Let's take Fireplug's intruguing question regarding one gun and one load for Alaska wilderness travel/hunting, covering large and small game and add one handgun. COMBINED WEIGHT LIMIT IS 10 LBS.


requirements:

1) Able to take either small or big game as opportunity or need presents.

2) One long gun, one hand gun, one factory load for each - factory loads only.

3) Portability counts. Note 10 pound total weight limit for 2 firearms.

4) Meet Canada's and Alaska's regulations requiring a firearm for wilderness travel.

5) Durable.

Your thoughts.

Can't take a handgun into Canada from U.S.!

Loader

Great thread, but here's my problem. ;) The first time I went to Alaska I didn't take a handgun, figured why when I had a rifle. Then we camped on the Tundra, ...with a boned out Moose on the 4-Wheeler. And blood all over my clothes..:eek: As I thought about being "bait" for the first time, it occured to me that ifun Mr. Bear stepped on my rilfe why I was in the tent, :confused: I would have a real problem. The next year my 44 was next to my head, for the close encounters of the furry kind! Haven't needed it so far thank God. And I do mean that!

It kinda depends on why you have a rifle in the plane to start with. If you are on your way to your hunt, then your rifle will be whatever you are going to be hunting with. That will be determined by what and where you are going to be hunting. That also may determine what handgun you will be carrying. If I'm carrying a 375 H&H rifle to the hunting grounds, I may only want to pack a .22 handgun for grouse or ptarmigan. If I'm carrying a 270 Winchester, I may want to pack a heavy handgun.

If this is going to used in the summer or winter for survival purposes while you are heading on a fishing trip or just flightseeing, a great idea would be to carry a 12 gauge shotgun with slugs and birdshot.

If I only could bring a 1 handgun and one rifle, this would be my choice, My scoped 450 Marilin Guidegun using 350gr interlock on top of 50gr of H4198, CCI mag primers, heavy crimp, 2250 fps, this will take anything large with fur within 200 yards,for a handgun, my Ruger Mark2 22LR, this will take care of any small game using Rem yellow jackets hp, with both of these guns I am king of the tundra;) sleep with one eye open. Aim small hit small. RAMbo.

Should have read the thread a little closer, I can have 2 guns! Whew! Much better. 30-06, 180 grain Nosler, FN 98 action. 44 mag pistol, hard cast load, probably the Federal load. Might not make the weight limit.

Joel -

I think you can make the weight with the '06 @ 6.5 and the 44 @ 3.5 lbs.

My pics would be rifle either 1) My SAR-48 Bush rifle (FAL) with Federal .308 Claw 165/180gr. or 2) My Springfield M1903A1 in .30 USGovt with same Federal load. Pistol would be my SW M58 in 41mag with Federal 250gr Cast Core. My FAL may not make the weight but the Springfield and Smith will be close.

De Oppresso Liber

.375 Winchester for hunting big stuff and protection from bigger stuff and my .357 blackhawk for hunting small stuff and protection from anything else.

(not ideal for some, but the best combo in my safe right now)

I'll go with what I have instead of what I would want. I'm not familiar with the Alaska regs, so forgive my ignorance if these don't qualify. I know they'll make the weight requirement. I'd rather have handloads, but factory is the rule.

Rifle-340 Weatherby Mark V with synthetic stock and the factory load with the 225gr X-bullet. I'm sure this will kill anything on the continent unless it charging. It will kill down to deer/antelope without blowing it in half. This shoots as flat as my .270 Wthby with 210gr XLC handloads.

Revolver-Ruger Single Six in 32 H&R Mag, 4 5/8" barrel with the Federal factory load using the 85 gr Hi-shok bullet. A close runner up would be my same barrel length Blackhawk in .41 mag with whatever mid-power factory round I could find. The .41 is a little more to pack around but will kill a deer with a mid-range load.

I think this would do it pretty well if called upon.

I would take my mossberg 835 12 guage with all sorts of pellet sizes and slugs and for the handgun it would be my 480 Ruger with some 370 cast flatpoints. Now granted I may not be able to reach out far but I like to look my game in the eye before I shoot it. You see I started out bow hunting and never got over that type of style.


Depresion is merely anger without enthusiasm:p

My '06 with Hornady High energy 200-220gr's for the big stuff.
For my side arm-454 Casul with Buffalo Bore both in 454 and 45LC loadings 325gr - 360gr for hairy nasty stoppers, some 45LC regular factory stuff/CCI Bird shot loads for small game punching

Come on guys, I had to stick with ONE factory load for each weapon (hard as that is), so stick with the instructions on this one. I almost had to cut off my hands to stop from listing handloads after over half of my 31 years handloading. Let's hear about the one load to do it all. I think you'll find that the handguns are what you depend on for most of it. This also makes it interesting in that you can't define calibers that rely on handloading. God knows I'd rather have my 32-20 handloaded, which will take a deer if need be, than the 32 H&R. There has been some very good insight in this post. Shotguns: one load. I'd love the metric equivalent of the 375H&H with a 12 guage slug under it for this one, but it's all about ONE FACTORY load. I don't have experience stopping angry bears, but I think most who would have to wouldn't want to rely on ANY handgun to do it at the moment of truth.

OK, I'll bite.

.338 Win Mag, 250gr. Nosler Partition, available as factory load in Federal Premium line, I think. Runner-up, .30-06 with 180gr. Partition.

Handgun - .22 rimfire, any. Whatever makes the weight limit. Don't want to try to shoot bunnies with a .338 if I don't have to. Carry lots of .22 ammo in a small space and it's light.

Gentlemen,

Its been quite awhile since I have fired a factory load from any of my rifles, so I am not really sure of what is out there.

But, having said that, Reckon mine would be a 300 magnum of some fashion loaded with 180grain fail safes. The weight requirement impacts choice of pistol, and thus restricted, I would take my slicked up model 12 smith with 158 grain lead hollowpoints, and hope like heck my two handed gun stayed in good order.

Good thread, lots of good input.

Steve

Well now,

One rifle...Weight limits...Overall effectiveness even at a distance...
1. My Winchester Timber carbine in .444 shooting 240's OR
2. My "new" Model 700 in .308 loaded with 180's.
I know the .308 is kinda under-gunned, but it just shoots so sweeeeeet!:D

Pistolas.....

The .22 has great capabilities for small game, but really wouldn't, as Joel stated, want to become some bear's snack!!!:eek:
I'd have to go with the Smith Mountain Gun again in 45colt using 265 BTB keith bullets......

Looking over the excellent responses to my question, and learning from them, I'll take the 338 with Federal 250s @2800 fps and my trusty CZ 75 in 9MM with 124 gr Ball ammo.

kciH
O.K If your going to get snooty about it:D , your going to force me to buy another gun though!!!:D I 'll have to go buy a New Rossi 454 lever gun with 20 " barrel to Max range out to 200yds, so I can use Just Buffalo bore -resticted to one load - it would have to be 360 gr for both rifle pistol for the big stuff and 45 LC bird shot loads for small table fare. Yes I'd have to get up close and personal but hey life would be exciting!!! :D

And before all you guy's start harping on me that the 454 isn't good enough for Griz/Brown bear - In the Lever Action 20' tube I'll be getting around 1900 fps, 2886 ME BB360 Gr thats a 196 on the Thornily scale -46 over that reqiured to take those big hairy's! Just a few pionts below whats needed to make it Rhino foder. In the 454 SRH it is only 7 off from 150 requires pionts. So I would not feel under gunned with either.:p

I have handled the Puma 454 and it is very smooth, fast and light. The round in a 20" bbl = modern 45-70, so there is enough power for griz.

Hey Loader,

I go away for awile and here you go not only giving them a second load but a second gun. This makes it too easy, but this is your thread not mine so to answer:

Rifle: The factory load part rules out my beloved .35s so M70 .338 in synthetic for weight with the aforementioned 250 partitions.

Pistol: The old High Standard Model B or Colt Woodsman in .22. Both are slim, light, and typically tack drivers. I like Winchester hollowpoints in most of my .22s.

Now if I did not plan any hunting, I might go more controversial with a .22 rifle and a big pistol. I would justify this choice by saying that if you are already forced into a survival situation you should work very hard to simply stay away from anything big, bad, and furry.

Fireplug

Fireplug -

Welcome back...see what happens when you turn your head on a moving target? I read all you threads today, and you are right on.

Forgot to mention that my CZ 9MM has a 22 adaptor and I planned to sneak it into my bag. Never trust the rulemakers to follow the rules...

OK OK one load for each gun. Thats pretty simple. I would take the 835 Mossberg for the rifle loaded with 3 inch # 2 , adjustable choke. That would be for any small game and or birds or anything I wanted to blind before It ate me. Then for the gun it would be My 480 again with a 400 flatpoint loaded for the most accurate shot and best TKO. and after I blinded that big brute I would put it down with the 480. Now granted I have never hunted Alaska but for survival reasons that my story and I'm sticking with It.

I intend to live forever, so far so good

I'll bite the bait 8*)

Rifle...Win 9422Mag. Plenty to "meat" my first priority after water and fire. Since we have to travel light, I can get many boxes of solid points in my pack and will be able to forage to my hearts content. The .22 Mag will put down anything I care to stuff in the pot or make jerky out of for my woods lounging pleasure. Two solids behind the front shoulder of a moose and you best start whittling out a cabin because you are going to be camping on a pile of meat.

My Smith Mountain Gun in .45 Colt would get the nod for handgun. Heavy CorBon hardcast loads for strictly defense or putting down something bigger than I can eat in a month.

In this scenario, I could probably go the distance without disturbing Mr. Grizz to the point I would have to shoot him and disturb him more, and would find that most, if not all, of my shooting would be at small game.

If I were to reverse the order/priorities a bit, I could also be quite comfy with the Marlin GG in 45-70 and my little Smith Kit Gun and LOTS of 22 ammo.

My life used to be pretty simple when about the only firearm I had was a Mini-14. While there was not alot of "choice" and accuracy was/is not stellar, we ate real good ;*) If I were forced to go back to those days, that ugly ol Ruger is still handy.

HEY...22MAG. Sheer genius! I'm changing my mind and going with Taurus 22 Mag carbine and 454 Casull. I could even make a 7 pound limit with my 45LC blackhawk.

Bear pucker factor goes up a bit, but i'd have a sporting chance except in a **** bent charge and that would be my fault anyway. And yes, a 22 Mag will kill a moose in close.

Loader,

As I read your first post and looked at the ten pound limit, I considered getting the ammo in that ten pound sack.

I have, over the years, considered this very thing since I get to travel a bit in the bush. Weight is always an issue. I have yet to be able to put together the perfect pack for an extended walkabout in the bush but I am very close. If you figure on ten pounds of firepower, you just limited your other gear to about 20 pounds (to make for a 35 pound pack). If you get to much more, you are into the realm of setting up a base camp and waiting for winter.

At least twice a year I spend several weeks guiding for DenaliHunts (Archery Only) and am expected to fit my personal "needs" in as small a package as possible so as to make room in the aircraft for the Clients duffle (which often includes the kitchen sink!) I always stuff a takedown bow and a dozen arrows in my gear but am also expected to be the gun bearer. I sure go through agony about my personal choice in firearms for those events. The 45-70 is a "given" since I have no doubts about it's effectivenes in do or die situtions. There are times between clients where I get several days of wilderness to myself and I seldom tote the GG around since I am cutting firewood, building bridges over beaver sloughs, tending meat, and in general finding my hands full. I carry an Estwing axe more than a rifle! When so occupied, I find that the best fiream is a big bore handgun that can be worn on my belt at all times. In that case, size and weight of the handgun is critical since it has to be comfortable enough to not be left hanging somewhere yet of sufficiant accuracy and power to to a variety of tasks. I believe that if I were in the Coastal areas, I would be forced to learn like the .454's or the .475 Linebaugh. As it is, I can get away with a bit less (knowing that I MUST use good bear sense and not invite trouble) I spent three nights last fall doing guard duty at our lake camp with nothing but two hanging moose and my Jack Russel Terrier for company. In that situation, the 45-70 was a comfort.

I guess I am rambling a bit here but perhaps it will fuel the fires of thought a bit.

Coldfingers -

No wonder you came up with such a good solution...you really DO this stuff!! When it comes to AK and true wilderness hunting, I admit to being armchair.

That's why this forum is no great...you throw out a question and someone with real experience may answer it...

I did try a 480 in Taurus 5 inch the other day, and must admit the recoil is significantly less than the Casull and velocity holds up in a short barrel. Might have possibilities.

Loader,

My best bowhunting buddy has one of Gary Reeders UBU II's (Ultimate Back Up) which is a 3.5 inch .475 Linebaugh with a rounded grip. For a strictly defensive handgun in a VERY portable package, it is about perfect.

When I look at the Inuit hunters in the Arctic, who have a vested interest in fruegal firepower that will harvest a wide spectrum of game (from Ptarmigan to furbearers, seal and Polar Bear) I find that the .22 Centerfires are very popular. The .222/223 class of rifle will substian life for a long time it seems.

My only reason for choosing the .22Mag over one of those was the issue of weight/bulk of ammo and the fact that you allowed a second firearm and opened the door for a large handgun for defensive purposes.

I know from past experience that I could live quite well with nothing more than a .223 to kill everything that needs killing. With a little tweeking, the Mini-14 is a very durable and dependable package that will provide "minute of meat" accuracy over a broad spectrum of game with rapid followup for emergencies. My wife and I wintered in the Wrangle Mountains one year in total isolaton for 4 months and everything we ate from bunnies to caribou fell to the Ruger. I have also taken Moose with it when under fifty yards and presented a broadside shot. It is death on wolves and such and I used it from the back seat of a Super Cub when we could do such things. I did most of my meat gathering with Military Ball ammo that I had run a file over the tip so as to provide a bit more wound channel. I used the unaltered ball ammo for fur gathering. The stuff was (and still is) almost dirt cheap and you can get a few rounds in an ammo can. I used a twenty round clip to carry extra ammo in my pack and would feed the five round clips from it when carrying the rifle slung or on/in aircraft and snowmachines. If I thought things may get exciting I would just put the twenty round clip in and get ready to make noise. There is nothing fancy or endearing about that ugly old Ruger other than that fact that it works every time and has never failed to get the job done. Sometimes it takes more than one shot, but in a less than sporting situation that is of no consequence. If I was forced to pick one rifle for the rest of my days I would probably fall back on the Mini-14 and do some downloading for small game. I can envision myself hunkered over a stump with a Lee Loader tapping out some little bunny busters or flinging a hail of lead at some bruin in a last ditch effort to remain on the top of the food chain 8*)

Hopefully, I have not digressed too far from the subject matter.

All my best,

Scotty/North Pole, AK

Coldfingers -

How was your response a digression? 223 semi-auto does the job, period. An this from a man with experience.

I do have a treat for you, however. In my little lab I've been very successful working with 7.62X39, pistol bullets and 22 cal sabots. Thanks to the burn characteristics of Lil Gun, The 55 gr 224s cycle perfectly in mini 30, clocking 3400 fps. So, you have your 223 when you need it. Many different .312 pistol bullets and a pinch of Universal can be single shot or hand cycled @ 1500 fps with surprising accuracy (probably low bbl vibration or tight bore).

Good Russian 124 gr ammo (NOT Wolf) clocks 2450 fps, and one 20 rnd clip alternating FMJ and HP rounds would be formidable in your "noise making" mode. I shot 3 FMJs into 24 inches of wet news print and I don't think they even slowed down...The HPs make a fist sized wound channel 16 inches deep. Steel cases and moderate operating pressure makes them very reliable.

A triple tap is 372 grs @ 2450 fps - If that doesn't do the job, neither will a 375 H&H.

We need a 4.5 pound semi auto survival rifle in this caliber, preferably take down.

"We need a 4.5 pound semi auto survival rifle in this caliber, preferably take down."

I concure with that statement.

Your experimentation with Sabots has made for interesting reading on my part. I like the idea of squeezing the most from a rifle (or handgun). How I did not ever find myself with a 30.06 escapes my imagination.

A friend and I are dinking around with a 7.65 necked down to .25 cal in hopes of rebarreling a Mini 30 to create a long range, rapid fire wolf wacker. (Not that we don't like wolves mind you ;*) but your Sabot idea has great merit.

I would be very interested in hearing more either via email or perhaps a seperate thread since I doubt I am the only person relegated to a small gun cabinet.

Scotty

Hey Scotty, how do those caribou taste? A friend got one in Canada and said they weren't too good to eat, but it was a bull in the rut and thought that had something to do with it.

You might be on to something with the Mini-14. I can't imagine the griz that could take a magazine full of FMJs at short range. Actually, with multiple shots it seems like you have an even better chance to hit brain/spine than with a single shot from a bigger gun. Interesting......

Loader- Does the Carbon Fiber AR-15 fit your criteria for a takedown, 223 semi auto under 4.5 lbs? A standard M4 carbine is 5.5lbs.
Only been up in Grizzly country once (Montana) during a exercise and I kept a 20 rd mag of M855 ball on me (M16A2). Have carried an older XM16E1 on the dark continent before and last time there carried a M9 Beretta with 16rds of Ball when I encountered the Big 5. Had a M14 with me on that trip but never when I saw the big guys. Pucker factor goes up when you bump into a rihno at 5 FEET and a loiness at 20 FEET! Small calibers maybe but alot of firepower up close.

De Oppresso Liber

Combat Diver -

Sorry, I don't know the weight, but could be close to 4.5 lbs.

Coldfingers and I are discussing how to build a 4.5 lb 7.62X39 off line. Barnaul Russian ammo clocks 2470 fps out of my SKS with 16 (yes, 16) fps std deviation. Comes in PSP and JHP. Check the ratings from customers on Midway. The stuff is devastating, with excellent penetration and expansion. Oh...almost forgot, its $1.82 per box of 20.

I do love the 223 in semi-auto as well, but these are very different rounds, in spite of comparisons. On the terminal end, you are looking at more than double the bullet weight, 39% more diameter, 92% bigger cross section, 84% more momentum, 28% mre energy and 30% higher sectional density for the 7.62X39. When something that wants to eat me is close enough to smell, that's what I want. FMJs might even smoke your Rhino...

Mike.

Caribou are one of the finer eating critters up here (second only to Dall Sheep in my book) but when they are in the rut, my Jack Russel will not even ROLL on one, let alone eat it! I sure love to hunt them because a fella can pack one or two out without busting a gut or tearing up his back like them Bullwinkles.

I have a good friend that spent a number of years in Barrow. His tales of Polar Bears and Mini-14's or Bolt .222's will make your hair stand on end. One of the Inuit used to wait till the bear was coming down an ice heave at about 20 yards so that he could shoot through the top of the skull. All in the timing he says. Next best is to shoot em in the ear. Them guys add meaning to "subsistance"

Scotty

Will have to do some research later but, since the Carbon Fiber is 4.5 or so lbs for a 5.56 SA and Colt makes the AR in 7.62x39. New 7.62 barrel and bolt on the Carbon Fiber frame? I'll post this over on the AR15.com page and see what we get.

De Oppresso Liber

I think you guys have pretty well covered most options.

Another way to go would be one of the Marlin 44mag rifles and a 44mag short barrel from Ruger. You can pare quite a bit of weight off both of them if need be.

Then pick one 44mag load and one 44spl load to cover the uses outlined.

One thing I noticed was no one mentioned the weight of the ammo. A belt of 20 rounds of 44 ammo is quite noticeable.

Bob,

Ammo weight is an issue. There is also something good to be said for having both rifle and handgun chambered the same. The .44Mag would do great in this scenario as would a Puma .454 and a .45Colt (although you would not be able to run the heavy rifle ammo in the handgun).

Unfortuantely, in order to maximize the use for small game, one would have to sneak a Lee Loader in the pack along with a large scoop of Bullseye, some primers and lead.

My experience so far has been that even over a fairly lengthy period, one would fire less than a dozen giant killers while the majority of shots would be at critters that could be boiled up in a canteen cup or cooked over a fire, a very small fire at that.

Blessings,

Scotty

How about one of the new Marlin "Buckhorn" .30-30s, these have a 16" barrel or so?

.30-30 doesn't get a lot of respect BUT if you could get some of the PMC loads with the "X" bullet, and leave those up the spout for Mr. Bear, I think that it would be a handy combo.

And if you can't get .30-30 ammo somewhere, they probably don't have any ammo at all.

I bet you could get that gun, AND a Ruger 10/22 rifle under the 10lb weight limit!

OK - How about a few from left field that one can easily build on a low budget?


1.Thread both barrels of an IGA 12 GA coach gun, and put a rifled choke in the left barrel. Use a full choke the right bbl. Use Aguila mini shells in the right bbl for small game, using other 12s sparingly. If you see fresh bear sign, hunt with the breech open and the Lightfields in both chambers. Exchange the right chamber for shot when opportunity for small game comes up, and reload immediately after shooting. Lightfield Commander sabots will not damage the full choke.

2. Acquire an NEF .410/45 survivor rifle. Use Lil Gun to drive 360 gr LGCs 1200 fps from 20 inch bbl. Will also fire .357 and .40 saboted pistol bullets.

3. Acquire Encore Katahdin Carbine in 45-70 (18" bbl)and a 22 LR side arm. Rifle is 32 inches and under 6 pounds. Available in 450 Marlin as well. Easily freebored 1/2 inch to add 15 grs of capacity with 500 gr .458s and 1850 fps.

4. Rossi combo gun with 22 Mag and 12 ga bbls. Rig for 3 second quick change of bbls. Carry 12 ga, cut to 18 inches, in pack scabbard charged with Lightfield sabot (Weight 1.5 lbs).

Hi Loader, good info;) I have a Superredhawk in 454, I cut down some 410 ammo to use for grouse, there was many times I was heading to my baited bear site, I ran up on cubbys of grouse and only had the big stuff due to I was bear/deer hunting, now I carry a single cut down 410's on the back end of the cylinder in case;) I see them this year, they will be dinner on the table. I'm making this gun very versatile LOL. i tried them out at the range on a turkey target, very good pattern at close range, much better than the rat shot they sell. RAMbo.

My answer follows; my address -- to send me my 'prize' for the correct answer -- is with the moderator.

The 'longarm', after reading about "Garrett Cartridges" online, would be a .44 magnum Marlin lever action shooting Garrett's 310 grain factory load. This load is used by the State of Wyoming Grizzly Bear Team. If it's plenty in a handgun, it'll be more in a Marlin. This load would stop the "coastal grizzly". (They have since brought out a 330gr. load that is even heartier - for Redhawks and Super Redhawks only).

The handgun would be a 5 1/2 inch Ruger Super Blackhawk, loaded with any factory .44 Special or .44 magnum cartridges for the smaller(?) game. The .44 special can be bought in some very mild loads, as we all know, and the 310 grain Garrett factory load will fit in the Super Blackhawk.

I would not 'scope' either gun; and the total weight is: 6 lbs. for the Marlin and 46 ounces for the Super Blackhawk .

Larry Kelly harvested a very large Brown Bear with a Ruger handgun, as pictured in "Hunting for Handgunners", with J. D. Jones co-authoring. He did this with a 240 gr. Hornady FMJ, having probably 3/4 of the 'punch' that the Garrett 310 grain load now develops, using a Super Blackhawk.

I would try for the largest of the bears with the Marlin, however.

None of the 45 Long Colt fans need apply!

Respectfully,

SafetySheriff

My BFR in .450 Marlin w/10" Barrel would do the job. You could load up some real small loads (250g) for the wabbits and some heavy loads (400g) for the waskally bears!

Sorry guys, just saw a Browning BLR w/ 20 inch bbl in 358 Win. Have to hold it to believe it...very good balance and 6.5 lbs. As mentioned before the 358 will shoot 90 to 310 gr bullets, so if we allow handloading, I aint even taking a handgun...maybe a slingshot...

I think at this stage of the post it would be helpful to have some input from those that hunt the bigger bears, if any are here. I know handgun cartridges have a lot of punch in a carbine, but how many guides/serious hunters would use it as the arm of choice? I'm just curious since one of the more recent posts says the .45Colt is not what the 44 is, and those of us who have used it for years know that it's everything the 44 is in a good gun, if not a little bit more. That said, it's not what I'd want to tackle a grizzly with, of any kind. I'm a handgun hunter, but I prescribe to the "use enough gun" theory, and no multiple shot pistol fits the bill that doesn't carry a bore size of .475 or better. I'm just curious to see if anyone here actually has killed a grizzly with a 44 or 45 and if the situation was dangerous or not. Keeping in the spirit of the original post, I know the .45LC loads, available commericially, are AT LEAST as effective of those for the 44.

Kcih,

The BFR shoots a .450 Marlin which is a beefed up 45/70. The KO on a 475 Linebaugh is 40.9 with a 385g bullet. I chronied my 350g .458 out to 1815fps which gave me a KO of 41.54. Thats with a factory load. I would have no problems with a bear.

I hate to beat it to death, but I can see right now that one word from the Safety Sheriff and all you guys will do as you darn well please...

The web sites I've reviewed, particularly Garrets, indicate that for us 'average' Joe's the .44 is tops. Check the site, please.

The use of a 12 ga. slug shooter such as Mossberg's stainless or electroless-nickeled street sweeper could fill the bill for 'Brownies' quite well. with #2 or 4 shot to blind the bear to start. (seriously!). The Brenneke 3" magnums would finish that job. The pump action coupled with the pistol grip stock make it a real contender for the big ones. It would be easy to sling over your back, too.

A stainless steel Super Blackhawk is still my 'belt' gun. Loaded with .44 specials or magnums. That still gets me under 10 lbs, and allows me to carry pepper spray for the bears to boot!

Would somebody please give me an "Amen"?

Zeppelin,
I don't doubt that your handgun would cleanly take a big bear, but the "shice your pants" factor needs to be taken into account. I personally would feel better with a powerful rifle, as I think a follow up shot with a bolt action would be just as quick and more effectivley aimed as with the very powerful handgun you carry. It has also been my experience that it takes little or no more time to unholster a huge handgun than it does to bring a slung rifle to "bear" no pun intended.

Safetysheriff,
I'll give you a amen on the 44 being a powerful handgun, I own a couple and love them. I like my 45LC Bisley better, but it's had some work done. Personal preferance and nothing more. The idea of counting on taking more than one shot at a charging griz, as a matter of planning, is not what I'd want. In the spirit of the post we can have one load for each weapon. One for the handgun and one for the long gun.

Granted, I'd still like a combo gun with a 375 H&H level rifle over a 12 gauge with my handgun of choice. I'd rather blind the bear with muzzle flash and drill him with a couple tons of energy than rely on blinding him with birdshot and hammering him with a slug if time allowed. Just a matter of shooting style of one well placed shot over the spray and pray method. Have you ever shot 3"magnum slugs out of a pistol grip shotgun? You're a **** of a man if you can do more than one quick and accurately.

AMEN, with the possible exception of blinding a Bear. If they are close enough to have even a 50% chance of hitting 2 grape sized targets 8 inches apart, you are in for some excitement.

This forum deserves the truth, and I'm beginning to 'warm' to the debate. (It is good to interact with you all.)

No, I've never shot the 3" Brennekes from a pistol grip, but I've found 2 3/4" Federal slug loads to be easier to handle than I ever expected. I did that with an 870 Remington.

The 2 3/4 Brenneke magnums should also be considered an option - especially since they are made with the harder/hardened point on the front of them. That sounds like a bone-crushing load to me.

In a not-too-long-ago article in American Hunter, I believe, they told of a lady who killed an Alaskan Brown Bear with a well-placed 150 gr. bullet out of a .270 Winchester! Holy mudhens, that puts a lie to some of the 'big-bullet' theory. I wish I could remember which year/month the article was in. Two 'brownies' were stopped with one-shot kills by .270's, if I remember correctly. The author of that piece may have been John Barsness.

p.s. Is there anything more beautiful than a Ruger Bisley?

I took out my .44 mag and my .480 ruger and my friends 454 casull. We had a nice 3/8" metal target to shoot at. All three put small dents in it as the taget would spin around. The BFR pushed the metal all the way through and almost penetrated the metal. A large lump is on the back now. Both of us were in shock at the power of this handgun. I picked up some African Grand Slam 458 at 500g. I will let you know but basically I am shooting a 45/70. A few shots from one of these BFR's in 450m and one begins to understand the stopping power. I would go hunting for bear with this revolver anytime.

Safetysheriff,
I don't dispute that a .270 will kill anything that walks if you put the proper bullet where it needs to go. I really don't think this says anything about the big bores at all. Did'nt O'Connor shoot lions with it? I'm talking about "overkill" if there is such a thing. I've never overkilled any animal, not even a yote I drilled with my .340. I wouldn't go out with the intent of shooting grizzlies, big or small, with a .270. Lots of guys have killed Cape Bufflo with .44's. I'm a handgun hunter, but this wouldn't be my bag. Of course these guys are backed with large caliber rifles, very large. I think most shooters will acknowledge that far less than what we want is neccesary, but it is what gives confidence. I think when the chips are down, I'd rather have more than enough gun.

I agree that few things made of metal are more pleasing to hold than a Ruger Bisley, but I still disagree with blinding an animal as a defense tactic. I agree shotgun slugs are very powerful, the next best thing to an "elephant gun", I just like the idea of precision shot placement at ranges that preclude shotgun use. A semi-auto, rifled barrel shotgun with a low power scope or a open peep could be a very good answer to this question out to 200yds, especially if we could have more than one factory load. There is no doubt that a modern, sabot slug in one of these guns will drop anything that walks on this continent.

I've been pretty close to 3 Grizzlies. Wasn't hunting either one of those. I for one wouldn't want to shoot to blind them. In fact I'd rather not shoot, if I don't have to, but if I do, I'm going to try and crush his shoulders, I mean literally pile drive him into the ground, and before he can wiggle I'm going to whack him again.

That being said, like Scotty has said, a .223 would work for most situations. Because I'm kinda of a chicken, :cool: I'd still prefer my 30-06. I could tolerate a 22 pistol too. If I was strickly hunting and the possibilty of having lot's of blood on me and the game I'm packing, (ie. Moose!) that would change the parameters. If I was cruising the tundra, light weight would be my goal.

I think that it may not be clear to everyone what your options are to stop a charging animal at short range. Let me add my perspective:

You can brain it with your first shot, or possibly hit the spine through the top of the neck, in which case problem is solved, debate is over, caliber is relatively insignificant.

You miss entirely, again, caliber is insignificant.

Or - if you miss the central nervous system, but hit the critter, you MIGHT get a chance to get another shot off, IF you can slow the critter down. Slowing it down means hitting & breaking one or more leg bones, the spine or the pelvis.

Heart/lung doesn't count when range is measured in feet. Bear might bite you fewer times with blown-up heart/lungs, but once is too many, as far as I am concerned.

So.... consider the x-ray view of an animal from the side. Few bones, lots of critter, easy to shoot and miss a big bone or hit an insignificant one, like a rib.

Now imagine the same x-ray, but from head-on. It'll be mostly white, with closely spaced bones, and some bones behind other bones. Much easier to hit a bone - if your bullet can go deep enough, maybe 3,4,5, or more feet of tissue first!

.223 doesn't do that. Neither does .270, or frankly, most shotgun slugs (some do penetrate deep).

Big deeply penetrating bullet gives you more chances to put the critter down - if you hit it at all - and take multiple shots.

Blind it? Not sure that will help enough. My lab retrieves on scent, not sight, for the most part. Seen him run right past a dummy or bird many times, then slam on the brakes when he catches the scent, and goes RIGHT BACK to it, the exact spot. Plus, a thousand pounds of critter running right over you, whether it sees you or not, is gonna hurt. Ever had a 90lb dog run into you at full throttle? Now scale up 10x. Once Mr. Bear has steam up, you might end up as toe jam even if he can't see you. Remember the critter is charging directly at you!

Course you gotta hit first.........

Good points Mike,
I probably wasn't clear in my previous post. If I had to shoot a Bear that was intent on getting to me, I'd want a 300 mag minimum, with 200 grain bullets. 338 with 250's would be much better.
If I was just hiking through the bush, I think for the most part I could stay away from the bears. In that case, my 30-06 would suit me fine. When I'm hunting bears, I don't want my 30-06, even though I know that it will handle 95% of the situations, it's the other 5% that bother me. I've alway's learned the hard way, for once I'd rather be prepared!
I've hunted Grizzlies twice with a 300 Weatherby, this year it's a 338 Win Mag.

Joel, just wanted you and everyone else to know that I'm not being critical of anyone's personal choices, just giving my perspective/theory/opinions. Heck that's why we have a discussion board, so we can discuss things!

Scotty has an interesting thought with the .223 in a semi-auto. Changes the equation a bit when you can dump several FMJ rounds at once, again, it's all about hit probability and max damage per hit. .223 has steel-core AP ammo available, most hunting calibers don't! But load the same cartridge with a .40gr. Ballistic Tip and it's just gonna annoy the bears.

.270 with Fail-safe beats .45-70 loaded too fast with lightly-constructed JHP - you get the idea.

You guys that live in AK and deal with this stuff every year, I appreciate hearing about your real-life experiences. Just because Scotty dumped a moose with a .22 mag doesn't mean I want to try! And I know that Scotty would have preferred something a little bigger for the occasion.

It's all about perspective - the .223 grows by leaps and bounds when compared to a rimfire. And so on.

I've shot hogs with my .257 Roberts - out the window of my pickup truck! Haven't seen one yet that could get through the door skin on a Ford Ranger. That's different than crawling through some thorny brush, looking for one that may blame you for all of his troubles.

In some ways it's like concealed carry - we know that most of the time you won't need it (avoidance), most of the time you need it, it doesn't need to be used (deterrence), and then there's a tiny fraction of the time when the crap hits the fan and you wish you had brought something bigger.

Amen brother Mike.
The largest effective caliber that I can shoot, that I've tried, is a 416 Rigby. I know the Remington Model 700 AWR used to be available in the .416 Remington, but no longer is. Too bad. I don't anticipate being able to recover from the recoil too quickly with the rifle only weighing in at 6 3/4lbs, but I'd rather get hit with the recoil than a big angry bear. I would'nt ever consider putting a scope on a rifle of this power level. As I said in my original post, my .340 would likely do the job when it comes to crushing bone and smashing vital tissue, but it's the minimum I'd want. You can bet the .340 would be driving the heaviest ultra-premium bullet available, handloaded or otherwise. I would rather shoot a deer/caribou with a cannon than a bear with a pea shooter (270 Win, in this context). Besides, the smaller animals can be handled with the handgun. I'd bet there are a lot of shooters/hunters on this forum who pride themselves on handgun accuracy. Failing that, a deer minus a front quarter is better than nothing. As a matter of reality, I'd bet a big tough .375 or .416 bullet travelling at moderate velocity would cause no more damage than a 30-06 because of the velocity and bullet construction of common bullets for the smaller calibers. When you're not trying to shoot something a quarter mile away, the big bore rifles shine with no comparison. There is far less demand put on the projectile because even a solid still makes a big hole with a .416, not to mention the exceptional penetration. Nobody advocates shooting grizzlies with a .357 when a .475 is available in handguns, so I have a hard time grasping why you would want to use a .270, 30-06, etc when there are more powerful cartridges available. I'm not saying I'd lay anything over 35 caliber across the bench, and not even some of those, but who cares if it prints 1" groups at 200 yds. 3" groups at 100yds is more than sufficient to take any medium to big game at 200 yds. As you may have surmised, I'm all for having a a large caliber rile when the chips are down. The bigger the better if you can still light it off to good effect.

To echo Mike, I'm not trying to bash anyone or their favorite round. I'm just trying to provide the worst case scanario and what I feel is likely to see you through it with the greatest chance for success.

Its interesting how Alaskan and Canadian Bears drive this discussion...as well they should. I think a lot depends on how much risk you want to take, and the trade-off between lower risk and the gun's usefullness on other game. There is no "right" answer, because risk, and perceived risk, is a personal thing.

Shotguns are interesting because the 12 GA is excellent for small game, and a variety of slugs and sabots duplicate a hot 45-70. You get a fast repeating, high capacity, firearm of relatively light weight in a pump, and they strip into a compact package for stowage. You can add rounds to the magazine while the gun is in battery, and they will be "next up". Folding stocks are still legal, and work quite well. Ammo is bulky and heavy, so the Aguila mini shells help in the small game department.

Paired with a good, scoped, 22 side arm, one can keep the 12 GA rounds to a minimum and still eat well.

I think that's where my personal comfort zone is.

If you are a guide or a Ranger, and are responsible for the safety of others, as well as the protection of bears, you need the 100% one shot stop, and everything changes.In this situation, you are intervening...coming into the trouble, and need to be able to wait out a bad situation to see if it goes from bad to ugly, or the bear is bluffing. Sometimes this may be a wounded animal in very thick cover. In the ugly alternative you must put the bear on the ground with one shot, even if you miss the vitals.

Now we are in 458 Win and 416 Rem/Rigby land, iron sights and all that. The 416 Rem Mag APR, discussed above, would be my choice because it is short, light, reliable and absolutely up to the task.

Concerning using the pistol on a bear, I think most of us mean only in an emerengcy when a rifle is not in your hands.

You cant always have a rifle ready but you can keep your pistol on your belt.

For a very different approach see www.alexanderarms.com and click on the 50 Beowulf. This is a 50 cal AR, and you can just buy the upper. Top laod is 400 grs @ 1850 fps froma 16 inch bbl.

The argument may be over :O)

http://www.smith-wesson.com/Products/Firearms/m500.htm[/url]

While impressive, I doubt the 500 Smith will end this post, since most of us, some with extensive hangun experience at hitting things at or beyond 200 yds, wouldn't rely on any handgun to do so if it dictated what we would have to eat on a cold night stranded in the wilderness. I understand that a handful of extremely talented individuals can take big game at ranges up to , and in some cased beyond, 200 yds with a handgun. I also understand that in a survival situation, where every factor is not in your favor and control, and you have no "spotter", that long range shooting with handguns far more accurate than any revolver of any make that has ever existed, especially S&W, would be a risky proposition for survival. I sincerely doubt that a follow up shot of any effect could be fired with this revolver any faster, if as fast, as that of a bolt action carbine providing up 4,000 ft/lb of energy, and certainly not as effectively at ranges outside 25 yds. I've shot handguns since I was 14, extensivley, but I've also been in a life and death situation in the outdoors, and I'll tell you that a rifle has no substitute. I also tell you that, while very impressive, no handgun has the power that a rifle has. My .284 Winchester XP-100 produces very, very near the published 2600 fr/lbs, and I would NEVER use it in a life and death situation with a very large animal, unless it was all that I had. I'd have to blame my own demise on not being prepared, if such was to happen.

I disagree with you on your statement that no handgun has the power of a rifle. Like you I have been shooting since I was just a kid. The only advantage a rifle has is that of distance, in hitting the target and in delivering the energy at that distance.. The closer the target the more advantage a large caliber revolver has over a rifle. I have a 450Marlin rifle, I have a BFR that will shoot the 450Marlin. With Iron sights I can hit a deer or bear at 200 yards with that BFR and drop them simply because of the mass of the bullet tagging them. I am not a great shot, just practice most weekends. Granted, given the choice, I would use my .338/.378 Weatherby and take them out at 500 yards. A handgun is not a long distance weapon but under 100 yards most rifles can not compete with a big bore pistol for KO. I would rather take a shot from a .308 then I would a 300g cast 44mag. Linebaugh was correct. Large mass of lead hitting the target at 1200fps+ is the goal.

A handgun is not a long distance weapon but under 100 yards most rifles can not compete with a big bore pistol for KO.

I take it from this quote that you think a large bore rifle, like a .458, the wimpy .416's, and the 375's, which are the rifle calibers that I have been discussing, not to mention the downright anemic .340 Weatherby, are not the equal of a large bore handgun? At any range from spitting to 200 yds?
I enjoy shooting and hunting with handguns, but I contend that you are out on a limb with this one. I have a hard time believing that any handgun packs more controllable firepower than BAR in .338 WinMag. If you're going to tell me that a 4lb handgun (in any caliber) is more powerful and effective than a 7.75-8.25lb rifle (with or without the Boss) in .338 WinMag with two instantaneous backup shots, I'd have to question your logic. I understand that the handgun is more likely to always be with you, but a revolver like this is little more convenient to carry than a rifle, and I'll contend that's it is NO quicker to bring to bear for an accurate shot than a rifle is. I've never tried my big revolvers from a low slung, tied down, type of western rig, if they're available, but I don't consider them practical gun toters anyway. I also use holsters with retention devices that usually need to be unsnapped or unhooked with larger hunting type revolvers, which would give the further advantage to the rifle.

I realize that muzzle energy is not the do all to end all, but the .338 WinMag sports almost a TON more energy than this latest S&W revolver. Coupled with premium bullets in a far more controllable package, I really fail to see how the two can even be compared at any skill level, let alone the "average" shooter.

The only time I'd want a handgun for self defense in Alaska, is when I was sleeping. Just for the close, bear in your face, I'm in a tent, can't swing a rifle shots. Any other time a rifle would suit you much better, even a 30-06 rifle. You've got to hit your target for the energy to accomplish anything.

this thread is lively, thats for sure.

Mike, I hope I never, ever, EVER have to date a moose with the .22Mag again.

I have been on the recieving end of three bluff charges by Interior Grizzlies and hope to avoid that if I can also. A coastal bear can be two or three times as large and much more prone to full contact rather than a bluff. They scare me. Alot.

I do not care how big a handgun you carry, it will not seem like enough. On the other hand, a large sow fell to a lowly 9mm this fall. The shooter had to have nerves of steel or God's Grace (and probably BOTH!) but he was successfull. I doubt you could pay him enough to try again. I still believe that shootabliity and controlability play a much bigger part than raw power.

We all have our personal favorites, and unless you could pick the exact circumstances, I bet all of us would spend a bit of time out there saying things like "I wish I had picked..." I would seriously regret a .223 if all I saw for a week were flying ducks and geese

Alot of what it realy boils down to is personal preparedness in the head and basic to advanced woodcraft skills. There are several stories of folks that have walked the clean accross the state with no more than an old .22 or 30-30 and a few shells (through the wilderness, not along the pipeline or road system) and came out fat and happy.

Scotty

this thread is lively, thats for sure.

Sorry, I forgot to take my medication. :)

"" I also tell you that, while very impressive, no handgun has the power that a rifle has."" That is the statement I disagree with. A revolver that will shoot a 350g .458 at 1800fps with a factory loads will wipe a 30/06 at 100 yards or under. Its the same principle as a shotgun. A 30/06 shooting a 180g bullet at 2798fps produces a KO of 22.16 while my 10'" BFR in 450 Marlin provides a KO of 41.54 (double the power) and even my 44 mag shooting a 355g hard casts gives a KO of 27.19. Distance is the key. :O) I would not go hunting a bear with a 22/250 if he was 20 yards away.

The Smith 50 is a highly specialized revolver with limited application in a survival situation. It weighs 72 ounces empty and over 5 pounds loaded. The 50 cal slugs are relatively light for that caliber and energy is dumped into the air so fast that it is relegated to very short ranges in spite of its muzzle energy. It duplicates, almost exactly, any number of 50 cal shotgun sabot slugs in external ballistic performance.

Since its in the same weight range, and you can't shoot squirrels, rabbits and grouse with it, I would never even consider lugging it around for survival purposes.

Its going to be interesting as Corbon lists a 440g at 1625fps, KO of 51 which is very impressive. I am wondering if the bullet is a .511 like a Linebaugh so I shot S&W an email.


http://www.cor-bon.com/500s&W.htm:confused:

I would have to agree with the rifle voters here.

I do not have as much experience as many here on the board, especially those with a lot of big-bore hunting experience.

But given the worst case scenario and limited to the guns I have in the safe, I would still feel safer with my .375 Win or even my .307, both capable of multiple, accurately placed shots with open sights than a big revolver.

In my mind even a 44.magnum with mild factory loads would take more time to get off multiple accurate shots than either of the levers I own.

If I had the money to outfit myself with better equipment than I already have - I would start at the 358 win and go up from there.

To me the handgun part of this euation is for the small game use and last gasp defense - in which case 6 well placed .357 magnums beat a couple of 44s.

But then what do I know, I live in the east and the biggest bear I have seen in the wild weighed less than I did at the time :D

A little fun reading about big bore revolvers:

""We learned that a .500 bullet at 1000 feet/second can do devastating things to animals, wood, and outboard motors. We learned that one gentleman, whose name escapes me, put a cast LBT 46 inches into an elephant’s head. It traveled straight, was undamaged, and lodged in the third vertebra""

http://www.sixgunner.com/linebaugh/page3.htm

http://www.sixgunner.com/linebaugh/penetration_test.htm

Zepplin,

I have no doubt these big boys are powerful and if you can shoot them accurately more power to you, I just think shot placement is more important than power - and I doubt my own ability to shoot these monsters multiple times accurately.

(I personally would rather take a 300 grain 44 in the shoulder than 2 150 grain 308s in the chest.)

As for the Smith .500, it looks great on paper - but I have shot Smith 629s and 29s that would bind up after a couple of cylinders of weak factory ammo.

It would take a lot to convince me that I want to stake my life on a revolver they made capable of handling the power they claim with the .500.

If I want reliable Big-bore power, I'll stick with ruger or Dan Wesson.

Zeppelin,
We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. Do you think a .450 Marlin is more effective (combination of accuracy, power, and ease of follow up shot) in a lever action carbine or a handgun? This way you won't be comparing a pistol cartridge to a rifle cartridge. I'm prett sure that the .450 Marlin is at least as powerful as the new S&W round. The beauty of the BFR and this new S&W is that after you've emptied your shots into the ground and trees, in a panic for your life, you can pummel the bear with them. :)

The thought of attempting to kill a charging bear with any handgun scares the carp out of me. On the other hand, the thought of attempting to use a rifle with one hand while being shaken like a dying rat in the mouth of a terrier is not very comforting. Hard to use a rifle from the fetal postion or while engaged in a rather active rasslin match. It is very difficult to hold fire durring a false charge unless you have thought out the scenario of being hasty on the trigger is probably going to increase the odds of a severe whuppin. Fortunately, almost every encounter with Bruins can be resolved without firing at the bear. If they are not, you should set your mind to getting a good chewing and attempt to minimize damage. If the worst comes to worst, any handgun of reasonable power will pust a bullet up through the top of the skull from under the chin. I theory I hope to never have to prove!

Coldfingers,
I'd imagine that is where the second gun in this comes into the equation? The light revolver of moderate power that is easy to carry? The one that is in a holster that doesn't pull your pants down to your ankles.

kciH.

Exactly. I have pondered long and hard to arrive at what I HOPE will work for me IF it ever comes to that. I think that all of us have a certain threshold of pain that will define where we draw the line. A Smith Mountain Gun or Ruger Bisquero is the top end of what I will faithfully keep strapped to my person for weeks on end in the bush. Neither of these are what I would choose to hunt a bear with but could be very effective in close quarters.

You cannot believe how many folks I encountered in the field that have an absolutely HUGE handgun "back in camp". Much like the rifle that is left leaning against a tree while one goes to the latrine or just up that little hill to glass a bit or the fellow that leaves the gun in the boat while he fights his way through twenty yards of willow to glass an opening. It does not take twenty yards of willow to hide a sleeping giant.

The other factor that I had to come to grips with was my personal tolerence for recoil. I simply would not/could not shoot a .454 enough to attain any level of confidence with it. In our worst case scenario, I would have done much better with the snubnose .357 that I shot twice a week and carried every day. Familiarity will play a large part when the reptile brain kicks in and you are only thinking "fight or flight" and most likely thinking/dong a little of both and neither of them very well. All of us probably live pretty far removed from a lifestyle that has our minds and nervous system keyed up for living out the Law of the Jungle.

Scotty

Coldfinger,

You made the point I was trying to make.

I know I can get at least 5 of 6 shots into anything at close range with any of my .357 rugers fairly quickly, and I feel multiple 158 or 180 gr jsps at close range is going to hurt even a big bear.

With anything larger I am just not sure due to the recovery between shots.

Scotty's post is why I recently sold my Smith 29 44 mag with the 6" barrel. I carried it up there 4 years running. But's it too big and heavy. The "Mountain Gun" was causing me to lust for her just the other day...

I'd have one now but won't be hunting Moose for awhile, no overnighters on the Tundra. But if I do some more of those trips, the "Mountain Gun" will be listening to me snore.

The question is one of bullit mass. I shoot a lot of pistols and revolvers along with my rifles. If you cant hit a charging bear at 50 yards with a revolver then you better have the carbine. What I am saying is that a larger caliber round is much more effective then a smaller faster one. Given the choice of a 30/06 rifle laying on the table and a BFR in 450marlin or my Tarus in .480 I know what I would grab, the .480 with 425 grain hard cast lead (the BFR is single action) and the bear would have 5 massive wounds in it (the BFR and Tarus are 5 shooters) I guess I have shot so much I am very comfortable with a big handgun especially when I have "fine tuned" the load. :cool:

Zepplin!

There is one small problem as I see it.

Alaska is VERY protective of their Grizzly population and the laws that govern what constitutes a DLP (Defense of Life and Property) shooting would leave you with a rather sticky legal problem if you started your shooting at fifty (or even twenty) yards. The mauling from Fish and Game makes a Grizzly enounter look like a dutch rub. The critter better have powder burns if it is taken in a DLP setting.

Scotty

A grizzly bear can outrun any human being, as far as I'm aware. A human can run 50 yds from a dead stop in 5 seconds or less if they are very fast. I would like to see 5 double action shots from a 480 Ruger with any level of accuracy in less than 5 seconds under the strain involved in a situation like this. I'm assuming a 480 Ruger has quite a bit more recoil than my 45 Bisley with a 300gr slug loaded to full steam. I think with heavy cast bullet, full power, loads that this would be somewhat difficult even with a 44 Magnum in a 5" revolver, let alone a .480.

Scotty -

Here here! Handguns in this application are really close range fight stoppers, and that includes during the fight. The 45 LCs can be had in guns under 40 OZ, and work great out of a 4-5 inch bbl. 300 grains and up will do the job.

This puts a little pressure on the long gun, as we still need something to harvest small game, including fowl. I would still be tempted to carry a pump shotgun with a folding stock as a reliable food getter.

KciH
Your assuming you can shoot a bolt action rifle or a carbine faster then a handgun? Draw up a rifle with a scope on it that quick at close range? By the time you "aim" the bear would be on you. Hopefully you have the scope set at 2x. One can put a hollow dot on a handgun (i have one on my .44) and pinpoint the target much faster then a scope. Myself I use iron sights 50 yards and under. A 400g + hard cast bullet does not bounce off the head, it bone crushes it. :D The larger the caliber the more you can be off center a bit and cause a massive wound. I have not tried speed firing my .480 but my S&W 44 mag I have timed and I can empty 6 rounds of 320g cast in 2 seconds. Yes it does take practice in timing when to pull the trigger while the barrell drops. Mass makes up for speed!!!

I wouldn't consider carrying either a handgun or long gun with a scope on it for this application - its receiver sight or open sights.

As for speed, I have never timed it - but I can empty the tube of my lever guns without taking it off target using a receiver sight - and I can get 8 rounds in the tube of my Winchester plus one in the chamber.

I can also add more rounds without taking the gun out of battery - not that this would apply with a charging bear, but I can't even imagine the pucker factor trying to speedload a big revolver if I'm empty and big and hairy is still moving.

I have to correct myself, 3 seconds with the 320g's, 2 seconds with 240g's.

The issue is one of the how much wound damage is done by the caliber which is back to bullet mass. I can empty my mini 14 real quick but a few 400+ grain slugs hitting the target will have much more knockdown then a .223 will. The bear would die from the .223 but only after getting real ticked. I think everybody looks at bullet speed over bullet mass. A 12 guage with a slug has low speed but its devastating at close range. It simply causes a larger wound damage. You cant hunt bear or deer in Arizona or any other state I have lived in with a .223 because it takes too long to kill the animal, but, you can hunt with a 12 guage or a .475 - 44 mag revolvers. 30 caliber rifles require shot placement.

I never said anything about a scope on a rifle for this purpose. I was talking about a weapon that would pe proper for the job at hand. That's the beauty of a rifle, even with a ghost ring sight or a good express style, it's no real problem to take medium to large game out to 200 yds. No scope to break, batteries to die, etc, etc. I'd alot rather dump a .416 or .450 into a bear that hit where it should than dump 5 or 6 rounds of handgun into a bear, hoping it goes where it needs to. I can assure you that it will be quicker to get the shot you want with an open sight rifle, and have the confidence it will go where it needs to, with much more authority than any repeating handgun, of any kind that I have ever seen or even heard of, can produce. I'm guessing that you just carry that revolver around in your hand? right? Maybe a custom, low slung, tied down, gun slinger-type holser with the special cutout for the holosite is the answer, oops I almost forgot to make sure that there is nothing that actually holds the revolver in the holster, that could get in the way when things go bad. I believe you can light off a VERY large double action 44 6 times in 2 seconds with heavy cast bullets, loaded for maximum power, but I don't believe you'd hit anything that wasn't very very close and very large, to any good effect.

The original post for this thread was a rifle and a pistol. I simply suggest a larger caliber pistol and a smaller caliber rifle. I carry my big guns in a bandoleir <sp> so yes I can draw them real fast. A .416 Rigby will not out perform a .458 or .475 revolver at close range if you are shooting heavier bullets in those revlovers. Most .416's I have seen are single shot or double rifles and one can load up the same barnes .458 solids in the BFR and get 80% of the velocity with the 10" barrell.
Taylor created the KO index based on his hunting experiance in africa. He noted that a bigger, heavier bullet stopped large game in its tracks faster then a smaller faster bullet.
Ultimately , if weight was not part of this discussion, I would carry a Barrett semi auto .50 BMG so I would have speed and heavy bullets .
:D
Maybe I just have had more handgun time them most people as I am out at the range 40+ weekends per year shooting rifles, pistols, revolvers and class III weapons.

Hey Guys,

You are forgetting that the odds that you will need a lighning rod on this exercise are very slim. If you do need a lightning rod, you will be going for a CNS (Central Nervous System) hit...a target the size of a grapefruit that will be "Bouncing" towards you at 35 mph while breaking trees and making horrible noises. Any shot that does not hit the grapefruit has the potential to kill but will NOT prevent the owner of the grapefruit from giving you a thrashing! This is a target where "knockdown" is a fallacy with any handgun and a whole lot of rifles.

If I had to walk out of one of our remote camps, my primary focus would be on what would give me tne most meals with minimum misses and minimum ammow weight (since I have other things to carry on my journey that just as important, if not more so.

Bear attacks happen every year in Alaska, but considering the hours afield spent, they are the "boogymen" of our planning

Scotty

Scotty,

I like your latest aproach: Travel light and fast, Stay fed on small game, and Work very hard at avoiding mister Brownie.

Fireplug

Fireplug,

That method has worked for a great number of years. If it quits working, hopefully one of my family members will let you all know that you need to throw my method out the window and try something else ;*)

Scotty

Zep,
I tried out a .480 Raging Bull at the range today. The $5 rental wasn't too bad, but the $22 for 20 shots was a bit of an ouch! How much more recoil does this generate when using the heavy cast bullet loads you mention? With the factory Hornady 325gr loads and the porting in the huge pistol, the recoil was more pleasant than full steam 300gr cast loads in my 5 1/2" Bisquero. What kind of velocity will this round produce with the heavy cast bullets? I don't see firing this revolver rapidly in double action mode with a great degree of accuracy a practical matter. An impressive revolver, that was easy to shoot accuratley, but I'd have to put some suspenders on to wear it on my belt. My wife wouldn't try it for some reason, probably just as well. I will say that it was a liitle loud on the indoor range.

I'll have to agree with you guys on doing every thing in your power to avoid the possible showdown with the ultimate predator. Anything that can grab a 200+lb man by the head and shake it like a rag doll has my utmost respect.

Yeah, they screw you on the initial cartridges. But if you relaod like me 18-20 g of H110 is cheap and $43 gets you 250 x 412g cast bullets (bout 18c
each) so figure maybe 35-40c shot.

The 412's run around 1250-1300fps and the 425's run around 1150fps but both shoot real flat because of their weight.

To be honest I dont feel much of a difference between a 325g and a 412g since the arms take the shock and I roll up with it. I think Tarus did an excellent job designing the size and weight of that revolver and the porting is just right. Those grips are king and I wish I could get them on my BFR.

Bandolier is the only way to go with that big puppy.

I agree, God, my Ruger in 45LC hurts 2x as much with 300g then the Tarus does with 400g. Hand on metal while the Tarus has such a nice grip.

Glad to see you had a chance to see how accurate that revolver is right out of the box with factory ammo. Works good on Taliban eh?

Zep, if you can empty a .44 mag at that kind of speed, you're a heck of a shooter. And you have my admiration. A .45 Auto - maybe (speaking for myself only) as I've shot bowling pins a few times. We all gotta know our limits.

Most of us can't do that with anything with real power. I'd bet the average experienced hunter, who has some shotgun experience, can bring a rifle up and put a center-of-mass shot into a critter much quicker with a rifle, scope or no scope. I know I could - and I've had occasion to shoot a running pig at short range (although it was running AWAY) with a handgun. Harder than it sounds, even when range is measured in feet. Although when I did put a .45 Colt cast bullet through him lengthwise, it sure did brought the problem to a quick resolution. But my first shot missed, so caliber was unimportant when only dirt got hit.

Rifle or shotgun - I was close enough to just point it at him and score a hit, shot plenty of quail & running rabbits to make that statement. Yes I DO leave my scopes on the lowest power until/unless I need to bring the magnification up. Don't forget how truely difficult it is to squeeze a trigger when your lungs are heaving & heart is pounding.

I appreciate the various comparison systems for 'rating' ammo and cartridges, but frankly that's all they are, a comparison, I do not believe that Taylor vs. muzzle energy vs. ??? can predict the outcome 100% of the time (and count me as a fan of deep-penetrating hard cast bullets, but I don't have enough experience to absolutely prove one over the other).

As Scotty notes only hits count so it seems that we must leave it up to the individual, whatever weapon they are most comfortable with, whether it be rifle, pistol, or shotgun (and hope to not have the occassion to need it).

Now this thread is amazing. and its good to see so many oppinions on what you think you would do if a ton of snot, drool & fear came jumping out of the bush at you. It reminds me of the clip they show of the Ohio state Patrol shooting it out with a felon. They were both about 10 feet apart blazing away and niether one was hit. One could have any combo of guns and ammo you wanted but the best scenereo for your back up is an experienced Guide with a big honkin canon to pull all of your brave little butts out of the frying pan. I've been up by the canadian out of new port washington and have encountered some griz and they left you pretty much alone. It was those pesky old range bulls that scared the heck out of me. Those things are very unpredictable

I guess my belt fed 105 recoiless in the composit stock with the bbl shortend and the starlite scope on it woundent quite make the weight limit?

:D :D :D

Gun Runner

"a ton of snot, drool & fear"

LOL! You put into words what I never could when trying to explain the slip knot in my pucker string...

I just re-read Alyeska338's note in the Alaska hunting forum about his freind that was mauled.

Sobering. I remember now why I like winter in Alaska. No bugs and the big boys are sleeping (usually!)

Scotty

There are 2 tricks: First is to aim lower then you intend to shoot, the first shot will be low on the torso but the following shots will slowly rise. Second hold the revolver high in the hand, that is to say that flap of skin between the thumb and pointer finger close to the hammer. That helps control the rise of the barrell. You would be surprised at the nice virtical string you can get. Yeah it feels a little funky the first few times.

BOWLING PINS ARE TOUGH!

Shoot more, shoot more often, shoot everything, shotguns, rifles, pistols, revolvers.

I fully agree its whatever is comfortable to the shooter ((gawd, a .308 at a bear at close range? :eek: To me that takes guts. ))

As long as its got some mass to it.

Come on Zep,
Bowling pins are tough? you've just got to use enough gun, and I think you've got that covered. Tough to break em' maybe. Put a 240gr in the M29 (or your gun of choice for fast shooting) at about a 1000 fps, and they'll never touch the table, let alone stay on it! I prefer the 45, but the club I used to belong to in MN, before I moved here, had seperate classed for autos and wheelguns, so I had to do both. 240gr Keith and 7 grains of 231 in a 44 Special case gets the job done on bowling pins if you want to use a revolver. There was a guy there that could clear the table in under 2 seconds, five shots for five pins is the most important thing. I'd alot rather face down a table of menacing bowling pins with a 44, than an angry bear.

MAAAAAAAAAAAAAN....you guys are FUN!!!!

No kidding, this is all very good entertainment, and most points of view are well supported.

That Drool, Snot and Fear thing has been bugging me since I was 4 years old...now I know what was under the bed all those years...:D

We set bowling pins up on tables, no glue, nothing to hold them down and the bullits wont penetrate it, too much energy knocks them off the table before you can have full penetration. Bowling pins in ARIZONA are tough!

MikeG
You hit the nail on the head-You got to be able break down a charging bear! If you shoot for the head your dead!! To small of a target when you have a 2ft wide shoulder to shoot!! No I will shoot just over his head into the spine./shoulder area!! I know I will get atleast 2 Ft or better bone breaking penertration with either a 454 in rifle or pistol at 50 yds!! Shoot the rifle with 325-360 bullets at 2500-3200 ft lb energy will shoot clear through end to end!! :D

Gunnut, then you must like my BFR in 450 marlin. I am getting 1800 fps with a 350g .458 bullet out of this revolver.

The 412g cast bullets in my .480 will go right through the head, wont bounce off.

Two foot of shoulder on a charging bear? Your bears are bigger than ours ;*)

Right, wrong, or indifferent, I always figgured the target was the nose. A little low still puts it down the throat or into the neck. A little high provides a spine or top shoulder hit. Right or left will hopefully break one of the shoulders. If God is smiling on me that day, a good hit will send ir right up the nasal canal. The biggest problem with Grizz is the large bone mass that is over the eyebrows. While it looks like that is where the brain is, it is just a bunch of lead eating bone and a kind of useless target for those who intend to walk home on their own.

scotty

The most popular cartridges in Alaska, according to a survey at Anchorage in 1999, are the .30-06, .300WM, and .338WM. These three outnumber all other cartridges by a wide margin, and the next was the .308 (if I well remember). The .375 H&H was farther back, behind the 7mm Magnum.

For me, the best all around cartridge for Alaska is the .338WM, and the .454 Casull for a handgun. But I would not like to hit a deer with a .230-grain FS, nor a 250 or 300-grain bullet, since our deer are very small. However, perhaps one could get away with some 225-grain A-Frame bullets for everything. If deer and smaller game are not in the picture, then one could use 230-grain FS for everything, as well as 250-grain bullets. For within 250 yards (bears, moose and the like), 275-grain A-Frame, and even 300-grain Woodleigh SP bullets. These two guns are my personal choice, because these are the guns I am most proficient with. If you would ask me which guns to use in Alaska, I would said: "The biggest guns you are most proficient with, starting with the .30-06 for a rifle, and perhaps with a .44 Magnum for a handgun."

Keep in mind, however, that I have never been charged by bears of any kind, nor so my hunting partners. I have met people who have survived a charge. Most survivors will tell you that by the time they knew a bear had charged, the bear was on top of them. In such instances it does not matter if you have a big or a small gun, since one would have to be extremely lucky to be able to fire the gun one time. Some people have shot and killed bears during a charge, without being able to look through the scope, and from the hip (with the rifle's butt far from the shoulder) by instinct. As we age we lose hearing, and some hunters have gotten too close to bears without knowing bears were there. Also, some hunters have been charged by bears that were not aware the humans were close (one may walk too close by accident). This could easily happen if there is too much ambient noise such as on windy days walking on animal trails or through the brush, or walking by a creek or river where the water makes enough noise to muffle human sounds.

Ray -

Great point about the stealth, quickness and ferocity of a bear charge. I am reminded of true accounts in Jack Corbett's "Man Eaters of Kumaon", concerning rogue tigers in India, turned to eating people and bringing the rural economy to a halt.

It was best to still hunt them over bait from a tree or platform, but one did have to get to and from the area while the beast was out there. When moving about on the ground Corbett always tried to walk with the wind in dense cover.

Since the Tiger was a hunter, it would approach and attack into the wind...somewhere in front of him, in the direction he was looking to pick his way through the cover.

To move when it was still, or to walk through cover into the wind was absolute suicide, because the attack would come from the rear or side. Under those conditions a man with a rifle had NO chance.

A savy, motivated brown or griz is right up there with these tigers.

I will tell you hunting a bear and a bear hunting you are very different bye far. I read good book about bear attacks, True stories of recent bear attacks and the hard lessons learned.
The name of the book is Mark of the Grizzly, some of the stories will send chills down your spine, this book tells it the way it really is, makes you look over your shoulder more often, I have hunted many bears in my life Blacks,but when you start getting into remote area's with little or no humans where there is browns&grizz, now your on there turf, well may I say we are dinner LOL. you run, your dinner in there eye's. I have yet to hunt Alaska, this is my dream hunt. Aim small hit small RAMbo.

Bottom line with Bears: The BIGGER the caliber the BETTER your chances are.

Last week I was able to pump out 320g hard cast .44's at 1298fps (ok, the load was a bit hot) That would be the smallest hand gun I would feel comfortable with in Alaska.

Rmouleart: There are several good books about bears/human confrontations. For example:

1. "Bear Attacks, Their Causes and Avoidance" (Revised Edition), by Stephen Herrero is a great book if you want to learn about bear behavior. It could be a great help to every person who likes to spend time in the outdoors in bear country. This book includes how to defend yourself, firearms, etc.

2. "Some Bears Kill," written by Larry Kaniut (author of Alaska Bear Tales I, and II), is another book about bear attacks, but it only relates to people who have survived bear attacks. The reasons why these people survived are explained, weapons used, caliber, etc. This is a great book of survival and learning how. After reading this book, you will notice that it was not the gun size that decided the outcome of the encounter, but the person or persons' wits and desire to survive. At least one person killed a grizzly/brown with his fists and a knife, while another kept a black bear at bay with his knife, while another used a park bench.

3. Gary James Shelton, a Canadian author, has several books about bears that are good reading.

If you watch PSA's video title "Pursuing the Bruin," you will notice that bow hunters kill grizzlies with bows and arrows.

To get an idea on the actual number of bear/human confrontations in Alaska, look at the "Slide Presentation" at the following site:
http://www.absc.usgs.gov/research/brownbears/century.htm

Thanks for the info Ray, The Author of Mark of the Grizzly's is Tim Cahill copyright by Scott McMillion. This book was advised for me to read bye many bear guides. Aim small hit small. RAMbo.

I just recently reviewed a video that I've had for quite a few years that has an archery grizzly kill. Durning one shot they slip up and you see the rifle the guide is carrying, the barrel is almost as big around as a quarter. I'd guess it's a.458 of some sort. I've done quite a bit of bow hunting for deer and tried for black bear but never got one, but even then I always had a large calliber hangun on the bear stand. The state I was hunting in specifically allowed this when bow hunting.

Dont tell me, a Baer Bow with a scope on it. :D

Someone above asked if Jack O'Conner shot African lions with a .270 Win. No, he did not. His wife, Eleanor, did kill one with her .30-06.

Jack O'Conner killed African lions with a .375 H&H.

Just yesterday, I attended the Boise Sportsmens Show, and there was the travelling Jack O'Conner Exhibit, hosted by Leupold Optics. it was fascinating to see the many mounted African, North American, and India animals O'Conner killed over the years when he was writing for Outdoor Life.

I talked with his son, Brad O'Conner, and he said his father certainly loved the .270, but he also believed in "using enough gun," when faced by animals that bite back.

He also told me that O'Conner had three, .280 Remingtons, and thought very highly of that cartridge, too.

As for grizzlies, I used to know a man who lived in Alaska for 12 years, after WWII, and killed eight Grizzlies with his sporterized Springfield .30-06, with the 220 round nose bullet. He was never mauled, but he was also a very good shot.

FWIW. L.W.

Zep,
I don't know what kind of bow it was but it certainly didn't have a scope on it. The bear was a big one and it was dead nearby where it was shot, but they did have to go find it in some tall brush around a stream/river. I would imagine the pucker factor was rather high.

I used to know, and hunt with, two guys who made professional hunting videos, one of them got to hunt and fish for a living. While in Canada bear hunting, one of the guys had a cameraman from Iowa who was in a second treestand overlooking the bait. Upon the shot at the black bear, with a bow, the bear let out the "death roar", this was about 2 in the afternoon. The cameraman would not come out of the tree until the guide/outfitter dragged the dead bear carcass into his view. Just goes to show that some people are afraid of ANY bear. I've not had experience with Grizzlies, except for seeing them at Glacier Natl Park, and was happy to have distance between us. Black Bears typically are far more afraid of you than the other way around. I will say that hiking in an area with the temporary "Danger Grizzly" sighting signs sure made you a little nervous when you got to the confined parts of the trails armed with only a camera.

I'd pick my FN Herstal 12 gauge police Self Loading Police 3'' magnum loaded with 3' Remington buckhammer slugs (6/3/4 lbs dry) and the newest flyweight S&W 44 mag at 29 oz w /4 inch barrel.

Oh boy, I can't believe some of these combinations. I lived in Alaska for 15 years. My partner and I both had airplanes and we fished and hunted all over Alaska. I never carried a sidearm and he always had a 44mag. We use a big A-Frame base camp and a small two man tent for spike camps. When we pitched our tents we always tried to have the back of the tent against an obstruction. Our thought was the bear then had only three ways to get to us. The problem with using a firearm in your tent is the bear doesn't know where the door is. If a bear attacked us in the spike tent it would be on top of it not from the front. Can you imagine the turmoil of being attacked in the middle of the night. I doubt that we would be able to even find our guns in the tent, in the dark, with a bear on top of us. It never happened but the potential is always there.

Hunting bears takes a very special mind set or you can't do it. You have to assume that you are safe and that you can handle anything that happens. I have got to tell you that when a bear charges or false charges, the adrenalin really starts to flow. Just knowing a bear is in the alders with you is unbelievably stressful. A hand gun is the choice of last resort. Any handgun capable of taking down a bear has high recoil and the recovery time can seem like forever. It is not a matter that the hand gun can kill a bear but whether the hunter can shoot well enough and handle the stress. There is a big difference between punching targets and shooting at a charging bear. People who kill bears with a handgun are generally expert hand gunners and know what they are doing. Most hunters don't have that experience with a handgun. They also have a guide to back them up and believe me that make a big, big difference.

Since I am limited to 10lbs then my choice is a 375 H&H or a 416 Taylor in a rifle. I have no need for a pistol of any caliber because I can't shoot one well enough to even try to take on a bear. As for a survival gun it would be a Rem 870 with slugs and bird shot. That is what we carried in the plane.

Frank

OK, I'll bite too!

Picking from what I have:

RIFLE
Brno Mauser in 9,3x62 but I'd cheat and use my 286 grain Nolser PT handload.

HANDGUN
6" Ruger GP-100 in 357 mag. revolver and Buffalo Bore 180 grain lead flat nose.

When I lived in Anchorage, my "go-to" gun for the salmon streams was .454 - 350gr LBTWFN pushed by 31gr H110/W296.

Match that load with a Revolver and a Rossi/Puma 1892 and I don't think you will have a thing to worry about.

OKay, to bring this back to the Original Posters question 4 years ago, under 10 pounds and Factory Ammo.

Ruger 77 mkII magnum, restocked in synthetic, in .375 H&H magnum shooting Federal Premium Nosler Partition ammo with a Leupold Vari-X 3, 1 1/2 to 5 on top. My GP100 with 180 grain CastCore or CorBons and box of 158 grain JHP for small game.

Buffalo Bore .454 Item 7A: 325 gr. L.B.T.- L.F.N. (1525 fps /M.E. 1678 ft. lbs.) (Big game up to 2000 lbs.)

Totally commercial, totally whompum. Only marginally less hot than my handloads.

Terrain up here varies considerably barren ground,mountains,alder thickets and a mish mash of just about every hunting scenario you can imagine.I would go with 338 win in 225gr nosler partition for goat,sheep,moose,caribou and bear,and I go with 22lr for small game.Yes you can shoot grouse and ptarmigan up here with a 22 they are not all that bright,I shoot them in the head.If you want to shoot them on the fly with a shot gun throw some rocks at them,and still they don't fly far,I could tell why but thats another story,but I digress...Anyways 338win and 22lr is pretty good combo in the great white north

The thing about a good plan is, that it's only what you can imagine ought to happen. Sometimes the animal forgot to show up for the planning meeting. check out these videoa..

http://www.Break.com/index/huntlion.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_yTNo36YOs

I'm glad this thread got resurected.

Rifle: 375 Ruger with 300 grainers. Balistics are as close to the 375 H&H but with a 20" barrel. I don't own this gun right now because I have my 338 Win Mag, but I'm going to if my wife lets me. I guess this is kinda cheating since that round wasn't around in 2003, but there you have it. When I guided for Ron Hayes in Bristol Bay (this guy's been around since 1957 so he knows his stuff) he swore that the 375 H&H was the only rifle you ever need and that it is the only one he owns.

When I guided (fishing, not hunts) I carried my guide gun around the rivers for bears. It's a fabulous gun but for a serious hunt, I'd rather have a 375 for the distance shots.

Handgun: A lightweight 22. Great for ptarmigan and grouse.

Chris

Welcome to the forum Chris. Rules are simple, be nice and join in.

I've got to agree that new 375 Ruger sure looks impressive. Hope you get one and let us know how it works on the big bears up there. I spent five years up there in the late 70's. I used a Rem 8mm mag, but built my hunting partner a 375 H&H on a Long Sako barreled action. He and I took several nice bears with both those guns.

Thanks for the warm welcome, Bob. Most Alaskans declare the 375 H&H or 338WM as their "allaround" gun, although you could do fine with a 30-06 loaded with 220 grainers. Based on what I've read and seen of Ruger's new Hawkeye Alaskan, it would save a lot of weight over the H&H. I would probably have bought that over my guide gun if it was around back then.

Thinking again, I would probably leave the 22 at home. If you can't kill a ptarmigan with a rock, you probably shouldn't be out there anyway. :)

If you can't kill a ptarmigan with a rock, you probably shouldn't be out there anyway. :)
Or a grouse with a stick...

But then again, that isn't a whole lot of fun.

Or a grouse with a stick...

But then again, that isn't a whole lot of fun.

well it is not meat damaged for sure using a projectile at 20fps :D

I suppose I would use my left hand Ruger 77 30-06 and Leupold 2-7x scope with Hornady 180 gr. Light Magnum loads and a ruger semi-auto .22 pistol with high-velocity plain lead bullets. The rifle could take any game in Alaska, and the pistol could take small game including ducks and ptarmigan, if I shot well.

I have never seen or heard of either of those types of firearms failing in the region I grew up, except my own rifle. I had sent out my 30-06 to Douglas Barrels and they installed a 24 inch barrel on it. On one hunt, I had 6 out of 8 shots misfire with the Hornady load, but I don't know why that was. The pimers were all properly dented. I am sure that the problem is a fluke and not inherent in the rifle or ammo, normally.

I have taken duck at 120 yards with a Ruger .22 pistol. We had them for dinner that night. I wouldn't shoot a bear unless I thought it was going to attack me because I don't like the taste of them. I don't want a whole freezer full of bear to eat.