44 Special for Grizzly?

[BearBio]

I don't know but bear threads are always rife with illogical comments.

You make your own point.

 

[Chuck 100 yd]

Bear threads are always fun. Ridicules ideas abound. Lets hear some more!

 

[MaxP]

What is ridiculous about the ability of a properly loaded handgun stopping a determined attack by a bear? It still all boils down to marksmanship under extreme duress, irrespective of the firearm chosen. The assertion that a handgun shouldn't even be considered is what bothers me the most.

 

[JLarsson]

Who made that assertion?

 

[Jim Puke]

What is ridiculous about the ability of a properly loaded handgun stopping a determined attack by a bear? It still all boils down to marksmanship under extreme duress, irrespective of the firearm chosen. The assertion that a handgun shouldn't even be considered is what bothers me the most.

For the most part, the assertions expressed in this thread are that there are better choices than a handgun...and that is TRUE.

Just watch some of the safari programs on Outdoor Network...listen to those professional hunters and watch some of the videos they show on dangerous game attacking and the loads they can soak up...and still cause great damage or death to people.

A handgun, in most any loading...is a poor choice to stop an attack. Have they been used successfully, yes...but they are still a last, last, last resort...if for no other reason, they are very difficult to shoot fairly accurately while you are in the eye of the storm.

Half of the time, you can shoot a 120lb deer with one of the heaviest handgun loads and he will still run. How does that translate to stopping a charging 800lb griz...not too good.

 

[whichwatch]

I don't often get into bear country, but when I do it's black bear country only and this what either my 4" M29 or 4 5/8" Super Blackhawk is loaded with: Buffalo Bore 255 gr. Keith - G.C. (1,350 fps/M.E. 1,032 ft.lbs.). IF I were to get in grizzly territory I would leave both at home and opt for my Super Redhawk Toklat in .454 Casull.

 

[Slenk]

I hunt with a guy 45 years ago that tried to stop a 250# black bear , at to close range . Did not work good for the shooter. My old colt 44-40 worked good though.

 

[MaxP]

What is ridiculous about the ability of a properly loaded handgun stopping a determined attack by a bear? It still all boils down to marksmanship under extreme duress, irrespective of the firearm chosen. The assertion that a handgun shouldn't even be considered is what bothers me the most.

For the most part, the assertions expressed in this thread are that there are better choices than a handgun...and that is TRUE.

Just watch some of the safari programs on Outdoor Network...listen to those professional hunters and watch some of the videos they show on dangerous game attacking and the loads they can soak up...and still cause great damage or death to people.

A handgun, in most any loading...is a poor choice to stop an attack. Have they been used successfully, yes...but they are still a last, last, last resort...if for no other reason, they are very difficult to shoot fairly accurately while you are in the eye of the storm.

Half of the time, you can shoot a 120lb deer with one of the heaviest handgun loads and he will still run. How does that translate to stopping a charging 800lb griz...not too good.

Not true at all. I take it you haven't shot anything big with a handgun. I've seen 120 lb deer hit with a .300 Win Mag run off. That isn't a good indicator as to the effectiveness of a given firearm/caliber combination. Each animal is a law unto itself. Some run, some drop, some continue eating/drinking/walking or whatever it was they were doing when they were hit. Sometimes the signal that they're supposed to be dead doesn't reach the brain immediately. Some animals soak up lots of lead, some take one shot. Too many factors involved to make the sweeping statement that handguns are a poor choice.

 

[CraigC]

A handgun, in most any loading...is a poor choice to stop an attack. Have they been used successfully, yes...but they are still a last, last, last resort...if for no other reason, they are very difficult to shoot fairly accurately while you are in the eye of the storm.

Which alludes to a basic lack of understanding of how big bore revolvers work on big game. The only advantage to a rifle in this case is that they are easier for the average person to shoot accurately. If you think a .475 or .500 lacks in killing ability, you're uninformed and your opinion is worth very little.

In my penetration testing, the best handgun load went 25" deep. Meanwhile, a 225gr .338 load went 11". Do you really think the rifle is a better tool for the job?

Half of the time, you can shoot a 120lb deer with one of the heaviest handgun loads and he will still run. How does that translate to stopping a charging 800lb griz...not too good.

I've had deer run 100yds uphill after a killing hit with a .54cal roundball at 1850fps. What does that tell us about stopping bears? Not a friggin' thing. What deer do on a double lung shot is irrelevant. Break shoulders and hips on the way in or out while still punching through the heart/lungs and things change drastically. If you knew what you were talking about, you'd understand this. Which is what you have to do with a bear (or any other dangerous game), take away its ability to move. Break down its structural integrity. Sure, a CNS hit would be great but only a fool thinks attempting a head shot is a good idea.

 

[whichwatch]

I hunt with a guy 45 years ago that tried to stop a 250# black bear , at to close range . Did not work good for the shooter. My old colt 44-40 worked good though.

So, what did he try to stop it with?

 

[GunnyGene]

The only way I see to settle the issue is Roman Gladiator style in a rodeo ring. Except the humans get the handgun and ammo of their choice - no reloads and no body armor. Ring the bell and turn 'em loose. See who's the last man (or bear) standing. Any volunteers for a little one on one with Mr. Grizz? :wink: :mrgreen:

 

[Slenk]

I hunt with a guy 45 years ago that tried to stop a 250# black bear , at to close range . Did not work good for the shooter. My old colt 44-40 worked good though.

So, what did he try to stop it with?

I have no clue as to his ammo it was .357 and a head shot that went bad. Bullet hit the forehead and followed the skull under the skin out the top.

 

[Naphtali]

We ain't had this discussion in a while

CraigC, whatcha say?

Had you seen a mature grizzly within 50 yards of you - without bars and moat between the two of you - you would accept without question my reply query: Are you out of your mind?

I have seen two - one across the street and two lots down (75-100 yards), the other when woods walking at a little less than the same distance. At home, I bolted into the house, locked the door, and got my 45-70 from the safe. In Lolo National Forest, I drew my 45 Colt and mumbled a prayer for the dead. My 45 Colt load was/is 45/300/1150.

These animals are nearly as large as an original VW Beetle.

FYI: Five years ago (it seems like only three years) on the first day of shed season at the Clearwater Wildlife Refuge (3-4 miles from the house) a man was charged by a grizzly sow protecting her cubs. Four hits from his 44 Magnum caused the sow to run off. About nine hours later a pair of federal game wardens killed the sow with several hits from [unknown] magnum rifles.

 

[Armybrat]

Seems the Yellowstone grizz are about to lose their government protection:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/us-seeks-end-to-yellowstone-grizzly-protections/ar-BBqiWmA?li=BBnb7Kz

 

[Jim Puke]

What is ridiculous about the ability of a properly loaded handgun stopping a determined attack by a bear? It still all boils down to marksmanship under extreme duress, irrespective of the firearm chosen. The assertion that a handgun shouldn't even be considered is what bothers me the most.

For the most part, the assertions expressed in this thread are that there are better choices than a handgun...and that is TRUE.

Just watch some of the safari programs on Outdoor Network...listen to those professional hunters and watch some of the videos they show on dangerous game attacking and the loads they can soak up...and still cause great damage or death to people.

A handgun, in most any loading...is a poor choice to stop an attack. Have they been used successfully, yes...but they are still a last, last, last resort...if for no other reason, they are very difficult to shoot fairly accurately while you are in the eye of the storm.

Half of the time, you can shoot a 120lb deer with one of the heaviest handgun loads and he will still run. How does that translate to stopping a charging 800lb griz...not too good.

Not true at all. I take it you haven't shot anything big with a handgun. I've seen 120 lb deer hit with a .300 Win Mag run off. That isn't a good indicator as to the effectiveness of a given firearm/caliber combination. Each animal is a law unto itself. Some run, some drop, some continue eating/drinking/walking or whatever it was they were doing when they were hit. Sometimes the signal that they're supposed to be dead doesn't reach the brain immediately. Some animals soak up lots of lead, some take one shot. Too many factors involved to make the sweeping statement that handguns are a poor choice.

You stand by your beliefs and I will stand by mine.

You feel comfortable taking on a griz with a handgun...knock yourself out.

Since you are so adept at making the case for handguns and dangerous game...WHY do professional folks that go into dangerous game and bear country, prefer to carry a rifle to backup shooters...when all they need is a bigbore handgun?

You and CraigC have probably shot just as many charging grizzly bears as I have...meaning, y'all know no more than I do about how effective anything is on a charging grizzly.

And, BTW, the fact that a 120lb deer can tote off a heavy handgun or rifle caliber shot is just more evidence that more is probably better with an even LARGER animal. So, you make my point.

 

[MaxP]

You stand by your beliefs and I will stand by mine.

You feel comfortable taking on a griz with a handgun...knock yourself out.

Since you are so adept at making the case for handguns and dangerous game...WHY do professional folks that go into dangerous game and bear country, prefer to carry a rifle to backup shooters...when all they need is a bigbore handgun?

You and CraigC have probably shot just as many charging grizzly bears as I have...meaning, y'all know no more than I do about how effective anything is on a charging grizzly.

And, BTW, the fact that a 120lb deer can tote off a heavy handgun or rifle caliber shot is just more evidence that more is probably better with an even LARGER animal. So, you make my point.

I stand by my beliefs because they are based on experience. To what do you owe your beliefs? Have you simply decided they are inadequate, or have you proven it to yourself?

Actually, lots of hunters in Alaska carry revolvers as backup. Have you ever tried taking a rifle or shotgun in the sleeping bag with you? Keep in mind that many -- maybe most -- folks that dabble in big-bore revolvers, don't put the time into getting really comfortable and competent with their sidearm.

So, again, I take it you've never shot big-game (at least the aforementioned 120 deer?) with a revolver. Or have you?

Lot's a folks hunt large and dangerous game with revolvers. You don't, so you assume it can't and/or shouldn't be done? Am I reading you right? I know quite a few folks who have hunted Africa with revolvers as well.

Here's an anecdote to ponder. Back in 2007, a friend of mine and I were hunting wild hogs in Florida. He shot a small hog (maybe 50 lbs) at 350 yards with his .300 WinMag, loaded with 180 grain TSXs. Shot was in the shoulder with the animal quartering to him. The bullet in essence unzipped the animal, spilling its contents on the ground. It still ran off and required a finisher. The moral of the story is that again, each and every animal is a law unto itself. Some run, some attack, some die.

I would suggest getting out and taking a few heads of big-game with a revolver before declaring their inadequacy. Just a suggestion.

 

[whichwatch]

We ain't had this discussion in a while

CraigC, whatcha say?

Had you seen a mature grizzly within 50 yards of you - without bars and moat between the two of you - you would accept without question my reply query: Are you out of your mind?

I have seen two - one across the street and two lots down (75-100 yards), the other when woods walking at a little less than the same distance. At home, I bolted into the house, locked the door, and got my 45-70 from the safe. In Lolo National Forest, I drew my 45 Colt and mumbled a prayer for the dead. My 45 Colt load was/is 45/300/1150.

These animals are nearly as large as an original VW Beetle.

FYI: Five years ago (it seems like only three years) on the first day of shed season at the Clearwater Wildlife Refuge (3-4 miles from the house) a man was charged by a grizzly sow protecting her cubs. Four hits from his 44 Magnum caused the sow to run off. About nine hours later a pair of federal game wardens killed the sow with several hits from [unknown] magnum rifles.

I'm pretty sure the bear reconsidered possibly coming after you knowing that the door was locked.

 

[contender]

I always enjoy these posts,,,, until they get ridiculous or when they get ugly to one another.

Just like so many similar topics,,, there is NOT one end all be all answer. Way too many variables. So I guess all the discussions will continue long after we are all gone.

 

[MaxP]

I always enjoy these posts,,,, until they get ridiculous or when they get ugly to one another.

Just like so many similar topics,,, there is NOT one end all be all answer. Way too many variables. So I guess all the discussions will continue long after we are all gone.

The only thing that pulls me into these "discussions" is the declaration that a revolver is inadequate for large animals. I know for a fact that this isn't the case, however, some would like to impose their limitations on others. Other than that, have at it..... :mrgreen:

 

[pisgah]

What gets me is -- there is really only one answer to the question, "What is the best gun for protection from big bears?", and it
is -- the biggest, baddest thing you can carry without wheels on it, and still hit what you are aiming at.

And I don't care what anyone picks -- if you get yourself in to a situation where you actually need it, may God be with you, 'cause you are in a jam, and odds are about 99-to-1 you put yourself there.