Going to Alaska fishing. I'm not sure where yet but it's a free tag a long type deal ...so no complaints! Anywho I was figuring I'd bring my Glock 20mm and load it up with Buffalo bore 220gr hard cast in case I ran into a bear problem.

I usually shoot 200gr bullets from this and it's my favorite handgun. I shoot it all the time and very good with it. So I figure moving to the 220s isn't a stretch.

Other posibilities - include: buddy has a S&W 460v 5" which I've shot and can do so so with it but I really need to work at it to get the bullets to go where I want them and it isn't fast. (that's shooting 395 corbons HC)

Then a 454 casull 2.5" taurus - about the same as the 460v in terms of accuracy and quickness etc.

Next option I was looking at was a 44mag ruger alaskan loaded up with some corbon 300s or 340s?


I feel the best with the G20 as I can put em where they need to go and fast. But is it enough for a nice size grizz charge?

CNS being required but not always attainable maybe better to miss a little and use the 44 over the G20? Thanks in advance

btw I don't expect to encounter anything but might as well be prepared for the worst.

Personally I would NOT feel undergunned with a 10 mm Glock at all. Right bullets to penetrate assumed.

May not be the best choice, but take something like a hot 44 mag like mine in a 329PD and the first shot is fine, but the follow ups are hard to control.

I've often thought of the souped up 45 like the 460 Rowland would be a better personal choice or a 10mm. Though I'd also think it fairly rare to draw the gun in time to fire, and to get off more than 1-3 shots anyway. So there is the thought that one well placed larger round MIGHT be a better choice.

The best is a heavy rifle starting at 338 win mag IMHO though a shotgun with GOOD hard slugs wouldn't be a slouch either.

Should be plenty........

Was thinking the same. TSA will surely frown upon ammo for such in luggage however. Seriously wonder about 20 mm ammo in Alaska too.

I wouldn't be afraid to venture out armed with one either.

looking at the #s...

with my G20 10mm 220 buffalo bore hard cast combo = 1200fps & 703ftlbs

Ruger alaskan 2.5" 44mag bufflo bore 305gr HC figuring 1175fps & 925ftlbs

Ruger alaskan 2.5 454casull buffalo bore 360gr HC figuring 1200fps & 1175 ftlbs.


Question that lingers in my mind is: Say I hit the brownie somewhere near the brain but not in it. Will approx 500 ftlbs of energy MAKE THAT BIG OF A DIFFERENCE in the outcome? (10mm 220 703ftlbs vs 454 360 1175ftlbs) ?

I took my G20 to Yellowstone recently. Maybe I could make a killing shot during a charge and maybe not, but I sure liked having it and a full 15 round clip in my fanny pack when we were hiking. A guy in Jackson Hole told me "be sure and carry bear spray too....after you kill the bear, spray him down real good with it"...As Mr. Ken Howell said recently "One day it will be a felony to be killed by a grizzly"

IMHO if you hit outside the brain, its just gotta make sure it penetrates totally any vitals it hits so the bear dies eventually. Extra energy isn't going to impress the bear at all.

Hmm, wonder if it was a felony for a bear to kill a man, would it stop them?

Non-sense for laws to penalize someone defending themselves - that might be a big case re: one's rights to protect self. Seems the 'elected' want to re-write the Constitution.

Talked to a Montana Fish and Game officer who works in an area with a lot of grizzlies. I asked what sidearm he carried and it was a Glock 10mm - FWIW...




Johnny $

Man...the recoil of that 20MM must be brutal. doubt I could handle it.

Lefty C

Pepper Spray.

Or a shotgun.

Do you really think you can hit a charging bear with your handgun. Next question, do you think you can stop a charging bear with your handgun.

Wish you luck..

funny, that...

i spend a lot of time on griz turf and i don't have any problem with our current laws protecting grizzly bears. the laws don't stop you from defending yourself or someone else, but you can't just shoot at every bear you see, which some people think is their god-given right.

A game warden works out at the gym when I do and I spoke about this the other day. Thinking he said most of his guys/galz carry 40's day in and day out. But...when it came time to sort out a bruin out came the shotgun and the 06.

Dober

That energy stuff just will not kill bears. Holes, big deep ones is what will do the trick.

How does that pepper spray work when the bear tries to come in your tent, as is reported every year from New Mexico to Alaska?

Of all the recent bear attack incidents, in most of them the victims would have had a chance to pull a handgun and fire at the bear multimple times (in several the victims were trying to do things like kick the bear, etc ...). I don't have the time right now, but I can link you to numerous videos on line where bear (including sows protecting cubs) ran like hell the other way when they heard the first handgun shot (even when it didn't hit). One guy in Alaska last year killed a brown bear with a .45 ACP. But the point is that you don't necessarily have to vaporize a bear to make it go away. They're animals, not Mechagodzilla. Unless there is someone who can point me to any contrary evidence, I have seen nothing to suggest that even the biggest bear will get "angrier" and more aggressive while being shot with a handgun. I've been looking for some contrary evideence (I also killed a big boar brown bear last fall), and have seen nothing but an assumption that shooting a bear with less than a .458 Lott will make the bear attack faster and more aggresively. I think there is nothing to this. We all know a wounded bear who is then pursued by the hunter will be more willing to attack than other bears, but I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about a bear being shot with ___ caliber handgun before it flees. There is no evidence (unless anyone wants to show me) that bears who are being shot with handguns do anything but tend to run away. You don't need to explode their shoulder, liver, and spine to make them do so. And bear spray doesn't work in tents, where I spend 1/3 of my time in bear country.

A bear does not need to be "pursued" in order to be provoked into an attack. Bears are known to sometimes attack at the shot. They don't always run away.

That said, I prefer a handgun to pepper spray.

I'd rather have a 12 ga. over a handgun and a rifle (of almost any cartridge) trumps all.

I would never say that they "alaways" run away. But can you identify any examples of a bear being shot with something like a 10mm or bigger and coming on stronger? I'm not saying it has never happened, but I've never seen a confirmed report of such. I'd like to hear of a few examples of it compared to the numerous examples of the bear running away when being shot or even just hearing the blast from the handgun. The 2010 .45 ACP example comes to mind.

Also (for the people who think handguns are just for macho fat heads), a few times in the remote world (including in the Marines), I saw a few guys step on their handgun. Not smart, I know, but what happens to a spraygun when you step on it? And can you protect yourselves from a persistent, armed person with it? Couldn't they just back off and come again later? And can a spraygun work to acquire emergency meat if you are trapped somewhere? Handgun sounds better to me as an emergency tool.

On the other point, I'd like to hear of the confirmed reports of a 10mm+ handgun causing an attack as opposed to the many confirmed reports where they prevented one. Not saying it would always work, but there is a myth that shooting a bear with a .357 or whatever will just get you killed the quicker. I think it's a myth. I'd like to see actual reports to the contrary rather than just the mythical logic that, unless your firearm can break the shoulder and vaporize the CNS of a charging big bear, it's just going to make you deader quicker. Myth, I think.

Forget that FE BS. A wide meplat hard cast bullet that penetrates deeply through vitails will kill and kill well



I prefer at least a 45 Colt with 325 grain wide meplat hard cast at about 1300 fPS + or -

A handgun is much better at getting into action inside a tent than a rifle or shot gun

Doesn't Glock advise against shooting non-jacketed bullets?

I don't know, but the DT 200gr HC FN bullets are gas checked, and give me no problems in my stock G20. I know others have reported the same.

I saw a video of Ted Nugent braining a Cape Buff with his 10mm Glock.

It was a multiple shot deal on a previously arrow wounded bull but it sure enough dumped the bull. He shot it 3 or 4 times in about 1 � seconds.

If you are more comfortable with your Glock that would be my choice.

I regularly carry a 45 ACP with a flat nose hard cast 230gr at 900fps in grizzly country. I have killed about a dozen steers for slaughter with that load and it will penetrate the skull with no problem. Bear skulls are thinner.

The trick is getting the grizzly to stand there like a steer for the brain shot...

If a steer is the measure of effectiveness, just carry a .22 rifle.

Not so handy.

A steer head is actually a pretty good measure and contrary to urban legend the 22 LR out of a pistol is not reliable on unconfined steers on a one shot basis.

The hard cast 230gr bullet would reliably penetrate the skull completely and be in the neck.

Pretty much going to have to hit the CNS at some point if you want to stop a bear attack with a pistol as apposed to simply killing a bear at some point in time. Point is the 10mm with a good hard cast bullet will do as well as about anything and be quicker with follow up shots than something silly like the S&W .460.

Of course having killed a few critters with a handgun and hardcast bullets one learns of the effectiveness of such things.

It's not even reliable on unconfined hogs. That's why I stated rifle.

Nice critters John. Is that your 10mm in the pictures?

No that is a 45-70 (.454 Casull running 350gr WLN at 1600fps) that fits in a holster.

My point is that I would prefer a good 45 ACP (or 10MM) and load over that revolver if you were going to stick me in a room (or tent) with a pissed off grizzly because until the brain pan is punched the bear is going to still chew on my sorry ass and more shots per second will aid in getting that brain shot.

On a side note I do appreciate you not ridiculing our �Midget Moose� and �Toy Bears� down here in Wyoming.

I have a Glock SF 10mm with the 6" Lone Wolf barrel & I'd like some advice on the best all around factory load for big game as well as bear medicine.

Thanks,
Jeff

Ditto. I carried my .454 when I was HUNTING in Alaska, but I probably would have rather had my G20 with 200gr HCs for a self-defense situation. It's counterintuitive, but until someone can give me an actual real-world scenario where shots from a good handgun load in 10mm, .45 ACP, .41 RM, etc ... has actually caused a bear to become a more aggressive and effective killer, I will continue to avoid the commonly-held theory that they actually do so. Arguably, you're going to be more likely to get a good brain shot with one. But also, I still have not heard of one single actual real story where a bear shot with any handgun accelerated toward the shooter after being hit in the brain, chest, butt, or just the muzzle blast of a 10mm, .45 ACP, .41 RM, etc. If it's happened, it's happened, but I've never heard of such a real incident. I've only heard of the idea that you've got to break down a bear's CNS in one shot or you're dead, and shooting at a charging bear with anything less than a .500 JRH will get you kilt. In recent times, I've come to question that home-spun wisdom for lack of a single substantiating example, much less any significant number of examples.

Dober,
Didn't you try to talk him into 7 Mashburn?? Yeah, for anykind of bear I would go to a rifle and for grizzly I would go to the 20mm mentioned earlier in the thread...no such thing as over-kill!


Johnny $

not sure how realistic this is but interesting anyway. guns are a 5.5 S&W 460V and Glock 29 10mm

1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ETHPYuuPms

2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZicahVgn0UA

3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDEy3RJdjhs

I like Glocks and the 10mm G20 for a S-A 'bear gun. But change out that barrel for a fully-supported [chamber] one!!

I had a kaboom with a G23 this past July, using factory ammo. Yeah that sorta thing gets a fellow's attention! Wish i had swapped out the stock-Glock barrel before I learned how bad a fully-un-supported barrel can be.

Bar-Sto barrels are @$200, and a good add-on in my opinion. With one of those installed that Buffalo Bore ammo shouldn't be unsafe - I would think. If/or when I get my G20 10mm, thats what I will do besides installing Ashley Express sights, is also install a Bar-Sto barrel!

Hope you catch lots of salmon and halibut in AK.

if i go with the glock I'd use an extended barrel with 2 ports.

http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=944&CAT=236

ADDED: I agree a long gun is the best weapon to deal with any bruin, but esp a GRIZZLY even in the contiguous 48 states.

For the lower-48 I'd likely chose a Nosler PARTITION 180 or 200 grainer in the .308Win and .30/06 respectively; or a 160 in the .280Rem or 300 grainer in a .45/70. All cartridges that I shoot.

However if I found myself headed to the 49th state, preferably a carbine length .45/70 Marlin Guide Gun or 20inch .375 H&H bolt-gun would be my picks around fishing holes and brownies.

In twelve gauge ammo, I already have the two most powerful loads available for ANY bears [via a camp gun] Winchester Partition Gold's and Remington 1 3/8oz Buckhammer's - both in 3 inch! Both loads generate 3400+ FPE and 3200+ FPE, respectively, and are more powerful than an '06. Each of those rounds either makes a .50 or .72 caliber hole going in.

The last nine days of my float bear hunt last September (after I got my bear and was in constant celebration mode with some fishing and unsuccessful wolf hunting mixed in), I was REALLY, REALLY glad I brought a pistol, so I didn't have to lug my rifle (or a shotgun) around every second or worry about perhaps needing to use it in the tent:



Much more comfortable than a rifle or shotgun, and the 360gr HC bullet moving at 1,500 fps would be more than necessary IMO. I would have felt fine with my 10mm.

That's a mighty-fine looking grayling!!

Good fer yoo!!

Thanks. We were in a place that no one ever goes to except for my guide and his hunters--far away from everything and accessible only by a float plane coming in, and you have to get 48 miles down stream to get picked up (input lake is too small to take off with a load). So, we were fishing fish that likely never had been fished before. It was sooo easy, it almost got boring for me after a while--catching one good fish for about every third cast (when they were jumping).

Good for breakfast:

I caught some decent Grayling in the Chena near Fairbanks and some really nice ones in the Talkeetnas but I never saw one that big. I always heard Iliamna had some huge ones.

MarineHawk,

A few years ago a couple of bowhunters after elk here in Montana ran into a sow grizzly with cubs that acted aggressive. One of the guys had a .45 ACP and started shooting, hitting the bear somewhere. She charged and got him down, and was tearing the hell out of him when his companion chased the bear away with pepper spray. Luckily the first guy lived.

Example of one, but you were asking about real-life examples of bears becoming more aggressive after being shot with handguns.

Sounds like that bear was aggressive before being shot. The bullet probably helped change the bears mind, not that the added help of the spray hurt anything either

The bear didn't charge until hit.

I have been bluff-charged--or even bluffed without a charge-- several times. All those instances could have been termed "aggressive." But none of those bears ever actually charged--and I didn't shoot at them.

From the descriptions of the instance I've cited, the bear was acting aggressive but wasn't very close. There are several levels of aggression "action" displayed by bears, which range from nervousness to warnings to bluff charges to serious charges, or even stalking. All have different body language.

The guy who shot at the sow was with his .45 wasn't being charged, and was somewhere around 50 yards from the bear. But who knows exactly what the bear was doing before it charged? And estimates of distance are always suspect, especially when grizzlies are involved.

I have also a grizzly "charge" three horseback hunters from a couple of hundred yards--and been turned back when the hunters spurred their horses toward the bear.

There aren't any rules about what an individual bear will do, which was my main point in my post. MarineHawk was guessing about a firm rule, and there isn't any such thing.

Mule Deer, we had 3 instances of brown bears in our camp the week before last. A sow and two cubs which we just got out her way, a 7' boar, and finally a 3 year old (probably ran about 250 lbs or so) totally confused getting within 5 feet of my guide. My guide yelled at it, of course then it ran down the beach to within 10 feet of me. We kept yelling at it to go back in the willows and it finally did. Was it dangerous, sure, did we think about shooting it, no. I wasn't about to use my bear tag on a bear that small lol

I was figuring I'd bring my Glock 20mm

Hell of a handgun, don't know i would want to touch it off but intimidating as he--.

.80 calibers rule....

Mule Deer, I appreciate the account above about the attack. I don't think you're quite being fair about what I said, which is requoted at bottom (with emphasis added). I never said there was a "firm rule" or that a handgun had not caused an attack. I just said that I want to hear more about any real, confirmed instances and compare them in nature and number to the many confirmed instances where a bear has been deterred by handgun bullets and, in many instances, just the sound of a handgun. I think there is an eager acceptance of the "better cut off your front sight" principle that any handgun that won't physically shut down a bear's CNS is more dangerous to use than climbing a tree, etc ... I tend not to believe it based on numerous actual videos and state and federal investigation reports of incidents that objectively contradict that cliche.

There may be some incidents that support the cliche too. And you have identified one. I would like to know more about the conifrmed details to know what to take away from it. But even airbags and seatbelts in rare circumstances cost, rather than save, lives. It does not mean that, on the whole, it is better to have them than not have them. I tend to think, based on all I've observed first hand, on video, that most decent handgun calibers also are more of a benefit than a cost. There is a line somewhere between what calibers (when well handled) will usually work and which ones usually won't work. I'm not sure which side of that line the .45 ACP lies, but I wonder if many animals would be encouraged toward a person repeatedly firing 10mm 200gr HC FN bullets @ 1,300 fps at it.

And I still don't know what the spray proponents would do when the bear tries to come in their tent, or seven guys try to abduct a wife when their far from help. What happens when the spray dies off, and the seven dudes come back? In a personal incident that shaped my own preferences, about nine years ago, I was hiking in a national forest in Colorado, when seven malicious-looking guys approached me and my fiance (now wife) and started asking questions about directions, and they obviously didn't care about my answers. It was really scary and they were clearly sizing me up. When they were about 15 feet away, I made a decision based on my powerful instinct that these guys were mischevous, pulled my jacket over my USP, drew it (without yet pointing it at them), and asked them to leave "now." I don't know what would have happened if I only had a spray gun, and I'm glad I did not find out. Everyone should make their own decisions based on their own personal preferences, but I think my carrying of a handgun in that instance saved my now-wife from a terrible assault. I just feel more comfortable and confident with a handgun than with other options when I am in places where I have to protect myself and my loved-ones on my own.

Are you trying to convince yourself or everyone else?

Either? About what?

You've got 24,608 more posts on here than me. What do you do with all of those? Convince yourself or others? No comprende.

That's not a charge situation, but should get you charged.
...............................................
Look, bears have been DRT with a rifle shot and bears have charged after being hit with rifle shots.

Lives have been saved by handguns in DLP situations and sometimes they have been made worse.

Pick the proper search terms and have a go at Google and Youtube. You'll find examples of both.

Carry what you want and good luck with it.

I too would rather have a 12ga or rifle if actually being charged. But I carried a handgun (in my case, a FA .454 with 360gr HC FN bullets chronoed at an avg of 1,503 fps) while fishing the rivers, and was glad because carrying around a rifle while fishing and screwing around for hours at a time nine straight days after I got my brown bear with my rifle would have been, to me personally, somewhat annoying.

And I brought an anti-tank version of a handgun, but I would not have felt completely undergunned by a 200gr .40 caliber HC bullet moving at 1,300 fps. I know you can find some things to support both sides of almost any opposing arguments, as you say, but I haven't seen the number of specific incidents supporting the "better file off the front sight" argument as I have seen supporting the opposite. And I'm talking actual specific reports, such as:

"'The man, who was in the lead, drew a .45 [ACP] caliber semi-automatic pistol when they heard a noise coming from the brush. When the bear emerged from the thicket and ran toward the other hiker, he fired approximately nine rounds in its general direction. The bear stopped, turned, and walked back into the brush, where it quickly disappeared from view,' said the [park's] release. ... The bear was found dead in a willow thicket approximately 100 feet from the pistol casings ..."
LINK.

I freely admit that I could be wrong, but people, like me or anyone else, must make judgments based on what we have observed and been able to learn and the logic that seems most appropriate. There is disagreement on this issue, so people can't simply "rely on the experts" to decide because they don't agree. I have seen countless animals from squirrels to humans to deer to brown bear being shot with some kind of firearm. There may be countless examples that I just haven't seen, but in every instance where the animal could, he/she went the other direction if at all possible and as quickly as possible. The 10mm load described above is essentially a standard .41 Mag load from the past. I know that talking about rapid-fire shots at a bear sounds intuitively silly to many, but I can empty my G20's 15+1 capacity pretty quickly, and am probably better at shootinig it, especially with folow-up shots than with my .454 Casull. And I just haven't seen any really compelling collection of data or even annectdotal specific reports that show me that, even a big bear would simply laugh off being pelted with a lot of .41 Mag bullets in a short period of time and just march toward the source of the pain and shockingly-loud noise. It's possible that I'm overlooking something (and I'm not saying it has never happened), but if I had to bet, one way or the other, I would think many many more than 50 percent of brown bears would flee when being pelted with such projectiles, just like every other animal I've ever observed, and just like in the reports I've read, like the one quoted above.

It appears that there is an average of something like one or two fatal bear attacks per year in North America (of course more are injured too). If someone is hiking in bear country and can't shoot a .500 JRH well and doesn't want to lug along a 12-ga or .375 H&H every time they go out into the wild, I just see nothing wrong with relying on the equivalent of a fast-shooting .41 Mag that's easy to carry, draw, and shoot quickly. Of course, he might be attacked by a rare angry bear that charges into .41 Mag explosions and bullets, but it might work like the incident above, or more likely, he won't get attacked at all, but will have a decent survival tool (for emergency meat hunting, signaling, and inti-personnel protection as well). And of course, I'm not questioning anyone who prefers something else. I'm just defending the judgment of those who do choose to rely ono something like a 10mm with hot and heavy hard cast loads.

Your mission, should you chose to accept it...



Nothing wrong with it, IMO.

The problem as has been posted by others in similar threads, is that far too few are able to shoot a handgun with the accuracy that's needed, let alone during the stressful event of a true charge.

And, the best weapon is between one's ears rather than on one's hip.