If you're packing a handgun for bear protection, is a revolver less reliable than a semi-auto?

Get a bear bodyguard and quit worrying. Let them keep a lookout, while you relax.

So long as it's in good condition, and has been checked out with whatever ammo you're using, a revolver is right up there with a good auto pistol.

The most reliable gun is the gun you are most proficient with. There are two kinds of reliable--whether the gun will break and will the bullet stop the bear. You can buy a firebreathing 500 Mag but if you don't practice and become proficient at shooting DA rapidly, it won't do you any good. We get customers like that all the time, but it normally concerns the Ruger SRH Alaskan. I'm not quite sure how to figure it out. It's not for CCW so in a chest rig/etc., wouldn't you rather have a couple more inches of barrel?

Reliable .. in what way?

First, there's reliability of operation. It's been my experience that revolvers are less touchy about a bit of dust or grime than semi-autos. They are also less affected by technique / stance ... revolvers don't fail to operate if you limp-wrist them because you're having to shoot from an awkward position. Semi-autos do to varying degrees.

Second, there's reliability of "punch". Up to 10mm level, you can get about the same "punch" out of revolver or semi-auto with roughly the same gun weight. Beyond that, revolvers keep going up with about the same platform weight, low 40s to low 50s ounces (minus the scandium S&W who do that job at around 25 ounces for full throttle .44 magnum) but to get more power than 10mm in a semi-auto generally takes a big step up in gun weight .. Desert Eagle, LAR Grizzly if you can find one, etc. These are roughly the same weight as the big X frame S&W and, though more powerful than the .44, are nowhere near in the game with a .460 or .500 S&W.

I give the edge to revolvers in both ways. The only way to level the playing field is to shoot a less powerful cartridge more times from a semi-auto.

Tom

No.

Hmmmm, I would say that revolvers are more touchy about dirt and grime. Sure doesn't take much to stop the cylinder rotating.

But you're right about the other areas you mentioned.

The one person I've talked to who actually was attacked by a sow grizzly, ended the encounter with 5 quick shots from his 329pd - I'm pretty sure 1 or more were contact shots because he had hair stuck in the front sight. I know a Glock will go out of battery if you push the muzzle against something.

I'm the contrarian here I think - I believe that revolvers are less reliable in general.

Not in the least. A revolver has never failed for me even not cleaned for 5 years. Semis can fail to feed or stovepipe. Then most have little power to stop a bear. Some will tell you a .380 will but the net is a dream world. Mix pepper with powder for seasoning with a toy. The very least is a .44 mag with a heavy LNGC and the .475 or .500 is better. Hit a bear in the mouth and the bullet will remove the tail.

i may own bigger revolvers than my 44 mag. revolver with a 4 inch barrel but its so much easier to carry than my big revolvers and my 4 inch barrel 44 will still get the job done . no way is semi-automatic as reliable as a good revolver ,but all pistol need some care .

The move to a semi was more shots instead of one good shot. Your pistol has 17 or 19 rounds that sting a bear. Just makes him madder. No way on earth you expend 17 rounds before dead. All if you hit can fail too. Pepper spray is to use on you so the bear eats better.
Eskimos favor a .22 to kill polar bears---OOOPs the .222 is a favorite for head shots. Much different then a face to face encounter.

No.

Anyone feel the need to run 200-500 rounds through a revolver with their carry ammo to verify function?

Damn good point.

Nope. Six rounds is enough.

I have had revolvers choke before. A tight barrel cylinder gap gummed with powder fouling tied up cylinder rotation, another gun had the extractor rod back out and did the same. Those are not easily remedied in the field. That's not tap, rack, bang quickly fixable. Of course those stoppages were the result of high volume shooting. I wouldn't go trekking around bad guy country after firing 500 rounds of old school Unique dirty handloads without cleaning the revolver. But there are other ways for revolvers to choke, they aren't foolproof entirely.

Revolvers are more reliable than semi autos in general.
Semi Autos are easier to replace parts in when something is broken, in general.

A Revolver would be my choice by far...IMO its not even close...Hb

Despite all being "45 Auto", only the wheelgun can eat all five....in any order.

Revolvers are by far the best option against bears. And I would go single action before a double action revolver.

Example of one: no, actually the opposite....

Most guns of any kind are about as reliable as the operator.

i had a friend of mine some years ago take a renewal class for ccw, and the instructor was making the claim semi auto's were more reliable.

no one, i clean my guns regularly so there was no cyclinder gap issue ever.
i did have once, in the last 50 years, have an extractor rod back out, that's one time.
i did have once, an issue where i didn't set the primers deep enough preventing the cyclinder from turning, one time.
you can have stuff get under the star wheel, if you don't clean the revolvers.
I don't throw any of my guns in the mud so dirt and stuff is not an issue on any of them.
you don't have to do any of those fancy tap and rack drills with a revolver.
i am still shooting a couple or more handguns that are well over 100 years old. still work too.

I'm having difficulty imagining that shot angle. How close were you?

Why would you go 5 years without cleaning your gun?

And if I'm carrying Apex Predator Insurance, I want the policy to include function with the barrel jammed hard up against the animal.

Amen to that sentiment.

I wouldn't say less reliable, but when a revolver locks up on you, it ain't gonna be cured with a slide rack.

Because he hasn't shot it in 5 years...

we have no shortage of experts that have never been attacked by a bear giving expert testimony on the subject. Shrapnel's comments of yore as I paraphrase "6 shots triggered into the ground" etc etc. because you don't like to shoot your titanium 44 magnum you don't practice with your titanium 44 magnum and you can't hit s-hit with your titanium 44 magnum. Reliable means that you can count on something to work for you.

Yep, I’ve had revolver stoppages 1) from extractor backing out (much less likely in anything like a modern, high quality, revolver, though), 2) from buildup of grime, 3) from mechanical issues, 4) from bullets pulling under recoil (even light .38 Special loads in an all steel K Frame) and stopping cylinder rotation. That’s why I specified a revolver that’s in good condition with quality ammo you already checked function with.

It largely depends on how you define reliable. A good, high quality, clean, revolver can certainly reliably cycle a wider variety of bullets within its caliber designation than an auto pistol.

Any handgun I carry is clean and checked over. I had my first 629's cylinder start binding and the problem was carbon and powder residue between the cylinder and the crane. Now I remove the crane and cylinder to clean and lube that area. There's more than one good reason to carry a clean gun.

On revolvers that are used often I do that once every couple years, maybe. They get nuked by the air compressor in the garage after most uses. It's a real time saver.

No,not unless you're carrying handloads that weren't crimped adequately. Otherwise, a revolver is considered more reliable than a semi-auto with all it's moving parts.
.

Most semi-autos have fewer parts.

Wait, are we talking 1911?

I have had numerous semiauto pistols jam and have never had a revolver with factory ammo jam or fail to function that I remember.

Since I'm not in the Cop business, and I'm not a mall ninja who carries (6) 33rnd magazines for his Glock 26 and practices one-handed reloads using his butt cheeks, I have a different notion to what "reliable" means.

Part of "reliable" is whether or not I can get my firearm working again with the tools I have on hand. Another part of "reliable" is whether or not I can control the failure mechanisms - or whether they just happen at random.

I can:

• Take my glock or 1911 apart without tools to clean it up.
• Test my ammo out ahead of time to avoid crimp-jump.
• Know what the bad-word I'm doing when reloading so that I don't get a squib (standard primers won't shove the bullet in so far).
• Take care of my firearm knowing that I might need it to save my life.

I can't:

• I can't get to the internals on a revolver without a screwdriver.
• A squib will tie up a revolver and shut down a semi-auto - no solution other than pound out the stuck bullet (very hard to do with a stick)
• Deal with an extractor that decides to break, or any other critical part breakage. This is where user history matters (P365 owners understand this).

I still believe that a revolver is mechanically less reliable than a semi-auto. However, after reading about the hunting guide who was killed because the magazine dropped from his G20, and his client couldn't find it and didn't know how to run the G20 anyway - I like the simplicity of a revolver.

https://trib.com/outdoors/wyoming-o...5913d2a-4889-5fa9-89d8-e44562b06717.html

Heavy loads with heavy recoil can and do at times jump crimp and tie up revolvers with the very best of crimps. The 454 is famous for it.

Those S&W Titanium 44 mags are real bad about doing that. Mine would do it nearly every time with heavy loads.
I sold it and went back to carrying my Glock 20 10mm with the Buffalo Bore 220 hardcast load when bow hunting in the lower 48 in bear country. It’s never failed to feed once with that load.

65,000 psi out of a semi-auto and a jumped crimp will be the least of your problems - more like a jumped slide. The combination of gun weight and recoil that leads to a jumped crimp has nothing to due with the mechanical reliability of a revolver, yet it is beyond the mechanical capabilities of a semi-auto.

Show me a 12-oz. semi-auto that can handle something along the lines of a .357 Mag.

Bullshiza! Why don't you post your bs elsewhere. Anybody with a working brain knows how to avoid crimp jump.

Glock 32 or 31 Model in 357 Sig caliber handles .357 mag ballistics just fine. It may not be 12 ounces, but it easily carries 16 rounds.

The gun weight is the whole fricken' point.

You likely don't shoot a lot of revolvers.

Not wanting to practice with a titanium 44 magnum, a 35 ounce 357 magnum with the 180 grain BB load makes more sense to me than the glock 20 for penetration, hit-ability, lethality while not wanting to agree with DLA putting the muzzle against anything that breaths God's air and pulling the trigger will totally ruin anythings day despite its size a lot of gas goes behind the bullet. Wish dumbass colt had put adjustable sights on their 2019 king cobra, that thing is only 28 ounces.

If the revolver is not American, semi allday, everyday.
Most foreign revolvers are either junk, or underpowered.

I have seen quite a few Ruger single actions tied up by the
Plunger dingus in the hammer.
All were newer guns that the owner shouldnt have needed to
clean internally yet. Some cleaning and lube, they were fine.

For some of us, that probably wouldn't have happened.
But, it did.


These arguments are fun, and informative.
In a, "never thought of that" way.

Honestly, anyone who thinks they have the definitive answer,
shows a lack of understanding, and/or the ability to learn.

You have to pick your needs and concerns, then use the best one for those criteria.


If I want to carry a gun when I'm running a saw, Glock x3.
A revolver would be a terrible choice, even in a flap holster.
Most plastic semis can be field stripped, and blown out in seconds.

Just one case of matching a tool to a job.

Best line in this thread....


ETA: Except maybe I would switch "ability" with "desire"

As somebody already pointed out, probably nobody who's posted to so far have ever shot a charging bear with a handgun (or maybe even a rifle).

Even a .500 S&W isn't a "stopping" cartridge on big bears.

The one guy I know who killed a close-range, charging 9-foot brown bear with a handgun used 7-shot 9mm S&W auto. He said he'd had preferred his S&W Mountain Gun .44 Magnum, but the 9mm was what he had on him during a fishing trip. (Google Phil Shoemaker., 9mm, brown bear....)

Phils killed a number of charging brown bear with rifles, and would much rather have one of his .30-06's than ANY handgun.

Not a 9 foot, rather a 7 footer in 1988 with a 475 Linebaugh outside of Kotzbu Alaska. One shot.

Where did you hit him?

Rib cage toward the off shoulder

A friend of mine just last summer had a grumpy bear experience while salmon fishing in Alaska with his brother and another friend of ours.

Maybe I can get him to join and post his experience.

Let's just say he's not a fan of at least one particular auto (which fortunately, eventually DID fire)....

No he didn't get mauled, nor did the bear require being harmed. I do know he wished he had his OWN handgun.

Was he charging you? Did he go down or change course and then go down?

Well if you put the muzzle of a Glock against anything it probably wont go off if the gun is held at any kind of an angle hard enough to take the gun out of battery.

My G26 will go out off battery IF the muzzle is at a particular angle with the trigger doing nothing.MAKE SURE THE PISTOL IS UNLOADED IF YOU DECIDE TO TRY THIS FOR YOURSELF !!
However unless it is held just at the particular angle it will stay in battery and would have fired MOST of the time.

On the other hand my Glock 21 with an extended 6 inch 10mm barrel installed will come out of battery rather easily when the muzzle of the barrel comes in contact with something.
.
MAKE SURE THE PISTOL IS UNLOADED IF YOU DECIDE TO TRY THIS FOR YOURSELF !!!!!!!!!!!!

My earlier comment, regarding contact shots against predators, was not made with any concern about a semiauto failing to fire because it was out-of-battery. It was related to blood, fat and hair blowing back and preventing the slide from returning to battery and/or the close quarters interfering with ejection.

I am acquainted with a deputy sheriff that got into a dust up with three drunk rednecks on a rural forest service road. The three bad guys were aware they had the advantage over the deputy both in numbers and location. The three drunks decided to beat hell out of the deputy and had him on his back in the gravel ditch running along side the forest service road with all three kicking the crap out of the deputy. At some point one of the bad guys was sitting on the deputies chest and smashing him in the face repeatedly. Somehow the deputy got his Glock 22 out and around front and shot the bad guy at a long angle upward through the chest. That was a fight stopper. However the gun was close to the deputies chest and when the slide went rearward it impacted the deputies chest and failed to clear the fired case - jam. Evidently the killing of their friend sobered the other two [bleep] up immediately. They helped pull the deputy out from under the now dead drunk on top of him and helped set the deputy up against his car where he could breath and communicate on his radio. The remaining drunks went over and sat down by their vehicle and the deputy covered them until help finally arrived about 30 minutes later. Only later after other officers arrived did they realize the deputies G22 was still jammed. In the thrty something minutes waiting for back up the deputy held the bad guys at gunpoint with a jammed gun and didn't realize it.

I'm with IB on that. I've carried a revolver for over 40 years for bears, and don't plan on changing.

I'm with IB on that. I've carried a revolver for over 40 years for bears, and don't plan on changing.

Amen +2

If you read my post, I advocate for the 357 wheel gun. I am well aware that being out of battery prevents firing in an auto, why it even works with the 1911, until it doesn’t. Having known a man whose father shot his hand demonstrating it would not go off.

Wow! Almost won the Darwin Award.

Thank God he wasn't picking his nose at the same time.

If you're close enough for a semi to be out of battery, you're close enough for hide, hair, or clothing to get between the hammer and firing pin or prevent the cylinder from rotating on a revolver. Pick your poison.


I've had more revolvers fail to function than semi's over the last 40 years. I'll take my G20 or G29 loaded with heavy hardcast bullets over any revolver ever made. The militaries of the world proved over 100 years ago that semi's were more reliable in field conditions than revolvers. Kept reasonably clean and stored in a nightstand a revolver will most likely work perfectly for 1 cylinder full every time. After that the odds tip fast toward semi's.

Fellow I’ve met a couple times, and a friend of Sitka deer’s.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.adn.com/alaska-news/article/twig-snap-alerts-dog-walker-charging-grizzly/2009/08/14/%3foutputType=amp-type

It was Aug. 2, a little after 11 a.m., when he headed down Dirks Lake Road, a quarter-mile from his home, taking three dogs for some exercise in preparation for hunting season. Brush talked to his animals as they walked past homes on one- to five-acre lots.

The slightest noise -- a twig snapping -- prompted Brush to glance over his shoulder. Less than 20 yards away, a brown bear was charging, "ears back, head low and motorin' full speed.

"Came with zero warning," Brush said. "No woof, no popping of the teeth, no standing up, nothing like what you think."

Brush said he wears a pistol on his walks because bears have chased his dogs in the past.

He drew a Ruger .454 Casull revolver. There was no time to aim, barely time to squeeze the trigger. He's not sure whether he got off two shots or three, but one proved fatal.

And then he orgasmed and woke up.

Old enough to not hotlink. C&P for full story.

no one here has killed a bear but JWP, and he did not indicate that it was charging. However we have all expertly decided on our favorite caliber-gun as the only choice that makes any sense. I tell you what I don't know about the rest of you, but the butt pucker factor of something close and ready to kill you moving rapidly in our direction would make lesser men than we have posting here on the fire, miss a shot, piss their pants, poop their pants, shoot into the ground or over the target. I just have to wonder if someone who has fired their 454 about 20 times at a target would be able to whip that sucker out and administer a surgically placed kill shot right to the body without pooping their pants? Realistically your probably p-hucked if the animal is on you despite what magic handgun your have in your possession. And a Kanowing my piss poor limitations, I would say I could probably make a a lot of hits with a 9mm a few hits with a G20, or a 357 magnum revolver, maybe 1 or 2 with a 44 magnum and maybe none with a 475 Limburger cheese. We all love to talk about stuff we have no clue about and about none of us has ever faced anything where we had to make a split second decision and that decision made us either live or die...well once I did....I thought Shrapnel was full of chit when we had this same discussion in one of the last 50 times we have discussed it, but he is right, your better off hitting the animal with a reasonably powerful penetrative bullet that you personally can shoot well and handle proficiently than missing 2-3 times with something you cannot shoot. I rest my case.

Many of us have killed bear with a handgun - just not brown bear. Don’t push your limitations on anyone else. I have faced pissed off bovines and I would imagine it’s no less unsettling. Jimmy, you have a lot of hard-nosed opinions on handgun performance but I’m not sure you’ve used handguns on a lot of game.

let me add you to the list Max, you and JWP have shot a lot of animals with a handgun. Have you ever been charged at close range by a big bear? I watched your bovine video nice shooting, I have no doubts that ice water runs through your veins. OTOH, it appears to me that many who have posted about this gun or that have not been charged at close range by an animal that wants to kill you, nor have I but for a large pit bull. I have no designs that I would be able to handle a situation like this, but I do believe that having a gun that I am proficient with might be better than having something I read about on the fire that I thought I needed to have. Just sayin is all.

I just see you making lots of declarations. I nearly got run down by a Watusi someone else shot a number of years ago that reanimated. I was nearly on top of it when it took offense to my presence and I had to put it down before it turned me into a grease stain on the ground. I’ve had a number of run ins with water buffalo as well and they typically double the weight of a brown bear. So, speak for yourself. It’s not theory for me. I take this topic rather seriously.

as I said, you have ice water running through your veins, I and most others do not, but like to think they do. I believe I am speaking for myself.

Ice water is a decision that is a consequence of training proficiency and mindset. Not something you are born with.

well I will wait until we start a 51st bear thread before adding more fuel to the fire, and yet I wonder how many shoot and are proficient with a large bore revolver except Max, JWP and a few other? Me I would be better off with a smaller caliber, at least the animal would have a hole or two in it.

I am kinda stunned by some of the talk of big bores and proficiency My 3 eldest kids are very very proficient and one being a 96lb daughter shoots a 480 very well and shoots my 454 srh with the same loads ive used on cape buff, waterbuff and the like. My 11 year old shot deer last year with a 41 mag and mid range 454 loads. Not sure why this is a hard thing to do. It just requires a little will and proper practice.

Why would anyone care? Especially since this thread was about revolver vs semi-auto reliability.

Do you have some sort of hero worship fetish? I see you bringing this sort of stuff up a lot.

I would go with a wheel gun for bear defense IF I didn't want to carry a rifle or shotgun. 44 Mag and above if the bear you are wanting to defend yourself from is a Mountain Grizzly or Coastal Brown Bear. For black bear I'd still want a wheel gun .357 mag or above. In almost all scenarios you are better off using bear spray. Scenarios where you would be better off with a gun: the bear is trying to get in your tent. In that case he's in predator mode and you need to fight back with whatever you have handy. He's wounded. You blundered into his kill, he blundered into your kill. I've been in close proximity to bears many times and have never had a problem. I was bow hunting in New Mexico once, set up on a small meadow, and a huge Cinnamon appeared 30 feet to my left, I didn't even hear it until the last second. He turned my way, and not wanting him to get any closer, I stepped forward so he could see me better. He hauled ass. After an underwear check I was good to go.
From the national wildlife service:
The question is not one of marksmanship or clear thinking in the face of a growling bear, for even a skilled
marksman with steady nerves may have a slim chance of deterring a bear attack with a gun. Law
enforcement agents for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have experience that supports this reality --
based on their investigations of human-bear encounters since 1992, persons encountering grizzlies and
defending themselves with firearms suffer injury about 50% of the time. During the same period, persons
defending themselves with pepper spray escaped injury most of the time, and those that were injured
experienced shorter duration attacks and less severe injuries. Canadian bear biologist Dr. Stephen Herrero
reached similar conclusions based on his own research -- a person’s chance of incurring serious injury from
a charging grizzly doubles when bullets are fired versus when bear spray is used.
Here we go....

Of course if you want to use bear protection as an excuse to buy a new pistol or revolver, that's different. They're both great!

Have you insomuch ever shot a deer with a handgun?

Seriously...

you seem to care or you would not have quoted me. Thank you.

Yes, inquiring minds want to know....

I noticed he skipped the question. Last time I pressed Jimmy he came up with a rather vague answer.

My guess is no.

This from the guy that thinks the .45-70 is inferior to the .30-30.

Herrero's work is tainted by bias and bad methodology. And since when does "investigation" equal "experience"?

This I agree with completely. I’ve always been skeptical of Herrero’s work.

One spike buck.

Good deal.

Gun, bullet?

Any other particulars?

If I deem a semi-auto reliable enough to go up against any bad thing a city conceivably has to offer, I deem it reliable enough to go up against any critter running around in my woods.

Yup, let's hear it.

300 BO pistol at 50 yards using 110 grain Barnes VorTX bullets and a red dot sight using home made bog pod from a ground blind at dusk....it was a semi auto and not a revolver.

Yup. One and the same.

You know, you just might be, but that is YOU. Not me. Not anyone else. Your abilities are YOUR abilities, your limits are YOUR limits. They have zero relevance to the abilities or limits of anyone else on earth. Assuming others share your limits, or shouldn't try because you didn't succeed ... is both foolishness and arrogance. Likewise, assuming everyone else can just because you can ... is both foolishness and arrogance. You have to learn, and live, YOUR limits. Same as I have to learn, and live, MY limits.

For me, I shoot a .44 as well as any other revolver. I don't shoot semi-autos as well on average. There are a couple exceptions but most simply do not fit my hand correctly for accuracy.

That should not attack your .. competence. That's ME. What works for ME. You really ought to worry more about you, about being comfortable with your limits, and focus less about telling others what to do.

Tom

Are you on drugs? Maybe you can’t read.

Who would have guessed that a question about the reliability of mechanical devices would devolve into a dick measuring contest? Absolutely unheard of here on the Fire.

I've owned all sorts of autos and revolvers. Other that 22 LR, I've never had a failure fire from a revolver. Never.

Shooting Colts, Sigs, and CZs I have my share of FTFs and failures to eject. Not many, but it happens.

Revolvers are, in my opinion, FAR more reliable. If 6 shots is all you need, that't the way to go. In fact, giving some thought into dumpjng my autos. I just like revolvers better.

I read pretty well. No, I don't do drugs. Is it necessary to do drugs to comprehend your writing? Would it be ok to just find someone here who does drugs to interpret for me instead?

Tom

Yea, what's this place coming to??

Next thing you know, they'll be arguing 'bout scopes...

I think Phil's experience and opinion pretty much settle that part of the discussion.

I studied under Herrero at the University of Calgary many years ago, and in my opinion is a very good and reputable ethologist. I've read most of his papers and consider them valid.

However: the firearms-vs-pepperspray paper he co-authored that FreeMe refers to was a very sloppy study and, as FM says, was badly flawed. It isn't well-regarded even among wildlife biologists.

where do you read I am imposing my limitations or abilities on you? Is "I Wonder" some secret new slang that says "You are" or "You can't"? Where do you read I am assuming others share my limits? Is "I wonder" a new way of saying "you suck"? As far as your abilities with a 44 magnum, I am sure many can shoot one proficiently knocking thrown aspirins out of the air, on the internet anybody can do anything, however I WONDER how many can shoot a 500 SW, or a 454 Linebaugh, or a 475 Linebaugh "proficiently"?

Is a .454 Linebaugh some new wildcat? :-)

Here's Phil's opinion, just for clarification.

They are both reliable if they are maintained properly. For bear protection neither is adequate IMHO. Buy a shotgun.

For the record a good semi auto is more reliable in my experience.

A correctly loaded big-bore revolver is perfectly adequate in the right hands.

We may have different thoughts on adequate.

A big wheel gun can work...so can a 10mm. I’d not want either in my hands though when it came to sort out a bear. Don’t he me wrong...they beat the hell out of a shirt stick but I’d want a shotgun or rifle. Preferably a shotgun

Can I assume you don't handgun hunt? I have decisively killed animals much larger and tougher than brown bear with revolvers and you're not giving anything up as long as you are capable of shooting them competently.

I disagree on Herrero's body of work on bears. He wrote a thick book, not just a paper, for public use. His first edition was horribly flawed at many levels and he was strongly rebuked for it. Rather than get out of the bear advice business, or write a solid apology on later editions, or even highlight the changes, he simply wrote a new edition with major changes and then another. All editions look pretty much the same. Those reading a first edition and not knowing any better get very bad advice. Those reading later editions tend to support him often without realizing the potential differences in the argument.

Even at that he continues to believe in bear spray and fails to address both the serious shortcomings and the extreme pro-bias from various politicized agencies. Having used bear spray twice under ideal conditions without saving either bear's life I would never, ever trust it in a stand alone way. I believe the average claim of a spray-averted charge was a bluff charge, start to finish.

Having watched more than a few bears die including very big bears I am not uncomfortable carrying modest revolvers in bear country when fishing. I find revolvers more reliable for the first few shots.

My latest personal bear revolver is a titanium 44special at 20 ounces. I suspect I will be more likely to have it if needed. It replaces a 12 ounce Titanium 38+P only because it showed up, not because I think the 38 inadequate.

I agree. Much is said about how "large-boned" bears are, which is completely false. Bears have tough yet quite thin and flexible bones. They have no where near the weight nor hardness of moose, or even caribou bone.

The only question I would have though is how you rate toughness of the bears themselves. It is said that Coleseum fights between brown bears and all other critters were dominated by bears.

Many years ago as Army pilots and flight crews we had to qualify annually with our side arms. Our company had a mix of 1911 45s, Colt and S&W 38s. I was shocked that the 38s always malfunctioned way more than the 1911s. All of the guns were maintained by the company armorers.

I had previously carried a 44 mag as my bear gun but switched to a Glock 10mm after that. The Glock was faster to bring on point and is about as reliable as you can get. And when it comes to energy/knock down power 15 rounds beat 6.

Still, if you are comfortable and familiar with whatever you are carrying it will nearly always be the best choice.