Handgun for bear

[ianpadron]

Long time ago, USFWS used some brown bear skulls for testing of rifles cartridges. Cracking skulls reliably did not happen until they got to .338 Win Mag or better.

I have a real hard time believing that.

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk

 

[b0nes]

That's because it's bs, I bet a 22 would would go through a bears skull far enough to hit be brain cavity if fired from close enough. It's just thick bone, people act like bears have a titanium skeleton. I lived in ak for 21 years and heard of way more people getting trampled by cow moose than I did mauled by bears. Bears are very tough creatures but a lot of that is due to their demeanor and attitude rather than their other worldly biology. A 9mm hard cast will go through a bears skull and carry on for a few feet through a bears body from the right angle.

 

[jorgensen.travis]

With expanding bullets of the day. Hard cast 9mm will go through any skull on the planet.


The the last time I was in grizzly country and within 10m of a very aggressive sow and get two cubs, I had a G19. Zero issues in that moment with the pistol I had, and the most concerning thing I had in my mind was having to explain why I killed a grizzly.


ALL pistols poke holes. That’s it. Animals and tissue are not steel, and the difference in holes between a 9mm and a 40/10mm or 45 auto in tissue is less than the thickness of a nickel.

I did some testing of hollow points on a ham with a pork rib and a piece of leather wrapped around it. This test was intended to test guns for self defense against humans not bear, but the difference between a 9mm and a 10mm was huge. The 9mm made a hole in the ham and I recovered the bullet on the off side. The 10mm blew the ham in half!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

I did some testing of hollow points on a ham with a pork rib and a piece of leather wrapped around it. This test was intended to test guns for self defense against humans not bear, but the difference between a 9mm and a 10mm was huge. The 9mm made a hole in the ham and I recovered the bullet on the off side. The 10mm blew the ham in half!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don’t know exactly what you did, but no, there is not a huge difference in any of the common “self defense” cartridges. You would not be able to tell by looking at the wounds whether someone or something was shot with a 9mm, 357, 40, 10mm, 45, etc.

 

[jorgensen.travis]

I don’t know exactly what you did, but no, there is not a huge difference in any of the common “self defense” cartridges. You would not be able to tell by looking at the wounds whether someone or something was shot with a 9mm, 357, 40, 10mm, 45, etc.

What I did was actually test it rather than repeat things I’ve heard from others. It’s on YouTube under “Solo Custom Archery”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

What I did was actually test it rather than repeat things I’ve heard from others. It’s on YouTube under “Solo Custom Archery”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Terminal ballistics is a part of my vocation. I’ve seen multiple things both still living and dead, shot with all of the major “self defense” cartridges, with multiple projectiles. No one, not me, not the senior FBI terminal ballistics personal, nor surgeons can tell you what pistol round someone was shot with without finding the gun or recovering the projectile.


You shot shot a ham. A ham that looked like it had been shot multiple times with other rounds. If that is your version of testing and it makes you feel better about your choices- great. Rock on. But do not confuse that with verifiable, repeatable testing that has proven to correlate with actual tissue destruction in live tissue.

 

[Wrench]

I killed this bear at about 10 feet with my 10mm. They were handloads with 200gr xtp at 1250fps. I never intended to shoot the bear with that load, I normally carry a 200 doubletap....but it didn't time out that way.
I recovered the bullet 17 or 18 inches away from its face, through the back of its skull and down the neck. It was instantly dead.
View attachment 78496

 

[Wrench]

View attachment 78497

The recovered slug.

 

[MHWASH]

I pack a 9mm loaded with 147 Buffalo Bore ammo. Either in a G19 or Shield depending on the situation.

I've owned and shot lots of 44, 41, 357 and 10mm. My take away is the 40+ caliber revolvers are heavy cumbersome, and in a real world bear charge situation I think you'll be lucky to get off follow up shots, plus if your charged how likely is that first shot going to be effective.

Same thing can be said for the 10mm. I've had the G20 and the G29, those are both handfuls when trying to shoot rapid fire with stout loads. Although I haven't shot one, I'm sure the G40 would be better in the recoil department, but I feel the 6" barrel is a great detractor for a self defense weapon.

According to Buffalo Bores website the .357 w/180 hardcasts is equal to the 10mm. I may just carry my 357 w/ 4" barrel this fall while in Grizzly, but haven't decided yet. I need to shoot it and the 9mm again before I decide.

That's my 2 cents worth, so take it for what it's worth.

 

[Beendare]

There has been some good threads on this in the past.

Whatever you choose, the hardcast or penetrator bullets are the way to go.

More power is always better if you can handle it...

A functioning firearm is critical eh? But there are plenty of guys every year that don't function test their pistol with their chosen ammo. Some of the hardcast bullets....and the powerful ammo doesn't play well in an auto; Jams, FTF's Stovepipes, bullets tumbling, etc.

The guys that don't function test better make that first one count!

If you aren't shooting a 44 mag or better....then 10mm or 45 super is the way to go.

 

[Thinkingman]

My preference is a Glock 30SF with a KKM barrel, 23 lb spring on a SS
guide rod and loaded with 255 gr. Buffalo Bore .45 Super.

I can't tell if these posts are a joke or not.
I've been shooting handguns from 22lr to 500SW and the idea of holding a G30SF with the load mentioned....I'm not going to say it's impossible but certainly very challenging.
Same for 147gr BB out of a Shield.
I bought BB 180gr hardcast 357 for my SW 686 and followup shots were challenging, to say the least.
I will say these 'which handgun for bear country' threads are entertaining.

 

[MHWASH]

I can't tell if these posts are a joke or not.
I've been shooting handguns from 22lr to 500SW and the idea of holding a G30SF with the load mentioned....I'm not going to say it's impossible but certainly very challenging.
Same for 147gr BB out of a Shield.
I bought BB 180gr hardcast 357 for my SW 686 and followup shots were challenging, to say the least.
I will say these 'which handgun for bear country' threads are entertaining.

Apparently you haven't tried the 147 & Shield, its not terrible. Ya, I've even practiced in rapid fire. I wouldn't waste the weight carrying it, if I didn't think I could use it proficiently.

 

[wind gypsy]

Apparently you haven't tried the 147 & Shield, its not terrible. Ya, I've even practiced in rapid fire. I wouldn't waste the weight carrying it, if I didn't think I could use it proficiently.

^ I concur with this. In fact i find it notably easier to shoot accurately and rapidly than I do my G40 with mild range ammo.

In regards to G40 being more tame than the shorter barreled glocks, I feel like my G40 has more recoil/muzzle rise than i recall while shooting my buddies G20. Maybe it has something to do with the longer barrel having more leverage and a little more velocity in the rounds? I haven't shot them side by side though so I can't say that definitively.

 

[howl]

With expanding bullets of the day. Hard cast 9mm will go through any skull on the planet.


The the last time I was in grizzly country and within 10m of a very aggressive sow and get two cubs, I had a G19. Zero issues in that moment with the pistol I had, and the most concerning thing I had in my mind was having to explain why I killed a grizzly.


ALL pistols poke holes. That’s it. Animals and tissue are not steel, and the difference in holes between a 9mm and a 40/10mm or 45 auto in tissue is less than the thickness of a nickel.

I think you're probably right about the testing with expanding bullets. Seems I remember they needed 250gr, even in .338?

And, I've seen 9mm hard bullets exhibit unreal penetration, but not reliably. Even .38 Spl target loads will penetrate more than most people will believe, but not 100% reliably.

Taking the broad view, which is what I took that USFWS trial to attempt, you're not hedging your bets about brown bear threats until you get into .338WM.

 

[RumLover]

I think you're probably right about the testing with expanding bullets. Seems I remember they needed 250gr, even in .338?

And, I've seen 9mm hard bullets exhibit unreal penetration, but not reliably. Even .38 Spl target loads will penetrate more than most people will believe, but not 100% reliably.

Taking the broad view, which is what I took that USFWS trial to attempt, you're not hedging your bets about brown bear threats until you get into .338WM.

I'd agree. I haven't shot a 400 lb grizzly with a 9mm, but I have shot 160lb African's of various tribes that were high on Kot (similar to heroin). What I learned was that a determine enemy takes a lot of energy to put down. So ask yourself, are you going to come across a determined Grizz or a lazy Grizz, and base your choice off that. If you don't know, sell the 9mm and get the 454 you really need. Otherwise, please record the moments in which you determine what type of Grizz you encountered so we can learn from your experience.

 

[Formidilosus]

I'd agree. I haven't shot a 400 lb grizzly with a 9mm, but I have shot 160lb African's of various tribes that were high on Kot (similar to heroin). What I learned was that a determine enemy takes a lot of energy to put down. So ask yourself, are you going to come across a determined Grizz or a lazy Grizz, and base your choice off that. If you don't know, sell the 9mm and get the 454 you really need. Otherwise, please record the moments in which you determine what type of Grizz you encountered so we can learn from your experience.

”Energy” didn’t, and doesn’t, put anyone down. Destroying anatomy vital to function, or the person deciding they don’t want to be shot anymore “puts them down”.

Pistol bullets poke holes. There isn’t a person alive that can place bullets from a 454 at speed, under stress, on a small moving target better than they can with a 9mm. Both poke holes. To think that a 454 handgun is some how “powerful” is laughable when compared to rifles. Any rifle. A 223, 243, 30-30, etc aren’t bear stoppers, but a handgun is?

 

[jorgensen.travis]

”Energy” didn’t, and doesn’t, put anyone down. Destroying anatomy vital to function, or the person deciding they don’t want to be shot anymore “puts them down”.

Pistol bullets poke holes. There isn’t a person alive that can place bullets from a 454 at speed, under stress, on a small moving target better than they can with a 9mm. Both poke holes. To think that a 454 handgun is some how “powerful” is laughable when compared to rifles. Any rifle. A 223, 243, 30-30, etc aren’t bear stoppers, but a handgun is?

A 454 or 460 can definitely be more powerful than a 223. It depends on your definition of powerful. I believe there’s more to it than poking holes. Shoot a water jug and you’ll see that there is a shock factor involved. Also there’s the idea of hitting hard bone and the way a bullets reacts. It’s laughable the way you speak as an authority on the subject. How many charging grizzlies have you stopped?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

A 454 or 460 can definitely be more powerful than a 223. It depends on your definition of powerful. I believe there’s more to it than poking holes. Shoot a water jug and you’ll see that there is a shock factor involved. Also there’s the idea of hitting hard bone and the way a bullets reacts. It’s laughable the way you speak as an authority on the subject. How many charging grizzlies have you stopped?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bullets are bullets, and tissue is tissue. The fact that people think somehow there is “magic” in terminal ballistics is laughable. None of the common handgun round being discussed reach velocities required to have secondary wounding effects, therefore they all just poke holes. To be clear there is “some” differences in effects between large handgun rounds and the common duty/carry rounds when using expanding bullets. However, the difference is in no way as large as most believe, nor is it equal to the recoil and loss in shoot ability.


Please cite a single reputable terminal ballistics entity that uses water jugs as a measure of anything? There is quite a difference between elastic tissue and water contained in a semi solid structure. What I wrote is terminal ballistics facts, not opinion.

 

[wind gypsy]

Am I the only one who's interest in a thread increases 10 fold every time someone challenges Form's experience or knowledge?

 

[jorgensen.travis]

Bullets are bullets, and tissue is tissue. The fact that people think somehow there is “magic” in terminal ballistics is laughable. None of the common handgun round being discussed reach velocities required to have secondary wounding effects, therefore they all just poke holes. To be clear there is “some” differences in effects between large handgun rounds and the common duty/carry rounds when using expanding bullets. However, the difference is in no way as large as most believe, nor is it equal to the recoil and loss in shoot ability.


Please cite a single reputable terminal ballistics entity that uses water jugs as a measure of anything? There is quite a difference between elastic tissue and water contained in a semi solid structure. What I wrote is terminal ballistics facts, not opinion.

With that logic we might as well all carry a 22lr. Too bad Elmer Keith isn’t alive to teach him your facts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk