Bear Defense Rifle
- Thread starter DSC223
- Start date
A black bear yes, perhaps a grizzly but no way for a polar bear! They'd rip that little tank apart!! I hope you plan on having a "back up" for bear defense.
LOL
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
The .308 is ballistically superior to the .30/30 in that it can drive a heavier bullet at a higher velocity in the same length of barrel. The heavier the bullet, the greater the potential for expansion, the larger the expansion the greater the wound cavity, the greater the wound cavity, the more rapidly the bear succumbs to the loss of oxygenated blood to the brain. The higher the velocity, the greater the momentum of the bullet resulting in deeper penetration of a shot made on the length, and improves the chances of the bullet exiting on a broadside shot. The exiting of the bullet can be considered desirable in that both the entrance and exit holes contribute to blood loss, and both the entrance and exit holes allow cold air to enter the body cavity which results in shock. Bullet choice is important because a round nose or flat nosed bullet produces a better entrance wound as the entrance wound of a pointed bullet often closes up and doesn't bleed, where as the round nose or flat nosed bullet cuts a full diameter hole through skin, fat, and tissue.
Does this make the .30/30 a poor choice for black bears? I don't think so. I often say that there is a difference between a bear shot during a hunting scenario and one shot during an attack scenario. In the case of black bears however, the range at which the bear is shot is likely similar in both hunting and defense scenarios, and the bear might be equally aware of the human presence in either case. To suggest that the .30/30 is insufficient under these circumstances is not realistic. If an individual is more familiar with the .30/30, then that is the rifle he should carry. In a bear attack scenario, things will happen very quickly, and having a gun you are familiar with trumps fumbling with a gun you are not.
Last edited:
WOW maybe it should be made a sticky! or some kind of mathematical equation to answer the question once and for all..
people that actually live in the bush and are even remotely likely to run into a bear know what to do and know what they need.. the rest are just people that watch too many movies or something
people that actually live in the bush and are even remotely likely to run into a bear know what to do and know what they need.. the rest are just people that watch too many movies or something
Question: Why not shotguns? They are perfect. I bought a Mossberg 500 in pretty good condition for $115. It came with a 28" barrel and a new 18.5" barrel cost me $80. Bam. Got me a gun that can pretty much do anything. I can take it out in the bush, have a bear/duck/squirrel/grouse/deer gun.
Then if you want to spend a little more, you can buy something a little more "crazy" like a Remington 870 Super Magnum Express. I got mine for $250 used, but my brother just bought his from SIR for $320. Then mod the crap out of the thing for a couple hundred more and voila a gun that can do anything.
P.S. I'm not trying to sway your opinion. I'm just wondering why no shotguns.
Then if you want to spend a little more, you can buy something a little more "crazy" like a Remington 870 Super Magnum Express. I got mine for $250 used, but my brother just bought his from SIR for $320. Then mod the crap out of the thing for a couple hundred more and voila a gun that can do anything.
P.S. I'm not trying to sway your opinion. I'm just wondering why no shotguns.
Perhaps I'll never use it on a bear but I'd like to have a rifle that I can enjoy, which would double as bear protection. The reason I think that I might need it is because the area I will be moving around/fishing in is frequented by bears who know that humans often leave behind tasty fish remains. It's better to have it and never need it then to need it once and not have it.
I value your suggestion and I admit that I had considered it for a while but I'm not a fan of shotguns (my friends think I'm crazy) and I'm looking for something in semi. I could get something like a Rem 1100 or a Mossberg 935 but I wouldn't enjoy shooting it as much as I would an M305 or any other centerfire rifle.
I'm trying a friend's M305 out before the end of the month and I'm following up on a for sale add for a Ruger .44 mag carbine (perhaps a Deerfield). Thanks guys!
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
The most important characteristic of your defensive rifle, beyond either power or accuracy is reliability. Rifles based on military actions like the M-14 clones, the M-1 Garand, FN-49 etc probably have the best reputation for reliability although sporting rifles such as the BAR, and some of the new Euro gas guns by reputation are very good. I don't have any personal experience with this new breed. If you can get a Remington gas gun to function with 100% reliability, then it would be an equally good choice. Until a rifle, any rifle, can demonstrate 100% reliability under difficult conditions I would not choose it for protection.
In Canada, I would define difficult conditions as being out in conditions of high humidity and freezing temperatures with wind resulting in ice fog or freezing rain that without attention will cause the mechanical parts of the rifle to become ice covered. Dust and sand can pose serious problems as well, but this is normally a condition outside of the Canadian experience. If your rifle works under these conditions, then with reasonable attention to care and maintenance it will work on demand at any time. Any instance of failure to fire, failure to eject, or failure to feed should disqualify the rifle for use as a defensive arm, until the cause of that failure has been resolved.
This subject causes me to remember a day that polar bear came quite close during a lunch stop while on the coast. My Mossy 590 was propped against a nearby rock and when the dog took off for the bear, before we realized one was close by, he got tangled up in the sling and pulled the gun down into the soft beach sand. This resulted in some fast wiping and blowing, and a round could only be chambered with enthusiastic manipulation of the action, but it worked. I shudder to think what might of happened had that gun been an auto and the bear had been looking for a fight.
+2. plenty accuracy for the distances (or lack of) involved, and you have a handy bayonet.
Would need something bigger for a polar bear though.
But overall I'd go with a M44 Mosin carbine, it has a more meaty cartridge, and is battle tested reliable rifle built for harsh climates, and conditions...it also has a bayonet.
Last edited:
- Location
- Lakes District BC
HOLY EFFIN URBAN BEAR DEFENCE, do your bears come with bandanas and gac's tucked into there baggy pants
Geoligist nice lookin rig
Geoligist nice lookin rig
ipscgraz
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Without getting on the Bear Thread bandwagon, why a semi?
If you want to stop a bear, go big bullets.
If you want to walk in the bush for work, go light gun.
When you hear that gruff snort in the underbrush, a couple of hundred bucks difference won't be important. 12 Gauge short shotgun or better still, Marlin guide gun in 45-70.
If you can shoot and can avoid panic, you won't need a second round except maybe as a coupe-de-grace.
If you want to stop a bear, go big bullets.
If you want to walk in the bush for work, go light gun.
When you hear that gruff snort in the underbrush, a couple of hundred bucks difference won't be important. 12 Gauge short shotgun or better still, Marlin guide gun in 45-70.
If you can shoot and can avoid panic, you won't need a second round except maybe as a coupe-de-grace.
