Best handgun to protect against aggressive bear

[WESHOOT2]

Don't care for the launch platforms. Prefer handling of 5.5" Redhawk.

Someday.....

[Ben Shepherd]

DITTO, in this situation I would prefer a shorter barrel. The shortest for SRH is 7.5". Good for hunting, not good getting into action fast.

[355sigfan]

I agree that a 4 inch barrel is good. 5.5 is ok and 6 inch is too long. I have a 5.5 inch on my converted 5 shot redhwak and I wish I had cut it back to 4 inches.
PAT

[Jim March]

The problem with the 480 is that while it's a good basic design, there's no "low powered factory practice ammo" available. And component selection for handloaders is low, not that I'm a handloader yet.

In .45LC, I can get factory 325grain hardcast doing 1,300+ FPS. I can also get a selection of JSPs from both CorBon and Buffalo Bore that would be excellent on Calif-sized wild boar (sub-200lbs) and JHPs suitable for deer.

I don't need more than that much power in a handgun. Period. Unless I was crazy enough to hunt Elephant or Cape Buffalo with a handgun, and that's not my thing. I doubt there's a lot of people who need more power than that.

And in that same caliber, I can get far milder plinking/target/personal defense loads in "non +P" flavors. I can also get a second cylinder in .45ACP (for any Ruger SA) and now I've got all kinds of cheap and effective ammo options for purposes other than big game or bear defense. The proper barrel for .45LC and .45ACP share the same bore and same twist rate (1:16, Ruger's factory twist, although for ultimate results in heavy .45 slugs at long range, 1:20 is better per Linebaugh and others).

In .454Casull, I get all of that (except .45ACP swap-in) plus the ability to shoot real monsters more potent than .480 if I ever needed such, which I can't imagine would ever be the case.

For those people that really think they need to exceed serious .45LC+P without getting into .454 recoil levels, the .480 appears to make sense - but I would advise such people to take a fresh look at what .45LC+P can do, and re-evaluate that "need".

[DeadCalm]

Thank god we got off the subject of the original post and can go back to armchair discussions of bullet diamter, fps, mass, bc, and all that good stuff. The longer we stay on this thread the safer we and our ursine friends will be. When it comes to handguns and big bears, "I see dead people."

Ross

[swsurgeon]

Good point and a very witty reference. However, this topic usually gets us so excited that we almost need a separate "handguns and bears" forum (just kidding)!

[Keith Rogan]

The Bear Page is currently defunct (until I find a new server), so I can't link you to any of that info at the moment.

I'm a survivor of a brown bear attack and I've had hundreds of close range encounters with bears here on Kodiak. I've done as much research on the subject as anybody, short of a handful of bear biologists. That's the story, take what I say with that in mind.

Here's my take on the matter:

1. Follow all the rules about food and cooking in camp.
2. Buy some pepper spray - a large can which advertises a range of no less than 20 yards.
3. If you insist on carrying a handgun, make it a double-action .44 mag or larger and load it with heavy flatnosed bullets - Garret or Buffalo bore are the best choices.
4. If you shoot an attacking bear, make it a head shot. Through the nose, not in the "forehead". There's no brain behind a bears forehead, only muscle and hide. The brain lies low in the skull, behind the nose and mouth. A shot to the chest will not stop an adrenalized bear in time to spare you a mauling.
5. Read rule number 2 again.


The vast majority of actual attacks by brown/grizzlies are absolute surprises. The bear simply bolts from cover and is on you before you can react. Just a few weeks ago near Fairbanks a bear got TWO hunting partners a few yards apart (both holding rifles) before EITHER could raise their rifle and shoot! The grizzly ran over one guy and simply side-swiped him into the brush before continuing on to rip the other guy up. That's how it happens, and that's why you'd better have a double-action revolver. If you actually need it, it will likely be used while the bear has you by the head shaking you around like a dog with a rat. A thumb-cocker is poor choice in this situation.

So why the pepper spray? Because the 99 times out of a 100, when you encounter a bear at close range it is only "acting" aggressive and pepper spray is the only way to drive them off safely. If you shoot them, you may just turn a territorial threat into an attack. I can tell you a hundred stories about people standing there banging pans and shooting guns in the air while a bear destroyed their tents and equipment for kicks. I can also tell you stories about people panicking and shooting bears that didn't need it, and the fines and jail time they served. It costs the state many thousands of dollars to track down bears wounded in this situation - and likely many maulings are due to bears with an "attitude" after being shot like this.
Many areas of Alaska have densities of brown (grizzly) bears as great as one per square mile. You'll see bears every day, and some of these will be at close range and if you shoot you'll only endanger yourself or someone else who later encounters the bear you've wounded. And trust me, short of a close-range shot through the brain you aren't going to kill a grizzly with a handgun most of the time. Get the pepper spray.

I don't have nearly as much experience with black bears, but most of what I say above holds true for them as well. You are much less likely to be attacked by the average black bear, but when they do attack it is nearly always fatal because the majority of these attacks are food-driven - it wants to eat you - while with grizzlies, they are generally just removing a threat and are (usually) content to maul you and move on.

That's the lecture, take it or leave it.

[DeadCalm]

Thank you, Keith. I remember your web site from a while back but couldn't remember its address. Moot now though, it seems. I have only a vague recollection of your encounter. Would you mind sharing it again, if it's not too much trouble?
Thank you.

Ross

[Hunter Rose]

Wasn't there a gentleman somepoint in the recent past (the '50s, IIRC) who had a reversed grizzly hide jacket (fur still on it, on the inside) that could stop a 45acp? Seem to recall hearing about something like that...

As for the 50AE: if I need to put a 12.7mm hole in something, I damn well better not be in handgun range!

[drsmooth]

UMP45,

I highly recommend the LAR Grizzly Mk V in 50AE if you can manage it. It's basically a tuned-up 1911 on steroids. With the factory compensator, the recoil isn't bad at all, although the grip is rather large. 325gr at 1400 fps rivals 12ga performance. They are utterly reliable, right out of the box. The recoil spring is so strong that you won't have to worry about your rugrats chambering a round, but in an emergency you can do it one-handed by shoving the muzzle of the compensator against a flat surface. The model has been discontinued, but LAR still offers support and parts. IWI will install tritium sights.

According to Will Dabbs, it's often said by Alaskan oldtimers that the only important thing to look for in a handgun in bear country is that the front sight is ground off so it hurts less when the bear rams it up your backside, but I feel absolutely confident carrying the Mk V on my hip. I do agree, however, that flare rounds and flamethrower rounds should be avoided, since the only thing worse than an angry griz is an angry griz on fire.

[355sigfan]

drsmooth



The 45 win mag is not a bad round. The gun you have however is very large in the handle and would not fit most people well I believe. Also I live in Alaska where big bears roam and I will tell you that you need a rifle or a shot gun with slugs. The handgun is also needed as back up. Why because too often the long gun is not in your hands when you need it.
PAT

[faraway]

Really shouldn't matter, any good revolver that makes a loud bang! Most of the blacks I've met are camp raiders or trash bears, a round in the ground, they pack up and go. For the raging, rabid,rampaging attack bears...good luck.

[Steven_Seagall]

eg a mossberg or remington in 12ga should do it

[CoyDog]

Those who are interested in bear protection issues should really read James Gary Shelton, a British Columbia man who does bear safety training seminars and has written several books on bear protection. Coincidentally, he has also killed at least two grizzlies who were charging him at the time. He places an emphasis on human safety in his writings, which distinguishes him from the many bear advocates out there.

In his book, Bear Encounter Survival Guide, Shelton estimates the degree of risk that a human faces from a grizzly bear in the worst case scenario, an all-out attack.

Unarmed Person: 45% chance of survival
Person w/Bear Spray: 70%
Person w/Firearm: 95%

In his calculations, Shelton is assuming proficiency and a weapon of proper power/bullet construction.

The conclusion I draw from this is that bear spray beats being unarmed, but when people say that bear spray is better than a firearm, they are asking really me to accept an additional 25% risk.

It's a matter of personal choice, but my answer is firearm all the way!
Good Shooting, CoyDog

[355sigfan]

CoyDog

I read a figure once that persons who used handguns alone had only a 50% chance. I still carry my 5 shot 45 colt loaded with hot loads in addition to my rifle. The best coarse of action however is simple common sence. Like making noise while your in the woods talk to yourself if you have too. Keep your food put up while in camp. Believe it or not bears are more scared of us than we are of them with one exception Polar bears. Polar Bears will hunt people. But unless you plan on visiting Beautifull Barrow Alaska then you don't have much to worry about.
PAT

[Greg Hamilton]

I have trained wildlife biologists on counter bear techniques for about 6 years now. They helped us develop the course by providing a lot of information about what happens in a bear charge and attack.

The short answer is anyone that fights back with any type of handgun wins.

To my knowledge, based on information from people that study grizzly bears full time, is that no one has ever been killed, that got a handgun out and got to fighting.

That said a short barreled, double action revolver, of large caliber, would be best. Revolver because of both the power of the loads you can carry and the fact that it will more reliably work while in contact with the creature. DA as you don’t want to rely on having two hand available or have to compromise your grip to cock. Short barrel for the ease of maneuver while in contact with the bear.

There has been no differences in outcomes based on 357 vs. 44. Of course the total population in the studies are small. I would carry a short-barreled 44 mag with deep penetrating solids.

Pepper spray has been proven to be the most reliable nonlethal charge stopper there is. I would carry it and have it ready to draw and deploy.

[MeekAndMild]

There has been no differences in outcomes based on 357 vs. 44. Of course the total population in the studies are small. I would carry a short-barreled 44 mag with deep penetrating solids.

Frank Barnes mentioned the 357 in his 7th edition Cartridges of the World book. He said that it had been used successfully on both black and grizzly bear. He said in the 357 magnum rifle chapter that "the 357 revolver was for many years considered a perfectly adequate deer and bear gun."

He mentions the 44 magnum has been used to take Alaskan brown bear but says the recoil and blast are excessive, a statement I heartily endorse.

Because of the recoil I tend to carry 44 special in the 44 when I am out hunting, but according to the numbers the 357 is superior, so I may rethink this issue when I'm in bear country.

[Ben Shepherd]

MeekAndMild, after taking similar sized deer with similar shot placement with both calibers, I would lean HEAVILY toward 44MAG. for bear purposes. While the 357 may be "adequate" in a purely defensive situation, I'll take any edge I can get.
Although some poeple really can't hold on to the 44. Then 357 is fine. With the limited power of any handgun cartrige, PLACEMENT is the key. I'd rather hit w/357 than miss with 44.

[Keith Rogan]

>>>>>The conclusion I draw from this is that bear spray beats being unarmed, but when people say that bear spray is better than a firearm, they are asking really me to accept an additional 25% risk. <<<<<

Coydog,

With all due respect to your sources, I think you (or your sources) are missing the point here.
I'm speaking of grizzlies here rather than black bears and it's important to separate the two because they act quite differently. Anyway, for every actual attack by a brown/grizzly you might have ten or more events that are best described as "Territorial displays" where a bear at close range will go through a big "act" that might include vocal noises, ground pounding, teeth clicking and short false charges. These sort of negative encounters make up 90-99% of the "bad" bear encounters you are likely to come across. It's very common, while actual attacks are not.

The theory is that the bear really doesn't know what he wants to do (flee or fight), or that he doesn't know whether to classify you as prey or predator. If you run during such a display they will always attack. If you stand your ground they will GENERALLY back down.
THIS is when you want to use pepper spray because in every single case where it has been used in this scenario, the bear has fled - every time. Probably not because of the pain it inflicts, but because he instantly loses some of his senses like sight and smell - a bear without these senses is biologically "wired" to flee.

Now, were one to shoot a bear with a handgun in this same situation, you'd very likely turn a bad situation worse by turning a threat into an actual attack. And it's very unlikely you'd kill an angry, adrenalized adult grizzly in time to prevent a mauling - does it matter if he dies later, if you're dead?

When an ACTUAL attack occurs you will have no warning at all. The bear will simply rush you from cover (they're faster than a race horse in a short stretch) and take you down. There will be no ground pounding or roaring or standing on his hind legs beating his chest in TV fashion. And this is when you'd want a gun, aim for the head, keep shooting and hope for the best.

I hope I'm being clear here. I'm not against guns as defense against bears or any other predator with 4 or 2 legs. I'm just saying that in the MOST COMMON type of dangerous bear encounter, pepper spray is more useful than a gun. Pepper spray with a partner backing it up with a gun would be better yet.

Even more common than these dangerous situations above is the bear that comes into your camp and begins eating your food and destroying your equipment, and here again a shot of pepper spray is a lot more likely than a gun to drive the bear off without precipitating an attack or wounding a bear that will later attack someone else.

Use the right tool for the job.

[MeekAndMild]

Ben Shepherd,
I thought to mention what Barnes said. Actually I try not to go out into bear country with a handgun, especially during tree planting season when the sows might have young cubs. I'd be more afraid for the dogs than for myself but even so one should try to be prepared.

Is there anyone here who would take a handgun, any handgun, into bear country if they had any other choice at all? I sincerely doubt it.

I would think a shotgun or lever action rifle would be preferred. Don't you agree?

[CoyDog]

Keith:

When you instruct me to "use the right tool for the job," this implies that you are an expert that I should defer to. Well, I am not going to. In this case, "the job" is protecting my life, not protecting bears. I will choose my own tools.

I don't bet my life on aerosol products that can blow back in my face and render me helpless to further defend myself.

I hunt elk alone in griz country, and I carry a 375 H&H with a 44 magnum backup. If I am mauled, there will be no one to send for a helicopter. Therefore, if I am threatened by a large predator at close range, I will not waste precious time by trying to divine whether it is bluffing or not. I will take appropriate action and accept the consequences.

I don't think you will ever convince me otherwise, and I'm sure I won't change your mind either. We may have to let it go at that.

Good Shooting, CoyDog

[Keith Rogan]

Well, good luck!

I hunt in griz country too. Except that where I hunt the numbers of grizzly are about 1 per square mile, rather than the 1 per 100 square miles where you hunt, and these grizzlies here weigh about three times what yours do. It isn't a case of I "might" run into one on a hunting trip, I WILL run into them, sometimes several times a day. I just returned from an elk hunting trip on Afognak Island where I ran into 4 bears but only saw one elk - lousy odds!
I don't claim to be an expert, but I've had hundreds of encounters with grizzlies, and perhaps dozens of close-range "threatening" encounters - surely far more than the the Shelton you quote as an "expert". He lives in BC where bear numbers approximate those in parts of our western states - perhaps one grizzly to every 25 square miles along the coast to 1 per 100 square miles in the mountains. I mean, how many grizzly bears can this guy have encountered?
I will agree with you that if you pop a little mountain grizzly at close range with a .375, you probably don't have any worries about getting mauled. I don't know what the legal repercussions of that would be in the state you hunt in. However, that is far different thing than cutting loose with a handgun - which is the subject of this thread.
I will say unequivocally that anyone who shoots a grizzly with a handgun is making a bad mistake, UNLESS they are under attack in which case they have nothing to lose.

[71Hoss]

Meek, that's funny!

I can't believe there is no champion for the Colt Anaconda in this thread. Here I come to save the day.

Get an Anaconda in .44 magnum. Two birds, etc. You'll own a work of art AND a magnum handgun.

[Fred Hansen]

There are a lot of posts here and I was only able to skim through them, so please forgive me if this has been brought up already. I believe that you mentioned Park Rangers in your initial question. Guns of any kind in all national parks are illegal, and they will conficate them and/or arrest and fine you if the are found. I wouldn't be at all surprised if pepper spray is illegal too. There are at least a few folks here at TFL that can tell you why an animals life is more valuable than a humans, but I'm not one of them. Having said that, the G20 is counted on by many fishing guides to defend against Brown bears.

I just am tickled to death by people who can tell one what a large predatory animal "intends". They are a lot like every psychic in the world (that would be ALL of them) that failed to predict the WTC/Pentagon tragedy. Entertaining when their mouths are moving, useless when the SHTF. JMO

"If someone comes at you with a knife or gun, say, 'I know you're upset.' We all want to be valued as human beings."**

-- Jessica Flagg, spokeswoman for the Thousand Mom March, Washington, DC, May, 2000

** unknown if this was tried on September 11

[jtduncan]

The top one . . .



A Magnum Research 45-70 revolver affectionately called "Maxine." 1400 fpe at the muzzle and at 100 yards, a good 1250 fpe.

While my Redhawk in 44 mag can only throw 959 fpe at the muzzle and 820 fpe estimated at 100 yards. Both will do just fine since you'll be dumping that energy into target at very close range.
Both will serve you well. 44 mag is funner and more affordable to shot though. But 45-70 extends your range out to a good 175 yards if you want to scope the above revolver.

Check out Randy Garrett's 330 grain hammerhead loads for bears. That's the 44 mag ammo I'd carry for safety purposes for bear or elk. and you can eat grizzly.

But no less that 41 mag.