Choice of Revolver against Grizzly Bear attack.

[dverna]

Funny how we cannot figure out for sure what is a perfect SD gun for two legged critters that get shot multiple times every day. Even with all that data/history we have varied "opinions".

I am lucky that I have zero chance of meeting up with a grizzly bear. I have no idea how frequently that occurs in grizzly country but one encounter is all it takes.

If I was in the OP's situation I would look at a Stainless Shockwave:

https://www.mossberg.com/product/590...2-gauge-50656/

And carry it in something like this:

https://ads.midwayusa.com/product/10...=1101131606224

I know...it is not a holstered gun and will be slower to get out. It can be loaded with large buckshot and/or slugs. Looks like the scabbard will carry the gun without having the gun catch many branches. Weight is not too bad at 5.3 lbs. Recoil should be more manageable with two hands to control it. Certainly more effective than a .44 Mag.

I am a coward, so would look at reducing what I need carry to clear trails and focus on having an effective weapon.

[junkbug]

I am not familiar with your terms. Are you saying the screw that holds the ejector rod housing broke off? That is a bad scene, but any handgun is a tool, any of them can break.

Since you are used to what you have, I would take your revolver to a good gunsmith and have him (or her) tap the barrel for a bigger screw and put it back together. I know that failure is nerve wracking, but a Redhawk can break in some unexpected way just the same.

Best wishes to you with your search.

[500aquasteve]

If I lived in a high risk bear attack environment, my 3.5" 500 loaded with 500 grain HRNDY XTP FP's to close to 1200 ft/sec 25 yds (near max for the that short barrel) would make me feel safe(r). I would certainly practice and master drawing for, and hitting an approaching target

[badguybuster]

You could get a Model 625 and have it converted to 460 rowland.....thats beast

[Three44s]

A lot of good ideas thus far.

That said, my experience has been owning and shooting the Smith 629 Mountain Gun (4”), a 7.5” SS Redhawk and a 9 1/2” (SS) Super Redhawk, all in .44Mag

I traded my Super Redhawk for a 7.5” SRH in .480 Ruger .... I really like that .480!

I have shot the 329 Smith in 4” (44 Mag). If I was working and packing on my feet day in and out, I would give it serious thought. I get the part about how the gun will look, but I am more interested in how “I look” ..... as in having a less pretty gun but a more pretty me.

Back to stainless.

I have shot the Smith model 69 in 4” as one of my nephews has one. I can not tell you what it is other than grip shape but it is not very friendly in the recoil department. My Mountain Gun (629) weights just one ounce more (empty) but it is a sweet cat compared to the 69 in my opinion.

The RedHawks and Super RedHawks are plenty tough. They over shadow your Super Blackhawk. With a cylinder that is .050” longer than a SBH or the comparative Smith &Wessons you have more effective boiler room in your casings provided you chose a boolit that can take advantage of it. Fortunately Lee did just that with their ..310 gr cast boolit. Other designs are “dual” crimp groove as well. You might ask, does a mere .050” make much difference? Well yes especially when it’s housed in an “artillery piece” like a Redhawk or Super Redhawk.

I would be wary of lighter springs to make the trigger sweeter in the Rugers, I went that route and had to stick with old school Federal primers to keep from having light strikes (FTF). A very good gunsmith can help those triggers but it requires more than just changing springs alone to get where you maintain reliability.

My best advice I can give is shoot the various guns you are thinking about, hand guns are just too personal for someone else to pass judgement about what you will actually favor.

I had a Grizzly on our cattle mountain range 30 years ago but not since and never came across it myself and it must of moved on so I can not tell you any experience there.

With that, I favor my Smith MG for packability (39 oz ) and why I would think very hard about the 329 in a 4”.

But in Grizz country I would really think double action Ruger. In theory the Super Redhawk has a better trigger spring set up than a Redhawk, but my Redhawk out shot my Super (more because my RH cylinder is more consistent that was my first Super RH) but it was not really noticeable except at long range.

The SRH has another edge with grip choices over the RH and being more comfortable.

Simply put the S&Ws will not take the pounding long term that the DA Rugers can nor in my opinion the heavier bullets are somewhat tough on them (the Smiths). Untouched my Mountain Gun has worked into a trigger to die for, though. The S&Ws just are a very sweet ride, there is no two ways about it.

My .02 worth

Three44s

[Graybeard96]

I am not familiar with your terms. Are you saying the screw that holds the ejector rod housing broke off? That is a bad scene, but any handgun is a tool, any of them can break.

Since you are used to what you have, I would take your revolver to a good gunsmith and have him (or her) tap the barrel for a bigger screw and put it back together. I know that failure is nerve wracking, but a Redhawk can break in some unexpected way just the same.

Best wishes to you with your search.

Yea, that Screw sheered right off dropping the Ejector Housing and anything into the Gravel. Did not even noticed it until all 6 where trough Target and I wanted to drop the Empties out of the Revolver.
Don"t get me wrong, I love this Gun points & shoots like a Dream (with my "Custom" Bisley Grips) but this failure plus the all-ways very awkward finding the Cylinder hole to push out the Empties convinced me its not the Revolver I should pack for my Work in the Bush.

I am not a Big Guy (not counting my Belly) just wiry, old and Stubborn and love my Job and most of the Grizzly's around and they know me too and usually give me a with Berth. But some of them give me the Willies. There is one huge Sow must be 600 Lbs. or better probably 15+ years old, when she has young ones in tow I detour pronto.

You mention a Ruger Redhawk can break in some unexpected ways. As you said anything can break but if you know something I should before I find one and get the Plastic out I appreciate you or anybody else to tell me.

Thanks

[Mk42gunner]

I do not live in Grizzly country; in fact I can only think of one bear I have seen in the wild, a black bear in Colorado. What I am is an old retired Military Armorer that went to school when they still taught how to fix revolvers.

As I was told, for street/ combat (I think shooting a bear of any sort off the top of me constitutes combat) usage: a smooth action is good, weak springs are not.

For what you describe, I would get a stainless Redhawk. I like the 5½", never shot any of the shorter ones. I would pay someone that knows how to smooth its action, with factory weight springs. Very bad time for a misfire caused by a light hammer blow.

You know about what kind of loads you need than I ever will, the plain Redhawk should outlast your grandkids.

Robert

[Graybeard96]

A lot of good ideas thus far.

That said, my experience has been owning and shooting the Smith 629 Mountain Gun (4”), a 7.5” SS Redhawk and a 9 1/2” (SS) Super Redhawk, all in .44Mag

I traded my Super Redhawk for a 7.5” SRH in .480 Ruger .... I really like that .480!

I have shot the 329 Smith in 4” (44 Mag). If I was working and packing on my feet day in and out, I would give it serious thought. I get the part about how the gun will look, but I am more interested in how “I look” ..... as in having a less pretty gun but a more pretty me.

Back to stainless.

I have shot the Smith model 69 in 4” as one of my nephews has one. I can not tell you what it is other than grip shape but it is not very friendly in the recoil department. My Mountain Gun (629) weights just one ounce more (empty) but it is a sweet cat compared to the 69 in my opinion.

The RedHawks and Super RedHawks are plenty tough. They over shadow your Super Blackhawk. With a cylinder that is .050” longer than a SBH or the comparative Smith &Wessons you have more effective boiler room in your casings provided you chose a boolit that can take advantage of it. Fortunately Lee did just that with their ..310 gr cast boolit. Other designs are “dual” crimp groove as well. You might ask, does a mere .050” make much difference? Well yes especially when it’s housed in an “artillery piece” like a Redhawk or Super Redhawk.

Thank you for your assessment of the Redhawks, makes me feel I am on the right Path. !

Thanks again & Cheers

[Three44s]

You are welcome. I added more after you quoted my post.

Good luck on your “journey”!

Three44s

[Graybeard96]

I do not live in Grizzly country; in fact I can only think of one bear I have seen in the wild, a black bear in Colorado. What I am is an old retired Military Armorer that went to school when they still taught how to fix revolvers.

As I was told, for street/ combat (I think shooting a bear of any sort off the top of me constitutes combat) usage: a smooth action is good, weak springs are not.

For what you describe, I would get a stainless Redhawk. I like the 5½", never shot any of the shorter ones. I would pay someone that knows how to smooth its action, with factory weight springs. Very bad time for a misfire caused by a light hammer blow.

You know about what kind of loads you need than I ever will, the plain Redhawk should outlast your grandkids.

Robert

Thanks Robert, good to her from someone which knew they way it was I am one of them !
I believe I still have a .44 Lyman Mold casting a 300 Grain GC Bullet. Once I have a Redhawk or Super Redhawk I might just try them and see how they compare to the 240 Grains in a Wood Block penetration Test.

Cheers to you
Karl

[memtb]

If it is to be a new revolver ......sorry, “Go big or go home”! The Ruger in .454 Casull or either of the S&W X Frames in 5” or under version. I love my 460 X Frame.....for hunting. It’s too long (8 3/8”) for a practical bear defense gun.....though, I’d certainly not be “under gunned”! I’m presently looking for a 5” model for those hikes, scouting, and horn hunting trips! The long barrel gives good accuracy at longer ranges, and higher velocities.....neither are important at arms reach! memtb

[Bigslug]

A good friend of mine who spent much time in the Alaska boonies suggested a 9mm Glock 19 for the job, because, as he put it "It isn't for the bear"

He also suggested a handgun with the front sight removed, because when the bear inserts it where the sun don't shine, it'll hurt less.

Truthfully, I don't see much advantage to .44 over .357, or .357 over 9mm for the job, provided you're sticking with heavy-ish for caliber solids that will penetrate. The goal will be to stop the bear before he folds you into a tiny origami version of your former self, and waiting around for the effects of internal bleeding to set in isn't going to help you in a short range charge. My plan would be to go for the face and hopefully thread one through his nasal channel into the gray matter.

I had a 4.25" .45 Colt/ACP round butt Redhawk on my CCW for a couple years. Carried beautifully in a DeSantis Thumb Break Scabbard, but wasn't as versatile as the 4" GP-100 .357. The S&W Mountain Gun in .44 ain't a bad choice for keeping the weight down, and with warm .44 Special-level solids would be manageable in the recoil/follow-up department.

But considering the stuff that gets humped around and the weight penalties for something you hope never gets used, I'm kinda liking that heavy 9mm solids in a Glock notion.

[Dieselhorses]

I don't bear hunt, nor do I have to worry about bear attacks (at the moment). I think we need to understand what we're shooting "at" before deciding what to shoot it "with". Here's a couple of informative sites.

https://youtu.be/yzxL9r_1IF0 (young brown bear 250 lbs.)

http://www.ballistics101.com/images/...tplacement.pdf (shot placement and anatomy)


https://qualityhunts.com/product/hun...ska-peninsula/

[chrometip78]

I like carrying my Ruger Redhawk 4.2" 44mag when I'm walking in the woods, not going to claim it's the best bear defense option in existence but I like it. Large enough to tame recoil, not obnoxiously large getting in the way and hanging up on everything, the double action trigger pull is smooth and excellent IMO, single action is crisp but heavy, sights are good, getting it dusty/wet/scratched doesn't hurt my soul, and mine's been reliable.

[smkummer]

Yep, I would want a double action just in case I only had one hand to shoot and needed a fast shot. About 4” for easier carry but enough barrel to get the bullet moving. 44 mag. or more power level ( 45 colt plus P is fine). Often in these cases, the gun may never be needed, but of course if needed, it must perform.
Maybe more importantly, just like LEOs have to qualify, I would practice drawing from the holster and getting a accurate shot off on a bear size target facing you. Sure, use lighter loads for practice but the last practice scenario should be with carry ammo. Know your ability and limitations.

[1006]

Admittedly, I do not know much about this topic. But, just talking guns, required power, and carry convenience, I would opt for a light weight rifle, or slug gun over a heavy revolver. Maybe a 338 Federal, or in the case of a 44Mag preference: one of the Ruger carbines. I think Ruger used make a lever, a bolt, and a semi-auto.

[RJM52]

Was wondering if there is any particular load you are carrying or have to carry...

Don't have them in .44 Magnum but do have two of the above mentioned guns in .41 Magnum...the S&W Mountain Gun and Ruger Redhawk 4.2"...both are great shooters. If you are using reasonable .44 Magnum loads the Mountain Gun is great as it has nice balance and a lot of different grip options.

The Redhawk is definitely the tougher of the two but at a cost of weight and balance. It also has far less grip options...but will run 300 grain bear loads all day long.

Pair of Mountain Guns...

[Lloyd Smale]

My first choice would be a 12 ga Mossberg loaded with 8 slugs in the mag and one in the chamber.

If I had to take a revolver into thick brush I would take a 4" barreled Super Redhawk in 454 Casull or 480 Ruger.

It is not a good decision to make caliber choice for protection against a grizzly based on what $45 set of dies one has.

This decision should be to carry the most knockdown energy you can carry and still shoot accurately.

im with doug. All we have here are black bears and a 44 or about anything will work on them. If i was in brown or griz territory i wouldnt be caught without a long gun period. Ive killed lots of game with 475s and 500 linebaughs. Some as big as bison. Ive had deer run off after a good hit with a 500 and watched one 1200 lb cow bison keep eating grass after i hit in behind the shoulder with a 500 shooting 480lfns at 1200 fps. I kept eating like it wasnt even hit for a good 30 seconds before it tipped over dead. PLENTY of time for a big bear to tear you limb from limb. All a handgun would be for me in big bear territory would be a back up and that said i doubt a bear is giving you time to use your back up. Id prefer 3lbs less weight on my hip when i tried to get out of dodge then to count on it saving my life. People overestimate the power of even the biggest handguns. They think there dinosaur slayers when in fact there barely equal to a black powder 4570 load in a package thats much harder to place a good shot with. a 44mag? less real world power then a 3030. A 9mm??? About like walking into a firefight armed with a 25acp. We had a charging bear target at one linebaugh seminar and just the pressure of having people watch had about 50 percent of the shooters missing the bear completely. Keep in mind those are some of the best handgun shooters in the country. I could count on my 10 fingers the number of guys who could consistently make a central nervous system hit. Now add a real bear with claws and snapping teeth and a roll of toilet paper might be better in a holster then a handgun. if your out where REAL bear dangers are likely and you dont have a long gun, good luck to you!!

[zarrinvz24]

Elmer Keith in Sixguns described a friend of his that had killed numerous black bears with a 32-20 SAA. I haven't seen anyone else discuss this, but the first consideration that should be made when choosing a firearm for self defense is one that you can make hits with, and a knowledge of anatomy (know where to put it). It isn't the sound it makes, or the size of the projectile that matters. It is the hits that count. Next up Rifle/Shotgun > any handgun. I love handguns, specifically revolvers - but I understand the limitations, and in a type of defense situation a handgun is best thought of as a means to which you fight your way back to a rifle. Wandering the woods, I would much rather carry a 12ga or 30-06 rifle. Most friends I have in Alaska carry a 12ga w/slugs.

[starnbar]

Like you Gray I am over 70 now yeah eyes and ears are not as sharp any more so I rely on my dog she is trained and stays right near me we have a hog problem here and some are pretty nasty and yes hogs will eat a person if they get em down.