What Rifle for Black Bear hunting?
- Thread starter jphilp87
- Start date
- Status
.257 Roberts is a great gun for Deer / Hog / Black bear...
Depending on the terrain a 30-30 or 35 rem would be acceptable.
.30-06 and .308 would also be good.
The .257 Roberts is one of my favorite cartridges and shouldn't be over looked just because it likes the word (magnum) or (over-gunned) in it's title.
EDIT:
On the budget side of the equation, the Mosin Nagant 7.62x54 / .303 British would all work extremely well on Bear and hogs using mil surp or other ammo. Mil surp is corrosive generally, so keep that in mind.
In the case of the Mosin Nagant, you can have a rifle for $100 and a box of ammo for under $10.00 (silver bear) and be ready to rock an roll. A scope or something can be fitted to them if you decide you need one or want one.
The British Enfields can be had for $250+, Remington has factory loads and it is a proven game getter. It was and is very popular in Africa as a mid game hunting caliber, about equivalent with the 30-06 and 7.62x54
Depending on the terrain a 30-30 or 35 rem would be acceptable.
.30-06 and .308 would also be good.
The .257 Roberts is one of my favorite cartridges and shouldn't be over looked just because it likes the word (magnum) or (over-gunned) in it's title.
EDIT:
On the budget side of the equation, the Mosin Nagant 7.62x54 / .303 British would all work extremely well on Bear and hogs using mil surp or other ammo. Mil surp is corrosive generally, so keep that in mind.
In the case of the Mosin Nagant, you can have a rifle for $100 and a box of ammo for under $10.00 (silver bear) and be ready to rock an roll. A scope or something can be fitted to them if you decide you need one or want one.
The British Enfields can be had for $250+, Remington has factory loads and it is a proven game getter. It was and is very popular in Africa as a mid game hunting caliber, about equivalent with the 30-06 and 7.62x54
Last edited:
Gryffydd
Member
This is true. I shot a 400lb bear with 1650 ft-lbs right through the heart and it just looked at me funny and walked away...
Funny how there's no mention of the importance of bullet design and construction here. Just energy.
Yep... Energy is the most dubious calculation as well. For instance, a .30 carbine out classes the .357 and is dang near the equivalent of a 44 mag from the same barrel length according to "energy readings"... The field reveals a different story.
Bullet weight, construction and cartridge design are important. A .44 mag out of a carbine is absolute black bear medicine, although the energy readings may not confirm that...
Fisherman_48768
Member
I spoke with the game warden that looked into that bear's death. Very questionable at the least that it was hit with a combine while alive.
tactikel
Member
Think premium bullet for Black bear, Nosler partition in .30-06 180 gr. They shot a 600 lb black bear just north of Green Bay last year-I don't think a .243 cor-lockt got him. Penetration, wt retention, and reliable expansion are more important than foot-pounds!
Kernel
Member
Guys lighten up. Muzzle energy is just a guideline. Something a guy that's looking to buy a new rifle, to hunt an animal that might want to eat him, would want to consider. It's easy to comprehend, and there's lots of free ballistic charts, showing m.e. at range, available all over the internet.
You've made fun. Now I’m curious. Do you think my m.e. numbers are too high? Too low? Or do you just believe there's no coloration between effectiveness, game weight, and energy. It’s luck of the draw. Flip of the coin. Unknowable. When shot animals fall over, or don’t, and there’s just no accounting for it, so why even try.
A proper bullet hitting the target is assumed.
Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 13,146
.30-30 is now a poor choice for blackies. Pretty sure I've heard it all now.
Actually, a .30-30 levergun is perfect for what you want. Nothing wrong with .35 Rem or other calibers, but people have been killing deer, bear, elk, moose, and everything else with .30-30 for around 100 years or so.
Actually, a .30-30 levergun is perfect for what you want. Nothing wrong with .35 Rem or other calibers, but people have been killing deer, bear, elk, moose, and everything else with .30-30 for around 100 years or so.
Gryffydd
Member
Oh, I believe there's a correlation between effectiveness, game weight, and energy. I just don't think it's anywhere near 1:1. More energy does not automatically make one round better than another and less does not make it automatically worse.
Kernel
Member
Before that they used long sticks with stone points. That lasted for tens of thousands of years. Must of been the best method EVER.
Arkansas Paul
Member
+1 Kernel.
Speedo66
Member
Why limit yourself to Marlins and Winchesters? :banghead:
No disrespect to the above, but a Browning BLR is the way to go with 20th century cartridges.
No disrespect to the above, but a Browning BLR is the way to go with 20th century cartridges.
Realistically I think any common deer rifle chambering is adequate for most black bear. It is unlikely that you will be shooting them at a distance of hundreds of yards. I'd just pick a heavy for caliber and/or premium bullet to ensure adequate penetration to the vitals, especially with the smaller calibers. Plenty of eastern black bear are killed with 30-30 and .243. If the rifle will be used commonly for black bear hunting though, it would be reasonable to pick a cartridge on the middle to upper end of the common deer cartridges for some extra insurance should you be lucky enough to get a shot a one of the big boys some day! For me that equals .260/6.5x55 and up.
Bear
If you shoot a 350 lb. black bear coming up a very steep hill toward your tree stand just under the chin. With a 30-06 and 180 grain bullet. He will not even blink, he will collapse as though electrocuted. He will die in 1/1000th of a second. He literally did not even blink when I shot him. Absolutely instant collapse. So I believe a 30-06 will be sufficient if the bullet is placed in a lethal spot.
If you shoot a 350 lb. black bear coming up a very steep hill toward your tree stand just under the chin. With a 30-06 and 180 grain bullet. He will not even blink, he will collapse as though electrocuted. He will die in 1/1000th of a second. He literally did not even blink when I shot him. Absolutely instant collapse. So I believe a 30-06 will be sufficient if the bullet is placed in a lethal spot.
shaggy430
Member
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2008
- Messages
- 950
Most shots at black bear are taken at close range. I've never killed a bear, but from what I understand your standard deer rifle is more than sufficient. I would imagine that especially in the Southeast more bear have been taken with a 30-30 than anything.
Reading many responces here was so entertaining on this subject.
I guess those Inuits who live and hunt in the arctic circle, who carry .223 to hunt everything (because its cheap and easy to get) have killed polar bears consistantly by luck and the "shear terror" from the sound of the rifle firing, lol.
I remember hearing far too many stories over the years about the "exagerrated need" for monster guns to hunt everything from squirrel to bears.
This was entertaining to read.
I guess those Inuits who live and hunt in the arctic circle, who carry .223 to hunt everything (because its cheap and easy to get) have killed polar bears consistantly by luck and the "shear terror" from the sound of the rifle firing, lol.
I remember hearing far too many stories over the years about the "exagerrated need" for monster guns to hunt everything from squirrel to bears.
This was entertaining to read.
Reading many responces here was so entertaining on this subject.
I guess those Inuits who live and hunt in the arctic circle, who carry .223 to hunt everything (because its cheap and easy to get) have killed polar bears consistantly by luck and the "shear terror" from the sound of the rifle firing, lol.
I remember hearing far too many stories over the years about the "exagerrated need" for monster guns to hunt everything from squirrel to bears.
This was entertaining to read.
Oh, that photo was photoshopped, and so obviously, anyone who didnt notice it, wow.
I guess those Inuits who live and hunt in the arctic circle, who carry .223 to hunt everything (because its cheap and easy to get) have killed polar bears consistantly by luck and the "shear terror" from the sound of the rifle firing, lol.
I remember hearing far too many stories over the years about the "exagerrated need" for monster guns to hunt everything from squirrel to bears.
This was entertaining to read.
Oh, that photo was photoshopped, and so obviously, anyone who didnt notice it, wow.
Kernel
Member
Another photo of the same bear taken from another angle. Was this one Photoshopped, also? LOL. Take of the tinfoil hats people. Not everything is a conspiracy. The pictures look real to me, and there’s not one shred of evidence that they’ve been altered in anyway.
Granted, they are crappy photos. But that’s not evidence of a conspiracy. Lots of people take crappy photos. The shadows, blur, focus, exposure, and small details are all constant. Probably a POS cell phone camera.
What’s the motive? What’s the necessity? No one doubts the bear existed. That it was as big as they say. That the Schlough family had possession, the DNR issued them a permit. That they took it to a local meat locker to have it processed. That it was hung from a strap at the meat locker. That’s all part of the record. None of it is contested.
It’s called a hoist. Meat locker are full of them.
The strap is clearly visible. It goes around the bear’s back and under it’s armpits. You can clearly see how it disrupts and displaces the animals fur. Again, straps are common items found at meat lockers.
No he doesn’t. Rotated the animal looks very unnatural. Why would the head extended and at such a high angle. Why would the ribs be stretched out like, you know, the animal was HANGING.
So, why Photoshop it? You don’t think they owned a camera? That they had to “doctor” these photos to…. to…. to do what exactly? Make a 7 foot tall, 700 lb bear appear bigger than it really was? LOL. This is an old farming couple that probably doesn’t even own a computer, let alone Photoshop and the knowledge to use it.
Why would they need to Photoshop a picture of a bear they had possession of, being processed at a meat locker they paid for, hanging from a strap that’s clearly visible. The paw only partially obstructs the view of the strap. The paw is not supporting the bear in any fashion. That’s clear from the photos.
It’s this same type of heard mentality, lazy thinking, and lack of critical thought that leads people to believe the old .30-30 is an ideal cartridge for a 600 lb bear.
If you STILL think these pictures were Photoshopped, all I can say is, wow.
There's more to the story, but that doesn’t impact the validity of these photos. Unbeknownst to the Schloughs, two days before an out-of-state deer hunter had shot the bear twice with a .30-30. Once in the head at near contact range. Didn't kill the bear. The combine finished it off two days later. That’s why the bear didn’t run. It was paralyzed and barely alive. The guy who shot it was from North Dakota, got caught because he was bragging about it, was prosecuted, and paid a $4140 fine.
Gryffydd
Member
Who said "Ideal"? There's a big difference between Ideal and Sufficient.
And doubtless with proper shot placement and proper bullets that bear would have been dead right quick. To blame this on the .30-30 is stretching it a bit.
Do you know these people personally, or are you just stereotyping them because they're old? Or because they're farmers?
- Status
