There seems to be a lot of fuddlore on what calibers are adequate for stopping a grizzly bear charging. What would you use? I live in the Rockies and even though bear attacks are rare, I'd still wanna be packing something I know will not get me held down and eaten alive by a big pissed off hairy bastard. Hand guns or long guns, doesn't matter.
A lever action .45-70 would be a decent option. I also live in the Rockies and that is what I carry while I hunt.
9mm buffalo bore.
>https://www.ammoland.com/2020/03/update-handgun-or-pistol-against-bear-attack-93-cases-97-effective/
Bingo. And a big magazine.
The point of using something like this is so that you arent using a fricking 44magnum you have 1 box of ammo through and have never drawn from a holster in your life. Use a platform you are comfortable and experienced with. I have a glock in 357sig I use. But I would still use my vp9 over my 357 magnum, as I honestly never train with that revolver.
my dick.
bump
Theres only two-ish answers.
>Rifle .45-70
>Handgun .460 Rowland or .44 magnum.
Anything less and you're rolling the dice and don't let 9gays try to psyop you into trusting it for bear skulls let alone flesh.
bears aren't bullet-proof.
and bear heads dont stay stationary.
Seems like .458 SOCOM would be better .45-70 Govt. It has similar power, but you can easily find it in a shorty AR that allows for quicker follow-up shots.
Bears arent bulletproof you tard. Not until some punk kids strap a bulletproof vest to one
Why would you even put this idea out there? Is that what you want? Invincible bears running around; raping our churches and burning our woman.
Better than deer filling our daughters heads with nonsense
>Theres only two-ish answers.
is my 338 winchester magnum no sufficient?
I’ve killed 100+lb hogs with a single .22 LR to the head. Obviously not the same thing as a bear, but should count for something.
>I’ve killed 100+lb hogs with a single .22 LR to the head
Guy I know uses a .17 HMR to the front of the head. His backstop is the truck and trailer that brought the pig there, beyond is a local highway. I sure hope he knows what he's doing
You'll live a long life as long as you have a 22lr
> fake bullshit story written by bears
Rocky mountain anon here, this is what I do
>on dirt bike
>braps to scare off/ prevent startled bears
>can outrun a bear trying to chase
>200gr 40 just in case
>on foot
>USP 45 with 6" barrel and 15 rounds of pissin hot 45 that would destroy lesser handguns
>460 Rowland
Meme for people who can't into reloading
Just put more powder in a 45 acp case and save the $500 grifter tax
450 bushmaster is a little more versatile with more bullet options. The guy who designed it preferred the ubiquitous 230gr fmj which is surprisingly excellent when pushed past the "magic" 2200fps and even below that it does really well.
>big wet slow bullets like .45
45 gives you all the sectional density and speed 10mm can provide but with more mass and frontal area if you aren't a pussy and put more powder in the case
>Meme for people who can't into reloading
>Just put more powder in a 45 acp case and save the $500 grifter tax
You also need a much heavier recoil spring and a brake is highly encouraged. But yeah you could basically mimic it. The Rowland case is a little longer though.
A recoil spring is $10 and an eBay brake is under $50. Even if you have to buy a $200 threaded barrel you're still at less than the cost of just the authentic™ Rowland™ brand comp, spring, and chambering; the Rowland™ brand barrel is another $2-300 on top of those parts too. The longer case doesn't do anything to increase performance, it's just boomer lawyer shit. Starline makes the brass for them and it's the exact same as their 45 super case where it matters. The stronger brass isn't even necessary as standard 45 acp cases will hold over 40ksi in a properly supported chamber.
You'll save hundreds up front and a dollar per round by DIYing with no loss in performance
Average male grizzly in Alaska is 858 lbs and female is 456 lbs. In Canada average male is 306 lbs and female is 209 lbs. Therefore you probably need a bigger gun in Alaska than outside of Alaska.
Why are American bears fatter than Canadian bears?
high fructose corn syrup
>Why are American bears fatter than Canadian bears?
Bergmann's Rule.
The farther north you go the colder it gets and the bigger they get. Polar bears are bigger still. Same reason why Whitetails in Texas are tiny compared to those in northern states.
Coastal bears are bigger because they have access to more fish like salmon earlier in the spawning runs
>In Canada average male is 306 lbs and female is 209 lbs.
I thought we were talking about bears
10 mm, heavy hardcasts
9 mm would probably suffice, but I'll take that extra something.
Therea a guy on YouTube who has a cool bear charging target setup. They pull the target with a snowmobile or something and it simulates a charge. After practicing with his 10mm and 9mm he decided to go down to 9mm because his hits were much better. He lives in bear country too, fluke or something is his name.
I've been to a shoot set up for big-game hunters, safari stuff, etc that had a setup with a plywood target meant to look like a charging lion, it ran along a cable strung up between two trees and was pulled by a system of pulleys and a garage door spring.
>What would you use /k/?
12 gauge, >30 gram lead slugs (Brenneke style) or expanding steel ones (DDuplex).They do well against dangerous game.
12 guage slugs are literally the top choice among bear hunters and guides.
Surprised at how few anons picked that.
Anon, the 12 gauge is the way to go with this.
I suggest the Maverick 88 if you are povertygay, Mossberg 500 if you are poorgay, or the 590 of you can get one.
Any of these will serve you well, they are in fact my favorite gun.
Here's my 500 as proof that I at least have one, so you know that I'm not just bullshitting you.
>What would you use /k/?
.600 nitro express
.22LR
Or are you not as good a hunter as a 67 year old squaw?
You can in theory drop a bear with 9mm but only an idiot would rely on it. Cops have mag dumped 9mm into a loose cow with little affect. You want to rely on that for a charging grizzly? Frick no.
You want a canister of bear spray. Spray is designed to put up a deterrent wall of mist. After that you can choose a Glock 20, a S&W 500mag, a 12 gauge or a .45-70 guide gun.
My choice would be the bear spray and Glock 20, because you shouldn't need the Glock with the spray and it's the smallest and lightest to carry, you can even carry concealed on the hip.
There are literally over a dozen documented uses of 9mm, .38 special, and weaker used against bears successfully. It’s not a theory. It’s completely successful in practice
Yeah and 22 has killed countless people but you're still a moron if you go that direction for self defense.
Not an argument
someone pull up the webm of the russian police blasting a bear with 9x18 makarovs
Influenza kills more people than AIDS every year. Which one would you rather catch?
>with little affect
>affect
You must be the cop in question
My grandpa used a. 22 to put down cattle.
44 magnum or 10mm for a pistol.
7mm RUM for a rifle.
If 10 mm is sufficient, so should be 223
If 7 mm rum is necessary, no handgun is sufficient
>If 10 mm is sufficient, so should be 223
are you going by energy? because the important metric is maximum penetration. there's a lot of stuff in the way if a bullet is supposed to reach heart/lungs and the brain is a small, rapidly moving target. if you find me a 223 that penetrates as deep as a hardcast pistol cartridge I'll take it.
What makes you think 223 would be sufficient? It's a small bullet jacketed for deer at a high velocity. Not only will it fail on bear it will most likely dump all the energy far short of the vitals and just cause superficial wounding. And if you switch to fmjs you aren't doing enough damage to stop.
10mm (180g) m 33
5.56. (55g) M 25
Momentum is the determining factor between these two
7mm RUM has a momentum of 75, and an ungodly energy level to boot.
Energy alone doesn't tell us shit. And just because you saw some pedophile get his arm exploded from three feet with a 5.56 doesn't mean it will have the same effect on a 500lb hairy fat monster that lives in conditions that would kill you.
What about 7.62x39?
>What if I told you there's more than one kind of .223
>>more than one kind of 223
List them
Are you seriously asking for a list of all .224” bullets? Are you dumb?
>https://www.hornady.com/bullets/rifle/#!/
Filter for .224 and you have 37 separate grain and bullet type options from Hornady alone.
>>are you dumb
No but you clearly are and I needed to understand what flavor moron I was dealing with. Know I know.
Even a high sd/bc bullet of say 75g is going to struggle with bear. You gave up your velocity and therefore a lot if energy for momentum and SD. You get a far better penetration but end up "poking holes" of a very small diameter. That explosive tissue damage you would see at 55g is gone and now you have a more serious issue. As you are shooting a charging bear there is no way a bullet that leaves whitetail regularly running over a 100 yards before they are out of oxygen is going to drt a black bear.
When an experienced hunter tells you you COULD hunt a grizzly with 223 but it's highly recommend you don't try that shit AND fish and game have caliber restrictions specifically on anything below x caliber for bear, moose, elk then you can safely assume they all know
is more than one 223
No shit moron. No fricking shit.
>Poking holes
Ballistics gel does not mimic human or animal tissue. It is not representative of what a bullet will do in human or animal tissues. It is only a comparison medium for a one to one between rounds.
Who is fricking moronic now? (You)
Just walk away son. You have a tenuous grasp of terminal ballistics at best.
>no I won’t present a counter argument I’ll feign superiority and act like I win by default
>You end up poking holes of very small diameter by using bullets that are famously more terminally effective than 55gr
>You're not doing this with non expanding pistol rounds
I think you might be kind of a mouth breather anon.
The hole a hard cast 44 pokes is multiple times what you get out if a 75g 223 that comes out of the barrel at 24, 2500 fps.
Sorry about you being moronic.
Post a single firearm you own. Preferably something larger since those are the only things that can kill a bear according to you.
Gets his claim buttfricked into oblivion. Makes a second claim. Gets that one buttfricked into oblivion. Posts picture of jello not realizing it exposed his lack of knowledge on the subject.
>>post guns
Point and laugh at the last refuge of the moron!
That's a lot of talk and no posted guns anon.
>Point and laugh at the last refuge of the moron!
You mean the oldest and most cherished tradition on this board, newbie.
>3 days have passed
>not only has the gay refused to post firearms, he started shitposting about da ebil joos and fedoras
Janitors hard at work to justify their $0.00 paychecks, I see.
I thought the people talking about israelites were the ones demanding he post a gun.
I know I was doing both.
is more than one 223
>No shit moron. No fricking shit.
Then why did you ask?
It was such a moronic statement it seemed with Paul's picture you may have been talking about the ar platform being chambered in other calibers. That would have been far less moronic than your actual statement.
First it wasn’t me you replied to about more than 1 kind of .223. Nor am I the ballistics gel guy. Second, why didn’t you post guns. I haven’t been wrong about anything I’ve said. You haven’t posted anything to support your claim. Where’s the proof for these
>There are multiple papers on the subject from Russia, India, and other places covering brown bears (and other large predators) and the conflict often lethal with humans. There are also reports as narrow as covering the issue with black bear in NY.
It’s been 4 hours. Where are they?
post easily searchable information for me
No
>>I'm not the guy who sounded all moronic and shit
Yes you are
>>post guns
I do. When it's a conversation where people are sharing for the sake of enjoyment. I don't "post guns" when it is demanded by someone mentally struggling to keep up in a conversation they made several grave errors in
>nooo don’t expect me to back up claims I made
have a nice day. There’s 170 documented cases, including dozens with service caliber pistols and weaker, you are expecting people to ignore based on literally nothing from you.
>they made several grave errors in
Like which? Be specific.
>I don’t post guns
Because you don’t have any until proven otherwise.
Also this is you too
and I called it earlier with this
. It’s pathetic
ammoland article, now subject matter expert on bear attacks worldwide.
Lol.
>still doesn’t post a single example
>still doesn’t post guns
Just as I expected. It’s been 8 hours now and you still haven’t shown me a single example of these “failures” you seem to be so sure of. Why? Why even mention Russia and India when for all practical purposes they don’t have civilian gun ownership?
>inb4 just search for yourself
No. It’s your claim. Support it.
It's a report with 170 almost all of are after 1960. They excluded at minimum 40 known cases where there were in fact failures to stop. On top of that in those they excluded many were multiple defense failures using a combination of. For example bear spray then handgun.
The ammoland report seems to intentionally ignore multiple worldwide reports done on the subject outside America. Including Russia, India, and even ignored reports in places like upstate NY.
What the frick is it with redditchan and parroting single wrong bias reports?
The worst part is they left out decades of hunting reports where pistol calibers failed and claimed they were hard to find.
What is happening here is
>>The people selling me the ammo told me it was all good enough for what I need.
Post something to back up your counter-argument there Anon? Link to these "40 known cases"? Was the failure in those cases a matter of not hitting the bear? Or of not hitting the bear anywhere vital? Failure to penetrate deeply enough? These details are kind of vital to the subject.
>>post up these cases
You mean the cases the report (ammoland) you are quoting as your source tells you in said report that they didn't include
It's almost like you haven't actually read the two studies you quote as sources in every one of these threads you shit up with this misinformation.
? Source me bro. Sources. Post guns?
The fricking original source of said information is the fricking article you quoted butthole. Go actually read that advertisement bullshit again and do some actual reading on the subject you dumb c**t.
>>we went ahead and didn't include all the reports where the guy was eaten and never had time to fire his pistol
>>we went ahead and didn't include all the incidents where the person used bear spray that failed then fired a pistol and the one to two rounds they got off didn't stop them from being mauled and eaten
>>we went ahead and completely discounted the reports on bear spray and firearms that did the exact same thing we are doing now and adjusted their percentages to fit our needs.
Lol at fricking quoting ammoland as a viable source.
I repeat
>still doesn’t post a single example
>still doesn’t post guns
You waited until 4:00 in the morning to post that? Confirms you are a gunless euro, or the even more sad option that you posted that in the middle of the night.
Just post a gun. It’s simple.
till 4 AM EST to post..
Proves I get up in the morning not a noon like a slob
>>post example
Your cited source IS the source material for my claim
>>but read it for me
No
>>do something else I demand
No
>>but brush?
No
>>if you don't it means
No
will
No
>>but muh distraction
No.
>Three failures and 140 successes out of 143 cases is a 98% success rate.
You didnt even read the article did you?
> Proves I get up in the morning not a noon like a slob
Nearly no one gets up that early, not unless you work nights. You were up from the night before.
> Your cited source IS the source material for my claim
No, it isn’t. My source shows 170 examples with 3 failures. It doesn’t mention Russia, India, or exclude other things because reasons you made up.
You don’t own a single gun and have never been hunting. Prove me wrong.
>>no one gets up that early.
US Army veteran. 11B. 1P. Old habits die hard.
>>no it isn't.
Your source states the examples they left out, the studies they disagreed with AND the adjusted percentages (that they ammoland) used to justify their position.
>>I didn't read the study I'm using as a source could you quote it for me
No. Use your eyes for something other than wienertail gazing
>zogbot
>is moronic
Checks out
I did get to frick your little brown mom in the butthole so there is that.
>continued seething from a noguns larper
It truly is hilarious
The only one seething here is you. I already played with all the toys you dream about and will never touch. But do go on calling an infantry veteran "nogunz" because it doesn't at all make you look like a seething 12 year old moron.
And I definitely fricked your mom
Post proof of infantry veteranship w/timestamp.
DD214, military ID, hell, I'll even take a VFW membership or American Legion membership. Anything along those lines buddy.
You keep making claims, but you continue to fail to back them up.
see
>You need to learn that if you make a claim it has to be backed up; and if it isn't backed up it is ignored. That's how adult discourse works. Otherwise, I can say some stupid shit like "There's an engraved silver tea set from 1875 orbiting Jupiter. You can't disprove it, therefore it's true and I'm right." You need to back your shit up or be ignored because that's how it works. If you don't understand that, I don't know what to tell you except that you're going to have a really difficult time getting anywhere in life.
If you want to be taken seriously instead of everyone laughing at your ass.
Post guns, post proof of infantry service, post _anything_ that shows that 9mm, 40 S&W, 45 ACP are insufficient for bear protection; you know like incidents where people got killed despite the bear getting shot somewhere it should have been vital but the round just didn't pack enough punch.
For real, just post anything that will back your claims up. Anything at all.
Or don't.
But if you don't everyone now knows you're full of shit (as if they didn't before, but hey, maybe there were a couple of folks on the fence about it.)
>>we did not include when the pistol was not fired
Huh, didn't include all the times the pistol was drawn but didn't have time to fire.
>>To be complete, we include combination defenses where a pistol(s) was/were used in conjunction with other weapons. Those cases are not included in the 104 cases or in the 97% success rate.
Weird. They included those many of were failures and deaths but didn't calculate them into the success percentage. Odd huh?
Did you even read the fricking report butthole? This fricking clown was triggered because bear spray was getting toted as a viable defense tool. He didn't like how they compiled the reports. He then PROCEEDED TO DO THE EXACT SAME SHADY SHIT to come to a high success rate in pistols.
This fricking article was nothing more than ammoland trying to get a chunk of business back that the bear spray market took.
Fricking morons.
>>post proof of military service.
Eat a dick kid. Post your fat little smooth fricking done nothing hands.
Post your guns. Oh wait…
Post guns (you)
>>>we did not include when the pistol was not fired
>Huh, didn't include all the times the pistol was drawn but didn't have time to fire.
Because why would you? If you couldn't fire a pistol you wouldn't have been able to access and deliver any other defensive item like bear spray for instance.
Not having the chance to use it doesn't mean it isn't effective. It isn't like a pistol is slow to deploy; or if it IS slow to deploy you had it somewhere it shouldn't have been and again that isn't the fault of the pistol. If the discussion was about how effective some sort of slow deploy defense was, then it would be a legit critique to say not including times said defense never made it out was skewing results. But that isn't what going on here, so you're b***hing about a nothing burger.
>>>To be complete, we include combination defenses where a pistol(s) was/were used in conjunction with other weapons. Those cases are not included in the 104 cases or in the 97% success rate.
>Weird. They included those many of were failures and deaths but didn't calculate them into the success percentage. Odd huh?
No, it isn't odd, not even a little bit. Why? Because the question revolves around _pistols_. Combination events are more than pistols and introduce extra factors that skew data. Also it was in response to some asshat who claimed pistols were ineffective against bears and would just get you mauled.
But let's be generous.
Let's say combination events should count.
What would the numbers be then?
OH LOOK! All the combination events were successful! Ending in the bear either dead or leaving.
So, that would bring percentages for pistols up a bit. Huh. Go figure. Looks like you were grasping at straws and full of shit.
Oh, and you don't want to post any proof of military service. K. Given your track record so far I'm just going to assume that means you've never served.
And I don't owe you shit because I haven't made any claims that need more vindication.
So you are dismissing the unfired pistol claims that refute your claim that bears do not commonly attack people before they are aware or can respond.
Annnnnnnnd you then tried to fact check an article with itself.
>>fact checks article with said article. Squacks and walks around knocking the checkers off the clue board.
>So you are dismissing the unfired pistol claims that refute your claim that bears do not commonly attack people before they are aware or can respond.
Never made any such claim. Why are you just making shit up now? Are you that thin on brain?
You claimed it left out combination events. You claimed those combination events had deaths that would make the numbers look bad.
In fact the article included combination events, and in all of those events bear defense was successful.
I am no longer going to engage you. You're wrong, all the evidence shows you're wrong and you refuse to post anything that backs up _any_ of your claims.
You won't post any of the supposed events/reports from India, Russia, Upstate NY.
You won't post ANYTHING that disputes the premise that pistols in the common calibers (9mm, 40 S&W, 45ACP) are an effective defense against bears.
You won't post anything to back up your claim to have been in the military.
Engage in the discussion like an adult; or don't and be ignored.
>Reminder that israelites and Atheists vote identically on every single issue, including gun rights, and when asked, 94% of atheists strongly support homosexuality.
I'd love to see the study/research/body of evidence that supports your claim here.
Or maybe you should just go to /misc/ and stay there.
Also, pic just in case anyone is in doubt.
You have a heart condition. A pretty serious one judging from the hand discoloration. That explains your online behavior. You are not getting enough oxygen to the extremities or the brain.
You should get offline where you have been exposed as a fricking moron who checked the reliability of a source by reading its own claims again and get on down to a doctors office.
For real moron you are about to pop.
>Are you that thin on brain?
Yes anon. Yes he is. I’ve been doing this gay song and dance with him for 3 days and he’s only gotten worse.
Go see that doctor dipshit you are getting worse.
>>the report is correct and I know that because the report said so
>>the Bible is the truth because the Bible said so
bro? Show gunz.NOGUNZ! Sauce? Someone sauce me bro.
The level of homosexual that tricked down from Adam's reddit shitshow is mind-numbingly moronic.
Reminder that israelites and Atheists vote identically on every single issue, including gun rights, and when asked, 94% of atheists strongly support homosexuality.
Post gun is the oldest tradition on /k/ for a reason, it's the most effective filter ever designed online. It cuts out the vast, vast majority of homosexuals and raiders from outside our community. The tiny minority of our enemies that it lets slip through are a small price to pay for eliminating the lion's share.
Catholics get the rope too.
How do they vote on average?
Patterns matter, not incidents.
On average, they vote illegally. Frick off back to spicland.
Everyone who attacks Christianity is afraid of actual statistics.
Catholics vote just left of center on average and it has only gotten worse with time.
The only real "right wing" voters are english, swiss, and german protestants. Basically those who made the bulk of the nation until the 20th century.
Have you seen New England and the Midwest? Full of soft handed debt slaves who dont care about your white ethnostate. Keep worrying about preserving the same class that rules and is ruining this country. Most Presodents have been Protestant and have been horrible for demographics.
>Neetsoc moron whos entire ideology relied on allying with Catholics in various countries like Croatia, Italy, Spain etc chimping out on allies
Perfodious mountain germ.
All these words and still no gun
>>fact checks report with said report
You have been invalidated
>day 3 of still not posting a gun
Just give up. No one has or will believe you. You dropped the “I’m on the military and know better” pretty quick too
>>I'm a stupid moron
Yes you are
will believe you
That you haven't a clue and tried to say that an article must be right because the article said so? I'm sure they will if they can read.
>>I'm on the military
What? I was in the military
>>jews bad, samegayging
You have argued with like eight people at least in this thread and you have accused them all of being the same person.
>>post things when I demand them.
I don't take orders from anyone. morons doubly so.
post forthcoming about nogunz, noserved, claiming to be right
No. We have already established your opinions are invalid as you are simple jack levels of moronic.
I'm beginning to think you are that moron trip gay that can't weld.
>seething so much he can’t follow a conversation
When did I mention israelites? Who else have I been talking to?
Kek still no gun posted. It’s the ultimate filter.
claims an article must be true then posts claims from said article as evidence that said article is true.
Keep em rolling stinky. I'm enjoying the level of panic you are displaying with your attempts at distraction. Get those fat fingers moving and clean out under those breasts before you get an infection fatass.
>claims an article must be true then posts claims from said article as evidence that said article is true
What? The ammoland article has links to news stories, police reports, etc. Are you saying those are all fake and didn’t happen? That no bears were actually killed by pistols?
>>what? You caught me quoting said article as evidence said article is correct?
You clearly missed some school.
Yes. I am asserting the ammoland article is correct. This isn’t a gotcha moment for you. Myself and others are using the physical evidence from that article (which just compiled hundreds of other articles) as evidence pistols kill bears.
You going to show anything different? We both know you won’t.
>>I made a claim using an article as evidence. Then when that evidence was questioned I quoted the article again to show that the article was correct.
WOW! We got a BIG OL moron here now don't we.
>Are you saying those are all fake and didn’t happen? That no bears were actually killed by pistols?
It’s a yes or no question. Answer it
>>I quoted the article the op posted as a source then when told it was not reflective of all the facts and had bias I then quoted the same article to show that it was in fact correct.
Post palms. Is that grit stuff they put on you shiny?
Let’s see you went from
>your source is wrong and dumb
>no I won’t show mine
>your ballistics gel results are wrong
>no I won’t explain why I think that or offer alternatives
>your wrong because I was in the military
>your wrong because I banged your mom
>your wrong because I played with fun shit in the military
It’s impressive how insecure you are. Your story keeps changing and your reasons for disagreeing do as well. I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if this is from a dumb, bitter zogbot who’s incapable of critical thinking. But I’m rather certain it’s not the case. You have no career, you have no guns, and you have no argument.
The story hasn't changed. You are wrong. Your own source shows that. And I in fact have experience you don't. That simple kid.
>he’s still going
Why even bother dude? It’s not just me that’s calling you dumb. You’ve provided no evidence and made no arguments this whole time. Just “I’m right and you’re wrong”. You’ve restarted to your mom jokes to try and win. You really think anyone believes a word you say?
>have experience you don’t. That simple kid
>>no I won’t present a counter argument I’ll feign superiority and act like I win by default
I said this Monday afternoon and saying it again for the third time. You’re pathetic and weak.
Not an argument. If you would like to take part in future debates first educate yourself on the subject. Both sides of the argument. You should have learned that in an elementary education. That will also prevent the embarrassing "source" parrot in response to common claims and knowledge.
already done it twice. Your turn gay
No you haven't. Nogunz
>resorts to unironic no u
Why are you even here?
Please quote and post the part of the ammoland article where they say they excluded 40 or more cases of pistol defense that didn't work.
Please post these reports from Russia and India and upstate New York.
Please post decades of hunting reports. Or where they were excluded.
"Do it yourself." Is not an acceptable answer. You need to learn that if you make a claim it has to be backed up; and if it isn't backed up it is ignored. That's how adult discourse works. Otherwise, I can say some stupid shit like "There's an engraved silver tea set from 1875 orbiting Jupiter. You can't disprove it, therefore it's true and I'm right." You need to back your shit up or be ignored because that's how it works. If you don't understand that, I don't know what to tell you except that you're going to have a really difficult time getting anywhere in life.
9mm handgun w/penetrative bullets. 5.56x45 rifle (7.62x51 if you want to actually hunt and be ethical). Shotgun with some sort of slug.
>obligatory buffalo bore 9mm.jpg
it should be noted he used 147 grain hardcasts, which is known to jam up with shitty handguns. always make sure to test your carry ammo before you rely on it.
Why are those subhumans torturing the animals with their gay ass pistols instead just using an adequate rifle like a normal human? Is this their way of coping with their small dicks?
>killed bear in self defense
>killed with a well placed shot in close range hunting
What was so cruel? Seethe more eurotrash
>I just know it took a long time to die, because of my feelings that it had to have.
Best bear defense is to have a second person with you that's slower than you are...
https://www.ammoland.com/2022/04/update-of-pistol-defenses-against-bears-123-cases-98-effective/
123 documented cases of pistol defense vs bear. You can do your research to see what is used/effective vs type of bear.
As always, the most important thing is going to be the shooter's ability to get quick consistent hits that have enough penetration while shooting under incredibly stressful conditions. What that gun/caliber combination is will vary greatly depending on each person.
Are you really good with a 1911? Yeah? Load that b***h up with fmjs and you'll be fine. Are you really good with your 9mm Glock? Load that b***h up with fmj's and you'll be fine. Can you handle the recoil of a 10mm and get back on target quick? Awesome. Load that b***h up with fmj's and you'll be fine.
Me, personally, if I had to take a sidearm for protection in bear country; I'm going to take my PX4 Storm, compact carry. I'm going to load it up with Underwood extreme penetrators. I'm going to check PoI vs PoA (because I haven't actually shot those rounds out of that gun). Because I know I can shoot that gun very well, quickly and accurately (though I don't know about the extreme stress part). I know I'm going to have enough penetration. I know I'll be able to get more than one shot off. I know I can fire it well one handed (either hand) if I have to. I know it isn't going to malfunction.
>As always, the most important thing is going to be the shooter's ability to get quick consistent hits
This, honestly. It's much better to carry a 9mm you can competently hit with than some huge handcannon you will miss with because of a flinch. If you're competent with a bigger gun? Great. Use it. But getting reliable hits on target is far more important than shooting the biggest meme caliber.
My choice? I'm a revolvergay so my default innawoods sidearm is a Ruger Super Redhawk. I've owned it longer than any other handgun I currently have, going on 20 years now, and I've shot the piss out of it so it's just second nature to me. My other choice is a Glock 20. I've owned this nearly as long as the Redhawk, I've trained a lot with it, and it's hard to argue with 15+1 of hot 10mm for dangerous animal defense. As another anon pointed out you could even conceal this if you had to.
As far as long guns go? The most practical/accessible would probably be either a 12ga with slugs or a big-bore levergun. .45-70 is classic but I wouldn't look down on .44 Magnum out of a rifle-length barrel.
Bears are not bullet proof. There are 9mm loads designed to go through 20+ feet of flesh. Shot placement is always key, even a proper 9mm shot can score a key joint/bone hit or CNS/heart shot. Bigger bores have the capacity to do more immediate trauma but any bullet that can go through multiple feet of thick flesh, which is most, can kill a bear.
>There are 9mm loads designed to go through 20+ feet of flesh
Could you please give an example of this load Mr Biden?
Bro forgot the conversion rate from depth in b.gel to real penetration
For a charging grizzly? I would want a .375 H&H.
>But a guy with a 9mm killed a one!
And Karamojo Bell killed elephants with his 6.5x54mm Mannlicher. The exception is not the rule. Freak scenarios should not be used to dictate standard practice.
>>.375 H&H
Truly a patrician caliber.
It’s not just one with a 9mm. It’s multiple. It’s not like bear attacks are super common so the fact we have quite a few successful ones with smaller caliber pistols is telling.
I’d obviously prefer a rifle or shotgun over any pistol, and a larger revolver over a 9mm, but pretty much any gun will do with the proper bullet selection.
And multiple people have fought and killed lions barehanded. One nog did it 3 years ago, got away with his arm in a cast and some scars, that's it.
You still shouldn't count on not getting fricking wrecked in a second if you come face to face with one, tho.
>multiple successes
>literally zero instances of 9mm not stopping a bear attack
>no bro you’ll totally get destroyed
Why do you persist? I didn’t always know this. I saw it, learned, and moved on. You can too.
Literally first post in this thread has the data moron. Its not a freak accident animals are not bullet proof. Shot placement is king.
Let's see how good your shot placement is when a 700 pound monster is charging at you at full speed. A larger round gives you greater room for error, and it won't hurt you to carry a bigger gun.
>A larger round gives you greater room for error,
By fractions of an inch. While hurting your follow up shots. It would be one thing if there was only 4 or 5 cases of using “small” pistols against bears. There dozens and dozens.
>and it won't hurt you to carry a bigger gun.
I do agree and this is what you should do
Gregory's pistol round "stopping power" report showed that people miss equally with all pistol calibers in emergency situations. Caliber choice is irrelevant when it comes to accuracy.
Caliber choice is also largely irrelevant when it comes to results when bears have been shot at by handguns.
.45 ACP out of a 1911
Fellow Rockynon here. I carry 10mm and 44 mag handguns and either 12 gauge with slugs or 45-70 for a long arm.
Chemical defense spray. Those hand cannons are for making insecure needledicks feel protected, not actually protecting them
You can and should carry bolth of those things. full spectrum bear warfare
Plenty of first-hand reports of the spray can not working, doing nothing to the bear, enraging the bear further, or wind blowing the spray back in the user's face. Alaskan guides all carry a gun.
22lr should do the trick, my nan did it once
I would feel relatively confident with my 9.3x62 (which is what I carry most of the time when hunting) as a 286 gr premium expanding bullet at 2400fps is good for most things that walk the earth (including much of the big stuff) but would choose my 458 Lott if I had the chance to stop a charge. 500 gr @ 2400fps is serious medicine.
fricking homosexuals ITT you deserve to be grizzly poop
Blowguns.
AWESOME
Frick that bear
I'd carry a nice 5 lb hammer with me to bash that frickers skull ..righhhtt the frick in and cut its stupid head off and leave it on a pole as a warning to other bears.
If you're a Bear.... don't frick with me I'll kill you just for looking at me.
Big game guys in Montana and Alaska have all moved to 10mm in the last decade. Saving up for a FN510 before the next season to follow suit. .357 is also highly regarded. You're generally looking for penetration, not diameter of the hole, so big wet slow bullets like .45 tend to underperform from what I understand. There are grizzlies far down south as the San juan mountains now.
Of course you want something super powerful, high power rifle calibers or shotgun with hardcast slugs. In handgun, anything less than .44 magnum is not ideal but CAN work. The thing with hangun calibers is bullet type. You want hard-cast lead bullets, heavy for caliber, with a flat nose. Penetration is key with handgun calibers. That all being said, If I am going hiking in known grizzly country, I am taking a .44 magnum revolver. I don't want a auto-loading pistol for the simple fact that a bear might be on top of you before you know it. As he is biting into your shoulder or leg or whatever, I want to be able to draw that sucker on handed, press it into the bear's body and just start firing. A pistol can jam or go out of battery, etc... No thanks.
There was a YouTube video comparing a lot of bear defense incidents with a slew of different handgun calibers, and the result was that caliber didn't have much influence on the result, since most times the bear simply ran away from the report of the gun going off.
How would high quality soft points out of a 5.56 AR do?
I can't imagine any bear will hold up if their chest is riddled with soft points
They don't penetrate well, typically like 15" or so. So those would be a poor choice on a large bear. You want max penetration and a bullet that does not change shape. Any hollow point, soft point, fragmenting, etc, round is your worst choice. Hard cast, heavy for caliber bullet with a flat nose. 20 Brinell hardness or better.
Wouldn't the mild steel in a green tip round not really deform at all in meat?
It probably won’t deform but the penetrator is pretty tiny. The steel piece might not bend but the rest of the bullet could tumble which lessens penetration. Still though if you have an AR you’re knocking Yogi on his ass if you don’t miss every shot.
>I can't imagine any bear will hold up if their chest is riddled with soft points
You would be correct. Bears get stopped with pistols, a rifle will be fine. Especially one that can fire quickly with minimal recoil.
Also Black folk poach elephants by mag dumping them with AKs. 5.56 on a bear won’t have problems.
elephant with an AK
Takes a long time for them to die. Often they trample some of the guys shooting them. Elephants don't frick around. Wildlife officials cull elephant with fmj 308 from a helicopter and they just mag dump until it drops. Usually takes quite a few shots.
I wouldn't trust my life to an AK against a charging bear knowing I may only get one shot.
WWND?
I think I'd honestly rather shoot a bear with m855 because they tend to penetrate farther before tumbling/fragmenting
m855, or solid coppers are going to be better, you want penetration. m193 will shatter which in humans is awesome but not something as large as a bear, and softpoints will dump all their energy early which again against something human or deer sized is awesome.
Midwit take. m855 frags too and not all softpoints are designed for lower penetration. Something like a 70gr TSX would probably be ideal though.
.22 is all you need and anyone who claims otherwise is a peanut brained needle dick.
my .69 cal charleville flintlock musket loaded with a double .67 patched round balls
what if you just spam fired some ak or ar bullshit at it? out of 30 rounds a few have got to hit it and bears arent bullet proof, I bet 7.62 would fricking hurt. I dont think id trust a lever action or something with only 6 rounds, you'd be fricking terrified if one actually charged at you. I'm just some noguns moron though.
The big bears have a habit of popping the frick up when you least expect them. Like being in your fricking kitchen when you get home. Or running into the bushes only to pop the frick back up almost on top of you. The brutes will stalk you while you are hunting. It's creepy. When you read about those encounters where someone dropped a bear with a round like 9mm it's because they had "all the time in the world". Usually they are gnawing on your head long before you could mag dump.
The stories of bear attacks are very limited compared to the actual number of attacks that happened in US and Canadian, Russian history. A small fragment.
Walk softly and carry a big boom stick.
>It's creepy. When you read about those encounters where someone dropped a bear with a round like 9mm it's because they had "all the time in the world". Usually they are gnawing on your head long before you could mag dump.
Fantasy, the statistics say otherwise.
You realize Wikipedia doesn't count right? And the single claimed report in circulation is not representing of the actual situation?
There are multiple papers on the subject from Russia, India, and other places covering brown bears (and other large predators) and the conflict often lethal with humans. There are also reports as narrow as covering the issue with black bear in NY.
The problem with the firearms community in general is we get our information through a siphon and consume it in a vacuum. Reports like the "all pistol calibers are the same" and "9mm is fine for bear look 100% survival" get parroted and quoted and never questioned. A quick look outside what you have been spoon fed shows the exact opposite of what you have been told.
>You realize Wikipedia doesn't count right?
Where was Wikipedia mentioned? Why are you ignoring the ammoland article that links to each news story?
>And the single claimed report in circulation is not representing of the actual situation?
Post anything more accurate.
>There are multiple papers on the subject from Russia, India, and other places covering brown bears (and other large predators) and the conflict often lethal with humans
Again post them. Furthermore why do people getting attacked in countries with basically zero civilian gun ownership have anything to do with this topic? So a bear mauled an unarmed person? No shit the bear wins.
>>but muh ammoland story
Ammoland
Ammoland
Lol
>doesn’t post his studies
>still no argument
Just as expected. So 170 individual instances with sources to police reports, news stories, etc mean nothing, but your actual nothing means your word is law? Just making sure we’re clear here.
Glock 20
Surefire x300 turbo
Underwood 200 gr. Hardcast
Aimpoint Acro
Everyone in this thread is fricking moron. 7.62 AK is the best option, including a Draco.
is moronic but me
You either should leave the room, or are the moron.
I just keep my distance when I spot them.
Just bring this guy.
He paid with a hand and an eye iirc
If I'm hiking bear country on a serious hike chances are I'll be carrying an AR and have a 7'-9' spear in my hands because pointy walking stick best walking stick. Would like to have at least one Thunder B airshit grenade (they make a very loud bang and are very light) and a can of bear spray too though.
9mm with good shot placement and a good mag capacity is legitimately fine. More powerful is better though until the recoil starts heavily affecting follow up shots, you can't carry a suitable number of rounds per mag, or the whole package just too much weight to comfortably carry even with a really good sling and whatnot. Personally I'd want an intermediate rifle caliber at minimum and a nice 30-40 round mag. Something chambered in .308 with a 20 round mag is probably the absolute biggest I'd consider carrying for bear defense. Big rounds like .458 and .50 beowulf have plenty of ass behind them but I'd rather have a better magazine capacity. Semi-auto>manual action. Lever guns like .45-70s are GREAT if you're also hunting and can't carry anything over 5 or 10 rounds because the trees routinely speak Game Warden. When taking a lever gun or other manual action as a dedicated wildlife defense gun you better not miss that first shot or hope the bang spooks Yogi into hesitating long enough for you to chamber the second and pop him.
Regardless you should practice fast accurate shots under stress, it can absolutely save your life. Last thing you want is to become Yogi's dinner (or Daqwarius's onahole) because you choked under pressure.
Forgot to mention also make sure you choose a good cartridge and bullet that will get to vitals and still frick them up. That's especially important with the lower end calibers for this purpose like 9mm. You want a good balance of damage and penetration.
I didn’t get the Alaskan specifically for bear defense, but if I had to pick something I owned for bear defense it would be the one I grab…. 454 is no joke… pick your poison, 420 grain hardcasts rated for 1400 fps, or 230 grain hollow points rated at 1900…
>no weaponlight
Kind of cringe grandpa.
your muzzle flash with a light
Lame
Depends where in the world I was. Most likely carry 308 or 762x39 and holster 45 or 375. Either way, whatever has the most bullets of I'm in bear country. If I was bear hunting specifically Noreen 30-06 semi auto lol because frick it
.45-70 / .308 / 12 ga slug
.460 or .44 for handguns, although a rifle would be a significantly better;
or just pull up with a fricking .700 nitro and rip the fricker in half
Whoever's b***hing about 5.56/.223 not being effective I don't care enough to find out the exact track of fuddlore bullshit you're on.
22lr punched holes in one of the biggest grizzlies of all time
5.56 will punch a hole through a quarter inch of steel.
Any bone struck on a bear with a rifle round moving in substantial excess of mach 2, will be destroyed. The shoulder will be destroyed, the skull will be destroyed. 9mm and 45ACP have almost perfect records against bear attacks when the bear was struck in the torso or head, 5.56 is obscenely more lethal than either, or both at once, frankly.
>all this drama for something that's been solved for decades
You're all just arguing to argue.
>handgun
Literally any caliber using hard cast bullets. A .32 ACP hard cast to the heart will kill just as surely as a .50 BMG.
If carrying a big bore, at .44 Mag power and above, you can go to 240gr JHP and heavier for better per-shot performance without sacrificing too much penetration.
>semi-auto rifle
.223 needs barrier-blind bullshit like M855 or even M855A1. It is just NOT made for large animals. Larger caliber intermediates like 7.62x39, 6.5 Grendel, 6.8 SPC, etc. can just use FMJ. Full-power rifles can use anything not made to fragment.
>manual-action rifle
You better be using something big. I wouldn't feel comfortable bringing anything less than a safari gun in the vein of .375 H&H if I'm getting off 2 shots at the most.
>shotgun
000 buck or Black Magic slugs. Shotgun is the hardest to frick up.
> 223 needs barrier-blind bullshit like M855 or even M855A1
You act like that’s super obscure. Everyone that has an AR has some M855 even though it kinda sucks. Bonded soft points, TSXs, etc are at every sporting goods store. In what world does 9mm outperform .223/5.56?
>In what world does 9mm outperform .223/5.56?
5.56 doesn't have a lot of mass and doesn't like staying nose-forward without expanding. All spirepoint bullets have the latter problem but have enohgh mass and energy to overcome it. 9mm hard cast, just like any other solid cast or machined round with a wide meplat, just trucks along in a straight line.
You can kill any animal in North America with a .22lr and good shot placement that bypasses thicker bones. Hunting is very different from dangerous game defense.
>https://rokslide.com/forums/threads/77gr-tmk-season-review.79301/
There are tons of pictures here if you look through this thread and similar ones on TMKs. If a TMK can drop and elk in one shot, even with time to take a good clean shot, it can stop a bear. If you happen to have a 5.56 rifle and get attacked by a bear it’s almost certainly a semi auto magazine fed that you can drop 5-10 rounds into it within a very short amount of time. It’ll penetrate the skull, it’ll get into the heart and lungs. It’ll break the front legs. It just might take more shots than a .375 or something
>bypasses thicker bones
Luckily 5.56 will shatter any bone you hit.
Your comparison becomes meaningless because of the difference in scale, and because one of the biggest bears in history had it's skull smashed by a 22 in a defensive shooting.
>It is just NOT made for large animals.
Feminine safety cult members trying to force others to use something other than a round proven to be capable for killing bears because they don’t hecking feel like it’s Safe and Effective™
>Feminine safety cult members
.22LR killed the largest Grizzly ever recorded. Shot by a little old lady
I think you're the feminine safety cult member
Different anon but use whatever the frick YOU want. Recommending 22lr for large bear defense is moronic considering the number of people who died never getting a shot off, and those who used bear spray and then a handgun or rifle and were still tore the frick up and partially digested by the forest pigs.
>nt. Recommending 22lr for large bear defe
I'm not recommending anything. I'm saying its a stupid thing to fuss about. Worry more about how to use the gun you've got, or more importantly how to avoid grizzly bears. Pick whatever caliber you like best, I like 22LR because I can fit them in my urethra and the rim stops the round from going to far in
220 grain hardcast
Would you rather have
>A can of high quality bear spray and a 9mm
Or
>A full power rifle SBR/shotgun/etc but that's it
in an "o fug a bear" incident?
What about bear spray or a 9mm, nothing else?
>first question
The SBR, assuming it has decent mag capacity and isn't some Commiefornian abomination with 5/10 rounds.
>second question
The 9mm, wouldn't want to rely 100% on spray.
Of course, both questions don't touch the big IRL issue, which is "what are you going to ACTUALLY carry with you every day, and thus have on hand on if you get bear'd".
This might not be /k/ per se, but I guess some people might know here.
So obviously bears getting into your shit is a problem in rural areas, but as any other anons who own lots of rural property surely know, building a wall tall enough to stop a bear around your entire property would be FRICKING EXPENSIVE.
Would a barb wire fence stop a bear? Or would it just grug moron mode through it and not care about getting sliced? I've seen cattle that could squash a bear like a bug try to go through barb wire and change their minds, but then they were also not charging it with their full weight and just trying to get to some tasty plants on the other side, plus a bear might just try to climb over the post since they're far more agile than a cow.
I suppose I could run an electric fence, but I personally don't like the idea of an electric fence strong enough to make a bear frick off if I can make do with a non-powered one.
OP here. I regret making this thread. I'm just gonna get a 12 gauge, a few boxes of frick you slugs and some bear spray and keep them close when I'm out camping. Have shot 12 gauge slugs before accurately at 30-40ish yards when I was tired and irritated so hopefully that'll be good enough. I've already got an AR and 40 round mags filled with m855 too just in case. Weapon lights will be on both. I'm a poorgay so I can't really financially justify a fancy lever gun or a stopping rifle at the moment, I probably should have mentioned that. Thanks for the input frickers.
12ga slugs are excellent. You don’t need to overthink this. Bears aren’t bulletproof or immortal.
I'm more worried about a grizzly having a basketball american-esque adrenaline dump and doing damage before it stops moving tbqh famalam. But you're right, and I should practice shooting accurately under pressure like some other anons have said if I'm really that worried about it.
Thanks anon, I'll order a few boxes. Maybe some dragon's breath would work better for skinwalkers and mothmens and such.
maybe don't shoot it in the head if the bear skull is apparently made of tungsten??
surely a 12ga to center mass would be fine. it's not like the bears are wearing armor or have fused ribcages designed to deflect anything short of .50 bmg.
militaries use normal pump shotguns for bear (and other animal but mostly bear) safety when operating in the arctic. if you hate shotguns because you're gay, canadian rangers use .308 (that they use .303 enfields has not been true for a few years, they finally got new rifles in like 2017) so if it works for underequipped abbos it should work for you
dragons breath is a meme
You should strip naked and tie a salmon to your wiener and fight the bear with your fists like a man, pussy.
>frick you slugs
Might I suggest the black magic by Breneke? They're ribbed for Pooh Bear's pleasure. They would also theoretically work well on cryptids.
>caliber is adequate
Wasn't the record for largest bear killed done with a .22 by some chick back in the 30s?
in red dead redemption 2 i use the Lancaster repeater with magnum rounds so you should get one of those
>What would you use /k/?
Caliber and stopping power aside, it's going to be a rifle. Unless bear gets the jump on me, I want as much distance as I can get while I'm shitting myself and missing with my first few shots.
AR-10 will just have to do since that's what I have.
UNDERWOOD AMMO 30% OFF
BUY ENOUGH AND SHIPPING IS FREE.
How bulletproof is grizzly in comparison to a moose?
Is just a big deer. You can put them down with 06 and even 270. Magnums like the 7mm Remington and the 300 win mag will produce bang flops. The 338 mags as overkill.
>grizzly in comparison to a moose?
I'd much rather meet a grizzly in the wild than a moose. Bears are territorial, grumpy and dangerous. Moose are maniacal psychotic supervillains from Planet Frick You
12g slug.
15 rounds of xtreme penetrator 10mm and an extra mag just in case
Does a black bear require smaller caliber than a grizzly?
You can drop a black bear with damn near any rifle. You can drop them with a 30-30 with a single shot from a 100 yards. They go down easy. Unless you get a big one they die faster than a whitetail.
12 gauge loaded with fragmenting slugs.
.44 magnum.
americans brag about how much untouched wilderness they have compared to europe and then do shit like strolling in the woods packed and hyped just itching to shoot the first thing that moves. what the frick did they do to you, those bears? gun toting fricking hypocrites, your kids deserve to die in school shootings.
Shut the frick up eurogay. You buttholes clear cut an island then b***hed about the weather for a while then ficked off to go rape some Indians. (Red dot). Fix your own shit moron.
look who's talking, mr plywood goes everywhere. dumb frickers will not give a shit about nature until it's gone. i guess the only reason why you still have some woods to brag about is because you didn't have millennia of systematic deforestation like we did. give it time and you too soon will advocate for animal conservation. dumb frick.
Trees are a renewable resource. Since we buttfricked you gays back across the sea our forests have been fine. It was you wig wearing tards that were the issue. Oddly we have an abundance of wildlife. The wolves are back and causing an issue. We have way too many deer and the human deer interactions (car accidents) are growing in number. The Bison have reproduced so quickly they are wandering off the national parks and are fricking with the bongs who are visiting.
Don't believe the news can't. You guys are fricked. We here in the states are fine. Well not commiefornia because they are gay honosexuals and don't understand wildlife and forestry management, but the rest of us are fine.
>europe is england
american education
Nobody outside of England is really worth acknowledging in Europe.
Beer spray.
If the bear can't be scared off by normal means, bear spray.
I'm not kidding. Ask any fricker who knows and they'll tell you that a charging, angry bear can and will ignore bullets. There's a good chance that it'll just enrage an angry bear further.
But the bear spray will get them. It'll irritate them, make them confused, blinded and fearful.
You want to HUNT a bear, it's a different story, but if you want to absolutely safely ward off a bear? Bear spray.