Sidearm for Protection in the Field

[Brother Bob]

I've always wondered what's going through an animals head when it charges. Is it focussing on your actions? The reason I ask is because a co-worker of mine told me to actually run at an attacking dog when it's coming at you. I did it once and the dog stopped in his tracks! It really messed with his head, I guess. Most folks that are attacked are either standing still or retreating. I always wondered what would happen if you advanced on a charging animal. Someone test this theory and see if it works. If we don't hear from you anymore, we'll know to scratch that idea off the list! LOL!

[Mooseman684]

Phil,
For one thing, it is the SURPRISE factor that gets most people that are armed in trouble or mauled...they Freeze. Popup Targets or surprise targets train you to instantly draw and fire. You can cutout a plywood Bears head and front body image, and attach it to a clothesline system and have a friend
pull the rope very fast bringing the Target right at you, it bounces like the real thing...
As far as a Handgun for Elephants,Buffalo, Lions, Rhino, etc, there would be only one choice for those animals...A Thunder .50 BMG hands down!
Secondary choice would be one of the 45/70 revolvers and 405 gr. solid bullets...I will grant you that for African Large game, it would only be Backup for a large caliber rifle , in case it jammed or failed to fire it would beat haveing nothing at all...We do have people that carry registered 12 ga. double pistols here with slugs for bear protection...
People seem to forget that a large slow moving slug can be very effective in stopping an animal dead in its tracks...a "Flying sledge Hammer" so to speak!
Rifle bullets have to EXPAND by velocity in order to achieve the desired energy and wound channel effect , hence mushrooming into a larger caliber and slowing down...Imparting that stored energy.
Rich

[Phil Lozano]

Originally Posted by Mooseman684

Phil,
For one thing, it is the SURPRISE factor that gets most people that are armed in trouble or mauled...they Freeze.


People seem to forget that a large slow moving slug can be very effective in stopping an animal dead in its tracks...a "Flying sledge Hammer" so to speak!
Rifle bullets have to EXPAND by velocity in order to achieve the desired energy and wound channel effect , hence mushrooming into a larger caliber and slowing down...Imparting that stored energy.
Rich

The guys I spoke about, didn't make it for 15 years "freezing". They weren't surprised as they were going into the bush looking for the critter.

As far as your comment that "rifle bullets have to expand", rifle bullets do not have to expand to impart/deliver/transfer energy.

Best,

[Mooseman684]

Rifle bullets don't have to expand ??? They do if they are going to impart ALL of the energy and create a massive shockwave in the animal and Tissue damage , otherwise we could all hunt with Ball ammo, which imparts the least amount of energy and creates only a small wound channel unless it tumbles on Impact...Thats why More people are wounded than killed in war !
The best analogy I know is take an Orange and strike it with a pointed chipping hammer dead center...It will put a hole in it , sure! now take a 3 lb. sledge hammer and hit it...now its Orange Juice!...Big difference...

[Tater]

I personally would carry nothing smaller than a 44 mag. Of course then again, im from Tn and there is relatively few animals that maul you to death.

A few years ago, maybe 1-2, A man was hiking near Gatlinberg with his wife in the mountains. Some how they pissed off a bear, and it charged. The man shot the bear 5-6 times with his 38 special, and was then mauled to death, and I think his wife ended up being hurt too. Several days later authorites found the wounded bear and put it down.

I personally think that goes to show that bears are powerful creatures, and you can never have to much gun when in their territory. I realise that a 38. isnt the largest caliber in the world, but the bear was shot 5-6 times, and was alive and kicking several days later.

[Phil Lozano]

Originally Posted by Mooseman684

Rifle bullets don't have to expand ??? They do if they are going to impart ALL of the energy and create a massive shockwave in the animal and Tissue damage , otherwise we could all hunt with Ball ammo, which imparts the least amount of energy and creates only a small wound channel unless it tumbles on Impact.

Not totally true. I have shot many solids into animals that did not exit. Are you saying those bullets did not impart/transfer/deliver all of their energy into the animal ?

Are you stating, a bullet that exits . . . does not transfer as much energy as a bullet that stays inside the animal ? If you are, that simply is not true, assuming bullet of the same type, diameter and weight.

Best,

[Nathan123]

Personally, if i am in a situation where a backup firearm is needed, i make sure my rifle is up to the job.

I will join the minority in this thread and say that if i am in a charge situation i would much rather a rifle cal than a pistol cal. 10, 15 shot pistol or not.

When i do have backup, it is in the form of a mate with another rifle that is up to the job.

Originally Posted by Brother Bob

I believe the question was "Backup Weapon", and I assume this means that you have an incoming bear within dancing distance. By now you have dropped your 22-26 inch barreled rifle and have reached for your pistol.

There is not a chance in the world i would drop my rifle to reach for a pistol.

[Mooseman684]

A solid that hits enough Mass on a large animal and stays in Imparts ALL of its energy , but those are usually Big Fat Slow(er) Bullets....arent they ?
A bullet that passes thru and keeps going Does NOT impart ALL of its energy, sure it makes a small wound channel, but it acts like a pencil hole and if it exits, it still has energy to do so = Wasted bullet energy !
Soft tip bullets running higher velocity are made to expand on entry to cause a greater shock , larger wound channel, Impart all of its energy, and the mushrooming head acts like a brake in soft tissue and bone...At longer ranges!
Look at the .600 Nitro-Express at 1950 fps MV with a big solid and ME of 7,600 lbs...Professional African Hunter John Taylor claimed that it would knock an Elephant down even with a head shot that missed the brain, it would stun it for up to 30 minutes...Not Kill it...It takes a Brain shot to kill it...Hmmm
The 460 Weatherby Mag which was more powerful had a Faster bullet that was soft nosed to expand and Impart all its Energy over 8000lbs. at the muzzle, with a bullet designed to expand to over 75 caliber on Impact...
My theory is it is better to be caught slightly OVER-Gunned than to be eaten by a Lion or Trampled by an Elephant !!!

Originally Posted by Nathan123

Personally, if i am in a situation where a backup firearm is needed, i make sure my rifle is up to the job.
I will join the minority in this thread and say that if i am in a charge situation i would much rather a rifle cal than a pistol cal. 10, 15 shot pistol or not.
When i do have backup, it is in the form of a mate with another rifle that is up to the job.
There is not a chance in the world i would drop my rifle to reach for a pistol.

Nathan, you would if your ammo didn't fire !!! And your mate was taking a leak or couldnt get a clear shot....

[Purdy]

I'm not sure about what you mean by "backup" Do you mean you have already expended all your rifle ammo on the critter and he is still coming? If you can't settle his hash with a rifle I doubt you would do better with a pistol, or even have time to get it out for that matter.

If you are talking about being out somewhere and not having your rifle, I think most would be better off with Counter Assult Bear Spray than a pistol (which would only wound and piss off a bear anyway)

Just my opinion.

[Nathan123]

Originally Posted by Mooseman684

Nathan, you would if your ammo didn't fire !!! And your mate was taking a leak or couldnt get a clear shot....

In that circumstance, you would be silly not to.

I was more refering to droping a perfectly good loaded rifle, to reach for a pistol. Personally i would not do that.

[Mooseman684]

Originally Posted by Nathan123

In that circumstance, you would be silly not to.

I was more refering to droping a perfectly good loaded rifle, to reach for a pistol. Personally i would not do that.

Just common sense Mate !!!
Rich

[ezearln]

Fact is folks a sidearm in as far as dangerous game goes is now and always shall be a last line of defense.. It is what you carry to the privy at night, it is what you may carry when dipping a line hoping for trout or Dolly Varden. But it is as always never ever intended as the FIRST line choice if you're actively hunting the beast you encounter. Truth be told there are cases of brown and black bears taking massive damage from rifles from .30/06 to .375 H&H that survived long enough to maul and mangle the hunter using them, there are admittedly also cases of elephant dropped in it's tracks by a .257 Roberts, these are the exception rather than the rule and I would assume most people here that actually do spend many hours in the field would agree with that. A sidearm in dangerous game country is always a good idea, and as I've said before one of the two I'd carry would definately be a M1911A1 with the warmest loads I and the pistol can handle and at the MINIMUM a .44 Magnum with the most destructive and powerful load I can develop or purchase, and control.
Sometimes blast and smoke can turn an animal wishing to do you harm, sometimes it takes a powerful well constructed bullet to get the job done in all cases, Just as we defend ourselves from 2 legged predators we also if in the field make allowance and prepare for four legged vermin as well.

[Phil Lozano]

Originally Posted by Mooseman684

A bullet that passes thru and keeps going Does NOT impart ALL of its energy, sure it makes a small wound channel, but it acts like a pencil hole and if it exits, it still has energy to do so = Wasted bullet energy !

Wasted in which way ? That it exited ? Or it did not deliver the same amount of energy as a bullet that did not exit ?

I am not clear on your theory here.

Best,

[Mooseman684]

Originally Posted by Phil Lozano

Wasted in which way ? That it exited ? Or it did not deliver the same amount of energy as a bullet that did not exit ?
I am not clear on your theory here.
Best,

Wasted in that it did not expand , open a large wound channel, and stop inside the animal...more than likely wounding an animal and not cleanly , quickly killing it.
Wasted in if it exits and keeps going, it did not impart what potential energy it had...These are not My "Theories"...This is tried and tested Ballistics technology that engineers have worked on since before we were born...
Ask Hornady, Sierra, Barnes, Speer, Winchester, Remington, Roy Weatherby,
P.O.Ackley ,and Jack O'Conner if they were alive...They will all tell you it boils down to 3 basics...
1.Is a well Placed Shot...2. is Bullet performance...3. Is enough Imparted Energy from the proper caliber bullet to "Shock" the animal and kill it quickly!
Remington doesn't advertise Core-Lokts as being "The Deadliest Mushroom in the Woods" for Nothing...LOL
Rich

[bs1865]

What are your thoughts on a 10mm auto?

[Phil Lozano]

Originally Posted by Mooseman684

Wasted in that it did not expand , open a large wound channel, and stop inside the animal...more than likely wounding an animal and not cleanly , quickly killing it.

Bullet expansion is not what kills animals, nor is a large wound channel or the bullet stopping inside. Tissue/organ/structure/CNS, failure/destruction is what kills.

Because a bullet does not expand does not mean energy was wasted. If it transfers energy (which it does), the energy was not wasted. It may exit, and upon exiting, it will not have transfered all it's (that particular bullet's) energy into the animal. However, it has transfered the same amount of energy as any other bullet (soft or solid), of the same expanded or unexpanded diameter bullet, before it exits !

So if a bullet that exits sheds the same amount of energy before it exits, how is it wasted. It surely may have more energy than needed to penetrate the entire animal, . . . . . but, wasted ? I think it is quite difficult to have each bullet stay inside every animal and get maximum energy transfer, assuming you want to have any kind of reasonable bullet performance.

There are photos of animals on my site of wounds (quite large) of some bullets that gave maximum bullet energy transfer that failed to penetrate or kill quickly . . . . . . . . . not even reasonably quickly (as it the animals required more shots).

Actually, bullets that exit (of the same diameter) actually "deposit" or "transfer" more energy than bullets that do not exit (stay inside).

Originally Posted by Mooseman684

Remington doesn't advertise Core-Lokts as being "The Deadliest Mushroom in the Woods" for Nothing...LOL
Rich

Ads don't kill critters either. LOL

Best,

[ezearln]

Originally Posted by Phil Lozano

Actually, bullets that exit (of the same diameter) actually "deposit" or "transfer" more energy than bullets that do not exit (stay inside).

Phil, I hate to contend with you there but that my friend simply isn't true, if the projectile retains enough energy to exit the target it failed to deliver all it's energy fully into the target. It is simple physics 101. If the target absorbs and retains a properly designed projectile ALL of it's energy is transferred into that target. The energy transferred has little to do with wheather or not the bullet is expanding or solid.

But I heartily agree that tissue/organ/CNS damage have MOST to do with putting down any animal cleanly, expanding bullets of proper design and construction for the game sought are MOST effective in doing this, large wound channels do contribute and during upset (expansion) these projectiles do more damage. Additionally there is the factor of Hydrostatic shock imparted to the target along the projectiles path through the target which is enhanced by bullet upset.
The key phrase here being a properly designed and constructed projectile for the intended game. Such projectiles stay together to reach the vitals, break bone and destroy critical organs.

[andrew cochran]

Originally Posted by Mooseman684

Wasted in that it did not expand , open a large wound channel, and stop inside the animal...more than likely wounding an animal and not cleanly , quickly killing it.
Wasted in if it exits and keeps going, it did not impart what potential energy it had...These are not My "Theories"...This is tried and tested Ballistics technology that engineers have worked on since before we were born...
Ask Hornady, Sierra, Barnes, Speer, Winchester, Remington, Roy Weatherby,
P.O.Ackley ,and Jack O'Conner if they were alive...They will all tell you it boils down to 3 basics...
1.Is a well Placed Shot...2. is Bullet performance...3. Is enough Imparted Energy from the proper caliber bullet to "Shock" the animal and kill it quickly!
Remington doesn't advertise Core-Lokts as being "The Deadliest Mushroom in the Woods" for Nothing...LOL
Rich

I agree with ya.

[Brother Bob]

I never meant to imply that I would drop a perfectly good rifle and opt for my pistol while the charging animal is still a barrel's length away! The pistol is for "dancing distance"! When the animal is that close, the rifle is no better than a broom stick! You may be field-dressing a kill, only to have a bear decide to take it away. Your rifle is out of reach. What are you gonna do? Call time-out to the bear so you can get your rifle? You're trying to jack another round into the chamber and your spent shell or fresh shell jams. Don't tell me this scat doesn't happen! That is what the pistol is for. Extra insurance against your untimely demise.

[Phil Lozano]

Originally Posted by ezearln

Phil, I hate to contend with you there but that my friend simply isn't true, if the projectile retains enough energy to exit the target it failed to deliver all it's energy fully into the target. It is simple physics 101. If the target absorbs and retains a properly designed projectile ALL of it's energy is transferred into that target. The energy transferred has little to do with wheather or not the bullet is expanding or solid.

I agree, it has not "dumped" ALL of it's energy. But that is not what I said.

I said ~

Originally Posted by Phil Lozano

Actually, bullets that exit (of the same diameter) actually "deposit" or "transfer" more energy than bullets that do not exit (stay inside).

What I am referring to is . . . . . . . if it takes (pick a number) . . . . say 1,000 ft. lbs. of force/energy for the bullet to penetrate 3/4 way through an animal and stop, . . . . . it will take the exact same amount of ft. lbs. of force/energy for a bullet of the same diameter to reach that same point (3/4 through the animal), however if that bullet keeps going and exits the animal, it has delivered more than the 1,000 ft. lbs. of energy, b/c it is still giving up energy as it penetrates further during the final 1/4 length of the animal.

Bullets that stay inside animals do not transfer more energy than bullets that exit, with bullets of the same diameter and weight.


Have a look at it this way.

The animal has "X" amount of resistence
The bullet must "shed" "X" amount of energy to penetrate 3/4 through the animal. The same amount of force mut be applied to the resistence to reach the same depth of penetration.

Kind of like driving a nail in a 4x4. You have to apply the same amount of force with a hammer to drive the nail in 3/4 way through, no matter what size hammer you use.

Also Physics 101.

Best,