A client of ours is going on a Brown Bear hunt in Alaska in a little over a month.
He said he really wants to take his 7-Mag as he is comfortable shooting it well.
He is having trouble finding ammo and I told him I would load up anything he needed if he wanted me to.
I told him off the top of my head the first 2 choices that came to mind are the 175 Partition and the 160TSX.
I personally think the 160TSX might be a pinch better but that is just based on limited research.

What are your thoughts? Also does anyone here have any good loads for that bullet? I have just about every Hodgdon's powerder there is and IMR 7828.

Well... My thoughts are .338 Win Mag or .375 H&H

just my personal thoughts

Have had good accuracy with H4831sc and IMR7828 with 150-160 gr bullets

Brown Bear? With a 7mag? Seriously? What does the guide/outfitter have say about that?
I'd try to start somewhere around 32 or 33 caliber, preferably ending up in the 375/416 range.
just sayin'

I would personally use something bigger than a 7mm Rem Mag but if Phil thinks that a .30-06 is adequate, the 7mm Rem Mag should be too.

I remember Bob Hagel was on a hunt where on of the guys killed a brownie stone dead with one shot from a 7 mm Rem and a. 175 gr. Partition.. But Hagel was carrying a .340 for his bear. I guess the guide would be happiest with a guy who can hit the right spot with a 7, rather than a gut shot with something bigger.

Ya, I personally would probably at least take my 338WM or would buy a 375 because I would have an excuse. But he said his guide is fine with it and he is confident in how he shoots it.

What are everyone's thoughts on 160TSX vs 175 Partition?

H4831 for 160s and RL22 with 175s is what mine likes. I would use the 7 without hesitation, it wasn't that long ago the 30-06 was considered the bear rifle.

I'd not think twice about using a 7mm Mag for hunting brown bear. I'd probably be in 175 NPT mode, as in my experience it creates a wider initial wound channel than the TSX does on average and that NPT offers more than ample penetration for bears.

I had a hunter with me last year miss an easy opportunity on a B&C class brown bear, due in part to the fact he'd bought a "bear rifle" for this trip. I encouraged him in preparation of the trip to bring his "deer rifle" with specific ammo, but he was certain it wasn't enough gun. He'd fired the "bear rifle" less than 40 times when he arrived in camp and was ill prepared for the hunt as his poor shooting displayed. I stress proficiency over power, but it seems machismo normally wins out.

160 TSX without question

Your first two choices are the best ones, and I'd lean towards the 175NPT...



Thoughts are if he shoots it well, that counts for a LOT more than a new gun chambered in a bigger cartridge . I personally wouldn't hesitate to shoot brown bear with the .30-06 we have and that Im used to...7 mag aint much different.....

160 TSX
175 A-Frame
175 Partition
175 North Fork

Any of them will do the job.

GO with the 175 Partition and kill away

Send Phil Shoemaker a PM.

The 160 grain TSX gives serious penetration, which is going to be a plus for follow up shots, or worst case scenario if it's coming at him. Mine really likes Reloder 22, but H4831 should be just fine.

Any of the four SKane listed will work and as much of a fan as I am of monos, I'd agree with 406 and go with the heavier 175 for the reasons he specified.

It depends. Where is he planning to shoot the bear? If he's planning to shoot him in the vitals, I'd have no problem with using either a 160 TTSX or a 175 Partition.

Ain't much new.....under the sun. A little retro cool


Just occurred to me some younger folks might not know who these guys are.

I'd be pretty happy with a 160gr TTSX. The TTSX seems to do a bit more damage than the TSX, on average.

I've killed one Brown Bear with my .338 and when I hunted them again 2 years ago, I had the .338 as well as my .375. However, my guide and good friend killed his first Brown Bear about 25 years ago with a 7mm Rem. Mag. with 175gr NPT, in a Ruger #1. I also had a different bear guide that also had a 7mm Rem. Mag. in a Ruger M77. He'd killed quite few Brownies as well. Bottom line, it doesn't matter what we consider the right cartridge, the 7mm will get the job done if put in the right spot. If he is comfortable with the 7mm, I'd tell him to go for it.

A famous gun writer also told this story in one of his books.

MM: Come to think of it,you're right!

That famous gun writer was along on the hunt!

Graf and Son's has this 7RM in stock:

http://www.grafs.com/retail/catalog/product/productId/4288

175 Nosler Partitions through the lungs and you'll have your bear. Just accept the fact that your guide will be in full readiness to back him up if the 7 doesn't flatten his bear!

I know the rifle/cartridge has already been decided.
I like the way Steve thinks. Mr. Phil has made this point more than once.



As we know--THE BULLET--is more important than the gas tank, between these two.

Jerry

I'd hunt them with a 175 grain Partition.

He watched the whole thing. I also believe he said a brown bear is a lot bigger than any lion when referring to the 7s use in Africa.

Thanks for posting that Bob

MM: Good old school stuff...

Bob,
I'm very thankful dad had a decent gun library around when I was growing up.

As Paul Harvey would have said, "and that's the rest of the story." 🐻

TSX

Cheapest part of the hunt and it's the only thing to touch a brownie before it's dead.

Yer killin me.....

Either bullet should work well. I wonder how many bears the people on here have killed that are so concerned about the 7mm mag.... I'm willing to bet that most guides would be happy to guide him since he knows he cans shoot that rifle well and is taking it instead of some brand new "big" rifle he just bought for that hunt. The guide will have a proper back up rifle in case things go wrong. As a back up gun on big bears I would want something bigger, but for hunting them, the 7mm should work fine.

Just my 2 cents. That being said, I have not hunted the big bears either but know those who have and like most game, you only hear about when things go wrong, not the many more times they go just boringly fine with small guns and good shot placement.

I'm not arguing about a bullet thru the lungs killing the bear.

I wouldn't be shooting at the lungs in all situations.
I would want a bullet I could count on to ANCHOR the bear.

I would choose one of the 175s already listed by SKane.


That from my ZERO experience in bear hunting! I believe in being prepared for the worst case scenario !!

That leaves OUT any scenar!!

Jerry

175 Nosler is a proven choice. Use R22,25,26, H1000, IMR7828, MRP or similar. The 160 TSX or Nosler would be good for open country with the same powders.

I have seen six taken with a 25-06. I carried a 7 mag while guiding fly fisherman but never had to use it. Been close enough to smell them and had the hair raise on the back of my neck on a couple of occasions but never needed to shoot one.

There's a couple articles in older Rifle magazines regarding cartridges, bullets and brown bears. It seems a native girl killed the largest recorded grizzly with a 22lr. The record held for many years. The article "What 63 dead Grizzlies tells us) (I think) said that a woman got a one shot kill with a varmint rifle (270 haha) and another got a one shot kill from a 375. People that brought 458 mag and 358 mag didn't do well at all.
Generally, except for the 375 the lighter cartridges - 06, 7mm mag, 270 etc did well.
It seems people bought rifles they had little skill with and many shots were required to bring down the Bruins.

I am planning a trip and am trying to decide 350, 338, 375, 300, or 416 to take. I'm practicing with the 416. It's expensive.

I have TSX's for the 416. The rest I'd use Partitions.

Kinda surprised that Phil hasn't posted. I know for sure at least one of his clients killed a BIG bear with 150-grain Partitions from the .270 Winchester either last spring or the year before, and another guy did the same with a 7mm RM the same spring, but I couldn't swear to the bullet. (The guy who used a .270 took two shots, one which anchored but didn't drop the bear, and another that finished the job.)

Always amazing how many think there's vast difference in the way good bullets kill big game. A bullet that penetrates the vitals does the job, regardless of the name on the bullet's box.

? ? ? I don't know if I'm misunderstanding what you mean or not. I understand the words you used but am not sure of your intent.

So, let me ask, Would you explain more clearly?

I'm not going to jump to a conclusion NOR to ass ume.

Here's what I'm thinking...

There are bullets that will destroy the vitals of any animal BUT would NOT do a good job against Heavy Muscle or Heavy Bone.

What am I missing?


Jerry

Jwall What you are missing is,, don't take a marginal shot! Wait as long as it takes to get a bullet into the vitals,, if not thats hunting.

Your not an expert at this!!!

Well put.

How long did it take y'all to figure that out??


I ask Mule Deer a sincere ?

Sometimes in the real world circumstances dictate that you can not wait for your preferred shot.

My ? still stands for Mule Deer.

Jerry

Jerry,

There are a bunch of bullets on the market these days that do a good job of penetrating heavy muscle and bone on their way to the vitals. I know this because I've used a bunch of different bullets to hunt game larger than deer. But apparently because there are so many choices these days, many hunters like to pick one as the one and only.

It's a lot like arguing about cartridges, rifles, scopes, pickups, binoculars or anything. Some people think one is superior to anything else, or at least they feel compelled to pick one and let the world know about it.

jwall, I get where you're coming from, so I thought it was a legit question too.

I have come to realize that the 24HCF is full of self proclaimed expert handloaders, LR shooters, LR hunters, one hole shooters, etc, but in reality, occasionally shots don't go exactly where you want them too.......or so I thought.

If you use any common sense it is hard to pick a bad bullet today and after that the three most important considerations are bullet placement, bullet placement and bullet placement.

A few years ago I had two ranching brothers from Colorado hunt brown bears with me. One brought his favorite 7mm Rem Mag and the other a 270 Win with 150 Nosler partitions.
The one with the 7 mag punched a single round clear through a big boar just behind the front shoulder for a one round kill and his brother place two quick hits in the same place with his 270 on this boar for a DRT kill.



And the comment about possibly not being able to make your preferred shot can be true but on any game, especially dangerous game, you still need to be able correctly place your bullet in a vital area --- Or wait until you can.

Heres what Alaska Fish & Game says: http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=hunting.firearms

Thanks MD

Your FIRST sentence explains what you meant. There is more than 1 brand of bullet dependable to do the job.

Thanks for the rest of your response too.

Jerry

Thanks JG

I tried to describe my intent W/O writing a book.
__________________________________________________

Posted on P 4.....

I wouldn't be shooting at the lungs in all situations.
I would want a bullet I could count on to ANCHOR the bear.

I would choose one of the 175s already listed by SKane.

That from my ZERO experience in bear hunting! I believe in being prepared for the worst case scenario !!
That leaves OUT any scenar!!
Jerry
______________________________________________

When hunting deer/grouse/nutria/squirrel et.al. If you don't get a perfect shot--it's no big deal.

Toothy critters don't always give you the opportunity to say, "Time Out", "No Mas", or "I'm leaving".

Worst case --could be-- you last case.

Thanks
Jerry

Thanks Mr. S

I appreciate your answer and respect your experience.

Jerry

There is so much truth in what Phil says that it's hard to emphasize it enough IMHO.

I have only killed two Alaskan browns. My first one, I did not do a very good job,not because my rifle was too big or I could not shoot it well . I actually hit precisely where I intended...but it was the wrong spot.

It was a brief rodeo; I got lucky and it still ended well but it was a lesson I learned that I never, ever forgot...and that is that you have to be very precise with the first shot on any dangerous game.If the conditions are not just right you must not shoot. You can follow a wounded deer or elk with impunity but marginally hit dangerous game can ruin your day.

I vowed to never let that happen again if I could avoid it,and did not repeat the mistake on my second bear. It worked perfectly the second time around.

EXACTLY.

Thanks
Jerry

338s and 375s and excellent bullets have been responsible for their share of rodeos with bears, statistically perhaps more than other calibers.



.........though, of course, that doesn't mean the rifles or bullets are actually the problem.

I would bet that the 30-06 has probably killed more than either the 338 or 375 as it was the most popular guide's rifle well into the 1960's and is still a valid option.

I've always REALLY liked that pic.


Jerry

Yes I agree. Plus Phil ought to patent that camo pattern.

And still is considered a 'big rifle' in many parts...and used quite effectively.

With his endorsement, it outta sell !!







Well, that's the 'clean up' pic. <grin>

Jerry

Hey Phil,

Just for curiosity's sake, where would you draw the line and tell a client "no you are not allowed to bring that small of gun on a bear hunt"?

Way, way back in the day a 30-30 was magical medicine.
There isn't anything native to this continent that can't be taken effectively with a properly loaded 7mm Rem Mag., or 30-06 for that matter.
I have a 7 Mag because when I was looking for 'new' rifle a very friendly gun dealer I knew had one for sale that met all my criteria except caliber. He offered me the rifle for half of what I was willing to spend. Yes, he was that good of a friend. So, I decided to give it a try. It's VERY accurate and absolutely reliable. But, I still wish it was a '06.

Howdy neighbor. You're right down the road from me. I'm in Hickory.

Thought that was muzzle tape?

Phil what bullets do you like in the 06?
180/200 Partition?

I guess this shows the tremendous improvements in bullets in the last few years, as this is what Bill Pinnell, the "P" part of Pinnell and Talifson, the famous Kodiak Island brown bear guides, said about the 7mm on bears: "the .30-06 is the smallest rifle anyone ought to rely on for big bear hunting. Some years ago, many hunters touted the 7mm magnum as the cure-all cartridge. But you got to riddle the bear to kill it with a 7mm magnum. "

P&T outfitted from the early 50s thru the 90s so when the 7 came out, probably few bullets in the 7s were ideal for the big bears and I suspect very few of their hunters used handloads. P&T sure weren't gun men, but weren't short on experience with bears as they guided a total of 784 hunters, almost all after brown bears. So I suppose that when it came to factory cartridges and loads they'd pretty much seen it all.

Bill Pinnell carried this surplus 8mm on Kodiak until after WWII




I have a copy of their brochure and they recommended clients bring a 30-06 or larger.

My preference in the 30-06 ( and most any other 30 caliber for that matter) is the 200 Partition

I like the wool shirt....who makes that?

Old Filson? MilSurp?

My coworker spent a lot time with P&T his late brother guided for P&T had some great pictures, he said they had quite a gun room and had lots of guns. P&T got real upset at my buddy for shooting birds in the cannery with a 22 from the gun room. Something about xtra ventilation in the Tin Roof!

Went to a gun show on Kodiak around 84 and there were 5 or 6 Winchester 71 levers, that were P&T old guns, wished I would have bought one now!

Copied this from Alaskan Department of Fish and Game.

Big Magnums Not Needed

The rifle you bring hunting should be one with which you are comfortable. Because of the presence of brown and grizzly bears, many hunters have been convinced that a .300, .338, .375, or .416 magnum is needed for personal protection and to take large Alaska game. This is simply not true. The recoil and noise of these large cartridges is unpleasant at best and plainly painful to many shooters. It is very difficult to concentrate on shot placement when your brain and body remembers the unpleasant recoil and noise which occurs when you pull the trigger on one of the big magnums.

The two most common complaints of professional Alaska guides are hunters who are not in good physical condition and hunters who cannot accurately shoot their rifles. Because these hunters do not practice enough they cannot shoot accurately enough. They miss their best chance at taking their dream animal or worse yet, they wound and lose an animal. Most experienced guides prefer that a hunter come to camp with a .270 or .30-06 rifle they can shoot well rather than a shiny new magnum that has been fired just enough to get sighted-in. If you are going to hunt brown bear on the Alaska Peninsula or Kodiak Island, a .30-06 loaded with 200- or 220-grain Nosler® or similar premium bullet will do the job with good shot placement. Only consider using a .300, .338 or larger magnum if you can shoot it as well as you can the .30-06.

yar -

Thanks for posting that.

Humm, 270 Win or 30-06......well I guess that says a lot by what all is not said.




Jerry

Some have a bit more experience than others... while I do not like Partitions as much as Waterrat I sure as Hell would not argue with him...

Sitka - I agree w/you and so stated in my post.

Jerry

Sitka, jwall I'm not set in my ways too bad it's just that I have a friend that uses the 175 NP to great success and has a huge selection of expanded bullets that are perfect. In our house,
222 Horn SP
260 NBT
284 TSX
308 NP & SST
30-06 Horn SP
9X57 Horn RN
35 Gibbs NP
358 Norma Swift AF
400 Whelen Woodleigh
458 Northfork
500 S&W Woodleigh

We have used most other bullets in the past but these just seem to work the best for us now.
300 Savage NP

waterrat-

I think there was some mis understanding of my first response in that I was thinking and tried to say that...

there are occasions when the hunter is not given the opportunity to aim at the lungs. I didn't disagree with any of your post, cartridge-bullet.

I was simply emphasising the importance of 'a bullet strong enuff' to anchor a bear in BAD circumstances.

I'm familiar with a few circumstances where hunters were 'surprised' by toothy critters and some of the hunters did not survive the 'worst case scenario'.

OTOH



This quote was not aimed at THIS discussion at all.

I just noted that several cartridges "just as good as" the 270 W are not mentioned.

Separate subject and point.

I hope this clears any misunderstanding. Let's have fun.

Jerry

I haven't read all the posts but why do we continue to have all these threads about using marginal cartridges on game? A brown bear hunt costs $15,000 to $20,000, so why chintz out and not buy a decent rifle for it? Anyone who can't hit a brown bear in the vitals with a .375 has no business hunting them.

*sigh*

Yep, bullets from any cartridge smaller than a .375 H&H just bounce off brown bears.

Indy,
how many brown bears have you shot?

LC

30-06 marginal ?

All about placement and proper bullet ... shouldn't be taken bad angle shots anyway no matter what you use. It's That simple the way I see it. I would have no qualms using a 7mm Rem mag with the RIGHT bullets myself.

What's really amazing, is the number of people who spend the money, but won't spend the time. Money can buy a good guide, it can buy a good rifle, it can buy good ammo, but it cannot buy you a healthy heart, strong legs, or good rifle skills.

The bigger question is why are people who are willing to spend so much money not willing to spend the time (or understand the need to)?

Some folks cannot handle the larger recoil. Just a fact of life. Some are much more senstive. Some get sensitive as they get older.

Its all about shot placement in the end, as long as it has enough power and the right bullet is chosen.

My guide buddy stopped I can't recall how many of the rascals with a measly 338... thats not supposed to happen.

Generally when it comes to what to bring, as long as its "enough" then I'd just as soon you pick a good bullet and bring a rifle you can shoot if you go with me.

That minimum caliber varies from game to game obviously....

How heavy is a brown bears shoulder bone structure compared to an elk or a moose?

Hey Phil,

Are you going to answer my question?

The quote pulled from the AK F&G regulations, reference to the .270Win/30-06, is a defining statement for many of us to remember.

in the past 37 years that I have been guiding bear hunters here in Alaska I have found the biggest problem, by far, is hunters bringing magnum rifles that they can't shoot. Which means a tracking job for me at best and occasionally a lost bear.
And the quickest kills are from hunters using rifles that they are familiar with and can shoot well. I had one hunter kill a brown bear with his 257 Weatherby with Nosler partitions and a couple others use 270's.
I am not obsessed with the size of the hole in the barrel, but rather the ability of the shooter.

So there you have it. Between Finn, Phil and Mule Deer, not much more to say.

My Dad blew ones lungs all over a berry patch with 160 Partitions in his 7RSAUM a few years ago. He put one through the chest from each side and the bear made it maybe 25 yards.

Wasn't a huge bear, 7' inland grizzly, but dead from a well placed shot with what is arguably not even a magnum 7mm.

Know a guy who has a grizzly in the record books he killed with a 308 and I think CoreLokts. Another fellow who killed a 9'er with one chest shot from his 16" barreled 30/30 with a factory Silvertip.

They can be hard to kill at times but in the end they are made of blood and organs like anything else. Make a good first shot and prepare for sticker shock when you hear what they're charging to make a rug these days.

The outfit I hunted brown bears with recommended nothing smaller than a 375, with 416 being preferable. I used my 33 G&A and did just fine but they were skeptical about it, being as they had seen poor results with the 338. They also preferred soft bullets, namely Hornady round nosed type.

Very interesting Phil, thanks for your reply.

Very, very light. Not even in the same Zip Code. A brown bear's scapula is light enough I fleshed one out shot by OlBlue (8'+ older bear as I recall) and took a photo of it with an orange handled knife behind it on a gorgeous Kodiak spring day.

You can clearly see the color and shape of the handle THROUGH the scapula!

Materials science weights a lot of materials in very specific ways and the bb scapula is an ultimate example. Clearly they are designed to the ultimate needs of brown bears, but heft appears to be unimportant. I suspect shock-absorption and strength in virtually every other dimension is the real test of a brown bear skeleton.

They say the world's great predators are built well muscled and light boned.

Failed to mention I have posted that photo here many times and it should still be here.

"Guide" and "Knowledgeable about guns" are far from synonymous...

I get a kick out of stuff like that. Back in the day I remember Jim Carmichael writing about how the .338 impressed him on Cape Buffalo.......

I thought it was a bit over the top, but they have their reasons. They don't seem to hurt for clients😉

I see no camo. But I suppose that must be the entire point.

My cousin took both of his big bears with a 270 and 150 grain Bronze points.

My cousin talked about a guy he'd met who had shot a grizzly in British Columbia with a 22-250...DRT...

I've got a baited brown bear hunt scheduled for june 2017. I asked the question. I've got either a 30/06 or 375 Ruger. I was told either would be good. 375 would be better but the 06 will work. I'm leaning towards the 06--I can drive tacks with it. Ask Ingwe, he saw the head shot on the dink pig on the 24 hour Hog hunt.

Cindy Rhodes shot a Kodiak bear that remains in the top 10, All-Time B&C.

The 7x57 piled him up with a single shot...

Dang it, Now you've gone & done it !!

Let the cat out of The bag ! !

Don't tell Inger !


Jerry

The 270 Bronze Points only came in 130 gr, 150 Bronze Points were 30 cal.

Having said that, I have killed quite a few "big" bears with a 270, including one that fell at my feet, literally close enough to touch with the muzzle of the rifle.

Don't tell Ingwe that either,

Ted

Ted
And Riley "managed" to kill a modest brown bear with a 25-06 spitting 80gr TTSX... It took two shots, but either was 100% lethal and quickly so.
art

Hey, I sent you a PM a few days ago. You been standin' me up!

Say hello to Riley for me. It's been years since I met him with you that day.
Ted

I do believe there were 150 Bronze Points for the 270 for some years. I know the 180 in 30-06 were one of my early introductions to the magic of ballistics. (The terminal effect of those 'big' bullets in plastic water containers, while enthusiastic, were amazingly weak in terms of penetration, exceeded even in some regards by simple old 40 grain RN bullets from a 22 LR.) Heavy game bullets they most certainly aren't.

Ted
Not at home, prepping for a few Kodiak bear hunts and out of most coverage... just discovered the notion of a hotspot on my phone... By the time I figured that out you were back from Sitka. All I could do was chant "Channel Club" over and over!

Last time we had lunch I believe I told you Riley was going to make me a grandfather, which happened 1/16/16.

He is doing very well in virtually all respects. He did burn up the bearings on his mini-boat today looking for good spots to place black bear bait stations... but that just shows he wants to break as much stuff as I have and I have a huge lead!
art

Roger that. I do remember the 150 and 180 gr 30 cal Bronze Points, but never saw or heard of 150s in 270 cal.

The 130s certainly shot flat, but made a terrible mess in sheep and caribou. You certainly didn't want to hit them anywhere but in the lungs.

Ted

Well, congratulations Grampa!

My apologies for the brief hijack,
Ted

Ted
I suspect you are "Forgiven" with appropriate leeway for double entendre...
art

Ain't that the Truth! !

ONE WT was all it took for me to 'forsake' the Bronze Points and I was SO very disappointed. Good Looking, Sleek, Point Deformation protection--ALL for nuttin.

Jerry

I saw that post! As long as theres armchair quarterbacking going on here I'll say I would have no qualms about shooting a brown bear with a 7x57 and 175 NPTs...

Except i sold my 7x57 to Rev Mike


That leaves nothing but my wife's '06 for big guns...


And I would listen to Phil and say I would indeed use use with a 200 NPT on a brown bear.....


if one ever wanders by the house.

I'll loan you mine

you pay for the hunt, and I'll do it!

I think he and his family are a bit more experienced in Alaskan hunting than most on this forum, been in business since 1974 and is a master guide. Also hunts world wide and was IPHA in 2005. He knows what works in his area and for his clients.

I wish I could just pay for mine

.Thats gonna be tough to do when you are paying for mine first.....

I'll start saving.............tomorrow.

Ok, standing by for the 'I shot a ten foot brown bear with a 22 story with no problems' post.... Never shot brown bear, but from what I can tell, when it comes to calibers, they are much like bra sizes; the bigger the better...

Procrastinator.

I'll do better in the future

Yep, at this point I am 'armchairing it'. That's what dreams are made of.

I haven't had the op YET to hunt Elk, but I put in for the draw EVERY yr. I am prepared - rifle/load/bullet>>practice.

I probably will never get to hunt Brown Bear but I LOVE the idea and AM prepared - rifleS - load/bullet>>practice.

Ingwe this is NOT directed at you. Some people don't believe you can learn anything W/O doing it.

I guess some people can't/aren't prepared to do MUCH.

As to The REV.- he now has the 'liability'.

AND yes I would confidently use a 30-06 or 7 RM or 300 WM all loaded with Controlled Expansion bullets.


SO - I guess the Alaska G & F C recognizes the queer 270 as adequate for Brown Bear! Sounds MANLY to me.

Jerry

Pretty typical Campfire thread on cartridges for hunting game larger than deer, whether elk, African plains game or big bears: The votes for bigger rifles come from hunters who either have never hunted the game in question, or maybe have done it once or twice and believed their guide that a bigger rifle's required.

This isn't because their guide is so experienced, but because like many hunters, many guides believe particular cartridges work better than any others, when the bullet and shooter are MUCH more important factors. Such guides tend to be surprised when a smaller cartridge than they believe necessary kills an animal quickly, even when it happens over and over again.

I've hunted with a few guides here than there, and while some are very knowledgeable about hunting rifles and bullets, most are not.
Consequently, over the decades I've developed a ballistic BS detector concerning advice on rifles for big game larger than deer:

1) The farther the hunter lives from the animal in question, the larger the cartridge necessary. This is most common if the hunter has never hunted (or even seen) the game in question.

2) If the person dispensing advice firmly mentions a minimum bullet diameter and weight, they're stuck back in the early 20th century with Elmer Keith.

3) The same as 3 except they firmly advise a "magnum." Often this is part of 3.

4) They state that anybody who "can't handle the recoil of an adequate rifle" shouldn't hunt the game in question.

I've seen this thread for a while now and I keep pushing past it. I just used my best self discipline to walk away.

However this morning It got the best of me. I've worked in this business with the big costal brownies for a part of my early hunting career and my life. There are a few things that I learned with this "recreational" pursuit that were life changing, and likely helped me survive the next part of my future has a Professional hunter in Africa.

To start off, realize that the 7mm is almost 17% smaller in surface area then a 30/06 so when the references are made that if a 30/06 is good so is a 7mm. Would you take a nearly 17% pay cut? Like to be 17% shorter? maybe add 17% more fat to your frame? Pay 17% more taxes?

Also there should be an understanding of what the design intent is of a generally light weight bullet at very high velocity. This is a long range, medium game, flat shooting open country design intent. The 7mm is all this in spades!

What is the requirement of a Brown bear bullet/ cartridge combination? The shooting distance or range will very likely be under or around 100 yards. The animal weight will be likely pushing 800-1000lbs.

So simply from a design perspective this is a mismatch. The cost of this hunt for a non-resident is well in excess of 10,000 USD today.

As far as just some basic ethics and etiquette where cartridge selection is concerned. Everyone wants to go home to their families when the fun and accomplishment of the hunt is over. Nobody is hoping for a military type middle eastern survival, life and death situation. There is an element when you voluntarily walk into this type of hunt that has some life threatening element involved.

Remember though that this hunt with the associated costs, is not simply about killing a bear. The ultimate goal is killing a bear, returning home safe, and actually finding the bear you shoot. Deliberately going into this with a set of options and choosing the one that will most likely get a single .284 diameter hole into an 800-1000 pound animal. The bear could have 3-4" of fat under the skin, and 2-3" long thick hair to soak up the blood. All while hunting in the rain soaked bush for an animal that rarely leaves tracks you can follow in all but the best conditions.

While I was only in my mid 20's and early 30's working in this business in Alaska, Those years were very much a part of my formable youth. The comments I listen to from the then " old timers" were some of the things that still echo in the back of my mind today. Most if not all of the hunting lore they imparted on me are as true right now as they were in the 1960's.

There is no catch and release in hunting. The Brown bear is not a cartoon creature that plays nice with others. This is not a video game where you can start over when you run out of lives. It's a real situation that requires a serious level of good decisions along the way, to ensure you get home safe! I close with the soap box rant by saying that you can haul a good deal of firewood in a camero, but that does not make it the right tool for the job.

I had a good friend who guided bear hunters here in Alaska for over 3 decades who was big on his recommendation of the 375. What I also noticed was that he seemed to book a lot of clients who didn't shoot their rifles very well ...and a surprising number of tales of guns which had obviously never been sighted in with live ammo. ("I had it bore-sighted by an 'expert'.")

That logic is so flawed I'm surprised you even posted it, given the other, generally sensible, things I've seen you say on here. Death is not quantifiable. While it is nice to save 17% on taxes, I've never walked up to an animal and been able to determine how much deader it would have been if I had used X cartridge instead.

When you are tracking something in long wet grass, the kind where you cannot see your feet when looking down, and it's currently raining. Would you like to see 17% more blood?

How about just seeing blood period, from a hole that is just barley big enough to provide this for you? Speaking for myself, I'll take all the blood flow I can get when looking for something this big with the potential to change your view forever on recreational sport hunting.

It's fine with me to see this differently, I lived through my careers in Alaska and Africa now doing this for a living. I've made some reasonable good choices to be able to continue doing this as well. People have their own opinions, However very few have lived through this process for over 30 years.

When you actually see one dead on the ground and are able to absorb the magnitude of what your seeing, then you lift up a front leg and see the paw and the claws, with the giant head laying there. That moment sticks with you forever. How you carry on with the career path and the choices you make, might not be the same as the moment before you had this experience!

Sorry, but gotta agree to disagree... too many every bit as knowledgeable have found it quite different. There is no magic in anything, especially big rifles handled by guys that have not shot them much.

I guided a couple Texans with 340Wbys many years ago when we stumbled into a grizzly of ordinary proportions and they both shot extremely well with their rifles and if that was the only marker in the trail you might assume it would be needed. Virtually all others with big rifles I saw screwed things up...

I have seen more brown/grizzly bears shot with smaller cartridges and none have gotten away... I used a 300WM for back-up for years. I have shot several with 375H&H and AI and will continue to... but not because it is any minimum.

JJ
When Riley shot his second brown bear with a 25-06 and 80gr bullets it left the most blood I have ever seen from any animal. One pool was over four feet in diameter and the rest of the blood trail was not really important because the bear was rolling down the mountain leaving plenty enough evidence.

And I automatically cede it was a bit of a stunt, at first. But he was very patient and when presented with the right shot he took it. As the bear was running his final streak he hit it again. Entrance and exits were so close you could easily put your fingers in the holes on each side.

Any rifle shot well is better than any shot poorly.

This line of argument assumes, for example, that a 175 7mm bullet running at 2800 fps muzzle velocity will expand, penetrate, and leave a hole an equivalent percentage smaller than a 200 grain 30 caliber bullet running some 200 fps slower.

A more likely scenario as it relates to this thread would pose the question: "Would you rather look for a small quantity of blood over short distance, or a perhaps larger quantity of stomach content over a longer distance?" (I never have been very convinced that looking for blood in open tundra had much value, bent and pressed materials being somewhat more useful sometimes. YMMV.) What isn't subject to YMMV is the fact that good shot placement trumps marginal shot placement, the weight and diameter of the appropriate projectiles notwithstanding.

This is the same bear I posted with me wearing my infamous blue Patagonia underwear ( I worked up a sweat playing cat and mouse with him in the pucker brush) He had been wounded and charged from under 20 feet when I finally caught up with him. And the 30-06 obviously worked


And the comment about many guides not being gun people is quite true. Most "learn" from the guide they apprenticed under and, like so many here, when they see a bear get away wounded come to the conclusion that a bigger rifle is needed or that the bullet was at fault. There is a Master guide in Alaska, who has even won the Weartherby award, who claims that a 375 is required even for black bears

One of my favorite Finn Aagaard stories is when one of my clients came back to camp after loosing a bear and claiming that he had hit it "on the point of the shoulder" with his 338 and 250 gr Partitions. Finn commented that he was sorry that the hunter had lost the bear but that if he had actually hit it on the shoulder with a 250 gr Partition that it wouldn't have been lost!

How my coffee missed the screen is an amazing thing! My tax forms were not so lucky! Obviously I was shooting a bore bigger than I can handle!

You're still making false arguments.

17% more blood? As a constant? No way.

I've never shot a brown bear, I'll give you that. But I've killed enough elk to know that sometimes you get blood, sometimes you don't.

I killed a cow a couple years back that ran a good 50 years without spilling a drop of blood. I know because I tracked her through the snow. Rifle was a 300 WBY, bullet was one of your beloved Barnes. Bullet hit the top of the heart and exited accordingly.

A few years before that, I knocked one over just across the drainage. Used a 7STW and got both lungs. That one left a blood trail.

But by your math, elk #1 should have bled more.

Tenacious, ain't ya?

They call me the bulldog. Better watch out, bro!

Actually I should have phrased that differently. I watched the elk drop and walked right to her. Then I back tracked her looking to see what things looked like. I was surprised not to find any blood at all.

I'm no bear hunter, but I know this much. 17% of $1,000,000 is a sizeable sum of money But 17% of $1 isn't enough to worry about. The difference between 25 caliber and 35 caliber just isn't that great. I don't see how the difference between 28 and 30 caliber can make a bit of difference. 17% of next to nothing is still not much.

Yeah, quite a few times I've held a .284 and .308 cal bullets side-by-side and wondered what all the fuss was about, and how any animal could ever tell the difference between the two.

So the 358Norma is now too much?

You trailed it for 50 years?

BearStalker, your math situation is in error, you're modifying the control number not the percentage

17% is the same amount regardless if it's $1.00 or $1,000,000, it's still 17%...... The Amount itself is 17%!

The totals per one dollar or one million are far different, however it's an incorrect analogy in itself used this way.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Someplace in most critical applications of things there is a minimum accepted amount for nearly all engineering practices. Regardless if it's electrical, cement structures, Jet engine thrust, plumbing, mixing of fuels, carpentry, there are minimum standards for serious applications.

If 338 is about as good as 375HH, then really a 300 win mag is about as good as a 338...... right? then a 30/06 is darn close to the 300 win mag, so that should mean a 270 is about the same as the 30/06 according to most fans of that cartridge. Well then it stands to reason that a 25/06 should be about as good as a 270..... making the 243 a near equal to the 25/06, so that should mean that a .223 can be loaded to get pretty close to the 243, etc etc. etc. By this measure a .223 will kill a brown bear because there is no functional line in the sand for a base line of lethal function.

Someplace there should be a point of no return. Sure as Art pointed out that he saw a 25/06 kill a brown bear and with substantial blood to boot. As Well, Bell used a 7mm to shoot elephants( another story with an important reason that is always left out)

As a logical, thoughtful, responsible group of guys that we are. Without going down the path of argumentative one ups-manship that befalls this forum so often. Wouldn't if be a prudent observation to think logically about where that line in the sand is at?

It seems to me that every guy has his favorite cartridge or rifle, and wants to justify it's use on one of, if not the most deadly creatures on earth. This has already been done in countries with far more species of dangerous game then Alaska. Regardless of the choice or if it's right or wrong, these third world countries have at least come together as a group of responsible folks and created a minimum to set some type of standard.

I never really cared about what cartridge a hunter brought with him when I was a guide there. I was too young and stupid to consider the possibilities. As I matured, I began getting on the target to back up the shots nearly instantly as problems might present themselves.

The topic is further confused by folks that have never engaged in this. As I wrote earlier, when you walk up to a bear like this, and see it laying there dead. You hit an emotional point that leaves you breathless and in absolute awe of the moment. I've never had a hunter with me in this type of setting that felt he had enough gun. Not a single time! The great majority of my hunters would make a comment at some point regarding the massive size of the bear, and the puny nature of the gun used. ( regardless of the cartridge).

This is just as common and nearly an identical situation when an elephant, rhino, hippo, big croc, or buffalo, etc are killed. There is an awe "moment" that leaves the hunter breathless, it's as if they re having an out of body experience for that instant.

Still in the safe waiting for a return trip to Kodiak. It's the whole tag thing that doesn't want to cooperate!

JJ...

to get back where this started. It's not really about where the line is, but about what is best in a particular scenario...



Certainly very few people who have killed bears would quibble with whether a good bullet from a 7 Mag in the hands of a person who is both familiar with and confident in said rifle could be improved upon by bringing a new rifle into the equation. I don't think anyone is arguing that a 7 Mag is the equal of a 416 Mag. Certainly, a good 7 mm bullet placed well in a bear would be hard to better with an unfamiliar rifle. I think the "too big and unfamiliar" scenario has been played out enough times in various camps to think otherwise.

When it comes to this discussion of 30 caliber being "more" of everything than 7mm and smaller stuff, I'm going to string along with JJ Hack,since i assume that's where he was headed without saying exactly so.

I did not have time to read everything in the thread.


I like and use 7mm's but think the reason they perform well is that the heavier bullet weights creep squarely into the middle 30 caliber range. You may end up with dead stuff with either but side by side and shot into enough animals, i think that a 30 caliber magnum with a 200 gr bullet is more gun than a 7mm shooting a 160 to 175 gr. Shoot enough animals with both and you will see more damage from the 30's,assuming bullet structure is the same. It simply has the advantage in bullet weight and expanded frontal area(cross section of expanded bullets).


I had some knowledgeable and very experienced trophy elk hunters tell me this back in the 1980's and made the observations many times myself using 300's on elk sized animals.

With heavy 30 caliber bullets at magnum velocities,these guys felt the 30 caliber magnums broke up heavy bone,penetrated more reliably,destroyed more tissue.

This does not mean I doubt the capabilities of 7mm magnums with good heavy bullets,since they work too, but I simply think the 30 caliber magnums with good 180-200 gr bullets are "more gun" based on what I've seen,assuming equally good bullets.

Oops! Typo. Yards. Dang autocorrect.

So how do so many bow hunter manage to kill big bear with arrows with only 80lbs of kinetic energy every year ?

Placement, placement and placement !!! Good bullets with a reasonably powered cartridge 7x57, 270 ,280 ,30-06 on up to WHAT YOU CAN SHOOT ACCURATELY will get it done.

Choices

A)Shoot a 7x57 175 gr bullet into bears vitals........ DEAD BEAR

B)Shoot a 338 Win mag into the gut ....... ANGRY WOUNDED BEAR

I will chose A

Im not opposed to big caliber magnums and I can shoot them well but I have seen many hunter who can not but seem to think the more power will anchor his game faster regardless of where its hit.

"IF" your outfitter said that then he's an a$$hole!

It's always a Weatherby and (almost) always Texans. At least they could shoot.

No slam intended on those fellas... they did just fine with their rifles and all that noise and recoil... they were the exception.

My experience is some outfitters are not particularly knowledgeable about guns as they are the game they pursue.

Before shooting real premium bullets I said lots of the same things you are saying... but I now realize I was very wrong.

Since I started shooting X bullets in most everything I have seen a huge difference in penetration and real World performance on critters. I have recovered almost none and those were from Riley's stuff rather than my own.

I have never recovered a single one in lightweight examples shot fast into big animals. At the same time I have yet to see a pass-through with an Accubond. I saw a broadside brown bear stop four of them two years ago. They were 375H&H driven.

I have put a bunch of the 270gr X in several iterations through brown bears without ever catching a single one and many of those were coming or going shots that went full length through the bears...

I believe those deep wound channels with a leak at each end are important to killing. Moreso than a bigger hole that stops before it reaches the other side.

Having shot more than a few critters now with the monos, I believe they changed the game...

The two guys that another guide and I guided more than 30 years ago, a father and a son, both had Lazermarks in 340, shooting 275 gr semi-spitzer Speer handloads. I well remember the bullet used in their loads, because they had contacted me before coming to hunt, and asked about it. I had used the 250 gr Speer in my 358 Norma Mag for years, and figured 25 more grains in a smaller bullet certainly wouldn't handicap.

They were from Lake Charles, Louisiana, and could both surely shoot the rifles and the load. That Speer did alright, too.

Ted

This 375 minimum talk has surprised me. I thought the 338 and 340 were universally accepted in the Brown Bear world?

They are... along with the '06, 270, 7x57, and a bunch more...

I was going to get into the whole bullet thing,since i was shooting "premiums" at elk and brown bear in the 80's and 90's ( Bitterroots), which are every bit the equal of anything out there today in terminal performance.So....premium bullets aren't anything new to me. I was using them before many on here were born.

But i did not want to get into bullet discussions, because I'm not writing an article,and don't want to take the time to cover another subject.

Obviously, the bullets can make these distinctions between cartridges a bit fuzzy,making smaller cartridges behave a good deal "bigger",especially in the case of premiums lie the Bitterroot, partition, and Barnes etc etc.. I also tried to couch my comments with qualifiers like "bullets being equal" but I guess i did not make my thoughts clear enough.


Also, the same bullet technology that benefits the smaller calibers ( 7mm say), benefits the larger calibers as well ( 30 caliber) so the relationships remain unchanged.

So, no , I don't think I was wrong about the relationship between the 7mm's and the 30's. I have been watching the effects of Bitterroots driven at high velocity from magnum cartridges from 7mm to 375 since the 80's, in the real world, on animals. I would turn a 165 BBC from a 300 magnum on a brown bear in a heartbeat. The results would be devastating.I have seen what happens to elk. Turns their innards to jello.

I don't think it matters a lick in terminal performance if a bullet exits or doesn't. So long as the bullet destroys everything passing from entry to the off side hide, the damage is done,and the hide is a bullet trap.

OTOH I have never had a Partition or a Bitterroot stop "partway" through a brown bear..any that I have used passed completely through the bear to the offside hide or exited, and made a mess in the wound channels. Moot point...really,,,the recovered BBC above was the only one of three recovered, the other two blasting through.

I have no idea what bullets do shot lengthwise in brown bear. I've never shot them that way.



I don't use Accubonds on anything. I'll stand by my comments on 7mm's vs 300 magnums.

I was gonna say I thought you were a very tenacious tracker.

The tracking part was only a few minutes. The pack out felt like 50 years though!

This thread sure turned into a "Should I buy a 7mm Remington Magnum as an ultimate bear rifle?" thread.

I kind of think that wasn't how it was intended, and I will - though I realize there are better rifles out there- stand by the idea that a fellow who is very comfortable...confident...familiar with his 7Mag is going to be better served with it than by buying a brand spanking new 338 or 375 for a hunt in another month. 175 Partitions are available factory loaded. I'm sure an adequate iteration - 160/175 grains - of the Barnes TSX is as well.

To paraphrase and interpolate what Mr. Shoemaker has been known to say about the '06, "If you can't get it done with that, it ain't the rifle's fault." And a well directed bullet trumps a lot of other 'deficiencies'.

I've wondered just how important having the bullet leave an exit hole is? Yes you get two holes to leak out of, which may leave a decent/better blood trail. And depending on the location of the bullet channel, you've gotten good penetration through everything in between, which is important, but is the second hole itself that important?

Say the bullet is lodged against the hide, with no exit hole. You still have almost the same wound channel in the critter and should have basically the same amount of blood loss, with the exception that more of the blood will pool inside the animal. That pooling itself can be fatal if it fills up the lungs, keeping some of the blood inside might actually be an advantage.

We often look at energy, and a fast moving light bullet can have the same energy as a slower moving heavy bullet. Say both bullets are well constructed such as a partition and both have the same energy. The kinetic energy (1/2 mass x velocity squared), is proportional to the velocity squared. The momentum (mass x velocity)is proportional to the velocity and the cartridge with the same kinetic energy but heavier bullet will have substantially more momentum. When a bullet hits an object, the bullets momentum and construction (not energy) will determine how closely it continues along it's intended path without deflection.

The heavier bullet of equal construction will also be that much tougher and less prone to failure, especially at the slower velocity. If in a less than ideal situation, the bullet has to go through tough bone, without deflecting from it's intended path, the heavier cartridge will have the edge. Also with the larger diameter of say a 9.3 or 375 bullet the chances of a decent blood trail should be much greater. As an example the 9.3 bullet starts out with 66% more cross sectional area than the .284 bullet.

All this assumes the hunter can actually place the bullet where it needs to go and that the larger diameter bullet can still manage to penetrate adequately.

Terminal ballistics loonism.

Maybe not on brown bears, but with elk/deer/antelope I'd say that be seen a direct correlation between whether a bullet exits and how fast they drop. The correlation being, if the bullet doesn't exit, it means it expanded rapidly and the critter doesn't go far.

As I said, that may not apply to larger game, but on the smaller ones it definitely does.

Wow

I disagree with just about everything in this, just saying...

The exit hole is usually larger than the entrance and bleeds far more freely. Filling the lungs with blood is not as effective as draining the whole unit. Blood pressure remains high as long as there is fluid to fill the heart and allow it to move it. No fluid to pump and blood pressure crashes and animal falls down.

I have never had an issue with penetration with the monos, nor with the notion that there is a paradigm change in the nature of wound channels between jackets and monos...

The heavy bruising well away from the wound channel and tremendous areas of bloodshot meat in jacketed bullets is very different from the "sliced and diced" looking mono wound channel with little bloodshot meat and free-flowing blood...

The advantages in reduced meat loss aside, the double ended hole makes a great deal of difference to me. And I do not find the bullet diameter makes as much difference as the bullet construction in regard to how freely the wound bleeds.

And you may often look at energy and momentum and all that, but I have almost no interest in the issue and find it without merit as a marker on the road to understanding how stuff dies.

Does a Barnes that does not exit kill less quickly?

Like jokes in Germany and virgins in Denmark, retained Barnes bullets do not exist!

C'mon Art....you know they do! Here and there,now and then.

BTW I'm not dumping on the penetration capabilities of a Barnes,or how they work. Just that any expanding bullet will be stopped sometimes.


The bear that stopped this one did not go 30 feet. What killed him,the two that exited and blew blood all over the beach, or this one that got trapped on the offside hide?

Quien Sabe?

Can't say I've caught one, but in general, Barnes don't kill as quickly as lead core bullets IME. There's something about the grenade effect of lead core bullets. That said, Barnes do penetrate, no doubt about it.

Location, location, location...

IME, shooting through shoulders tends to lead to more DRTs than any non-CNS shot. I do not shoot through shoulders if using lead core bullets.

Agreed....


just for the record,the bullet shown above was fired into the shoulders and did a good job. But then again a Bitterroot is not your average jacketed bullet,and will not fragment or shed weight. 95%+ weight retention is common.

The only X bullets I have seen stopped were in heavy service for their size... 80gr TTSX from a 25-06 into a huge-bodied bull moose coupled with finding the biggest bones in the whole skeleton. Two there.

The other was flukey in that a Sitka buck was bedded against a big rock. The bullet went all the way through the deer and got hung up in the hair on the opposite side after hitting the rock the buck was bedded against.

I do not understand how so many have caught so few NPTs and so many Xs... it does not work that way in my anecdotal World.

My post didn't directly pertain to bears. I've never hunted a brown bear and I certainly defer to folks like Phil on that subject specifically. Good point on the exit hole often being much larger, although on elk and such, when using a tough heavy penetrating bullet, it may not be all that much larger. On a deer with a more rapidly expanding bullet you may have a huge exit hole, but that type of bullet may not make it all the way through an elk or moose for instance. Not sure where the mono issue comes in? That is what I prefer and use, Partitions, Barnes, A Frames, so no argument there. My point on the energy and momentum was that it can be a mistake to look only at energy like many do so maybe we actually agree on that part? A bigger slower heavier bullet with more momentum like a 9.3x62 will do a better job of staying on path within a large big boned animal. Although that doesn't mean you need a 45-70 and we know that the 06 is quite capable with the right bullets and shooter. The elk I shot this year was with a 300WM using a 200 grain partition. It went in one side and out the other, and I certainly didn't object to that. Exit wound however wasn't all that large, nor was there much blood on the ground. A good number of the elk I've shot have fallen to a 270 using cup and core bullets, many had no exit hole but the boiler room was mush. No doubt bullet placement and construction are first priority by a huge margin. Some like to have a bigger hole both entering and exiting and I've read that mid bores like 9.3 or 375 on up have a better chance of leaving a good blood trail with a bear given the thick layer of fat and hide.

You want some game catchin' bullets?



The middle one on the far right is a 1999 model 250 gr .375X that stopped a woods bison that weighed over a ton.

Ted

Only thing I would suggest here is that the Partition is not a mono. It has a lead core and tends to lose 40ish percent of its weight in the critter. That weight loss does several things in addition to shedding E and p. It changes the shape (especially the length) of the bullet and importantly the length to width ratio, a huge factor in stability.

I have caught a huge number of Partitions in critters...

Yukoner,

What was the bullet in the second column from the left, third from the top?

I like the frontal diameter.

I've caught Partitions....deer to brown bear. They have been in the minority. But of course, it happens.


I have found the 160-7mm and 200 gr 30 cal tough to stop.


I bet Ted's wood bison would stop about anything.

Wasn't sure what you meant by mono, figured you were just generally referring to bullets with tougher construction, my mistake. Was aware of the lead core in partitions. I caught an 250 grain A Frame from my 9.3x62 in an elk two years ago. It expanded nicely but didn't go out the far side.

Sorry, but I will have to find it in the jar after I get back home, and then try to tell you.

It may be a Matrix Bonded Core, made here in Canada. That is pretty typical expansion for them. Here's one, a 270 gr 9.3 taken out of a big grizzly I got in 2011. It broke the big tubercle on the near shoulder, chopped up two vertebrae and stopped against the hide. Almost made it through, and still weighs a bit over 240 gr.



Ted

Bitterroot Bonded there Bob?

raybass: Yes.

The ones I have are still on the shelf waiting. Thanks bsa BTW

Other than that type of story seems to appear on every Weatherby hater thread, I'm sure they were the exception. There's almost never any mention of the likes of Elgin Gates or AFrican PHs like Grant who've used them all of their lives..

Mornin Ted -

Am I to understand that ALL the animals died when ALL those bullets didn't exit?



Jerry



Sitka, Yukoner, Bob--everybody
The WHOLE intent of my ? is humor.


I am thoroughly enjoying this discussion by THOSE who have experience shooting/killing BIG game with diff. bullets. Please don't stop.

An ADDENDUM:

In 42-43 yrs of WT deer hunting and using GOOD c/c bullets, I have NOT recovered that many bullets.

Thumbs UP!


Jerry

I also have a large collection of recovered bullets, all from animals that died. Since these discussions always seem to come down to Barnes X against every other bullet, here are some statistics from my collection:

Many people state that Nosler Partitions retain around 60% or 65% or 2/3 of their weight. In my collection, 20% retained 60% or less, and those averaged 57.8%. All of those bullets were relatively light for caliber, ranging from 100 to 150 grains in calibers from .25 to 7mm.

There's a reason for this: Nosler designs the lighter, smaller-caliber Partitions to retain less weight, figuring they'll mostly be used on "deer-sized" game. John Nosler always believed (based on considerable experience) that deer die quicker with more bullet fragmentation.

But I should probably also note that the lightest retained percentage of a recovered Partition in my collection is a 150-grain .270, shot into a medium-sized Shiras bull moose. The bullet entered the left rear of the rib-cage and ended up in the right shoulder, retaining 53.7% of its weight. Yet the bull took a step-and-a-half before folding up dead.

The Partitions over .30 caliber have the partition moved forward to retain more weight, because the folks at Nosler figure they'll be used on bigger animals. I've recovered some in calibers from .338 to .416 from animals like bull moose, musk ox, bison and Cape buffalo, and they average 86.3% weight retention.

Have also shot some Barnes X's into animals here and there, and recovered some, though not as many as Partitions, mostly because I've been shooting Partitions since the mid-1970's and Barnes X's--from the original to the blue-coated XLC to TSX's--since the mid-1990's. (Actually did shoot a few at targets before then, but never could get them to shoot well enough to want to take them afield.) The recovered X's average 90.6% in weigh retention.

Have recovered a higher percentage of X's than Partitions, but only because I've tended to use lighter X's for various sizes of game than Partitions.

Have done considerable experimentation with bullet penetration in consistent media of various sorts, and eventually came to the conclusion that depth of penetration is more tied to frontal area of the mushroom than percentage of weight retention. This is due to testing the same weight and diameter of various bullets at the same velocity: In every instance some bullets that retained less weight penetrated just as deeply as bullets that retained more--and the difference was in the measured diameter of the mushroom.

Whether or not all of this makes any difference in "killing power" is debatable. I've only noticed that expanding bullets placed in the vitals kill stuff pretty quickly--but do know that extrapolating the penetration of some bullets of a certain make to ALL bullets of a certain make is a mistake. Some Partitions simply penetrate better than others, even if not one of the over-.30's with the partition moved forward. I'd put the 160/175 7mm and 200 .30 in this class, but have also seen consistently deeper penetration from the 250 .338 and 286 9.3 than some other over-.30 bullets.

I'd have to say the same about Barnes X's. The 100-grain .25 TTSX hasn't penetrated any deeper than the 100-grain .25 Partition on the game my wife and I have shot with both--though both penetrate plenty, especially for the size of game they're usually used on.

Can't say that my hunting notes reveal any pattern in how far game has gone after a good hit in the vitals that exited or didn't exit. Have seen plenty drop very quickly, like that moose my wife killed with a lousy .270, from lung shots that didn't hit any major bone. Have also seen the same thing with bullets that did exit, whatever the make of the bullet, but can't find any statistical pattern.

The Barnes I have collected have either been stopped by heavy bone - which tends to put the animal down fast, or they have been stopped due to distance of penetration through atmosphere and/or flesh and often with minimal expansion. The latter tend to be slow killers, not surprisingly.

But my Barnes collection is all non-bear kills, mostly ungulates. The few bears I've killed have involved mostly full penetration, and mostly with various non-monos. Where the first bullet lands and what it does seem to matter more with bears. If they can recover from the first shot and build up a head of adrenaline, they become a very different creature than the ungulates tend to do. (Although a rutting moose which is already high on testosterone when it is first struck can try to be sporty if you don't slap him correctly when the curtain opens.)

I've had just a handful of one-shot instant drops with moose. A couple were monos; one was a 'stay-in' which broke both shoulders. The other was a 'thru-thru' which separated the spine. Cup and cores have also dumped them straight down a couple of times. They have also done it both ways. However, 'shock' has seemed to be the process involved with cored bullets - IOW, who knows exactly why they went straight down?

I think we missed the point and are not looking at the same place at all. We were talking about folks with limited trigger time on a rifle because they just bought a big one because someone told them they needed it. And then they take it on a brown bear hunt.

I used the 340Wby example only as the opposite side of the equation. Obviously you bring experienced shooters into the equation and it is a whole 'nother discussion.

MD that is great info. Thanks.

One of the first outfitters I worked for in South Africa swore that his 340 weatherby was the most lethal rifle ever made. I witnessed it absolutely clobber animals are ranges that I would have never expected. One Livingston Eland had escaped a breeding operation by jumping an 8' fence where is was kept. We watched this jump, so there is no doubt about it happening. Imagine seeing a 2000 lb animal as big as a black angus bull, a bison, or a bull moose make a running leap over an 8 foot fence!

Anyway, that bull was free ranging for a few weeks, no matter the effort or the attempts to dart it, we never managed to recapture it. The owner finally said that it was bad enough to lose the value of the animal, but he darn sure was not gonna lose the meat too. He sent us out to shoot it and get the meat back to him.

When we finally came upon this big bull at about 150 yards, Pieter shot it with this 340 weatherby. The impact was impressive and the bull folded on the spot, without a CNS hit, it was a lung shot. It still never took a step. In my career I've seen a lot of big eland shot with a lot of cartridges. Nothing I've ever seen has the pure crumple power of this 340 weatherby. It's in a class all it's own for decisive, and astonishing power. This was with factory Weatherby 250 grain ammo too. ( imagine the additional performance with a TSX today!)

As an interesting side note, the scope on that rifle was worth about 20 bucks, a Tasco. Never failed, always was dead on the money, and Pieter said he never touched the adjustments in at least ten years he owned it. I shot this rifle about 5 times in my life. Probably 2 times for "fun" to feel the power, and a couple more times for "emergency" situations that came up when it was all we had.

So this is the good news about the 340 weatherby....... The bad news is that the recoil was by a wide margin the most harsh I have ever felt from any gun. It made me temporarily blind at the moment of the shot. I seriously went black the instant I pulled the trigger. I also don't see this being sighted in from a bench for entertainment to shoot groups. I owned a 458Lott and I shot a 460 weatherby, Several 500 british cartridges and other massive "elephant guns" Nothing hit back to my 175pound anatomy like this 340 weatherby.

It is to this day the most lethal and tissue destructive cartridge I have ever witnessed. Like a 220 swift but for the biggest game, same results!

Part of the crumple factor on a lung shot may have been because of, rather than in spite of, the Hornady supplied factory bullet rather than a "harder" option.

I second that salute.
I also appreciate the others entered too.


BTW - y'all can have my part of a 340 Wby! No shame, I just don't HAVE TO suffer that abuse.

I have shot the 375 H H multiple times and did NOT have any problem with it.
IfN I needed it, I can hunt a 375 HH.

Jerry

Here is one of the three bullet boards I kept for a while. This is the one with the most Barnes bullets on it.

I had always heard the .338 Win mag was designed for the large bears. If/when I get to go for them I'd like to take an 8mm Rem mag.

Hack: o doubt in my mind that speed kills. The most impressive deer killer I've seen is my 257 Weatherby with 100GR Hornady Spire Points. Over fifty deer, and NOT ONE EVER, took a step. I've seen the big cats react to a 378 Weatherby like no other caliber, and Ross Seyfried writes the most impressive Buffalo killer he's seen is the 416 Weatherby. With today's modern bullets Weatherby calibers have really come into their own. When I decide to (finally) book a big bear hunt, my weapon of choice will probably be my 340 Weatherby Lazermark with either 250r TSXs or that superb 240r North Fork. The Lazermark's just to piss the haters off!

I think ol' Roy himself liked the 257 Bee for African game.

It is the bullet, not the size of the bore or name on the barrel, that kills and like others on this forum I too maintain a large collection of bullets recovered from bears, with data on hunter, type and weight of bullet and any other informative data. I am currently on box number four.

Phil, that's pretty cool. Lots of stories in those boxes!!!!

My collection is, well, ummmm, not nearly as robust.

225gr TTSX and 225gr Northforks.

And that is impressive too, considering the source and experience.


Jerry

+1

I'll take Phil's word over that of anyone else when it comes to killing bears.

Of course bears are similar to other animals- they die when you shoot them. And contrary to old folklore and tradition, I've found that if you can properly place a bullet that opens up and wrecks tissue, bore size and cartridge are nearly irrelevant. Even on large critters.

+2

Pretty hard to argue with that kind of experience although some will no doubt try.

I need to try those Matrix bullets but sadly they don't make a 358 version so it will need to be a 6.5 or 277.

Laker - You must have missed it. He answered your ? on P 9.
just tryin to help.


Jerry

I answered your question right after you posted it...

Missed Jwall's comment...

Notice how similar the headstamp is to the Herter's logo... always thought that was satire and directed...

Read the whole thread and it is an interesting one.

Which begs the question...

Why bother hunting, tracking, stopping wounded bears with anything over 30 caliber?

OR

Is there a scenario in which the over 30 cal rifle gives the hunter or guide an advantage?

Thanks. No idea how I missed that.

No problem, it is easy to get lost in a thread like this...

I used a 300WM through the late '80s-early '90s and felt comfy enough with it. I stepped up to a 375 and then a 375AI because of a couple situations that left me wanting a bit more.

Coincidentally I started shooting Barnes bullets about then...

Any of my smaller bore rifles are lighter than my 375s... and they handle a little quicker.

I hope this is a joke.

It's kind of like asking, since 3 ounces of red meat supplies all the protein one needs from meat in any given day, why eat more?

As usual, this thread ran tangents whereby we have determined that only 9 ounces of Tiberian gazelle meat is truly enough, but if it's cooked just right, even a 6 ounce monkey steak can suffice.

Never knew there were 6 ounce monkeys...

Which is why at times I prefer the most satisfying feeling of my 458 !

While I might be willing to hunt the large bears with a sub .30 caliber rifle, I sure wouldn't want to see one in my guides hands. I've read stories of native guides backing up bear clients with .30-30's. In that situation I'd carry a .338.

This. I have no do have a dog in this fight other than having bear on my list. I would feel comfy HUNTING a bear with my 30/06, but I know I'd reach for my 9.3 in a charge/tracking situation.

I realize a charge would not allow that convenience.

It was his favorite caliber but in his book he admits he had some spectacular kills...and failures with that caliber. Had he been able to use what we have today, I think a lot more folks would be using his calibers. back then, bullets were just not up to the task.

After seeing Phil's post on his "satisfying feeling" the 458 affords him, one has to be AN IDIOT, to show up for a big bear hunt with a 3006 and bordering on lunacy with anything lighter. Having been up close to a pissed off elephant once, I can more or less relate. The 416 Rigby I had with me left me wishing for a 417 or even better some Close Air Support!

I know that feeling!

My PH in Cameroon decided the wind and cover were right to sneak up to within 25 yards of herd of elephants. I was holding my .450/400 and just had this feeling of being naked and vulnerable should the situation "change". Anything that did have a lanyard attached wouldn't not have given me confidence.

I'd recommend .338 and up for Brown Bear, but let me admit I've not taken one. Big brown bears are substantial critters. .375 H & H is the minimum for African DG game including lion and buffalo for a reason. I'd consider a big brown bear to be in that same class.

But then Phil may also get that "satisfying feeling" when a hunter shows up with .30-06 or less loaded with a proper bullet that he can handle rather than the alternate.

jorge,

I guess Phil's an idiot, since he's often carried a .30-06 when backing up brown bear hunters.

Oops!

I guess so (sorry, Phil).

Edited to add: then why the 458 and it goes for anybody else that shows up in Africa with an 06 as a backup, not to mention that "showing up" clearly defines a client, but now that you bring it up, if I were with anybody going into the alders with an 06, my response would be, "I'll wait right here, and give me the keys to the airplane and let me hold your wallet"...

Sometimes a man's gotta do what he's gotta do to make a living. BTDT

There's a lot of common sense in this thread and a fair portion of common senselessness, as usual. I've never hunted big bears; but, some things just make sense. If I was a guide for big browns and a client showed up with a 375 for his bear hunt, my first questions would be "how long you been shooting a 375?". If his answer was anything close to "I got it for this hunt", I would politely ask if he would please consider using my 270/280/30-06 instead.

It would be interesting to know, though probably difficult to quantify, what calibers of rifles used by clients, have required the most frequent follow-up shots by guides in bear hunting situations.

I"ll have to ask Spencer when I get a chance, but all our conversations I can recall there were 2 things they hated, ballistic tip type bullets and guns they clients could not shoot. I know he always said he'd rather the client shoot a small gun and hit the vitals on the first shot, rather than the client be sold a gun he won't shoot enough, can't handle by a gun "store" salsemen because the cant' be killed with an 06...

IIRC there was a story from them about a farmer that brought his old 270... that never had a single issue...

OTOH I"ve shot close to 20 deer/pigs with 257 and 100 ttsx and NEVER had one DRT. I've had em fall awful quick generally.... but never on the spot. My buddy has probably more than that wiht his, and same load, and has yet to drop one on the spot also, though his for whatever reason rarely make 10 steps, save the one doe htat made about 120 yards...

Speed does somethings, but its also bullet choice and shot location.

I'll take a good bullet and precise placement ever time over speed. All 3 never hurts.

In this thread, we went from 270's 7x57's 7mm Rem Mags and 30-06s


.. and that it is all about shot placement and type of bullet...



To....







As for me, this is the REAL answer. If someone wants to HUNT bear he should be able to handle a bigger bore and be in shape to follow up all the way through.

The idea of "that I'll have my guide to back me up and put the killing shot in it" takes away from the the hunt. Guides can line their pockets every day with those types of people.

For me personally, I don't want any guide putting in bullet in MY bear. I want to kill it.

You don't know fear until you have one of these bastids coming after you.....


[img:left][/img]

Perhaps the most common mistake one can make when hunting bears or similar big creatures is thinking it isn't about where that hole is placed. (And no one is less impressed by the numbers on a barrel than are big animals.)

You might be surprised how many 3/8" holes a bear hide can have in it and still contain a live animal.

No, I would not be surprised.

I'm sure many brown bears have been killed in days of yore with a 30-30, but all I can say is I hope you "use enough gun" as a backup.

Seems to me the client has more money than common sense if he wants to use his .7 Rem Mag mainly because "he feels more comfortable with it".

I would buy a .338 or .416 and learn to be "comfortable with it", rather than risk wounding something as dangerous as a big brownie. I think it is possible the bullet could break up on its upper leg bone.


Perhaps he should go with solids (if they make them for a .7mm Rem Mag).

BH

That'll teach you to shot straight or climb trees faster.

That size goes good in a smoker or Cajun microwave.

If you use the rifle correctly in the first place there should be no need for a backup.

And while a big bore rifle can be more comforting to carry into the pucker brush and a little quicker at putting a wounded animal down, it doesn't mean they are a better tool for every hunter.

The 30-06 was the most common caliber used by Alaskan guides well after the 375 became available, even Hosea Sarber, the legendary Alaskan territorial warden and bear hunter preferred his 30-06 ( and sometimes even his .270) over his 375 H&H when stalking bears due to the fact that it handled quicker and he had absolute faith in it. And there are still Alaskan bear guides who feel the same.

Bore size is not a substitute for bullet placement and energy is no substitute for bullet performance.

I might argue the opposite. A couple of experienced folks have chimed in here stating they'd rather have the client with a gun/chambering he/she is comfortable and familiar with. To me, the guy wanting to use his 7mm mag shows he's a somewhat rationale and reasoning human being. There's no way of knowing if it's a financial based decision, or perhaps recoil tolerance or familiarity are the driver.
Would it be my pick? Nope - but it'll work.

The guys with more money than sense buy a 375 or .416 a month or two before the hunt. And it's all relative anyway - some of those folks will put down 15-25k on a hunt and beotch about the price of the factory ammo so they won't shoot it much. Or, if they do shoot it a bit, decide they've bitten off more than they can chew but will use it because they have to have it based on what they've read.

When I went on my first brown bear hunt, I didn't even bother posting about the anticipation leading up to the hunt because I knew there would be 6 pages of "there's no way I'd go with less than XXX chambering and I'd be shooting XX bullet if it were me". And 90% of the responses would have been from folks that had never been.

I used a 35 Whelen and anchored my bear on the spot and put a few more in him for good measure. The two hunters after me (in speaking with the guide a couple of weeks later) used a 375 Ruger and the other a 416 of some flavor. Both of those hunts led to a rodeo in the alders afterward - one bear was never located.

The particular outfitter/guide knows rifles/bullets quite well and shares Phil's mindset when it comes to hunters and rifles.

I know and talk with a lot of guides and a lot of experienced ones claim they really don't care what a client brings because if they can't shoot the guide will have to kill it anyway.

Which is why, when asked what rifle a client should bring, I always ask what they have and what is their favorite and then recommend they buy a box of premium bullets and bring it.

That was intended as a rather generic 'you', not directed specifically. (Plenty of folks have some unfounded, erroneous ideas, perhaps worse with bears than with many animals - at least in North America. I will venture that the average Alaska moose is more likely to trap and stop bullets than is the average Alaskan bear, yet people don't seem to have a lot of concern with 'how small' they can get by with on moose - and moose are often shot from greater distances and frequently moving.)

Sounds sensible enough, Phil.

But that makes me wonder about your choice of a 30-06 for your backup rifle... is that what you carry when you know your hunter can shoot well and you figure you won't need it? From your articles, I had assumed you always carried Old Ugly or one of your other big-bore rifles!

Anybody who wants an opinion from "an expert", here it is.

No kidding on the expert opinion. How anyone could possibly second guess Shoemaker is amazing.

Of course not sir, but given everything equal and providing (of course) your client can shoot what he brings well, what would you prefer him to have, an 06 or a 375? ANd I hope you took no offense Phil as my comment was obviously rhetorical

Yet - they keep asking......when he has answered very clearly.

Jerry

I just loaded my super cub and am headed out to camp and will have to see where this thread goes when I get back next week.

Oh, for what it is worth, in my wing strut scabbard there is a Ruger No 1 35 Whelen in case I go down and need to defend myself .

IMO - that answers several questions.

Thanks very much and have a GREAT hunt.

Jerry

Thanks, hatari, that kindasorta answers my question. Still wondering why sometimes a 30-06, and sometimes a 505 Gibbs, y' know? Not a burning desire for knowledge, just scratchin' my head a bit.

Because Phil is a rifle loony....

Since you quoted my statement about stepping up to the 375 and 375AI let me explain again...

I had a bear shot in the heel and in the guts once. Shooter was new to his rifle. I followed and killed it a couple miles away in an alder patch at staplegun range with my 300WM... it was mighty sick and did not charge, just tried to hunker down and let me go by, I think.

For a follow-up gun I would have preferred the 375, so I got one.

I have no issue with someone shooting them with just about anything, but if the odds of things getting sporty are elevated by a new shooter I will bring the bigger rifle. But that obviously is not about hunting them, just stopping someone else's.

And, BTW, to those feeling like you do that your bear will not be shot by the guide unless absolutely needed you should be very careful about talking to your guide about that. Many guides will shoot IMMEDIATELY after you do. There was even a thread here a while back by a guy bitching because he missed the bear but the guide did not...

Of course. I knew that.

Lots of fellers have people at home whom they are rather fond of too, and having been spooked a time or two by the mutual stalking process that a wounded bear sometimes becomes part of, I can hardly blame the guys that do that. Nor do I blame them when there is a second client who also expects to be provided a decent opportunity, but get short-shrift due to the first hunter's wounded animal that wasn't hit well and gets sighted again day after day; (and the first hunter's tag is legally filled whether the wounded animal is ever recovered.) A smart guide sometimes knows more about the holes in an animal than they ever reveal to the wallet bearer.

What a bunch of hypothetical bullshit,, this thread has turned a fairly simple question into another, I'd Do This, or I'd Do That,,,,,,When in fact very few here had done business with a brown bear, much less wounded in the brush!

I'd feel comfortable hunting and tracking brown bear with a .223 AI. The regular .223 wouldn't be enough though. That is where I'd draw the line.

Shot one 50 yards out twice with my 375 KS and he plum flipped over heels to the sky.

Well....actually, he ran off.

If'n I ever show up for a guided Brown Bear hunt with a .338win mag or a .375 hopefull the guide will slap the fu ck outta me give me his spare 30-06..

So I was wondering is a 7mm REM mag enough for brown bear?

It's enough for sure and a lot better than a graphite fly rod for self defense in thick alders. I carried a 7 RM as it was the only rifle I owned at the time. Also carried a heavily loaded Colt 45. Never shot a brownie with that but it put the hurt to a 350lb black bear alright.

Given my druthers it would have been a .375 as the carry rifle.

Some would qualify the 7 as a beach rifle or Mt. rifle which is good. In the thick stuff nothing is too big.

Wow.

No. You need at least a 7 RUM.

Well, I gave him credit for being 'sarcastic' w/o the emoticon.

IF he is serious THEN he mustn't have read much of this thread.

I think we should start WOW upside down, = MOM -

-----------------------------

I have thoroughly enjoyed this thread and have a different perspective for Big Bear hunting.

I sincerely appreciate all the input from 'experienced' big bear hunters/guides.

Jerry

Since the key phrase seems to be "a rifle he/she is comfortable with", then what does it take to get "comfortable" with a rifle?

In my experience it is just getting it sighted in and shooting (and carrying it) enough so that you can aim, mount, and shoot it with field accuracy (based upon the ranges you will most likely shoot at the animal hunted).

You should be able to take the safety off or on without conscious thought. It also means to me, knowing the ballistic limitations of your rifle as far as range.

For my .416 Rem Mag it took me about 2 months and 2 boxes of rounds to be able to shoot it effectively out to 200 yds (that includes sight in rounds). In actual hunting conditions, I never feel recoil or even think about recoil.

If a person doesn't handle moderate to heavy recoil very well, than I would suggest they have no business hunting large DG. JMO.

However, I can certainly see where a guide would rather have a client use a minimally adequate caliber that he has a lot of confidence in, rather than deal with a nervous nelly who is scared of his rifle and can't shoot it for sh*t.

People draw confidence when faced with a potentially dangerous situation from different things. Some from external things like a rifle they have killed a lot of game with, some from religion, and some draw confidence from within.


BH63

I was wondering how long it would take before this thread turned to schitt!

Yes I was being sarcastic.....

Don't know if it's already been mentioned so lets just say someone was convinced they needed a new rifle of a larger caliber for a brown bear hunt because they feel their(fill in the blank)chambered rifle isn't enough no matter what they've read or been told. Couldn't they just step up in caliber size to rifle that produces the same or near the same recoil as the one they have? As an example I feel my 9.3x62 w/270's recoils very similar to my .30-06 w/180's. Granted the 9.3x62 is a bit over one pound heavier. 8lbs compared to a little over 6.5lbs. Not enough difference for a hunter who should be in good shape for the hunt though.

EZEARL: That's an option and the reason cartridges like the 35 Whelen, 9.3x62 and 338/06 are useful, too.

I did load workup for an older guy who was headed for a brown bear hunt in Alaska. The 375 and the 300 Weatherby were too much for him but the 35 Whelen was just right.

I think the Alaska game department recommends using 200 or 220 gr bullets with the 30-06 for brownies.

BH63

This thread has now reached the stage where, like history, it tends to repeat itself, because it's grown too long for anybody to read the whole thing.

Of course, some people never read threads even if there are only 3-4 posts, because they're too eager to post their own answer.

Give me that and a 62 or 70 Gr.TTSX, and I would take a wager.


Seriously.




The wager would have to be large, and it would scare the crap out of me, but I'd take the chance....


I'm not crazy, as sheldon Cooper says, my mother had me tested...

I know a trapper who has lived in the Brooks Range for the past 30 years and uses a 22-250 for everything and has killed a number of grizzlies with it.

A few years back natives in Ft Yukon used 223's to kill a marauding polar bear that wandered near the village.

And hundreds of Alaskans pack handguns of all sorts for protection from bears, yet none of they have the power, nor ability to be shot accurately, as a 7mm rifle.

As I have been saying all along on this thread, it really doesn't matter what caliber floats your boat, bullet placement is the key. It makes little difference whether a bear is gut shot with a 243, 7mm or a 460 Wby.

I can't tell you how many villagers from up at Barrow or Wainwright I've had ask me at the shop if we have any 222s. Just for fun and out of curiosity I often ask why they want a 222. The answer is nearly always the same, "good for seals and polar bear".

Talked to a young guy from Barrow one year who had just killed a rather large polar bear. When I inquired as to what he shot it with he grinned and said "my mini 14". When we remarked that the 223 seemed a bit on the small side he seemed puzzled and said he didn't know why we felt that way, mini 14s hold a lot of bullets and his brother was there with his mini 14 too.
Just some stories I get a chuckle out of when I think about them.

When I hunted musk ox in Canada quite a while back, my guide was an older Inuit (as they call themselves in Canada) whose favorite polar bear rifle was a .22 Rimfire Magnum. And no, he didn't use sled dogs to surround bears and then head-shoot 'em. Instead he stalked close enough to put a bullet broadside in the heart. After a while the bears just "went to sleep." He'd taken a number that way, and preferred the .22 Mag-a-num (as he called it) because it didn't tear nearly as big a hole in the valuable hide as his .30-30.

Phil,
What kind of bullets do you load in your 35 Whelen?
whelennut

I have always been partial to the 250 gr Partitions but am planning on trying the 225 gr Accubonds

Oh Jeez!

Phil, Now you gone and done it! Don't you know that Accubonds are the worst game bullet made??? They just bounce off and when they do they could put your eye out.

The Accubond .277 bullets are the only PETA approved bullets.

I know, but my son, Mule Deer and I have had great luck with them.

It's fairly simple to ferret-out those who have the most experience with actual game killing, and those wedded to their own biases based on very little experience with killing game, but a lot of toilet-side reading.

The former aren't especially hung up on cartridge/bullet combos, the latter ALWAYS are...

The more you kill the less you rely on power and the more you rely on placement, I think. Commonly, the folks gunning the most powerful armament don't have many kills under their belt. Of course that is an oversimplification but confidence comes with experience.

I know from experience moose don't like the 35 cal 225 gr Accubond so I'm pretty sure a bear won't either lol. Been trying the 200 gr Accubond and TTSX lately from the Whelen and don't think either of them will bounce off.

And I have come to notice the amount of crap mounted on their rifle is inversely proportional to the amount of experience they have.

A reliance on gadgetry instead of trigger time and experience..

Great thread and id like to say thanks to all the truly knowledgable folks that have posted.

Ive never hunted Brown Bear or Griz...with that being said...

My Grandfather lived in Alaska for 20 years, mostly on Kodiak. My Mom and Uncle were both born there prior to its statehood. My Grandfather always felt that the 30-06 was absolutely enough for bear hunting. In all honesty he told me on many occasions that anything from the "Swedish Mauser" on up works fine.

At the time (i was young) I didn't know anything about the Swede and 6.5 anything was not really in mainstream fashion. Its interesting though that his opinions formed in the 30s and 40s still hold true today even though our bullets are so much better.

Based on the performance I've seen in Black Bear, Elk and Moose and perhaps most importantly from the respected options voiced here...I think a 6.5 with heavy bullets probably makes a sensible minimum for bear HUNTING. If i had the chance to go and was limited to a 6.5 I would not hesitate.

One observation I've made a few times here and there that always drives a certain number of people batschidt comes from a conversation with the African PH I know best. He was one of the most experienced African hunters I've ever hunted with, having made his living at it since age 17 when he hired on with the then-Rhodesian game department. Among other things, he was a Selous Scout and a game culler for one of the biggest ranches in Rhodesia.

By the time I hunted with him, he only used three big game rifles, a 7x57, .375 H&H and .458 Lott, all top-notch but very simple 98 Mauser-actioned rifles. For backup on most plains game hunts he carried the 7x57, since he'd killed thousands of animals with one, including a number of eland. For elephant and some very tight-cover buffalo hunting he carried the Lott.

But for most dangerous game hunting he carried the .375, and joked he was often out-gunned by his clients. But he finished off a lot off buffalo they failed to kill with their larger rifles.

The statement he made that drives some people really nuts, though, came from when I asked what bullet he preferred in the .375. He said he didn't prefer any, instead using whatever ammo his clients left behind, because "all of today's bullets are good."

Since he never had to shoot anything over 50 yards, and most of the time the range was half that, any slight variation in point of impact didn't matter. A well-known rifle and plenty of experience did the job, every time. He's now enjoying a well-deserved retirement, after having killed far more buffalo than many of us can imagine, at least half with a .30-06 and 180-grain Partitions during his culling years.

As I age I have come to realize that most people use fishing tackle that is too long and too heavy, and rifles/scopes that are too big.
The increase in the quality of bullets over the past few decades absolutely has something to do with this.( not the fishing rod part, we don't all shoot fish like Big Stick...)

Having followed the entire thread, often shaking my head, rolling my eyes, and laughing, I'm going to say that the last couple pages have been far and away the best, and they even answer the question in an appropriate roundabout way.

Since John has decided to share his story about his PH friend who held views contrary to many on this thread, I have another about the Zambian PH my son worked for. He is a second generation PH, now retired, who grew up with his father's early 416 Rigby and a BRNO 30-06. Between them the Rigby had accounted for over 1000 BULL elephants and the checkering was worn completely smooth.


Although he was intimently familiar with the Rigby, for lions he claimed he prefered the 30-06 as lions are so blazingly fast he felt the fraction of a second speed advantage that the 30-06 gave him far outweighed the extra power of the 416 ! As bullet placement was paramount no matter which rifle you use.

That's a great story JB, and that quote says it all.

A .22 mag might be cutting things a bit thin, but I'd be happy to hunt big bears with a 7 mag and some good bullets.

Good point, if you are not an AK resident, someone will be backing you up.

Otherwise alone -I would prefer nothing short of a 375 H&H in open country-A 450 Alaskan on an early Model 71 in the thick stuff. If they reach the timber, you may have a fight on your hands.


Any other time, a 348 Ackley Improved (ballistics-- a 35 Whelen) in a M-71. With 270 gr Hawk or 250 AK Works-Juneau. But then, I am a moss back with 1886's...

__________________________________________
Somewhere between Minchumina and Wien Lake
Hey Phil-remember Duane OSE? Oliver Cameron died awhile back-lower 48-

I've never shot any kind of bear (i've seen several blacks in the wild while elk hunting) but it's interesting to hear about what works from those that have.

I would guess by that PH's experience that an '06 might work on a grizz...ASSUMING it's wielded by someone that can shoot.

What little I know is that my guide for my hunt in a couple of weeks is more than pleased that I am bringing a 375 H&H loaded with 270 gr TSX's. His words, "perfect".

So Phil,

Where do you prefer to hit a charging griz?

Just for curiosity's sake.

I am sure he is pleased as that is the reference standard for big bear rifles. As I said, when a client askes what to bring I first ask what they but if they have already decided that a brown bear hunt in Alaska is a good reason to buy a new rifle I suggest either a 338 or a 375.

Fortunately while I was planning on using my old BRNO ZKK 375 a semi-custom stainless/synthetic M70 appeared for sale here a year or so ago. I am sure either would work.

On the money.

Good luck Ed!

Mike & sb -

I agree in principle in that WT are the largest big game I've had the privilege to hunt. I know exactly what y'all are saying is true but I would like to add this caveat,
'Faster' cartridges allow flatter trajectory, making placement easier at longer distances.

I am NOT speaking nor recommending 'long' range shooting of bear. That's out of my wheel of experience.

Jerry

I'll second that

My uncle took TWO lions in Africa in the 60s with a 270 and old fashioned Winchester Silvertips. Fast forward to today, another good friend of mine has taken virtually every species of soft skinned African game, bear, red stag with his 375 and Nosler Accubonds and TSXs for his buffaloes and big lion.

You might want to tell your "guide" to check with the "Nosler Police" about the TSX usage...

True, but just like bigger bores, not nearly as much as most people believe. If you are using a rangefinder and know the trajectory of your rifle you can make hits with any caliber.

Im anxious to get the after action report on that hunt!

Certainly agree...IF/WHEN you have time to 'rangefind'.

In Southern WT woods, we often don't have time to...
use binos...
range....
twist dials...
aim...
shoot.

With a 400 yd MPBR you spend LESS critical time. I admit that I'm spoiled to 'FAST' cartridges for that reason. I've been using 400 yd MPBR since the 1980s.

It really is hard to leave a process that works and you've been using so long. Call me 'mossback', set in my ways, or Hard Headed.

Thanks Phil, I always enjoy your input and respect you.

Jerry

Trophy bear and moose hunting tends to be a rather deliberate type of hunting. Bears get plenty of eyeball time, and many bears are killed at distances where you don't need to know the precise yardage. You might easily know a bear is big enough at 250 yards, but, unless you really have good glass and the time to lay it on him, you might not be able to tell what the condition of the hide is. (Not everyone is okay with spending multiple thousands of dollars for "a nice even rub". )

Tripe and yet another 'fire generalization...

Respectfully Ed, I feel there is merit especially in the first sentence.

Mr Phil has given evidence & support even in this thread.


Jerry

Only lived up here for about 6 months so have ZERO actual experience but I have talked to a number of guides who tend to make fun of the lower 48 people who think they need to bring a howitzer up here. They will have the big gun, you bring what you can shoot well with a premium bullet.

I agree, Ed. I personally have no problems with recoil and I've posed the same question to the shot-placement-uber-alles folks (which in my book rates a "DUH"! and so intuitively obvious it's irritating)' Given all other things equal, i.e., exact shot placement, range and type of bullet used (let's stick with a Partition, lest the Nosler Police chastises), would it not be more prudent and efficacious to shoot said bear with a 375 and a 300 grain pill or a 3006 with a 180? (completely rhetorical post)

A big "thank you" to the master bear guides (and others) who have the patience to field questions and entertain comments form deer hunters, everywhere.

I figure there isn't but a small handful of game in NA that can truly justify a 375 H&H,brown bear being one of them. And so wanting to be traditional I brought one on my first hunt....and my second as well.


I just like the old cartridge. Any reason is a good one to use it.

This is really it...^^


And, as they say, money talks.....

....but it should be remembered that animals don't know what that phrase means.

And, while it does create more opportunities to shoot better stuff and more of it, it doesn't guarantee that the fellow who has it will do so. And that has been proven time and again.

This thread goes on and on, and in some ways resembles the thread on Hi-Vel's reticle-truing device.

The original poster didn't ask whether the 7mm Remington Magnum was enough for brown bears. Instead he asked whether he should load up some 175 Partitions or 160 TSX's for a friend of his who planned to use his 7mm Remington Magnum on a brown bear hunt.

The second post, per usual, was some guy who totally ignored the question and said the guy should take a .338 or .375 instead. The next step was for a bunch of people to post THEIR preferences, of course not limiting it to the 7mm, .375 or any other round.

By now we have heard from a bunch of people, including many who've never even seen a grizzly or brown bear in the flesh, much less hunted one--and several who have hunted them, including one of the most experienced outfitters for really BIG brown bears in the business, because his guiding area holds not only more browns during the salmon runs than any other place in Alaska, but some of the biggest.

Now we're getting to the point where some people are insisting that because they're fine with the recoil of a .375, that's obviously the best choice. Which is exactly what happened to the Reticle-Tru thread, when some people said they'd never needed one, or preferred some other method, so obviously anybody who prefers to use a Reticle-Tru is blind, incompetent or gullible.

As I pointed out in that thread, humans aren't all the same in their ability level a scope reticle. Similarly, they're not all the same in recoil tolerance. Some who are recoil tolerant (as apparently I am, since I've used not just the .375 H&H but various rounds from the .338 Winchester Magnum to .416 Rigby on a lot of big game) apparently think this means anybody can shoot harder-recoiling rifles well.

Phil has repeatedly pointed out that he much prefers clients who can shoot accurately with the rifle they bring, because the vast majority of wounded bears he's had to follow up have been due to recoil the hunter couldn't handle. He's also listed several hunters who successfully used cartridges considered completely inadequate by many who posted here, with bullets apparently also considered inadequate. He's also repeatedly said that a .338 or .375 is a very fine choice--IF the client can shoot one well.

My experience in observing numerous other hunters is the same as Phil's: While a few can handle pretty stout recoil, most can't. And like Phil I've seen plenty of other hunters in action, partly due to some guiding, but partly due to spending lots of time with a lot of other hunters, including a month-long cull hunt in Africa where two dozen other hunters showed a wide variety of recoil tolerance. All had previously hunted considerably, but by far the vast majority of wounded animals were due to hunters who pulled shots with harder-kicking rifles, NOT because of inadequate cartridges or bullets. One hunter even admitted he couldn't handle the recoil of his 9.3x62 after a few days, so switched to his 7x57, and quit wounding animals, taking gemsbok and zebras with one shot each. Others were more stubborn, like the guy who brought a lightweight .300 magnum and ended his safari by shooting a big kudu through the jaw. (It was found a couple weeks after the guy left.)

That trend also been noted many other hunters who spent considerable time observing other hunters in the field, including Finn Aaagaard, who said in his experience only about 1/3 of his clients could handle the .300 Winchester Magnum. A long-time guide I know here in Montana is even less generous, saying around 20% can shoot .300's straight.

Obviously some who've posted here think anything less than a .375 isn't adequate, and a few have even said anybody who can't handle the recoil shouldn't hunt brown bears. Do they actually think that if they continue to insist that THEY would bring a .375 that somehow Phil will cave and say, yeah, you're right, anything less is inadequate? He's already said the .375 is one of the best choices--if the hunter can shoot it accurately.

The original poster hasn't even logged onto the Campfire since the day he posted. He posted twice, once for the original question, and then once specifically asking again about the 175 Partition and 160 TSX, because his friend's guide, like Phil, said he was fine with the 7mm.

and my question remains unanswered...Operative words "everything else being equal" .

I have to admit I've never quite understood the "shot placement first" argument in the context of most of these discussions. Why isn't shot placement implied? If you aren't hitting where you're aiming we haven't even gotten TO the caliber question, have we? (serious question)

For big and dangerous game I'm inclined to want the most gun that puts bullets where intended. If that's a 7mm or .505 Gibbs so be it.

If the OP original question would of been answered and nobody else would of advised what they would use this thread would of died way to soon. Were is the entertainment in that?

If good shot placement is implied and can be counted on what difference does it make if you put a .308 hole or a .375 hole through a bear's heart. The shot placement issue is why guides like Phil recommend bringing your deer or elk rifle and good bullets instead of going and buying some cannon that you may or may not shoot well. If everyone could shoot a 505 Gibbs with guilt edged accuracy from field positions I'm sure bear guides would love to have everyone show up with one. But most guys, even some who claim otherwise, heck most who claim otherwise if my very short guiding career is any indication, cannot shoot much of anything with any great degree of accuracy. And accuracy gets worse as recoil increases generally speaking.

So has anyone ever seen a problem putting a bear down with a correctly placed bullet of smaller caliber?

A bear that lived a significant amount of time after the shot?

Or lacking penetration despite an adequate bullet design?

Or is it just a blood trail issue?

Based on the hides I've seen on the fleshing beam and salting floor over the past 30 years or so, I would have to surmise that 'intent' and 'execution' don't exist in the same zip code for many people. (And that's without touching the topic of appropriate equipment set-ups and in-the-field use of same.)

...or is the paw a good classic kill shot? (Could a guy actually pull the shot that low at 50 yards if he flinched? )

Klik -

Yes a bullet thru the paw IS a killing shot when the bear covered his eyes from the spot light !!!





Jerry

...as the bear hollers, "Hey Mabel, hold my beer and watch him score my skull!"

Ditto! Wishing you a great hunt and great success Ed!

Hoooooooly Moooooooly !


Mr Phil do you have the measurement of that head ? W O W !!



I'll REcant - take the BIGGEST cartridge that you can shoot WELL !!
(that's TNC)

Jerry

Looks like that fellow bagged one that might have had matching drapes to go with the rug!

Funny you should mention that... I just read your post, and last night read your story in Life of the Hunt in which David Ameganik was featured. Great book, btw.

You have to admire the practicality of these Inuit hunters.

Shot with?

a 22 AI and Noslers of coourse...

Rainbow Bright stock?

Phil,

My computer doesn't have enough resolution for me to tell, but is that dark spot behind the orbital arch a bullet hole?

Thanks!

I think either bullet would work fine, but I've always loved the results of Nosler Partitions so well that I'd pick the Nosler. I have not tried TSX's on game yet, even though I have lots of boxes of them and I never reach for them when I'm handloading. (They'll probably go on my estate sale.)

Both Phil and MD are way more experienced in big animals than me and I'd take either of their words.

I'm struggling with which rifle to take on a planned grizzly bear hunt, but I think the fiberglass stocked 350 will work fine. Most of my rifles are wood stocked and that is the biggest consideration for me.

Bugger,

TSX's are great bullets too, one reason I just restocked my supply of 270-grain .375's. They're often (but not always) more accurate than Partitions, though I generally try both in any particular rifle--and a little difference in accuracy doesn't make any practical difference when hunting large, dangerous animals at typical ranges.

You can also drop down some in weight when using TSX's, or similar monlithich bullets, whether Hornady GMX's or Nosler E-Tips. Just yesterday I worked up a new elk load for my wife's .308 Winchester, using the 130 Tipped TSX, which shot great. Since she killed her last elk (a cow) with no problem with one 100-grain TTSX from a .257 Roberts, I know she'd do just fine on any sort of bull with another 30-grains of bullet!

Doc,

Thanks for the kind words on LOTH. That musk ox trip was a very interesting hunt, in several ways....

Did your guide ever mention a back-up plan for the 22 mag and did he ever have things go south?

Walking up to a polar bear takes some big brass balls. I don't doubt he had them, though.

He did his polar bear killing in late fall and early spring, while taking his wife and kids on a 1000-mile round-trip in a snowmobile pulling a covered sled each year. He and his wife lived in Gjoa Haven, a village on Cambridge Island in the Arctic Ocean, and his wife had a sister who lived in Rankin Inlet, another village on Hudson's Bay.

As soon as the ice formed on the ocean, they'd load up and head out, dropping off fuel cans full of gas in caches along the way, with meat from caribou they killed. He'd also set traps for Arctic fox, wolverine, and wolves, but when he spotted a bear would make a stalk. As I recall he got a bear on most trips, but I don't know if he also brought along a .30-30 (his "big" rifle) in case of emergencies. He didn't mention it, but had killed polar bears with the .30-30, which is how he knew it made too big a hole in the hide, which cost him money when he sold the hide, even after his wife sewed up the hole neatly.

After visiting in Rankin Inlet for a while, they'd head back, using the gas and caribou meat cached on the way over, and pick up the frozen carcasses in the traps.

Bravery is finding a polar bear's hole in the ice, then laying peas around the hole. When he comes up to take a pea, you kick him in the ice hole. Sort of like counting coup, I guess.

Interesting stuff.....

Ever read "Kabloona" by Gontran de Poncins? I believe the (very interesting) tales were centered around that area most of a century ago. Fascinating living.

That is fascinating, John. I'd love to talk to a guy like that for a couple hours.

I'm sure it was! Meeting David not the least! Alas, I have shared hunts with the equivalent of John from New York a time or two myself.

I'm late to the discussion, but it seems silly to debate whether a 7mag with a premium bullet is good enough for a guided bear hunt. It wouldn't be my first choice, but I dang sure wouldn't stay home if it was all I had. I'd load up the heaviest A-Frames I could find and go hunting.

bellydeep,

One of the best parts of hunting various places in the world is the people you meet. I've spent a lot of time among the Inuits on northern hunts in Canada, and while they've always been fascinating times (including a beluga whale hunt on Hudson's Bay) spending a week with David was one of the most interesting experiences. We hit it off very well, and talked a lot, though his English isn't the best in the world. But have also found that it's amazing how well two hunters can communicate, even if they speak very little of each other's language!

I can imagine that.

Doc,

That story of the musk ox trip was originally published in GRAY'S SPORTING JOURNAL. After a friend read it, he called me and said, "Is that guy's name ---- -----?" When I said it was, he said, "It had to be! I met him once."

It turned out my friend had been on a safari somewhere in Africa. One day he and his PH had driven by another camp during mid-day, on their way to somewhere else. The two PH's knew each other, so my friend and his PH were asked to stay for lunch.

The client in camp turned out to be none other than my musk ox hunting "partner." My friend only spent about 45 minutes with him, but after reading my description knew it had to be same guy....

If only for emphasis....

One shot?!?!

Can't be!!!

But that was back in the day when hunters understood the importance of shot placement, and took the time to learn to do it !

About seventeen years ago I went on a caribou hunt in Alaska. One day I asked the guide what caliber would be a good choice for brown bear.
He replied, "What difference would it make? As soon as you shoot there will be three guys shooting the bear until it goes down"
I kind of lost interest after that.
whelennut

Ha!

Well, guilty as charged. I have spent a lot more time on the toilet than I have in Africa and Alaska combined. I hunted Africa with a borrowed 7mm Mauser and Alaska with my beloved 35 Whelen and 225 gr Partitions. My bookshelves are sagging with books written by Bob Hagel and Peter Capstick and others like Elmer Keith and Jack O Connor.
I am hoping that Phil will write a book someday. I would love to read it.
whelennut

Would you let a hunter take a 300 yard poke at a bear? That magazine clipping says that is how long the shot was. I suppose they are big targets, but if I showed up for a BB hunt and my guide said nothing past 150 yards I'd say no problem.

Bob Chatfield-Taylor did a LOT of hunting.....far more than our average CF member,and on a few continents. He was an experienced guy.

Ralph Young was a legend in SE Alaska. Doubt he would have allowed a great deal of risk.

RCT shot constantly. I doubt there was any "poking" involved"...

Pretty sure he killed grizzly with the 284 Winchester and 270 Winchester as well

His early stuff on the 30-338 was always interesting reading...as was about anything he wrote. Not your average boob.

That article showing the bear was a good one!

AND

Originally Posted By 458Win
"It is the bullet, not the size of the bore or name on the barrel, that kills..."

Just for a Reminder.....


IMO Phil has been gracious, patient, & kind in responding during this thread.


AND he is Qualified to answer....no?


Thanks

Jerry

What I want to know is why are these threads always about Brown Bear and not Grizzly? Don't sports go to Alaska for Grizz anymore? Growing up it seemed like the old writers mostly went after Grizzly when they bear hunted the Last Frontier. Now everything is Brownies.

Brown is a fish fed grizzly with a longer growing season than a grizzly.

Also bigger.

This thread sure didn't need to be 15 pages long....could have been shortened to Phils post....

But has Interior Grizzly hunting gone out of vogue? A big Silvertip used to be the stuff of dreams, at least among the 20 th century writers and adventurers.

Oh great, now someone asks a question more difficult than the difference between arctic char and dolly varden.

Which side of the Yukon River you're on when you pull the trigger has sometimes been used to answer the browny/grizzly question, BTW. IMO, they might as well use 'length of hibernation' in the equation also. The coastal grizzlies can get very large, and many of them are more blonde than grizzled. Nothing hard and fast; all the same species.

Boone and Crockett even has an arbitrary, perfectly straight line across a large part of southern Alaska. Below the line B&C considers the bears brown, even if they're 150+ miles from the nearest coast.
Safari Club International considers them grizzlies in much of the same area.

Yeah, it could but what we'd miss the fun of conversing, arguing, criticizing, et.al.

Jerry

If you read African Rifles and Cartridges by John Taylor he says "Is it going to be of much satisfaction to you to know that you have killed a charging lion with a low powered rifle if he has first succeeded in killing you?
I very much doubt it."
whelennut

W nut -

I do hear ya!! In my mind low powered rifle would be LESS than an 06 >> SINCE many have used them effectively on LARGE Browns.

In your quote - the lion/bear would be much more satisfied than I would be. grin


Jerry

Jerry,
I have told this story before but for my tenth wedding anniversary I convinced my wife we should go to Alaska and hunt caribou. The first day in camp I noticed that there was meat piled on a wooden pallet just a few feet from our tent.
I had read a book that suggested you should never argue with a guide because it would ruin the trip.
I decided to bite my tongue.
That night I was awakened by some noise like walking on gravel. I thought my wife was grinding her teeth and I said something to her about it.
I heard a loud woof and realized it was time to Lock and Load.
There was a sow and two very large cubs right outside having a caribou buffet.
My wife peeked out of her sleeping bag and asked if I was going outside but I replied that they might want to come inside and it was about to get noisy.
Eventually I decided to take a picture and when the flash went off it looked like the Kentucky derby. I thought my 35 Whelen was overkill for caribou, but for three bears just a few feet away it seemed pretty pathetic.
I wish I had a 400 Whelen that night.
whelennut

I can pretty well guarantee you that it would still have felt too small ! Unexpected Bears in the dark have that effect on people .

whelennut & 458 -

That's my first time to read that story and it sounds very exciting in a horror flick kinda way.

I certainly don't know but seems RIGHT that at times like that a...

458 Win would be consoling !!

Jerry

I hate it when the porcupines start rummaging around in the dark; the feeble flashlight beam doesn't always provide the right perspective.

Speaking of bears in the dark, that kind of reminds me of an evening years ago with my 6 year-old son. We were coming down out of the hills on an ATV with the first load of moose meat. It was evident that the second load would involve darkness both ways, about 7-8 miles round trip with a couple mud wallows to negotiate. I asked my young companion if he wanted to put the tent up on the beach (the bear tracks on the sand looked old....at least 24 hours. ), or try to push the boat out at low tide and run 4-5 miles back along the coast to our cabin. I knew I had a smart kid when he opted for the cabin, a comforting boat ride even in virtual blackness. (I could have made soup with my pants for a week. )

Apparently no one caught my drift......

THE consoling 458 W would be NO LESS than Mr. Phil!...

Jerry

Question for Phil.
Do you keep statistics on how many shots it takes to anchor a brown bear?
It would be interesting to know if caliber made any difference. If the hunter was flinching it actually might make it worse to use the big rifle.
Years ago I had two businessmen who were customers in the gunshop I worked for. One used a 375 H&H
and the other used a 458 Magnum.
They were after elephants.
They told me that the elephant shot with the 375 died a lot faster than the elephant who was shot seven or eight times with the .458.
The owner had a huge black and blue mark on his shoulder.

Nothing helps the movement of a morning constitution quite like waking up and finding grizz tracks down a streambed, circled around your tent, and then on down the streambed.....

We woke one morning on the Big Salmon River, and saw exactly that, only it was three tents. The bear walked past all three tents, right through our cooking area, past two grub boxes, and kept right on going.

Three couples, and none of us heard a thing. Probably good that no one did, as there was nary a 7mm Mag in camp!

Ted

Ted -

Please ignore what I posted and have deleted. I made 2 mistakes in reading your post and responding.
I'm sorry for MY misunderstanding.

Jerry

do you remember the porcupine that i took for a grizzly cub playing with the pans around the camp on Sandie river.... luckily for us i did not have a 7mm mag lol .... still not by the way ...

This thread has inspired me to commission a porcupine stopping rifle. Not just a rifle that will "work" mind you, but one which will turn a charge. Of course it will be chambered in the classic porky stomper, the 7mm Remington Magnum.

Stainless synthetic or classic wood, what say you?

I would use whichever is more resistant to scratches from flying quills.

Perhaps a compromise should be considered with what would work best for stopping hoop snakes that are rolling forward in attack as well.

A Colorado outfitter once told me to bring 140 BT's for my 7 Rem Mag.

He said mid day, when things got slow, they'd glass the tops of the oak brush jungles for porcupines and shoot them. Th fast opening BT's made the quills fly higher.

No problem at all, Jerry.

When I am in Little Rock this August, you can drive up and we'll sort it out over a burger and a coke.

Ted

5sdad,

I was suggesting that shooting a porky with a 7 mag might result in the secondary ballistic effect of flying quills!

Either will work. Just hang a Ruby Eye Wiggler off the front sling swivel to keep their attention, and you will be fine.



Important that the hook be barbless and not too sharp.

Ted

Ah, I thought that you were poking with a stick the hoary old tale of porcupines throwing their quills and thought that I'd add to the jocularity with another bit of false folklore. (As to the secondary ballistic effect of flying quills, a study should probably be undertaken concerning the BC among the quills of porcupines from different areas. )

The really dangerous quills would be from African porcupines, as they're several times the size. But since this is a North American thread, no doubt a little less stock would be necessary.

That sounds great and I'd be very happy to meet you. I'd even buy the food.

Thanks

Jerry

My late father in law was a lumberjack and hated porcupines with a fervor.
I Handloaded some 85 gr. NOSLER
Solid base for his .243 pump Remington and he loved seeing the quills raining down. He ignored my advice and used them on deer as well.
Worked on broadside lung shots just fine.

The only thing worse than a bear in camp is a wounded bear in camp!

Plus 2 on willingness to pre-order any AK hunting book by Phil.

It must be uh, amusing, for you AK folks who have seen a dozen brown bears shot to attempt honest answers to posts like these. You are generally a patient lot!

The Magnificent Land continues to fascinate armies of 11-year-olds reading Sports Afield with their flashlights, now grown to men. Myself among them.