Grizzly rifles, confusing issue

[grubbylabs]

Silly gun hunters, when I go, I am taking my bow and arrow I just watched the guy on Easton bow hunting T.V take his second brown with a re curve. While I am not that brave I would take my compound bow without hesitation.

 

[dalegribble]

if i was lucky enough to be heading to ak for a big bear i suppose i would be lucky enough to be packing a new 338 mag winchester. as it stands now i would have to make my 7mm rem mag and 45/70 marlin do. i think they would do. wasn't it jack o'conner that used a 270 for everything from chipmonks to a t-rex all around the world?

 

[Alaska444]

One of my friends in Idaho knew of Jack O'Conner through his father who hunted with Jack. Interestingly, my friend hunts with a .270 for elk but even he would want more gun going up against grizzly for sure. The .270 is quite similar in ballistics to the 30-06 which many consider the minimum for bear.

It should be noted that professional hunters promoted the .357 early on by killing a whole bunch of grizzlies. In the hands of an expert, you can kill a grizzly with just about anything.

That still doesn't answer the questions of putting the animal down humanely, avoiding a prolonged tracking of a wounded bear as mentioned above, and having the power to stop a bear that turns and charges the hunter after the first shot. That limits the discussion to big bore lever action rifles for quick follow up shots, or the high powered bolt action rifles. 30-06 is the foundation, but most guides will want to start with .338 magnum.

The terrain comes into play on how long the client will be shooting. Many areas in Alaska are wide open, Tundra where you will need the range of .338 or other bolt actions. In other areas, the brush is so thick that the action will be up and close. In that situation, the 45-70 lever action prevails with proper hot loads.

The answer to what is the right rifle must start with: it depends.

 

[jgcoastie]

^ +110%

 

[RevGeo]

Like Alaska444 I live in N. Idaho which is grizzly country. Not many of them, but one is enough if it's suddenly standing in front of you. I've never seen one in the woods around here. When I am hunting for deer, elk, moose or black bear I just carry the rifle I always hunt with - 30-40AI. If I run into a truculant grizzly that rifle is what I'm gonna have to shoot because it's what I have.

As far as hunting them in Alaska or Canada, if it's a guided hunt the rifle will be one of the least expensive elements of the trip. If it was me and I was purposefully heading out to shoot a grizzly bear (which I would not) I would buy, rent or borrow the biggest, baddest rifle I could find. Recoil from a .460 Weatherby is a sweet kiss compared to what one of them big suckers can do to you. I'd sight it in at a bench with sissy bags against my shoulder. I've never shot a grizzly, but I'll bet if you do the recoil or muzzle blast is the last thing you will be thinking about.
Grizzlies can be killed with a sharp stick, but I'd have to be really hungry to give that a try. And then I'd send the young guys out to do it.
Having said all that, my really good buddy Wayne - a Canadian - killed his last grizzly with a 6mm Rem. One shot.

George

 

[aaalaska]

While these threads are entertaining , let's face it, by the time the metallic cartridge became common old griz had pretty well gone the way of the do-do bird in the lower 48.And no not all those old boys made it home, but a few don't today either. When I go out the door I carry what I carry,don't give it all that much thought, just do a lot of practice and hope for the best if TSHTF.Yes there are bears here ,never saw one n the yard but did see tracks out back two years ago.Next door neighbor shot one DLP two years ago. and one of the guys I know shot a 9'8" within a mile of the house a few years back.Last year a griz chased a moose down the next road in the area.about a mile away. Like I said I carry what I want to for the day cause any gun out there will do the job , and no gun out there will do the job.If you think your going to shut one down on the spot, well maybe, but I'd say the odds aint in your favor.I'd much rather have a gun I'm comfortable with and confident in than any wiz bang mag. Yes I carry mag's and a GG's and a lot of other guns but I shot those guns ,a lot,cause you don't have time to think if it all goes bad ,all you have is instinct an muscle memory.
When one of our party had to shoot a sow on Kodiak a few years back, we went to skin it out for F&G, we found all three shoots he fired, first one hit the bear, knocked it down, but it got back up, second and third shots were found in trees from 4 to 6 feet from any chance of hitting the bear. Lucky for him the first shot was enough to turn the bear and she had no more interest in seeing him out of the alders. The next door neighbor also hit the bear with the first of multiple shots, the only one that hit. But it turned the bear and it ran off. By the way both of those bears were shot at ranges less than 30 ft. One with a 300 win mag, and the other with a 7mm mag. So your going to grizz country an wondering what gun, my .02 carry what you shoot well ,practice a lot. Use hard bullets that will go deep, and pray today isn't your day.

 

[4sixteen]

Go with the American classic gold standard of dangerous game rifles, the .458 Win. mag. That big bad bear is going down. Plenty of penetration and shock.

 

[Art Eatman]

Hunting the big bears is a relatively controlled situation. The main idea is to see the bear before it sees the hunter. A skilled shooter can then make a good hit and kill the bear--and such as the .270, '06, 7 Mag and 300 Win Mag have all worked well in those situations. The .338 and 375 H&H, however, are preferred by many.

Stopping is a whole 'nother can of worms. There, it seems that for a reliable stop, the .338 or .375 H&H might be called starting points for power.

I'm no BTDT, but that's the gist of my reading, these last sixty or so years...

 

[samsmix]

As one who also hunts with a traditional muzzel loader, I will say "no" to your
.54 cal round ball. Even in flintlock days the mini-ball was in use. You need penetration with a capital P. A big, heavy, long for caliber bullet is how to do that.

I would also say "no" to your flintlock. Alaska it notoriously wet. I would use a caplock, a double if possible, and I would DEFINATLY replace ther #11 nipples with musket cap nipples. Far, FAR more reliable ignition. Cabelas markets a .72 cal. double barrel, and that is what I would prefer, but a .54 will do. I would use a smokeless BP substitute. Pyrodex is NOT smokeless. I would carry a sidearm in a large magnum caliber.

On that subject, a .357/180 from a 6" barrel will out penetrate a .44mag/240, but .454 and up would be better IF you can shoot such things well.

 

[jgcoastie]

I would use a smokeless BP substitute. Pyrodex is NOT smokeless.

I yield to your experience. My apologies, it was my understanding that Pyrodex was smokeless, I stand corrected.

Thanks for the info.

 

[treg]

I recall the writing of one grizzly guide who stated he'd rather see a client show up with an old worn .30-06 than with any brand new magnum rifle.

 

[samsmix]

jgcoastie,

Wow, I didn't realize last night how firmly stated my point on pyrodex was. I had my facts right, but upon rereading my post, I feel I was rude about it. My appologies to you.

 

[1hogfan83]

I may have missed it but no props for any of the weatherby mags? I would bring a .460 wthby if I knew I would be charged, actually I would bring a ma deuce. I think a .300wthby would be a great choice, you can get them in a light gun, even in a cheaper vanguard and compared to the bigger rounds they are cheaper. I dont know that I would want to shoot it in a light gun, I have but I dont know if I would want to agian. But as it goes, you dont feel a thing when the game is in your crosshairs.

 

[Big Pard]

Its better to have a client that can place a premium 270 bullet than to have one who is so scared of his/her "tank killer" that they flinch so bad that they miss or worse wound a bear. In my opinion anyway.

 

[jmr40]

I found this link http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr152.pdf

It is a study done by the Alaska Game dept on stopping power for large bears. Their conclusions in summary is that for pure stopping power the 458, 375 and 338 magnums were the top choices, but that a 30-06 loaded with 220 gr bullets was right there with the heavy magnums and was a very viable choice for most hunters or anyone else wanting to stop a grizzly charge primrily because of the reduced recoil.

Also note that there are several listings for each cartridge depending on the load. For example you will see the 338 magnum in several places near the top and again down near the middle of the group.

The 12 ga slug and 45-70 were well down near the bottom of the list.

 

[Rifleman1776]

jmr40, some really interesting results on that report.
The 7mm mag. is a big surprise for me.
And, the venerable 30-06 comes through again as the #1 all-around North American big game rifle. One gun, who needs more?

 

[jgcoastie]

Alaska Department of Fish & Game can come to whatever conclusion they wish...

I'll come to my own conclusion... And I recommend you all do the same...

ADF&G also released a report that recommended people carry only bear spray for bear protection, saying that people were safer with it than guns due to the inherent danger of firearms. If I can find that report, I'll post a link. Last time I saw it, it was posted in a sporting goods store in AK right next to a display of bear spray cans...

One gun, who needs more?

People who want more than one gun... One gun is boring... Multiple guns, now that's happiness...

 

[jgcoastie]

I found this link http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr152.pdf

It is a study done by the Alaska Game dept on stopping power for large bears.

Wrong. It was a study conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Pacific Northwest Region. That's not the same as the ADF&G. The Dept of Ag letterhead was my first clue in figuring that out...

The 12 ga slug and 45-70 were well down near the bottom of the list.

That doesn't surprise me, because the test was conducted in March of 1983...

The bullet and powder technology available at the time doesn't even compare to today's technology... The heavy-hitting lever action loads didn't become prevalent until the last 10 years or so...

Large-Caliber Standard Rifle
Cartridges
.45-70 U.S. - We tested the .45-70 in
two bullet weights (300- and 405-gr)
and in rifles with two barrel lengths (20
and 22 inches). Both rifles were Marlin
1895 lever-action. In both, the 300-gr
bullet ranked much higher than the
405-gr bullet, primarily because of the
poor expansion of the 405-gr bullets. At
the 1200-1300 ft/s striking velocity,
some of these bullets acted as solids
and penetrated as much as 24 inches.
This was the greatest penetration
recorded in the tests. The 300-gr
bullets, with 300 to 400 ft/s more velocity, did not penetrate deeply but held
together and expanded well and uniformly. Low velocities resulted in low
striking energy. Shortening the barrel
by 2 inches had no effect on the performance of the bullet; in fact, the rifle
with the 20-inch barrel performed
better with the 300-gr bullet than did
the longer barreled rifle. Recoil in thisrifle, which weighed less than 8 lb, was
much less severe than in the largecaliber magnums; it is thus not a
detracting factor. The poor action of
the 405gr bullets may limit their use
for protection from bears. The 300-gr
bullets in the commercial ammunition
we used are designed for animals the
size of deer and may expand too rapidly and lack sufficient penetration for
use against bears. In our test they did
not fragment too badly. The lack of a
proper bullet is unfortunate. The .45-70
can be obtained in a compact, moderate
weight, lever-action rifle that may be
easier and faster to operate, particularly for left-handed people.
Perhaps the current reinterest in .45-70
rifles will cause the manufacturers to
produce a more suitable bullet. We do
not consider factory-loaded .45-70
ammunition particularly suitable for a
rifle for protection from bears, especially with the 405-gr bullet.

Just as I suspected, the major detracting factor for the .45/70 was the lack of a suitable bullet.... And it's worth noting that the 300gr bullet penetrated 24 inches, deeper than all the others tested in the study. And manufacturers are doing exactly as the study hoped, they're putting out premium bullets for the .45/70... Something no one was doing in 1983..

The velocities the study cited were in the 1200-1300fps range. Modern factory loadings for the 405gr heavy-hitters are in the 1800-2000fps range...

If you're going to post old information, at least be sure it's still applicable in today's world...

 

[Alaska444]

Yes, that information while useful is nearly 30 years old and out of date compared to modern 45-70 ammo. Since many government related organizations recommend Garretts Hammerhead 540 gr in 45-70 for all of their employees, I would venture to say it is actually obsolete information. Happens quickly any more.

 

[Ridgerunner665]

I have fired a few hundred hot 45-70 loads...my reloads, 405 grain Beartooth bullets at 1,900 fps (50 grains of H332 in Rem brass)...a few loads even hotter (52 grains)

Lots of power...on both ends.

Those things kick like a mad mule in a Marlin...I'm no wimp when it comes to recoil, but about 20 of those will literally give me a headache.

Would they stop a mad grizzly? Yes, I believe they would...especially if you let him shoot it.

If I were hunting a grizzly, I'd rather have a 30-06 loaded with a stout 200 grain bullet.