Bear:is the9mm enough

[tipoc]

Yes, ball ammo. A groundbreaking seminal round.

tipoc

[rock185]

We have a few bears around, had a young one in the yard a time or two, but we have not caused each other any particular concern. Were I carrying a 9mm, and my concern was adequate penetration, I'd make it easy on myself and just load it with either Winchester or IMI 124 grain NATO ball. Nothing exotic, but I've used thousands of rounds of NATO ball and it has functioned reliably in every pistol, revolver or carbine I've used it in. I suspect penetration would be about as good as might be hoped for in a 9mm round......ymmv

FWIW, the IMI NATO is the warmer load of the two.

Just noticed that you were more interested in the bullet than the cartridge. Yes, hard bullets likely better for penetration than soft bullets regardless of cartridge.......

[Double Naught Spy]

Is 9mm enough for bears? Yes, unless it isn't.

Is 454 Casull enough for bears? Yes, unless it isn't.

Is .45-70 enough for bears? yes, unless it isn't.

Over the years, there have been people who have defended themselves with .22 lr, 9mm pistol etc. and you have had people that failed to defend themselves with the rifles they were using for hunting bear or moose despite having shot the bear.

You have to do your part. With that said, I would never suggest going with the minimal option for bear defense.

[SIGSHR]

Jeff Cooper answered a reader's letter:
"As much as I favor the 45, I wear a 44 in bear country. "

[jfruser]

Is 9mm enough? I dunno. But it was designed to knock down 180lb men, not big honking bears. So I suspect it will be marginal, but still better than harsh language.

Were I stuck with 9mm, the ammo I would choose is one of the 147gr flat point or truncated cone designs.

Buffalo Bore +P 147gr. Hard Cast FN as was linked before would be at the top of my list:
https://www.buffalobore.com/index.ph...t_detail&p=388

But the standard pressure 147gr FMJ-FN might also be a reasonable choice:
https://www.buffalobore.com/index.ph...t_detail&p=342
This would be choice #1 for my wife's 1911 OACP 9mm.

Underwood has a contender with their 147gr +P+ FMJ-FN
https://www.underwoodammo.com/collec...=7865898696761

Of the three linked options, the first has the largest, sharpest meplat.

================

Frankly, were I entertaining thoughts of "minimalist bear defense handguns" I would be more likely to tote a .38 Special snubby loaded with hard cast wadcutters. Again, BB and Underwood can help. Both my alloy snubbies have a Crimson Trace laser grip that will aid in low light/point shooing up close.

[Josh17]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

I took a look at the bullet the OP linked to. Interesting, we're shooting Phillips Screwdriver tips now.

OK, its solid copper alloy...yawns...

And its specs are EXACTLY the same as the WWI and WWII German FMJ, a 115gr @ 1150fps. I don't see how any kind of tip, or alloy composition will change the performance to a significant degree.

I do find it amusing how people are so concerned about 9mm shooting through people and walls and hitting other people somewhere downrange, but at the same time think the same ammo won't shoot half way through a bear.

I kind of was wondering the same. Supposedly 9mm FMJ can pass through Barriers too easily and over penetration is always said to be a major flaw of it.
But against a bear or any large animal... Wouldn’t you want something that “over penetrates”??

https://youtu.be/DYLbmSp5itA

TNoutdoors tested it. Skip to 2:20 when the testing starts.

I don’t know why he got frustrated in the test, as it was doing what it was labeled to do. I guess he was hoping it wouldn’t penetrate that far? Not sure. It went through 32 inches multiple times. I wonder if he had like 4-5 gel blocks how far the 9mm round would penetrate, as TNoutdoors couldn’t get the round to not keep doing complete pass-throughs. Which that’s what the round was designed for, so not sure why he got frustrated. But would have been interesting to see how far it could go max in the gel blocks, if he had a lot more gel blocks to just line up.

So it would seem the 9mm round in question would penetrate better than a .40 would..The only advantage to a .40 is slightly larger round. But if pentration is most important on bears then wouldn’t the 9mm round the OP listed beat .40? In the video comments a lot of people are mentioning it for use in the woods and it seems like most agree it would work considering how much the 9mm round penetrates.

[Bottom Gun]

The gentleman in the video complains about the amount of penetration but that’s exactly what the Lehigh bullets are supposed to do.
Tnoutdoors obviously wanted a bullet that penetrates less for shooting in public places.
For my usage, this sort of terminal performance is perfect. I use the Xtreme Penetrator and the Xtreme Defense Lehigh bullets in my .357 Sig loads that I use for woods carry because I’m more concerned with large animals like black bear or mountain lions, both of which we have in abundance here.
I used to carry a .45 ACP or a .44 mag but these days I carry .357 Sig. For my usage, the Sig round makes better sense to me.
Should I ever have to shoot a bear, I would want as much penetration as I can get. If I can punch all the way through, better yet.
Tnoutdoors also mentions the cavitation as being similar to that of a JHP. If you consider the cavitation along with the degree of penetration, that looks like ideal bullet performance to me. This, in my opinion, is a very impressive bullet.
When I’m in the forest, I feel more confident having my P229 loaded with these Lehigh bullets than I did with a magazine full of Gold Dots.
That’s just my opinion.

[44 AMP]

Is 9mm enough? I dunno. But it was designed to knock down 180lb men, not big honking bears.

The 9mm Luger was designed in 1902, in order to appeal to the German military who felt the 7.62 bullet (.30 Luger) wasn't big enough to be combat effective. 180lb men were not nearly as common back in those days as they are today. The German Army adopted it in 1908, and the load was a 124FMJ @1050fps (4" barrel). Shortly before WW I, the load was changed to a 115gr FMJ @ 1150fps.

There are better performing 9mm loadings today. 9mm Luger will kill bear, (and everything else) so it can work as a defensive weapon. However, its not my first, second, or even third choice for defense against bears.

[tipoc]

The rap against ball ammo as a useful type bullet for hunting or self defense against animals is three fold:

1. It doesn't track straight. Unlike gel, which is consistent throughout it's length, mammals are not. The density of our tissue varies quite a bit. The shape of ball ammo lends it to taking the path of least resistance. This is why in large part a flat meplat was placed on the nose of bullets intended for hunting or self defense. The meplat resisted the tendency to veer off the intended course once in tissue.

2. Shock and internal damage. It's easier for a pointed nose bullet to pierce and penetrate than a round with a flat meplat. Passage through flesh with ball ammo takes less effort than with a jhp or a round with a wide meplat. Thus both the initial shock of the bullet striking and the damage as the bullet moves into and through the flesh is greater than with ball. You can visibly see this in slo-mo video of game being shot and in gel tests. This is why the lead round nose ammo cops in the U.S. used to carry developed such a bad rep. It's also why RNFP and LFP bullets were developed and why the LSWC was developed a several generations back.

3. Bone. It tends to deflect off bone easier. Breaking bone is a greater advantage than either punching a hole in it or being deflected off it.

Ball ammo of any caliber penetrates well. More so in 9mm and 38 caliber than in larger calibers. It's always easier to poke holes with a sewing needle than a knitting needle. Smaller diameter bullets meet less resistance in passage through various materials provided adequate energy for the task.

So the effectiveness of handgun rounds meant for defense against wild animals requires a bullet type that penetrates well and has a flat meplat at it's tip. As always the more powerful round will be better provided the skills of the shooter are up to handling more power. Use what you can shoot accurately at speed.

tipoc

[Cosmodragoon]

Tipoc did a nice job explaining why FMJ is a poor choice. I'd argue that flat-point FMJ isn't a whole lot better because it's rarely sharp and still relatively soft. The "sharp meplat" discussed there and by jfruser above is an improvement and the increased rigidity of solid copper or hard-cast lead could help as well.

This brings me back to the Lehigh Penetrator design. What's better than a sharp circular meplat around the tip? How about the greater area of sharp edges along the plus-sign, the complex area of the striking surface, or the flutes which actually do work towards tissue disruption along the wound channel? I know the difference those features make is arguably less than, say, the increased mass or velocity from upgrading caliber. Still, if features like "a sharp meplat" are significant determinants within the realm of 9mm, I'll stand by my recommendation.

That said, nice to see .40 come up in josh17's post. This is obviously a gross oversimplification but I tend to view .40 as allowing 9mm-ish velocity with a bigger bullet, and .357 Sig as allowing a 9mm-ish bullet with more velocity. Sectional density plays a role in penetration and .40 does suffer a little in that area. Is it enough to matter? As tipoc correctly stated, "the density of our tissue varies quite a bit". While sectional density might be a loss, the .40 might be better at smashing bone or inflicting other kinds of damage. I've never shot an animal, or a meat target, with .40 S&W.

At the end of the day, I still think the Lehigh Penetrator in .357 Sig will be my new woods round. The .40 S&W will still be my winter carry round around town. The rest of the time, it will still be 9mm or .327 Federal.

[Josh17]

This kinda answers the thread with a video test against an actual bears head.

VIDEO:
**9mm extreme penetrator (exact same round OP mentioned) VS an actual REAL Black Bear Head**

https://youtu.be/1Dv5LSsss3U

The test starts at 1:25 mark. Now the only down-side is it was shot on the side, not on the front. But that doesn’t somehow diminish the round the OP mentioned.

“Now as for the damage... Nice holes. No problem passing through. Exit holes are pretty brutal you can see broken bone on the exit holes. Shattered bones no problem penetrating all the way through”.

—just quoting the main part of the video for those who don’t watch it.

[Josh17]

Also, further proof the 9mm CAN stop a bear (actually the video shows the weaker 9x18 Mak round dropping a Brown Bear). Does it mean you should hunt bear with 9mm? No, of course not. But if someone feels more comfortable carrying a Glock 19 with 16 rounds of 9mm extreme penetrator then looking at all the evidence and tests it seems like it would work, if the shooter does their part (vs someone who say cannot shoot a snub nose sized revolver or similar size revolver - that is a similar sized revolver compared to the mentioned Glock 19 - in 44 mag even half as accurately or confidently as they could shooting a 9mm Glock 19 with 3X + the capacity... Well, I guess I can see why people ask this question and consider it.

***VIDEO: 9x18 drops Brown bear instantly shot multiple times by Police. It was very up close, so they likely landed a shot to the head against the brown bear.***

https://youtu.be/tM2ifggeH0Q

If the 9X18 Mak can down a brown bear (isn’t the 9x18 Mak only slightly more powerful then a 380?) then a 9mm “extreme penetrator” round - which has been tested heavily and shown to penetrate very far, including a test against an actual Bears head - then the 9mm extreme penetrator would obviously work as it’s much hotter round with more pentration.

I think the two videos I linked above answer the “9mm vs a bear” more so than anything else.

[44 AMP]

I would like to point out that it isn't power alone, nor bullet shape when it comes to penetrating a black bear's skull. The angle matters, as well.

Few would argue that a .30-30 doesn't have the power, especially at close range, but I know of a case where several (4) shots deflected off a bear skull at close range. Shot 5 at a slightly different angle penetrated ending the bear.

No matter what you use, sometimes Murphy takes a direct hand, and things that ought to work, don't.

[Old Stony]

I'm not one to argue minor points about bullets, but I can state some of my experiences with them. I shoot a lot of hogs, both in traps and in the woods. Sometimes I use a pistol to finish off one that is already down, and I often shoot them in traps...penetrating the skulls.
I have used most of the common pistol calibers from .22 lr on up through the big bores for this stuff. I often carry a 9mm, 40, or 45 auto with me and use whichever is with me at the time. I have been surprised at the penetration of fmj's in 9mm penetrating as far as it does. I'm usually carrying 115 grain in one and shooting a hog through the forehead, I often find an exit hole through the lower part of the hog..either rear of the rib cage or stomach.
I don't want to necessarily recommend any calibers for bear hunting, but I can say the 9mm fmj does penetrate well.

[Double Naught Spy]

Is 9mm enough? I dunno. But it was designed to knock down 180lb men, not big honking bears.

What does it matter what the design intent was? Design intent often does not turn out to be the only reality for a product and is often a failure. Viagra was a failed blood pressure medicine. Kevlar was designed with the intent to replace steel inside of tires. Carrier's air conditioner was originally designed as a dehumidifier, not something for cooling purposes. There is ammo out there that is designed for varmint that works very well in much larger game. There is expanding ammo out there that does a poor job of expanding reliably. In the grand scheme, design intent is meaningless. All that matters is how the product actually performs.

I would like to point out that it isn't power alone, nor bullet shape when it comes to penetrating a black bear's skull. The angle matters, as well.

Few would argue that a .30-30 doesn't have the power, especially at close range, but I know of a case where several (4) shots deflected off a bear skull at close range. Shot 5 at a slightly different angle penetrated ending the bear.

I see and hear of claims of bullets deflecting off of animal skulls all the time, including bears, but the evidence for this actually happening is often lacking. Particularly in the case of bears, what folks often see as the bear head is a LOT of fur surrounding a much smaller actual skull. From what I have seen as examples on YouTube appear to be misses more than deflections or "bounces." Nobody wants to admit they missed.

I made this dotted representation of the bony area (skull and jaw) of a bear relative to fur. As can be seen, the bony area is much smaller than the perceived head size. https://thefiringline.com/forums/att...5&d=1230728059 On top of that, an even much smaller area is brain/brain stem, which are the critical areas that need to be damaged.

Here is a classic video, hog and not bear, where the claim is that the bullets are bouncing off the hog's skull. The guy is actually missing and shooting the ground. However, this sort of claim seems to be typical.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rI0l29YGA-c

Bullets certainly can deflect off of curved surfaces, no doubt. So the potential is real for this happening, but I doubt it happens as commonly as claimed. However, if there is a nice picture of 4 stripes of where bullets literally deflected off the skull (and there would be actual skin and hair removed as a result), that would be super cool to see.

[44 AMP]

Sorry I can't give you any proof, the incident happened back in the 60s, so, no selfie or video, and nearly everyone involved including the bear is long dead now, anyway.

I didn't mean to make it sound like it was a common thing, its uber rare, but like the friend of mine who was hit by the falling duck he shot, it did happen.

[RETG]

Anecdotal info from last week.
Went camping 30 miles eat of Yellowstone in Shoshone National forest, noted for a high concentration of grizzlies. Came across about seven guys and one woman fishing in the north fork of the Shoshone river and all were armed with handguns on their sides. Started talking to them and asked what calibers, and all but two were carrying 44 mags, one had a .454 and the other was carrying a SW 500 .50 cal.

And everyone, had a large container of bear spray hanging from their fishing vests.

Just an idea of what the local fishermen/fisherwomen carry when out in bear country standing in very cold running water, just in case.

I was carrying a .40 with 200 gr Buffalo Bore and a can of counter assault bear spray.

[Cosmodragoon]

Went camping 30 miles eat of Yellowstone in Shoshone National forest, noted for a high concentration of grizzlies. Came across about seven guys and one woman fishing in the north fork of the Shoshone river and all were armed with handguns on their sides. Started talking to them and asked what calibers, and all but two were carrying 44 mags, one had a .454 and the other was carrying a SW 500 .50 cal.

Now that's a well-armed group!

[jfruser]

Originally Posted by Double Naught Spy

What does it matter what the design intent was? Design intent often does not turn out to be the only reality for a product and is often a failure...In the grand scheme, design intent is meaningless. All that matters is how the product actually performs.

I, too, value empirical evidence above most other factors. But sometimes such evidence does not exist or is so rare as to not be reliable.

In any case, design intent matters a whole lot. And it is meaningful. Performance on any particular task is usually a function of design intent, design failures and/or unanticipated uses notwithstanding.

Killing a brown bear with a 9mm pistol is a bit of a fluke and noteworthy and newsworthy. Killing a brown bear with a .375H&H is just another day in Alaska. There is a reason that even a non-gunnys can grasp: The 9x19 pistol was designed to kill humans, the .375H&H rifle designed to kill large dangerous creatures. The implementation of that intent into the design of the .375H&H resulted in greater and/or different resources being brought to bear--in this case ON bear--relative to the 9x19.

Another such fluke would be fishing for Marlin using the same tackle you'd use to fish for bass. The probability for success while using Billy Bob's bass rig versus marlin exists, but using a rig whose design intent included reeling in marlin will most times increase probability of success. IOW, using the right tool designed to do the job at hand matters.

FTR, I have been involved in developing many thingys during my current career. I have also been a user of such thingys in a previous career. I am quite cognizant of both design failures and using a thingy in a way the designers did not anticipate. BTDT.

[wild cat mccane]

Lehigh has an Xtreme Defender (shallow 15" penetration) and an FMJ amount of penetration in the Xtreme Penetrator.

Two different rounds, both the cross shape, full copper.

[agtman]

Is 9mm enough? I dunno. But it was designed to knock down 180lb men, not big honking bears.

Dude, it doesn't do that reliably even on 150lb men.

Why would anyone think it's suddenly a 'whopper-stopper' round for use on the big bruins?

Look, the mini-meter serves quite impressively for crowd control at the annual Gay Pride rallies in the greater San Francisco area but beyond that there are certainly better handgun cartridges for Alaska, or even for the lower 48 when you're going into black-bear country.

[PatientWolf]

Is 9mm enough for bear?

It really depends on how mad you want to make the bear.

[Chainsaw.]

This is all much a-do about nothing. Washington state has 30-40,000 black bears and a smaaaall hand full of griz. Lots and lots of people go to the mountains, lots of people live in the woods with black bears, they are in my neighborhood trash all the time. All of this and there are what, three casss where a bear has killed a person, one was a 4 year old girl.
Between my Wife and I, we have run into dozen pf bear, not ONE stood its ground, pulled out a knife, or even pestered us for a quarter. Not even the 488 pound boar that I ran almost nose to nose with, he took one look at me and went "NOPE" as he dashed off into the brush.

You are much more likely to be killed by yellow jackets, you neighbors dog, a ladder, and let not even get into the ride home in a CAR.

When you compound how much time you are in the woods, with all the noise and smell people make, how skittish bears are and how most will run if even slightly injured the odds are so low of you being mauled or killed....its hardly worth talking about.
If you have a pistol buy some hard cast ammo and hike in confidence, because in reality those other people you encounter are much more dangerous to you.

[briandg]

My father was attacked by a grizzly. He had nothing but a fishing rod and won the fight. (It got bored and walked away.) The bear was shot by a ranger later with a .357.

I will carry some weapon in bear country that isn't tourist friendly. Mace, and then a gun. I don't care what the gun is, it's going to be used if I have to, and as god is my witness, I will either live or die. Better to go out shooting and hoping and praying than to drop to the ground and beg for your life.

I won't deliberately choose to carry a nine, that's an open invitation for a losing battle. Maybe a ten mm magnum? I can't carry my twelve gauge with buckshot and slugs.

OTOH, robert redford kicked a big grizzly's butt quite handily with nothing but his bowie knife. I saw him do it on a documentary once when I was a kid.