Is anyone here aware of a revolver or single action which is chambered in .444 Marlin or other rifle calibers with a 6-8 inch barrel? I found one with a ten inch barrel, which I eliminated, along with the entire T/C single shot series. .30-30 is the minimum I would consider, though I would consider a .45-70.
Thanks

Magnum research makes a revolver in 45-70 with a 7 1/2" barrel. It is single action in stainless steel and I've seen them as cheap as $900.

More pistol than I care for. The 500 S&W revolver can be had with a 7" barrel, and wouldn't be much less than the 45-70.

Thanks Benjammin. I'll check it out. I had considered the .500 at one point, may give it another look. recoil isn't really an issue, noise might be a consideration. A friend has an AMT in .30 carbine and it's extremely irritating.

I personally wouldn't want one of these super powerful handguns, but if I were to get one, I think it would be a .460 S&W magnum, which is only a small step down from the current king of the hill, the .500 S&W magnum. Then when you get tired of blowing your hand off, you can switch to .454 Casull. Which will still blow your hand off, but a little less so than the .460's. And when you finally get older and less macho, load it up with .45colts or even .45 Schofields. I've never shot the .460 S&W before, but .454 Casull I have. It has recoil for sure, but I didn't consider it punishing. But if you're not a long time experienced handgun shooter, that .454 Casull will probably do most folks in. I can't imagine the .460 or .500 S&W... Unless you have a specific need for a cartridge of this power, and such need would be extremely rare, I can't fathom any reason someone would want one. .45colt, on the other hand, is my absolute favorite handgun cartridge. Plenty powerful, easy to shoot, easy to reload, and the SAA revolvers chambered for it are my favorites.

I must be getting old,but I am still fond of my S&W 357 Magnum-it can still put holes in things...

A "fiend" with a .30 carbine would be fiendish indeed!

Haertig.
I have a .454 Casull and a .50 AE. Recoil doesn't bother me much. Thanks for the information

Hikermor
.357 is nothing to sneeze at.But theres an old saying, bigger bullets make bigger holes. And if the.44magnum is no longer considered effective on bears then where does that leave the .357? JMHO

AKSAR
I cant type for spit

I figured it was a typo, and I was just joking with you. It was just too good to resist!

LOLIknow, np

I'm curious, what exactly do you need that much gun for?
One would have thought that anything requiring that much gun, and by that I mean Elephant, Cape Buffalo, Hippo, Tiger, Polar Bear , Kodiak or a largish Grizzly would be better handled with a rifle, or possibly a 10 or 12 gauge Shotgun loaded with Brenneks or Copper solids.
If you are dealing with large game in close quarters then one would have thought .454 Casul more than adequate, provided you load it with hard semiwadcutters.

.500 Linebaugh by Hamilton Bowen...

'Cause I like big guns? That would be my answer .

You actually don't need any kind of gun at all to survive a grizzly attack. I worked for a lady who, on duty in a park in Alaska, played possum with an attacking griz and emerged unscathed. Her partner suffered significant wounds and they aborted their mission.

I could have suggested that she was simply too tough and ornery for the grizzly to stomach, but, since she was my boss at the time, I held my tongue. Just for the record, she was one of the better supervisors I have experienced. Grizzlies just have no taste whatever....

Liegh

What Chaos said, Cause I like big guns. The little woman is into .45's, including old and exotic makes. I'm a large, extremely muscular guy so I can soak up a lot of recoil and carry a lot of weight. And it's going to be mounted on a survival vest for a trip to Alaska. I'll have a pair of rifles of course, but if they can't be retrieved then I want to have something on me capable of handling the situation. And I promised my .454 Casull to someone in the event of my death, so if I don't make it out for some reason the it might not be recovered or returned either.

Les

I've heard of that once or twice, will check it out.

Chaos

You sound like a man after my own heart.

Hiker

I've heard of that several times, but wouldn't want to test the theory personally. There are cases where playing dead did not help. Bears are carrion eaters, so just curling into a ball doesn't seem that good of an idea to me, JMHO. If I can find room on my vest I'd like to add bear spray, but to be honest, in a survival situation an attacking bear, it would supply a lot of meat, a warm fur to wrap up in (far more durable and warmer than a heat sheet), tools and some claws for jewelry and to remember the bruin by in my aging years.

Thanks to all of you for responding.

I'm hardly a bear expert. This guide looks pretty good to my untrained eyes: http://www.wikihow.com/Survive-a-Bear-Attack.

What I've read is that a bear feeling defensive for some reason is more likely to leave you alone if you don't act like a threat. A predatory bear needs to be convinced that you are not food; playing dead or running away will just cause you to become bear scat.

Playing dead is indeed a pretty dicey procedure,I'll admit. I would prefer to carry a shotgun with slugs. I understand that bear spray is statistically more effective than firearms at halting attacks.

I would check out a biologist named Stephen Herrero and his latest information. He is no theoretical biologist; he has field time and face time with both griz and black bears. I believe he is a proponent of bear spray - and a very clean camp.

Ah yes, the eternal and very contentious debate about guns vs bear spray. These arguments always become very heated, with lots of strong opinions, often by people who have never actually shot a bear. In my opinion, a good sources is Rick Sinnott's article Are guns more effective than pepper spray in an Alaska bear attack? Sinnott recently retired as an Alaska Dept of Fish and Game wildlife biologist. For many years he was the biologist for the Anchorage area, and investigated numerous human/bear encounters, and disposed of many problem bears. He knows what he is talking about.

For a scientific article on the effectiveness of spray, see Smith et al: Efficacy of Bear Deterrent Spray in Alaska

See Herrero's book Bear Attacks: Their Causes and Avoidance. Herrero is a Canadian wildlife biologist, and one of the worlds experts on bears. His book is well worth a read. However the "revised edition" doesn't have a lot of new material, so it is well worth buying a used copy of the first addition, if you find one.

For the record, I own both long guns and handguns, and am profficient with them. I have killed two bears (one black & one brown) on hunting trips. However my own personal choice for most of my frequent activities in bear country is to carry bear spray rather than a gun. Your choices may differ.

Personally, I wouldn't want a charging bear to get close enough to me to where bear spray might be effective.

I would prefer, in this order, a powerful rifle, a powerful handgun, and a can of bear spray. My choice is dictated by how close the bear has to be to you for your chosen protection method to have half a chance of being effective. At ten feet, bear spray might well be as effective as a handgun. But I don't want a charging bear to be ten feet away from me to find out!

A rifle could take out a bear (assuming appropriate caliber choice and marksmanship skills) from 100 or 200 hundred yards away. A handgun would probably be limited to 25 yards (assuming you choose an insane caliber). A can of bear spray would be limited to only a few feet or yards. Now, how close do you want that charging bear to get to you? Personally, I'd want all three options. And if possible, I'd throw a hand grenade into the mix as well, as an additional choice.

Better yet, try to keep yourself out of "charging bear" situations in the first place. None of your options are really that great once the brute is coming at you.

First, let me say this: I can understand how this discussion of guns vs pepper spray can get heated and out of hand. That is not my intention and if it starts to lean in that direction I'll ask one of the mods to lock or delete this thread, whichever is done on this site. That said, I appreciate all information, tips, advice and links from everyone. You've all been very informative and helpful. I thank you for that.

Chaos
Hence the big gun and possibly spray. If I can leave the animal alive and a bit leery of humans, that's a win win. But when the chips are down, if I can only have one, I'll take the gun, far more multi purpose and in my opinion, more sure of stopping the bruin. A dead bear is a better option than a dead me, JMHO.

Hiker

I read an article by a guy who either lived or just spent a lot of time on Kodiak Island. He carried a .44 mag and I believe a .460 Weatherby mag and had some good advice. He was the one who said the.44 isn't effective and the recoil of the Weatherby had become too much so he switched over to a shotgun with slugs. All well and good, IF I can retrieve my gear and guns and bow. But I'm looking at the worst case scenario, where I get out with only my vest and what's in my pockets. So a handgun is the choice of the day. I even considered two handguns. The big one for dangerous game, and a .357 with assorted .38/.357 loads as a hunting tool for smaller game. Thanks for the link.

AKSAR

I'm willing to go the non lethal route, it's a wild animal, it doesn't know any better. He see's a lot of easy meat for the taking, in HIS territory. It's no more personal than a hunter shooting a deer for the freezer. But looking at my vest design the bear spray would be with my grab n go bag, so it might come down to pistol and a well placed shot. Or three. I would rather err on the side of caution. Thanks for the links.

Haertig

Very well said. I agree whole heartedly. Except about the handgun range. With an "insane" caliber I'd feel comfortable out to fifty yards. But at that range I'd fade away, or just try to discourage him. He's not an immediate threat at fifty. At twenty five it's time to take action.


All that said; The chances of going down and being in a survival situation are very small. And having to face a bear in a life or death confrontation in a survival situation is even smaller. But I'd be a fool not to consider the possibility of it happening, and not preparing for it would make me an even bigger fool. Besides, There's a lot of mental comfort in being armed and equipped in the back country. JMHO.

Just a note to clarify, so people don't inadvertently get into trouble. Alaska law allows killing game for food in a survival situation, and also allows killing a bear in self defense.

However, state law is also quite explicit that if you do shoot a bear in defense, you must report it as soon as possible, skin out the bear, and surrender the hide with claws attached to the state. The Wildlife Troopers and/or Fish and Game will investigate all of these shootings, but in practice, they virtually always give you the benefit of the doubt. The hides taken in "Defense of Life and Property" are then sold at auction. If you don't report the shooting and/or keep any part of the animal, it would be considered poaching.

The reason for that requirement should be fairly obvious. If one could keep the animal after a DLP shooting, then anyone who wanted a bear rug would go just go out and shoot the first bear they see, irrespective of whether or not they were in danger. Nobody would bother with such things as season, hunting licences, tags, etc. If you want a bear trophy, you need to do it on a legal hunt.

I know you wouldn't intentionally break the law, but I just want to make sure everyone understands what the Alaska DLP laws mean. Below is a quote of the actual statute, with a few key points emphasized:

Hmmm. Thanks for bringing that up AKSAR. Very good to know, and if forced to defend myself, you may have saved me some jail time. Very much appreciated.

Yes, a powerful enough handgun would have a range beyond 25 yards. My opinion was based on the markmanship skills of the typical shooter. IMHO, very few people would have the skills necessary to hit a vital area of a bear at 50 yards with a handgun. Let alone if the bear was charging you - moving, and you pumped up on adrenalin. An accomplished handgun hunter, with a scoped handgun, could certainly make the shot. But for the average Joe ... handgun group sizes at 50 yards are usually measured in feet, yards for some folks. But with a .444 Marlin handgun? Average Joes first shot might be within a few yards of the bear by pure dumb luck, but his followup shot would be more likely to take out the 747 flying overhead.

LMAO. I agree. I'm pretty cool under pressure, and the best shot here with handgun or rifle. That's why I shoot for two other guys when it's time to qualify. Well one now, see looking for a special daypack. Loved the 747 comment. And you're right, the average Joe would probably end id as bear scat like Chaos said. I just hope that if that situation ever comes to fruition, and I hope it never does, that I do better than the average Joe. Thanks.

More people have died from bear defense arguments than from actual bear attacks.

Face it, Deathwind, you just need an excuse to buy another gun over the missus' objections. You're making us enablers in your habit...

LOL 50 yards with a hand cannon against a stationary paper target is very doable; against a fast moving target while the clock is running and you're amp'd up on adrenaline? That's not a good plan.

The thing that riles me about the gun vs. spray argument is that so much of the "no gun" side depends on least common denominator thinking. They just seem to ass-ume that a gun toting hiker will not know how to run his gun under stress, that he has not practiced with it with hundreds of rounds, that in general he is a dumba**.

It gets old, and it drives me ignore their arguments.

There are so many variables at play with the "in XX out of YY bear encounters, guns didn't help" analyses that they are useless.

How about this: have spray, have a gun, and be a flippin' surgeon with that gun.

You should know that you really don't know that. Among other reasons, there are many definitions of "best shot" out there -- I've seen plenty of benchrest shooters who can split an atom at 1000 yards but would never be competitive in any sort of action shooting competition.

Bingley

Shh!!! She might see this!

Russ

I have a great deal of respect for your opinion. See below.

Glock

Exactly. The whole save the poor bear at the cost of your own life and limb has gone a bit far IMHO. And I never carry a gun until I'm comfortable with it and have put at least 300-500 rounds through it and know EXACTLY where it will print. As for firing calmly under stress; I have a great deal of experience with opponents far more dangerous than a bear. Nuff said.
Thanks to all of you for your input, and thanks to you Glock for expressing my ideas.

I meant under combat shooting and sharpshooting testing chaos. If there's anyone who can shoot better in this area I haven't met him or her. Would actually enjoy the competition. My brothers always said I was a freak of nature when it came to shooting. But I'm sure there are plenty who could out shoot me. Note that I said here.

By the same token, the "Anybody who doesn't carry a gun is a dumba**" side always seems to ass-sume that any body who does carry a firearm is automatically skilled enough to hit, with a hard kicking gun, under extreme stress, a small target moving very fast towards them. That also gets old.

For the record, while I choose to carry spray, I don't have an issue with folks carrying guns for bear protection, provided they have put in sufficient realistic training to be truely profficient with that gun. In previous threads on this issue I have even given advice about what firearms are considered adequate for bears and what sort of shot placement is best.

However, in Alaska I see lots of folks out in the woods carrying firearms for bear protection. Anchorage is a relatively small town, and I know some of them and have seen them shoot. Some of them are skilled shots. But far too many of them are probably more likely to hit themselves or their companions than to hit a charging bear. They buy a gun, shoot it now and then, but never really develop any real skill with it. Likewise, a lot of hunters, who may be in fact be adequate shots with a rifle, go buy a 44 Mag or 454 Casull for casual hiking. But they don't shoot it much, but they just know their rifle skills automatically translate to the big handgun. Those folks are without question better off carrying spray, in my opinion.

Who here has suggested that, if I may ask?

I agree AKSAR. Practice makes perfect. And moving targets under stress take a LOT of practice. Recoil is also a major factor for many people.

No one here has suggested that, but I've talked to some animals rights people who think that.

Handgun is very different from rifle. Furthermore, handgun skills deteriorate rapidly without practice, unlike what I've seen with rifle skills. I hope these people figure it out without having to learn the hard way.

we shoot every week. I like watching the little woman out shoot the so called experts and the range cassanovas. No one will bet against her anymore. That helped defray the cost of ammo.

I wonder whether animal behavior is a factor here. Perhaps it's much worse for a bear to get its sinus, eyes, nose, lungs, etc. irritated, than to be shot? Or perhaps wounding a bear, even fatally, doesn't it make it want to fight less, but irritating the respiratory membranes does? I'm no biologist, so I'm just guessing here, probably saying some ignorant things. But the highly favorable statistics for pepper spray suggests bears really, really don't like sprays. You know, it's like how primates are instinctively afraid of snakes, or how I'm utterly defenseless against pretty girls. Does anyone know more about this (the bear stuff, I mean)?

Has anyone actually suggested a pistol? Maybe Deathwind should check with a gun forum. There are a number of gun enthusiasts here, but we just don't talk about firearms a whole lot.

google "bear sense of smell" and the answer to the question of pepper spray or gun is quickly settled.

Well, that explains why I jump every time I see one!

We may have evolved alongside snakes as our big enemy, developing certain physical traits to better avoid becoming snake food.

http://news.ucdavis.edu/search/news_detail.lasso?id=10757
http://www.livescience.com/4183-fear-snakes-drove-pre-human-evolution.html

I remember reading somewhere that most primates are hardwired to fear snakes, and sometimes the wiring just needs activation by an encounter of the slithery type.

Next topic: snake guns -- the Taurus Judge or something else?

Turkeys are afraid of snakes as well. Saw that on another site sometime back. I vote for the judge. Explain our fear of spiders. most people fear one or the other.

Using any firearm on snakes is just a waste of good ammo. My favorite reptile expediter is a long handled shovel. If that is not available, use any handy rock.

Usually the snake and I come to a quick agreement - he (she) goes north, and I go south...

I absolutely agree hiker. 99.9% of the time. However there are some snake that are just aggressive, flat out mean or someone may have stepped into their strike range and don't have time to look for a stick or a rock. Then the critter has to be dispatched. Snakes make wonderful pets and are essential to the eco system, it always makes me a bit sad to kill one.

From what I've read about bear attacks, you will have the chance to use only one tool if attacked by a bear. Especially if we are talking about grizzlies, attacks happen at close quarters due to surprise encounters. Add to that, grizzly's are capable of running upwards of 55 kph (35 mph).

Personally, I defer to the advice of the experts in the field likes of Stephen Herrero and Tom Smith who advocate that the best defense against such attacks is bear spray; statistically you are more likely to walk away from a bear attack with bear spray as your primary defense tool and that is really what our end goal should be (I know its mine!). For example, Tom Smith stated the following regarding the gun v. spray debate:

What position do bear biologists take in this debate? I can’t speak for others, but after studying more than 600 Alaska bear attacks, I've learned:

• In 72 incidents of people using bear spray to defend themselves against aggressive bears in Alaska, 98% were uninjured, and those that were suffered only minor injuries.
• In 300 incidents where people carried and used firearms for protection against aggressive bears in Alaska, 40% were injured or killed, including 23 fatalities and 16 severely injured persons. Another 48 people suffered lesser injuries.

That said, it is perhaps even more important to understand the preventative measures you can take to avoid such surprises to start with.

Also, here are some additional conversations here at ETS on the topic: Teens mauled by grizzly in survival skills course, Bear attacks vs armed people

I think I have that book at home; lent to me by a fellow ETS'er with the instruction to "pay it forward." So, OP, if you want it, shoot me a PM with your address.

Then you can tell me where you can shoot every week, and how I can better my skills at it!

Cows kill more folks in North America than bears do. I don't think that there is a handgun powerful enough to deal with the likes of Hamish

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEi_m5jqak0

Edit.

I would instead take some flash bang grenades instead if in the deep wilderness if you come across a Sasquatch, Am Fear Liath Mor, Yowie or even a Yeti as described in the following video involving the Australian SAS (Super Army Soldiers) and a bad ass Yowie (Aussie Bigfoots are notoriously grumpy) after getting into a fight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8LlLdZXjMA

AFLM, I just learned what your name is all about. Cool. Only took a few years.

The Big Foot of Scotland? Clan Sasquatch?

DW,

John Ross (of Unintended Consequences fame) worked with S&W to commission a limited number of .500 Magnums with 5" barrels.

If you are indeed accustomed to recoil, one of these may be a good choice for your purposes.

John Ross Website

Have a great time in Alaska!

Greg

Greg

Thanks! Sounds like what the doctor ordered.

I think a my .454 Casull could down a sasquatch. Honesstly, I don't see any land based animal currently in existence which could survive a solid hit to the vitals with a flat nosed solid powered by a heavy charge. JMHO

MD

I presume you were addressing me?
We go to a public firing range to shoot, and while we pay our fees we stay away from the meetings and politics. Once a month we go to a private combat firing course with various firearms. We also like to keep up on long range rifle. I would suggest either a gun club or simply finding a private area and practicing as much as possible. If it's private land be sure to get permission first. Your local Sheriffs office or police department may also be able to direct you to an area where people shoot, as well as where the city limits end.

I also have a copy, first edition, of Herrero's book. I too would be happy to pass it on. I found it very objective and factual. Herrero had no axe to grind (an axe wouldn't be of any use against a grizzly, anyway).

But will it take down a sasquatch before it takes down you? Animals could fight on even when mortally wounded.

While we're talking about such creatures, what do we do against aliens? I hear they use thought waves to paralyze you. Then they take you on board the ship for some probing. The aliens account for half of all disappearances in national parks (sasquatches account for the other half). Do we use pepper spray or big caliber handguns for this one?

Neither. You have to go defensive: tinfoil hats ... block the thought waves and you'll be okay .

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that I'll either be just be wandering about in a blind panic and an angry chipmunk will spell my doo. Or that I'll curl in a ball and cry in despair as bears and bigfoot and all his cousin have their way with me. I assure you that neither scenario is a possibility. You have a better chance of winning the lottery than of me letting my guard down. Sasquatch are not ninja
s. I have heard not a single account of a bigfoot laying in ambush for some poor human wandering about the wilderness. Yes animals can fight on after being injured. But big, heavy bullets tear up muscle, destroy arteries and internal organs, and break bones. And the cause bullet shock and profuse bleeding. Four rounds of .454 or .500 mag are going to put a dent in a grizzly's day, leaving one for the coup de gras. A gun doesn't mean that I'll survive the encounter, not by any means. But with a BIG gun, if the bear kills me, even wounded, the bear won't survive long enough to take out his frustrations on another human, like say a .357 might allow. And hopefully the bear bell I bought at Wal-Mart a few months ago will scare the bears and bigfoot and his cousins away and I can have my emotional breakdown in safety. JMHO.

Lol Denis. Remember to make your tin foil hat with the shiny side out. A crumple it slightly to disperse the government lobotomy laser beams like the guys down at homeless shelter do. And don't let the faces of your pocket change face each other or they'll plot about you. There are dozens of little tricks like that. Surprisingly they're more worried about the government than they are about aliens and ghosts.

Axe
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NupaOZCTFJY

knife
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/11/01/fraser-graham-kills-grizzly-bear-knife_n_4194910.html

handgun
http://www.fieldandstream.com/photos/gal...node-1001334546

Kicking
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fetEkYRXkP4

Way off topic, but yes, I was referencing you.

Gun clubs in my area are pricey, and from what I hear, "good ole boy" related. I'm cheap (on some things) and not local, and not planning to stay that way. I found my local outdoor range, but it's pretty ... how to be polite ... well, a trash dump looks rather similar. Isolated, random trash/melons/clay pigeons/brass everywhere. The few times I'm there alone it's fine for some drills, but when there are folks there, it's very loose rules. More than once I've started past the line after a general cease fire and some jackwad started popping off rounds.

Then you can tell me where you can shoot every week, and how I can better my skills at it!

Damn, that's not safe at all. We;;. when I was growing up we just found a quiet place with a good solid backstop like a berm or cliff and did our practice there. My advice would be to call your local SO or ask around. I'd also suggest reloading if you don't already, but kike I said the price of components has gone way up. Some LE departments allow civilians to use their ranges on the theory that it's safer to have them shoot there.

No, I was not assuming anything of the sort about you. In fact, I have no questions about your manhood, since you have repeatedly told us how big, strong, brave, and deadly you are. Jerry Miciulek would probably pee in his pants if he ever had to shoot alongside you in a competition. I was merely assuming that since you are so gifted and knowledgeable about guns, you'd know about the robber who took a hit center mass. With a 12 ga slug. He kept fighting, In fact, he was still alive the next day and he survived. You also know about the guy who took multiple hits to the heart, as autopsy showed, and still kept fighting, killing some LEOs in the process. (Alright, I think this case was 9mm, but the 12 ga delivers more energy than the large handgun calibers.) Now, these may be freak cases, but it just takes one freak bear to survive a minute after being shot to kill you with one well-placed bite.

According to some theorists, sasquatches are scouts for an alien invasion. They are enormously strong and resilient. They bleed acid. You'd better prepare. There are lots of them in Alaska because of the oil reserves. I doubt they'd be as gentle at probing as the little greys.

Lmao
I think whoever started that rumor about the sasquatch has watched the six million dollar man to much. And as I recall that one was a robot so it might take a LAW to take it down. I've never claimed bravery, I'm simply impulsive and too dumb to let fear rule me. Were these cases you cited on dust or ice or some other drug. We had a copy of street survival in the lending library and it was pointed out that one individual took 33 rounds of 9mm to put him down. If aliens came here why would they want oil? Surely they would have far more advanced energy sources? I certainly hope to never be probed by anyone or anything.

ROTFLMAO!!! I have this image in my head of a big burly dude face down in the forest, his big bare butt sticking up in the air, with a 454 handle sticking out. Meanwhile a Sasquatch is sitting leaned up against a nearby tree bleeding out.

Watch the Jack's Links commercials. Don't mess with Sasquatch!

Lol Ben. That's funny. But Painful.

I busted my gut on that image. Wife looking at me like something is wrong with me. I tried telling her between guffaws and coughing fits. Apparently she doesn't have the imagination I do.

For some reason most ladies just don't get our (men's) sense of humor. You know they all think we're just over grown children, don't you? Mine has mastered the art of rolling her Persian eyes. Hey, at least you didn't picture a bear having his way with me as I sobbed uncontrollably and sucked my thumb. Lol.

Izzy

It's to go on a survival vest. No room on there for my .375 H&H Mag, or .460 Weatherby Mag (which hasn't been out of it's case in the safe for about a decade). Assuming I survive a crash and can retrieve my long guns and gear then fine and dandy. But if I can only make it out with the vest I want the nest, most powerful gun I can handle.

Not me. I would be content to have a single shot 22 and enough ammo to get me by. A good knife would be better for me. I can find much better ways to deal with bears and other would be predators after ditching out. In fact, I'd prefer becoming the predator of them than letting them consider me their chow.

Yet another reason why I don't need to go out into the wilderness just to explore what's there. Every trip needs a purpose, for me anyways. Otherwise it is just reconnoiter??? Purpose being a material objective. Surviving a wreck is just an opportunity for material gain, in that case.

It is a different perspective than most people might have, but then if you've read my posts, you know that's me.

Ben

My friend in Alaska lives out where it takes a bush plane to get to. Which isn't exactly the safest mode of transportation. So if it goes down I could be bear bait. Or alien/sasquatch bait. Never know, might run into a bunch of good ol' boys who tell me You sure do have purty mouth on you boy. I'd be mighty happy to have big gun to dissuade them.

The 1st Alaskan Combat Intelligence Platoon-Castner's Cutthroats- chose to arm themselves with .22 target pistols during the Aleutian Campaign. Seems like an intelligent choice.

Consider a trip to the south of France Festival of the Bear in preparation for the Alaskan adventure.

We always used a .22 LR pistol to end Hamish types. Learned it from my Vet who used a Colt Woodsman. Probably used it 5 or 10 times a week to put down large animals. Never had a failure. Many slaughter houses used a .22 with graphite bullets.

That said, the .22 is certainly less than optimal against bears, although as others have said, it may be the optimal short term survival tool. Like fishing gear it will keep you busy until the rescue takes place.

Many want the maximum power available. I do not agree nor do many other experienced people ( http://www.garrettcartridges.com/defensive.html ). If you are going to stop a charging bear you need enough power to consistently penetrate the skull. Any other shot will not stop the bear. Once you have enough (my information suggests that a standard pressure .44 mag with proper bullets is enough) then any more power just slows down repeat shots. Since we cannot be assured of hitting what we need (a baseball size) in a head moving multiple directions, even with great skill, we need to be prepared to shoot multiple times. Recovery time is faster for anyone with a lower recoil. If the guns are the same, everyone will shoot faster with a .44 than with a .454. That is why I think you can carry too much gun. Even if you are good with it, you will be better with less recoil.

With a rifle you can go to a higher power level and still recover quickly, although the same concept applies here. I use a load like the Garrett standard pressure 420 gr as a defensive load. For hunting Alaskan bear I would use the +P from Garrett or Buffalo Bore.

Respectfully,

Jerry

p.s. Usual disclaimer about Garrett and Buffalo Bore - just a satisfied customer.

If I could carry it, I'd just carry a CIWS and settle the debate over caliber vs recovery time vs hard to hit a moving target.

I might have to hire a few sherpa's to do the heavy lifting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS

Jerry,

On certain points we agree, on other points I would somewhat disagree. The "what's the best gun for bear defense" is probably second only to the guns vs spray question for generating heated arguments. Here are a couple of my opinions.

Re: "Many want the maximum power available. I do not agree nor do many other experienced people .." By the same token many highly experienced people do argue for the most powerfull gun you can shoot well. Alaska bear hunting guides probably have seen more bears killed, and killed more bears in dangerous situations than anyone. Guides frequently have to go into the pucker brush to finish off a bear wounded by poor shooting clients. While I've heard of a few who carry a semi auto 30-06 or similar, most seem to prefer bigger guns. The 375 H&H is a common choice. Quite a few carry the 458 Win Mag.

Re: "If you are going to stop a charging bear you need enough power to consistently penetrate the skull. Any other shot will not stop the bear." I don't quite agree with that. While a hit on the bear's brain is certainly ideal, any number of people have successfully stopped charging bears with other than head shots. A hit on the shoulder (with a powerful, penetrating round) for example, can both shatter the shoulder bones (slowing the charge) and penetrate into heart and lungs. To reiterate, lots of people have stopped charges without hitting the brain.

Other hits can also do the job. I killed a smallish (at least by Kodiak standards) brown bear at about 15 yards. He wasn't charging, but he dropped like a rock and didn't even twitch after. What happened was that our carefully planned stalk took us out of sight of the bear for a period. Unknown to us, during that time the bear decided to move. We had just crossed an alder choked gully, and as I extricated myself from the last of the alder, the bear suddenly appeared about 15 yards away out of some high grass. He was as surprised as I was! I'm sure the bear was trying to decide whether to charge or run. I reacted first, and shot for the shoulder. I was a bit high and the bullet drove through and broke the spine. I was using a 338 Win Mag, shooting 250 gr Nosler Partition bullets.

Re: "Since we cannot be assured of hitting what we need (a baseball size) in a head moving multiple directions, even with great skill, we need to be prepared to shoot multiple times." While getting in a second shot is certainly ideal if you can do it, a great many bear encounters are at very close range and happen very fast. Quite often one shot is all you get, no matter how fast you are. You need to balance the ability to get a quick second shot against the importance of making that first shot do the job. As noted above, a few guides opt for guns that allow a faster follow up shot, but most seem to prefer more punch on the first shot.

I think the strongest argument for a less powerful gun is not the second shot, but rather that you are more likely to put in the practice necessary for making the first shot good. Many people find the bigger bores less pleaseant to shoot. Hence they don't practice nearly enough with their defensive gun (be it rifle or pistol). When I drew that Kodiak hunt I mentioned above, I immediately started shooting a lot. I burned a very big pile of ammo (and $$$$) practicing shooting in the months before that hunt. I've probably never been as good with a rifle as I was at the time of that hunt.

In my opinion, the bottom line is still to use the most powerfull gun you can shoot really well!

Were they using those .22's against human targets or animals?

I'm sure it would be all well and good to use a .22 on a bear if it held very still and let me jam the muzzle down it's ear channel. But in that situation he would be no threat and we could go our separate ways in peace.

Well said AKSAR. I practiced extensively with my .454, starting with reduced loads and working up to maximum loads for that gun. I handle the recoil very well in both one and two handed grips and cock it on the way down from the recoil. I'd like to think I could get two shots off. And people seem to forget that bears, moose and other dangerous animals are flesh and blood and bullets do slow them down with shock and damage.

Good post, man! Well put.

I am curious about this:


Can you go in to your decision to shoot, as opposed to no-shoot or use spray? If the bear was not being actively hostile, why did you decide to shoot?

Note, I am NOT saying you were wrong. I want to better understand what "reasonable measures" are for dropping the bear. I do hike out West but not often, and I want to improve my mental parameters for shoot/no-shoot on bears in case I need to justify that decision someday. From the info I've received from the NPS in Yellowstone, I don't think they'd be happy if I shot a bear (even at 15 yards) that was not aggressing on me, but I expect I would feel the need to do so.

Again, great post. Nothing beats first-hand experience.

Glock

Perhaps you glossed over AKSAR's post which was long but as always had solid information in it. He was hunting that bear, not killing it in panic or for fun. Anyway looks like I won't be facing any bears. The little woman watched Grizzly Park last night and she blew a gasket. I pointed out that it was a tame bear and that the theme song was cute, but she put her foot down so back country flight for me. I'm still gonna buy a couple of big guns though. I may be whipped but I'm not totally stupid.

Glock,

I probably wasn't articulate enough in my explanation. This was a bear hunting trip, so decision to shoot was easy. We were stalking this bear with the intention of shooting it. The plan was to get into position to be able to take a shot at 100 yards or so. However, the stalk didn't go as planned, the bear moved while we were moving, and we encountered it much closer than I would have liked. However, I had a chance to take a shot, and I did. The bear is now a rug on my wall.

Had we not been hunting for the bear, but rather just out hiking and accidently met the bear, it would have been a harder (but still very quick) decision as to whether to shoot. When I saw the bear, he was looking at me and I think he was as surprised as I was. Most of the time, bears will try to avoid people, and it is likely he would have turned and run off. However, he was very close, and if he charged he could have covered that distance in a second. If I had a gun (or spray) in hand I would have had it up with my finger on the trigger. If he started towards me I would have shot (or sprayed). If he turned the other way I would have not. At least that's what I think I would have done.

But if just hiking in that thick terrain (rather than hunting), I would probably been trying to make some noise. In which case the bear would probably have moved away before I ever saw him. When hiking in thick brush I usually sing my favorite blues songs, which generally scares off all wildlife (and people) in the area!

Of course bears don't always move away from people, even loud blues singers with lousy voices . For example a sow with cubs or a bear guarding a deer or moose kill might charge rather than run. A gun or spray is a back up in case you accidently find yourself meeting a grumpy bear at close range in one of those situations.

OK, now I get it. I read this line as meaning "we were trying to avoid contact by using stealth but ran into a bear anyway". Sorry.

Np Glock

You need a .22 to survive a bear attack. You use the gun to kneecap the other guy. You only have to be faster than one person. Other than that, when I was in Alaska I flew in a Cessna 152 and 172 with a Ruger Redhawk .44 Mag (7.5-inch barrel) strapped to me in a shoulder holster (hip carry was out of the question) in summer and winter. It proved to be almost more annoying than not having a gun at all. It was bulky and got in the way of everything. I would switch to a Super Blackhawk in the same caliber/barrel as the dimensions are a little more manageable. Maybe go with the shorter barrel.

YMMV

Standard Disclaimer

My $.02

LMAO. True Mbob. The pilot who got me there could entertain Yogi while I go for help