Long post warning (you should know that about my posts by now, LoL)

<< no one firearm is going to suffice for all situations >>

Of course not. I answered the specific question that was asked with my opinion and the reasons why that is my opinion - in some detail. Since I can't figure out where you were going with your post, I'll amplify my post instead.

In the early 70s Speer came out with their 200gr very large hollowpoint 452 bullet (they still sell it), partially in response to some apocryphal urban legands going around at the time about 45ACP ball ammo fired by stake-out cops failing to put down the odd bad guy here and there (although most of the time it did). I believe that it was the first readily available bullet for the 45ACP that, as near as anyone could tell, reliably expanded in flesh. The current crop of premium 45ACP expanding bullets are far superior and ARE proven to reliably expand, real world. Examples would be bullets like Federal Hydra-Shock (oldest of the new type) or Remington Golden Saber (my personal preference).

Like many others, I developed an extremely hot load for that 200 gr Speer bullet out of a M1911. My 1911 is ramped properly, but trying to hot load that bullet has probably blown more magazines out and grip panels off than all others combined, due to over-enthusiastic modification of the feed ramp that left un-supported case wall forward of the case head hanging in thin air. I NEVER, even then, figured that for a bear load - too light a bullet for the caliber.

But some folks thought otherwise and I recall reading about a couple of fellows who successfully hunted black bear (IIRC, in PA) with M1911 and that bullet loaded to something over 1,000fps. They reported cleanly taking some bears, supported in the magazine article by photographs of bears and some recovered bullets - IIRC, at least one bear expired to a shot that exited the off side. Bullets that were recovered were supposedly expanded to around 0.90" (I think - may have been less - 0.65 seems more likely to me, but 0.90 is what I remember) I believe that the bears were shot from the sides with heart-lung type hits - as long as the bear cooperates by not getting POed for a minute or two, the shot that reliably kill with the least amount of penetration required. It was, and is, a believable story. Lots of caveats, and it never claimed to transform the 45ACP into a bear-defense gun. Oh, it's still used by some boar hunters from what I hear and read, although I personally would be leery of electively shooting a large boar with it.

The current crop of uber-bullets/factory loads for the 45ACP are exceptional and well-proven FOR WHAT the 45 is intended for: anti-personnel. Their depth of penetration is designed to a fair-thee-well for Law Enforcement anti-personnel use, and they perform real-world as-designed. So I conclude that they would be better than the old Speer 200gr on bears if a shot to the heart-lungs can be made without requiring deep penetration (like head-on on all fours). Bear caliber of choice? Hardly. Pot meat gun of choice? Not even close. But I stick to the question asked. Backpacking requires compromises, conciously or sub-conciously, and since human predation is more likely than bear predation back East, a 45ACP is a reasonable compromise. Of course, the VAST majority of hikers carry no firearm and manage just fine...

I have an adequate selection of weapons to choose from and don't routinely carry a 45ACP in the woods. On the RARE occasions I carry my 1911A1 while hiking/backpacking, I stoke it with 230gr factory Golden Sabers unless I'm in a location likely to have pesky black bears. Then I carry handloaded 230gr Hornady truncated-cone FMJ bullets as a compromise - one magazine of those in the gun, and 2 magazines of the Golden Sabers. It's my opinion that the TC FMJ bullets develop a better wound channel than RN ball and reliably penetrate deeper because they are less susceptable to being deflected and veering off inside the target. My opnion on TC FMJ performance, AFAIK, is as yet unproven in that caliber, but has been amply demonstrated in the 9mm; that's the original form factor for the 9mm and the bullet that gave the 9mm its early good reputation in WWI.

In any event, the 45ACP gets the job done on humans, cougars, and lesser animals. With good ammunition, skill, and luck, it probably will get the job done well enough on an average Eastern bear or boar. But it really can't get up over the event horizon of a 255+gr 45 bullet leaving the muzzle at 1,000+fps, so it's a compromise weighted towards the more likely threats. Even those threats (human) are very low probability. I just don't see a problem with what he wants to buy, even though it's not my first choice.

<shrug> The short-barreled DA large caliber revolver options mentioned in other posts would be OK, too - just threat-weighted the other way, in my opinion. S&W is not the only one that offers those kinds of options, FWIW. And there's nothing wrong with a properly fed DA 357, either, although that flips back over to the human-weighted side. And Ted's 40 S&W is great, too, although I would be VERY picky about bullet weight and selection if bears were around - available loads and bullets for the 40 are even more oriented towards anti-personnel than the 45ACP.

The list of plausible compromises is long and I can cheerfully accept many opinions on the "right" answer to his question - regardless of what I choose to do for the reasons I wrote and others that are less relevant to the question.

Regards,

Tom

I'm always a bit bemused at priorities and what scenarios we think we will play out. We cut blank sections from Topo maps, handles off toothbrushes, pack obnoxious freezedried food ( just add clorine cleaned crypto free water for visions of grandma presenting a steaming platter of blueberry french waffles) and optimistically arctic rated sleeping bags that miraculously roll up tighter than a baby armadillo. And then we strap a axe and firearm on that together wiegh 12 pounds, have enough metal to throw our compass 90 degrees off true but give such a list to starboard we compensate anyway in an uneven stride. I suppose we expect to build a saxon great hall and cover the floor with Grendel's hide. Anyone pack the whistle and mirror when the reality of 99% of our real adventures play out and we want to come home? <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Tom, thanks for your well thought out reply. Don't fret, I am not sure where I was going either. I guess the bottom line on firearms in a wilderness survival situation is that most likely it will be used for nothing more than taking game for food. With that in mind, one should set out to find the most suitable weapon considering size and usefulness. One choice would be a .357 revolver and a supply of hot ammo plus a supply of shot shells. I've never tried the shot shells but I would think the range would be limited on ground animals. Maybe further on winged creatures. I have to believe that .357 hollow point hot loads would be adequate on a 200 pound bear. What it would do to Bigfoot is another story. Problem is, with most pistols and revolvers, every time you fire it you announce your presence and location to an unknown audience. Maybe just for game a .22 revolver with sub-sonic bullets would suffice if you are a decent shot. Who knows? When I was a kid in the last century, we used to put baby bottle nipples over the barrel of a .22 and we "imagined" that it silenced the bang somewhat. <img src="/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

Boone

Yeah, what you said...

Boone,

I agree. Setting aside TEOTWAKI and other fantasies, foks here at ETS have such varied locales and circumstances that any hard-and-fast answer to questions about firearms is going to be wrong in some way for most of the readers... and most of us could go safely without a firearm in the woods all of the time. So nowadays I try to just stick to the question asked instead of extending it to justify my choices.

However, I am mindful of my own experiences here and abroad and there is absolutely no question in my mind that there ARE exceptions and that it would be just plain stupid to go unarmed some places in some situations - specifically including parts of North America. At least here in the USA I can legally exercise my choices in the places I choose to go. (I rarely frequent NPS lands because that choice is denied me there.)

Tom

I have a Mosin Nagant M44 and love it <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I'm not suggesting that 5.56mm is ideal or anything, just that if that is something he routinely carries around, it will likely be more effective than a .45 on just about anything he's shooting at.

Ghris... Dude... you don't have to list, strap the axe on one side, and the hogleg on the other... they balance each other out, and you walk straight <img src="/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Troy

You keep poking fun and commenting on how amusing we all are...
Kind of discouraging <img src="/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" /> not to mention the off the wall randomness lately

You have a good point about the 357 Magnum revolver being a fine all around sdearm. I don't see the great fascination with the auto pistol for field use. (Please, no rants, feeding a revolver is a lot more flexible than an autoloader.)
My one comment concerns using the Speer 357 shotshells: they are not a reliabile game getter except at extremly close range, say ten feet. Try wadcutter loads or semi-wadcutters for small game. In my S&W, 158 gr semi-wadcutters hit the same POI as a hot 125 gr hollow point soft nose.
Except for someone hunting Black Bear, the chance of a mauling in North Carolina is probably on the same order as being hit by a meteorite, but.... the question was asked.

"There is nothing so frightening as ignorance in action"

I always mimic Gilligan in the opening credits. Can anyone list what the castaway's had in the pilot episode? <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />