Celt
.450/400 Nitro Ex
Absolutely!would a 357 magnum with some good hard cast 180+ grain projectiles be sufficient to defend yourself against the bears we see in NY?
Absolutely!would a 357 magnum with some good hard cast 180+ grain projectiles be sufficient to defend yourself against the bears we see in NY?
What ever you shoot it with your supposed to shatter its hips to disable it. They have such a slow heart rate that even with a well placed shot to the vitals they will still have enough in them that it will ruin your day if your anywhere near them.
But if it's coming at you, how can you get a shot at it's hip? My S&W 500 magnum won't stop it from heads-on? My understanding was that was the whole purpose of that weapon.
Not if that vital is the brain!What ever you shoot it with your supposed to shatter its hips to disable it. They have such a slow heart rate that even with a well placed shot to the vitals they will still have enough in them that it will ruin your day if your anywhere near them.
Because its built like a tank, and can handle the hottest 44mag available, over, and over, and over.I was at the local gun store picking up some Hornady and I saw that Super Redhawk Alaskan in 44 mag. It was over $1K. Not sure how that is better than the Raging Bull 4" barrel for like $350 less?
yesWould you bet your life on that?
Main reas o n i got 460 over 44mag. 1100 for it.I was at the local gun store picking up some Hornady and I saw that Super Redhawk Alaskan in 44 mag. It was over $1K. Not sure how that is better than the Raging Bull 4" barrel for like $350 less?
If a 9mm killed a Grizzly in Alaska, I'm sure any caliber from 9mm on up loaded with Hard Cast Flat Points would do the job.
Alaska Outfitter Defends Fishermen from Raging Grizzly with 9mm Pistol
Just as long as that bear isn't taking cover behind a dumpster, I would feel 100 percent comfortable using the .45.You read about the .45 acp hi point that someone used to kill a grizzly in Alaska? No good on frying pans in some cases but it can drop big nasty bear!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Then it's scary. Lead paint and all.What if the dumpster was made in china?
I think I am leaning towards the 44 mag. I don't want another Glock (10mm). Part of the reason I want this gun is just because of the cool factor. The 454 is cool, but with Buffalo Bore/Garrett ammo I can push a hard case 300+ grain 44 mag at over 1000 FPS. Plus I looked, 44 mag is about the same exact price as 45 colt.
Anybody on the Island have a 454 they wouldn't mind letting me squeeze a few rounds through?![]()
I don't see anything wrong with an AK for Grizzly protection. The 7.62x39 in a FMJ will be no different than a .308 at just a couple hundred fps higher yet many carry just that. The penetration will be very similar to the .308 and perhaps higher with a bigger hole than a revolver round from one of the accepted calibers.
It's just an anti assault weapon thing from Fudds that would have no issues if shot from a .308.
In the video below at the 2.42 mark, Sue Aikens kills a Grizzly with a .308. Many bear are hunted every year with a .308. It's all about shot placement. A bad shot with a .44 Magnum or a .300 Win Mag will not do the job.
Not ideal for hunting but better than a .44 Magnum for defense is my point.Just a few (around 300 fps) and about 50 grains more weight make a world of difference. A 7.62x39 is a lousy choice for a big bear country rifle. Things like a .44 mag are recommended because they are easy to carry (being a handgun). Sue is also a dreadful hunter. I have seen here shoot a caribou about 5 times to finish it off. Since when is fmj considered a good bear bullet? With the .308 you can use 180 gr slow expanding bullets.
I was talking big bear (coastal brown ect.). The .223 or x39 are bad choices for black bear also. Sure they can do that job but why? There are so many better choices. Many deer have been killed with a .22. That in no way makes a .22 a deer rifle. Handguns suck for bear protection, AK's suck for bear protection. The difference is most handguns can ride in a holster. Hunting is not the same as protection of course. How many bear guides carry AK's (or .308's) to back up hunting clients in big bear country (defense situations)? I would guess zero. No one that knows a thing about big bear would recommend an AK for protection (or hunting).Not ideal for hunting but better than a .44 Magnum for defense is my point.
This guy hunted one with a .223 55 gr Poly Tip. Shot placement.....And lets not forget the .38 Special, 9mm and .45 Acp that have also killed Grizzly and Polar bear in defense.
Bear aren't as bullet proof as the internet makes them out to be. Hunters of old have taken them down with muskets firing lead balls at much slower velocities.
I'd much rather grab an AK for bear protection (not hunting) than a revolver.
View attachment 1874
The thing is, most of the time your bear defense gun is just that, for defense. Youre not hunting, you are hiking, camping, picking berries, WW rafting, cutting trees....etc. Any rifle is cumbersome and useless when leaning against a tree while you are doing something else. In these cases, a 44 mag in a chest holster outside your cloths is the safest, fastest and most useful defense. That is why almost all Alaskans use this setup nowadays.Not ideal for hunting but better than a .44 Magnum for defense is my point.
This guy hunted one with a .223 55 gr Poly Tip. Shot placement.....And lets not forget the .38 Special, 9mm and .45 Acp that have also killed Grizzly and Polar bear in defense.
Bear aren't as bullet proof as the internet makes them out to be. Hunters of old have taken them down with muskets firing lead balls at much slower velocities.
I'd much rather grab an AK for bear protection (not hunting) than a revolver.
View attachment 1874
I was talking big bear (coastal brown ect.). The .223 or x39 are bad choices for black bear also. Sure they can do that job but why? There are so many better choices. Many deer have been killed with a .22. That in no way makes a .22 a deer rifle. Handguns suck for bear protection, AK's suck for bear protection. The difference is most handguns can ride in a holster. Hunting is not the same as protection of course. How many bear guides carry AK's (or .308's) to back up hunting clients in big bear country (defense situations)? I would guess zero. No one that knows a thing about big bear would recommend an AK for protection (or hunting).
The thing is, most of the time your bear defense gun is just that, for defense. Youre not hunting, you are hiking, camping, picking berries, WW rafting, cutting trees....etc. Any rifle is cumbersome and useless when leaning against a tree while you are doing something else. In these cases, a 44 mag in a chest holster outside your cloths is the safest, fastest and most useful defense. That is why almost all Alaskans use this setup nowadays.
I get all that. Even a .44 Magnum for a large Grizzly is not ideal but used due to portability.
My point is that the .44 Magnum is accepted (caliber wise only for protection and at times hunting) yet a rifle with more energy and or penetration is not.
It's hypocrisy that has been preached throughout the ages and accepted as fact.