Gen4 Glock 20 for a woods gun

[Up1911Fan]

Seriously considering a Gen4 G20 for a woods gun. Primary use would be as my carry gun when snowshoeing and snowmobiling in the winter, and hiking/backpacking the rest of the year. Would also be carried as a secondary when hunting. No grizzlies in Upper Michigan, so primarily for black bear, cougars, wolves. I have two small dogs I often take for long day hikes. Primary carry for me is a G17/19. I'm also thinking about a G22 with a KKM or BS barrel as it would fit all existing support gear. Mainly looking for any advise/experience you may have with either one given my potential use for them. Load suggestions?

[secondstoryguy]

Don't know about the Gen 4s, but I carried a Glock 20 for years in Montana. IMHO it's the perfect woods gun and I say this having carried various other "woods" type guns such as a S&W .44 mountain gun. Another plus to the G20s are the ability to drop in a .40 barrel and shoot 40 or even .357 sig. Mine ran perfectly with a .40 cal conversion barrel dropped in.

[warpedcamshaft]

Glock 20 = Good Business

[Wendell]

Backpacking: bears (http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4585-Backpacking-bears)
<http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4585-Backpacking-bears>

[GJM]

I recently got a G4 Glock 29, and feel it is better than my 29SF. The OEM beavertail is more protective of the base of the inside of my dominant thumb with heavy loads. The Gen 4 texture also helps me hold onto the gun better. So far no stoppages through about 100 assorted 10mm loads, from the Underwood 200 penetrator, DT 200 penetrator, Barnes 155 JHP, Hornady XTP and CD. I am running the small frame height Trijicon HD sights and they regulate for my pistol.

I like the 29 for defensive field use, versus lots of shooting, because it carries so much smaller than a G20.

[Up1911Fan]

I recently got a G4 Glock 29, and feel it is better than my 29SF. The OEM beavertail is more protective of the base of the inside of my dominant thumb with heavy loads. The Gen 4 texture also helps me hold onto the gun better. So far no stoppages through about 100 assorted 10mm loads, from the Underwood 200 penetrator, DT 200 penetrator, Barnes 155 JHP, Hornady XTP and CD. I am running the small frame height Trijicon HD sights and they regulate for my pistol.

I like the 29 for defensive field use, versus lots of shooting, because it carries so much smaller than a G20.

Thanks, do you still prefer the G22 over the G20? Whichever I go with will not be a high volume shooter, or replace my 9mm Glocks. Just enough to verify function and POI.

[GardoneVT]

Aren't the terms "woods gun" and " handgun" mututally exclusive?

If I were sharing real estate with animals capable of serious harm, I'd be toting my trusty Benelli 12 gauge.

[JHC]

I'm having a ball with this topic also planning an Alaska trip this Summer to include some hiking and fishing. My perspective is one needs adequate penetration and shootability to face shoot a big bear or moose at close range. Personally I think the widespread advice for giant .454 Casull and UP handguns is pretty much nuts. Way too much recoil to make a 2nd or 3rd shot if you miss popping the brain pan on the first. I'm still not sure about the .44.

Today I got 3 hits on a 4x6 card at 7 yards in a little less than 3 seconds with a 4" model 629. Twice in a row. That's coming along ok from when I first started playing with this a few weeks ago.

Glock 10mms seem like the most capability with least serious power compromise.

[Nephrology]

Black bears are big old pansies, cats and dogs of the predatory variety can be handled with pretty much anything that would be useful in humans. so, unless you really just want a Glock 20 (perfectly legitimate thing to want) you probably don't need to sink money into a new pistol/support gear/caliber.

[GJM]

Thanks, do you still prefer the G22 over the G20? Whichever I go with will not be a high volume shooter, or replace my 9mm Glocks. Just enough to verify function and POI.

I find the G20 to be slightly big for continuous carry. Last summer I ran a G22 with a KKM barrel and DT hard cast. I (belatedly) discovered some feeding issues with the last few few cartridges in the magazine. If hard cast doesn't run, I am leaning towards the G29, as there is a better selection of penetrator type loads. Trying to verify the G29 is reliable with the penetrator loads.


Aren't the terms "woods gun" and " handgun" mututally exclusive?

If I were sharing real estate with animals capable of serious harm, I'd be toting my trusty Benelli 12 gauge.

Whenever I hear this sort of advice, and it is frequent, I wonder why choose between a handgun and long gun, when the obvious answer is to have both.


I'm having a ball with this topic also planning an Alaska trip this Summer to include some hiking and fishing. My perspective is one needs adequate penetration and shootability to face shoot a big bear or moose at close range. Personally I think the widespread advice for giant .454 Casull and UP handguns is pretty much nuts. Way too much recoil to make a 2nd or 3rd shot if you miss popping the brain pan on the first. I'm still not sure about the .44.

Today I got 3 hits on a 4x6 card at 7 yards in a little less than 3 seconds with a 4" model 629. Twice in a row. That's coming along ok from when I first started playing with this a few weeks ago.

Glock 10mms seem like the most capability with least serious power compromise.

Four inch Smith .44 has been the "school solution" for a long time. If I didn't shoot so much semi-auto, and frequently have a long gun with me, this would be my solution.

[Charlie Foxtrot]

Got a Gen 2 G20 and like it a lot. With some Buffalo Bore or Doubletap full-boat loads with 200-220gr hardcast lead solids, you're about as good as you can get in a semi (Deagles notwithstanding.) I've heard of many hunting with a G20, and a lot of them use the 6" Lone Wolf barrel.

I'm curious on how the recoil of a 4th Gen G20 differs from the earlier generations. I'll admit I'd like a bit less kick when shooting heavy 10mm SD loads.

[JHC]

I've found it interesting in scouring the web for authoritative commentary on this subject how strong the .357 mag shows. It sounded legit that US Forestry or maybe the state of AK has issued .357's with select loads because it was common to find that shooters could not manage more recoil than that. Plus accounts of heavily loaded cast .357 loads penetrating like the dickens on big animals.

[GJM]

Got a Gen 2 G20 and like it a lot. With some Buffalo Bore or Doubletap full-boat loads with 200-220gr hardcast lead solids, you're about as good as you can get in a semi (Deagles notwithstanding.) I've heard of many hunting with a G20, and a lot of them use the 6" Lone Wolf barrel.

I'm curious on how the recoil of a 4th Gen G20 differs from the earlier generations. I'll admit I'd like a bit less kick when shooting heavy 10mm SD loads.

Curious how may of the Buffalo Bore heavy loads you have run from a reliability perspective -- they don't run in multiple G20 and G20SF pistols we have.

[Charlie Foxtrot]

Haven't shot the Buffalo Bore in my gun - not a hunter (not yet) - and I don't s##t in the woods: frankly, bears scare the wee out of me. I talked to a gent (...at a gunstore :eek:...) who said he had. He liked their accuracy and hitting power. No mention of any issues. I've also read internet reports on the effectivity of Buffalo Bore.

What problems are you experiencing? My G20 has shot everything from 10mm Blazer Aluminum, to handloads, to the evil Black Talons without a problem, save one Blazer that just wouldn't load.

[GJM]

What problems are you experiencing? My G20 has shot everything from 10mm Blazer Aluminum, to handloads, to the evil Black Talons without a problem, save one Blazer that just wouldn't load.

In 5 G20 pistols, between by my wife and I, the Buffalo Bore and Corbon heavy penetrator loads causes stoppages. DT is better, but not perfect, especially with a bad grip, as in one hand. Heavier recoil springs with a Wolff guide rod don't fix the problem.

[JHC]

In 5 G20 pistols, between by my wife and I, the Buffalo Bore and Corbon heavy penetrator loads causes stoppages. DT is better, but not perfect, especially with a bad grip, as in one hand. Heavier recoil springs with a Wolff guide rod don't fix the problem.

It's really going to be interesting to hear your results with Gen 4 G29s. Sure will be nice if they run those stomper loads well.

[GJM]

Joe, I think the stompier you get, the further out you get from the center of the reliability envelope. I think a 180 or 200 grain flattish meplat FMJ at about 1,100 fps would be ideal as a compromise between penetration and reliability.

[JHC]

Joe, I think the stompier you get, the further out you get from the center of the reliability envelope. I think a 180 or 200 grain flattish meplat FMJ at about 1,100 fps would be ideal as a compromise between penetration and reliability.

Agreed. A decent heavy solid clocking 1100 fps is going to penetrate plenty I should think. Within a certain sectional density range per caliber (specifically what that is I don't know) I think that would apply.

What do you think a 230 grain FMJ-FP at 960 fps would penetrate in gel? 30 inches? I wouldn't be surprised. Same for the BB 9mm 124 gr fmj - FP +p at 1300 fps.

Mr Wiggins? ;)

[Jack Ryan]

Seriously considering a Gen4 G20 for a woods gun. Primary use would be as my carry gun when snowshoeing and snowmobiling in the winter, and hiking/backpacking the rest of the year. Would also be carried as a secondary when hunting. No grizzlies in Upper Michigan, so primarily for black bear, cougars, wolves. I have two small dogs I often take for long day hikes. Primary carry for me is a G17/19. I'm also thinking about a G22 with a KKM or BS barrel as it would fit all existing support gear. Mainly looking for any advise/experience you may have with either one given my potential use for them. Load suggestions?

I've got a G20 I carry a lot. I've shot thousands of rounds through it and made the usual back yard penetration tests. IMHO, it's plenty of gun for everything you mention but bears. I don't think a handgun is really much for defense against a deliberate attack by any of those but it would work well to get any of those other than a bear while it's chewing on those little dogs. The dogs are what will give you time to get out a handgun, if you get it. Have enough gun to help them if you want to repay the favor.

[Jack Ryan]

I'm having a ball with this topic also planning an Alaska trip this Summer to include some hiking and fishing. My perspective is one needs adequate penetration and shootability to face shoot a big bear or moose at close range. Personally I think the widespread advice for giant .454 Casull and UP handguns is pretty much nuts. Way too much recoil to make a 2nd or 3rd shot if you miss popping the brain pan on the first. I'm still not sure about the .44.

Today I got 3 hits on a 4x6 card at 7 yards in a little less than 3 seconds with a 4" model 629. Twice in a row. That's coming along ok from when I first started playing with this a few weeks ago.

Glock 10mms seem like the most capability with least serious power compromise.

I've got one of those 629 same as yours. Those guns are awesome. I'd take that gun over my G20 in to bear country every day of the week. I've been tieing kite string to a tree branch on my target range with a loop on the end. Then I can use the loop to easily hook on a soda can full of water or plastic soda bottles. Those would be close to the size of your card. Try getting 3-4 of those swinging on the ends of string at about heart high and see what kind of times you get trying to take them all out at 7 yards. Everyone who's ever tried it just can't get enough of those drills and it's a lot more representative of a live defense situation. Multiple attackers and they don't just sit there pinned to a post.

[vaspence]

I took my Gen 4 20 to Alaska last summer. We hiked, fished, etc. and I carried it in either an HPG kit bag or a forward cant IWB. Mine runs the Underwood 200 TMJ and XTPs just fine. I've put around 150 TMJ's and approx. 200 XTPs through it (may be a little less I'd have to check to see if there is a partial box). That's in addition to 600 AE 180s and 500 Privi 180s.

Here in VA it's now more of hunting pistol. The Gen 4 23 with 180s is my woods runner. Perfect backup to my Benjamin Discovery .22 yesterday while fetching a limit of squirrels.

[Malamute]

I think in non-grizzly areas the 10mm would be fine. After the question came up a while ago, I asked on the Alaska Outdoors forum about 10's used on game. There were some interesting replies.

http://forums.outdoorsdirectory.com/showthread.php/137747-10mm-use-on-game

I don't believe I would choose to carry one in grizzly country (my neighborhood). The 4" 29 absolutely positively works every time I've shot it, no matter what loads. I never wonder if it will feed because of the bullet type. If the cartridges go in the chambers it will function.

I agree with GJM's comments about "either-or". Why go without a pistol just because you have a long gun? I regularly carry rifles, but I'm never ever without a pistol when out and about. It's simply not a question whether I have it no matter what else I may have.

Hunting small game with a pistol is pretty good practice for moving targets. Bunnies and squirrels. Shoot them on the run. Great fun, and great practice. Stuff thrown in the air is too, but its hard to find good places to do that for most people.

[GJM]

I've got a G20 I carry a lot. I've shot thousands of rounds through it and made the usual back yard penetration tests. IMHO, it's plenty of gun for everything you mention but bears. I don't think a handgun is really much for defense against a deliberate attack by any of those but it would work well to get any of those other than a bear while it's chewing on those little dogs. The dogs are what will give you time to get out a handgun, if you get it. Have enough gun to help them if you want to repay the favor.

We are probably rehashing ground that has been covered in previous threads, but the longest running study of the use of firearms to deter bear attacks, shows that handguns are a smidge more effective than long guns. These handguns are in very "un-bear like" calibers like 9, 40, 45 and .357. I suspect that, like people, bears don't like to get shot, and many of the stops are psychological stops, where a "still alive" bear goes elsewhere. Now for a determined bear, a handgun will most likely need to penetrate the brain to stop the charge. That means you need a bullet/gun combination sufficient to penetrate the skull on a brown bear.


I took my Gen 4 20 to Alaska last summer. We hiked, fished, etc. and I carried it in either an HPG kit bag or a forward cant IWB. Mine runs the Underwood 200 TMJ and XTPs just fine. I've put around 150 TMJ's and approx. 200 XTPs through it (may be a little less I'd have to check to see if there is a partial box). That's in addition to 600 AE 180s and 500 Privi 180s.

Here in VA it's now more of hunting pistol. The Gen 4 23 with 180s is my woods runner. Perfect backup to my Benjamin Discovery .22 yesterday while fetching a limit of squirrels.

I just bought a bunch of the Underwood 200 TMJ load to test in my 20 and 29. So far, it has run in my G4 29. I have never had any problem with Hornady factory 200 XTP functioning in any 20 or 29.

[Up1911Fan]

Appreciate all the input.

[EMC]

These threads always discuss skull penetration on brown bear. Is there any kind of testing done on large game cadavers to see how bullet resistant these skulls are?

[Malamute]

These threads always discuss skull penetration on brown bear. Is there any kind of testing done on large game cadavers to see how bullet resistant these skulls are?

I haven't heard of any testing, though most decently constructed solids seem capable of making holes in them. I think round nose is less desirable.

Like shooting through auto glass, angle probably has some bearing.

One aspect seldom mentioned, bear skulls are pretty narrow. I've seen comments online about believing shooting them in the eyes is a good idea to kill them, which it is not if you intend to make a hole in the brain case.

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b387/Malamute/IMG_0053.jpg

Phil Shoemaker carried a 357 with heavy bullets and thought it capable for killing bears (I think his opinions were formed from actually doing it). I believe he went back to a 44, because it made him feel better, but gave the 357 to his daughter who was also a bear guide.

Elmer Keith wrote of shooting large bulls (cattle) with the 44. I believe he was shooting through the skull and several inches into the neck bones with the 1950's lead factory loads, his cast loads shot a bit deeper, though of a bit less velocity. I believe the bullets were harder than the factory loads.

[Charlie Foxtrot]

In 5 G20 pistols, between by my wife and I, the Buffalo Bore and Corbon heavy penetrator loads causes stoppages. DT is better, but not perfect, especially with a bad grip, as in one hand. Heavier recoil springs with a Wolff guide rod don't fix the problem.

Thanks for the advice. I'll be extra careful qualifying that ammo before taking it to the field.

I wonder if it is related to the bullet design or weight. I had no trouble with the stout self-defense loads, but the heaviest bullet was 185 grs(?) And they were smooth jacketed hollow points.

[JHC]

I haven't heard of any testing, though most decently constructed solids seem capable of making holes in them. I think round nose is less desirable.

Like shooting through auto glass, angle probably has some bearing.

One aspect seldom mentioned, bear skulls are pretty narrow. I've seen comments online about believing shooting them in the eyes is a good idea to kill them, which it is not if you intend to make a hole in the brain case.

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b387/Malamute/IMG_0053.jpg

Phil Shoemaker carried a 357 with heavy bullets and thought it capable for killing bears (I think his opinions were formed from actually doing it). I believe he went back to a 44, because it made him feel better, but gave the 357 to his daughter who was also a bear guide.

Elmer Keith wrote of shooting large bulls (cattle) with the 44. I believe he was shooting through the skull and several inches into the neck bones with the 1950's lead factory loads, his cast loads shot a bit deeper, though of a bit less velocity. I believe the bullets were harder than the factory loads.

Back more than 10 years ago I came across a website about bear defense in AK. The author had been mauled by a sow brown bear while hunting and rescued by his hunting buddies who had to shoot not only the SOW but two large cubs that followed up with charges of their own.

He'd made it his mission to study all he could find about bear attacks and had some pretty good info pretty early on about the different characteristics of a grizzly/brown bear attack vs black bear predatory attacks.

Regarding pistols I thought he had the most interesting new tidbit. He reported that the Alaska Troopers conducted tests on large bear heads that the DNR had collected from all manners of bear deaths. Their findings - per him - were that any service pistol 9mm on up would pop the brain pan if struck in the nostrils or through the mouth. But these loads and larger handgun calibers like the .44 and up could be expected to regularly fail to reach the brain if striking other parts of that narrow skull you mention at angles.

He believed a pistol armed defender's best chance at close range was the brain and that counting on body/shoulder shots once the distance closed was not such a great plan. Brain it. He thought heavy kicking single action revolvers .44, .454, and larger to be about the worst choice for the recoil and follow up split times if the first shot was not perfect.

DA revolvers better and semi autos in a caliber to crack the brain pan also serviceable. He promoted accuracy and follow up shots above raw power per shot.


I've scoured that AK board you linked to as well and didn't find their discussion dramatically different than on many other bear defense threads. What I think is missing is more specifics on shot placement from the .44 and bigger only advocates. Perhaps you could stand in for them? ;)

Are they promoting heavy caliber revolvers with the expectation of breaking down shoulders and dropping bear during a charge? I've broken both shoulders on a whitetail doe with a through and through .30-30 hit and still trailed her 50 yards to where she dropped. I don't know how she did that. Her front legs would hinge and touch each other over her back when I found her.

With the grizzly you found the .44 to work well on; where was it hit and how did it react to the hit/hits? And data on the load?

Thanks much. I love that wilderness big bore revolver stuff you bring here. :D

[JHC]

I've got one of those 629 same as yours. Those guns are awesome. I'd take that gun over my G20 in to bear country every day of the week. I've been tieing kite string to a tree branch on my target range with a loop on the end. Then I can use the loop to easily hook on a soda can full of water or plastic soda bottles. Those would be close to the size of your card. Try getting 3-4 of those swinging on the ends of string at about heart high and see what kind of times you get trying to take them all out at 7 yards. Everyone who's ever tried it just can't get enough of those drills and it's a lot more representative of a live defense situation. Multiple attackers and they don't just sit there pinned to a post.

Good stuff! 3 or 4 swinging soda bottles - and six shots to do it with? ;) You see where I'm going with this. :D It's been too long since I've worked with this 4" 629 and I'm starting to get into it now.

[Malamute]

He thought heavy kicking single action revolvers .44, .454, and larger to be about the worst choice for the recoil and follow up split times if the first shot was not perfect.

DA revolvers better and semi autos in a caliber to crack the brain pan also serviceable. He promoted accuracy and follow up shots above raw power per shot.


I've scoured that AK board you linked to as well and didn't find their discussion dramatically different than on many other bear defense threads. What I think is missing is more specifics on shot placement from the .44 and bigger only advocates. Perhaps you could stand in for them? ;)

Are they promoting heavy caliber revolvers with the expectation of breaking down shoulders and dropping bear during a charge? I've broken both shoulders on a whitetail doe with a through and through .30-30 hit and still trailed her 50 yards to where she dropped. I don't know how she did that. Her front legs would hinge and touch each other over her back when I found her.

With the grizzly you found the .44 to work well on; where was it hit and how did it react to the hit/hits? And data on the load?

Thanks much. I love that wilderness big bore revolver stuff you bring here. :D

I didn't shoot a bear with it, the comment was regarding the gun functioning positively with any load.

I agree about brain shots being best, and the path of least resistance is up the nasal cavity, though folks that deal with the issue don't always have the option. Side shots in the head will have less bone to deal with, but that isn't always on a list of choices either. I wouldn't hesitate to make a head shot from the front if its what I had available. It's worked enough times to be worth trying. (Ralph Edwards wrote that he stopped counting at 50 the number of grizzlies he killed in Canada in the 20's-30's, most with a 30-30 or 35 Remington and head shots up close)

I don't care for the superpowered revolver rounds, recoil is just one aspect, I don't care for the muzzle blast of the 454 and high intensity loads. The 4" 44 isn't pleasant, but not in the same class as the 454 in even a 7 1/2" barrel. I'm not opposed to the single action, I've carried and used them a fair amount over time. They are easier on the hand for a given heavy load then a double action. They can be shot one handed, yes, there's a fair pause in repeat shots. I'm willing to accept a certain amount of that for the carryability of the gun for the power level, and how well I shoot them. I carry both 4 5/8" Ruger SA's as well as the 4" smith. I wasn't able to shoot heavy loads in a DA for many years due to a hand injury, and was OK with the SA for the most part. I can't get them into action for the leather as quickly as a DA, but that's mainly a practice issue.

I'm not an SME by any means, others here have more firsthand experience, I've just tried to learn as much about the subject as I could when I started working in bear country and eventually moved here full time. I've talked to people that have shot bears in unpleasant circumstances, and had many discussions with Mr Linebaugh, who has a fair amount of correspondence with folks that have used his and other guns on largish animals. The main reason for heavier calibers/loads/bullets isn't just to poke a hole in the brain, but the likelihood of body hits, as a miss from a head shot or as the only available option at the moment. The deeper the bullet will shoot and the more bones the bullet is capable of breaking, the better the odds of one of those less desirable shots doing some good. There have been one or two instances where a bullet broke a hip after shooting through the length of the animal. A given shot may not stop a bear in its tracks, but may slow it down enough to get another shot in, and sometimes, shots turn bears. As with the deer, theres no guarantee a particular shot will have the effect we want, but we have a fair idea how certain types of loads generally work on large animals from the number of reports. I want the bullets to shoot as deep as possible and have a reasonable chance to break bones.

I use the Keith load of 22 grs 2400 with the 250 gr Lyman 429421 bullet in the 29. I also have some 290 gr Keith style bullets, they go 1225 fps in a 6" 29, though I mainly carry the 4" with the 250 gr loads. For the 45 Colt, I carry 300 and 325 gr bullets running about 1250 fps. I don't recall the exact amount of H-110. Its on Mr Linebaughs web site. He told me the load a long time ago, and that's what I loaded. They arent much fun to shoot, but shoot close enough to point of aim of the regular loads (250's @ 1000 fps). That said, one guy I talked to had shot a 300-ish lb grizzly sow with a 41 mag with 210 gr factory jhp loads. He made two body hits and had complete pass throughs with the bear DRT. This was after she had caused considerable damage to him in an ambush in thick sage brush (yeah, classic bear habitat, eh?). The load isn't one we'd think of as an ideal bear load, but it worked for him that day. He has since bought a larger caliber gun, a 454 I believe.

Some of the guys on the Alaska board have shot a number of bears hunting them. Hunting is a little different situation than stopping shots, but gives some good info on load performance. I believe theres also a few that have had stopping issues also.

[JHC]

Thanks and my apologies for mis-reading the prior post re a Grizzly. That's a lot of interesting info.

[GJM]

I didn't shoot a bear with it, the comment was regarding the gun functioning positively with any load.

I agree about brain shots being best, and the path of least resistance is up the nasal cavity, though folks that deal with the issue don't always have the option. Side shots in the head will have less bone to deal with, but that isn't always on a list of choices either. I wouldn't hesitate to make a head shot from the front if its what I had available. It's worked enough times to be worth trying. (Ralph Edwards wrote that he stopped counting at 50 the number of grizzlies he killed in Canada in the 20's-30's, most with a 30-30 or 35 Remington and head shots up close)

I don't care for the superpowered revolver rounds, recoil is just one aspect, I don't care for the muzzle blast of the 454 and high intensity loads. The 4" 44 isn't pleasant, but not in the same class as the 454 in even a 7 1/2" barrel. I'm not opposed to the single action, I've carried and used them a fair amount over time. They are easier on the hand for a given heavy load then a double action. They can be shot one handed, yes, there's a fair pause in repeat shots. I'm willing to accept a certain amount of that for the carryability of the gun for the power level, and how well I shoot them. I carry both 4 5/8" Ruger SA's as well as the 4" smith. I wasn't able to shoot heavy loads in a DA for many years due to a hand injury, and was OK with the SA for the most part. I can't get them into action for the leather as quickly as a DA, but that's mainly a practice issue.

I'm not an SME by any means, others here have more firsthand experience, I've just tried to learn as much about the subject as I could when I started working in bear country and eventually moved here full time. I've talked to people that have shot bears in unpleasant circumstances, and had many discussions with Mr Linebaugh, who has a fair amount of correspondence with folks that have used his and other guns on largish animals. The main reason for heavier calibers/loads/bullets isn't just to poke a hole in the brain, but the likelihood of body hits, as a miss from a head shot or as the only available option at the moment. The deeper the bullet will shoot and the more bones the bullet is capable of breaking, the better the odds of one of those less desirable shots doing some good. There have been one or two instances where a bullet broke a hip after shooting through the length of the animal. A given shot may not stop a bear in its tracks, but may slow it down enough to get another shot in, and sometimes, shots turn bears. As with the deer, theres no guarantee a particular shot will have the effect we want, but we have a fair idea how certain types of loads generally work on large animals from the number of reports. I want the bullets to shoot as deep as possible and have a reasonable chance to break bones.

I use the Keith load of 22 grs 2400 with the 250 gr Lyman 429421 bullet in the 29. I also have some 290 gr Keith style bullets, they go 1225 fps in a 6" 29, though I mainly carry the 4" with the 250 gr loads. For the 45 Colt, I carry 300 and 325 gr bullets running about 1250 fps. I don't recall the exact amount of H-110. Its on Mr Linebaughs web site. He told me the load a long time ago, and that's what I loaded. They arent much fun to shoot, but shoot close enough to point of aim of the regular loads (250's @ 1000 fps). That said, one guy I talked to had shot a 300-ish lb grizzly sow with a 41 mag with 210 gr factory jhp loads. He made two body hits and had complete pass throughs with the bear DRT. This was after she had caused considerable damage to him in an ambush in thick sage brush (yeah, classic bear habitat, eh?). The load isn't one we'd think of as an ideal bear load, but it worked for him that day. He has since bought a larger caliber gun, a 454 I believe.

Some of the guys on the Alaska board have shot a number of bears hunting them. Hunting is a little different situation than stopping shots, but gives some good info on load performance. I believe theres also a few that have had stopping issues also.

Lots of good info in this post.

Ultimately, it is a compromise as to what you choose. Certain guns are better at delivering one powerful shot, others at delivering a bunch of less powerful shots. Some are obvious dedicated bear guns, others are general purpose woods guns. The same gun you would take to the Alaska Peninsula hunting large brown bears is not what you might want to stop a pack of wolves on your dog, or deal with being in the middle of a gang shoot out in (Los) Anchorage.

I have gravitated to a 40/45 for more of a town focus, with just a possibility of a moose or bear, and leaning towards the 10mm as more woods with a chance of town issues. If I felt a long gun was not available, than a S&W 329/629 goes to the top of the list.

[rattler459]

This my be off topic if it is I can start a new thread.
Of the calibers I have available which do you think would be better for a woods round.
9mm, 40s&w, 357sig, or 45acp are the calibers most of my woods time is in CT, or Maine.
Also would a heavy xtp type round better than a fmj ?

[41magfan]

I've often wondered how these would fare against something with the capability to bite back. Back in the day they were kinda standard issue rounds for Thompson & Reising SMG's when the need to shoot through car doors was anticipated.

http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/14/pict0979w.jpg (https://imageshack.com/i/0epict0979wj)

[Malamute]

Regarding the last two posts, if it were me, I'd avoid RN bullets out in the woods, unless your goal is shooting small game or grouse without tearing up the meat. Even at that, its sort of startling the first couple times you shoot stuff like cottontails and jack rabbits with 45 auto ball rounds or 45 Colt with the old factory semi-pointy loads and have them get up and run off. Large flat points or the Keith type with sharp shoulders and flat points don't seem to have that happen. Comparing wounds in animals shot with the two different types shows a very pronounced difference in effect. The Keith types make bruised, bloodshot wounds, RN makes clean wounds that don't make the animal react much when hit compared to the Keiths (some commercial SWC are similar in shape, some have smaller noses and rounded fronts, I don't think they are quite as effective as the wider points and clean sharp shoulders). Good hollow points should be fine if you arent dealing with largish animals, or if you are pushing enough bullet weight to penetrate OK.

[GJM]

This my be off topic if it is I can start a new thread.
Of the calibers I have available which do you think would be better for a woods round.
9mm, 40s&w, 357sig, or 45acp are the calibers most of my woods time is in CT, or Maine.
Also would a heavy xtp type round better than a fmj ?

The caliber that is on a gun that is reliable and you shoot well. The only reason to choose a "tier 2 or 3" woods caliber is because you shoot it so much better than a proper caliber, that your shooting ability with the lighter caliber gun trumps the large caliber.

[secondstoryguy]

GJM your right on. Most of us have a good amount of trigger time on Glocks and other modern semi-automatic handguns so moving to a large bore revolver seems to be taking a step backward. Lighter, big bore revolvers are very uncomfortable to shoot with full house loads. This makes practice time consuming on a type of gun(revolver) most have little trigger time on. Combine this with a limited capacity (6 rounds vs 15) and to me the Glock 20/29 is the best compromise.

[Dan_S]

The caliber that is on a gun that is reliable and you shoot well. The only reason to choose a "tier 2 or 3" woods caliber is because you shoot it so much better than a proper caliber, that your shooting ability with the lighter caliber gun trumps the large caliber.

Having grown up in, and subsequently spent time working in remote areas of New England, I cannot imagine what animal lives between Maine and Connecticut where a 9mm would be a 2nd or 3rd tier caliber.

I carried a Glock 19 most frequently when I was in the woods, and honestly, that was more for dogs, than wild animals.

[GJM]

I am not talking about CT, but rather places with grizzly bears.

I consider .44 mag, heavy .45 LC and larger calibers like .500 S&W, .475 Linebaugh, etc. to be tier 1, using my analogy.

Tier 2 is 10mm. Tier 3 being .40, .357 magnum, 9mm, .45 acp, etc.

[1slow]

Ross Seyfried wrote a lot on this subject in the 1990s in Guns and Ammo, Linebaugh cartridges, revolvers, Bowen revolvers, S&W .44 Mag mountain gun.
Personally I like my Bowen 4" Redhawk in .500 Linebaugh as a large animal pistol. About 3 lbs. Going lighter I like the .44 mag mountain guns. Single action is not fast for me with my arthritis in base of thumbs.

[GJM]

I started with a Bowen Alpine -- a Redhawk chopped down to four inches, and round butted, before Ruger offered a shorter barrel than 5.5 +/-. I found the round butt ruined recoil control, and had him make another Alpine, but in .44 magnum and square butted. It is hell built for stout loads, and I have the heavy Garrett .44 magnum loads in it. However, it is so much bigger and heavier than my 629 and 329, that I don't carry the Alpine any more.

[1slow]

GJM, I agree the Alpine is heavy. Having the 329 and 629 Mountain Gun, If I am going to go heavier I will go to the 4" .500 Linebaugh Redhawk rather than the Alpine.

[Dan_S]

I am not talking about CT, but rather places with grizzly bears.

I consider .44 mag, heavy .45 LC and larger calibers like .500 S&W, .475 Linebaugh, etc. to be tier 1, using my analogy.

Tier 2 is 10mm. Tier 3 being .40, .357 magnum, 9mm, .45 acp, etc.

I understand what you're saying.

What I was trying to say, was that given that the individual you were responding to said he would be in the ME - CT area, a 9mm in that particular geographical context, isn't really a third rate caliber.

:cool:

[Harm]

I know I have a Gen 3 G20 & that I got specifically as a woods gun. As I've come face to face with wolves in the wild albeit rarely, and been stalked by mountain lions on multiple occasions and seen several get hit with 357 and 40 I opted to step up to a 10mm. While I have Buffalo Bore ammo I tend to carry Double Tap or Underwood 200grain bullets. I've shot both for reliability and had no issues.

I did change to Wolff 22# recoil spring and a steel guide rod and also added Trijicon HDs and a quick & dirty trigger job.

And since buying it I've not SEEN any dangerous animals. :D of course I live in Arizona and while we do have black bear they are certainly not a regular threat.

I have run a few local matches with it. I like that my first shot times are a bit faster than normal while my splits are a hair slower. FWIW.
If I were to be in grizzly country I'd be carrying my 1895GBL and the G20, not either or.

FWIW regarding bear and the G20: http://www.westernshooter.com/2011/02/bear-hunt-with-a-glock-20-10mm.html

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[Chuck Haggard]

I recall in the past seeing penetration tests, actually quite a bit of it, that folks have done with rounds such as .44mags and .45Colts with Keith style bullets, using media such as soaked newsprint and such. While it's not valid gel testing, I thin for these purposes it's fine. It at least gives you a marker if a particular bullet is better or worse than another bullet in that media. I haven't seen any such testing with the hot 10mm rounds. I'd be curious to see the 10 compared to known rounds such as the .44mag with 240gr SWCs.

[LSP552]

I was initially thinking about picking up a Blue Label G20 for my AK trip in Aug. I really wanted to bring just a single handgun for both around town and hiking/fishing. The more I read, research and listen, the more I'm leaning toward bringing two. My short Ruger .45 Blackhawk for walking around on the Kenai and the 239 9mm I normally carry around people.

I shoot the .45 Ruger well, thanks to the ACP cylinder and former unlimited access to .45 ball. Might be time to dust it off and play a bit.

Ken

[Malamute]

I recall in the past seeing penetration tests, actually quite a bit of it, that folks have done with rounds such as .44mags and .45Colts with Keith style bullets, using media such as soaked newsprint and such. While it's not valid gel testing, I thin for these purposes it's fine. It at least gives you a marker if a particular bullet is better or worse than another bullet in that media. I haven't seen any such testing with the hot 10mm rounds. I'd be curious to see the 10 compared to known rounds such as the .44mag with 240gr SWCs.

I agree, its not perfect, but interesting. As an example, in reports from guys that have used them on game, the 348 seems to penetrate pretty well in elk, in Johns tests, he said they generally go about 16" I believe, which is about half what they went in elk. Many expanding rifle bullets dont penetrate was deep as a solid pistol bullet, but as another example, the 180 gr Core-Loct 30-06 load I hit a deer with @ 250 yards went about 30" (in by the tail, I found the bullet in the neck). In the wet paper tests, such loads generally don't go that deep. About the only way to truly know how bullets perform in game is to shoot game with them. It takes a decent volume of examples to get a good baseline of representable performance.

In reading the comments from the Alaska Outdoors forum and other sources, the guys that have used both seem to feel the 10 is OK to pretty good for hunting stuff (different than a stopping round), but isn't in the same class as the 44 or other heavy revolver loads when used on game or as a stopper.

I recall reading Ross Seyfrieds comments about the heavier (300+ gr) 44 mag bullets after they became common. He felt the heavies just about doubled the 44 mags killing power on large game, which isn't represented in any test data, just a subjective opinion from using them.

The 10mm isn't represented in the tests shown, but the 41 mag is, with similar bullet weights and velocities.

http://www.handloads.com/misc/linebaugh.penetration.tests.asp

[GJM]

I was initially thinking about picking up a Blue Label G20 for my AK trip in Aug. I really wanted to bring just a single handgun for both around town and hiking/fishing. The more I read, research and listen, the more I'm leaning toward bringing two. My short Ruger .45 Blackhawk for walking around on the Kenai and the 239 9mm I normally carry around people.

I shoot the .45 Ruger well, thanks to the ACP cylinder and former unlimited access to .45 ball. Might be time to dust it off and play a bit.

Ken

NO "right" answer here, other than always have a Guide Gun or Brenneke loaded shotgun along. :)

If I was looking to buy a "one" gun solution for your trip, it would be a Glock 29, as I think it carries much smaller than the G20, but at the 12 yards and in you would and should, possibly be shooting a bear, it offers no real disadvantage compared to the G20 in shoot ability.

The only possible flaw in your two gun strategy, is while gangs don't inhabit rural Alaska, bears and moose have no problem with wandering around the more settled areas. For this reason, a .40 is the minimum caliber I carry in Alaska.

PS: Linebaugh article on the 45 Long Colt:

http://www.handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=12

[Malamute]

Thanks for posting that link, its a good one, and one I haven't seen in a while.

This one is also good,

http://www.customsixguns.com/writings/dissolving_the_myth.htm

As to town vs woods guns, I spend far more time out of towns, and what towns there are have very little personal crime (everyone simply assumes they will be shot as to home invasions or person to person crime, according to a friend in LE in the area). I tend to carry my woods guns as town guns, partly because I always have them with me. I drop down to medium vel level loads, mostly with Keith type bullets when not out where the bears live. I'm pretty impressed with how they perform on animals I've shot with them. A J makes a fine "civilized" gun when preferring to be discrete and compact.

[LSP552]

Thanks for the links GJM and Malamute. Maybe I need a concealment rig for the .45 Ruger :)

Ken

[GJM]

this load may be a game changer for the woods gun:

http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?11503-Have-you-10mm-guys-seen-this

[JHC]

The only possible flaw in your two gun strategy, is while gangs don't inhabit rural Alaska, bears and moose have no problem with wandering around the more settled areas. For this reason, a .40 is the minimum caliber I carry in Alaska.



I just read that the estimated population of moose INSIDE the city of Anchorage is 1500. LOL how great is that?

[Malamute]

Thanks for the links GJM and Malamute. Maybe I need a concealment rig for the .45 Ruger :)

Ken


I think the Mernickle holsters may be a useful rig for those crossover areas, and the situations we've been discussing. I'd like to try one.

[MRW]

Sorry to bring up an old thread but my question ties into some stuff already brought up in this thread. How has the G29 Gen4 worked out so far for those that were testing it out.

[JHC]

Sorry to bring up an old thread but my question ties into some stuff already brought up in this thread. How has the G29 Gen4 worked out so far for those that were testing it out.

Great question. I'm glad to raised it back up. I think that was GJM and I also recently saw him mention packing a HK45C around this Summer (or was is a USP Compact .45?).

GJM - if you're packing a .45 ACP around the AK wilds this Summer; what are you loading it with?

[GJM]

Sorry to bring up an old thread but my question ties into some stuff already brought up in this thread. How has the G29 Gen4 worked out so far for those that were testing it out.

So far, the G4 Glock 29 has functioned with everything I have tried, except Buffalo Bore 200 FMJ. That load won't run in any of my 20/29 pistols, so I wasn't surprised. It has run Underwood 200 FMJ, Hornady 180 and 200 XTP, 180 Gold Dot, and Hornady Critical something.


Great question. I'm glad to raised it back up. I think that was GJM and I also recently saw him mention packing a HK45C around this Summer (or was is a USP Compact .45?).

GJM - if you're packing a .45 ACP around the AK wilds this Summer; what are you loading it with?

I have been carrying a .357 Sig, .40, 10, and .45. They have all worked fine, in the sense that I haven't needed to shoot anything with four legs with them. In the USP C .45, I have been carrying Barnes 185+P, Ranger 230 Bonded, and +P 230 Ranger/HST.

[MRW]

Thanks for the response. That's what I was looking for. I was also curious about which .45 loads were in the USPc as well. I'm looking at the G29 as an alternative woods carry and hunting backup to the 4" 686 I usually carry. One of my LGS' s has both a Gen4 and an SF. Trying to decide which one.

[GJM]

Thanks for the response. That's what I was looking for. I was also curious about which .45 loads were in the USPc as well. I'm looking at the G29 as an alternative woods carry and hunting backup to the 4" 686 I usually carry. One of my LGS' s has both a Gen4 and an SF. Trying to decide which one.

1) Gen 4 for sure because the texture makes it easier to hang onto with wet hands and/or heavy loads.

2) I know squat about which .45 loads would penetrate, and suspect they penetrate worse than most .40 loads, and even less than the .357 Sig loads. I just like having a hammer, and how I shoot the USP C.

[JHC]

I thought some of the UMC .40 I shot last year seemed loaded hotter than some other brands of FMJ. Don't know about these; leadless and all. But I reckon it will penetrate. http://www.midwayusa.com/product/878785/remington-umc-ammunition-45-acp-230-grain-flat-nose-enclosed-base-box-of-50

[1911Nut]

Based on GJM's input a couple of years ago, I purchased a Gen 3 G20SF and carry hand loads in it when out and about in the desert and forest in Arizona in my Jeep or on my UTV. My handloads are:

Hornady 200 gr. FMJ-FP's or XTP-HP's at 1100 to 1150 FPS
Hornady 180 gr. FMJ-FP's or XTP-HP's at 1200 to 1250 FPS.

Never had any reliability issues with the loads and both are loaded to 1.260" COAL.

I carry the G20SF in a Hill People Gear bag on my chest with a Raven Concealment holster that covers the trigger guard. Very handy for when driving the Jeep or UTV and it is out of the way if I hop out of the vehicle and grab a long gun. (Another idea from GJM).

Ken

[s0nspark]

I alternated between carrying a G20 Gen4 and a G29 Gen4 for about a year... I got the G20 because I expected it would handle a bit better than the G29 but surprisingly it did not for me. I always shot the G29 better... both handled all the Underwood I threw at them without a hiccup.

[MRW]

Plus 1 on the HPG Kit Bag. It's the most comfortable and out of the way carry method I've found for backpacking. With one Kit Bag I can carry a variety of pistols too. It's a good place to stash maps, etc.

[vaspence]

I picked up a Gen 4 29 a few weeks ago and was pleasantly surprised how well I shot it. I only ran 125 rounds through it 50 Privi 180s, 50 AE 180s and 25 Underwood 200 TMJs. Didn't have any issues. When I get time we're going to take it and the G20 to the range to chrony the Underwood loads out of both and see what we have.

Huge plus 1 on the HPG Kit Bag, I think I have one of each model and use them a lot when mountain biking, hunting and fishing. Awesome piece of gear and Scott and Evan are good people!

[LSP552]

All my Glocks are 9mm………………but the 10mm keeps whispering in my ear.

Ken

[GJM]

While I shoot a 20 better, it sure gets old carrying one compared to a G29. I have said for years that the G29 is the modern outdoorsman's equivalent of the lightweight Commander.

Can't remember if I mentioned it before, but another reason I like the G4 29 is the OEM beavertail protects the inside of my dominant thumb shooting heavy loads.

9 and 10mm Glock pistols are my favorite Glock pistols.

[Malamute]

I really wish they'd do the 10mm and .45 in a 19 sized package. Not too big, not too small.


GJM, have you ever shot any of the Lyman 452424 bullets in your 45 autos? I tried some in a Colt, they did well for the 100 that I shot in a stock Combat Commander. I'd like to try them in the regular 1911. 260 gr bullet, I think the loads were going about 850 fps, about like factory 45 Colts. Should make deep holes.

[JHC]

I really wish they'd do the 10mm and .45 in a 19 sized package. Not too big, not too small.


GJM, have you ever shot any of the Lyman 452424 bullets in your 45 autos? I tried some in a Colt, they did well for the 100 that I shot in a stock Combat Commander. I'd like to try them in the regular 1911. 260 gr bullet, I think the loads were going about 850 fps, about like factory 45 Colts. Should make deep holes.

Back many years ago there was a gun writer of a specialty publication that was big on loading those heavy SWCs in the ACP at a modest velocity for just such purposes. With good magazines I'll bet most good 1911s would run them. My guess is good modern designs too.

[GJM]

I really wish they'd do the 10mm and .45 in a 19 sized package. Not too big, not too small.


GJM, have you ever shot any of the Lyman 452424 bullets in your 45 autos? I tried some in a Colt, they did well for the 100 that I shot in a stock Combat Commander. I'd like to try them in the regular 1911. 260 gr bullet, I think the loads were going about 850 fps, about like factory 45 Colts. Should make deep holes.

My wife I regularly discuss the idea of a Glock between G29 and 20 size. Something like a 4 or 4.25 barrel, slide profile like the new 41, and a thinner magazine would be neat.

When I was loading for my 1911, it was always the 200 grain, as my targets were IPSC cardboard. Is there any commercial source for loaded ammo with the 452424 bullet?

[Malamute]

My wife I regularly discuss the idea of a Glock between G29 and 20 size. Something like a 4 or 4.25 barrel, slide profile like the new 41, and a thinner magazine would be neat.

When I was loading for my 1911, it was always the 200 grain, as my targets were IPSC cardboard. Is there any commercial source for loaded ammo with the 452424 bullet?


I don't believe so. I was casting my own at the time, but a couple commercial casters make that bullet. It was in the 80's when I heard of them and tried it. I've googled load data, theres a couple good sources with data. I was using Unique, but don't recall the exact charge. I think its borderline +P but not crazy high pressure.

[LSP552]

My wife I regularly discuss the idea of a Glock between G29 and 20 size. Something like a 4 or 4.25 barrel, slide profile like the new 41, and a thinner magazine would be neat.


Put me down for two.

Ken

[tomr]

Have shot G30SF, but never any 10. Curious, how the G29 and G30 compare???

[s0nspark]

Have shot G30SF, but never any 10. Curious, how the G29 and G30 compare???

I am probably the odd duck in this regard but I found the G29 easier to handle - the recoil/flip seemed more predictable to me. I sold my G30 after the first range session.

[GJM]

Have shot G30SF, but never any 10. Curious, how the G29 and G30 compare???

All things considered*, 45 to 10 feels to me comparable to the difference between 9 and 40.

*10mm ranges from near .40 to 200 grains at 1,200 FPS.

[Rich]

Seriously considering a Gen4 G20 for a woods gun. Primary use would be as my carry gun when snowshoeing and snowmobiling in the winter, and hiking/backpacking the rest of the year. Would also be carried as a secondary when hunting. No grizzlies in Upper Michigan, so primarily for black bear, cougars, wolves. I have two small dogs I often take for long day hikes. Primary carry for me is a G17/19. I'm also thinking about a G22 with a KKM or BS barrel as it would fit all existing support gear. Mainly looking for any advise/experience you may have with either one given my potential use for them. Load suggestions?



I would feel safe using a Hi Cap 40S&W and feeding it FMJ loads.
I think the FMJ/ball penetrate enough! so no need in buying another barrel.

[GJM]

I would feel safe using a Hi Cap 40S&W and feeding it FMJ loads.
I think the FMJ/ball penetrate enough! so no need in buying another barrel.

Perhaps, if the FMJ loads were designed as penetrator loads. As I understand it, a lot of the ball loads are low cost, and may not even penetrate as well as a stout JHP?

[Dirty_Harry]

I have had a Gen 3 29 and currently own a Gen 2 20. I use it solely for a truck/camping/hiking/hunting sidearm. There is nothing in the Michigan woods that cannot be dispatched with 15+1 rounds of Buffalo Bore. Great handgun for that purpose. It shoots really nice also.

[GJM]

I have had a Gen 3 29 and currently own a Gen 2 20. I use it solely for a truck/camping/hiking/hunting sidearm. There is nothing in the Michigan woods that cannot be dispatched with 15+1 rounds of Buffalo Bore. Great handgun for that purpose. It shoots really nice also.

Depends on what Buffalo Bore load. My experience is that with the 200 FMJ BB load, a G20 and 29 quickly becomes a jam'amatic.

[Dirty_Harry]

Depends on what Buffalo Bore load. My experience is that with the 200 FMJ BB load, a G20 and 29 quickly becomes a jam'amatic.

I am using these:
https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=114


I am surprised that your glocks had trouble with that load.

[GJM]

I am using these:
https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=114


I am surprised that your glocks had trouble with that load.

No experience with their JHP 10mm loads, but the BB 200 FMJ has choked a half dozen or more G20/29 pistols of G3, SF and G4 type.

[Chuck Haggard]

Took me forever to track this down;
http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr152.pdf

I recall reading this report years ago and didn't have a copy. It wasn't easy to Google at all.

[Malamute]

Took me forever to track this down;
http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr152.pdf

I recall reading this report years ago and didn't have a copy. It wasn't easy to Google at all.


It's an interesting report. I skimmed through some of it, I want to read it all when I have time. A couple things come to mind though. Their test medium was sawdust and silt. We've learned over time that each test medium has strong and weak points, but even recently dead animals don't reflect bullet performance exactly like live animals do. Linebaughs tests used cow bones to try to make the tests more realistic, but even there, the test results varied considerably from field results in actual penetration depth.

One take away from the report, which I agree with,

"A bear that is hit and flees is extremely
dangerous. An unwounded bear can be
a dangerous animal, but a wounded
bear is a dangerous animal. The
wounded bear is dangerous not only to
the person who wounded it, but also to
others. The shooter has a moral responsibility
to find and kill the wounded
bear."

I'm all for using the most gun I can shoot well for bear protection. I have no desire to follow up a wounded bear in the thick stuff.

[Chuck Haggard]

I concur.

I think perhaps 20% gelatin and heavy bones or some of that bone plate composite would be a more real world test. I also note the lack of any premium or true hard cast ammo being used in the handguns. I just thought it was interesting.

From looking at what info we have, I am guessing the best of the FBI tests to check would be the auto glass testing. That is rather harsh on bullets.

[GJM]

I look at this report again every few years. Probably decent at the time, but a lot has changed since March 1983 when the report came out.

First, there have been great improvements in bullet technology. For example, they discuss how the 300 grain load in .45-70 is better than the 405 grain load. Now, no knowledgable person would use either of those loads, except as a last resort.

Second, they discount handguns below .41/.44 magnum as being ineffective, despite the statistics from the longest running study which finds handguns, even in smaller calibers, to actually be slightly more effective statistically in stopping bear attacks.

Third, they don't like slugs because "they don't expand." What year again did the Brenneke slug show up.

Fourth, it reads more like a primer on selecting cartridges to go hunting a brown bear, circa 1983, then stopping a bear attack.

I am all for not letting wounded bears going running off. However, in the vast majority of areas of rural Alaska, a wounded bear could go running 50 miles on the tundra without encountering another person. Pretty good odds that wounded bear will be eaten by another bear soon.

[Chuck Haggard]

Agreed George.

My thought was that's it's data, and one can replicate it with the testing method should one desire to do so. I might in fact give it a try. Perhaps with sand and sawdust since I have no idea exactly what "silt" they used for testing.

I would bet that something like the Federal CastCore in .357mag would have done a better job in penetration, while the Brenneke slugs would obviously be a top notch choice.

[JHC]

I concur.

I think perhaps 20% gelatin and heavy bones or some of that bone plate composite would be a more real world test. I also note the lack of any premium or true hard cast ammo being used in the handguns. I just thought it was interesting.

From looking at what info we have, I am guessing the best of the FBI tests to check would be the auto glass testing. That is rather harsh on bullets.

FWIW some years back the Canadian Mounties did some testing using gelatin blocks with pig (I think they were pig) ribs molded into the gel blocks.

[Chuck Haggard]

FWIW some years back the Canadian Mounties did some testing using gelatin blocks with pig (I think they were pig) ribs molded into the gel blocks.

They did, but to replicate human torso shots. In that testing the conclusion was "not worth the extra effort". I'm guessing 20% gel and maybe a cow femur might yield different results.

[GJM]

http://www.ktuu.com/news/news/sow-shot-dead-after-attacking-eagle-river-man/27137910

This just went from the theoretical to the practical. Just got out to our remote cabin. Last night a brown bear messed with property at four nearby cabins, then broke into a window and started raiding a kitchen. Inhabitants woke up, screaming and chaos continued until the bear went back out the window.

We only learned this after an hour hike right through the area. My wife had her Glock 29 and I had a 229R in .357 Sig, but all the long guns were back in the cabin. Learning has occurred.

[GardoneVT]

http://www.ktuu.com/news/news/sow-shot-dead-after-attacking-eagle-river-man/27137910

This just went from the theoretical to the practical. Just got out to our remote cabin. Last night a brown bear messed with property at four nearby cabins, then broke into a window and started raiding a kitchen. Inhabitants woke up, screaming and chaos continued until the bear went back out the window.

We only learned this after an hour hike right through the area. My wife had her Glock 29 and I had a 229R in .357 Sig, but all the long guns were back in the cabin. Learning has occurred.

Wow. Glad youre OK!

[Chuck Haggard]

GJM doesn't have to go bear hunting, bears hunt him!

[Tom Duffy]

Now I realize this is a gun forum and all... :) but I found this article in Slate concerning bear spray very interesting:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/history_of_innovation/2014/06/the_grizzly_history_of_bear_pepper_sprays.html

From the article:
In 2012, University of Calgary bear authority Steve Herrero examined hundreds of incidents of human-bear aggression and found that 98 percent of people who deployed bear spray were unharmed by their bear encounter (and no humans or bears died). Meanwhile, 56 percent of people who raised a gun to a bear were injured, and 61 percent of those bears were killed.

[GJM]

Now I realize this is a gun forum and all... :) but I found this article in Slate concerning bear spray very interesting:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/history_of_innovation/2014/06/the_grizzly_history_of_bear_pepper_sprays.html

From the article:
In 2012, University of Calgary bear authority Steve Herrero examined hundreds of incidents of human-bear aggression and found that 98 percent of people who deployed bear spray were unharmed by their bear encounter (and no humans or bears died). Meanwhile, 56 percent of people who raised a gun to a bear were injured, and 61 percent of those bears were killed.

The study generated a lot of heated debate in Alaska. Here is a link:


http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/bear_cougar/bear/files/JWM_BearSprayAlaska.pdf


Here is also a link to a story on four NOLS participants recently injured in a bear attack. They carried bear spray, but would be excluded from those counted as being injured, since they didn't deeply the bear spray.

http://www.adn.com/article/alaska-bear-attack-nols-kids-did-phenomenal-job


Contrast that result with this statement from the Slate article:

“I’d rate the effectiveness of bear spray at a 10 out of 10,” says Chris Servheen, the Grizzly Bear Recovery Program coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.


Consider this statement from a compilation of bear attacks :

Does carrying a gun prevent serious or fatal injuries by bears? Not according to Kaniut’s list. In 86 (70 percent) of the 122 maulings where enough information is provided, either the victim or someone else in the party had a firearm.

This sounds pretty ominous until you consider that this doesn't consider all the people, like me, who have used a firearm and were not injured. It is analogous to comparing the risk of injury after engine failure in single versus multi engine aircraft, where you only count the multi engine aircraft that crash, and not all of those that safely fly home on the other engine.

[Chuck Haggard]

You know, a person could carry both, there ain't no rule against that.

[Malamute]

http://www.ktuu.com/news/news/sow-shot-dead-after-attacking-eagle-river-man/27137910

This just went from the theoretical to the practical. Just got out to our remote cabin. Last night a brown bear messed with property at four nearby cabins, then broke into a window and started raiding a kitchen. Inhabitants woke up, screaming and chaos continued until the bear went back out the window.

We only learned this after an hour hike right through the area. My wife had her Glock 29 and I had a 229R in .357 Sig, but all the long guns were back in the cabin. Learning has occurred.


Were you the active participant in that?



Does carrying a gun prevent serious or fatal injuries by bears? Not according to Kaniut’s list. In 86 (70 percent) of the 122 maulings where enough information is provided, either the victim or someone else in the party had a firearm.


I didnt read all the link. Are they considering it a failure on the part of having a firearm if someone had one but was mauled before they were able to use it first? I know of one guy that was blindsided by a sow grizzly in tall sagebrush, mauled him pretty badly, than backed off to collect her cubs. She turned back to him with ears back and war in her eye when he shot her with a 41 mag and killed her. No, the gun didn't magically stop the attack from occuring, but likely saved him worse mauling if not getting killed. Some people think of that as a failure, I think of it as a roaring success.

It also doesn't make sense to say pepper spray didn't work if someone had it but it wasn't used.

[GJM]

You know, a person could carry both, there ain't no rule against that.

The question isn't whether to carry both or not, but how to deploy them. So when the bear charges, and you have your rifle in your hands, do you sling the rifle and pull the spray? Keep in mind, spraying or shooting typically happens inside 15 yards.

I am very much in favor of bear spray, and would love to have someone accompany my wife and I to carry the spray and get out front when the bear charges.

[Malamute]

The question isn't whether to carry both or not, but how to deploy them. So when the bear charges, and you have your rifle in your hands, do you sling the rifle and pull the spray? Keep in mind, spraying or shooting typically happens inside 15 yards.

I am very much in favor of bear spray, and would love to have someone accompany my wife and I to carry the spray and get out front when the bear charges.

I agree with you. I carry it at times, but it isn't the first thing I reach for. So far, I haven't had to deal with bears up close, only moose. No fatalities so far.

There are enough reports of bears acting squirrely, pacing back and forth like they aren't quite sure yet. For those times, I think pepper is a good alternative. Its also a good choice for people that are unwilling to carry a gun, or not familiar enough with them to be safe.

[JHC]

I agree with you. I carry it at times, but it isn't the first thing I reach for. So far, I haven't had to deal with bears up close, only moose. No fatalities so far.

There are enough reports of bears acting squirrely, pacing back and forth like they aren't quite sure yet. For those times, I think pepper is a good alternative. Its also a good choice for people that are unwilling to carry a gun, or not familiar enough with them to be safe.

Spray is about the only workable option for a lot of the military up there (AK), even in their off duty outdoor pursuits if they are junior enlisted in the barracks. The red tape around accessing a personal firearm is off the chain difficult.

[Chuck Haggard]

The question isn't whether to carry both or not, but how to deploy them. So when the bear charges, and you have your rifle in your hands, do you sling the rifle and pull the spray? Keep in mind, spraying or shooting typically happens inside 15 yards.

I am very much in favor of bear spray, and would love to have someone accompany my wife and I to carry the spray and get out front when the bear charges.

I was thinking more for the pistol carrying backpacker type person. If a dude has a rifle in hand then carry on.

[GJM]

I think the bear spray "study" is actually pretty interesting. What I would like to have seen is a deep dive into the methodology and results first, to tease out stuff like the two categories excluded -- folks with bear spray not deployed, and folks that used firearms either to scare off a bear with a warning shot or successfully that were not counted. Also, I would like to have looked at like periods given that spray has been around a lot less long than the period firearms have been used.

Instead, it seems like the usual suspects who don't like guns, and frankly often like bears more than people, latch onto the results to promote their non-gun view of the outdoors. Despite that, I am interested in how spray might work along with a handgun. Lots if caveats though. Anyone care to deploy spray in their small tent, or like where we just now hiked on a ridge in 20 gusting 30 knot winds?

[Chuck Haggard]

My experience with OC on bad guys leaves me with the idea that it ain't as effective on bears as people are claiming.

[MRW]

My experience with OC on bad guys leaves me with the idea that it ain't as effective on bears as people are claiming.

This is a valid point. A charging bear is very analogous to person who means to cause you serious bodily harm or death. A lethal means of defeating that attack would be preferable to a less lethal option. OC would be more effective for discouraging an attack than stopping one in progress.

[GJM]

Bear spray didn't look like it worked here:


http://kxlf.com/news/hiker-fends-off-bear-in-glacier-national-park/

[Gun Mutt]

I recently got a G4 Glock 29, and feel it is better than my 29SF. The OEM beavertail is more protective of the base of the inside of my dominant thumb with heavy loads. The Gen 4 texture also helps me hold onto the gun better. So far no stoppages through about 100 assorted 10mm loads, from the Underwood 200 penetrator, DT 200 penetrator, Barnes 155 JHP, Hornady XTP and CD. I am running the small frame height Trijicon HD sights and they regulate for my pistol.

I like the 29 for defensive field use, versus lots of shooting, because it carries so much smaller than a G20.
I know, yuuge necro, but my question for GJM fits well here.

I know you're all about the .45 Super, but I wondered if you still have that 29.4 and how it's held up. I love my 20 and I don't even sort of need a 29, but I have the wants for one...esp a gen 4 with the beavertail backstaps. I had a gen 3 about a decade ago that was a picky eater, even after two trips to Smyrna, so I got rid of it. But damn, I liked how it handled.

[Gun Mutt]

Double tap.

[GJM]

I haven’t shot my G4 29 for a while, as it was not reliable with stout loads. If someone was serious about this, they should put 100 rounds of Underwood Lehigh Penetrator ammo through one and see if that changes things. The HK45C meets this need in so much more a satisfying way for me.

[Walkafire]

I conceal carry my Glock 20sf
Course I live at 9,000 ft
Lots of Bears and Cats around here.
I used to carry a .45 Colt revolver (owb) but I like having 15 rounds as opposed to 6

[LockedBreech]

I conceal carry my Glock 20sf
Course I live at 9,000 ft
Lots of Bears and Cats around here.
I used to carry a .45 Colt revolver (owb) but I like having 15 rounds as opposed to 6

I live in the Rockies and I have long had the 20 on my shortlist because it's a fantastic catch-all for everything from bears to cats to 'yotes.

The big advantage of the sixguns, of course, being the "shove it in their ribs when they're on top of you" ability, but since I keep my "pack guns" in my bag rather than on my person, generally, that's less an advantage for me.

Currently it's just my police surplus M&P .40 with flat-nose 180-grains and a reload, which is not at all a bad multi-purpose layout for two and four legged critters.

[s0nspark]

The big advantage of the sixguns, of course, being the "shove it in their ribs when they're on top of you" ability, but since I keep my "pack guns" in my bag rather than on my person, generally, that's less an advantage for me.


Perhaps an X300 on the G20 would act as a standoff?