.357 or 1Omm

[chilehed]

I would use these or hand load something similar. These are designed for deep penetration and controlled expansion. The flat point will shear a good sized hole to maximize wound changel.

HEAVY 357 MAG OUTDOORSMAN Pistol & Handgun Ammunition

HEAVY 357 MAG OUTDOORSMAN Field Proven handgun ammo. Maximum firepower bullets. Best ammunition for pistols and handguns for sale. Buffalo Bore. Strictly Business.

www.buffalobore.com

Definitely use the heaviest .357 Mag ammo you can find. But check it out, that load is advertised at 783 ft-lbs of energy.
Now look at these offerings from the same source:
44 Mag Lower-recoil...............................1,032 ft-lbs.
44 Mag Dangerous Game.....................1,195.
.454 Casull Pistol & Handgun C..........1,623.
.454 Casull Dangerous Game...............1,813.

I suggest trying a range of calibers and energy levels to find out how high you can go and still maintain control, and then practice a lot.

 

[chilehed]

Even in the rare case that you are negatively affected by the bear spray, the chances of being harmed by the attacking animal would be very low. You're more likely to be injured or killed if using a firearm.

Efficacy of Bear Deterrent Spray in Alaska

Wind can influence bear spray’s accuracy and distance; however, our data show that wind rarely affected the outcome of bear–human interactions involving bear spray, which is likely because many close encounters do not occur in open areas, but rather in dense brush or forests where wind is greatly attenuated. High exit velocities of spray from cans likely compensates for cross-wind effects and may account for the low incidence of wind-related effects reported in Alaska. Of the 72 incidents we studied, 4 (6%) involved persons that had to leave the area to alleviate burning eyes and coughing. No one reported being incapacitated by spray, although one user said he had to move or he would have been overwhelmed.

Our research shows that bear deterrent spray is an effective tool for defusing bear–human conflict in a nonlethal manner. In Alaska, bear spray was highly effective in dealing with all 3 species of North American bears, although more data on polar bear responses is needed. Persons working and recreating in bear habitat should feel confident that they are safe if carrying bear spray. Although bear spray was 92% effective by our definition of success, it is important to note that 98% of persons carrying it were uninjured after a close encounter with bears.

Firearms failed to protect people for a variety of reasons including lack of time to respond to the bear (27%), did not use the firearm (21%), mechanical issues (i.e., jamming; 14%), the proximity to bear was too close for deployment (9%), the shooter missed the bear (9%), the gun was emptied and could not be reloaded (8%), the safety mechanism was engaged and the person was unable to unlock it in time to use the gun (8%), people tripped and fell while trying to shoot the bear (3%), and the firearm’s discharge reportedly triggered the bear to charge that ended further use of the gun (1%).



(YouTube) Is Bear Spray Better than a Gun? Here's What 352 Aggressive Bear Encounters Taught Us...

Adventurer and biologist Stephan Kesting looks at four studies and 352 aggressive bear encounters in Alaska to see whether bear spray or firearms was more effective at deterring aggressive black, grizzly and polar bear behaviour. The results may surprise you, but data doesn't care about your feelings!

That missive bears the hallmarks of lying with statistics. It claims that spray is 92% effective and that 98% of “persons carrying it were uninjured after a close encounter”, but it’s entirely unclear what “persons carrying it were uninjured after a close encounter” means. “Carrying it” doesn’t mean “using it”, and “a close encounter” doesn’t mean “an attack”. Furthermore, it doesn’t report the equivalent effectiveness of firearms. And it gives a breakdown of reasons why firearms weren’t effective (most of which were due to lack of training or lack of use), but it doesn’t give a similar breakdown for spray. And why would anyone include lack of use as a reason why a gun is ineffective, when not using spray would be equally ineffective but they didn’t include that? Perhaps the underlying report fills those details in but as presented here this is incredibly deceptive reporting, and it renders the reliability of the conclusions suspect.

 

[JosephZ]

That missive bears the hallmarks of lying with statistics. It claims that spray is 92% effective and that 98% of “persons carrying it were uninjured after a close encounter”, but it’s entirely unclear what “persons carrying it were uninjured after a close encounter” means. “Carrying it” doesn’t mean “using it”, and “a close encounter” doesn’t mean “an attack”. Furthermore, it doesn’t report the equivalent effectiveness of firearms. And it gives a breakdown of reasons why firearms weren’t effective (most of which were due to lack of training or lack of use), but it doesn’t give a similar breakdown for spray. And why would anyone include lack of use as a reason why a gun is ineffective, when not using spray would be equally ineffective but they didn’t include that? Perhaps the underlying report fills those details in but as presented here this is incredibly deceptive reporting, and it renders the reliability of the conclusions suspect.

The video I linked to goes into more detail.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Definitely use the heaviest .357 Mag ammo you can find. But check it out, that load is advertised at 783 ft-lbs of energy.
Now look at these offerings from the same source:
44 Mag Lower-recoil...............................1,032 ft-lbs.
44 Mag Dangerous Game.....................1,195.
.454 Casull Pistol & Handgun C..........1,623.
.454 Casull Dangerous Game...............1,1813.

I suggest trying a range of calibers and energy levels to find out how high you can go and still maintain control, and then practice a lot.

You, of course, are correct. Practically speaking, we always need to consider the repeatability of followup shots. The .44 mag dangerous game vs a 357 dangerous game has twice the recoil. .454 casull has about 75% more than the .44 mag. If you can't hold point in a rapid fire situation, you will miss. A .357 that is controlable is way more deadly than a .454 or .500 lead-spreader.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

That missive bears the hallmarks of lying with statistics. It claims that spray is 92% effective and that 98% of “persons carrying it were uninjured after a close encounter”, but it’s entirely unclear what “persons carrying it were uninjured after a close encounter” means. “Carrying it” doesn’t mean “using it”, and “a close encounter” doesn’t mean “an attack”. Furthermore, it doesn’t report the equivalent effectiveness of firearms. And it gives a breakdown of reasons why firearms weren’t effective (most of which were due to lack of training or lack of use), but it doesn’t give a similar breakdown for spray. And why would anyone include lack of use as a reason why a gun is ineffective, when not using spray would be equally ineffective but they didn’t include that? Perhaps the underlying report fills those details in but as presented here this is incredibly deceptive reporting, and it renders the reliability of the conclusions suspect.

Anti-gun, anti-hunters, you can tell them a long ways off, but can not tell them anything up close. LOL

 

[Hentenza]

Nothing is going to be 100% effective, but bear spray is a better option than a firearm for defending against a bear or wild animal attack.

I’ll carry the bear spray and my smith and Wesson 629 44 mag. with a 6.5” barrel. The bear is either going to run or be dead but me and whoever am with will live.,

 

[JosephZ]

Anti-gun, anti-hunters, you can tell them a long ways off, but can not tell them anything up close. LOL

I'm prior military, have extensive training in firearms, own guns, and am a supporter of the Second Amendment.

One of the reasons bear spray is so effective against bears is because they have a strong sense of smell. Many times stronger than ours. Creating a large cloud of pepper spray between yourself and a bear is naturally going to be the best defense. If a bear or other wild animal is coming at you and the adrenaline is flowing, it's going to affect your ability to place rounds where they need to be to neutralize it regardless of how good a shot you are.

Also, why would you want to kill an animal when you are in their territory if it's not necessary?

 

[Mark Quayle]

I once cleared the nozzle of hot pepper dog spray by pointing it into my office trash can and discharging it. Never. Again. Bear spray, which I assume is more potent, and dispenses larger quantities, most likely would be worse in close space.

That's true. I've had a similar experience.

Even a near miss, while it may by wind disable you, may not even slow the bear. Up close enough, even if it cannot entirely miss the bear, would be too late. It is not as fast-acting as a bullet or slug.

 

[Tuur]

Bears are just one of dangerous animals we have to contend with. I wouldn't have rounded a corner and found a bear where I found what has convinced me to go ahead and get a handgun. The alternative is a shotgun, which is what we used to do, but wouldn't have been able to use a shotgun in that situation. Then, the more I thought about it, it would be more convenient than a shotgun all around. Having had to fix fence while carrying a shotgun, that's not much fun, and that's back when I was a teenager and not an old man. Bears and hog happen to be the largest dangerous animals I could encounter, so it makes sense to plan for the largest - to a point. The rounds for hog and bear likely wouldn't work nearly as well for varmints like rattlesnakes, copperheads, and cottonmouths.

Main thing is I'm not adverse to firearms and know I'll have to practice until using the handgun is second nature. And had I used bear spray in the situation I ran into, it would have been much worse than the dog spray discharged into a trash can. For that matter, I wouldn't have been able to use my spear, which would be more unwieldy in that situation than a shotgun. BTW, it's a boar spear and good for last-ditch defense against smaller varmints, but frankly wouldn't want to try it on hog and definitely not on bear, unless I had no other choice.

 

[Tuur]

Also, why would you want to kill an animal when you are in their territory if it's not necessary?

Well, for one thing, it's at the home place. Fences are out in the woods; in the yard isn't; and my encounter was in an out-building. It's not "Oh look: there's a varmint: I think I'll kill it." It's "What's - OH NO!" That doesn't include the two times I had to put down a rabid animal. It's like the time my father had to beat a cougar to death: It's for "Me or it" situations.

 

[Tuur]

I get that you drank the coolaid and despise canadians unilaterally. That's OK, we are not all that fond of the US right now either.

Hardly. It's a matter of your country, your business.

 

[SJP51]

Need to decide between .357 and 10mm. The reason is dangerous wildlife of the four-legged variety. Largest is hog and black bear. Had decided on 10mm, then read they wouldn’t cycle if you had to jam the barrel into the critter. Is that true?

Any automatic that the barrel comes in contact with the target could jam if the slide is pushed back.

Hogs and larger black bear are tenacious, tough animals. I've hit hogs with a 30-06 the both shoulders and had them run 100 yards. Still either a .357 or 10mm is a decent choice. I've begun default to revolvers since I don't shoot that much anymore, at least not enough to stay real familiar with how each of them functions (have too many makes/models in the safe). Plus .357 revolver is not likely to jam at all and 6 shots should be enough.

If those are your caliber choices I'd say either one would do.

 

[Tuur]

Interesting comparason between .357 and .44. good discussion on handgun recoil towards the end of the video:

That's interesting. I doubt I could handle the .44 Magnum recoil that well. OTOH, a friend commented that he thought I could shoot a .357 one-handed. Wouldn't try that with a .357 or 10mm until I had a lot of practice.

OTOH, having grown up shooting shotguns, might not find a .44 Magnum in a lever action all that daunting. But my shoulder isn't the palm of my hand. Note: Until the recent incident, was thinking seriously about the .45-70 for this sort of thing; it's more compact than a 12 gauge shotgun.

 

[HARK!]

Our research shows that bear deterrent spray is an effective tool for defusing bear–human conflict in a nonlethal manner. In Alaska, bear spray was highly effective in dealing with all 3 species of North American bears, although more data on polar bear responses is needed. Persons working and recreating in bear habitat should feel confident that they are safe if carrying bear spray. Although bear spray was 92% effective by our definition of success, it is important to note that 98% of persons carrying it were uninjured after a close encounter with bears.

I'll remember that should I plan to visit the Alaska wilderness, and trudge across the tundra with snickers bars in my pockets, and a .22 in my holster.

You presented just one study that appears to be generated by a source that favors bears.

https://bearwise.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/efficacy-of-bear-spray-smith-et-al.-2010.pdf

I got this logo from their home page:

Isn't that so cute?

Man eating bears are just so cute and cuddly, that I think that we all need to find ways to coexist. They're so cute and cuddly; they're just to die for!

Never mind Dirty Harry's silly questions. I feel lucky!

A quick DuckDuckGo AI search:

Bear spray has been shown to stop undesirable bear behavior in 92% of cases for brown bears, 90% for black bears, and 100% for polar bears.

bear spray statistics success rate at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

Another quick DuckDuckGo AI search:

Success Rate Statistics​

• The success rate of using a .44 Magnum for defense against bear attacks is reported to be around 97%.
• This high success rate indicates that the .44 Magnum is a viable option for personal protection in bear country.

.44 magnum bear statistics success rate at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

Should I go frolicking through the wilderness in the contiguous US states on a snickers bar fast *; I'll stick with the .44 magnum.

Sure, I hold some reluctance to being eaten by bears; but if they eat my snickers for desert; they might get sick.

I've seen signs again and again that say "don't feed the bears." It's OK for bears to eat people for food. We can always make more; but bears should never eat people food.

* DISCLAIMER: I have seen no studies supporting that Michelle Obama would approve of presenting oneself as bear food on a snickers finishing diet.

 

[Tuur]

As much as I'm tempted by the .44 Magnum, unless I actually fire one, I don't know about handling the recoil. It's not going to be like shooting a 9mm. There I don't notice the recoil at all. Like the first time I fired high brass shells in a 12 gauge (a single-shot), I suspect a .44 Magnum would let me know it.

OTOH, a .357 or 10mm has roughly twice the 9mm recoil, so unless it's a "stubby" .357, I think I can manage that. That said, don't have a need for a "stubby."

Now, if I walked into a gun shop and saw a used .44 Magnum with a ported barrel, it might be mighty hard to turn down. But going from my tiny 9mm experience to .44 Magnum seems like a huge leap. Better the firearm I can actually use than one that I only think I can use.

 

[chilehed]

Lots of rounds on target but they're all too low-energy = bad.

Super high-energy rounds but you can't get any of them on target = bad.

Somewhere in the middle = good.

So shoot a variety of guns to find out where the optimum balance is for you, and then hone your muscle memory with a lot of range time so that in a moment of crisis you can engage the threat without fumbling.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Bears are just one of dangerous animals we have to contend with. I wouldn't have rounded a corner and found a bear where I found what has convinced me to go ahead and get a handgun. The alternative is a shotgun, which is what we used to do, but wouldn't have been able to use a shotgun in that situation. Then, the more I thought about it, it would be more convenient than a shotgun all around. Having had to fix fence while carrying a shotgun, that's not much fun, and that's back when I was a teenager and not an old man. Bears and hog happen to be the largest dangerous animals I could encounter, so it makes sense to plan for the largest - to a point. The rounds for hog and bear likely wouldn't work nearly as well for varmints like rattlesnakes, copperheads, and cottonmouths.

Main thing is I'm not adverse to firearms and know I'll have to practice until using the handgun is second nature. And had I used bear spray in the situation I ran into, it would have been much worse than the dog spray discharged into a trash can. For that matter, I wouldn't have been able to use my spear, which would be more unwieldy in that situation than a shotgun. BTW, it's a boar spear and good for last-ditch defense against smaller varmints, but frankly wouldn't want to try it on hog and definitely not on bear, unless I had no other choice.

I get it. Back in the 70's in our area we had a bad problem with ferrel dogs running in packs and attacking livestock, including chickens and young calves. My friend and I were about 16 or 17 years old, and we were cutting firewood in our hardwood bush. It was about 20 acres on our property and a total of almost 200 on all the other adjoing property. We shut the saws down and were clearing some brances when we heard russelling sound in the underbrush, before lone we realized it was a pack of dogs circling us. We both picked up some half rotten branches and stood back to back, one of the larger ones took a lunge at me and I hit him on the head with the club that I had, and with adreanaline, continued to pound his head flat. The rest left.

It happened so quick that we could not get to our axes, if we had a rifle or a shot gun, would likely would not have gotten to it where it was left either. Told dad what had happened, drove to the gun-store the next day, bought a cheap, surplus .38 S & W Webley Enfield revolver that was easy to keep on our person. We never needed to use it, but it was piece of mind. A few months later we were all informed to lock up our dogs, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Ontario Provincial Police organized multiple drives and shot dozzens of ferrel dogs in our township.

Interestiingly, the deer population gradually rebounded, and predation of livestock stopped.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

That's interesting. I doubt I could handle the .44 Magnum recoil that well. OTOH, a friend commented that he thought I could shoot a .357 one-handed. Wouldn't try that with a .357 or 10mm until I had a lot of practice.

OTOH, having grown up shooting shotguns, might not find a .44 Magnum in a lever action all that daunting. But my shoulder isn't the palm of my hand. Note: Until the recent incident, was thinking seriously about the .45-70 for this sort of thing; it's more compact than a 12 gauge shotgun.

.44 Mag in a carbine is mild compared to a 12 ga. with a hot Bernecke Slug.

My GP100 with mild, .38 special target loads for IDPA and PPC is easy enough to shoot accurately, one handed in a timed shoot. .357 mag is doable one handed, but target reacusition for me is at least twice as long. Two handed, let-her-rip.

 

[JosephZ]

You presented just one study that appears to be generated by a source that favors bears.

https://bearwise.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/efficacy-of-bear-spray-smith-et-al.-2010.pdf

I got this logo from their home page:

Isn't that so cute?

The study wasn't conducted by BearWise. I also provided a link to a video in that post that cites other reports and studies.

A quick DuckDuckGo AI search:

Bear spray has been shown to stop undesirable bear behavior in 92% of cases for brown bears, 90% for black bears, and 100% for polar bears. Additionally, 98% of people using bear spray in close-range encounters escaped uninjured.

bear spray statistics success rate at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

Another quick DuckDuckGo AI search:

Success Rate Statistics

• The success rate of using a .44 Magnum for defense against bear attacks is reported to be around 97%.
• This high success rate indicates that the .44 Magnum is a viable option for personal protection in bear country.

.44 magnum bear statistics success rate at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

This is what came up when I clicked the link you provided:

The top two websites contained the following information:

Why the .44 Magnum is still a bear-stopper (and where it falls short)

One of the most dangerous myths around the .44 Magnum is that power replaces precision. It doesn’t. A miss with a .44 Magnum is still a miss, and a poorly placed hit can still fail to stop a determined animal quickly. Bears don’t react like steel plates or ballistic gel. Adrenaline, momentum, and sheer mass can keep them moving even after serious injury.

If you can’t put rounds where they need to go under stress, the caliber won’t save you.

If your first few shots don’t stop the charge, you’re already deep into worst-case territory.

This doesn’t automatically disqualify the .44 Magnum, but it does define the margin you’re working with. You’re betting on decisive hits rather than volume. Some people are comfortable with that. Others aren’t. It’s an honest tradeoff that should factor into your decision, not something to hand-wave away because the caliber sounds impressive.

Is a .44 Caliber a Good Bear Defense?

While a .44 Magnum can be an effective tool, bear spray (capsicum spray specifically designed for deterring bears) is often considered the primary defense method. Studies have consistently shown that bear spray is more effective at stopping aggressive bears than firearms. Bear spray creates a cloud of irritant that affects the bear’s eyes, nose, and respiratory system, causing temporary but intense pain and disorientation. This allows you to escape the situation safely. Always carry bear spray in addition to a firearm, and be familiar with its proper use.

My earlier post sums up the points raised in those two articles pretty well:

One of the reasons bear spray is so effective against bears is because they have a strong sense of smell. Many times stronger than ours. Creating a large cloud of pepper spray between yourself and a bear is naturally going to be the best defense. If a bear or other wild animal is coming at you and the adrenaline is flowing, it's going to affect your ability to place rounds where they need to be to neutralize it regardless of how good a shot you are.

Now do a quick AI search on DuckDuckGo asking which is a better defense against a bear attack: a .44 Magnum or bear spray, or something along those lines.

Here's the answer I got:

Bear spray has a significantly higher success rate in deterring aggressive bears compared to firearms like the .44 Magnum. Studies indicate that bear spray is effective in stopping bear charges almost all the time, while firearms have lower success rates.

Legal and Safety Considerations​

• Bear Spray:
  • Non-lethal and can be used without significant legal repercussions.
  • Generally safer for both the user and the bear.
• .44 Magnum:
  • Comes with legal risks, especially if used in self-defense situations.
  • While it can stop a bear, it does not guarantee safety for the user, as there are instances where bear attacks still occur even after a bear is shot.

Accessibility and Use​

• Bear Spray:
  • Easier to deploy quickly in a surprise encounter.
  • Does not require precise aim, making it more user-friendly under stress.
• .44 Magnum:
  • Requires proficiency and quick access, which can be challenging in a sudden bear encounter.

In summary, bear spray is statistically more effective and safer for deterring bear attacks compared to a .44 Magnum. It is recommended to carry bear spray as a primary defense method, with firearms as a secondary option if desired.

Which is a better defense against a bear attack: a .44 Magnum or bear spray at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

 

[HARK!]

The study wasn't conducted by BearWise. I also provided a link to a video in that post that cites other reports and studies.


This is what came up when I clicked the link you provided:

View attachment 379606

The top two websites contained the following information:

Why the .44 Magnum is still a bear-stopper (and where it falls short)

One of the most dangerous myths around the .44 Magnum is that power replaces precision. It doesn’t. A miss with a .44 Magnum is still a miss, and a poorly placed hit can still fail to stop a determined animal quickly. Bears don’t react like steel plates or ballistic gel. Adrenaline, momentum, and sheer mass can keep them moving even after serious injury.

If you can’t put rounds where they need to go under stress, the caliber won’t save you.

If your first few shots don’t stop the charge, you’re already deep into worst-case territory.

This doesn’t automatically disqualify the .44 Magnum, but it does define the margin you’re working with. You’re betting on decisive hits rather than volume. Some people are comfortable with that. Others aren’t. It’s an honest tradeoff that should factor into your decision, not something to hand-wave away because the caliber sounds impressive.

Is a .44 Caliber a Good Bear Defense?

While a .44 Magnum can be an effective tool, bear spray (capsicum spray specifically designed for deterring bears) is often considered the primary defense method. Studies have consistently shown that bear spray is more effective at stopping aggressive bears than firearms. Bear spray creates a cloud of irritant that affects the bear’s eyes, nose, and respiratory system, causing temporary but intense pain and disorientation. This allows you to escape the situation safely. Always carry bear spray in addition to a firearm, and be familiar with its proper use.

My earlier post sums up the points raised in those two articles pretty well:



Now do a quick AI search on DuckDuckGo asking which is a better defense against a bear attack: a .44 Magnum or bear spray, or something along those lines.

Here's the answer I got:

Bear spray has a significantly higher success rate in deterring aggressive bears compared to firearms like the .44 Magnum. Studies indicate that bear spray is effective in stopping bear charges almost all the time, while firearms have lower success rates.

Legal and Safety Considerations​

• Bear Spray:
  • Non-lethal and can be used without significant legal repercussions.
  • Generally safer for both the user and the bear.
• .44 Magnum:
  • Comes with legal risks, especially if used in self-defense situations.
  • While it can stop a bear, it does not guarantee safety for the user, as there are instances where bear attacks still occur even after a bear is shot.

Accessibility and Use​

• Bear Spray:
  • Easier to deploy quickly in a surprise encounter.
  • Does not require precise aim, making it more user-friendly under stress.
• .44 Magnum:
  • Requires proficiency and quick access, which can be challenging in a sudden bear encounter.

In summary, bear spray is statistically more effective and safer for deterring bear attacks compared to a .44 Magnum. It is recommended to carry bear spray as a primary defense method, with firearms as a secondary option if desired.

Which is a better defense against a bear attack: a .44 Magnum or bear spray at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

Should we then ignore these key stats?:

Bear spray has been shown to stop undesirable bear behavior in 92% of cases for brown bears, 90% for black bears

The success rate of using a .44 Magnum for defense against bear attacks is reported to be around 97%.

Maybe I should just stick with my 12 gauge. A firearms expert (ex green beret) told me that handguns aren't much good except for using them to fight your way to your shotgun.

Another quick AI search:

A 12-gauge shotgun, particularly when loaded with Brenneke slugs, is highly effective for bear defense, capable of delivering significant stopping power at close range. Many experts recommend it as a primary choice for protection against aggressive bears due to its reliability and penetration capabilities.

Range Effective at close range, typically within 10-20 yards.
Reliability Shotguns are known for their reliability in high-stress situations.
Capacity Generally holds 5-8 rounds, allowing for multiple shots if necessary.

One-Shot Kills: Anecdotal evidence suggests that many bear encounters can be resolved with a single well-placed shot using Brenneke slugs.

12 gauge shotgun bear defence stats at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com