...it seems to me that if a guy can't get the job done with five rounds of .44 mag, one more probably ain't gonna help...it seems to me that there may be guys who like the fit of the smaller frame with it's narrower cylinder better….But just packin' in the woods for protection against other-than-grizzly? I hear all this talk about lightweight .44 mags being carried with light loads (.44spl) because they're a pain to shoot with mag loads. Might as well be packin' a 1911, says I.
+1 on the 1911
Re: "other than grizzly" comment------Having never been attacked by a bear, I can't argue empirically, however logic would seem to dictate that there are a couple of absolute truths concerning being attacked by a bear:
1. You would want more, not less ammunition (ie. you're not on fire or under water).
2. Recoil would be WAY down the list of undesirable gun-related issues concerning you at the moment.
3. Having a gun would trump the precision-accuracy of the gun.
All of those seem to lean toward a 6 shot, Scandium framed, short barreled N-frame versus a 5 shot, steel-framed, longer barreled L-frame.
Of course, my reasoning could be wrong.
