Is .44 Magnum Big Enough for Brown Bear?

[Alaska444]

The telling data goes against recommending a .44 magnum for bear defense and in general, I am in agreement with that recommendation. However, many go so far as to completely denigrate the ability of a .44 magnum as a last ditch defense weapon even against large brown bear. Here is a story with pictures of a bear on man attack where man one from one shot of a .44 magnum.

I pick up my Ruger SRH .44 magnum 7.5 inch in a week. I do have two ligitimate bear guns in rifles, but this will be my daily woods carry.

http://thegreatwhitehunter.wordpress.com/the-longest-minute-terrifying-bear-attack/

[Skans]

Read the story. That guy got lucky. After looking at the size of that bear, I've concluded that I can't think of any handgun round that I'd feel "safe" with. If I ever venture into the woods in Alaska, I think I'll just keep my rifle strapped to me at all times.

[Alaska444]

No doubt the rifle is the better choice, but in my mind it boils down to shot placement and penetration, both of which in some people's hands, the .44 magnum can do the job. This man did indeed get "lucky" just as Greg Brush with his .454 Casull did about a year ago in Soldotna Alaska.

http://thegreatwhitehunter.wordpress.com/2009/09/25/bear-decides-to-change-diet/

Yes, luck is involved even when a person has a high powered rifle in their hands. Yes, a rifle does improve shot placement and penetration, but stopping a charging bear with a rifle is no less luck dependent than with a .44 magnum.
My point is that the .44 magnum is adequate for the job, and yes, getting luck on your side helps as well. Both of these men have a little 3 pound piece of metal to thank for saving their lives.

No one will argue it is the "best" bear defense, but it is certainly is a bear defense with real effect.

[Rifleman1776]

This question of handgun vs. big bad brown bear comes up several times a week. I have read, at length, stories of griz encounters. The answer is a big "NO". Your .44 mag. is a trifling annoyance against a determined griz. Don't trust your life based on a few lucky survivors experiences.

[mavracer]

[opinion] if you can remain calm and place a round in it's brain you can stop one with a heavily loaded hard cast 357 mag [opinion]
I've seen too many animals run off and die over 100 yards away with their lungs and heart destroyed to think anything but a head shot is going allow you to outlive Mr bear

[Alaska444]

Once again, my point of placing this post was not to establish an optimal hand gun bear defense weapon, only to counter the extremely negative attitude towards large bore hand guns as a whole lot better than nothing attitude some folks oppose. Here is an example of a "lucky" park ranger that killed a large grizzly with the lowly .357 as suggested above. Up close and personal, a handgun is a life saver. Is it necessarily what we would call a bear stopper, well dead is dead.

http://www.carnivoraforum.com/index.cgi?board=video&action=display&thread=2724

[sirsloop]

Obviously .44 mag IS enough, as long as you can hit the vitals before the bear rips your guts out :eek:

[Chief Engineer]

Only in a life or death situation. His life, your death. :)

[Stevie-Ray]

I carry a sidearm for defense against blackies, but against browns, Grizzlies, Kodiaks? I've always said out of my own firearms, I'd want my FAL first, and that's only if I HAD to.

[youngunz4life]

thank you for the story&pictures alaska444(post #6). that camera might've been the only reason his neck wasn't ripped out. I do sometimes wonder how much 'stronger' the 44 is than the 357(if that's the right word).

[sirsloop]

I wonder how 3" mag 12 Gauge slugs would work :D

[Brian Pfleuger]

I'd rather have a big can of pepper spray than ANY firearm.

Well, unless it was a minigun. :D

[mavracer]

If you don't put that 12 guage slug in it's. CNS it'll still have time to slap your head into the next county before he dies.

[Alaska444]

My first line of bear defense in grizzly country is my Marlin .444. Perhaps not the hottest bear gun, but over 3000 ft-pds of muzzle energy and quite controllable recoil since I am getting too old for all of that shoulder jolting. Bear pepper spray is a very valid defense as well. The only trouble is the Marlin .444 rifle is not always the most readily available weapon to carry. For that reason, hand guns are the logical choice to have at all times for woods carry for a practical application.

The bottom line is that any firearm used for an instant stop must hit the bears CNS. A double lung, heart shot will not give an instant stop, the bear still has time to do you a great deal of damage. Once again it comes down to shot placement no matter what the weapon. For this reason and the small target the CNS is in a fast moving animal, bear pepper spray has very reliable data, but I will not trust it alone. Combining a large bore handgun and bear pepper spray gives the optimal access to lethal and non-lethal bear defense allowing you to be hands free whereas a rifle does not afford that accessabilty and carrying ease.

It is a trade off on carrying ease and stopping power. Having more than one in a group armed and carrying pepper spray is a very good strategy. The choice of arms depends on the activity anticipated. It is simply a fact that you cannot keep a rifle over your shoulder doing all of the chores folks do in bear country, but you can keep a .44 magnum tucked away nicely. The first story is a demonstration of this very fact where the .338 was left at the camp while packing out the moose. In reality, doing otherwise would be quite difficult.

So, in a perfect world, you can bring your 416 Rigby with you at all times, or you can make a calculated risk and take a handgun when the 416 Rigby is going to preclude your planned activity. The .44 magnum is a very viable option to give you a measure, perhaps not full measure, but nevertheless a reliable measure of protection which is by far better than only pepper spray or playing dead. I believe my purchase of the Ruger SRH is a prudent purchase.

[mavracer]

practicing situational awareness and avoiding the confrontation all together is the best option, but sans that when the feces contacts the rotary ocilater a big bore revolver and a cool head and maybe a little luck might get you out alive.
The SRH is a little big for my taste I'd prefer my 4" Redhawk but thats just me.

[aaalaska]

It's been said a handgun should be used to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have laid down to start with. And I agree with that, but until you've gutted a caribou / moose etc with a rifle / shotgun in one hand, or fought a salmon in hip deep water with a rifle /shotgun in your hand, don't tell me you would keep one on you,and if you do keep it, I'll bet it is in a position that you would find embarrassing if you needed it RIGHT NOW. Given all that I carry a Redwawk 44 loaded with 300 gr hard cast. Do I think it's enough He!! no ,but it sure beats the poo out of a sharp stick, even better than my fillet knife, or my skinner.I have never needed the handgun for brown bear and hope I never do,as for bear spray one of us usually has it, but we have noticed when bears do show up they are so inconsiderate ,the wind is usually blowing to us from them, not ideal for bear spray, and anyone that's been here can tell you the wind can blow.
While I've never had to shoot one ,some of a group I was hunting with had to put one down several years ago, a sow with cub in a alder thicket, the guy in the front had a 300 win mag with 220 gr bullets, his first shot from the hip knocked the bear down inside 20 ft of where he was standing, she was hit in the chest ,and when we skinned her we realized the hit probably would not have been fatal. his other shots missed we found them in different alders,the second guy in line had to take several steps to the side to find an opening ,and when he saw she was hit finished it with his 30/06. My point here is even though she was far from dead the hit was enough to turn her, so even a serious bear might well change it's mind if hit hard.With that in mind and the fact that like everyone else I know ,I sit the rifle down from time to time, I will continue to carry a handgun and pray I never need it.
Alex

[dsa1115]

Most guides carry bear spray. I'd also consider a .44 magnum loaded with hard cast bullets a good choice as a backup to a long arm. With brown bear in Alaska, best to consider a 12 gauge with slugs or a 45-70 rifle as your main defensive gun. Black bear is one thing, brown bears are quite another.

[Alaska444]

practicing situational awareness and avoiding the confrontation all together is the best option, but sans that when the feces contacts the rotary ocilater a big bore revolver and a cool head and maybe a little luck might get you out alive.
The SRH is a little big for my taste I'd prefer my 4" Redhawk but thats just me.


Try finding that in Kommiefornia!! I looked for nearly six months for the 4 or 5.5 inch Redhawk and then settled on the SRH 7.5 when I couldn't find one. Beggers can't be choosy in this state.

[mbb300]

a shotgun with slugs or sabots (if your choke will allow it) is by far the best, but unless your paranoid or will be very close to a boat or vehicle you will probably not have immediate access to it. I have heard reports of rubber shot being effective at preventing negative human bear interactions before they start. ie problem bear keeps sniffing around camp and you teach him a lesson. not sure about legality there as its not something i do. bear spray is iffy in that you can unintentionally fog yourself and bystanders so be wind aware. it is also very dangerous in small planes where if it accidentally go off in the cabin you and everyone is in big trouble. ziplock it and put it in the float if you can. additionally the only time i used it it was at ten feet and the brown bear was dead down wind, while the bear went away it was back in ten minutes so we left the area. i feel that handguns are a viable option but not in the quick draw scenario, with you drawing as a bear charges, that most people imagine but rather to dispatch a bear that is on top of someone at minimal distance with particular and crucial attention being paid to putting your shots into the bears skull and not your companion. also be aware of how relatively unpowerful most big bore handguns are as compared to a rifle you would select to harvest a bear under favorable circumstances.

More important than any of this is to not cook where you camp. keep food in bear resistant containers and clean up your trash. if possible cook in a tidal area where the tide will reduce cooking smell somewhat when they flood the area. there are also portable bear fences that never seem to go back into the bag they came from but are most definitely effective even at very low voltage. make human noise as you go though beary areas and dont wear those bear bells or use whistles as they mean nothing to a bear, your voice is much more effective and will not infuriate your companions. also unless you feel like you will die if you do not never fire infront or over a bear to scare it as it will learn to disregard gunfire. if you need to use your weapon to deter a bear be sure and use it for what its intended for. that got a little longer than intended but it should be reasonably thorough.

[mavracer]

Try finding that in Kommiefornia!! I looked for nearly six months for the 4 or 5.5 inch Redhawk and then settled on the SRH 7.5 when I couldn't find one. Beggers can't be choosy in this state.
Sometines you just have to take matters into your own hands LOL.
http://rugerforum.net/projects/26879-7-5-redhawk-4-round-butt-project.html

[madmo44mag]

I know in a hunting scenario the 44mag can take bear but in a self defense situation I think it would be more luck than gun.

There are a lot of uncontrolled variables in a bear attack vs a bear hunt.

[gearhounds]

I'd say no, but better than nothing else in your hands. With a bear that size, and the range involved, there is no handgun on the planet I'd feel comfortable with. Short of a brain/spine shot, mr. griz might not realize he's dead until after you been chewed a good bit.

[PIGMAN]

Here is the only pistol suitable for dispatching big bears.

http://www.vincelewis.net/60magnum.html

[skydiver3346]

Well, the .44 mag revolver has been a pretty good choice for sidearm in big bear country over the years. If you have great bullet placement, it's probably adequate, etc.

However, nowadays things have really changed. If I had my choice of weapons for walking around Brown Bear/Grissly country, I would now choose this:
The new "carbine size" Big Horn Armory Armory (mod. 89) lever gun
in .500 S&W. It is an awesome little carry package and easyly carried over your shoulder. The .500 S&W will do the job much better than the .44 mag with all things being equal (shot placement, etc.). Plus with longer sight radius, should be more accurate as well. Check it out on You-Tube....

[BGutzman]

You could also go with 460 Rowland in a Springfield XD Tatical with Corbon Hunter 230 grain FPPN traveling at 1225 fps and hitting with roughly 757 ft lbs.

You end up with 13+1 rounds of heavy hitting deep penetration compared to 6 rounds.

[mavracer]

Here is the only pistol suitable for dispatching big bears.
that might be a good idea if you miss you'll be knocked out and won't feel the bear eating you.

[reloader28]

Sure it is.
Its kinda funny, but most people forget that high speed jacketed bullets are only a recent invention.
People have been killing bears, moose and every other animal on the planet for 300+ years with slow, heavy bullets from around 44 caliber. Then came the invention of jacketed bullets and animals became bullet-proof.
If I had my choice (and I do) I would use a heavy flat nosed cast bullet instead of a jacketed one (and I do).

[Jack O'Conner]

I've worked and camped in the grizzly forests of western Montana. I carried a Remington 760 (slide action) in 30-06 loaded with 220 grain core-lockt ammo. Nope, I never shot a grizzly. But I'm confident that the aught six would do the job.

Jack

[gearhounds]

Just remember that it's one thing when you get to choose your battleground with a large bear (for instance, a long shot from cover), quite another in this scenario where the bear was a surprise visitor to what it probably assumed was a sure win compared to the nice little lunchbox sized mammals. Again, short of a good CNS shot, there are no guarantees with a determined bruin. I guess the best answer to this question is the biggest one you can handle.

[Alaska444]

A rifle is without a doubt the best option when you are in windy conditions and pepper spray is out of the question. The issue boils down to being able to carry at all times such a large weapon while doing the chores many do in the woods. It becomes a practical issue of being able to be hands free, yet still have some form of lethal force available.

Greg Brush was able to draw in one second and get a "lucky" shot that apparantly severed the beast spinal cord. It is very unlikely that he would have been able to take a rifle, turn behind him and get a shot off in one second with any rifle. In that situation, the rifle would have been a hindrance, not a help.

Brush instinctively back-pedaled to avoid the charge, drawing the Ruger from its holster. “I fired from the hip as he closed the distance,” Brush recalls. “I know I missed the first shot, but I clearly hit him after that. I believe I fired four or five shots."

http://www.fieldandstream.com/photos/gallery/survival/animal-attacks/2009/08/charging-grizzly-killed-alaska?photo=2#node-1001334546

[DeathRodent]

That was a small grizzley bear at 500 lbs and a lucky ranger.

I've seen and read where Alaskan Fishing guides carry a 12 gauge pump shotgun with slugs for bear defense.

I saw a show on TV where they used it and the bear dropped.

Gotta be better than a handgun.

Still, I think a ruger in .454 casull might be comforting in the tent at night - .454 on the right side and the 12 gauge on the left side.

[JerryM]

When I see the question posed by the OP I am not considering a lucky shot. I think of being adequate under most conditions, including being big enough to stop an attack from a distance under good conditions.

With those criteria, the answer is "No." Certainly a shot in the brain would stop a Brown Bear, but in my view it would be more luck than proving adequacy. I have read that Bell killed 1,000 elephants with a .275 Rigby (I think), but that does not establish that a .275 would be an adequate elephant rifle today. I doubt any PWH would use one even if it were legal.

When I was stationed in Alaska, I carried a .44 Mag when fishing, but I did not have any thoughts that it would stop a bear. I just could not carry my .375 Mag.

I suspect that if we were attacked by a bear most of us could not make a brain shot in the time required. At least I am not confident that I could.

Regards,
Jerry

[Alaska444]

Dear Jerry, thank you for the reasoned response, but your comment really goes to the heart of my OP. From a practical standpoint, how many of us could carry a .375 magnum? How many could carry a .44 magnum everywhere we go? So from a pragmatic standpoint, when you look at penetration, the .44 magnum delivers a large bore hard cast bullet with enough penetration to go through and through most bears.

It will not deliver that with hydrostatic shock that gives rifles their killing power, no argument there. But going to the heart of the issue, being able to carry a .44 magnum at all times, it wins hands down over the .375 magnum as you have already alluded.

I truly have no problem considering carrying a .44 magnum in the areas I will be going in northern Idaho along with bear pepper spray. I truly believe that is going to be adequate protection especially when done in concert with other members of the party so armed. There truly are enough examples of people who have successfully defended against a bear attack with a .44 magnum.

That being said, whenever I can carry my .444 Marlin, that will be over my shoulder as first choice with my .44 in cross carry on the opposite hip. There are times where it is simply impracticle to have a Marlin slung over your shoulder. In those situations, would anyone NOT carry a handgun for back up? That is really the question. I am sure that I can find more examples of bear defense with handguns such as the man who killed a grizzly in Denali last year with a .45 ACP of all things.

Is it the BEST defense, absolutely not. Is it enough, absolutely yes with proper shot placement as has been discussed.

God bless,

Alaska

James 4:8 Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you.

[JerryM]

We have to make some concessions in our activities and the degrees of protection. I would much rather have a 12 ga with slugs, but when fishing it is not very practical to carry anything except a handgun.

While the "bigger the better" as far as killing power is concerned, I have trouble with a .44 Mag, and I could not handle the 500s and such.

So for me the .44 Mag would be my companion for fishing. I might carry a light shotgun when hiking and keep it in hand. I doubt one would have time to get it into action from a sling if an attack came suddenly.

Regards,
Jerry

[kilimanjaro]

The Forest Service arms one crew member in Alaskan Bear country to protect the other workers. The other workers may carry a weapon if they wish, but one individual is tasked with protecting the others. They did a lot of ballistic and function testing, and no handgun made the cut, and even in the Ruger Carbine the .44 Magnum did not meet the requirements, both for ballistics and for semi-auto function, which was considered less than acceptable. The .375 H&H Magnum made the cut. Some of the larger calibers, like .405, .45-70, and the like were close competitors, but not chosen for one reason or the other.

[Alaska444]

If you were one of the Forest service workers not assigned to the .375 magnum, would you carry a .44 magnum on your hip while working?

Who would argue against the .375 magnum to stop a bear as more ideal than a .44 magnum. Once again, not really my point in the OP. Is it enough? There are numerous examples where a hand gun was enough. Granted, many take issue with that statement yet the question is not what is the best, it is in other words, would you utilize a handgun such as a .44 magnum in the situations where you could not sling a .375 over your shoulder. My answer is absolutely yes, and if I was a Forest service worker, the .44 magnum would be right on my hip while working.

[stevelyn]

Read the story. That guy got lucky. After looking at the size of that bear, I've concluded that I can't think of any handgun round that I'd feel "safe" with. If I ever venture into the woods in Alaska, I think I'll just keep my rifle strapped to me at all times.

That's fine and dandy depending on how much venturing you do. Then it becomes a pain in the arse. Not to mention how do you get your rifle into action when you're buttoned up in your sleeping bag at night?

Carrying a handgun in the woods for wildlife defense is not much different than carrying one for people defense. If you knew you would be getting into a situation that required you shooting your way out, you'd bring rifles, extra ammo and friends who are doing the same.

The handgun provides a compromise of convenience that is likely to be with you when you set the rifle down. As always the best defense is your passive radar giving you enough time to make more decisions.

[Scorch]

Is .44 Magnum Big Enough for Brown Bear?
While brown bears have certainly been killed with a 44 Mag, it would not be my weapon of choice. Google Larry Kelly (the founder of MagnaPort and a huge fan of hunting with a 44 Mag). If the story is still on the internet, he related a story about a hunting trip where he shot a brown bear at powder burn distance 6 times, and the bear just walked away, the guide had to shoot it with a 375 H&H. Brown bears are just too big and tough to be put down reliably in an emergency by a 44 Mag.

[Keg]

Scorch....CORRECT....
A 30-30 outclasses a 44 mag...I never hear..Is a 30-30 enough for brown bear??? Duh............

[HiBC]

I had one AK bear SD situation on a 6'6" nose to tail black bear.Frontal,him on hind legs,bead on his nose,my 12 ga slug took out his two lower front teeth,then failed to penetrate.he fell down and got back up.Next slug got neck cns.IMO,standard foster soft lead slugs are marginal for penetration.I would use the premium dangerous game slugs.
I'll spare the details,but expanding style jacketed .44 mag bullets in the 240 gr class do not penetrate well.They expand.Fine on a deer.Not good to stop bear.Heavy,hardcast bullets are going to penetrate.Same goes for your .444.With all due respect to a fine rifle,cartridge overall length to feed,twist,etc,I may be wrong,but are there many workable loads over 270 gr in .444? Beware a .44 mag expanding bullet driven at .444 velocity will penetrate less than a .44 mag due to bullet expansion at higher velocity.
Ross Siefred thought enough of a hotrodded 45 colt in a Ruger Bisley with heavy cast bullets he went to Africa and killed a Cape buffalo with it.Maybe one person needs a light,handy serious rifle.I made a foam core/kevlar/glass stocked 21 in bbl lightweight .375 Taylor(necked .458).Muleabelle.
I sure do believe in having a bear gun in AK.I agree CNS is the quick kill.Generally that is protected by bone.Orthopedic damage is one way to slam the cns.Penetration and breaking things is good.Expanding in a white tail is not good.
A cut down ,slenderized 18 in bbl generic non collectable 8mm mauser loaded with 200 grain partitions will work.
I do believe in being well armed.Odds of a bear problem are small.You can make them much smaller by using good practice in bear country.Take that small percentage and think about it.Bear spray is a percentage.Not bad,and,it may just buy a few seconds,or not.
You could get too close to the bear's dead moose or surprise it or otherwise have an ambush pulled on you.Ambushes are bad.Sometimes,the bear wins.
But another percentage is the bear who won't leave.He may kill you in time,but if you had a 30-40 Krag you could place a shot.make your odds.A lot of infantry keep thier rifle with them all the time.

[JerryM]

Hello HiBC,

[You could get too close to the bear's dead moose or surprise it or otherwise have an ambush pulled on you.Ambushes are bad.Sometimes,the bear wins.]

It seems every year I was in Alaska 60 - 64) someone got mauled by a bear that they surprised. In addition I had an Army friend who was attacked by a grizzly around 1973 or '74 while he and his wife were moose hunting.
He was using a .300 Win Mag, and I think his wife was using a .270. The bear was on him so fast he only got in one shot from the hip. His wife got in a shot, but the bear mauled his legs pretty badly. The bear then retreated, and as far as I remember was never found.

In 1963, I think, there was a shortage of berries and other things that bear eat and there were several attacks by black bears. At least one camper was killed.

When bears attack they are on you before you know it. It would be nice if they roared and attacked from 100 yards, but it seemed to never happen that way. Hunters are stalking other game, and Alaska is brushy and high grass causes the hunter and the bear to be unaware of each other until too close.

Under those circumstances one is fortunate to come out unscathed no matter what gun he is carrying. That is a major reason that one should never hunt alone if possible. Bear spray would be a good addition to a gun,and a partner could probably spray the bear when he might hesitate to shoot.

Not a pretty picture. Unless a brain shot, a 500 - 1,000 pound bear cannot be stopped instantly with anything we carry.

Regards,
Jerry

[Alaska444]

I had one AK bear SD situation on a 6'6" nose to tail black bear.Frontal,him on hind legs,bead on his nose,my 12 ga slug took out his two lower front teeth,then failed to penetrate.he fell down and got back up.Next slug got neck cns.IMO,standard foster soft lead slugs are marginal for penetration.I would use the premium dangerous game slugs.
I'll spare the details,but expanding style jacketed .44 mag bullets in the 240 gr class do not penetrate well.They expand.Fine on a deer.Not good to stop bear.Heavy,hardcast bullets are going to penetrate.Same goes for your .444.With all due respect to a fine rifle,cartridge overall length to feed,twist,etc,I may be wrong,but are there many workable loads over 270 gr in .444? Beware a .44 mag expanding bullet driven at .444 velocity will penetrate less than a .44 mag due to bullet expansion at higher velocity.
Ross Siefred thought enough of a hotrodded 45 colt in a Ruger Bisley with heavy cast bullets he went to Africa and killed a Cape buffalo with it.Maybe one person needs a light,handy serious rifle.I made a foam core/kevlar/glass stocked 21 in bbl lightweight .375 Taylor(necked .458).Muleabelle.
I sure do believe in having a bear gun in AK.I agree CNS is the quick kill.Generally that is protected by bone.Orthopedic damage is one way to slam the cns.Penetration and breaking things is good.Expanding in a white tail is not good.
A cut down ,slenderized 18 in bbl generic non collectable 8mm mauser loaded with 200 grain partitions will work.
I do believe in being well armed.Odds of a bear problem are small.You can make them much smaller by using good practice in bear country.Take that small percentage and think about it.Bear spray is a percentage.Not bad,and,it may just buy a few seconds,or not.
You could get too close to the bear's dead moose or surprise it or otherwise have an ambush pulled on you.Ambushes are bad.Sometimes,the bear wins.
But another percentage is the bear who won't leave.He may kill you in time,but if you had a 30-40 Krag you could place a shot.make your odds.A lot of infantry keep thier rifle with them all the time.

Dear HIBC, I believe you are simply ignoring the heavy, hard cast .44 magnum by Garret, Grizzly and Buffalo Bore which do have incredible penetration.

http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=54

The statistics you are quoting for the .444 are for older models. The current models do have a higher twist and can handle larger bullets than 270.

http://www.marlinfirearms.com/Firearms/bigbore/444.asp

I use Buffalo Bore 335's for my bear defense. They have more than enough penetration at 3000 ft-pds of muzzle energy. With my medical conditions, I must manage recoil, the .444 with extra lead weight in the stock gives me that situation. Does it have the killing power of a .375, nope, but it is what I can handle well. The rest is shot placement.

http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=156

[HiBC]

I did not ignore heavy hardcast bullets.Read again.I said heavy hardcast bullets will penetrate well.I even said Ross Seifred went and killed a cape buffalo with a Ruger 45 Colt.My message was expanding bullets will not have the penetration.I carried a .44 Ruger Super Blackhawk loaded with heavy hard cast bullets while in AK.I also went to the museum in Fairbanks and studied the anatomy of brown bear looking at skulls,skeletal parts,and stuffed bears.From the tip of the nose,spongy bone in the sinus area leads right into the brain pan.Frontal,the tip of the nose is a good hit.Teeth,not so good.
I am building a Rolling Block in 50-90.I intend to use a 450 gr bullet driven by black powder to modest velocity to shoot a Bison.
.
I did not say your 444 was unsuitable,I asked the question if good penetration ammo could be had.
You go do whatever makes you happy.Good luck.

[Alaska444]

Dear HIBC forgive me for overlooking your point on the hardcast bullets. I did miss that statement. Thank you for correcting me on that issue.

If I lived in Alaska, I would no doubt go with the 45/70 over my .444 despite the constraints on my left arm for recoil. However, I spend my time in Northern Idaho where there are grizzly, but not anywhere near as many as in Alaska. Black bear, mountain lion and the recently transplanted wolf are the most common predators with a few hundred grizzly total in the state compared to the density of grizzly bears in Alaska.

For me, the .444 gives me a a real thumper at the cost of a 20 ga recoil or pretty close to it when I compare the two. Once again, just fitting it to my own personal medical condition that limits the amount of recoil I can handle in my left arm.

I shoot the handgun one handed with my right hand for the same reason. I shot the .454 Casull last year one handed and it is not pleasant, but it was manageable. For my own situation, the .44 is capable of high powered, hard cast loads that get me right up to .454 Casull levels. That is why I am going with the .44 over the .454.

Once again, there are grizzly in Idaho, but very uncommon in the area I venture into. Black bear in Idaho tend to be quite a bit smaller than a lot of other areas so for my own purposes, I feel I am quite well armed. In the end analysis, it comes down to shot placement and penetration.

I appreciate your comments on the shot placement in the skull as well. The difficulty with the bears skull is more so in the shape where it is a very sloped and narrow angled bone. Many people wrongly believe the bullet just bounced off a bears skull failing to realize that they simply hit the soft tissue and fur above the actual skull. The nose is a great target if you can get a bead on it. The question comes down to be able to hit that target during a charge. In that situation, aiming COM is probably the best bet but give little chance of a CNS hit. I guess that brings us back to the luck factor spoken of before.

If I lived in Alaska again as in my youth, yup, give me the 45/70 over my .444 or even the .450 and I would just have to go with the higher recoil. Once again, just a matter of fitting the personal situation and maximizing all of the parameters. For that matter, in Idaho, I believe the .44 magnum is more than enough in camping situations where it is simply impractical to have a rifle slung over your shoulder at all times.

Just my own take on the situation. I readily understand a lot of folks feel the .44 magnum is inadequate, but what do we do in the situations where the rifle is impractical. Would people really NOT strap on a large bore handgun in that situation? Once again, it will then come down to shot placement and penetration, both of which when maximized, the .44 magnum is quite enough for the job in trained hands as you have so stated yourself in your posts above.

I wish you the best with the buffalo rifle, that sounds like quite a project with a lot of lead flying about when you get it finished. By the way, you can follow my link to the Buffalo Bore 335 gr ammo for a man who shot a "trophy" sized buffalo with one shot from his .444 under the reviews section.

http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=156

That is another whole can of worms, but .444 is an underestimated rifle as well based on the older models with the 1/38 rifling that did not have the ability to toss 300+gr bullets. The rifling is now 1/20 and they are very accurate rifles even with the 300+ gr bullets. I believe that some folks are able to handload up to 400 gr bullets for the .444 as well. So, putting the recoil issue into the equation, it does work for me personally.

Once again, I appreciate your input.

God bless,

Alaska

[Alaska444]

Dear HIBC, FYI, here is a reloading review article on the .444 in answer to your prior question on ammo available for the .444.

For a rifle conceived as a short-range brush buster with 240-265 grain pistol bullets, this .444 Marlin cartridge certainly thrives on long, heavy bullets, and does so with target-rifle type accuracy to boot! I think it safe to say that the notion of .444 Marlin rifles not being capable of stabilizing any bullets over 310 grains, not being able to shoot cast bullets over 1600 fps. and being capable of "gallon jug" accuracy at a hundred yards can all be definitively and finally put to rest as mythology! For the woods wise hunter who limits himself to 200 yard shots at big game, this .444 Marlin cartridge, loaded with any of the above listed bullets is MORE than capable of harvesting anything in North America cleanly and decisively. The first time, every time, with properly placed shots.

In summation, I would add that once loaded with bullets over 300 grains, the .444 Marlin begins to shine brightly as a superb big game rifle. Loaded with any of these loads, it would be a most welcomed camp companion when traveling in grizzly or moose territory, and gives up little in terms of stopping power or penetration to either the .45-70 Govt. or the new Marlin .450M. The accuracy potential of this gun over a wide variety of both bullet weights and nose designs lends it to remain America's Most Versatile Big-Bore!

http://www.beartoothbullets.com/tech_notes/archive_tech_notes.htm/28

[SavageSniper]

Hi fellas. Ok how about this, and maybe it has been done, I dont know. A canistor of pepper spray under the barrel of your firearm(what ever that may be) so you can stop or slow down the bear. That way if pepper spray works that well, your good but you have your gun to back that up. Sounds like a good idea to me. If im ever in big bear country, Im not trusting my rearend to any handgun, dont care what it is.

[thunderkyss]

This is just silly.

You're better off with a .45 acp... bigger bullet, bigger hole. It's like hitting him in the chest with a freight train.




:D

[wyobohunter]

If I ever venture into the woods in Alaska, I think I'll just keep my rifle strapped to me at all times.

I agree that a rifle is preffered but try fighting a salmon with a rifle strapped to you. Lots of people bring rifles & shotguns fishing, they usually end up on the bank out of reach.

[aaalaska]

My redhawk with 300 gr hard cast has shoot thru black bears from side to side and from front to back, thru both front shoulders on a moose, I guess they must be doing the job cause we've never recovered one.
Alex

[gearhounds]

"This is just silly.

You're better off with a .45 acp... bigger bullet, bigger hole. It's like hitting him in the chest with a freight train."

The only thing wrong with this statement is almost all of it. I love my P220, and couldn't ask for a better duty weapon for thin skinned 2 legged predators, but against a full grown angry griz? The .44 mag has a lot more going for it.

[10mmAuto]

The only off the shelf automatic I'd consider for woods carry in Brown territory is a Glock 20 with some 230gr hardcast. Dead reliable, throws a round with a high SD and a lot of energy 15+1 times. That being said, if I knew my most likely bear encounter would be with a brown I'd probably take a .454 Casull.

[grubbylabs]

I don't want to take the time to find it again but I have posted several times when this come up, a story about a 14 year old kid who took a very large charging black in Northern Idaho with a 44 mag. He was archery hunting and they had just left the truck. His father who had taken the pics and posted the story on an archery forum watched it all happen from less than a 100 yards away. They had literally just got out of the truck and were on their way to stands/water hole.

So naturally I carry one. Only I carry a 329 PD. It is fun to shoot.

[Alaska444]

The .44 magnum has great penetration with large hard cast bullets such as the through and through shots mentioned in the above post with moose and bear. it all comes down to shot placement and a whole lot of luck as many have already pointed out. But with the right shot placement, it is enough.

[PIGMAN]

Usually when someone finds themselves in a dangerous situation with a bear it is a surprise and up close, otherwise a bear at a distance is not immediatly dangerous.For this reason often times it is hard to even get a shot off before the bear is on you.In bear country taking a dog along can give you a big edge over the bear.A dog can smell a bear before you get too close and as a rule bears do not like dogs because they associate them with wolves. So in a close encounter the bear will probably go after the dog first or the dog will go after the bear thus creating enough of a diversion to retreat or give you adequate time to place a good shot or two.

In bear country a gun with out a dog is not adequate protection.I am is agreement with the gentleman from Alaska .375 H&H is a really fine bear stopper.I also like my H&R Handi-Rifle in 45/70 that I hand load up to 30/06 pressures.This is a small package with lots of stopping power and I feel pretty secure with it ,otherwise I tote a Browning .375 A-Bolt which is not very Handi due to weight and length.

[Edhem]

Ive heard all of those stories close encounters with brown bears.
You guys talking about those large bore guns, especially magnums, as everyone, including hikers are Wyatt Earps, Dirty Harrys and Rambos.
First of all, if youre faced with a bear, it is very likely that you going to be stoned for around at least a second and a half, which is crucial moment for a bear to attack you. If you dont get stunned and start to run with high on adrenaline it is very likely that you can outrun a bear. Youd be very surprised how fast people can run under life thretening circumstnaces, not very long distances, but very, very fast.
Second thing is that SW 29 is very cumbersome revolver, and it is very heavy too, so its very slow to draw. Also, the same gun have, while shooting have such enormous recoil that it is gonna take you a while when youre ready for another shot(in case you missed).
For that matter it is much better solution to have light weight 9mm pistol, with large capacity clips.
Also, you guys talking about stoping the bear right on the spot, and not about deflecting an attack.
.44 and stronger amunitin have enough power to kickdown even largest bear.
The 9's can deflect a bear for further attack on you, and if you miss one, you have another twelve trys, one after another semi-auto.
So with some SW 9mm i would feel quite safe.

I remember when i was around 9 years old, going with my dad in to the hunting. He offten caried this gun with him self:
http://www.czub.cz/en/catalog/81-centerfire-rifles-cz/KM/CZ_550_STANDARD.aspx
For the case of close encounters with bears he had this pistol:
http://www.czub.cz/en/catalog/79-pistols-cz/PC/CZ_83.aspx

And if you wanna be almost 100% safe from bear attacks, you will need a hunting dog with your self. This Bosnian "tough guy" is unbeatable for such purpose:
Bosnian Coarse-haired Hound. Check it out on the internet, and if you get one, i bet you wont regret. It is very brave dog, that can not be scared by even largest grizzly out there, because ive heard storeis that some dogs just run away in front of the bear, letting its master on the mercy of the vicious beast.

Cheers,
Edo

[youngunz4life]

yes, but you're rollin the dice and sometimes they don 't roll the right way. I can think of worse situations.

[Alaska444]

No one wishes to ever have to put to the test whether a .44 magnum is big enough for a brown bear. However, that being stated, it is a fact that many people have successfully defended against brown bear attacks with .44 magnum revolvers. It all comes down to shot placement which comes about by practice. I suspect none of us get as much practice as we should to be completely proficient. I am a much better shot with my Marlin .444 than with my Ruger SRH. However, the Ruger is much easier to carry and won't get the same attention by game wardens that could bring an accusation of poaching in the right/wrong circumstances.

Going prepared for bear defense just makes sense if you are going to be in that sort of woods. For myself, it begins with a .44 magnum as the minimum with large, hard cast bullets. Handling the recoil goes back to practice. The .44 magnum gets your attention but it is manageable to say the least.

[jackmon]

I wouldnt go with a 44 mag. Ive shot both the 44 and the 50ae. I will take the 50.

[Alaska444]

Go with the largest round you can comfortably shoot well. For me that is the .44 magnum. Sure, a 50 cal will put a big hole in the critter, but who can shoot one of those things easily.

[jackmon]

I have shot 100s of rounds through mine and im very comfortable with it

[Alaska444]

I tried a .454 Casull, but it made my hand go numb for 5 minutes even though I was able to shoot it well. I decided on the .44 magnum as my highest hand gun caliber that won't bother me to shoot. Once again, not the biggest and baddest, but who can contend that with the right shot placement and the right cartridge that it is enough. That is the question, not is it the best.

[Edhem]

Absolutely. .44´s have a lots of stopable power, no doubt, and a lots of hydrostatic effect on tissue. But in those crucial seconds after you encounter the bear, as you Alaska guy said, shot placement is crucial. I d like to see that terminator of a hum,an being to stay calm and take aim and shoot a bear in the midddle of the chest. And how many bulltes you have in Sw 29´ers? As far as i know six. And you can not shoot as rapidly as from 9´er pistol. Bet on that all of you guys would miss the target around 70%.
To put things straight-then the best thing out there woul be an HMG, anti aircraft .50cal with 12.7X99.


Cheers,
Edo

[2500ak]

Ive heard all of those stories close encounters with brown bears.
You guys talking about those large bore guns, especially magnums, as everyone, including hikers are Wyatt Earps, Dirty Harrys and Rambos.


Most real hikers in Alaska carry some form of firearm. We're not Earps, Harrys, or rambos. Just loaded for bear. No one goes into the woods completely unarmed up here.

Moose show up in my back yard fairly frequently. Bears and wolves occasionally.


First of all, if youre faced with a bear, it is very likely that you going to be stoned for around at least a second and a half, which is crucial moment for a bear to attack you.


I have never found this to be true, maybe I'm desensitized.


If you dont get stunned and start to run with high on adrenaline it is very likely that you can outrun a bear. Youd be very surprised how fast people can run under life thretening circumstnaces, not very long distances, but very, very fast.


Bears can run at 35 mph, with burst up to 55 mph. No human can run that fast. Also the times I've encountered bears (fortunately at safe enough distances) I've been hours away from my truck.

Second thing is that SW 29 is very cumbersome revolver, and it is very heavy too, so its very slow to draw. Also, the same gun have, while shooting have such enormous recoil that it is gonna take you a while when youre ready for another shot(in case you missed).

A .44 Magnum with a good compensator has less kick than a .40 S&W. At least in my experience.


For that matter it is much better solution to have light weight 9mm pistol, with large capacity clips.
Also, you guys talking about stoping the bear right on the spot, and not about deflecting an attack.

I know people who've found 9mm stuck in the hide of grizzlies they've hunted. 9mm cannot be trusted to penetrate. It's the equivalent of trying to kill a deer with a bb gun.

.44 and stronger amunitin have enough power to kickdown even largest bear.
The 9's can deflect a bear for further attack on you, and if you miss one, you have another twelve trys, one after another semi-auto.
So with some SW 9mm i would feel quite safe.

You'll get off maybe two shots, if you're lucky. Neither of them will do anything if it's a sow with cubs, or a starving grizzly, or a rabid grizzly, or an oblivious grizzly that's having a bad day.

[American Made]

I own several 44 magnums and reload all my own ammo. My 'oh crapolo' handgun is my Ruger 4" redhawk loaded with 265 gr hornady interlocks.

From my backwoods testing ( logs, coffee cans filled with dirt, etc) I prefer the 265gr hornady against the hardcast bullets. Because they do provide more tissue damage and hold together.

Will they save my life? I think that any handgun is marginal for big bears.

But..they sure are better than tossing tree branches and dirt clods.

My new .358 Winchester is a very different story... just can't find any holster for it. Just ordered some of these for spring bear
http://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=249

[warbirdlover]

Is .44 Magnum Big Enough for Brown Bear?

No

[Art Eatman]

Y'know, I feel real sorry for that poor old horse...