Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| addicted to trailing-throttle oversteer |
Since we got a few in I've been mulling over picking up a Shockwave. Seems particularly useful and potent for when I'm up near the Canadian border. We come across a lot more grizzly sign lately towards the north, and frankly I'd feel a lot more comforted having some heavy slugs at the ready than with any handgun. Plus the darn thing is pretty neat. | |||
|
| Member |
I also only have black bears to deal with when I am hiking in the Shenandoah mountains. I use a Hill People Gear chest pack, like Agony, most of the time and carry either a P227 or a P320 9mm with Underwood ammo, depending on which was my carry gun that day. I carry one mag of Underwood and one of regular defense rounds and load the appropriate one for the situation. I used to pocket carry a .380, not being concerned about black bears since all I had seen of them in the past was ass and elbows as they ran away. But, one day I ran into an adolescent male black bear on the trail with my 3 daughters. We had been making plenty of noise, so he knew we were coming. When he popped up from behind a boulder next to the trail (about 10 yards from us), I did my standard clapping and yelling to scare him off. It didn't work. I had my girls slowly back away until they were around a corner where he couldn't see them before they turned away from him and then walk faster back up the trail. No running! To a predator dinner runs. I stayed and kept making noise and waving my arms over my head, trying to look bigger than him. He decided to get up on top of the boulder and stand up, to show how he was bigger than I was. I stood my ground and then he came down off the boulder and slowly started walking towards me. At that point, I took the .380 out of my pocket, thinking I may need to shoot a round off to scare him (not at him). I did not have a round in the chamber, so I racked the slide and for some reason that got his attention. All of my clapping and yelling and banging hiking sticks, didn't bother him, but that sound did. He stopped coming forward and climbed up off the trail. I started backing away slowly at that point. He did pace me for a bit, but then lost interest. Moral of the story is, being bear aware and knowing what to do when and if you do face one is probably going to be more important than which gun you are carrying. I was extremely proud that my girls did not panic and induce an attack by running away. All that being said, I have changed my behavior and do not go into the woods with just a .380 anymore. I am comfortable with the 9mm or .45ACP with the Underwood Extreme Penetrators. But, that is what I am comfortable with, if others are comfortable with something larger, far be it from me to tell them they are wrong. | |||
|
| Member |
| |||
|
| Member |
Presenter didn't have a pistol to fire the ammunition in, and was afraid to fire it in a .380 pistol. Presenter fired .380 in a 9mm pistol, firing the wrong ammunition in the wrong pistol. Presenter fired into ballistic gel, not through bone and tissue. Gel is a consistent medium, not a variable. Presenter was not attacked with ballistic gel. To date, there have been no recorded accounts of attacks by ballistic gel, in the lab or in the wild. Presenter was unable to account for the difference between wild, raging ballistic gel, and an upset bear. Presenter would be a bloody idiot to attempt to stop a bear with his .380 ammunition in a 9mm pistol. Presenter is not Phil. This is about as relevant to the original poster's question as shooting bears in Alaska. In fact, it's not, and no, the .380 isn't going to penetrate six feet of bear, bone and tissue. You can try to make yourself feel better about carrying an insufficient firearm in all kinds of ways, whether it's attempting to compare yourself to mighty guide Phil, or by posting idiotic videos of guys shooting the wrong mouse gun ammunition in the wrong pistol into raging gel, and if it makes you feel better, then carry your inadequate firearm into an unwise situation. Feel good don't feed the bulldog, nor put down the bear. You're not planning on taking a .380 up against a bear, are you? How about .380 in a 9mm pistol? The original poster sought information regarding good choices for use against bears and other predators. .380 is not a good choice. Neither is 9mm. A 12 gauge with rifled slugs is a good start. A .41 magnum or .44 magnum is a good start. .380 in a 9mm pistol, or a 9mm in a 9mm pistol, are generally poor choices (unless you're Phil) for use against bear and other dangerous predators. Even when tipped with thermonuclear god-killing buffalo bore destroyer-of-worlds hard cast lead cartridges. Next? | |||
|
| Member |
Thanks Cheyenne. Still don't think I would be comfortable going back to a .380, and when I am in Yellowstone or nearby areas, I would not be carrying my 9mm or .45. Grizzlies call for .44 Mag or larger, in my opinion. | |||
|
| Member |
Here is the way I analyze it. Most of us have experience blowing out the hearts and lungs of big critters while hunting with high powered hunting rifles, and having the animals function for quite some time. With a dangerous critter, that means it still can kill me before it expires. So, the only way to stop a dangerous critter is to put a hole in the brain, neck, spine, or some other major part that prevents it from getting to me or hurting me. On a frontal charge, that area is right up front. I don’t really need 4 feet of penetration to do that, and a side shot still only needs a couple of feet of penetration to get a complete pass through. Hard cast rounds are designed to penetrate and punch a straight hole through barriers, including bone. That is all that I need from a pistol bullet. On a frontal shot, damage to the intestines is largely superfluous. (I should add that mountain lions, while dangerous, are not all that tough to penetrate, and most duty-caliber guns with self- defense ammo should work fine for them.) Even if you discount the 48+ inches of water jug penetration with the 9mm Outdoorsman round, it still can reach plenty deep enough with a frontal or side shot. The next component of stopping the critter is hitting one of the vital areas. That is where marksmanship and follow-through come in. I much prefer to carry a platform that sees 5,000-7,500 rounds downrange per year than a mega-gun that only comes out of the safe for special trips. I have shot .44 magnums and 180 hard cast Buffalo Bore in .357 magnums and I do not find the experience pleasant. Split times between shots are very slow. I consider it to be a single shot proposition for me if I am in the middle of being charged. My 9mm carry gun gets shot regularly in competition, and I basically can hit on demand at any range at which I would be defending myself against dangerous critters, and I can run pretty decent split times and get off multiple shots. I keep in mind that the standard black bear in my area of the woods is going to be a couple of feet shorter than me when it is on all fours, so it may be necessary to lead it while it is charging or a miss can occur, unless I am willing to, counterintuitively, speed crouch or get on my knees. For the true pistoleros who can bang away with full house .44 and .357 Magnums with good, fast accuracy, more power to them. I am just not one of them. So, I would invite people to figure out their own limitations in terms of power, accuracy, recoil and splits, then consider the types of critters that they will face, and make an informed decision. Try to avoid recycled Internet and gun magazine lore. It is not a purely academic question for me, as I have pictures of black bears, moose, and a mountain lion standing right outside the front door of my cabin. I do not have a death wish. If I lived in an area with grizzlies or 4 season crop fed black bears, I may do things differently. Somebody mentioned the Mossberg Shockwave. I had one for a couple of weeks. I did not like the way it shot slugs at 20 yards, and forget follow-up shots. I would rather have my pistol than the Shockwave if charged. (A shotgun with a buttstock is a completely different story. But, I don’t carry a long gun when bowhunting.) | |||
|
| Member |
I am honestly not trying to create any argument here but, I don't think we are disagreeing at all. In my post, I stated that I use my EDC gun, with different ammo mind you, for times that I am in the woods with black bears. I feel comfortable with my 9mm or .45ACP, that I shoot regularly. So, to be honest, I was confused as to why you added my name to that video, and along with sns3guppy. He and I don't have the same positions, as far as I can tell. He wouldn't be comfortable with his 9mm, like you and I would (and I have nothing against his position). The only thing I have said is that I don't carry a .380 anymore. I don't. I felt underpowered with it when I had my run in with the bear. But again, that is how I felt and I am not trying to convince anyone that my position or opinion is the right one. I was just relaying an experience that caused me to change my position. I also think we agree that for a brown bear, we would probably make different choices. If I missed something, let me know, or if I wasn't clear in my position, let me know so I can do a better job of it. | |||
|
| Member |
md-dave, my last post was in no way an argument with you. It simply was about my own personal analysis. You did a similar analysis and came to a similar conclusion that works for you. Cool. As for the post with the video link, I only mentioned you because you happened to be carrying a .380 during an encounter with a bear. If that's all I had, I'd be prepared to fight with it, too, whether it was loaded with self-defense hollow points or Buffalo Bore. It was intended to be tongue-in-cheek, for both you and sns3guppy. | |||
|
| Member |
Ok, cool. Glad we are on the same page. | |||
|
| Member |
Oh, no, the bear gun thing again... I've killed quite a number of black bear, seen them take amazing punishment from high powered rifles and been in a pistol fight with a bear. I wrote the latter up years ago on this site when it happened. It occurred with a .44 Magnum and didn't go as planned to say the least, in spite of the fact that every shot fired was fully LETHAL. First, I have no particular fear of BLACK bear at all in the woods. I live around them and bump into them from time to time. They CAN be a problem but usually are not. Grizzly are a different story. My son is a commercial production forester with a timber company and he is in the woods every day in his work. He is also in grizzly country more than I am tho as they expand their range they are getting into my neck of the woods on the ranch more and more. He and every other forester I know except one carry 9x19 pistols. The one carries a .22 Mag. I myself carry a 9x19. This isn't because we are confident in the 9x19 as a "Bear Stopper" but rather because we aren't too fearful of bear. Grizzly are a different story. As a dedicated black bear protection gun, a shotgun with good quality slugs is a good choice. Don't use buckshot at all. There are MANY rifles that would do very well. For handguns, the issue becomes the shootability, as there is no downside to carrying a very heavy caliber handgun IF you can shoot it well AND YOU WILL ACTUALLY CARRY IT. In our case, we use our pistols all the time and just don't want the bulk of a .460 or .500 for example, but again, ours are not dedicated bear defense guns. My .44 Mag is about the most comfortable sixgun a guy can carry in that caliber, being a Smith thin-barreled "Heritage". But even it is a bulky thing and I don't carry it much. Almost never on foot. Occaisionally on the horse or 4 wheeler. The key to stopping a bear is of course shot placement as everybody knows, but the lock is it is hard to accomplish on a moving and fighting bear. Thus blood loss also comes into play and that isn't always accomplished very effectively with hard, deep penetrating bullets that only poke holes. My bear gun I use primarily is a 16 inch barreled 9.3x62. We also have a .45-70 for hounding. But I've killed bear with the .44 Magnum, 7.62x54R, .303 British, .30-30, 9.3x57, 9.3x62, .45-70 and .348 Winchester. Many years ago the Forest Service did a bunch of testing using many calibers. It was written up in RIFLE Magazine. If you can track that article down it's a good one. I'm no Phil Shoemaker but my experience would lend me to tell you: Do NOT provoke any bear and definitely avoid a belligerent bear. If you must shoot, shoot for CNS and KEEP SHOOTING. DO NOT STOP. DO NOT ANTICIPATE ANY REACTION TO THE SHOTS. Carry spare ammo and learn to reload. Knowing what I know and shooting my 9mm as well as I do, I could do worse than that on bear. But I would follow my own rules set above. I have also killed many dozens of butcher stock in the 70-250 pound class with service pistols, using over the years the 9x19, .38 Special, .357 SIG, .45 ACP, 7.62x25 and also the .44 Magnum, .45 Colt, .32 ACP and .22LR. I'm pretty familiar with what to expect from the common service pistol calibers. None of the service pistol rounds are very impressive.This message has been edited. Last edited by: 3/4Flap, ********************** 53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Read Quod Apostolici Muneris (1878) LEO XIII. This Pope warned us about the Socialists before most folks knew what a Socialist was... | |||
|
| Member |
3/4Flap, thanks for sharing your thoughts. | |||
|
| My other Sig is a Steyr.  |
Yes indeed, I can only think that the best handgun to have with you is one you are most familiar with. The added plus of multiple caliber compatibility would be the deciding factor (at least for me) so as to allow to practice on the cheap when needed. Some guns will shoot to 4 or 5 types of ammo, so don't limit yourself. If you can get ~1700 ft-lbs and carry it in a shoulder holster that doesn't bother you, that would be ideal, some will say that a few pounds of pistol is too heavy to carry. To each their own, I suppose. | |||
|
Member |
Piggy backing on to this interesting thread what chest holsters are people comfortable with or is a conventional side/hip holster sufficient? ------------------ Eddie Our Founding Fathers were men who understood that the right thing is not necessarily the written thing. -kkina | |||
|
| My other Sig is a Steyr. |
I have mine with a The Master's Holster brand setup. It allows for the pistol under one arm and two extra mags on the other side. | |||
|
| Member |
Diamond custom, simply rugged and ginfighters inc for me. | |||
|
fugitive from reality |
This is a report produced by the US Forest Service on the effectiveness of rifle and calibers on bear. It makes for some interesting reading. https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr152.pdf _____________________________ 'I'm pretty fly for a white guy'. | |||
|
| Member |
That's the one I was referring to above. It was published in RIFLE as well. Thanks for posting. RE holsters, I make my own, but generally speaking, the same holster worn for CC will work for the same gun used in the woods, with the caveat that if your clothing is different and prevents easy access, another option is in order. Unless the gun may be exposed more to the elements in which you want a more protective holster. If the CC holster is used, it aids in presentation if that is the holster used in one's training. At the very least, whatever you do, practice with it in the clothing you will be wearing in the woods. Don't just do something without thinking it through. Which brings up a pet peeve of mine. Many train with pistols and holsters they don't actually use in a daily carry scenario. I suppose that's because the little gun they carry they can't shoot as well as the bigger gun they want to show off with at the next class. You've seen them. This goes for holsters, also. One of the reasons I liked the philosophy of Combat Focus Shooting was the doctrine of burst firing. Having killed a lot of stock critters that were moving, I have come to realize just how difficult it is to plant "2 to the chest and 1 to the head" and such. In addition, I've killed a lot that were in a crowd of critters I didn't want to injure, so accurate shooting is a demand as well. I suppose this applies to defensive shooting, but don't think the scenarios you train for are the ones that will confront you if the need arises. My own experience with my sixgun and that bear was enough to convince me not to stop shooting in the event of what might appear to be a lull in the proceedings. With a big animal, if you have got the bullets, use them. Then reload. I probably could have stopped the fight before it started had I really been thinking about it. ********************** 53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Read Quod Apostolici Muneris (1878) LEO XIII. This Pope warned us about the Socialists before most folks knew what a Socialist was... | |||
|
| Member |
Bear in mind that most USFS personnel do not carry firearms, and the report in question is 35 years old. | |||
|
| Member |
Well, of course in a bureaucracy as large and bloated as the USFS, that is technically true, but I think it is still USFS policy to require all work teams in Alaskan* bear country to have at least one member armed. I think they have shotguns w/ slugs are made available...Remington 870's? Somebody here with better typing skills than me might be able to locate the policy spec. * Given a little bit of time, the same might be required here as the range of these Lower 48 vermin expands. ********************** 53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Read Quod Apostolici Muneris (1878) LEO XIII. This Pope warned us about the Socialists before most folks knew what a Socialist was... | |||
|
| Member |
I've been involved with forestry operations for a long time now (on a USFS contract assignment at the moment, actually); while the thread specifically excludes Alaska as identified by the original poster, forestry personnel in the lower 48 are not armed except or credentialed law enforcement. Fire crews carry pulaskis, not glocks. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
© SIGforum 2024