sucks 9mm isn't a big game caliber...

[hoytcanon]

true...but I am the OP, so I can segway the discussion.

I know .44RM is a more capable round out to 100 yards than the .357WM...buy capable I mean I'd rather have a .44RM than .357WM if I came face to face with a hostile bear while out deer hunting.

so aside from the long gone Ruger .44RM carbine...what other semi-auto's are out there?

I had a 16" Rossi '92 in .44RM back in 2008. I think I'd want to pay a bit more for something a wee more premium (it felt so flimsy!) to maximize it's 100 yard performance.

There is no such thing as .357 WM... it is .357 Mag, it was not a Winchester development.

 

[MiG25]

There is no such thing as .357 WM... it is .357 Mag, it was not a Winchester development.

While it doesn't have Winchester in the name, I thought the technical work was done by Winchester?

 

[hoytcanon]

While it doesn't have Winchester in the name, I thought the technical work was done by Winchester?

As far as I know it was predominantly a Smith & Wesson development... regardless, it is not the ".357 WM." Elmer Keith and Phil Sharpe were working with Wesson in the development process.

 

[bearkilr]

I thought it was in Manitoba and a weight pushing 700 lb?

There was one hit by a car that weighed around 800 or so, but there are heavier bears killed every year in areas of North Carolina,Pennsylvania and other states where they don't hibernate, or only for a very short time.

But weight is immaterial. The Boone and Crocket Club, which is the official record keeping organization of North American wild game, uses skull size for its record book, and that top spot is held by a black bear skull picked up in Utah.

 

[Mr. Friendly]

now now, don't let the nomenclature get in the way of a reasonable discussion.
- post fixed to correct and remove reference to Winchester

 

[murph83]

9mm would not be my first choice to shot a bear with. Obviously, yes it can be done, and with proper shot placement very effective....but no thanks.

 

[tokguy]

A fella on here, LEO I believe...said this gem about 9 x 19 for bear defence ( I'm assuming he had dispatched an animal or two with a 9mm)..." The most dangerous part of the whole deal to the bear would be 'passing' the 9mm handgun.

 

[Brutus]

9mm would not be my first choice to shot a bear with. Obviously, yes it can be done, and with proper shot placement very effective....but no thanks.

Thank you for your mostly intelligent thoughts in a thread with tremendous need for words such as yours.

 

[BigBraz15]

Which is my primary concern regarding use of less obviously powerful cartridges for hunting. From my perspective, either I'm able to take that virtually guaranteed rear half of the brain shot and have it penetrate sufficiently (pass through completely - from as much as a 30 degree angle should the deer happen to turn its head during the shot travel time of roughly 0.2 to 0.3 seconds at suitable ranges), or I wouldn't take the shot. Without the relatively massive disruptive effects on soft tissue with bullets travelling at 2,000fps and above, it seems to me a lung shot is asking for a long blood trail and a lot of suffering in the animal. And the heart itself, while approximately similar scale with the brain, is a much more difficult target given the guesswork involved in precisely placing it in the chest. Even among deer of the same type and age there is going to be some variation in exact heart location. Compounded by small changes in angle of presentation, shooter experience, holdover if something over 60 yards distant... If my eventually field testing proves less than 100% satisfactory I'll just change gears and would have to look at a supersonic cartridge in a heavier rifle. Reluctantly, but necessarily if the mock-up results just aren't convincing.

It may be worthwhile looking at 300 blackout or the newer 35 cal based on 223. Either one you could load with subsonic loads and recoil should be very light.

 

[GerardSamija]

It may be worthwhile looking at 300 blackout or the newer 35 cal based on 223. Either one you could load with subsonic loads and recoil should be very light.

I've been looking at what's available there. Not a huge selection available in Canada. I see a bit more power becoming available with something like this 220gr .300BLK cartridge, priced at around $1.25+tax per round, delivering about 488fpe (my Winchester JHP 147gr at 1,100fps delivering 81% of that muzzle energy) which doesn't seem such a useful increase considering the cost of a .300BLK rifle... and then of course everything in the class is full size rifles, no takedowns...

https://www.reliablegun.com/en/fede...blackout-220gr-otm-subsonic-20rds-box-1000fps

Seems the .35 stuff is generally made to travel around 2,000fps and hotter, so perhaps not the best ballistically when it comes to cutting velocity in half? And the mass involved doesn't seem to offer anything over .300BLK in terms of muzzle energy when loaded subsonic.

I'm leaning more towards thinking about a shorter non-restricted 12ga shotgun with either a rifled barrel or 'rifled' slugs. A 1oz slug at 1,000fps gives 970fpe, with similar holdovers to 9mm or .22lr. Not so sure about precision shot placement however, which is my major point of hesitation with a shotgun, ESPECIALLY if trying to keep it small-ish for convenience in backpacking. This page has some good information on subsonic hunting:
https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2015/6/19/subsonic-shotshells/

While of course it's not absolutely essential that I go subsonic, it's a strong preference. I'd rather stick with just the one set of custom earplugs, not layering up with external hearing protection. It's not just a matter of being excessively sensitive to loud noises, which I am, but that my hearing is central in my profession, as musicians depend upon my ability to adjust the sound of their violins, violas, cellos and doublebasses with considerable sensitivity. So going hunting and being somewhat able to hear what's going on around me is at odds with my career. Subsonic ammunition seems the obvious compromise. And since I don't relish the prospect of hauling a full-length shotgun around in forests... a shorty seems to join the list, though not quite so imperative.

Sorry, going far off the 9mm question.

 

[Mr. Friendly]

so nobody actively hunts with the .44RM?

 

[Gatehouse]

so nobody actively hunts with the .44RM?

Lots of people hunt with carbines in 44 Mag and 45 Colt. They are very effective, and are significantly more powerful than a 9mm.

I often take a 45 Colt chambered firearm along with me for bear defense on hikes. Either a Rossi Ranch Hand with a red dot or a M94 Trapper. Both are comfortable to carry, and the ranch hand is easy to shoot accurately once you figure it out.

 

[Papaclaude]

Which is my primary concern regarding use of less obviously powerful cartridges for hunting. From my perspective, either I'm able to take that virtually guaranteed rear half of the brain shot and have it penetrate sufficiently (pass through completely - from as much as a 30 degree angle should the deer happen to turn its head during the shot travel time of roughly 0.2 to 0.3 seconds at suitable ranges), or I wouldn't take the shot. Without the relatively massive disruptive effects on soft tissue with bullets travelling at 2,000fps and above, it seems to me a lung shot is asking for a long blood trail and a lot of suffering in the animal. And the heart itself, while approximately similar scale with the brain, is a much more difficult target given the guesswork involved in precisely placing it in the chest. Even among deer of the same type and age there is going to be some variation in exact heart location. Compounded by small changes in angle of presentation, shooter experience, holdover if something over 60 yards distant... If my eventually field testing proves less than 100% satisfactory I'll just change gears and would have to look at a supersonic cartridge in a heavier rifle. Reluctantly, but necessarily if the mock-up results just aren't convincing.

One additional factor is that bullets don't always travel in a straight line once inside the body. A bullet headed straight for the heart may turn and never get there. Personally, I've always preferred a big, heavy bullet, but I know there are probably millions of hunters out there who prefer a smaller, fast moving bullet. I like to be able to eat right up to the hole, and have never had to track a critter using big bullets.

Just as a side note, I used a .22 LR, standard velocity lead bullet today to shoot a goat. One bullet behind the ear and it was over. Does that make the .22 a deer-sized game rifle?

 

[Ardent]

Shoemaker. I've always wondered about that story. Most veteran Alaska guides don't carry a 9mm lady's pocket pistol for grizzly defence, unless of course they want to become an internet sensation.

I don’t know Phil well but we’ve met and chat the business digitally a few times a year. He’s a solid guy, very solid, one of the people you just can’t not like. The bear situation was one many of us are in unarmed, fishing, he was out for an afternoon of salmon fishing. Very few West Coast salmon fishermen are armed, as in nearly none, and there are Grizzlies everywhere here during the salmon run. Contrary to popular belief that is true in our neighbour Alaska across the border a hundred miles north too, most fishermen aren’t “gun people”. I don’t find a single aspect of his carrying a small 9mm on a fishing day preposterous. If anything he was over prepared compared to the average, most here bring a mickey and maybe a joint.

 

[bearkilr]

I don’t know Phil well but we’ve met and chat the business digitally a few times a year. He’s a solid guy, very solid, one of the people you just can’t not like. The bear situation was one many of us are in unarmed, fishing, he was out for an afternoon of salmon fishing. Very few West Coast salmon fishermen are armed, as in nearly none, and there are Grizzlies everywhere here during the salmon run. Contrary to popular belief that is true in our neighbour Alaska across the border a hundred miles north too, most fishermen aren’t “gun people”. I don’t find a single aspect of his carrying a small 9mm on a fishing day preposterous. If anything he was over prepared compared to the average, most here bring a mickey and maybe a joint.

Not many fisherman in BC can legally carry a handgun, and Shoemaker isn't a hippie fisherman, he outfits for fishing and hunting, including bears. An Alaskan NOT bringing a gun to a salmon stream that's known to be frequented by bears would be an anomaly, as evidenced by Shoemaker himself. In the article it sounds to me like he's always armed.
Nothing against his character, as I don't know him personally, but the article reads like an ad for Buffalo Bore ammo.

"Larry and his wife were fishing with me, and because we were going to a small stream I had fished before, which had numerous large male brown bears, I decided to take my Smith & Wesson 3953 DAO 9mm, rather than the S&W 629 .44 Mag. Mountain Gun I have carried for the past 25 years, as the larger boars are usually less of a problem than sows with cubs."

https://www.americanhunter.org/arti...ishermen-from-raging-grizzly-with-9mm-pistol/

 

[GerardSamija]

Just as a side note, I used a .22 LR, standard velocity lead bullet today to shoot a goat. One bullet behind the ear and it was over. Does that make the .22 a deer-sized game rifle?

Many thousands of dead deer might suggest .22lr is adequate... if dead deer could talk... and understood concepts such as bullet lethality...

Here's a little test I did a few years ago, to see how much power was offered by CCI SV .22lr 40gr flying at around 950fps. 4 layers of new denim, 3/16" new belt leather, 1/2" expanded PVC sheet, and 1/4" dense foam, all taped to a water-filled 4 litre milk jug. The bullet expanded fairly evenly to about 40% larger than unfired diameter and stopped at almost exactly 1 bullet length into new Duct Seal putty. Comparing that last part to airguns fired into new Duct Seal I'd guess the power remaining after the water jug pass through was between about 8 and 12fpe, so not much. But a thrown-together analogue for skin, bone and fat plus a jug of water seems like decent penetration.

I'd not call it quite good enough for deer though. More like good enough for a raccoon, if one happened to raise chickens and need to defend them against raccoons. I don't raise chickens. The worst I've had to do was bend a thin steel mop handle over a raccoon which was refusing to leave our bathroom about 18 years ago. She left after ruining the mop handle with her butt and growling at me.

 

[Ardent]

Not many fisherman in BC can legally carry a handgun, and Shoemaker isn't a hippie fisherman, he outfits for fishing and hunting, including bears. An Alaskan NOT bringing a gun to a salmon stream that's known to be frequented by bears would be an anomaly, as evidenced by Shoemaker himself. In the article it sounds to me like he's always armed.
Nothing against his character, as I don't know him personally, but the article reads like an ad for Buffalo Bore ammo.

"Larry and his wife were fishing with me, and because we were going to a small stream I had fished before, which had numerous large male brown bears, I decided to take my Smith & Wesson 3953 DAO 9mm, rather than the S&W 629 .44 Mag. Mountain Gun I have carried for the past 25 years, as the larger boars are usually less of a problem than sows with cubs."

https://www.americanhunter.org/arti...ishermen-from-raging-grizzly-with-9mm-pistol/

Seems he explained it nicely in the quote. And I outfit fishing and hunting, including bears. All the remote streams locally have lots of Grizz / Browns. I carry on ATC and if I could carry a pocket gun unobtrusively, I would too many days. There’s nothing odd about it, take a tour of a wild northwest river and you’ll find bears, and happy unarmed fishermen both sides of the border. Believe me I’ve been there, both sides of the border. That Phil scaled down to a 9mm for a relaxed day of fishing sounds the same to me as hearing you hopped on a dirt bike instead of a quad to check a bait one day. I think we’re seeing some sour grapes at publicity and fanfare, and that’s natural.

 

[Gatehouse]

I've been looking at what's available there. Not a huge selection available in Canada. I see a bit more power becoming available with something like this 220gr .300BLK cartridge, priced at around $1.25+tax per round, delivering about 488fpe (my Winchester JHP 147gr at 1,100fps delivering 81% of that muzzle energy) which doesn't seem such a useful increase considering the cost of a .300BLK rifle... and then of course everything in the class is full size rifles, no takedowns...

https://www.reliablegun.com/en/fede...blackout-220gr-otm-subsonic-20rds-box-1000fps

Seems the .35 stuff is generally made to travel around 2,000fps and hotter, so perhaps not the best ballistically when it comes to cutting velocity in half? And the mass involved doesn't seem to offer anything over .300BLK in terms of muzzle energy when loaded subsonic.

I'm leaning more towards thinking about a shorter non-restricted 12ga shotgun with either a rifled barrel or 'rifled' slugs. A 1oz slug at 1,000fps gives 970fpe, with similar holdovers to 9mm or .22lr. Not so sure about precision shot placement however, which is my major point of hesitation with a shotgun, ESPECIALLY if trying to keep it small-ish for convenience in backpacking. This page has some good information on subsonic hunting:
https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2015/6/19/subsonic-shotshells/

While of course it's not absolutely essential that I go subsonic, it's a strong preference. I'd rather stick with just the one set of custom earplugs, not layering up with external hearing protection. It's not just a matter of being excessively sensitive to loud noises, which I am, but that my hearing is central in my profession, as musicians depend upon my ability to adjust the sound of their violins, violas, cellos and doublebasses with considerable sensitivity. So going hunting and being somewhat able to hear what's going on around me is at odds with my career. Subsonic ammunition seems the obvious compromise. And since I don't relish the prospect of hauling a full-length shotgun around in forests... a shorty seems to join the list, though not quite so imperative.

Sorry, going far off the 9mm question.

If noise is your issue, a much simpler solution is to just use a rifle and wear electronic ear plugs or muffs while hunting.

 

[Papaclaude]

Many thousands of dead deer might suggest .22lr is adequate... if dead deer could talk... and understood concepts such as bullet lethality...

Here's a little test I did a few years ago, to see how much power was offered by CCI SV .22lr 40gr flying at around 950fps. 4 layers of new denim, 3/16" new belt leather, 1/2" expanded PVC sheet, and 1/4" dense foam, all taped to a water-filled 4 litre milk jug. The bullet expanded fairly evenly to about 40% larger than unfired diameter and stopped at almost exactly 1 bullet length into new Duct Seal putty. Comparing that last part to airguns fired into new Duct Seal I'd guess the power remaining after the water jug pass through was between about 8 and 12fpe, so not much. But a thrown-together analogue for skin, bone and fat plus a jug of water seems like decent penetration.

I'd not call it quite good enough for deer though. More like good enough for a raccoon, if one happened to raise chickens and need to defend them against raccoons. I don't raise chickens. The worst I've had to do was bend a thin steel mop handle over a raccoon which was refusing to leave our bathroom about 18 years ago. She left after ruining the mop handle with her butt and growling at me.

Depending on how lazy I feel, I might try to find the bullets and see how far they went in, and how they expanded. If I do, I'll post pics. It dropped on the very first shot. I put 2 more in just in case, although I am certain they were unnecessary. That was with the muzzle inches away, though. No promises, but I'll see what I can do.

 

[GerardSamija]

If noise is your issue, a much simpler solution is to just use a rifle and wear electronic ear plugs or muffs while hunting.

Ultimately it may come to that. I have a good friend who makes custom electronic ear plugs and he made me a set back in 2012. Loved those for shooting at the 10 metre air pistol club as even that amount of *POP* *POP* action is otherwise painful to me without plugs of some kind, and the ones he built could filter the impacts while leaving conversation perfectly clear. Unfortunately one fell out of a pocket last year, and I just haven't gotten around to ordering another set... and his prices keep going up, and he'll probably try to give them to me free of charge, and that's not fair to him... Anyway, yeah, if the ballistics and my skill level in tests to be done over the next year don't satisfy me, I'll probably end up going to something in the realm of a .45" lever gun or whatever. Just hoping it can work with subsonics, but I'll certainly be brutally honest with myself in assessing my testing.