Revolver scope or not for bear protection

[Dano4734]

Thinking maybe I should remove my scope off my ruger 454 for bear protection only. What do you guys think. If a brown bear comes out I doubt the scope will be any use. When I am home and deer hunt with it I could put it back on. Would there be any reason to leave it on. Never been attacked by a bear thankfully

[HighValleyRanch]

Take off the scope. You won't have time to use it for bear protection. If you shoot the bear at a distance where you need a scope, you're not in enough immediate danger to warrant shooting it. IMHO!

[mgulino]

I second HiddenValley Ranch, and add that if the bear is close enough that you have to shoot, the scope wouldn't be of any use except added weight to beat him over the head.

[Dano4734]

Thank you

[LineStretcher]

+1 to the previous comments.

[Doc TH]

Agree with above.

[khegglie]

keep it on...it'll hurt his throat when he swallows it.

[Scoits]

Doesn’t matter, either way you will not be taking careful aimed shots, whether you are looking over the open sights or the scope the same reaction will Probabely occur.

[T. O'Heir]

If a brown bear comes out, PO'd and is less than 100 yards away, it won't matter. Yogi can cover 100 yards in less than 6 seconds. You'll never be able to recognise the threat, draw, aim and fire accurately enough in that time. And no handgun round will stop Yogi in his tracks anyway.

[BWM]

They are right NO scope !!!!

[HighValleyRanch]

And no handgun round will stop Yogi in his tracks anyway.

Just a little ole 9MM MIGHT work!LOL
https://www.buffalobore.com/index.ph...t_detail&p=388

[jmr40]

If I were going to carry a revolver that big I'd leave it home and carry a rifle instead.

Bear protection where? There is no place in the lower 48 where a gun with that much power is justified and only a handful in Alaska. But yea, I'd take the scope off if that were the only gun I had.

Yogi can cover 100 yards in less than 6 seconds. You'll never be able to recognise the threat, draw, aim and fire accurately enough in that time. And no handgun round will stop Yogi in his tracks anyway.

I don't believe the 6 second claim, but even if true a shooter would have time to empty their gun, reload and get off several more shots in 6 seconds. And people stop yogi all the time in it's tracks with handgun rounds.

[RETG]

I agree with most. Scope is not needed, but if on the gun, you don't have to use it. And yes, in most cases a .454 might be an overkill for a grizzly in the lower 48. People have killed them with 9mm and probably someone has used a .22 (not sure about that). However, under the same reasoning someone in the military could take down a fighter jet with a rifle but a rocket is a lot more efficient.

Not sure if in a case where your life is in danger there is such as thing as an overkill A kill is a kill so long as it was legal.

[NoSecondBest]

Focusing on the question about the scope and not getting into an argument about caliber, take the scope off. It's worse than useless for acquiring a target FAST. You will never, I repeat NEVER, see a steel plate shooter using a scope while attempting to speed shoot any type of plate at any distance. A scope requires you to get the tube lined up with your eye so you can simply see through it....then you have to stay on the target and take the shot. With just a couple of seconds to play with, that just isn't going to happen. You're actually handicapped with a scope in any speed shooting situation. Even a red dot isn't going to give you much time, but they can work in some situations. I'd suggest just using the sights on the gun and then hope you never have to use it for self defense. I gave up using scopes on handguns thirty years ago and went to red dots for the above reasons and that was just for deer hunting. I spent a lot of years shooting speed competition with a handgun and got pretty good at it. I have a pretty fair idea of what I'm talking about. If you need any further proof, take your gun out scoped and shoot at a steel plate by turning around and drawing your gun as you do so. Acquire the target and take the shot. Repeat the exercise with no scope and see what the difference is. Use random distances and close your eyes and turn around a couple of times before opening them and starting. Have a buddy say when just so you aren't already lined up with the target. It won't take but one or two times and the scope will be off. Good luck.

[LineStretcher]

FYI, I would carry this caliber for bear protection. Let's keep things in perspective. You are hunting in the wild and you come across a bear, you do everything you can to evade it but nothing is working and now you are fearing for you life. The bear is a small black bear and could probably be killed with a .22 if the shot was placed perfectly. One thing is for sure, this bear can kill you. You now don't have time for the perfect shot and the best you can hope for is a shoulder shot to slow down it's charge. You know a heart or lung shot won't work because a bear's heart and breathing are so slow that they don't know they've been hit and will continue to charge.

So now that you know what it takes to stop even a small charging bear, what caliber handgun would you carry that would give you the best odds of surviving a bear attack. Me, I'll carry my 44 Mag Super Blackhawk in my chest rig and with open sights since pointing the barrel in the right direction might just be all the aiming opportunity I get.

[briandg]

Can I say no without having to explain? you'll thank me later.

[buck460XVR]

Originally Posted by jmr40

I don't believe the 6 second claim.

The fastest among us can sprint 100m at a speed of 15.9 mph, or between 13-14 seconds. A Brown bear is capable of doing about 35 MPH and easily run down a full grown elk. 6 seconds sounds like a reasonable guess. Most attacks will probably occur at distances much less than 100 yards.

As for the scope on/off question, odds are by the time the OP gets the gun drawn and ready to shoot, the Brownie will already be on him or within point blank/pointing distance. Scope would not really be a factor one way or the other when it comes to accuracy, but may make the gun harder to draw quickly.

[Erno86]

If a bear has a close encounter, by charging at a human that has drawn a scoped handgun cannon; the shooter should be able to get off a reasonably accurate shot by aiming above the scope at the bruin --- IMHO --- Though I would suggest practicing the technique.

[jackmoser65]

Definitely take the scope off.

I'm stunned that anyone would think the 454 is overkill for a bear. Does anyone here actually hunt with handguns?

If a brown bear comes out, PO'd and is less than 100 yards away, it won't matter. Yogi can cover 100 yards in less than 6 seconds. You'll never be able to recognise the threat, draw, aim and fire accurately enough in that time. And no handgun round will stop Yogi in his tracks anyway.

I'm sorry but this is total BS. Man has been stopping the charge of dangerous game for centuries.

[Dano4734]

I am hunting moose in Alaska with a 45-70 however i will also want my 454 casull with me as back up when camping or what ever hence the question. A rifle can’t always be with you but a handgun can

[Dano4734]

One more question I have loaded up some 340 grain hardcast rounds and I have laying around a box of 300 grain swift a frame bullets what would you use in your gun

[Dufus]

My preference would be the cast bullets. They likely would penetrate better than an expanding bullet.

Not saying anything bad about the Swift bullets. They are good.

[Dano4734]

Thank you my friend. My hardcast is very accurate in my gun. Wish me luck Going all the way to Nome

[Dano4734]

And a shotgun is not with you all the time also. A 340 grain hardcast penn bullet out of my ruger is near 1400 fps with my hanload. It’s not a 45-70 but good enough to get the job done as humanly possible and luck. Much better than a stick or rock i think. The a frame is 1600 fps

[spacemanspiff]

Bear protection where? There is no place in the lower 48 where a gun with that much power is justified and only a handful in Alaska.

Are you forgetting just how big Alaska really is?