Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Alaska Minimum 'caliber' for Kodiak Brown Bear?

Sure, but the disparagement of Mike�s comment as "clueless" simply for saying �some folks might desire more range� is unfair for a couple of reasons. I don�t know exactly what he meant, but it applies to my upcoming hunt, because I�m hunting brown bear, moose, wolf, and wolverine (and possibly black bear when we get below tree-line). Where I�m hunting, my guide�s clients have taken wolves out to 350yds and a little beyond.



I�d like to keep that option open.

I don�t know for sure what might be capable with handloads and other specific bullets with the 30-06 220gr loading, but the factory loadings I can find have the 30-60 220gr loads dropping 25� below the sight line at 350 yds. My .340 puts the .225gr TTSX at a little less than 3� high at 150yds, and a little more than 6� low at 350yds (actual range results). Now someone who is really trained well with the 30-06 220gr can do it fine I�m sure, but it�s easier for me to learn to shoot a .340 at that range than it is to shoot a 30-06 220gr at the same range. So, a flatter-shooting rifle, of whatever caliber, might be more versatile for multiple game. Either option is fine, but neither is �clueless,� and worthy of disparaging insults.

Also, to the extent that the versatility of a multi-game rife is not allowed on this thread, although I doubt I would shoot at a brown bear much past about 200 yds, but maybe I would under great conditions on the last day of a hunt, and you mentioned �at any distance from the muzzle to 300 yards�: At least with the factory loadings I can find (e.g, http://www.federalpremium.com/products/details/rifle.aspx?id=19), a 220gr 30-06 bullet is moving at around 1,620fps at 300 yds. Is that good? I�m asking because I don�t know. But a .225gr .338 bullet out of a .340 moving at 2,600 fps at 300 yds might be a bit preferable. At 200 yds even, the 30-06 220gr is moving at only around 1,860 fps, and the 225gr .340 is moving at around 2,780 fps. Perhaps they both might work similarly, I don�t know, but hitting a big bear at rifle-velocity with a .338-cal bullet instead of hitting it with a fast-handgun velocity with a .30-cal bullet, even if not always necessary, can�t be clueless. It's close to the difference between hitting the bear near the muzzle with a 30-30 versus a 30-06. Maybe both would work, but it's not "clueless" to prefer a 30-06 over a 30-30 for close range work. Same difference.

Comments in response to a reasonable opinion like �some folks might desire more range� such as �Is there anything else you want to do to prove just how clueless you are? � Please, the above questions are purely rhetorical and your guesses are truly not being sought!� is just unnecessary and nasty for no reason. No one on here who advocates for a bigger gun is calling anyone who opts for a smaller one �clueless.� They�re just reasonable opinions to discuss. That�s what a forum like this is for I think.

Besides the issues of no wolves on Kodiak �

� folks with little to no experience with killing bears have to wade in to tout their favorite caliber and tell of how they are immune to it's recoil. I have heard those claims for 35 years and they usually are my first clue that I need to pack my 458.

I have known Kodiak guides who chose to carry a 270 as a backup rifle and a number of others who chose the 30-06. In fact the world record Kodiak bear was taken in 1952 with a 30-06.

Now if our big bore experts want to hunt "Kodiak" bears in some local where there might be wolves a 340 Wby would be one of the last calibers I would choose if I wanted the hide. I can also vouch from experience that the 30-06 ( with 200 gr partitions) works out well past 500 yards.

I�m sad that your clients are such dishonest blowhards.

Those are your words not mine. With the exception of a few Weatherby users most are great to be with.

Why would you �need to pack my 458� if someone said (i.e., �claimed�) that they could shoot a medium bore well?

You really don't have a clue ?

I can�t see the need since a .458 will only occasionally stop a bear a fraction of a second faster than a .270.

Because that is all ANY big bore does

Why do you need to go big with the .458 to back up the idiotic �claimers�? Maybe it's better at stopping a bear? Maybe sometimes by more than a fraction of a second?

Again, you show a serious lack of experience

Sorry you have had so many pathetic "claimer" clients. My guide hasn't.

If he hasn't it means he hasn't been guiding long. But my guess is that he is a real professional and keeps his opinions to himself.

And I�m trying hard, but I don�t understand one other thing: �a 340 Wby would be one of the last calibers I would choose if I wanted the hide.�



Again, a serious lack of experience

I experienced shooting at enemy combatants in the USMC with all types of weapons in the 1990s.

Funniest thing to me is the line about how his guide has not had �claimer" clients...

Really??? No chance of you ever being called sensitive if those three recoil the same to you. A nominal 40% decrease in recoil energy is not easily perceived by your greatness...

Just wow!

I can't keep up with and rebut all the attacks,

Just noticed this. I can't keep up with and rebut all the attacks, but yeah, there is a 37% difference in the momentum of the 160gr TSX leaving my 7mm ULW at 3,240fps and the 225gr TTSX leaving my .340 at 3,160 fps. The .340 rile weighs 24% more than the ULW lighter 7mm. Of course, you have to know the powder weight, and sometimes a rifle firing a faster/lighter bullet "feels" to recoil more. Perhaps they're 12% or so apart, but they "feel" about the same. It's in the same order of magnitude. The rifles weigh differently, and at the range, I put a 1-lb bipod on each and wear a recoil pad. and they feel about the same or so. Nothing terrible if you put a pad on your shoulder. Seriously, it's effective to have someone load/unload your rifle before you shoot so that you don't know if it will recoil when you shoot. Doing that, it's not too hard if you try to get to where you don't flinch. It isn't that hard. Just like diving the first time off the high-dive. The first time, it's seems like a nightmare waiting to happen. Then after you do it s few times, it's kind of fun. Jut gotta practice. Light hot 7mm recoils about like a stout heavier .338. Some difference. Not enough for me to notice. A thick shoulder pad at the range makes a huge difference. It really does. Yeah, my .375, 340, 300 WM, and 7mm rifles all weigh differently. So, the all recoil similarly because of that.

Just noticed this. I can't keep up with and rebut all the attacks, but yeah, there is a 37% difference in the momentum of the 160gr TSX leaving my 7mm ULW at 3,240fps and the 225gr TTSX leaving my .340 at 3,160 fps. The .340 rile weighs 24% more than the ULW lighter 7mm. Of course, you have to know the powder weight, and sometimes a rifle firing a faster/lighter bullet "feels" to recoil more. Perhaps they're 12% or so apart, but they "feel" about the same. It's in the same order of magnitude. The rifles weigh differently, and at the range, I put a 1-lb bipod on each and wear a recoil pad. and they feel about the same or so. Nothing terrible if you put a pad on your shoulder. Seriously, it's effective to have someone load/unload your rifle before you shoot so that you don't know if it will recoil when you shoot. Doing that, it's not too hard if you try to get to where you don't flinch. It isn't that hard. Just like diving the first time off the high-dive. The first time, it's seems like a nightmare waiting to happen. Then after you do it s few times, it's kind of fun. Jut gotta practice. Light hot 7mm recoils about like a stout heavier .338. Some difference. Not enough for me to notice. A thick shoulder pad at the range makes a huge difference. It really does. Yeah, my .375, 340, 300 WM, and 7mm rifles all weigh differently. So, the all recoil similarly because of that.

So what about a 308win with good bullets?