Printable View
Please do not put words into my mouth I did not say anything about using a cast 223 for bear.Quote:
Originally Posted by xacex
I use a 60 grain Nosler Partition do very well as does the TSX. The .223 is used a lot in and been very Successful in many parts of Alaska for hunting Bou, moose, bears.
I have a buddy who is a native and in Alaska and he uses a 243 to hunt everything and he takes brown bears with his 243 every year.
Some people need a slap upside the head, some once in a while, and then again some need a constant reminder.
Not a slam, not meant to be abusive and surely not directed at anyone here.
Well, it is a cast boolit forum so that is a automatic assumption with many of the members here including myself. Yes, a partition, or TSX will work just like 5.45 in an ak will kill a grizzly bear. It is not ideal with an animal that can kill you. 9mm is also not idea for deer unless you intend on stalking it to be within bow range. Not an easy thing to do during general rifle season after the rut. I did it last year, and got close enough to use my sidearm, but the 300BO pistol was a much better choice, and worked as it was intended.I did not have to second guess if I would kill it if I hit a bone.Quote:
Originally Posted by huntersdog
I hunt with the tools I have had for many years its all I have. I don't have the luxury to go out and buy a brand new toys big name for your arms to go hunting.Quote:
Originally Posted by gray wolf
I've seen my share of animals shot with quote on quote hunting rifles in hunting handguns design for hunting big game and is never found or runs hundred yards.
Is it Maine we're the snowmobilers shot and killed a moose with a glock handgun attacked him on his snow go.
I am NOT trying to be argumentative I was just asking if there is a good cast bullet that can be used in a 9mm for deer hunting. 9mm is the only handgun I own.Quote:
Originally Posted by xacex
I am trying to save up for a 45 Ruger Blackhawk.
The 223 came up when somebody question if we were allowed to use .35 caliber handguns in the state and then I mention that to 223 was legal to hunt with here. .
I believe that is why the thread went off on a tangent.
I'll probably make a statement contrary to what you are getting here but I'd go to the heaviest flat nose bullet you can get to function, with the idea that you will probably get better penetration. Even then I'd keep my shots under 20 yards.
cal·i·ber (kăl′ə-bər)
n.
1. Abbr. cal.
a. The diameter of the inside of a round cylinder, such as a tube.
b. The diameter of the bore of a firearm, usually shown in hundredths or thousandths of an inch and expressed in writing or print in terms of a decimal fraction: .45 caliber.
c. The diameter of a large projectile, such as an artillery shell, measured in millimeters or in inches.
by this definition .355 is 35 caliber and no judge could argue otherwise.
I remember reading years ago that the most common cartridge used (successfully) by the Alaskan Natives for seal, caribou AND polar bear was the 22-250.
Also make sure your state doesn't have a magazine capacity restriction. While my state doesn't spell it outright for handguns it does have a 5 round max capacity for detachable magazine fed rifles. I suspect our wardens might apply it to handguns also.
Well, one way you can look at this is that a good 9mm mold will cost about a quarter of what a Blackhawk does.Quote:
Originally Posted by huntersdog
But I have shot FBI gelatin with a .358 200 grain round nose at under 600 fps and had it penetrate 18" when it ran out of Jell-O and hit the backstop. 147 grain flatheads at 1000 FPS shouldn't show you much difference in depth, and 160 grain .357's moving only a little faster are regarded by many as "peachy keen" for the task.
The 9mm's reputation still suffers from the days roundnosed FMJ (that merely pushed tissue out of the way), and of the 115 grain Silvertip (that opened real pretty but didn't penetrate for beans). We've got better solutions today. You need to understand that you won't get damage from hydrostatic displacement at under 2000fps - the bullet is going to destroy what it touches, but not a lot more. A flat nose will help with the grabbing, crushing, and tearing, but don't expect more than about 3/4" to an inch tube of ruptured stuff. Don't let this worry you too much, because that's a lot like the mechanism guys use to kill deer with 200FPS ARROWS all the time!
Shot placement is #1. Penetration THROUGH the pumping station is #2. As long as you've got both, you're golden.
With shots behind the Ear, Who in there right mind would wantingly choose to hunt polar bear with a 22 anything.Quote:
AND polar bear was the 22-250.
But I have been told that head shots and behind the ear does put meat in the igloo.
I was the one that questioned if 9mm was legal. Back in post 8 the original poster said handguns larger than 35 cal were legal. The 9mm is NOT larger than 35 cal, it IS 35 caliber. Post 9 is where I questioned it.Quote:
Originally Posted by dakotashooter2
I found a 22-250 case once on the western shore of the Hudson Bay. I wondered who was crazy enough to carry a rifle that light in such country. The next day as I paddled down the shore I ran into a man and his grandson out with only a 22 rifle. People take some crazy chances. No question bigger animals than deer have been killed with less gun than a 9mm pistol. Placement is everything, but still if money is that tight trade the thing in on a single shot 22 rifle, something you can shoot accurately. To use the 22 rifle would be illegal in most places, but in my view a notch up in ethics above the 9mm pistol. To use any pistol effectively enough for big game hunting requires a lot of practice, and the practice necessary to be good enough, even with cast bullets will be much more expensive than the cost of a new gun of suitable power.
my misinterpretation of the 35 caliber. It states .35 or caliber or LARGER.Quote:
Originally Posted by 357shooter
Thanks for clarifying.Quote:
Originally Posted by huntersdog
Yeah I saw how they hunt on TV. A pot shot at long range to wound the caribou so it lays down. Then walk up to it and cut its throat. Not ideal at all IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by huntersdog
If you can afford a .243 you can afford to buy a 30-06 or trade the .243 in towards a 30-06.
It was and it was also a 10mm G20. Shots made within 10-15ft, and he did go down pretty quick. But that was quite a few shots too.Quote:
Originally Posted by huntersdog
To the OP, I'd pick one load and stick with it. 147gr loaded as hot as possible within reason, it'll be effective on small game and get at least close to penetration you'll need. Obviously a HP would be a exercise in futility on both fronts. I too would recommend a bigger caliber as 9mm has proven inadequate on men plenty of times. .40 would be a better choice to at least get some more weight at similar velocity.
The high and mighty .223 bear hunters.
Seriously guys use a gun with at least 150gr as respect for the animal. 223 disintegrate on impact with bone.
There is a big difference between hunting and substance living. In the bush, food is food.Quote:
Originally Posted by dkf
Edit: Yes it is legal and in certain areas on Native lands one can take 5 Bou a day and on Federal lands they can take 15 per day per person.
This may rot your socks.
http://youtu.be/e-KOJPax8OI
Thank you, for you for your opinion, I will make a note of that. Real hunters will skill to hunt bear with a .223 get well within 100 yards or less. That is a hunter. Give it try, you may like the challenge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magana559
Your welcome. I will admit when I dinked up something.Quote:
Originally Posted by 357shooter
The kills in the video are rather quick and humane kills. Not much different than putting one in the brain stem of a steer. I get that it is not the hunt but to put food on the table.Quote:
Originally Posted by huntersdog
Shooting to wound so you can get to the animal to finish it off is what I don't care for at all. Use a weapon that allows you to a good clean shot and quick kill.
Give it try, you may like the challenge.
I don't think your point has to be driven home any harder,
I guess some people think hunting game with a sub caliber makes a man a hunter.
I'm not sure who your trying to convince that your point is valid, For the record I am not one of them.
I am certainly not trying to slam your efforts or change your mind, or insult you in any way.
Now as far as insults go, I find your above post to be insulting and a tad troubling.Quote:
Real hunters will skill to hunt bear with a .223 get well within 100 yards or less. That is a hunter. Give it try, you may like the challenge.
If I lived any more in the bush I would be on another Planet, And I don't think of myself as a fake hunter, I am as real as you will get. Let us know how the real hair on your real hunter body stands up when a Bear charges you and your 223
I have to let this post go, I can't deal with the logic.