I rarely jump in these augments but this one by Bryce Towsley really reeks of self righteous B.S.
While I'm nowhere near articulate enough to put into words all that runs through my mind, there is so much to be said about this that it's hard to know where to start. His idea that a revolver is ideal for everything is laughable at best. He makes so many unsupported statements it's hard to read. There have been studies of armed self defense against humans, and of bears. Studies of what was effective, and so on.
While I confess that I have not been charged by a Grizzly, nor a mugger, I also have had a little training. People function in an emergency in much the same way they practice. Some don't function at all. So while I agree a revolver is generally reliable, there really isn't a reason I would feel better suited carrying one for self defense. In fact, even for bears I don't think I'd manage any better with a big revolver than I would with a semi-auto in 10mm or 45ACP. I'd probably do better with my Glock 19 with better placement & more hits than a revolver of either DA or SA.
If situation is such that I can't hide the G19, I usually carry a micro 9. It's easier to conceal than a revolver, and a spare mag makes for a quick reload. To discreetly carry a reload for a revolver you'd likely use a strip, as the bulk of a typical speed-loader would be uncomfortable and harder to hide.
To each their own I suppose but I can't see myself really listening to this writer about anything that isn't reported from a review/range day standpoint.
Well, he got you to post about his article, which will get others to read it. Seems he accomplished his goal.
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice.
Remember the descriptive word expert is a relative term. It is defined by Merriam Webster with a given definition. But , in relativity to the way it is used by many, expert can mean someone that just has a modicum more knowledge than someone else. While many on here have enough knowledge to class themselves as an expert compared to a no nothing, cant shoot person like me doesnt mean they are an expert compared to a real expert. Also many have been elevated to the level EXPERT by others who dont know jack feces but to the ones that dont know jack feces they are experts. Also some EXPERTS have reached that level by careful PR and using the self selling techniques as used by politicians. They politic their way to that level with carefully constructed self rightous, self serving use of the english language. Some can take a modicum of knowledge, and through the spoken word or printed word, and manufacture a personna that will make themselves look like a walking encyclopedia of knowledge on a subject, because they have enough just enough knowledge that they can spin to make their knowledge look legit and magnanimous in volumn. The problem is figureing out who is really legit and who is full of bull fertilizer. Youtube is full of bull hockey slingers as are shooting forums. So all you actually have are "experts" in slinging fecal matter. You have to have the knowledge to seperate the bull slinging, self serving politicing people in life. So one becomes an expert in using the bull hockey meter.
EXPERT noun ex·pert | \ ˈek-ˌspərt \ Definition of expert (Entry 1 of 3) : one with the special skill or knowledge representing mastery of a particular subject expert adjective ex·pert | \ ˈek-ˌspərt , ik-ˈspərt \ Definition of expert (Entry 2 of 3) 1 : having, involving, or displaying special skill or knowledge derived from training or experience 2 obsolete : EXPERIENCED
I AM THE GOOD FRIEND OF RENEGADE50. HE MENTORS ME. HE PUNISHES ME WHEN I AM WRONG. HE CALLS ME OUT WHEN I AM LYING. HE CARES GREATLY ABOUT ME.
He said the wheel gun is still a viable choice. Seven of his top ten were semi-autos. Don’t quite understand the outrage. Also, I know Towsley and he’s a pretty knowledgeable guy. It is an opinion piece and he shared his.
There is absolutely still a place for revolvers. Autos have come a very long way in terms of dependability, but nothing can be more relied upon to go bang when you pull the trigger than a time tested revolver that’s mechanically sound and clean, with ammo you know doesn’t jump its crimp under recoil.
Someone that is very proficient with a revolver might feel they "are" the best choice. And for them, it might be. Otherwise?
15 rounds of 220 grain hard cast @ 1200 from a Glock is a boatload of power & capacity IMO, but what percentage of shooters are really good with it after the first shot or 2. After that, having 12 more might not mater if ya can't control them.
I once could. Can't anymore. Changes, allowances must be suitable to the user.
I'd still take a 480 Alaskan for Alaska; and a G21 45 Super for the lower 48.
why not the same for both places...…..bob
Bigger bears, moose etc and you're likely to be further in the boonies.
not enough to make a difference...….if you are talking back east or in the south.....basically anywhere you don't have grizzles.....then a 357 or pick what you like works.
other than the costal bears.....the grizzles in the western states are on par with Alaska grizzles......moose are pretty much moose...…
not saying your line of thinking is wrong.....just it depends on where you are at...….bob
With quality ammo how likely is a semi auto to fail to function? I’m looking for statistics rather than opinion. Most of the arguments for one side or the other seem to be based on opinions, old ideas and emotion. Is objective data available? What to spec ops people use for life and death situations?
I bow hunt for moose every year in my former home state of Alaska. Where we hunt there are plenty of big grizzlies. When we put a moose on the ground we're hauling loads of meat in our backpacks back to the hilltop where the plane lands. The need for carrying something more than one of my company's recurve bows is clear. I've owned 500 S&W's, a 500 JRH, 475 Linebaughs, currently own a 480 Ruger tricked out for me by Jack Huntington, and various 44mag and 45 Colt revolvers. For decades I have been convinced that big heavy hard cast bullets from a revolver were what was needed. When still a resident of Alaska I killed two coastal brown bears and participated in killing three others (all taken with big-bore rifles). While not a life-long experienced bear hunting guide I do have first-hand experience with what it takes to kill a big bear. I have an appreciation for just how tenaciously those big bears cling to life and how much ground they can cover and how much damage they can do after being mortally wounded by a big rifle.
My current thinking about bear protection pistols has evolved and changed. I take a HUGE amount of comfort from knowing that with good ammo my revolvers will go bang every time I pull the trigger. But in an oh-sh*t close encounter with a bear you have to hope for a critical central nervous system hit with a pistol in order to be the winner instead of the loser. No matter how big the pistol is you must hit the CNS to stop the bear. For my limited and specific needs I find that a big semi-auto is a better choice.
I shoot my 10mm's and my 460 Rowland pistols more accurately and more comfortably than my big revolvers. The semi-autos are easier to control and quicker to get back on target than my big revolvers (with all due respect to professionals like Max I'm just not that good). In a finite amount of stressful trigger pulling time I can put more hard cast lead on target with one of my semi-autos and therefore have a better chance of a critical CNS hit that immediately incapacitates the threat.
If I was hunting big game with a pistol I'd use a big single-action Freedom Arms revolver, but I'm not hunting with a pistol. If I was worried about 2-legged threats I'd use something like a 9mm or one of my 10mm's with anti-personnel pills. But if I have to get a critical CNS hit on a large grizzly under extreme circumstances I have decided that either a 10mm or a 460 Rowland shooting heavy hard cast bullets capable of deep penetration are my best option. Nothing against revolvers (I own plenty of them and love them) but for my needs I leave them at home in the safe and carry a semi-auto on the belt of my backpack when chasing moose in big bear country.
In a finite amount of stressful trigger pulling time I can put more hard cast lead on target with one of my semi-autos and therefore have a better chance of a critical CNS hit that immediately incapacitates the threat.
Spray 'n pray?
Forgive me my nonsense, as I also forgive the nonsense of those that think they talk sense. Robert Frost
I'd still take a 480 Alaskan for Alaska; and a G21 45 Super for the lower 48.
I think often of Super-ing my Gen 4 M-21, but dang, 230gr gold dots at 966, 200gr Lehigh penetrators and 230gr fmj-fp's at 1K fps are tough to want to fool with, they're all accurate and run like a freshly oiled sewing machine.
one coastal.....2 interiors.....not an expert by any means.......when i go out here in mt i carry a 10mm 220 hc, hunting around here where i live you are always in bear country.
i used to carry a 454 and 44's......but i feel good with what i carry now...i like the package better.....dan wesson bruin or the silverback......bob
one coastal.....2 interiors.....not an expert by any means.......when i go out here in mt i carry a 10mm 220 hc, hunting around here where i live you are always in bear country.
i used to carry a 454 and 44's......but i feel good with what i carry now...i like the package better.....dan wesson bruin or the silverback......bob
I packed a FA 454 on a Thorofare elk hunt too, that revolver never left my side, grizzlies crawling all over that place, that said, and I remain ignorant about bears and bear guns, but, after seeing that video of an idiot trail hog cut loose on a cow moose from his atv with a Glock 10mm, I believe you're in good shape, he had her down in just a few shots, really surprising.
