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.

Epert opinion piece? or drivel

Well, he got you to post about his article, which will get others to read it. Seems he accomplished his goal.

Yep, their job to stir the pot and help sales. Is he an old boomer?😂

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'd still take a 480 Alaskan for Alaska; and a G21 45 Super for the lower 48.

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.

why not the same for both places...…..bob

Bigger bears, moose etc and you're likely to be further in the boonies.

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.

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

Here ya go guys. Good job Whitworth!

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?

Ouch! No shooting gloves, which you would NOT have in the field. Very good job.

Maybe a few bruises? Cuts?

If they chambered 44mag or greater in a reasonably sized auto - I wouldn't carry a revolver.

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.

Spray 'n pray?

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

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.

Newhall Incident 1970, Miami FBI 1986. The CHP & the FBI probably wouldn't agree with Townsley either.

Excellent video! I would like to try this....Towsley put his money where his mouth was, that was very impressive indeed!. And some nice shooting by all of those guy's 👍....Hb

At least Towsley can in fact shoot. For him carrying a big revolver is viable. The guys in the video all actually did better than I suspect most would. Shooting a hard recoiling revolver quickly isn't easy. Getting off a full cylinder at a charging bear in and of itself would be hard enough. Getting hits on a charging bear isn't going to be easy either. They cover a lot of ground quickly.

My opinion based on actually watching people shoot, and trying to qualify, after "training" for such makes me believe that the average hunter would likely NOT get off more than two shots from a big revolver in the time / distance a bear would give. Hitting what is necessary may be less likely. It takes a LOT of shooting to be able to shoot as well and as quickly as the worst one of the guys in the video. Again, this isn't what most people do.

Two legged vermin hell bent on trouble can cover 7 yards in three seconds pretty easily when motivated. If I had a revolver for self defense against one I'd feel I had a fighting chance. But if I were using either of my typical carry pistols I think I'd likely survive. Mine are automatics.

My biggest gripe I suppose is in recommending a tool that isn't likely to be used well enough, quickly enough. When you consider many of these situations will start with the firearm of choice holstered and the time it will take to draw and acquire a target it looks bleaker still. People don't practice enough to shoot the bigger guns well, and revolvers usually are harder for people to shoot well in DA.

The gun choice itself isn't of hardly any concern to me. If it[i] functions flawlessly, and you can shoot it well[/i], you're far better off than fumbling around and shooting poorly, regardless of caliber.

All this is my opinion of course. I wondered how many people would be on either side of the argument.

I believe it’s a pipe dream to think you’re going to get more than one maybe two shots off on a dedicated charge. So, they had better count and better be sufficient. I would much rather have a .454 than a 10mm...but that’s just me.

For the record, the revolver we used wasn’t ported, Tows key’s was, mitigating muzzle flip considerably. My second run which wasn’t filmed, was a 2.89. All of the other guys in the video acquitted themselves well despite limited experience with heavily recoiling revolvers with a minimum of practice. It only takes good instruction and some quality practice.

Always bought the bring a cannon theory.
Heck it makes sense, and it's the consensus opinion.


Then I started reading Phil Shoemaker.
He always subscribed that no handgun had enough
punch to stop a big bear unless you hit nerve centers.

With that as his premise, once you have enough power
to penetrate, more doesn't matter.

However, you might miss.
And having a gun that allows less recoil and more opportunities
to make that good hit, is advantageous.

Stay and pray.

What a bunch of bull spread by those to justify their choice.

Have yet to see someone who criticized fire power,
choose a single shot for defense from anything.

No such thing as too much power, or too much ammo.

Until, you can't handle it,
Or carry it.

I think the gist of what he said, was that it was still a viable option for alot of folks. I think he is right, based on seeing lots of people try to manipulate semi autos at a gun counter.

I am not sure Shoemaker was being charged but IIRC it seems he was, he shot the bear more than once or twice with his 8 shot 9mm. For me, familiarity with the Glock design might be the difference in hitting something 2-4 times with a 200 hard cast 10mm or triggering one 454 round into the dirt. If your a guy that is familiar with a big bore revolver that’s the one for you, but not for me.

For this discussion to have any merit you have to assume familiarity and competence with whatever firearm is chosen. I get tired of the assumption that no one can shoot heavy recoiling revolvers with a level of competence. Whatever you plan on staking your life on, you had better be damn sure you practice a lot with it.

You’re right, Phil wasn’t being charged and I’m sure if he had been the one being charged in that situation, he would have wanted more in his hands than a 9mm. That doesn’t detract from the fact that he likely saved the life of his client by being cool and capable.

The bear did indeed charge and came fir tha clients. They immediately fell to the ground causing the bear confusion. Phil had no shot for the head, therefore he made body shots into the bears chest cavity.

The bear was between Phil and his clients, with no exits the clients were not endangered by any of the bullets.

https://www.wideopenspaces.com/alaska-man-kills-charging-brown-bear-with-a-9mm-pistol/amp/

Mr. Shoemaker is the man! I think most people would resort to "spray and pray". It would be very hard to concentrate on your front sight in that situation. Charged by a 150# man is a lot different than being charged by a 500# bear, I would think. I've never been in either situation and would like to end my days that way.

Whitworth1's statment "Whatever you plan on staking your life on, you had better be damn sure you practice a lot with it" should be gospel.

Phil said that bear was about 900 pounds

None of us ever want to be in a fight for our lives with man, or beast, on top of us, but never forget, most autos jammed in ribs and out-of-battery will not fire. Not necessarily a proponent for one over the other. Just another wrinkle.

M7

Good point.

I've never been charged by a bear, but if I was, I'd rather have a standard velocity 240 grain .44 Mag. than any 10mm. The old-school 44 Mag. load is weak compared to what a lot of guys here would shoot too. If I had a 10, I'd sure give it a try and I doubt there would be that much difference, but I'd still rather have the 44 Mag. minimum.

They can provide advantage under certain situations. For example, alloy J-frame in ankle carry as backup or powerful caliber with longer barrel for handgun hunting. When pistols first came out the ammo was terrible so many such firearms were notoriously unreliable. This is what they are going back to when they claim revolvers WERE more reliable than pistols.

Two years ago, two friends of mine were fishing in Alaska; the one owning the cabin had a 44 Auto that stayed there.

My other friend was stuck in the water with a huffing, charging bear.

Long story short, dont leave a gun ready to roll at all times in a cabin for a year.

Another thing: some of the very best 44 Mag ammo (primarily the ones with decent bullets) wont function in 44 Mag autos.
Most "bear" bullets for autos are also adapted to function in the gun first, by sacrificing certain bullet characteristics or performance characteristics to do so.

Has anyone actually learned anything from this mess? Who cares what someone carries as long as it is the 9MM whether a semi or a revolver.
Hallelujah it will get the job done and will set you free.
May the farce be with you now and forever more.

Semi-autos for desperadoes with small, malevolent minds.

.44 magnum or .480Ruger revolvers for aggressive bears that want to be rugs.

gun, ammo, holster are easier to debate than skill w/ what you can actually shoot well. As a standard a Bill drill in < 3 seconds from the holster is hard to beat. What Whitworth1 can do w/ a gun does not reflect what I could do w/ the same gun. But I can shoot sub 3 second Bill drills w/ my G19 w/ 147 gr BB hcs on demand from my HPG kit bag. Different realities for different folks.

I now call it the Phil drill.


mike r

Sometimes I drink and sometimes I think - Maybe I was born with a thirst.
Things don't get no better for me - They just go from bad to worse.
- And then doofus come's along . . .

As far as what's best - Revolver vs. Semi-auto? I leave that to the individual.
and his comfort / confidence level. One's always free to change their mind at will as they
progress. No gun, cartridge. or technique is one-size-fits-all.

When our state legalized concealed-carry a friend was sure that I would be the first to obtain a CCL
I was too lazy and didn't want to make the commitment and discipline involved to 'carry' responsibly.
Surprisingly, my friend also didn't want a CCL His excuse was "I don't want to be tied to a gun."
But I know he's always got a loaded handgun 'close'.

A few years later just a valid state drivers license allowed one to legally carry concealed.
So, I do 'carry' but limitedly and carefully when I do. A couple friends also carry that shouldn't.
Both have had guns hit the floor when using a public restroom.

A couple others are responsible, committed, practiced marksman, sane, and responsible.
They're also willing to help and mentor others - for the good of all concerned.

Here is another decent drill. I ran some Bill Drills and this Roundup Drill this past weekend.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=K813qxrd44M

Big Nate I’m replying from your post on P 3.

I have many years experience practicing, shooting, & hunting 44 Mags.
Actually I have more yrs w/the 44 than 357 or 9 mm.

I have left the revolvers knowing their reliable function (normally)
I like the flat sides and ‘smoother’ cycling & higher capacity of the semi autos.
** MY preference.**

I agree with your two BOLD requirements:
A. Flawless Function
B. Shooting it well.

I like both revolvers & semi autos. The semis help in managing (reducing) gun jump
At least that’s MY observation.

In the scenario we are discussing, one should NOT use any handgun that is ABOVE
their capability. duh...

If your life depends on YOU using your weapon ——> use one you are proficient using.
Matters not the aggressor, man or beast.

Jerry

A long time ago In a galaxy far away I was taught “be prepared”. If I was a bear I would be a hell of a lot safer from a nimrod with a 454 he could not shoot and passed a little urine when he got excited, than a glockduffus with a G17 and 17 hard cast opportunities that he shot weekly such that it was second nature.

Wildlife NEVER contemplate those that are proficient in ALL weapons.

I believed (this was many years ago) the gun writer nonsense about absolute reliability of revolvers until my cylinder locked up on a round that had backed out due to recoil. Gunk can get in the way as well.

Revolvers have their place and I have several. But my favorites are semi autos.

I shoot my Glock 20 or Springfield XDM in 10 mm with 220 gr cast bullets more accurately and faster than my revolvers. Plus its easier and faster to go out the door with the 10 and a couple of mags, Than my revolvers. Brown bear will be waking up soon here often in my neighborhood F&G shot 2 last year under a block away. Large population of State Park Bears are an issue.

Link to bear attack right up the road 2018

https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/wil...rty-injured-in-eagle-river-bear-attacks/

You need the Korth, my friend.:-)

But then he would have to change his name to Korthdoofus

i have carried my old 44 mag revolver for many years hunting in bear country,this revolver shoots just fine with Buffalo lead ammo ,ya there might be some better choices now days but i can find 44 mag. ammo very easy most places and i don`t have to buy another pistol, holster or ammo again.i am still old school out hunting or camping so give me a wheel gun in a 44 Mag., its not fancy but the old 44 will still protect my family and me from man or beast in my hands !

In bear country - At least a .44 Magnum.

In beer country - A Saturday Night Special will do.

Took me a while to remember where I'd seen a recent article about this. I had been of the opinion that a .44 or .45LC would be my choice, but realized I didn't shoot big revolvers enough to have confidence in my performance if rushed by a bear. I relegated myself to carrying an auto and a .45 ACP was the biggest of mine. Not the best possibly, but useful, and better for me.

After seeing this debated many times I still felt for me a larger auto would be my best bet. This came up not too long ago on this forum, and during the discussion this article was posted. It confirmed in my eyes that it's more important to have hits with something than to leave it to chance. Here's the article, stating basically that handguns as a whole are effective 96% of the time.

Evvective use of handguns vs. bears

Don't worry, the bear spray proponents will be along momentarily. :-)

How many test firings of bear spray before it's deemed reliable? Do I have to throw it out of an airplane or run it over with a Humvee? If I refill it do I need to retest? Does that cause a feedback loop?

Yeah, a good third of those we see with bear spray (Northern Washington) have the canisters attached to their packs and not in a chest or belt holster!

You chose using a small gun over getting adequate practice to handle a larger one skillfully. That is a creative approach and thought process.

Tom

SheriffJoe: I trust the fellows who own and work at the Ennis, Montana (just north of Yellowstone Park) sport shop completely - and they laughingly relayed this "story/incident" to me about 4 years ago.
Seems a woman was travelling with her two kids from "back east" to Yellowstone Park and had stopped in to their shop to buy one of their lesser expensive cannisters of "bear spray".
Off they go and about an hour later they get a call from the confused woman wanting them to clarify if she was to apply the "bear spray" to her children's skin or to their clothing?
We always chuckle at her naivete/ignorance when we speak of this incident.
Bears are NOT mosquitos - I recommend the 44 Magnum 6" barreled stainless Smith & Wesson Model 629 line.
I saw/came across three different Grizzled Bears in Glacier National Park last September!
They are getting to be way more prevalent of recent than in the past!
Use caution and hot, noisy, heavy bullets.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Glad you you approve.