Odd (to me) survival question regarding gun choice

[Rothdel]

I have a friend who has the opportunity to go on the trip of a lifetime to the Alaska Bush Country to help build some community buildings (school/churches) for some research teams that will be living way up north for several years.

They will not be hunting but given where they will be the team is being advised to bring some form of portable firearm for wildlife protection.

Here is the odd thing. The organization that puts this group together gave a list of suggested firearms and their primary recommendation is a 10 MM semi auto with the suggestion to purchase and bring common spare parts such as recoil springs and firing pins. They specifically called out the Glock 20 along with what parts to bring back ups of.

I have not see the documentation although I asked for a copy. This seems odd to me as I would have suggested a 44 mag revolver for this kind of work. According to my friend the thought process outlined in the documentation is that a semi auto is easier to work on and fix broken parts than a revolver and where they will be the ability to get to civilization is less than ideal.

I have never thought about a survival situation quite like this before but now that I do it kind of makes sense. Most items on a semi auto are replaceable with limited skill out in the wild. If you break an ejector or crane on a revolver or your timing is out of whack how likely is that to be fixable on your own with limited tools?

I have always assumed revolvers were my preferred survival type firearm and now I'm second guessing. Does the above thought process make sense to all of you? I have far more experience with Revolvers and Semi's.

[Blindstitch]

The chances that either gun is used might be small unless someones poking the bear.

[pax]

More rounds before reloads, too -- and faster reloads should it come to that.

But I like my Glock 10mm in bear country mostly because I carry a Glock 9mm in daily life. My hands know what to do with a Glock.

pax

[TruthTellers]

This is all theoretical stuff. This group is sacrificing the short term reliability of a revolver for the long term sustainability of a pistol, not to mention a loss of power and penetration. 10mm is about the best semi auto cartridge for big game defense, but it doesn't compare to .44 Magnum, hot .45 Colt, .454 Casull, etc.

Let's say you had to repair a gun out in the wild with basic hand tools. Firstly, you're likely to be doing this when you're exposed to extreme cold or heat, you'll be tired, starved, and stressed... your fine motor skills will be greatly diminished. It could be done, but likely won't be successful.

I don't know what torture tests revolvers go through, but so long as they're kept relatively clean, they should last a long time without issues.

[pax]

I'm pretty sure the guys and gals who live and hunt in the Alaskan brush country have a pretty good, non-theoretical understanding of what firearms work well in their environment.

pax

[T. O'Heir]

"...recommendation is a 10 MM semi auto..." Suggestions from people who won't be there? The 10mm is really just a slightly hotter .45. Isn't any more suitable for big game anything. Also the possibility of not being able to find ammo, easily, should it be necessary. Plus it's not a bush survival thing if he's building churches and schools.
In any case, I think Alaska has rules about what calibre and type of firearm is carried to keep Yogi at bay. Of course, the flavour of Yogi living there is a great deal bigger than even the Griz flavour living further south.
According to most of these guys, the right hand gun cartridge for Alaska is a .44 Mag revolver. Lot of 'em suggest bear spray too. http://forums.outdoorsdirectory.com/...gun-for-Alaska
Anyway, unless your buddy is an experienced shooter, he's better off with a short barreled pump shotgun loaded with slugs. And only slugs. Give him a better chance if Yogi is PO'd. Yogi can cover 100 yards in less than 6 seconds. You buddy fast enough? Accurate enough with a hand gun? Can he throw a hammer accurately?

[45_auto]

Originally Posted by truthtellers

Let's say you had to repair a gun out in the wild with basic hand tools. Firstly, you're likely to be doing this when you're exposed to extreme cold or heat, you'll be tired, starved, and stressed... your fine motor skills will be greatly diminished. It could be done, but likely won't be successful.

What makes you think he's likely going to be working on his gun when he's exposed to extreme cold or heat, tired, starved, and stressed?

Good grief, he's going to Alaska with a group to build churches and schools, not repelling Mongol hordes.

If the gun fails during a bear attack repairing it will be the least of his worries.

If he's not under direct attack from a bear, he'll be well-fed and in a warm tent or building replacing parts. My 11 year old granddaughter can strip and replace every single part of a Glock and it will work perfectly. I'm not aware of a single revolver that has the same capability. Every one of them requires some individual fitting of specific parts.

[44 AMP]

A Glock, in any caliber would not be my first choice for a "survival gun".

And, really using the term "survival gun" is misleading, as we generally thing of survival as food & shelter type things, NOT defense. A survival gun is a light caliber pistol/rifle/shotgun for taking small game, to eat.

A "protection" gun is what they are recommending. And, if its protection from humans, there are lots of good choices. Protection from bears? No handgun is the best possible choice, but there are ones that work better than others.

.44 Magnum seems to be the most popular choice, on the internet, anyway. However, unless you are experienced, there is such a thing as too much gun. And an adequate gun for the job by cartridge power is an inadequate gun if it is too much gun for the shooter to use well.

As to what to take to Alaska, consider this line of reasoning...

Back in the early 70s, when my whining little brother finally convinced my parents to get a snowmobile, we wound up buying one from a guy who was moving to Alaska!

That's right, the guy moving to Alaska was selling his snowmobile! He was moving his entire household, and could just as easily have taken it with him (he was taking his truck..) but he decided to sell the snowmobile. and get one up in Alaska, one that he could be certain he could get serviced up there.

The same reasoning might be applied to firearms, as well. Something you know you can get ammo for, and minor repaired locally. Perhaps not a huge concern, but something to consider.

one "camp" I knew (40+ years ago) had the buildings roped together (so you didn't get lost and DIE during white out conditions) and every building had a slug loaded 12ga pump in easy reach of the door, that anyone could grab at need for bear defense.

And, the bears they were worried about weren't grizzly or big brownies, they were concerned about polar bears. And mad moose. (meese??) Though generally moose didn't need to be shot nearly as often as bears....

For Arctic conditions, I would choose a large bore revolver (either totally unlubricated or with proper arctic lube) over any semi auto. Handgun for constant wear, 12ga pump (also unlubed/arctic lube) or a heavy caliber rifle to keep handy in camp, and carry when appropriate. AND a small spare parts kit with tools for both. Firing pins and springs, primarily, as these are the most likely to fail from extreme cold.

[45_auto]

I would think that a weapon carried as defense against polar bears while patrolling the arctic on a dogsled would be acceptable in Alaska.

In military use, the government of Denmark has issued the Glock 20 to the Slædepatruljen Sirius (Sirius Sledge Patrol) headquartered in Daneborg, Northeast Greenland. The pistols are issued as a defense against polar bears which the unit encounters during patrols.

Comprised of two-man sled teams who patrol the wastes of Greenland, this unit carries 10mm Glock 20s to gain additional knockdown power against large polar bears.

Recruitment video is here (you can see the Glock 20 if you look quick!):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCTw6WNx_-4



Pic came from here:

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160...og-sled-patrol

[DukeConnor]

competition shooters routinely got 20,000 rounds out of a model 29. thats alot of bears.

[PACraftsman]

Now I have to admit I skipped a few replies. But I'm thinking one of the big revolvers would be best (and I'm primarily an auto shooter). I'm not sure why the autos would be best in this scenario except as mentioned before were their capacity and rate of fire.

I'd consider maybe taking both, or taking a duplicate revolver instead of just spare parts if it's that dangerous and breakdowns are that common. It is an unique situation for sure.

[agtman]

"...recommendation is a 10 MM semi auto..." Suggestions from people who won't be there? The 10mm is really just a slightly hotter .45.

No it's not. Clearly you know nothing about the ballistic output of the 10mm AUTO.

The .45 would detonate like a hand-grenade if loaded with a 200gn FMJ bullet at 1270fps, or a hardcast FN 220gn at 1200fps. Maybe you were thinking of the .40S&W?

Isn't any more suitable for big game anything.

Because of its terminal energy, the 10mm is listed as a permitted handgun-hunting cartridge for big game (like deer) in many states where the .45 is not allowed.

If all that weren't enough, maybe the folks in question have read something about the Danish mil units called the Sledge Patrol Sirius who patrol certain regions of the Artic Circle. They're issued 10mm Glock 20s loaded "heavy & hot" for emergency self-defense against aggressive polar bears when a rifle isn't within reach.

[Sarge]

Let's bring this back to earth... a lot is going to depend on the training, skill, experience and recoil tolerance of each individual making the trip- as well as their commitment to safely mastering a powerful, point-bang semiauto.

You could do a lot worse than a G20 but ammunition selection will be critical. It will need heavy cast or FMJ ammo to give the necessary penetration- adequate at best.

If there's a serious handgunner or two in the crew, a double-action 44, (heavy) 45 Colt, 454 or 480 is a better hammer. And personally, I'd feel a lot better if somebody had a reliable 6-8 shot 12 gauge loaded with Brennekes or a Marlin Guide with suitable bear loads.

[agtman]

* * * And personally, I'd feel a lot better if somebody had a reliable 6-8 shot 12 gauge loaded with Brennekes or a Marlin Guide with suitable bear loads.

Right, but only if you have that 12ga shotty or Marlon in your hands when Mr. Bruin suddenly appears.

The OP's post makes it sound like his friend's hands will be occupied doing construction-type tasks, and thus it's likely that any long gun when needed for bear defense will be waaay over there, or back in the cabin, or in the truck.

A Glock 20, or even a 5-shot boat-anchor magnum revolver, can be worn in an OWB holster of some sort, or as Alaskan guides seem to prefer, in a center-chest holster. So it's right there, right now.

[tipoc]

The Glock in 10mm is a good suggestion. It's easy to fire fast and accurately. It's easy to care for.

The number of people who can shoot the 44 Mag or heavy loads of the 45 Colt from a revolver fast and accurately enough for defense against bears, or people, is extremely limited in my experience.

tipoc

[Reloadron]

My love affair with the 10mm began and ended about 25 years ago with a Colt Delta Elite. I liked the cartridge but after 2,000 rounds that 1911 frame was rattling and the accuracy seemed to fall off. Given a choice for Alaska? I am going with a S&W Model 29. I have always liked and trusted my Model 29. The revolver, in my opinion, offers up simplicity and reliability. I am not saying a semi-automatic pistol is not reliable, simply stating my choice.

There was a time (a long time ago) when I got to Alaska quite a bit. It was incredible but today? Not going to happen. I hate Ohio winters and Alaska winters are very cold and dark.

Ron

[lefteye]

I really like my S&W 629 with an 8 3/8" barrel. BUT, for a survival handgun in Alaska I would suggest a Ruger Redhawk .44 Mag, probably with a 5 1/2" barrel.

[armoredman]

Yugo PAP M92 pistol with three point sling/chest harness? 7.62x39mm has more foot pounds of energy than a 44 Mag, can use 20 and 30 round mags, and is built from the ruggedest of basic designs. Yes, I am being terribly facetious. I wish him the best of luck up there and perhaps he might concentrate on the most basic of things - learning how to shoot in intensely cold weather. the best gun in the world won't help if you can't get lead on target. Perhaps a 10mm auto isn't the best choice but it beats harsh language.

[NateKirk]

I would think that a Glock 10mm would be fine for bear defense.

[ThomasT]

If I were going I would just take my super blackhawk 44 mag with hard cast 240-300gr bullets and hope like hell I never had to use it.

I can't imagine ever needing any parts or repairs done to it no more than it would be shot. Do those ever wear out?

[FrankenMauser]

My father had one of the first Glock 20s.
I own several 'big bore' "magnum" revolvers.

If I had a choice out of all of them for daily carry in Alaska in an area known for bears, I'd probably take the G20 and a magazine or two on the other side.

Reasons (and likely the same justification as the recommending party):
0. Factory loads suck (10mm 'light' / .40 S&W 'hot'), but handloads can get the 10mm back to its appropriate power level.
1. Yank the trigger, and it goes bang.
--- Same thing with the DA revolvers, but not the SAs.
2. Magazine capacity.
--- A single magazine in the G20 dwarfs the capacity of the DA and SA revolvers by nearly three times the number of potential lead injections.
3. Reload time.
--- A G20 magazine can be dropped and replaced in a fraction of the time required to stuff a speed-loader into the cylinder of a DA revolver, let alone the time required to get an empty SA revolver back in the fight.
4. Round count.
--- In a tense situation with cold hands, you have to count on missing 90% of the shots. With a 6-shooter (or even 5-shooter!), that's not a good equation. But if you have 15+ rounds on tap, the odds shift.

With a G20 and two spare magazines, up to 46 rounds can be sent downrange in the time it takes gloved, cold hands to fire 12 rounds from a big-bore DA revolver, by the average shooter.


That being said....
If I had to choose from what I currently own, I'd probably grab the S&W 29. Six rounds of .44 Mag from a DA/SA revolver, with a good 'hard cast' bullet, are a helluva lot better than a fictional G20 that I can't afford. And I do have a few speed-loaders, and appropriate carry pouch, for the 29.

(The .480 Ruger SRH and speed-loaders would be a viable option. But the added weight and current lack of a holster or speed-loader pouch relegate it to the 'wishful thinking' pile.)

[Lohman446]

My guess is many of the people involved are not firearm enthusiasts. A G20 is MUCH easier to shoot reasonably well for most people than a large bore revolver. Not even close.

[Wadcutter45]

Why all the concern about being able to repair your firearm in the bush? Guns aren't that fragile. Load it, carry it, and don't screw around with it.

You're not going there on a military operation. Get to work and stop playing with your gun. It won't break unless you break it.

[Hal]

How well does a revolver function @ minus 40/50/60 * F ?

[Wadcutter45]

How well does a revolver function @ minus 40/50/60 * F ?

Probably a whole lot better than a guy from the lower 48 who went up there on a summer trip to volunteer building huts.