side), Yosemite, Tuolome Meadows, Hunter-Ligget, Lake Pillsbury, Lassen, Whiskeytown Lake, Mono Lake, Christmas Rocks (Site of Gunga Din movie), Mt Tamalpais, Sequoia, The Pinnacles and Walker Pass where I was toting my Ruger .357 and Ithaca 37 12 Gauge, with which I dropped the chipmunk. That was a one-time survival hike and my two friends didn't eat that night.
 
Last edited:
I am not is Griz country or a major dangerous game area, so I came up with this gun as my "wilderness gun". It will take care of most everything I might encounter in the woods around eastern PA and probably most of the contigous US.
It is a S&W 65 with a 4" pencil barrel. The 4" barrel gives a little more vel over a 3" and it weighs the same, along with being able to carry it and plenty of ammo, makes for an easier day than hauling around a 44 or 45 and larger ammo. It is also moonclipped.
attachment.php
attachment.php
 
I started reading your post and immediately thought, "This guy needs a .480." Then I read that you are already familiar with that round. I don't see it as a wimp round at all; IMO, it's a very potent but shootable caliber. My local dealer didn't have one in the case when I looked a few weeks ago, but quoted me $589 for a brand-new 7-1/2". Still mulling it over, but it's bound to happen sooner rather than later.
 
jcs271;
There is nothing that matches my fear of Grizzly unless it is a Calif variety of meth freak. If I had to be live in Grizzly woods, I would look at your own choices. I would guess the new 460 would be a sharper recoil than the 500.
Why do you say the 440 solids penetrate deeper than the 45/70? I'd think with some of the Garrett and other specialty rounds that would not be the case- but I'm not in the loop of developing 500 ballistics. I assume like every new round, some reports are overblown, some are reality.
I'm not saying I wouldn't like 5 rounds, (or 15 better still) ; but reports of Grizzly confrontations rarely seem to allow the shooter a lot of shots. The 500 would certainly make the most of one.

HPF- you've hiked the best.

I was hoping I'd learn something in this thread and have.

Does anyone remember the Grizzly killed by the Ranger many many years ago, as he tried to let the animal out of a cage and something went wrong? It's on film. He discharged his 357 into the skull.

munk
 
Yes the Garrett Super hard cast might edge it out, I have no experience with them but here is what I have tested on my own. While my target was not ballistic gellatin or wet paper it did offer extreme/consistent resistance to the shots. I had access to a 35 inch diameter section of Tamarack log that was about 3 feet long. So setting up a target on the end my friend and I shot Rem factory 45-70 405 gr (6 3/4 inch penetration),,,rem factory 450 marlin 400gr (10 inches penetration),, 450 marlin 400gr hard cast handload (13 inches penetration) ,,.454 325 gr hard cast handload (14 inches penetration),,.500 S&W 330 gr Ultramax factory loads (11 1/2 inches penetration). We split the log and recovered all bullets and carefully measured all of the channels. The 454 and 500 slugs could literally have been reloaded, there was almost no damage other than rifling marks Very impressive!

This was just a quick fun shoot but it did give us some idea of penetration/performance with a variety of rounds.

We were all shocked at the complete lack of performance in the factory 45-70. I know they light load but nobody guessed it was that bad!
The 454 was a standout, 325 gr LBT LFN 28gr H-110 beat them all but recoil was SHARP!
The 500 S&W 330 gr Ultramax rounds performed extremely well plus being 1/2 in diameter right out of the barrel. Recoil NOT as sharp as with the Cassul.

So, FOR ME the 500 (now loaded with cor bon 440gr) in a quality Double Action revolver is just about perfect for my particular needs. I am certain that I'll probably never get off that 4th or 5th shot in a crisis situation but the fact that they are there for last ditch double action CONTACT shots is comforting.
Be safe. JCS
 
jcs271
Yes, Factory 45/70 fodder is both light and lightly constructed- the bullets are meant to expand at the lukewarm velocities. 1800 fps with the 300 gr is a Federal load and about as warm as any one gets until you go to proprietary company's like Garretts or load your own. It's been a while since I loaded my 45/70, but if I remember correctly a jacked 300 gr bullet can do 2200 fps out of the Marlin, and hardcast lead even more. I don't recall what happens with the 500 grain- the magazine/chamber OAL limits may slow the round down a bit. Certainly there are 400 grain solids which will outperform the Casul.


I believe the 500 Smith is pretty much a ballistic equal of the 45/70 in modern lever rifles. This loading does it with less pressure. A single shot 45/70 would walk away from the 500; the revolver round simply does not have the case capacity. The 45/70 also has the advantage of easier shooting.
How much does the Smith 500 4" weigh empty, and how much loaded?

We probaby won't live forever in Eastern Montana. Some of our future plans may include living in Grizzly country. Every year outside Cody Wy. there's an incident with a Hunter or horn shed gatherer.

I actually think the 480 Ruger with Hardcast would do very well. Certainly powerful enough for the penetration needed. I have 4 41's, a 45 Colt and a 44 mag. All of them loaded properly would be better than than a cell phone and the Sierra Club's wrist bracelet with a bell attached.

Nothing can compare to the Smith 500, not even he 475 or 50 Linebaugh, right? I wonder how the BFG does in 45/70?



munk
 
Total novice mouthing off here, since I have never shot a bear, but I have noticed that some ammunition manufacturers seem to make some pretty hot loads for the .44. The Buffalo Bore .44 mag +p+ load doesn't give up much to the .454 at all, and beats the .480 and .50 AE by a fair margin, if the online info can be trusted. If this is true, I don't see why a 5" Redhawk might not be plenty, provided that you think any pistol is sufficient. I couldn't compare weights of handguns, but I can't imagine the Ruger weighs much more than the DE.
 
I have rarely been to brown bear country and I've never shot one. Like every other person in the lower 48, though, I think about what gun I'd want with me about as often as little boys ask their daddies "what would happen if a whale and a lion got into a fight?" or "who is faster, superman or the flash?". ;) I guess little boys never grow up, huh?
From what I've read, bear attacks happen suddenly, usually without warning. Often the victim has a gun, but its not in arms reach, or they have a long gun and cannot raise it fast enough. Rarely do you read about a victim shooting a bear and still suffering a mauling (not saying it doesn't happen, but I am saying I've read plenty of accounts of brown bears being dispatched with .40's, .357's, and 9mm's).
1. So, the number one requirement is the gun must be light and compact enough that you will always have it with you. A 9mm in your hand beats a .454 in your tent or a 30-30 propped on a tree any day.
2. You must be able to draw and fire the gun quickly. Doesn't matter if you're disciplined enough to lug it around everywhere if it takes you 15-30 seconds to unholster it. Think "gunslinger".
3. Last is caliber selection. This is a distant 3rd in my opinion, and should only be considered after criteria 1 and 2 have been met. This is a very personal question. Bottom line, you must be able to hit what you're aiming at with this weapon. 5 hits from a 9mm beats 5 misses from a .454 every time.
However, if you can use something that fires a heavy hardcast or fmj bullet, do so. Heavy hard cast bullets from a .45 Colt Ruger Blackhawk, even at moderate velocities, will blow a hole through any animal in North Amercia (see this article for details on .45 colt pentration when compared to .458 Win. Mag): http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_158_26/ai_86704793
Do not use hp bullets for bear defense, stick w/fmj or hard cast. You may note in the above article that a .480 Ruger 325gr XTP round at 1,350fps has less than half the penetration of a .45 Colt 300gr SWC fired at 1,180 fps.
Anyway, like I said, I've never shot a brown bear. But even a passing look at newspaper accounts of bear attacks available online indicates the above criteria is important. Oh well. Back to my armchair.
D
 
Roscoe; A comparitive loading of the 480 would beat the 44.

Cookekdjr <<<You may note in the above article that a .480 Ruger 325gr XTP round at 1,350fps has less than half the penetration of a .45 Colt 300gr SWC fired at 1,180 fps.>>>>>>

But a hardcast 480 would beat the Colt, and the XTP may be a good choice in alternative chambers with hardcast in every other one.

I agree a bird in hand beats one left in the bush, but cartridge selection is not number 3 in my own book. I'm not sure how much 'aim' is important, either. You will probably be encompassed by minute of bear.


munk
 
Mag-Na-Port S&W 57 3"
Couger (Stainless Ruger Security 6 with 4" Colt Python Barrel)
S&W 63 4"
Looking into a Glock 20 in 10mm.

I grew up in Nothwestern MT nad the Dope farmers worry more than the bears.
 
I agree a bird in hand beats one left in the bush, but cartridge selection is not number 3 in my own book. I'm not sure how much 'aim' is important, either. You will probably be encompassed by minute of bear.
Points taken. However, media reports are full of accounts where people were mauled (usually to death) because they had no gun. I haven't found any where they were killed because the gun they used in self defense was not up to the task. There are a number of reports of people using 9mm's, .40's, .357's, .44's, .45's, 10mm's, and other "regular-sized" handguns to successfully stop a bear attack. The common denominator for these survivors was having the gun readily available. The common denominator for the dead/horribly injured was that they did not have their weapon close enough at hand. One mauling victim was carrying a big bore hunting rifle in a sling on his shoulder. He could not position this large rifle to fire it in time. A lightweight pistol in a holster could have spared him from the attack.
By the way, if you can find a report of mauling where the victim used a handgun to defend themselves unsuccessfully, I'd like to see it.
Thanks,
David
 
I'm 63 and have hiked most of the Appalachian Trail. Next month I will hike the Ozark Highlands Trail which runs from near Fort Smith to just north of Marshall -- about 170 trail miles, including an extention to reach Highway 65.

I live in the woods in the Ozarks, in an isolated area and I've faced down a Black bear (he was right outside my house) and seen cougars in this area.

There has been one bear attack on the OHT. David Gash of Wichita, KS, was attacked in his tent at Hare Mountain in 1990.The bear went after his pack at night, and bit him in the leg, and dragged him and the tent off about a hundred yards. He did not have a gun, and lay there for over an hour while the bear rummaged around his campsite.

I'll carry my Colt Detective Special but one of these days I'll get a Ruger SP 101 just for backpacking.
 
cookekdjr;

Do you mean Grizzly bear attacks, Brown Bear attacks, and or Black bear attacks? This just reminded me of something- Grizzly attacks in the lower 48 are different than the attacks of the much larger coastal Brown.
I hope you are right about cartridge selection. Certainly, putting up a stiff defense has to be better than any of the Sierra Club alternatives. Lord, when I think of the bull---t they've advertised over the years; "a rattlesnake will rattle before he strikes, get to help and you'll be Ok, play dead with Bear and you'll be OK, only an mother and her cubs will attack, and Cougars rarely attack- it is you who invade their backyards, and there is no sense carrying arms as you'll never get to them in time as your neck will be broken. And, Black Bears won't attack "

Srynidan: Aint that the truth about Dope growers? This 'peaceful alternative lifestyle" on the business end is deadly. I used to worry when I hiked in Ca and when i went to School in Santa Cruz.

Vern Humphey; there have been predation attacks by crazies on the trails you mention. Black bears do attack.

Like most here, my opinons on these matters is formed by reading expert and first hand reports.

munk


munk
 
Hi Munk,
I am referring to grizzly and other brown bear attacks (such as Kodiaks). Almost all the accounts I've read about took place in Alaska and involved a type of brown bear, not black bears. I've been pretty surprised at the success of 9mms and .40's. I've looked for cases where the victim shot the bear with a handgun, but was still killed or injured, but I haven't found any yet. I did find a case in Oregon where the hunter drew his 1911 as the bear charged, but the bear was so fast he could not get off a shot. Somehow his buddy got the bear to leave and the man survived.
From what I've read, a Glock 22 or 23 (lightweight and high capacity) with .40 cal fmj's would be a decent choice. Lightweight so you'll always carry it, and makes a big hole. Many would point out that sometimes you can only get off one shot, so a more powerful revolver might be appropriate. Of course, that's only the case if you'll be sure to carry it...
 
Cookekdjr;

Yes, you and I have both wondered what good a handcannon is if it is left behind as too unwieldy to carry.

I tried looking at some Smith 500 stats to see what the field was offering. Like a lot of you, I've got gunmags flopped into enormous piles, and I was only able to find a couple articles.

Here's Shooting Times, Dick Metcalf, March 2005 on the 460:

Corbon 300 gr Precision cast, BC gap .002, 8.5" barrel, gun weight 73 oz
1794fps
395 Cobon Precision cast; 1540 fps


Here's Stan Skinner, Guns n Ammo, Aug 2004 on the Smith 500,
He infers the Cobon factory 440 gr clocked faster than advertised 16oo fps
Hornady 350 gr 1715 fps
Sierra 400 gr 1687 fps

In both guns I see no greater ballistics than the 45/70 as loaded for modern levers, and actually, moderately/considerably less.

I tried to find Metcalf's recent report on the Short Barrel 500- as it is the one chosen for better portability by those living around the Bears. The velocity can only be less.

A 44 mag with a 300 gr solid at plus 1200 fps has got to do something. Ditto the 45 Colt with slightly more, the 41 with a 250 at almost 1300, and the Ruger 480 with a 350 above 1300 fps.

When I talked about a big bore revolver with moderate velocity, I was talking about the standard mags compared to rifles. Even when the gun's are much bigger and the cartridges huge, they are still not quite 45/70s or other rifles.

Man, if the Smith 500 could be put into a light, fast handling semi auto carbine. Course, would anyone want to pull it to their cheek bone and pull the trigger?



munk
 
Quote:
--------------------------
Vern Humphey; there have been predation attacks by crazies on the trails you mention. Black bears do attack.
---------------------------

I'm a lot more concerned about two-legged predators than I am about bears. But I think my Dick Special in a belt pouch will be adequate, whatever I run into.
 
The great division in the Wilderness Gun is between the Bear prevention crowd and those who chose a firearm without that as a main issue.

The .38 is a fine calibre for general carrying and game getting.



munk
 
Phil Shoemaker, who probably knows as much about big bears as anyone alive, recommends a .357 -- albeit with a heavy cast bullet, which would call for a heavier revolver than the SP 101.
 
Well this has been fun but I think we have about beaten it to death. The bottom line is roughly as follows....

The grizzly attack if it comes will be fast and furious from very close!

The firearm must be immediately accessible ON YOUR BODY at all times (probably not slung on shoulder so it kinda rules out rifles).

Any firearm beats throwing rocks

It should be loaded with hard cast or fmj slugs for deep (bone) penetration.

It should be a system you are VERY familiar with (auto, DA or SA)

You should be sighted dead on at 10 yrds (its not a hunting pistol)

It should be capable of repeated CONTACT shots (might rule out autos)

It should be operable with one hand if necessary (DA shines here)

It ideally will be the heaviest caliber you can confidently handle


Happily this is all just fun theoretical banter because none of us will probably ever even see a griz but somewhere, someone will and lets hope that he has given his equipment as much thought as we all have.

Well I gotta go,,the dogs are barking like crazy at something out behind the barn..................
 
My grandfather had a book all about bear attacks. A cursory search of Amazon and Google revealed nothing, but maybe I have the title wrong.
Alaskan Bear Tales. Anyone? Regardless, it was full of anecdotes about bears and a bunch of fatal encounters. It convinced me to this day that if I have to go to Bear Country, that 00 buck is my best friend. The story of the bear skull they found with 5 .357 slugs stuck in it is particularly chilling. The slugs were stuck in such a way that the shooter would have had to have been underneath the bear. :eek:

That being said, I'd carry either a .357 revolver or a 9mm double stack with JHP if I wasn't going to Bear Country. True, that .44 mag may make a big hole if it hits, but if it misses, it's just going to be a big hole in the ground. I can rip off 9mm almost as fast as I want, and in "Holy :cuss:" mode, that's what I'm going to do. I don't have to kill the critter, just convince it that these aren't the droids it's looking for and to move along. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top