IM_Lugger said:
No one is dismissing anything; both are important, but I have to agree with what it says in the FBI report on handgun wound effectiveness; penetration is the key! A bullet bust penetrate far enough to do the damage. If 12” in Minimum for self defence against humans I would think 15” is not optimal for bear defence.
Fackler's work - which much of the FBI reports are based on - suggests that kind of penetration is required because the permanent cavity - particularly in smaller bullets - is not particularly effective in the last few inches of penetration. If you have ever attended an autopsy, you would be hard pressed to disagree that the vital organs on a human being - particularly an assailant facing towards you - are definitely nowhere near 12" inside the epidermis.
Police also have to consider the fact they may be shooting at an assailant partially shielded behind a car door, building structure, etc. Back country workers don't have to be concerned about a bear launching an attack from behind the door of a Dodge truck.
As for optimal penetration, if I was about to get eaten, the only penetration I would find acceptable would be the one blowing bullets out his ass after traversing the entire body. But that ain't gonna happen with a useable handgun. So if 15" is not adequate, then we can throw out most of the 10mm loads as well. I doubt the extra .75" with less expansion will be any more helpful, so we can start by throwing out two of the three 180 grain loads. If you think 17" of penetration with .77" of penetration would make sufficient difference, then fine. Of course, that would mean the .40 S&W - described by some as totally inadequate as a defense bear gun, is also a fine bear stopper:
DoubleTap .40 S&W Penetration / expansion
200gr XTP @ 1050fps - 17.75" / .59"
I happen to think the .40 S&W works pretty good on black bears - if for no other reason than the CO's in this province regularly prove it by destroying nuisance black bears with their sidearms when necessary. But I don't think the .40 S&W is superior to a .45 ACP firing a 30 grain heavier bullet, of larger diameter, creating a larger permanent cavity, just because it penetrates gelatin two inches further.
We're left with ONE of the Double Tap loads used for all the measurebating in this thread that gives significant improvements over 15" of penetration with accompanying expansion and presumably a much larger permanent stretch cavity. Best/worst of all, those Double Tap loads aren't even available in Canada, nor are Buffalo Bore, so that level of performance is merely theoretical up here where those of us with ATC's carry while at work. What will ammunition available off the shelves in Canada give me that will meet the criteria of "more than 15" of expansion"? accompanied by acceptable expansion to create an effective permanent wound cavity?
We can handload hot, of course, to improve things. I can tell you that the best loads Hogden gives for their 200 XTP in my .40 S&W will give me 950 fps - a full 100 fps less than the Double Tap loads advertise. You can get up to Double Tap performance within SAAMI specs - sometimes - but most people who work in the bush aren't highly skilled reloaders. The handgun is a tool, not an object of their affection.
Add one more to the list - bullets that don't expand in real life, after being shot through denim into gelatin. John Farnam - one of the better known defensive shooting instructors out there, who has been at it longer than Massad Ayoob - reported doing a bunch of testing last April with high end hollowpoint defensive rounds. Instead of just shooting gelatin with denim over it, they added a leather jacket. Farnam reported that the combination of leather and denim frustrated almost all conventional hollowpoint carry ammunition, including Cor-Bon's PowerBall. The only round that consistently expended in all calibers was Cor-Bons loads featuring Barnes bullets (none of which are remotely near the heaviest loads measurebated here in the 10mm and .45 ACP).
It occurs to me that a black bear's hide, covered with thick fur and having heavy fat behind it, is the ultimate leather and denim jacket. So if this is true (and I haven't bothered buying some ordanance gelatin to drap with leather and denim and then shoot holes in), what's the use of all that heavy penetration if we're just drilling neat holes in bears and don't manage to hit the brain or spine? In fact, won't a .45 nice round hole do more damage than a 10mm nice round hole?
Terminal performance is a lot more instructive than measurebating tables. Farnam's findings just might be one more result pointing at why many handgun hunters of big game forego all the fancy hollow points and stick with LBT type SWC bullet designs for big game. Let's not forget that the bullet companies when designing most of their bullets in defensive calibers these days are thinking defense against humans, not hair and hide covered angry critters.
That's part of the reason why I load a 200 gr. custom LFN style bullet in my .40 S&W, rather than a hollowpoint. Tempered in the oven to a fairly high Brinell hardness, then the hardness completely drawn out of the nose portion with a torch. They don't give the wild expansion of some hollowpoints, but they do expand, they do hold together, and they do penetrate like crazy. I'm happy with that for my security in the bush, at least as far as black bears, cougars, and handguns go. If I do start doing a lot of work in heavy grizz country, rather than the occasional job, I probably will consider one of those .45-08's.
To get to the brain you need to go thu the skull, and not all calibers will penetrate bears skull esp. at an angle that isn't perpendicular. I wouldn't be surprised if a bullet out of a 'reasonable handgun' would simply glide off.
Bullets glancing off skulls is going to have more to do with bullet shape and momentum. Pin shooters understand all about bullet shape. And the heavier an object the harder it is going to be to deflect off it's current path of movement. AT 230 grains, the .45 ACP would be about the heaviest out there.
I would also have to take notice that the CO's aren't talking about bullets bouncing off bears' skulls. So if the .40 S&W isn't bouncing off bear skulls like hail from a roof, I would presume the .45 ACP would do as good or better.
Plus there's no way you can expect to reliably hit a brain or spine of a charging bear. So if ‘heart/liver lungs will not drop a bear’ you’re dead.
I have seen a fair number of bears that did not drop at the shot with long gun hits in the heart/lung area, including nuisance bears shot with 12 gauge slugs. If rifle bullets and solid slugs in the heart lung area can not reliably guarantee drop at the shot and that's the criteria for success, no handgun of any caliber is going to guarantee it either.
However, "you're dead" does not follow. Solid hits can turn attacking bears. And if you give up and roll over to die, yes you're dead. Myself, I'd prefer to fight back, even if it means feeding the bear an arm to crunch on as some people have while sticking a handgun under their chin or in their ear. Some have done just that and fought back and survived with nothing more than a pocket knife.
Personally I’d
much rather carry a 10mm over .45acp in wilderness. But I
never said 10mm is the ideal gun for the job. So yes I would like a
.44mag…
Well, I'll take a shot gun every time; but when work gear and helicopters make that impossible, I'll take a reasonable handgun, whether that is .357 Magnum, 40 S&W, 10mm, 45 ACP, or whatever in that ball park. If I could shoot an N frame well, I'd have one - but I can't. Better something I can hit reasonably fast and accurately with.
I gather, however, after 18 pages of posting, that this:
".45 ACP belongs in a museum, old cartridge, past its prime and quite easily a joke when compared to 10mm Auto... Normal .45 ACP is NOT an adequate round to dispatch a Black Bear. It may or may not do the job but lacks penetration needed to be considered an adequate bear gun."
Has been sufficiently examined under the cold light of day and been resolved.
