Escape from a charging polar bear

[M118LR]

God favors drunks, dogs, and fools. Usually Sailors make two out of three! Do they still have the Tasvo Lions in the Chicago Field Museum?

 

[M118LR]

"So I guess those folks expounding on the side of .22LR for Griz hunting they regularly go out with a .22LR?"

Expounding on the side of .22LR?

More like reporting.

I've never been grizzly hunting and if I did go I sure wouldn't use a .22LR. If you read the article I linked, you would see that Bella Twin used the weapon she had available when it became apparent that the bear was about to find her. Somewhat surprisingly, it did the job.

I believe I linked an article far more concerning than a once in a lifetime kill. JMHO YMMV. Yet somehow I feel that you didn't bother to read it by your reply? Still you expect quid pro quo? Oops, I've bagged them all. Foolish is as foolish quotes. Don't go hunting any of them and bet your life on a .22LR, it's a SUCKERs proposition. JMHO YMMV.

 

[Mike J]

"A Cree woman that was trapping in Arizona killed an at the time world record grizzly with a rifle chambered for .22 Long back in the 50's. If you do a search you can probably find the article. Her name was Bella Twin. The author of the article was Dean Weingarten IIRC. It was a world record bear at that time."

Thinking it wasn't in Arizona:

https://www.ammoland.com/2017/06/be...-take-the-1953-world-record-grizzly-and-more/

You are correct. The Arizona that is written by Ammoland at the beginning of the article was stuck in my head for some reason. It has been a long time since I read that.

 

[arfmel]

Bella Twin wasn’t out “hunting” bears. Again, she utilized the only weapon she had with her, surprisingly successfully. I don’t advocate using any smallbore rifle for any kind of bear hunting. I have no idea how you would have gotten the idea I do. My post was an attempt to provide information with regard to Mike J’s post. I admit I didn’t read the lengthy article in your earlier post (which I hadn’t seen). I apologize for any misunderstanding I may have caused.

 

[M118LR]

If brevity is a requirement, skip down to Velocity. Short read, but easy to take out of context. Yet min velocities by caliber diameter can be gleaned. JMHO YMMV.

 

[JohnL]

Since we are on about Polar Bears, I saw one in the distance while walking outside a village in eastern Greenland back in '72. A local resident in a kayak paddled up to me on the shore. He chuckled and spoke in their native language. Then he pointed to the bear in the distance. I went back to the village at a brisk walk.

 

[Wyandot Jim]

This is what you are dealing with. I want a belt fed 50 Cal BMG.

 

[M118LR]

Since we are on about Polar Bears, I saw one in the distance while walking outside a village in eastern Greenland back in '72. A local resident in a kayak paddled up to me on the shore. He chuckled and spoke in their native language. Then he pointed to the bear in the distance. I went back to the village at a brisk walk.

The one I shot in Greenland with a government issued shotgun, didn't require the skill set of the one I shot in Canada with a high-powered rifle. Yet in one instance I was the hunter, in the other I was being hunted. Big difference. JMHO YMMV.

 

[coachk64]

Of the guns I have, I would feel reasonably comfortable with a lever action 45-70, loaded to the max with 500 grain solid lead bullets. You'll never knock one down, but you need maximum penetration with a big enough bullet to cause catastrophic organ damage. Even then, you'd better be prepared to dodge around for a few minutes.

 

[vito]

An RPG would probably work just fine. Just a little heavy to carry around all day.

 

[Killer Bee]

I personally wouldn't get any closer to a polar bear than 800yds with my Barrett M82A1, otherwise nat geo on TV is close enough for me

Weatherby's polar bear in the old Southgate store

 

[Jeepnik]

So why do they always mount them standing on their rear legs? Also, why are movie/TV bear attacks always shown with the bears on its rear legs slowly approaching the victim.

Probably the silliest bear attack film was in Clint Walker's Night of the Grizzly.

 

[Paul B]

Not when it comes to energy.... not even close. And the .35 Whelen is just a .30-06 necked up - still a .30-06

Oh really? I've used both plus I'll add the .300 Win. Mag. just for spits and grins. I'll use elk in this case because I'll never hunt one of the great bears for several reasons. One is at 86 years I'm too damned old. Two even if I wanted to do so, I couldn't afford the price and three, I really have no desire. Hoe ever I have shot elk with the three cartridges mentioned and the one with the 30-06 ran for about thirty yards ater the hit before falling and expiring. The one with the .300 Win. Mag was about the same but just standing for about 30 to 40 seconds before falling, but the elk hit with the .35 Whelen were down and out splat, never moving in any direction except straight down. Bang, flop, DRT. You will never convince me that the .35 Whelen is just a 30-06 necked up to 35 caliber. So, yes if push came to shove, I'd use the .35 Whelen against one of the great bears if I was in such a situation and I wouldn't worry one damn bit.
Paul B.

 

[wwb]

Oh really? I've used both plus I'll add the .300 Win. Mag. just for spits and grins. I'll use elk in this case because I'll never hunt one of the great bears for several reasons. One is at 86 years I'm too damned old. Two even if I wanted to do so, I couldn't afford the price and three, I really have no desire. Hoe ever I have shot elk with the three cartridges mentioned and the one with the 30-06 ran for about thirty yards ater the hit before falling and expiring. The one with the .300 Win. Mag was about the same but just standing for about 30 to 40 seconds before falling, but the elk hit with the .35 Whelen were down and out splat, never moving in any direction except straight down. Bang, flop, DRT. You will never convince me that the .35 Whelen is just a 30-06 necked up to 35 caliber. So, yes if push came to shove, I'd use the .35 Whelen against one of the great bears if I was in such a situation and I wouldn't worry one damn bit.
Paul B.

Any single instance doesn't mean squat. I've shot a whitetail with a 165 grain .30-06 and had it run over 100 yards. Turns out the bullet entered between 2 ribs, passed through both lungs, and exited between 2 ribs. Never touched the heart, and the exit wound was a pencil-hole. No firm tissue of any kind, andthe bullet never expanded. I've also shot one with a .30-30 - broke the spine at the base of the neck, and it dropped in its tracks. Does that make the .30-30 a better deer rifle than an 06?

I stand by my statement - a .35 Whelen is just a necked-up .30-06. Bullet diameter is different, but with any load, the energy difference is negligible.

 

[Paul B]

I believe that there is too much emphasis on energy If a bullet passes clean through an animal most of that energy is wasted on thin air. However, passing clean through allows a lot of cold air going in and lots of blood leaking out. The .35W running a 225 gr. TSX will do just that. With the .35W I can run some of the long discontinued Hornady 275 gr, bullets that may stay inside in which case the full energy is delivered to the animal or pass though with the ensuing blood leakage and cold air entry. A win win in either case. I base my opinions on 71 years of hunting and I've used some of the high velocity whiz bangs and some of the slower calibers like the 45-70. I'm liking the heavy for caliber bullets more and more although at my age, there aren't very many hunts left in whatever future I have left.
Paul B.

 

[coachk64]

a .35 Whelen is just a necked-up .30-06. Bullet diameter is different, but with any load, the energy difference is negligible.

While I fully agree that a single data point isn't enough on which to base a hypothesis, a quick look at the load data for the 30-06 and the 35 Whelan tells a story. With the extra 16% of bullet diameter, you get a full 16% more muzzle energy, as the 150 grain 30-06 and the 180 grain .35 Whelan bullets achieve very close to identical velocities. 16% more energy and a 16% bigger wound channel, while maybe not substantial, is a bit more than negligible. I'm a huge 30-06 fan, but if facing a large dangerous predator, I'd feel about 16% more confident with the .35 Whelan in a reliable repeater.

That being said the rifle makes a difference all by itself. My M1 Garand with a couple of spare 8-round clips would be a much better choice for me than a bolt-action in .35 Whelan (or about any other caliber).

 

[XUSNORDIE]

Fred Bear, Fred Eichler, Tim Vance, Tom Miranda and many many others didn't need guns for Polar Bear.....Long Bow, Recurve, Compound.....

Tim Wells is planning a spear hunt.

But I'm sure there were some 338, 375 and others standing by during their stalks.....somewhere

 

[jmca]

Actually, 338 & 308 fall into the same category. Things improve with the 35 Whelen or .358 diameter. Scroll down to Velocity and read until Diameter. Got to admit I'm a 9.3x 62 fan.
https://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/Effective+Game+Killing.html

Skip read thru this article, seems legit? Definitely going to read again!

 

[Killer Bee]

 

[The.Tumbleweed]

This is what you are dealing with. I want a belt fed 50 Cal BMG.

View attachment 72634

I wonder how well a Benelli M4 loaded with brass slugs would fare against a beast like that.
Geez, what a monster !