PDA

View Full Version : 220 swift takes down grizzly


V00DOO
May 17, 2007, 01:04 PM
just goes to show....

here is a link

http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/wildlife/bears/attacks/story/8803434p-8704592c.html

Mak308
May 17, 2007, 02:07 PM
:eek: Feel Sorry for that bear.

Scorch
May 17, 2007, 02:11 PM
Not exactly what the doctor ordered for bear medicine, but three rounds at point blank range directly into the skull seems to work pretty well for almost anything. Sounds like full-contact hunting, though.

Groundhog
May 17, 2007, 02:35 PM
Sounds like full-contact hunting, though.

Note to self: Suggest new reality TV show to producers at first opportunity... :D

Dirty_Harry
May 17, 2007, 03:29 PM
I am just curios why he was carrying a .220 swift in bear country...something like a .25-06 - .270 would be better.

Jseime
May 17, 2007, 03:33 PM
I guess if thats what youve got and it keeps you alive its good but i would feel much safer toting around a .45-70.

BUSTER51
May 17, 2007, 03:39 PM
God was watching over him that day .:D

Groundhog
May 17, 2007, 03:47 PM
I am just curios why he was carrying a .220 swift in bear country...something like a .25-06 - .270 would be better.

The article said one guy was after bear and the other guy was after wolves. He was the one with the .220.

ConcealCarryNY
May 17, 2007, 05:32 PM
Wow thats what I call a good guy to have around

5whiskey
May 17, 2007, 05:54 PM
Wow thats what I call a good guy to have around

I agree whole-heartedly.

This is why I believe in carrying a sidearm as back up. I've been made fun of taking one varmint hunting before but I don't care. I live about as far from grizzlys as anyone can (though there are some blackies around, small ones) but I still don't care, though I carry the sidearm more for hogs than anything. Thanks for the link, thats a pretty good story. Very glad to hear the man is okay as well.

mrawesome22
May 17, 2007, 08:35 PM
People make fun of me for carrying a pistol everytime I take to the field. No matter what I'm hunting. I tell them "It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it." This is usually followed by a few moments of the "hard thinking look" then followed by "Yeah, that makes sense.".

Eghad
May 17, 2007, 08:40 PM
I betcha he leaves the .220 at home next time.

Varmint Eviscerator
May 17, 2007, 09:58 PM
"heard the first shot and felt the bear fall" Seems pretty darn effective to me!
Secondly, what is WRONG with you people??? Man, if someone uses a .338lapua instead of .50bmg for a coup de grace on a friggin squirrel your guys on on the shooter like flies on old fruit. Did it ever occur to any of you it was: 1) A survival situation... 2) 220 swift produces far more energy than ANY handgun aside from the 500S&W-TAKE THAT 45acp fans:mad:!
3) If it isn't a 30-06, magnum, or 45acp-it aint worth diddley squat for you people-get a grip!
-VE

JR47
May 17, 2007, 10:47 PM
It's just as simple-minded to go the other way. There have been documented kills upon grizzlies with a .22 LR pistol, and all it cost was his hand.

It might be noted, as well, that several areas have minimum caliber requirements for bear hunting. They are usually the result of some unintelligent fool, who believed that heavy calibers weren't necessary, and ended up as bear-food.

While the subject of caliber has been beaten to death endlessly, it does have a certain amount of truth in it.

Did it ever occur to any of you it was: 1) A survival situation..

It was a stupidity situation in bear country.

2) 220 swift produces far more energy than ANY handgun aside from the 500S&W-TAKE THAT 45acp fans

Ooooh, and a .30-06 produces far more energy than a .220 Swift-TAKE THAT mouse-caliber fans:mad:

3) If it isn't a 30-06, magnum, or 45acp-it aint worth diddley squat for you people-get a grip!

I see. You haven't a clue, have you? For every ONE of the small-caliber "saves" that are reported, there are far more numerous accounts of fatalities on the part of the undergunned losers. Not to mention something that the adherents of ground-hog calibers have obviously forgotten. The idea of hunting is to provide a humane death to the animal, and not a lingering one. Far too many animals, dangerous or not, are left wounded by undergunned hunters every year. Of course, varmint hunters don't seem to hold that in especially high regard, do they?

Compared to the power of a .220 Swift on a ground hog of say less than 10 pounds, we'd all be using 105 mm to hunt elk, based on a caliber/power to body weight scale. Yeah, you tell them how they're overpowered cartridges aren't needed. By your scale, you shouldn't need anything larger than a .22 Short to take the largest varmints in America.:barf:

ConcealCarryNY
May 17, 2007, 11:09 PM
Compared to the power of a .220 Swift on a ground hog of say less than 10 pounds, we'd all be using 105 mm to hunt elk, based on a caliber/power to body weight scale

Arty hunting???? where do I sign up???? Was it this site that had the guy who was hunting feral cats with a Civil war era mortar?

mrawesome22
May 17, 2007, 11:27 PM
Of course, varmint hunters don't seem to hold that in especially high regard, do they?

I do. Please don't sterotype every varmint hunter as someone who thinks their .22-250Rem will kill everything from g-hogs to elephants.

I am a firm believer in humane death.

I fought on a former post that .204Ruger was not adequate for hogs. Sure it will kill them. But sure it could easily leave them injured and suffering. My thinking on that post was the .204Ruger was designed for thin skinned, light boned animals. The hog is neither. You can look up the thread if you like. Search for .204Ruger for hogs in the rifle forum.


It was a stupidity situation in bear country.

It sure was. To not have a good 44RemMag or larger revolver as a backup in bear country is nimwitted at best IMO.

Ooooh, and a .30-06 produces far more energy than a .220 Swift-TAKE THAT mouse-caliber fans

I don't really get this. The 30-06Springfield cartridge produces FAR more energy than a 220Swift is a given. But why does that make the 220Swift a "mouse caliber"?

I'm with you on this. BRING PLENTY OF GUN! As I've said before, it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

There is a great advantage to having a super flat shooting .224" diameter bullet for hunting "varmints" though. You don't need a 300WinMag to kill a coyote.

joshua
May 18, 2007, 03:34 AM
Wow! Thanks for the story. If it was me I would have a handgun on my hip, but I'm not sure if I could've used it since he had the rifle and got a shot off that hit but did not connect very well.

gdvan01
May 18, 2007, 03:42 AM
Secondly, what is WRONG with you people??? Man, if someone uses a .338lapua instead of .50bmg for a coup de grace on a friggin squirrel your guys on on the shooter like flies on old fruit. Did it ever occur to any of you it was: 1) A survival situation... 2) 220 swift produces far more energy than ANY handgun aside from the 500S&W-TAKE THAT 45acp fans!
3) If it isn't a 30-06, magnum, or 45acp-it aint worth diddley squat for you people-get a grip!Drink much coffee?

stevelyn
May 18, 2007, 07:57 AM
The guy with the .220 Swift is from out here on the AK Pen where I'm at. His dad lives just up the street.
I suspect that's not the first bear he's whacked.;)

5whiskey
May 18, 2007, 08:20 AM
varmint eviscerator (???),

I was not supposing that the .45 acp would have been the perfect round to take the bear out as opposed to the .220. When I suggested carrying a sidearm it was solely on the grounds that very many people lay there rifle down as in this situation and if they do happen to be confronted with their rifle 20' away (as in this situation) you've a much better chance at drawing a sidearm and putting 6 .357 rounds in the bears face than you would running for your rifle and getting off 1 shot.

one more thing...

220 swift produces far more energy than ANY handgun aside from the 500S&W-TAKE THAT 45acp fans!

Really, no crap. A rifle caliber with more energy than a handgun caliber? Who wouldv'e ever thought that. Boy you sure told us .45 acp guys, I'm gonna throw out my 1911 and start ccw a carbine in .220 swift.

kickshot85
May 18, 2007, 08:53 AM
50BMG on a squirrel, hmmm, I like the odds. I suppose that a 50BMG could be the perfect squirrel gun, you could just shoot the tree out from beneath it.

As far as all of us needing nothing short of an Abrams tank to take a grizzly, all I have to say is this, give me a night stick and a Budweiser, that bear is going DOWN!!!:cool:

Groundhog
May 18, 2007, 10:30 AM
mrawesome22 said:

People make fun of me for carrying a pistol everytime I take to the field. No matter what I'm hunting. I tell them "It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it." This is usually followed by a few moments of the "hard thinking look" then followed by "Yeah, that makes sense.".

Imagine the looks they'd give you if you told them the only reason you carried it was to fight your way back to the rifle you shouldn't have set down in the first place! LOL :D

Art Eatman
May 18, 2007, 10:49 AM
Valium time, kiddies, and some warm milk. And then it's nap time.

After your nap, go back and read the article.

Two experienced hunters. One set up for bear, the other for wolves. So far, so good.

Find bear, kill bear, just as intended. Quote: "Tracks around the den also seemed to show one bear."

The main "mistake": Set rifles down in order to deal with dead bear. Trouble is, it's difficult to deal with a dead carcass if you don't have your hands free.

Second bear jumps out.

.220 guy has to go get his rifle. Gets rifle. Shoots bear. Bear dies.

The choice of rifles is not any sort of issue at all. I couldn't tell--definitively--from the article whether the second and third shots from the .220 were needed or not needed.

If there was any tactical error, it lay in not having an open-carry, large-cartridge handgun.

Still, note that even experienced hunters can get fooled. Neither expected a second bear to be in the cave, and from the tracks it was a reasonable belief.

Art