ORIGINAL: wyotimberghost
I appologize if it seems I'm beating a dead horse with this one, but I think it's a fascinating subject.
Since the last thread, I've been doing a lot of researching and asking around, and recently I talked to a fellow backpacker/hunter who had some interesting thoughts on the subject. He said whenever he is backpacking in grizz country in the lower 48, he carries a .357 Magnum with a 4" barrel loaded with hard cast bullets. His reasoning is that grizzlies in the rocky mountains are nowhere near the size of the coastal brown bears in AK that everyone thinks about when the subject of bear defense arises. He said A .357 will kill a bear no probelm provided the proper load, and a .357 is lighter and more compact than it's bigger bore counter parts, and thus much more easy to pack and draw. He also said that the .357 is much easier and cheaper to practice with, and thus a person is more likely to become proficient with a .357 than the larger cartridges.
Also, as someone mentioned before, experienced Alaskan guide Phil Shoemaker recommends the .357 Magnum loaded with 180 grain hard casts for grizzlies.
The more I think about it, the more I think he may be on to something. I looked, and Buffalo Bore has a .357 Magnum load pushing 180 grain hard cast bullets at 1400 fps and 783 fpe. It seems to me that such a load should have no problem penetrating bone, and a shot anywhere other than the vitals/central nervous system with a 44 or 454 will do no more to stop a bear than a 357. One would think that a good hit to the vitals or CNA with a hard cast bullet from a 357 would kill a bear just as dead as a 44 or 454.
I looked at the Taurus 454SS5M that several members recommended last time, and while it looks like an outstanding pistol, it's 10.5" long and weighs 51 oz. That seems awfully heavy and a little big to me. A .357 with a 4" barrel would be lighter and shorter and much more enjoyable to lug around on my 3 day forrays into the wilderness, not to mention cheaper to purchase and shoot. But it won't be worth it if it won't stop a grizz.
Thoughts?
The man is right, of course. I had a friend in AK who killed an 8-foot brownie with a .357 Magnum, with one shot up the nose at point-blank range. However, as I said the last time we belabopred this subject, to be effective, the bullet MUST disrupt the critter's central nervous s=ystem, as was the case when my friend's bullet went up the nasal passage and intoOld Ephraim's brain! (Also know of a case where an Inuit boy killed a polar bear with a .22 short! The thing opened its' mouth,he stuck the rifle barrelin the bear's mouth, fired, and the bullet went through the back of its' throatbreakingthe bear's spinal chord! Talk about luck!!
However, if I were to select a handgun for such purposes it would be at a minimum a .44 Magnum. Preferably a very heavily loaded .45 Colt, .454 Casull, .480 Ruger, or one of therecent S&W monsters (.460 or .500 S&W).
I second his recommendation for using a hard-castlead flatpoint-a Keith style or an LBT wide flatnose...... I make mine out of wheelweights and heat-treat them to a Brinell hardness of over 22.....
BTW, you will NOT get 1400 FPS out of a .357 with 180-grain bullets if it has only a 4" barrel. I know, having loaded my old 4" barrel .357 with Keith 173-grain semiwadcutters up to 1250 FPS with 15 grains of Herc. 2400. This load extruded the firing pin indentation in the center of most primers, and actually blew outa few. To get over 1400 with that bullet, the barrel would have to be an 8-3/8"er.......