going to AK ...is my 4" 357mag enough as a backup gun?

A strong .357 with a full house 180 or 200 gr hardcast load is bottom rung for bear protection. In reality you are highly unlikely to have a bear problem.

Depends.

Back-up for what, loaded with what, and shot placement.

IMO!................NOPE! Not a 4" 357 mag.

Black bears,,,,yes!......."BIG" BEARS??,,,,Absolutely NOT!!!

A 44 mag imo, would be a bare minimum for the big bears.

Much better back-ups for the big bears are the,,,454 Casull,,,460 S&W,,,500 S&W,,,and if you`re a single action fan, a 45/70 is available from "Magnum Research" along with the above choices from Magnum Research as well. They are BIG!!!

A handier 4" barreled double actioned 500 S&W would be my top pick (I gots one), followed by the S&W one revolver two cartridge combination of the 460 S&W and 454 Casull in the same barrel length.

A 357 for big bears????..........NO! NO! & NO some more!!!!

I wouldn't go buying a handgun for that "just in case" moment you will probably never experience. The way I see it, your 357 is better than nothing and should that moment arrive where you need to use it, it will be at close range. Hit him with the first 5 and if that don't stop him, save the last round for yourself.






J/K of course.

I don't know a lot about Alaska bears. Got a ton of "face time" with Oregon black bears. I'm pretty sure what is inadequate for Oregon bears is even less adequate for Alaska bears. With that in mind ..

I don't consider the .357 mag in any way adequate for black bear protection. When that's all I've had available to carry, I loaded it for 2 legged social situations and approached bear considerations as if I were unarmed. Don't let the puny gun inappropriately influence your "bravery" w.r.t. bears.

I'm not a huge proponent of bear spray, I like lead dispensers instead, but if all I had were a .357 I'd sure as hell pick up some bear spray.

Tom

hmm I have a glock 20 in 10mm how about that?

currently have some 125gr bonded stuff I think it runs about 1525-1550fps ~600ft lbs? Think I have some 158 bonded running 1300fps


in the 20 in 10mm I have the 180gr double taps which are bonded...think those are running 1350fps 728ftlbs

also have the 155gr barnes tac xp all copper stuff like these running at 1400fps 675ft lbs

Take a look at the DblTap 10mm 200 gr WFN GC @1300fps
http://www.doubletapammo.com/php/ca...05&osCsid=jv48g1eul9glsiu4o66e6hulb0
I'm absolutely no bear expert, not even a novice. But I wouldn't feel quite so naked in bear country with a Glock full or those. If a problem arose I'd just shoot him for a while and hope he dies before killin me. Betcha they'd penetrate some.

.................The way you see it, your analogy is a brilliant piece of work!!!.......NOT!!!..................Why risk it!!!

Buying a more powerful handgun for that,,,,"just in case moment",,,,CAN SAVE ONE`S LIFE!!! And is a very cheap price to pay for added insurance against a BIG bear.

It`s those UNEXPECTED just in case moments that can suddenly arise with little to no warning, where being under-gunned can certainly get one either mamed or killed!!!!

Whether it is needed or not, buying a more powerful handgun IS worth the price for added defense on a hunt, especially if hunting alone.

If that's what you got, then it's big enough. Save the last round to shove in his mouth. When you hit the back of his throat, touch 'er off.

well I have no problem buying a bigger gun IF i have to. Doesn't sound like 10mm or 357mag will do the job.

Fisherman killed a brown bear on the Kenai a few years ago with a 9mm. Not my choice at all, but if a 9 will do it, a 357 properly loaded will as well.

A strong 357 will push a 180 gr 1200 fps from a 4" barrel, and that'll penetrate the skull of any bear. As with any gun, you have to make the shot count.

Just remember, 95% of the people who give advice on bear guns have never even seen a grizzly or brown in the wild, under 1% of those giving advice have been uncomfortably close to one in the wild, and 0.00001% have had a DLP event.

Like Ironbender asked "backup for what?" Will you be hunting, fishing, sightseeing, or what? If you will be rifle hunting, why do you need a handgun backup? Even a .30-30 rifle is more powerful than a .357 pistol.

Don't get me wrong, I often carry a pistol while I'm hunting. I currently have two .357 mag pistols and two .44 mag pistols. I have only hunted in Alaska once. It was a DIY caribou hunt some friends and I did on the peninsula, SW of King Salmon. I carried my .44 mag Super Blackhawk. I didn't need it, but I just wanted to carry it.

Years ago, when I lived in NW Montana a friend and I were fishing in the back country. We both carried pistols, he a .357 and I my .44 Ruger. When we stopped for lunch, we decided to do some plinking at saucer sized rocks. His .357 would knock the rocks down, maybe breaking them in half. My .44 mag would shatter the rocks into gravel.

In 34 years of hunting the Montana back country, the only grizzly encounter that I've had was one year near West Yellowstone. We were camped at the end of a road, and we had a moose and two elk hanging in the stock rack in the back of my truck. One night I went outside to check the horses, etc. just before turning in and a 300 lb grizzly 10 yds above me on the bank started to snap his teeth at me. I had the lantern and was carrying my .44 Ruger. I fired one shot in the air over his head. No reaction. I fired another shot into the tree next to him. Again, no reaction. So I picked up a tennis ball sized rock, threw it and hit him. He ran off and we never saw him again.

I've killed a couple of balck bears with pistols. Both were one shot kills, but the bears were not charging. To kill a charging bear, I would want as much firepower as I could get...and you have to be cool enough to shoot it accurately. I guess a .357 would be better than nothing.

And, as you've posted several times Paul, most people don't practice enough handgun to be proficient *enough*, let alone when the teeth are coming at you at 30 MPH!

Almost any rifle is better than almost any handgun.

That said, my wife carries a 357 with Buffalo Bore HC 158s when we are riding. I'd rather she carried something bigger, but she doesn't like anything bigger and would not shoot it as well as the 357.

Placement, bullet, cartridge.

Good advice right there from someone who's been there done that....well stated Kurt.

fishing and sight seeing...backpacking. Guess it would be the only thing I'd be carrying. so good question "back up for what?"

yeah I guess it all comes down to shot placement. With a charging bear. At least with a handgun I would think the only option is to try to get a head shot? Or maybe with a 454 or 500 there would be enough there that a head shot is no longer required?

This is one more thread where the people who don't live here and, in some cases, have never even been here, are busy telling us how we're wrong. It's really pretty funny sometimes, and just silly others.

1200 lb all pissed off starving to death brown bears can't be stopped by .357's shot poorly -- there is no doubt for that. Of course, such bears essentially don't exist... The 10' male bears almost never present a threat to anyone -- it's the 300-400 lb females hanging around the edge of the feeding frenzy in the stream that are dangerous. Of course, if you can't hit it right with a .357 you still can't kill it -- but then you can't with a .458 Magnum rifle either -- if you can't hit it right.

The simple reality is, if you can hit it lethally at close range, you can kill a threatening brown bear with a .357, assuming good, solid bullets for penetration. As noted, they have been killed with even lighter firearms, like the fisherman with the 9mm. The primary issue is not the firearm -- it is the shooter.

And paying attention will go massive dimensions away from bear issues at all, which you tend to understand if you live here, and don't if you don't.

Dennis

Sometimes I think bears, especially big brown ones, are the most stressed and stretched excuse for buying another gun.

I really could give 2 [bleep] if you like my analogy, I didn't write for you. Tell us how many brown and black bear attacks you've experienced. Yeah, that's what I figured, zero, nada, zilch, none. Walking through the wilderness in Alaska being paranoid about bears is no way to experience this great state. Your probably one of those guys that carries a 416 rifle and 500 SW handgun while hunting, THAT makes a lot of sense.

I'm sure there is a reason to carry a handgun and not a rifle but I'll be damned if I know what it is.

Which brings up the question, what caliber of rock do you recommend? Should it be a magnum? Or maybe a +P?

Well stated as usual, Dennis.

The eternal but seldomly asked question is:

How big a cartridge is necessary to make up for a bad hit?

I would say fine for black bear....just put one behind his ear.....and NOT ok for the bigger bears. .44 mag or larger for big bear backup.

If I remember right that guy lucked up and caught the spine and put the bear down.

.........................Even though you didn`t write your viewpoint for me which I realize, it nevertheless doesn`t make your posted viewpoint immune from some healthy criticism, which by your reaction you didn`t seem to handle too well.

I experienced NO bear attacks when in Alaska several years ago on my successful big bear hunt. I didn`t own a 416 back then and don`t own one now. But I do carry a 500 S&W sidearm in big bear country. Carrying a sidearm did and does NOT make me "paranoid", nor did it eliminate or detract in any way from my great Alaskan experience. Nice try, but some wrong assumptions there on your part.

Even though the odds of a big bear attack might be one in maybe several thousand or even several million or whatever the odds may be, I nonetheless take no chances regardless of those very slim odds. Imo, which is contrary to your opinion, that makes alot of sense.

I'll be happy to explain it to you.

Try chopping brush with a machete, cutting firewood with an ax, or casting spinners or flies with a rifle in one hand. Doesn't work. You can sling it on one shoulder but it'll keep falling off. You can sling it across your back but then it's too slow to get to, might as well not have it. You can set it down, but then it'll be some feet away when you need it.

If you're working outdoors, or even recreating other than hunting, you need your hands free or you might as well not be there. A handgun is really the only viable option you've got.

At least, that's how it works out for me.

Tom

If you say so.

If you've got enough time to unholster your pistol, you've got enough time to get that rifle off your back. Doesn't take but a second or 2.

This topic has been beaten to death and all the sound advice offered up by the locals , as per usual, goes unheeded because the so-called, "I hunted Alaska once" experts from outside know better than we Alaskans.

A couple of days in Alaska and they know EVERYTHING, pretty typical of dipshitt Californians

I know approximately as much about stopping bears as I do about getting along with red headed girl friends, but Phil Shoemaker wrote that his daughter sometimes carries a 357 instead of a rifle when guiding fishermen. I think Phil has seen a bear, and may even have shot at one once.

Fred

Can a 357 stop a bear? Sure, but so can a sharp stick if the stars align right. I'm of the opinion that you can't carry enough gun, but then again, I'm just paranoid that way.
After seeing a medium size griz absorb 12 rounds from a combo of 375H@H and 416 Rem, they earned my respect. I've also seen em fall over dead very quickly from one shot from an 06 though.

How about shooting bears that ain't charging with a 357?

If'n I have my druthers, I ain't ever agin shooting a bear with a 357, black bear or brown bear, chargin' or sleeping!

I ain't never been to Alaska, but was charged once by a mother black bear with 2 cubs in New Mexico, of all places. Still here to tell the about it, but that is another story.

I know one thing...I would have felt a whole lot better that day with any 6 pound 30-30 Win carbine than I would have with a 357 in each hand.

Just sayin.

well if a bear is chargin I figure I can maybe get 2 to 3 rds off if I'm lucky. That said...am I THAT much better off with a shoulder shot with the 500sw vs the 357mag or 10mm ? Or at that point am I just fcked?

Define shoulder shot cuzz they tend not to charge sideways. Pard managed 1 shot on a bear that charged him. Lucky he was in an open area, as it started when the bear was 70 yards away.

Forgot to mention it was a 3 legged bear also.

LUCK

uhh inch or two to the right or left ...just missing head lol

yeah I know I know if you don't hit head yer F'd

The 357 Mag is plenty!! You just cock it and shoot yourself just above the right ear. Beats having to watch Ursus Horribilus rip your guts out and crush your stupid skull.

"Never take a knife to a gunfight". Don't use a pellet gun for deer or a 357 for Griz either.

Wayne

I know i don't live in Alaska, but I think that most people take bear defense a little bit too seriously.

wayne, well how about 10mm

Why would you want to? If it aint charging, it's not a DLP and there's no reason to shoot.

I can think of several good reasons to shoot bears that are not charging...

..............Since I appear to be the only one who lives in Calif on this thread, I can only presume that you were referring to me as the typical "dipshit" Californian????..........Btw! There`s only on "t" in dipshit there Mr. Genius!!

This has nothing to do with whether one has only one day of hunting experience in Alaska, two days of hunting time in Alaska or a thousand days of hunting time in Alaska!! Nor does have to do with how many bears one has killed or not killed. This has to do with common sense should that 1 in a million event occur, such as a serious confrontation with a big bear THAT COULD turn very deadly where any split second can make a difference.

Either way you cut it and with some serious practice, a handy short tubed revolver holstered correctly in a good location is quicker than a rifle to get into action should that unexpected surprise ever occur.

No matter how small the odds of a bear attack, I`d much rather be an alive typical "dipshit" Californian rather than a dead (from a bear attack) arrogant Alaskan.

you have 2 time zones on him, please don't keep him up too late....

I would not want to face a grizzly bear with a .357 magnum no matter what type or weight bullet you had in the pistol. Now when a bears button has been punched, it grows in size and becomes more massive to the human eye. I have been up close and personal with a couple of bears in my time and they can absorb a lot of lead, especially if you don't hit the bears "Central Nervous System". Once had a bear charge our group and 7 shots hit that bear in various places but the one to the head dropped it on the spot. It was a bullet from .338 Winchester magnum rifle.

I would not want even a .44mag pistol for bears, it would have to be at least the .454 Cassul in power. If your going to carry that pistol, you best be doing a lot of time at the shooting range as well or carry a jaw of vasoline in your back pocket when the time comes. Bears don't give pistol shooters a second chance.

Good way to make them charge.....laffin!

If you shoot yourself just above the right ear with a 10mm or 40 cal it will either kill you or at least render you unconscious while the bear has his way with you. Either way you won't feel your hide come off in big hunks.

Silly damn thread is getting worse all the time. I give up. If the bear doesn't charge, don't shoot at it. If it does, we'll see how dead you can play whilst Mr. Bruin eats you.

Wayne

When I first moved to AK I bought a 44Mag for bear protection, as that what all the guys in FL said I needed. I can't say I've ever carried it.

Cuzz I know Royce hunted bear with a 357. You do know people hunt, right?

I'd be more inclined to back up my rifle with another rifle.

But [bleep] head to describe you seems to get the point across better than bleep head. I'm thinking you and common sense seldom collide but keep going it's fun to watch.

Course I've seen more bears in a week than you've seen in a lifetime but that obviously don't mean much to the graduates of the Jeff O School of Idiocy.


Waiting for the tirade of being a playboy because you played stinky finger with little Sally Winters in the 4th grade.

I'm thinking anyone who is comfortable staring down the sights of a 357 pointed at a brown bear at close range is someone I can outrun. They would surely have balls the size of grapefruits.

I've seen firsthand what good bullets in a 45 Colt can do to a bear with questionable intent, looking at said critter across revolver sights of the same is hardly comforting. Give me a rifle- at least in a bigger revolver caliber- preferably (though I do sometimes carry a revolver that will deliver a 300-400 grain bullet at sonic speeds or so- and it has been useful.)

.............This is how Mr. Steelhead replies. A superb level of maturity! States alot without stating anything related to the subject!

You been drinking or smoking something perhaps????....... Tirade??,,,,Playboy??,,,,,Sally Winters??,,,,4th grade??,,,,Sticky fingers??....You must be extremely high up on the genetic totem pole with such marvelous comments related to the subject matter!!!

I don`t care if you see bears in your sleep or if you see thousands per day or how how much experience you have. That has nothing to do with anything!! It just means you`ve seen alot of bears!

And if you ever happen to ever get to So. Calif, please, please, please, please, by all means look me up!!! [bleep] is very easy to call someone on a thread who is several thousand miles away. However, in person to someone`s face directly, is quite another matter. We`ll share some tea and crumpets and have a good `ol time!!!

And btw there Steelhead!........Again! Please come to Calif. That`s assuming of course that you can leave your localities located somewhere between Flippant and Glib!!!!!!!!!

AMEN

FWIW:

I never been to AK. But many of the local fishing guides here in Ory-Gun split time in the AK rivers.

The general consensus is that a 375 (H&H or Ruger) is a bear defense weapon.

That being said, most of the Fishing guides carry that thing between their ears for bear protection.

If you placed me in a Defense of Life situation tomorrow, I would use my Remington 870. Because that is what I have trained with and have become most proficient with. It also has pretty good power and can be loaded with 400 grain nosler partition sabot loads:

Good luck.

Oh--If your wife is asking, you need a new gun!!!!

BMT

Cuzz I know Royce hunted bear with a 357. You do know people hunt, right?[/quote]

I just don't know anyone silly enough to go chasing bears with a 357 I guess. I don't think the original poster was asking about it's suitability as a hunting round, instead more of it's suitability as a defensive round.

I've seen first hand what a 357 does to a 3 year old black bear, at a range of 4 feet, lets just say I wasn't impressed with it.

Being one of the .00001 percenter's ,I still don't think I would be qualified to say yeah or nay on your question.

That being said I read some where years ago that a Wild Life Officer I believe in Wyoming was Jared off of a live trap during the release of a Grizzly and he Killed it with a .357.

All Bear charges don't start at 100 yd. across open water and clearings.Some come at 15 feet.

I've seen the video...he shot it from above at about three feet. The .357 worked just fine, because he put the shots into the spine and chest. And was deeply concerned with his situation, being cross-legged over the bear in the back of a pickup... .

I may be slightly biased by living here and everything, but I would be a lot more likely to pay attention to the outlooks of fellow Alaskans than people who live in big cities in highly populated, but brown bear free, states.

Just saying...

Dennis

I don't how this line of reasoning supports his need to BUY ANOTHER GUN!

I think it is a bit amusing that people will justify using a "big rifle" for hunting moose during bear "out" months on the one hand, but think a rather puny revolver might be okay for their defense. (Not saying any individual here fits both criteria, but the two lines of reasoning seem to coexist around here.)

But, I should talk, I just took proper "just in case" medicine (358 Norma) with me on a quick rabbit jaunt. Yes, those Speer or Hornady 250 grain SPs kill our local hares just fine (and I wasn't inadequately armed should I have run into old Ursas.)

Wow, you're even more [bleep] up than originally thought. Pretty impressive.

But I weren't asking the original poster.

This topic again..lol

I ain't qualified to tell you a 357 is good/bad..I guess if the bear was on top of you, it beats a knife.

I've wrote the story before, but one time while hunting bear in Idaho, I had a stare down @ about 15 feet with a sow Griz..my rifle was leaning against a tree out of reach, I was [bleep] basically.After a few seconds, she woofed a few times (she had cubs) and took off, thankfully I wasn't between her and her cubs and she just loped off.

Its a bad situation to be in for sure, I'm not confident I could have stopped her with a handgun if she decided to come..but thats just me and my lack of shooting confidence with them.I'd been better off with bear spray..I keep my rifle close now while glassing!

"...I've seen the video...he shot it from above at about three feet..."

I remember that video some years ago. It was in Montana. Some fast shooting, as you said handshake range. Bad idea to lift the door while standing on the culvert trap, it would seem.

That is the precise reason I often keep a large bore revolver available. I like to carry one when the possibility of that happening seems likely.

Bear and culvert trap
If I remember correctly, that warden had trapped a "black bear". He knew it was a black because there were no grizzlies in the area, and he had released many blacks while standing on the trap. When the door opened, the blacks would scurry away. Well, this time, when he opened the trap, the "black bear" had somehow turned into Mr Long Claws and was somewhat less charitable about his brief incarceration, and was going to give the warden a brief course in constitutional law, as interpeted by grizzly bears. I think the episode took place around the ennis area.
If I have screwd up any or all the facts here (which I am apt to do), please feel free to correct me.

Fred

Might be two different incidents.

The one I know of happened in '87 or '88 in or around Glacier Park, and the guy knew it was a big grizzly. The reason it got filmed was that the annual conference of the Outdoor Writers Association of America was being held in Kalispell, and the bear guys asked if any of the writers would like to watch and film a grizzly being released from a trap. Didn't work out quite like they expected.

By the way, the bullet that killed the bear was the last in the 6-round cylinder. The previous five had all hit the bear in various places, but didn't penetrate anything vital. In fact at least a couple hit the skull and then slid off between skull and hide to end up at the back of the head. The 6th went into the bear's mouth and throat, and broke the spine.

I also heard, however, that the bullets were typically soft 158's, not really designed to get inside a big bear's skull. There are .357 bullets today that will do that job, however.

I was fishing in Alaska in 2008 in an area with LOTS of brown bears. The closest encounter was with a big female that came out behind us on a gravel bar and wasn't happy about it, partly because she'd just been chased downstream by a nitwit woman who was trying to take her photo with a point-and-shoot.

Our guide was a very well-known brown bear outfitter from the Alaska Peninsula. The bear was 15-20 feet away and the guide whispered for us to just stand still. Meanwhile he slowly drew both is big can of bear spray and...his .357 Magnum.

Luckily he didn't have to use either. Since we stod still and didn't threaten her, the sow eventually just turned away and left.

Since this guide has seen LOTS of big bears taken over the years, and is a very savvy gun guy, I would guess that whatever load he had in the .357 had been tested on bear skulls.

And the other side of the deal is that with any handgun, at close range the only real chance you have is to put one in the brain.

Had a situation in Ak with a Black that would not let us alone. Tore up our tent while away, then when we came back with Goat meat and hide, he kept messing with us. Hissing and snapping at around 30yards. We would scare him away-he wouldn't go far-and then he would sneak back and start over. Guide finally said I think you should shoot him. I said we are going to have enough of a problem getting off the mountain without a bear hide to carry.

Got late and we crawled into the torn tent with the Goat hide and left the meat outside. During the night he took the meat.

All worked out well for us, but Chris said if he had it to do over we would of shot him, because now it thinks he can bully people out of their meat and the next group may not be as lucky.

Also a rainy night with a wrecked tent can cause its own problems.

So yes DLP can be justified without a charge.

To the original question. Just me, but in a charge situation it would be hard for me not to want a 12Ga. Not much can take a full load of shot in the face at 30yd and under and not say no mais. What say those with experience?

It didn't work that way for a couple of pheasant hunters here in Montana a few years ago. They jumped a mama grizzly in thick cover and when she charged they shot her in the face with birdshot, at less than 30 yards. She beat up one guy and then disappeared in the brush. Game wardens found her later and she was still alive and plenty pissed off. Luckily the wardens weren't carrying bird guns.

Thanks,

Another semi-original thought that failed when faced with reality.

............Well, come on down to So Calif then and FIX me up!!

so basically if you get charged by a bear a head shot is the ONLY option?

If you want the bear to stop or be incapacitated at the shot, you have to take out the central nerous system, i.e. brain or spine. Shots that will be fatal eventually really aren't much good, as a "dead" bear can be very dangerous.

The reason I say the 357 is up to the task, is only a CNS shot will stop a charging bear, and a heavy hardcast from a .357 will reach the brain or spine just as effectively as a 44, 45, 475 or 500. None of those more powerful handgun rounds placed somewhere are going to stop a bear, they also need to hit the cns.

For hunting, you aren't limited to a cns shot, hence the .357 isn't the best choice.

As a conversation with a former co-worker who sought advice about a bear defense handgun went. Him, what type of handgun do you recomend for bear defense? Me, are you an expert shot with a handgun? Him, no. Me, do you plan to put in the practice to become one? Him, no. Then a handgun will be useless to you, get some pepper spray and don't be stupid in the woods.

It would be my focus at close range, even if all I had was an axe.

db

Shoot them under the chin.........

Most Californians seem to have a touch of Little Man Syndrome...

Here is another prime example.

Bet you don't think a .223 can kill a deer do ya?

Mule Deer
Yea, it could be two different stories... Or it could be that I'm just not getting my money's worth outta that dam medication.

fred

They sure as hell know how everything should be everplace else. Pretty compelling all things considered.

I thought that was Texans !!!!

Some guides I know when inquired by a Texan "sorry all booked up" ... when a Cali-hunter calls "did I mention the sur-charges".

Nah, the belt buckle crowd just lets you know how everything is better where they came from.

..........Words are only words!! But you can join Steelhead and come on out then!!!.........I`ll be happy to show ya both some of that, as you put it,,,,,,,,"lil man syndrome!"..............

And btw, a 223,,,,can kill a deer!! You`d lose on that bet too!!!

Notice that none of us are debating with you about whether you actually know things about firearms and hunting in California?

Worth considering...

Dennis

the real question is can you maintain your composure and make your body respond to your brains comands when you are being charge by 500 or more pounds of brown,and can you put a round in 4in moving circle when you don't know wheter to s--t or go blind

4" is the window of opportunity size? yikes!!

Which is one reason that many people in bear country carry both a handgun AND pepper spray--if for some reason they can't carry a long gun.

One of the more interesting stories from here in Montana took place maybe 10 years ago. A couple of guys were out bowhunting in notorious grizzly country. One guy had a handgun (I believe a .45 Auto) and the other had a big can of pepper spray.

They chanced upon a mama grizzly with cubs and she started acting aggressive. Apparently she didnt actually charge but the guy with the .45 got nervous anyway and started blasting away. He hit her once or twice, neither fatally, and then she did charge, and got him down and started chewing on him.

The other guy ran up with his pepper and sprayed her in the face until she left. Then he got his partner semi-patched up and out to the vehicle and to a hospital.

Well I just read this whole thread, while I don't shoot handguns much I would think a 357 would be a whole lot better than say a rock, Are there better handgun cartridges for the task, yea but the chance of getting into trouble are quite slim. Take the gun if it makes you happy, I rifle or a good properly loaded shotgun is more to my thoughts on the matter, never mind about all the bs you have to go thru to transport a pistol these day. Never mind about exercising a Consitutional right. Or you could just file off the front sight so it will not hurt as much. There is a school of thought on that very subject. Have a great trip.

FWIW -

This always popular topic came up on Kifaru forums some time back. After all the guys with actual experience said "understanding bear behavior is most important", and after all the guys with actual shooting experience said "a rifle is a better choice than a pistol", it still came down to what an adequate handgun caliber might be.

I've always said "the biggest thing you can shoot quickly and accurately". Think about that for a moment... It's easy enough to look at specs and say the minimum acceptable caliber is a .454 or whatever, but can you actually hit anything with your pet hand cannon?

Finally I posted a bear gun challenge. Draw from holster (or however you carry), shoot 2 rounds @ 10 yards, post your times and group size. That may or may not have been a realistic standard, but at least it was a standard. Only a handful of people participated and posted times, but the data was interesting nonetheless.

NOBODY posted pistol times with a bullet heavier than 250 grains that was going faster than 1350fps. That was with a .41 magnum. People posted times with bigger bullets, but at velocities closer to 1000fps. People posted times at higher velocities, but with bullet weights closer to 180. All group sizes were inside of 5".

I'm still waiting for the proponents of the really hot chamberings (like Garrett's 310 grain .44 doing 1325) to post a time and group size. I'm truly curious to see if the guys carrying these monster loads can shoot them with enough speed and accuracy to be of any use.

well I talked to a few bullet makers etc. Consenus seemed to be

1. you want really high sectional density.
2. you dont want a jhp
3. said you probably want 1200fps at least
4. said hardcast flat point probably the best bullet.
5. said you want to get as many shots on target.

so high sectional density

.355" 357mag 147gr =.167, 158 = .179, 180gr = .204, 200gr =.227

.400" 10mm 180gr = .161, 200gr = .179, 220 =.196

.478" 454 casull = 335gr = .209 360gr= .225, 400gr=.250

.530" 500sw 400gr = .203, 500gr .254


based on those #s the 357mag doesn't looks so bad.

forgot to ask them what the difference between hard cast and FMJ was.

could someone tell me please

9mm 147gr lol looks like one could get 1200fps from a full size gun ...maybe that is how the guy killed the grizz with a 9mm!

357sig 147gr 1300fps from full size gun hmm wonder if you could get 1200 from 158gr

357mag 158gr 1400fps 4" , 1300fps from 180gr , 1200fps 200gr

10mm 200gr 1300fps from glock 20, 220gr 1200fps.

based on those #s looks like the 357mag 180gr load is on par with the 10mm 220gr load. almost like the 357 better cuz I can shoot it better. I've shot a 454 casull before and that is an a$$$ load of recoil. I think I could get more shots on target with the 10mm or 357 faster.

...............As some others have, nice try in trying to change or divert onto another subject. Worth considering? I know everything that I need to know about firearms and hunting here in Calif.

But as always, the little digs and blurbs (subject changers) keep on flying that have nothing to do with anything.

Bottom line! When I`m in big bear country, hunting or otherwise, I`m wearing my very handy and fast 4" barreled 500 S&W. Now if some of you don`t wish to wear a sidearm and feel it is totally un-needed, then be my guest!!! It can`t get any simpler than that.

Once again, you cleverly misunderstood everything any of us have tried to get across to you...no big surprise, given that you just don't get it. Or don't want to.

Son, you can carry whatever kind of pistol and rifle you want to, even when you come inside our lines to hunt here. We actually don't care what you like and what you carry -- that has never been the point. But when you've been here a few days once, under guidance of an outfitter and others -- stop thinking you know what to tell people to do here. And certainly don't imply that your knowledge is somehow superior to the experience of people who live here, just because you feel superior to us.

That is all. Do what you want...it's just fine. Just don't keep shooting your mouth off disagreeing with people who have spent vastly more time here than you have. Some of them, I suspect, have spent more time here than you've spent alive...

Carry on to suit yourself, of course...

Dennis

so just how thick is a bear skull...where you need to hit it?

I would diverge a bit from this idea in that, while one should not and cannot count on peripheral shot stopping, the bigger cartridges leave one with better prospects for frame breaking shots beyond a "vital miss" around the head or neck. I better trust and much prefer the idea of using a 300 hardcast or solid-type bullet moving at least 1000 fps. A 400 in a 480 moving the same would also be useful. If that takes out the spine at any point, or the pelvis, great. If all I get is one leg, that buys some time, however momentary it, perhaps, is. Stopping a bear is the ultimate time stopper. But slowing the process is another way to accomplish that outcome. While I prefer a handy carbine for bear duties when I really don't want to kill one, I think many times the now-mid-level big bore handguns get overlooked for the monster-mags. I have no use for a defensive handgun cartridge that blasts a bullet out with pressures required to move it at 1500 fps, give or take. Stout 44 Mag or 45 Colt loads or 480s seem just about ideal to me.

Instead of posting groups and times how about I just post what worked for me. The bear in the left photo came in while I was working the Moose kill in the left of the photo. The weapon is a 475 Linebaugh and that day it was shooting a 390 LBT LFN hard cast at 1350 FPS. It worked to perfection, and yes I can hit with it.

No I did not CNS hit this bear and the big slug did its job well

I don't think people take Bear Defence serious enough,in the past few of years 1 girl mauled while riding her bike on a bike trail,another woman killed while jogging,these around the Anchorage Bowl,plus there has been numerous other encounters with hikers and joggers.

Should that keep us from enjoying what we do, I think not ,as for me I carry something that will put a picture window in one should the need ever arise again.

Fair Winds and following Seas

I have never hunted Alaska but i believe the 357 Mag with a good hard cast bullet would as good as any other handgun, if for no other reason than most people can get off more accurate shots with the 357 than with a big bore magnum such as the 44 mag or 454 max loaded, because accurate hit will be the only one that counts. Single action revolver would be my last choice regardless of cal, because you would have very little time and the double action would give you a edge over the slower action. I still don't believe the 10mm is as good as a full loaded 357 magnum in stopping power. Big bears and handgun just don't go together but i would rather die fighting with a handgun in my hand than a rock or stick. My opinion the 357 magnum would be as good as any other cal in the time span you would have to use it. Bullet choice would be the key to surviving with any handgun .

Here is a story and photo sequence on the grizzly that was killed in 1987 by the Montana game warden with a .357. It worked a lot better than a harsh word, a sharp stick or a rock would have:

http://www.fieldandstream.com/node/1000014248

I had forgotten the whole trap slid right out the back of the truck...

I've never shot a bear although I have encountered one that ran from me while hiking. So I can't say what it takes to effectively stop a bear. I do know that a .357 doesn't always stop a determined man immediately and a fataly wounded man can cause you a lot of damage before he expires. I also believe that a bear is tougher than a man.
So...
If I couldn't hit the vital area of a bear with a gun bigger than a .357, I would practice until I could.

A few years ago a friend of mine flew his family up to Alaska to visit his brother who was a USFW biologist. He is not really a "gun guy" so he asked to borrow a revolver for a float plane trip to a cabin in the bush for a week of fishing without the brother.

He decided a .44 was too much so I sent a .357 with hard cast 158s. Long story short, they were terrorized the whole time by a black bear that hung around. He even broke out a small window that he could get his head in but nothing else.

The guys at the float plane base had made fun of the .357 to the extent that he was afraid to use it. As he described it he could have just walked up to the the bear numerous times when the head was in the window and shot it point blank but he didn't.

Moral of the story is you never know and a .357 is better than nothing.

They were mighty happy when the float plane returned.

I don't trust black bears at all. we don't have any here but I never felt comfortable around them with those little beady eyes.....

Lots of things can happen when you put a hole in a bear. If it doesn't go as you hope, there is still more benefit in creating bigger trauma rather than smaller. There really is no upside to using a 357... unless the alternatives are, as some have said, a rock, a stick, or a knife. I know it has become popular to parade the minimum caliber this and that around the 'fire, perhaps, sometimes, to demonstrate some form of superiority. I've had enough "been there, done that" to suit my tastes. I've also seen enough less than ideal," I wish I had done that better" deals to learn a thing or three. There is no reason to carry a handgun, or any other form of protection, if you are not willing to become proficient. If you can become so "dead-nuts" precise and skilled with a 357 to become proficient enough to stop an ursine threat, imagine how much better armed you would be against big animals with a more power round, often at lesser pressures? Precision on erratically moving targets is hardly a place to play the margins.

Took my S&W 629 44 magnum for bear protection when I went to Alaska. First thing the bush pilot said to me when he saw it was "you might want to file the front sight off of that.". I thought for a second, then asked him if it was because bear charges happened so close. He said "no, it's so it doesn't hurt so much when the bear takes it away from you and shoves it up your azz.". True story... Left it in camp and kept the 30-06 with 200 grainers on me at all times...

..............You sir, cannot interpret or maybe comprehend properly what was posted, especially from me!!! I went back and re-read the entire thread.

First!....Can you please quote "ANYTHING" anyone has been trying to get across to me on this thread that had any good advice or substance that was directed towards me???!!!! I`d like to read it.

Secondly! And what exactly is it, THAT I don`t happen to get or don`t want to, that you in your last post happened to just now additionally throw in???

Thirdly! And what quote can you produce from this thread which was posted by me, where I told anyone what to do??? Hmmm? Where is that one??? Just decided to throw that one in there too???

As far as me "THINKING" that I know what to tell people what to do up there???? Where or how did I ever imply that one on this thread??? Show me that quote too! You just decided to throw that one in there too.

Furthermore, if I choose to have a different viewpoint, I`ll disagree with anyone I choose to, regardless of how much experience they have or don`t have.

The only thing that I have read on this thread regarding more experience than me, was that some have seen many more bears that I have which was their best rebuttal???? So damn what! Experience in seeing alot of bears or the experience in killing alot of bears, has nothing to do with a decision in carrying a seperate sidearm.

Not one time do I read any good advice from anyone on this thread directed "towards" me about carrying a sidearm or not carrying a sidearem in big bear territory. From Steelhead? Nope! Any others? Nope! From you? Nope!

The bottom line is, that what you and some others have clearly demonstrated, is that you "FELT" and interpreted in-correctly, that I was somehow telling people what to do. Btw and again! Please produce that quote or quotes from me and to whom they were directed, where I was telling anyone what to do!!! All I posted were my own viewpoints. And because of those false interpretations, then came along the obvious built-in resentments and the name callings due to the fact that I live in Calif.

Why hell! We can`t let someone from Calif tell us what to do up here IN OUR TERRITORY!!!! Again! Show me my quote where I stated as such!

I happen to be 58 years old. And you are calling me son???!! I also read from you,,,"inside your lines." Do you happen to have a sign on a border somewhere in Alaska that says Mule Deer territory??? I`ll have to watch out for that one!!!

Now when you reply, try to be specific with your answers without adding further additional feelings, lies and suppositions not seen previously on this thread!!! That may be difficult but try real hard!!!

It is a wonder any hunters survive in western and northern Canada without pistols.

I wonder how they do it.

Bruce

My dick is bigger than yours.

It's true. Most of us survive! The chance of Bear attack is low but it would be a very unpleasant way to go. A small number of folks are killed by bears from time to time.

I have all the books I could buy on Bear Attacks (6 on the shelf) and thought about this a fair bit since we started taking the kids on wilderness trips. If it was legal I would take a 44 Mag on my hip. It isn't legal here so Bear Spray is on there instead. In many cases I think it's probably a better solution from a statistical point of view. I have a little Ruger 44 Carbine, a 12.5" 870 Clone 12 Gauge and a 450 Marlin Guide Gun as well. Problem is I don't carry them at all times when outdoors. Maybe I should but even the little Ruger isn't that handy at5 times.

The Bear Spray... I always have. I do suspect some Canadian lads smuggle their hand guns into a shoulder holster and pack anyway. I don't. My only handgun is a WW1 Webley in 455. 270 grain bullet at 600Ft/Sec doesn't inspire as much confidence as the Spray. I'd be delighted to have the choice of a 357 Mag but I don't. I am, not that upset though as with the good statistics on the usefulness of bear spray I wouldn't be surprised if this actually makes us safer in the long run.

This one time in hunting camp.....


The only reason to use a handgun is if you don't have a rifle and there ain't much of a reason to not have a rifle.

does anyone actually know how thick a bear skull is at the 4" circular window of opportunity?

Might have to test this with these guns...maybe using steel. Looks like avg bone density is 1500 kg/m3 and steel is around 8000 kg/m3 so about 5.3x more dense.

an inch of skull would = .18" of steel that doesn't seem right I doubt much of anything could get through that steel. So either my math is off or the skull thickness is less than an inch.

DINGDINGDING!! You are the winner.

That is officially the One Millionth time someone has posted that on an internet hunting discussion board.

Don't know about skull thickness. Do know about steel penetration however. My uncle was a gun master and tested a bunch of rifles on 1 inch steel plate. On a very hard target velocity becomes the determining factor of penetration followed in a distant 2nd place by the area of the projectile.

WW!! confirmed this. The Germans did pretty good work with the high velocity 88, putting holes in Allied Tanks to 1500 meters. The American Sherman low velocity 75 in the mean time was scratching German paint. The 75 was better than the smaller low velocity rounds though.

Bone probably falls between flesh annd steel in hardness and doesn't require the same properties that either steel or flesh has in regards to penetration.

jwp, great pic and story.

I'm curious -- was that a one shot stop? What was the range? How quickly was the bear coming in? Where did you place your shot?

I've got a buddy with a freedom arms .454. I shot a cylinder of 360 grain buffalo bore doing 1425fps out of it. Certainly manageable enough and very accurate. It took a while to get it back on target after each shot though.

Bear skulls are not so very thick, but bone itself is some rather interesting stuff from a ballistic perspective.

I have done quite a bit of testing of various bullets from both rifle and revolver on a variety of bone; also had a few interesting bullet results while hunting where bone was involved. In my experience and opinion, a glancing bullet strike may be one of the most challenging expectations one can place on a bullet. Hitting even thick-walled, heavy bones straight on can "prove" some rather light bullets as adequate.



The bullets in this picture were all shot through the heavy leg bones (in the marrow-filled mid-sections) of a moose at close range. They were full power loads in a 45-70 chambered Ruger #1. The 300 Hornady HP is not generally considered a tough bullet, but it fared quite well.




Bone ends are an entirely different story. This bone end, the joint portion of a moose leg bone, completely stopped a heavy 45 Colt load. It was a 300 standard XTP fired at 1100-1200 fps from a revolver.



These bullets were also shot through the same type of target. (Same test session, same revolver, same loads except bullets.) The single upper bullet is a Sierra 300 JSP. The lefthand column is the 300 XTP Mag; the two to the right are Speer 300 SP, a Uni-Cor (plated/bonded jacket load). Next to those are moderately hard cast 320 grain bullets. The junk on the right are two 300 XTPs- the standard versions- which were not repelled by the bone in their test.



This last image shows two fired bullets from a 358 Winchester, both recovered from the same moose which was shot at over 200 yards, perhaps closer to 300, both at the same distance. On the left is an unfired Hornady 250 SP. The open bullet next to it is the same one, but found in the dead animal. It hit the humerus toward the edge, glanced off, and managed to penetrate the rib cage slightly. The leg bone was intact and perfect. The bullet on the right is a Barnes 225 XFB. The big "tooth mark" in the side is from an apparent bone strike. This bullet hit the spine and slid for a ways along the vertebrae without doing any damage to the bones. I'm not really certain why the animal went down. I know my buddy was prepared to give him some 300 Winchester, but it wasn't necessary. The "failure" was my fault since I chose to shoot when the distance was longer than I should have tried with the little 358. The fat bullet was a dispatch bullet fired from a Colt carbine at close range into the animal's neck. The bullet is the 300 XTP-Mag. A second bullet, a Speer 300 SP, struck the base of the skull and penetrated completely, exiting the lower jaw after breaking the heavy bone there.

By comparison, a bear's skull is not very thick. However, it has all kinds of angles as well as some heavy tissue protecting some areas. I suspect this is why bullets are known to have been deflected. I have seen the skull of at least one bear that had 22 LR bullets lodged against the bone and healed. Breaking a bear's skull with an adequate bullet is probably not the biggest challenge one would face in shooting a bear in self defense. They can move.

FWIW, this is a 12 gauge "good" slug I took out of the shoulder of a bear we had to put down.



No major bones were broken on the broadside shot. The animal loped off and laid down. Two bullets from a Colt Carbine, both 300s moving at close to Casull revolver speeds, striking the shoulder area into the length of the animal, penetrated about three feet and exited out the belly.

old willie and ole joe can tell you they re using a 30/30 rifle in the polar bear areas. i myself use a 300 Savage and never feel undergunned. maybe the new 375 ruger is a new option ....

the natives are using 303 and 7 mm remington mag so im in between ....

I don't think that steel plate is a good indicator of effectiveness. I've shot steel plate with several calibers (the plates were not 1" thick). The steel plate was only dented with a .270 and a 30-06 but a .22-250 blew a hole through the plate. In spite of this, I would rather use the 30-06 for bear than any .22 centerfire.

If I was going back to AK for a visit sometime, I'd carry my 357 with some high velocity 125 grainers.

I've heard they are most useful for stopping the real "bears"--nasty tourists who hate hunter/fishers.

Why worry about 1 in a million bear charges, when the odds of other things are so much higher?

I wear a seat belt when driving, lock the doors to my house, and carry a heavy handgun in the woods. No reason not to take precautions.

454 vs bear from Nitroexpress.com-
http://forums.nitroexpress.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=143596&an=0&page=0#Post143596

If you're limiting your choice to a 357 or nothing, you're infinitely better off packing bear spray. The latter has a high-percentage chance of canceling the "rage factor," while the former is very likely to increase it.

Some food for thought.

Do any of the mentioned pistol cartridges have as much ME as the by today's standards lowly .30-30W? Which I doubt would be ones first choice for a bear stopper.

I didn't look them all up, but the ones I did fall far short. The .357 isn't even close. Just to keep things in perspective.

good point.....

454 is about the same ME.

While I prefer a light 30-30 carbine on the low end of the defensive long guns, I know a good bullet in even a 44 mag or strong 45 Colt will outpenetrate and outbreak bones.

Just as the 17 Remington is better than the 45-70 when shooting holes in steel, a stout, heavy, if slow revolver caliber may be "outgunned" by the lightweight rifles. That doesn't prove anything in terms of on-critter performance. Shooting steel or water jugs is not a good measure of what a bullet will do when contacting fur, flesh and bone.

I will gladly take a 30-30 over a shotgun with ordinary slugs or buckshot.

Since the N-frame smiths are to big for my hands to get proper trigger position for double action shooting I use a L-frame smith with hardcast buffalo bore or Corbon hardcast 200 or 180gr. Hope never have to test the theory but believe it will penatrate to the spine/shoulder bones and do the job. Have been charged twice and almost lost last one. Rifle jammed and bear was 4ft away, luckily had hit it in shoulder and it couldn't get over the creek bank with 3 legs. At time had a 9mm on hip and considered using it but cleared rifle instead, sold 9mm next day.

I've read a couple of posts now that say a 12 guage slug isn't good protection....can someone explain why to me? Just thinking about it it seems like a big heavy slow moving slug would be a good stopper. I can't figure out why not, so hopefully someone will chime in and help educate me.

RC,
Foster type slugs (hollow-base) are not good. They have a thin skirt, are soft lead to conform to even heavily choked shotguns, and are not very accurate.
Brenneke's ARE good. The are like a giant, stabilzed wadcutter travelling at 1200fps or so.
In my experience, they WAY over-penetrate!

Ed

Now, JWP, you've forgotten a few details. That bear ran off after being shot. Your partner even tried to stop it with a .338. That's hardly a non CNS stop with your pet load. E

You are full of BS "E" When I shot that bear all 4 legs went straight out spread eagle style and that was that. I hit in the back of the rib cage the bullet ranging forward to the off shoulder. You were not there and your continued miss representing of the facts is BS



This bear I emptied my 338 win on shooting all five of the 250 grain Parttions

You've shown us that picture of the bear that came to your moose kill many times. So now you say it was going away and then you shot him. Gee, and all of this time I thought you shot him because he was coming head on and threatening you.
So some bears take five shots from a .338 w/ 250 gr. Noslers while a non CNS hit from your custom pistol is all it takes.
If you say so. E

Almost any rifle is better than almost any handgun.

Then again, any handgun is better than a sharp stick!

Have you ever seen a bear sprayed? Having seen two bears sprayed a total of four times I would consider bear spray slightly more than a joke. I personally know more people that had very bad experiences with the crap than I know bear attacks.

You cannot fly with it so there is a very good chance you cannot even use it where you might need it most...
art

Is there a single less meaningful measure of bullet efficacy than ME? I have yet to see one less reliable.

I guess it's just one more attempt at "Hammer of Thor" quantification. All numbers need to be evaluated for what they show vs. what they are intended to show. Some have more value than others.

Re: bear spray: I've never used it, but I've read/heard some are effective while other brands are merely condiment.


A Rem 760 in '06 with 220 gr RN is my handi-carry rifle lately. Maybe I'll sprinkle the ammo with cayenne?

Might lead to a sticky chamber, best to carry the cayenne in your pocket...

This bear,



through the shoulder area, roughly broadside; breaking no major bones...



stopped this "over-penetrator" in the muscle of the offside shoulder. Distance was 30-something yards. I'll leave it to others to decide where it falls on the scale of "poor to adequate to excellent". (Two finishers from a 16" carbine 45 Colt penetrated 30-some inches and exited.)

Klikitarik,

Nice bear!

I was being sarcastic so I put the smiley face after my "overpentrate" comment to point that out. While I have dispatched a number of moose and one healthy black bear with Brenneke slugs, they are NOT my choice of bear medicine.

When I have hunted brown bear I have carried a .338WM loaded with 250gr Partitions.

As pointed out earlier, it beats a sharp stick!

Thanks for sharing the bear pic!

Ed

Wish I could have kept that hide. Hopefully, F&G was able to tan and sell it. It was an awfully nice hide, especially for a July bear. The little bugger simply would not leave, or leave us alone and I was not willing to feed our two-year-old to him so I finally stopped wasting ammo toward him and directed one at him. He was one of those rare examples that simply can't be scared away with a gun.

Unless F&G really messed up the hide, which they usually don't, I bet it brought a nice price at the Fur Rondy auction.
Too bad you didn't get it.
One of the most impressive Grizzly hides I've ever seen came from the Squirrel River drainage. A seven foot, six year old boar taken by a dear friend just after it came out in the Spring of 1994.

Can't blame you for not wanting to feed your two year old to it!

Ed

To the OP, I've never hunted bear (just getting that cleared right off). Teddy Roosevelt took a charging rhino with a .357 magnum, dropping it within feet of himself.

Ingwe swears by the .223 AI for everything under cape buffalo.

I am neither the caliber hunter of TR nor Ingwe. Most of us aren't. Use enough gun!

Shot the biggest gun you can shoot accurately. But then again ego is important and for those of you that this fits use a 17 HMR for all game.

Well friend, I only wish it worked that way with those who think they know all about CA and "most Californians". I can relate to your statement, after spending years on this site having others tell me all I need to know about CA.

That being said, it seems to be the consensus that it takes a well placed pressure (scared chitless) shot on a bear to put it down, can't most get more chances and quicker, to find that sweet spot with a .357 then say a .454?

I'm usually in black bear areas, and CA black bear to boot, and always figured .357 or .44, didn't much matter if I'm going to have to find his head.

Teddy Roosevelt and a .357? Someone might want to Google the history of the .357.

Either that or someone was joking.

Naw. Teddy was shooting the prototype of the .32 Magnum Snookumfutz. Only REAL ballisticians have found this arcane info in one of TR's private letters to Elliot Spitzer.

And a .357 is NOT enough for the black bear I ran into on the Yuba river thirty years ago while backpacking. Six rounds put it on the ground, but the seventh, after reloading, with the muzzle almost in the ear, finally finished the job. This was a small bear, maybe 200 pounds, and looked like she was starving. Perhaps that would account for her abberant behavior.

Terry

yeah but have you ever been fishing in bear country? Oh, nvrmnd


have you ever been out cutting wood in bear country? Oh, nvrmnd


My wife has a 4" 629 with one of the sweetest triggers I've seen or used. In my youth I fancied myself as a bit of a pistolero, competed abit with .357 and shot enough with a .45 to become somewhat proficient with it as well.


true I'd rather have a handgun than nada, but my knockaround gun is a .45/70 GG, it's light and handy. But even with one of my bolt action rifles I can get it into action pdq.

Have only ever been bluff charged twice, and I've spent a fair number of days afield, often with a bloody pack.

Have had a bear drag a cooler off into the thick stuff in Valdez.

Watched a cute little black bear spring onto a picnic table and run off with neighboring campers donuts, while they were sitting at the table. Oh my god did they scramble! lmao over that one.

Have had a bear repeatedly come into camp to steal meat and hides on a oh so long night, guy I was working with lost his voice from screaming at the bear, we shot over it, under it etc. but still kept coming into camp to raid. Hungry bear I guess. Only reason it didn't float is we had a State Trooper as one of our guests and didn't want to put him in a hard spot.

one of the best training exercises I've ever heard of involves a bit of risk.

have a pard, hopefully not a close pard or an ex wife stand behind a big tree and throw an old basketball at you from around 30 ft. away, when he yells fire (hopefully when he's back behind the tree) blow that basketball to kingdom come.....if you can.

I like to carry a rifle, YMMV

The more grizzly's I see the larger firearm I favour. However the firearm needs to be light and handy too so that it's with me. If I could carry a handgun in Canada I'd be ok with a 44 Magnum. In fact I often carry a Ruger Carbine loaded with 250 Partitions. A large part of this faith in the 44 (at long barrel velocities) has been due to a couple of factors:

1) A number of comparative tests on wet-newsprint, water containers, bone and hardwood suggest that the 44 has a pretty good combination of penetration and wound channel.

VS the 12 Gauge Slug...With 250 Nosler partitions, the 44 out penetrates the slug on hard targets, even when using the 1 1/4 oz slugs. The .44 doesn't have the massive wound channel but isn't whistling dixie either. On soft targets matches the penetartion of the slugs.

VS the 12 gauge 000 buckshot. The 44 badly outpenetrates the buck on hard targets. Matches it on soft targets.

Vs the 450 Marlin.... The 44 falls behind a bit in penetration and the 450 creates a similar wound channel to the Slug. It's about 60% of the wound channel the big Marlin when the Marlin is fired from a 16" Barrel. That's not so bad folks.

2) The recoil is controllable by even my seven year old. Fast repeat shots are a piece of cake.

3) The Ruger has never jammed....not once...in hundreds of rounds from 200-250 grain loads.

4) It is 5 pounds light and handy and easy to tote. Fishing I forget it's with me.

A 357 would not have the wound channel that would make me minimally comfortable. Hardcasts might penetrate for a brain shot but the wound channel is very low. My own tests with the 450 and hardcasts show amazing penetration but wound channels less impressive than a heavy bullet 22 Hornet load.

A test from a few years ago....


I also like this one..12.5" barrel and legal in Canada.

Roosevelt was long dead when the .357 was invented.

JW

Well after reading through all this I'll throw out something.

To me, anything considered "dangerous" deserves the best you can handle. Let me say that last part again...THAT YOU CAN HANDLE. I just recently acquired a 500 S&W. It's a lot of fun. I would not, at the moment anyway, take it out for hunting or defense of anything. In my opinion I'm not yet proficient enough with it. Right now I'd carry my .44 Redhawk with 340gr hardcast bullets. I can hit what I aim at with this and could probably get off at least a couple aimed shots if given half a chance. (I'd MUCH rather have my .340 Wby doing the shooting if I could help it)

Is a .357 "enough" for bear? Well, it's a hell of a lot better than fingernails. Would I prefer bigger? Conditionally, yeah. All else being equal (I'm talking shooting proficiency here) you can't go "too" big with an angry bear IMO. Even with rifles ask most any DG guide what caliber you should bring and they'll say something to the effect of "What you can shoot?"

You want something bigger for bear defense? Sounds like a good reason to buy another gun to me. Having said that if you buy a bigger gun but you shoot the .357 better...take the .357 anyway.

JMHO

If you have the opportunity for the precision shot placement that might make a smaller, lighter caliber sufficient, you probably aren't in a seriously threatening situation with a bear, (not that there aren't some other situations where DLP isn't also called for.) But I'd still prefer at least 220 grains on the low end - and preferably more weight- at speeds that deliver the bullet before the critter hears the shot. It's hard not to like a 44 Mag with 270 or weightier non-expanding slugs.

I'm no expert but I'm at the ANC airport trying to make it home. Since we can't take it home we fired off our 'bear spray' today, just for the heck of it. I'm a gun guy through & through but max strength bear spray is nothing to mess with. I think I'd take it over a 357 any day.

Well, neither firearms or spay has had close to 100% effectiveness. I'd rather have something than nothing.

Having watched two bears sprayed with huge quantities of spray, without saving either bear's life... and after careful analysis of exactly which way the wind was blowing... Bear spray is a sad joke and only inclined to make people think they have something real when they do not...

+1 Sitka.

+ again.

Falsely instilled confidence, as always, is false. (I think the lesson there is to make sure you know (from some experience) how it works, and, if possible, how well.)

Trader,

I haven't nor am I going to read through 16 pages of replies; sorry.

But, years ago when on an Alaskan river, salmon fishing, packing a 6" M28 with full house 357 Mag 180 gr loads, I came across some BIG FRIKIN bear tracks. My "little" 357 suddenly felt very small!

Now, when I go up and have a 45 Colt with 335 gr WFN LBT, I feel better.

Alan