Bears in the woods....

Yeah, the guy who loved the bears and spent years there.....until one day one of the bears said, "Who is this clown?"

I'd opt for the 480 Ruger myself. It doesn't have all the foot pounds of energy as the Casul or 500 Smith, but you can touch a couple off a lot easier.


I think a hard cast 480 would penetrate enough.



munk
 
Here ya go , Munk.
The 4 inch SW 500 MAgnum.
I like it.
5 rounds of 500 SW magnum.
Would something like this be "problematic" if you used it in a self defense situation against a human?
163504_large.jpg
 
DannyinJapan said:
Here ya go , Munk.
The 4 inch SW 500 MAgnum.
I like it.
5 rounds of 500 SW magnum.
Would something like this be "problematic" if you used it in a self defense situation against a human?
163504_large.jpg
Click to expand...
Imagine with me now, coincident with the 'blam', your right arm raising, your right wrist rotating 180 degrees, and the front sight imbedding itself in your forehead. Whadda you, nuts!!! Full house loads in a .44 mag run right along the edge of discomfort, and there is no shortage of penetration if you load something other than hollowpoints. Hornady's old 265 grain flatpoint used to give me nearly 2 feet of penetration end on into locust crotchwood when loaded over max loads of Win 296. One fellow who recently bought a .500 S&W at our local gun emporium brought it back and traded it in after firing only 3 rounds (he fired 2, his buddy 1). Controlled, aimed fire with reasonable penetration, even with hard cast lead flatnose slugs is far preferable to 'spray and pray'. Power does not make up for lousy accuracy.
 
I dunno Danny- it weighs a lot to carry around.

Problematic? For the recipient, not for the shooter, until Court day anyway....'You used a cannon like this on a human being ?? The attorney for the 'victim' will say....



munk
 
I tend to go along with that reasoning, Jurrasic.

I never liked the 240 gr 44. Bad round. Heavier grain weight bullets settle the 44 mag down.

I read one gun writer many years ago stating that before the Canadian govt closed handguns to outfitters and guides many in BC preferred the 41 in a Blackhawk over the 44, believing they could get in a follow up shot quicker and that penetration was equal or better. "Follow up shot' is not a term for the 500 Smith or the Casul.


munk
 
Im a big guy, so recoil never bothered me. Hell, I couldnt even feel it for the most part.
I was thinkign about legal problems, but the SW website does suggest it as the ultimate defensive sidearm.
 
Danny, if there's a correlation between recoil tolerance and size, I haven't found it. There are 127 pound men who fire large bores and 300 pound men of enormous strength who cannot. It seems to be psychological, not physical in the sense you mean.


munk
 
DannyinJapan said:
the SW website does suggest it as the ultimate defensive sidearm.
Click to expand...
IMO this falls in the realm of marketing rather than actual improved performance. Taurus and their 'Raging Bullsxxt' revolver was eating S&W's lunch, so S&W has to up the ante. I'm with munk on this one; I'd much rather have a 4" .41 mag (or .44 or .45LC) than any of the current crop of mastodon killers now being offered.
 
ACStudios said:
No, this was a different scientist. I think he was a bonified scientist... the other guy (I don't think) was a scientist...
Click to expand...
He was a bona fide scientist, but now he's a bonified one. Poor guy. :/
:D
 
Look again at the photograph of the .500 S&W. The center of mass is way above and well forward of the shooter's hand; this is your axis of rotation during recoil. Given the pivot point well away from the hand, and the energy of the round fired, there is a very real possibility of eating the front sight if you let it get away from you. Rifles are designed to put the center of mass between the hands, and to direct the recoil straight back to the shoulder. If you remember, rifles of old had sharp combs and too much drop in the stock, so that recoil up and back was actually painful.
 
That's exactly right about the 'axis' of the Smith. Rifles of old with steep drops at heel weren't too bad with black powder, but with modern smokeless can be devastating- to the shooter.

No one who shoots the big Smith claims it is fast to repeat. The arms must first be brought down from over the head to chest level once more. I don't think you'll get hit in the forehead, though you could.



munk
 
There's a very nice S&W stainless .41 mag downtown at the pawnshop. Luckily I'm broke right now.

Effective handgun loads for bear? A 9mm or .38+P is more shootable than the .44 or .50, and will do the job fine just as long as you remember to save that last round for yourself. :p
 
100 yards, zig-zagging, in 6 seconds AND no "starter's bell" to let you know when the sprint started?

un huh.



pass.
 
Im going back to my personal firearm the CETME in 308 with 20 rounds for Mr. Bear.

Don't forget the bayonet, so you can entertain him while you pull the trigger a few more times.

n2s
 
Forget the bayonet. 50 ft./second!!

(Alright Troops, fix .......................................................................)
 
I still say the way to deal with hostile bears is to tickle them behind the ears and call them by cute nicknames. However, I've not tried this myself. It's a theory. Like evolution. Or gravity. :eek:
 
The Japanese often worry about bears. I dont know why.
They did these tests on TV to see what might scare a bear.
They found out that holding up an opaque sheet and waving it around scared the bears off.
It looks big and its noisy and the bears take off in the opposite direction.
Anybody wanna try it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top