So I find myself in need of a good pistol to use for self defense while backpacking. I love my P228 but it's not very rust resistant (long story) and something I'd like to baby as they're no longer made. As I'm getting more and more into hiking and backpacking I find myself wishing for a lighter, more powerful, more rust resistant weapon to bring on my WA state excursions. Some of you may know 2 hikers have been killed in the last couple years. I wish I didn't have to pack a gun but reality is reality. My tactical advisers (my brother and father) have made some suggestions so now I'd like to hear what the great SF has to say on the matter.

My priorities are:
1. Rust resistance (it rains in WA - go figure)
2. Large-ish caliber (cougars and methheads don't go down easy)
3. Small size, preferably something a woman with small hands can work with

I'll probably decide on caliber later but suggestions are welcome. I'll also probably be buying used; I've had good luck in the past.

Question:
Which of these would you pack and in what caliber?

Choices:
S&W 686/640
S&W 66/67
stainless Tarus revolver
Sub-compact Glock (G29, G30, G33)
Compact Glock (G23, G32)
3" XD
4" XD with 3" frame ("compact")
4" XD with 4" frame ("Service")
4.25" Springfield/Norinco 1911
other (please elaborate)

 

You want to take down a large animal you need to get something bigger in caliber then the guns you've selected..lol.

You want a s&w you need a model 500 or 460

You aren't gonna take down a cougar with a little subcompact it's not gonna happen. Unless you get a glock 10mm.

I'd say 10mm would be good or higher in any platform. Remember that the smaller gun you go with and bigger caliber the more unpleasant that gun is gonna be when you shoot it. But when you're defending your life you aren't gonna care if your hand hurts afterwards i guess. But i practice with EVERY gun i own ALOT.

I don't go hiking so i don't have to worry about stuff like that but if i was I'd probably go with a high caliber revolver designed for hunting game or a long slide 10mm 1911. Course if i really wanted to protect myself out there i'd just carry a high powered rifle or a shotgun with half buckshot and half slugs

Gents,

My SS Series 80 Combat Commander has been my go to gun for about everything. It has enough "hootus" to handle most critters...be they two legged or four legged.
For deep woods use I generally carry a 4" barrel N-frame 'Smith in .41 or .44 Magnum.

Wes

Glocks have some damn good rust resistance. I would go for the larger clocks though a glock 20. Yes it's big but with a holster called the safepacker It will hold the gun on either your belt or your hip strap and a extra mag. As you know gloves are common on most hikes in the fall to spring in this area. You want something easy to handle with gloves.

I didn't see J-frame S&W air-weight, but that's my choice.

.

Ruger SP101 (.357) with the 3.25 barrel.

I'd get this:

.44 Mag

Maybe not as rust resistant as you'd like, but price seems decent.

I've shot it and a 2.5" barrel 686 back to back and thought the .44's recoil was a bit softer. The 686 had smaller wood grips which probably had something to do my perception.

A light gun, yet powerful caliber? I would suggest a Glock 32. That's what I carry when I go hiking in the North Bend area. I usually open carry though in a Serpa holster. Works great. .357sig is a great round for self defense against animals (and ppl too).

I wouldn't haul anything by Taurus if my life were to depend upon it. Spotty history and Q/C.


I vote for 44 Mag or 357 from a reliable manufacturer.

RMD

For protection against an assailant any one of those is good,
but for Bear or other large critters don't go no less than a .44 mag

I have the Alaskan in .44 for hiking and backpacking.

I voted other, I think a Ruger GP100 with a 3"barrel would be great in fact I plan on buying one within the next couple of monthes for that exact use. It is easy to conceal if you want to and it is a very robust weapon that can handle a lifetime of .357 Magnum ammo. The other selling point is price it is much cheaper then the S&W revolvers NIB its around $500.00 here. I would stay away from Taurus I have to carry one at work and it is nothing but a piece of junk with endless problems.

I've carried a Taurus Tracker 627SS 4" in 357 for years. I've shot nearly 3000 rounds of 125 gr JHP's and 180 gr CC's and it still locks up tight and shoots great. I carry it in New Mexico (cougar country) and West TX

quote:

Originally posted by jchen012:
A light gun, yet powerful caliber? I would suggest a Glock 32. That's what I carry when I go hiking in the North Bend area. I usually open carry though in a Serpa holster. Works great. .357sig is a great round for self defense against animals (and ppl too).

This is my choice as well. I don't plan on hunting bear or meth heads, but I think that a mag full of .357 Sig will ward off even the determined ones. My Glocks have never given me any problems with rust, are compact for ease of carry, and go "bang" every time. I have a 229 in .357, and a 2340 in .357, but the Glock is the truck / trail / whatever carry gun.

My idea of a great camp gun is a .44 mag either a Ruger 4 5/8 inch Super Blackhawk or Smith and Wesson Mdl 29 with a 4 inch barrel. You can even pick up a used Vaquero in .44 mag inexpensively. They are not prohibitively heavy, potently powerful and cut a much less intimidating figure for your average Joe hiker who may see it.

I live on the East coast so I don't know much about what it takes to stop a cougar. When I go into the woods, I feel pretty good with my S&W 686 w 3" barrel loaded with Buffalo Bore 357 mag cartridges with 180 gr hard cast bullets exiting the barrel at 1400 fps. Proably over-penetrate on a two legger but would go deep in a muscular deer-sized animal.

Thanks everyone for your replies. Here's where I'm at right now:

I'm seriously considering a Glock 10mm or .40. Though from whats been suggested here a .357 or .4x revolver isn't out of the question. I've typically hated the ergonomics of revolvers and the Glock would be smaller, lighter and cheaper which is a plus. In consideration of the Glocks; am I chasing a pipe dream hoping that +P .40 will handle cougar and bear? Heck for that matter am I overly optimistic about the 10mm? Does anyone know of ballistic gel tests done to compare the 10mm and .357? If .357mag is really the lower-end round used by experienced hunters/backpackers I definitely won't discount a revolver.

I would go with a Taurus Titanium model in 357. Regardless of what some say they are good guns. I do not like their automatics (1911 exception).

Run 250 rounds of 38 to prove its reiablity. When hiking I have carried the G26/27 but would not carry a round in the chamber. Got me to thinking 5 rounds of 357 ready to go increase my surival chances.

They are light, effective, and a simple to operate tool. Good luck. Good luck hiking !!!

From what iv'e read cougars are not generally hard to kill critters.Most go down with a 22 magnum when treed and shot placement is spot on.
However when one is face first in front of one
you will want something with a bit more umph.
357mag is about the min for close range deer hunting . so 10mm might be a good choice .
granted in a lightweight pistol it may be more than you can handle. If you want to kill dead
any critter on your case, than 44 or bigger
is my suggestion. if you want to mess up a meth-heads day and run away to tell about it
get a seecamp or naa guardian.in 32
I generally carry a .40 in the eastern woods
when i am hiking(not hunting).But black bears
are generally spooky critters and i really only worry about 2 legged varmints anyway.

I'm a backpacker(infrequently), day hiker (frequently), and do a lot of 4 wheeling, fishing, and hunting. I spend a significant amount of time in wilderness settings, often by myself.

Several years ago I went through the same decision you are going through now in trying to find a "wilderness gun" that would handle both 4 legged and 2 legged critters. We have both bear and cougar here and homo sapien hostilius is encountered from time to time.

I had already decided that due to the harsh conditions I expected the gun to be exposed to that I wanted a stainless steel revolver. I spoke with a lot of local firearms experts and hunters, including a professional bear hunting guide, about the decision and while some felt that this wasn’t the only option to choose, none felt that it was a bad decision.

The only decision left was what caliber and what make/model.

I received a lot of input split between 357 magnum and 44 magnum. Many felt the 357 magnum would probably suffice, but there were some that felt that anything less than 44 magnum would produce less certain results.

laivindil, I understand and agree with most of the criteria you've set for your new gun, however I think you may be approaching the decision in the wrong sequence.

I'd strongly suggest deciding on the caliber first, and then choosing the platform around the caliber.

When choosing a gun for defense against human attack it's a relatively simple process to pick from one of the commonly accepted calibers identified for this.

However, when you're choosing a single gun/caliber to pull double or triple duty then, IMHO, it's best to choose a caliber that is potentially effective against the largest or hardest-to-penetrate targets such as the bear.

I'm not going to categorically state that it is impossible to kill a charging black bear with a (9mm, 357 SIG, 40 S&W, .45 acp, 10mm etc…) however I have yet to meet an ethical hunter who advocates using one of these cartridges when there are better options available. Keep in mind that, if you get any warning at all, you will most likely only get one or two shots off before the animal reaches you and you will need to make the most of the rounds you do get off.

Obviously, not just the caliber but the actual load used plays a huge role in how effective caliber “x” is going to be in situation “y”.

I narrowed my decision down to an S&W 629 4” and a Ruger Redhawk. The consensus was that the Smith trigger action was much nicer than a stock Ruger’s and that tipped the scale for me.

My 629 4” has served me well and been a pleasant surprise as well. Quite honestly, I was not expecting the level of accuracy from the gun that I’ve seen so far. But even more than it’s accuracy, I am nothing short of amazed at how well it has handled the conditions I’ve tortured it with. So far it has been fully submerged in water twice (the last time for several minutes), exposed to triple digit and sub-freezing temps, covered in dust, splashed with mud, dripping wet from rain/snow storms, and slid down an ATV trail at 40 + m.p.h. after falling from my holster due to a (poor quality) broken hammer thong. The gun has a few small “battle scars” that, IMO, add to it’s character, but it still is incredibly accurate and has never failed to fire. No rust either.

This gun has served me so well that I’m torn between keeping it or replacing it with the tank-like Ruger Redhawk, which I have since learned would better tolerate high-octane loads that I’d like to carry in wilderness conditions.

Not to paint my 629 as perfection, I will mention that I pay a huge penalty in pack weight when I carry this gun. While I’m not happy about this when backpacking/ hiking, the trade-off is worth it for me.



I chose "other" in the poll and would suggest you look at the 44 magnum in a double action platform.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Modern Day Savage,