buffybr

[QUOTE=d80hunter;4123389] I ... would't use a single action revolver for bear defense. QUOTE]

Now you tell me! Here I've been carrying my Ruger Super Blackhawk in bear country for almost 40 years.

In all those years, almost every black bear that I encountered immediately ran away, I only had one grizzly encounter. Two friends and I were camped at the end of a road near West Yellowstone, MT. We had the quarters of 2 bull elk and a bull moose hanging in the stock rack in the back of my truck. One night just before going to bed I went outside and was standing on the side of the road when a grizzly woofed at me from the top of the cutbank, 30 feet above me.

I had my .44 on my hip, so I held the flashlight on him with one hand and fired a shot over his head. He didn't react at all to the shot, and continued to click his teeth at me, so I fired another shot into a pine tree next to him. He still stood there clicking his teeth.

So I then holstered my .44, picked up a baseball size rock that I threw and hit him. He then turned and ran off into the darkness.

He was wearing a collar, and I later found out that he had been a problem bear near Cooke City that had been trapped and relocated to the mountains north of West Yellowstone.

As to the OPs question, a .357 has a little more energy than a .40 S&W, and either will kill a black bear. I killed my first black bear with a single shot from a .45 acp, and it has less energy than either a .357 or a .40 S&W. The Glock has the ability of putting out more lead faster than a SA Ruger, but only shot(s) in the vitals of the target count.