Woods Handgun

[Jacket67]

Hey TFL,

I've been thinking a lot about what handgun would be best for a backup when I go hunting, or to defend myself (should the need arise) when I go backpacking. This purchase is far-off, but I'd like to try and get an idea of what would be best.

I live in Georgia and do all of my hunting here. I do, however, hike more in the Carolinas than anything. I've been trying to decide between a .45 acp 1911, or a .357 revolver. Where I am from, the main concerns are hogs, coyotes, panthers and "two-legged critters". I live in south Georgia on my own 40 acres of wooded land and know that panthers and the occasional pack of coyotes are in my woods, and that druggies from the nearby trailer park have been known to come onto my land (a problem my family and I are working on with local PD). Anyway, I can't decide which handgun would be my best option. My primary concerns about the guns are the effectiveness of .45 acp on big cats and possibly black bears I may encounter, and the defensive capability of a revolver should an unavoidable confrontation with bad people occur.

I've shot both and love both. I'm tempted closer to the 1911 simply because I know I will inherit a .357 or two from my uncle one day. But I also like the idea of a 4" .357 of my own. I try to stay very aware of where I am and what I might be around to avoid having to shoot an animal I'd rather leave-be, and I don't care to get into a gunfight. That being said, I want to be well-equipped for either should the need arise.

Thanks in advance.


Disclaimer: I've spent a fair amount of time researching this topic because I know many have asked it, but I never found anything that answered the question for my situation. Sorry for any redundancies.

[BarryLee]

You might consider a GLOCK G20 in 10mm. It will provide more capacity than the other models you are considering and plenty of power.

[CDR_Glock]

I prefer two guns: 44 Magnum and greater for animals. 45 or 357 for humans. I'm not a fan of semiauto though for outdoors as dust and debris could cause reliability issues.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[T. O'Heir]

You planning on losing or damaging your rifle? Different thing when backpacking. Use whatever you use in town for that.
"...effectiveness of .45 ACP on big cats..." Kitty is hunted regularly with a .22 Mag. Issue is the bullet, not the cartridge. HP's are not suitable for Porky unless he's of the 2 legged variety.
"...semi-auto though for outdoors..." 1911's seemed to work ok in the deep mud of W.W. I trenches plus the deserts and jungles of W.W. II. and every where else. Dust and debris will stop a revolver just as fast as it might a pistol too.

[the possum]

This is a subject I've devoted a lot of thought to, as well. I still haven't found an ideal solution. I'd love to have a packable handgun capable of hunting bigger game, or varmints at fairly long (for a handgun) distances. Yet won't be unwieldy and has high capacity in case of defensive encounters at closer range, such as a pack of wild dogs, or meth cookers & pot growers.

A high-cap 10mm seems like the best compromise I've come up with so far. But it's still at the bottom end of the power range I want. Top hand loads with a 180 grainer only list ~50 fps faster than hot 185 grainers from a .45. Hardly worth buying a new gun over. There is the .460 Rowland, but of course there's extra cost, limited options (not even sure if there's any hi-caps), the required compensator would make it ear-splitting loud, and I'd fret over losing the brass. The Desert Eagle and other magnum autos are just too big all around for me.

Of course, a mid caliber semi auto carbine covers all the above nicely, but that's not the solution for our question, either.

[Pathfinder45]

If you are already hunting with a rifle, then perhaps the handgun that makes the most sense would be a 22 rimfire. Other than that, for packing into the wilderness, I carry a Ruger Vaquero in 45 Colt. If I had to choose a different caliber, my #2 choice would be 44 magnum, and #3 would be 357 magnum, which is probably what you should choose. I like single-action revolvers, but you will probably want a double-action S&W or Ruger.

[ShootistPRS]

What would be the "normal" number of druggies that you would run into? Double that number and that is the number of rounds I would like to carry. A 357 with a couple of speed loaders is 18 rounds. A 45 1911 and two mags gives you 24 rounds and a round nose or SWC at 180 to 200 grains will take care of dogs, cats and bears as easily as a 357 Mag.

I back-packed all over the mountains in Washington. Day trips were usually less than 10 miles (one way) and short stays (up to two weeks) 14+ miles one way. I packed a gun from the time I was 18 and when I turned 21 the gun was my 357. I saw a few black bear, two cougars but not any coyotes in all those years. I never ran into any people who were dangerous and usually enjoyed a short conversation before moving on. Those were different times but I was also far enough from the rest of the world that no druggie or robber would expect to find any people to "do business" with.

I think if I found druggies on my property I would make sure it wasn't a pleasant experience for them. I would post signs that stated it was a private gun range and post a few targets with nice small groups near their entrance points.

[Pathfinder45]

And then there's the question: Which do you shoot best?

[Lohman446]

Top hand loads with a 180 grainer only list ~50 fps faster than hot 185 grainers from a .45

What numbers are you seeing out of a .45 exactly? Underwood lists there 185 grain 45 ammo at 1200FPS and 592lbs energy and 180 grain 10MM at 1300FPS and 676. I just clicked on the first two I say. While I grant those spreads were not as far as I expected that is some very hot 45.

[Hanshi]

The possibility of being attacked by a bear or big cat are very, very remote; a bit more of a chance from two legged vermin. Wild dogs can be a problem and I've encountered them in the past. I'm Georgia born and raised and lived there for more than 62 years. A retired couple were killed by a pack of wild dogs not far from our house; the pack was using an old, dilapidated farmhouse. The property owner knew about them and when LEO killed the dogs they charged the property.

If I want a heavy hitter in the bush I take my OM Ruger BlackHawk .45 Colt. I load it with heavy handloads that give a 260 grain swc 1260 fps in my 7.5" barrel. But the one I carry is the twin 4.5" barrel. Otherwise I like the .357mag with hollow points. I've killed quite a few deer with a couple of .357 revolvers and either of these two calibers will take down anything east of the Mississippi. I'm a huge fan of the 1911; but that's for city carry.

[Jacket67]

Most of the time I use a bow for deer hunting which is why I really want a good handgun for defensive needs. Even when I hunt with a rifle, I still don't like the idea of using a bolt-action defensively. I'm a lefty so it's a bit awkward to do quickly. It can be done, I'd just prefer a handgun.

I have no doubt at all in the 1911's reliability outdoors. Just concerned with the .45 for animals vs using a revolver defensively

[bamaranger]

We kick this around all the time. While the liklihood of an animal attack is low, it happens, and our society and the people that reside is a strange place these days. It never hurts to be prepared, and maybe more important aware.

I quit carrying a backup handgun for hunting after only one or two forays. Just plain to much more to keep up with and tote. Discounting my time in uniform, when you may have indeed carried both, on any other outing, w/ no long gun, I carry a handgun. And between work and hobby time, I've covered a lot of ground. What I've carrried has varied over the years. As a general rule, caliber has increased, but bulk and size has diminished.

I carrried a 4" .357 Security 6, than a Vlackhawk, for a long time, cause it was all I had. I switched to a .22 auto, and then a .22 mag SA, cause they were lighter and I could plink with them if I wanted, and carry a bunch of ammo. Then a father and son were kidnapped and murdered locally at a boat ramp, and I went back to the magnum. By then I'd acquired a 4" .44 mag Mtn version. Not much heavier than the .357, I just went ahead and carried the .44, though downloaded to a hot .44 Spl level.

What I learned with the magnums, was that the revolvers did not necessarily carry very easy. Hammer spurs stuck you in the ribs, adjustable sights were vulnerable, target blade fronts hung on stuff,, and square butts were bulky, and managing the ammo required some type of loops, loader or system in addition to the holster. Heavy too, all steel and , they ran about 35-40+ oz empty. ( I'll add that a 1911 falls into this same weight class) If they were blued, I had to pay attention to the care of them after a foray.

Quite unintentionally, I acquired an early Glock 20 (I was looking for a Delta, I was interested in the 10mm cartridge and wanted the SA of the 1911). At 30oz + empty,and just under 40 loaded, it was lighter than the revolvers. Flat and compact by design, with low profile fixed sights, it carried easier. The Glock finish on the slide held up better than pretty S&W or Ruger blue, and of course the polymer was worry free. Capacity, 15+1 of ammo exceeding .357 ballistics. And it ran just fine, wet, dry or neglected, and still does. I was hooked, and my revolvers have stayed at home for the most part since.

The issue with the 10mm is ammo. To avoid this, I see no reason that the .45 acp glock 21 can't be a wise choice as well. And if one want to cut size and weight a bit more, the Glock 29 (10mm) or the Glock 30 (.45) are compact versions offering more of the same in a smaller package.

[Berserker]

Dust and debris will stop a revolver just as quick as a semi auto. Never heard that one before.


Myself I am fond of 44 mag/special.

[amprecon]

I would trust a 9mm as a woods gun, more specifically a Glock 17, as long as we're restricted to black bears as the largest animal out there.

I've owned a .357 before, and after using it on a wild hog and then having my ears ringing for a week afterwards I got rid of it.

The .357 is a powerful round, it's basically a very fast 9mm. After that experience I decide that 10mm or .45acp would be the way to go, leaning more towards .45acp, I just feel the bigger hole would have made more of a difference on that hog than the .357 did.

I've pondered .44mag, 10mm, .45 Colt, .460 Rowland and a myriad of other handgun powerhouse calibers, but have decided that I would rather stick with calibers that are popular, not expensive and easy to obtain. For anything that might be encountered on the Appalachia, a 9mm or .45acp will be effective enough, just get the gun you shoot the best.

I don't like DA revolvers and prefer SA, so this Ruger Vaquero in .45acp


and this S&W SW1911SC are on my shortlist for some .45 caliber lovin'

[FrankenMauser]

Cats and bears are fairly fragile animals. You don't need a cannon to take them down.

I do, frequently, carry a .44 Mag or .480 Ruger in the woods here. ...But it's for angry moose and the possibility of wolves or a stray grizzly, more than anything else. (Wolves are here. The grizz... not so much. Last sighting was 20+ years ago, but the Fish and Game say they're moving back in. Moose are always angry.)

When I'm in a place where moose, wolves, and grizz are eliminated, I have no problem carrying a .327 Federal or 9mm.


Were I in your position, combined with my own feelings, I'd probably be weighing the needs for magazine capacity to decide between 9mm and .45 Auto.
Personally... I'd probably take the 9mm. Modern ammunition is amazing, compared to what most of us grew up with, or have read about in regards to comparing the cartridges.

[Doyle]

My woods gun is a snubnose Ruger Security Six in .357. I keep the first cylinder loaded with a CCI snakeload just in case Mr. Noshoulders wants to crawl too close to my stand.

[Cosmodragoon]

If the other choice is a 1911 in .45 acp, I'd go with the .357 magnum. A good, 4" double-action revolver with six or seven shots on the wheel can do a lot of jobs. This is just one of them. Heavier solid bullets will work best on bears, so long as you can put them in the right places. The 125-grain JHP is still famous for its stopping power versus dangerous humans, including those on drugs. As far as wolves, coyotes, or any of the North American wildcats I've seen; I feel like any defensive ammo in .357 will be fine. (I don't know about .38 special.)

The capacity difference seems negligible compared to a single-stack semi-auto. However, a higher-capacity .45 might work. You could explore the .45 +p or .45 super; or you could just get into 10mm. Either way, shot placement is still the most important factor.

(BTW, I also tend to carry .327 Federal more than .357 magnum but that's because I have a lot of choices. The .357 magnum wins in versatility and if you don't have one already, I'd go that route first.)

[random guy]

For bad peeps and small to medium animals, I'd go 9mm. If you are hiking you are generally on your own without the usual societal backups. If there is any chance of becoming stranded overnight or longer (not to mention attacked), have the best ammo reserve possible. That means a space/weight efficient round.

As far as a specific pistol, many to choose from but I'd want a polymer pistol, again for weight efficiency.

[jmr40]

I live and hike/camp in the N GA mountains as well as the Smokies. I used to carry a G20, but have recently downsized to a G29. It is much more concealable. My 2nd choice would be a 3-4" medium frame 357. I've camped in grizzly bear country with it as well and slept as well as I would have any other gun. Not that I really slept well, but!!!

If you're concerned about 4 legged critters 45 ACP isn't the answer. While those short stubby bullets may be OK on human threats they don't offer enough penetration for larger stuff. A heavy for caliber 180 gr or 200 gr hardcast bullet fired from 357 mag or 10mm will get deeper to vitals on bear if that is your concern.

If in an area with no bear I'm perfectly content with my G19 or G26.

I choose the G29 because it holds 11-16 rounds of ammo depending on the magazine vs 5-6 rounds for a revolver. Even in the woods human attacks are more likely. In the unlikely event of bear the better 10mm loads will beat 357 mag and come very close to 44 mag when fired from shorter 3-4" barrels. Being an inch shorter and a pound lighter than my 3" Smith 629 is a huge plus when hiking in mountains.

The G29 alongside a 4" magnum revolver.

[the possum]

Most of the time I use a bow for deer hunting which is why I really want a good handgun for defensive needs.

Ah, that explains a lot. I know what you mean. We're not allowed to carry any kind of firearm at all when bow hunting here in Illinois, but I still feel a need to carry something extra, for "just in case". I tote a long blade as a sidearm in that situation, but would rather have even a small pistol.

What numbers are you seeing out of a .45 exactly? Underwood lists there 185 grain 45 ammo at 1200FPS and 592lbs energy and 180 grain 10MM at 1300FPS and 676.

Firstly, let's go with your numbers. In the grand scheme of things, I still consider them in the same class. Both are more powerful than a .22 or .380, and neither is in the same class as a magnum big bore wheelgun. Nor are they anywhere close to a 3" 12 gauge or a .300 winmag. 100 fps either way isn't enough to quibble over- there's a lot of overlap in a Venn diagram of both rounds.

But to answer your question, I just jumped on handloads.com to see where they topped out, and their load data for 10mm must have been limited- highest I happened to see from a manufacturer was 1250 fps. My old load data from Vihta Vouri for .45 ACP listed a 185 grainer at 1248 fps using a max charge VV-N350. I busted hundreds of raccoons with that load using Gold Dots, and it became my standard procedure to dump the whole mag into 'em so they couldn't crawl down a hole to die, because one or two shots couldn't be relied on to finish the job quickly.

The common defensive handgun rounds put holes in things. I don't trust any of 'em to put a critter's lights out on the spot, unless you're lucky enough to hit the brain.

[bassJAM1]

I don’t think a 1911 or 4” .357 mag are the best choices for your needs. I know when I backpack I like to limit the weight I’m carrying, and both of those are heavy guns. I’m happy with using a .38 special j-frame when backpacking and fishing, but here in Ohio I only have to worry about people. In the several times I’ve backpacked and fished the Smoky Mountains in Tenn and N. Carolina I’ve only see bears while driving, and you really don’t hear about too many black bear attacks. I have taken a Glock 23 backpacking in N. Carolina once and while I found it a little heavy for my tastes, I’d suggest something like that before a 1911 or steel framed 4” .357. Your chances or having issues with any wild animal is pretty rare, and most people that make the effort to go backpacking are pretty decent. I’d vote a small 9mm, a .38sp revolver, or an LCR in either .357mag or .327 mag for pretty much any 2 or 4 legged critter in the eastern US.

[Siggy-06]

Aww just go ahead and get a nice stainless 1911 and a can of bear spray and you'll be good to go just about anywhere hiking in the lower 48. A glock 10mm is another lighter option that performs great as well.

[Model12Win]

A good .454 Casull would serve you very well, the compact Ruger Alaskan comes to mind as the ideal woods companion. Can we loaded mild to wild for whatever threat you encounter, be it man or beast.

[Hal]

My primary concerns about the guns are the effectiveness of .45 acp on big cats and possibly black bears....

Look here https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...highlight=bear

Scroll on down to where the late Gale McMillan relates a story of the .45acp and a bear.

[stagpanther]

Best handgun caliber? The one that allows you to get on target and shoot the most accurately the quickest. Hand cannon isn't going to do much good if you're winging squirrels in the trees instead of the charging whatever that you have seconds to hit and stop.