I have a 6.5x55 m96 swede that I have used in africa and , I love it .22" barrel ,synth stock
3-9x32 scope.Well,the thing is, we dont have bears in africa and I´m moving to B.C soon.
Question: Will it do in a crunch? I wont use it to look for bear,but could it save my ass?
I have a 7x64 that I could restock in plastic??

I dont want to mess up my 338win or my whelen
Advice?

RULES OF THUMB RE- NEEDING GUNS

1- IF you need a gun and have one it usually beats a fist or a short pointy stick. that puts you ahead of lots of people without guns in the woods.

2-think of the absolute worst possible case scenario you may find yourself in in a given geographical location, think of the gun you are thinking of carrying and having to use it in dealing with that worst possible case scenario. If it gives you a warm fuzzy feeling, you have chosen wisely. If it gives you pause for deep thought without that warm fuzzy feeling, you have chosen poorly.

3- having reflected on your response to #2 If you decide to use the caliber that gave you deep pause for thought and didn't give you that warm fuzzy feeling anyway... you have chosen poorly AGAIN and you should repeat #2 changing calibers and weapons until you get that warm fuzzy feeling.

4- weight of a weapon is not nearly the consideration the weight of a grizzly bear has when deciding if the gun is "too heavy"

5- repeat all thought process until you have that warm fuzzy feeling about your choice.

6- and finally
once you have achieved that state of nirvana and that warm fuzzy feeling in your choice, discard that choice and carry something even BIGGER.

OK, thanks, but what do you guys recomend? Do you allways carry for grizzley when you´re backpackin lookin for bambi?

Me, I'd rather have a gun that I am 100% familiar with and can shoot well. If this is the sort of gun you can wake up out of a dead sleep, and grab and instantly know where your hands go, and where to point the bullet to, then I'd have no qualms about saying it will be adequate for you.

Nosler makes a 140 gr partition, don't know if your twist will stabilize them too well but my guess is they'll work good enough at 80 yards regardless.

Mark

boet..........I am from BC and I hunted and guided all over for 30 years, mostly in grizzly country.

I have used just about everthing you can think of within reason, including the venerable .270 Winchester. Your 6.5x55 will work fine with good bullets for deer, goat and sheep, just place the bullet appropriately, especially with goat.

As for the bears...........well if you get in a tight spot with one the 6.5 is going to feel a bit on the light side. But, I have taken grizzly with the .270 and guided guys that took the big bears with .270's, etc. Not ideal grizzly medicine but they will do the job with a good bullet in the right place.

In all honesty, after 35 years of big game hunting over here I do not pack a small cartridge any more in areas where I will be hunting multiple species. You can get by most of the time, but once in a while you wish you had something that could reach a little farther with more authority or threw a big bullet.

I suggest you wait until you get to BC and get a feel for things and what you are going to do in the hunting department. Go on a few hunts and then decide what you would feel most comfortable with.

WHEN IN bear country, I carry for bear no matter what else I am hunting. It is just a character flaw developed from once coming nose to nose(close enough to smell the blue berries on its breath) with a 500+ pound black bear armed only with a .22 because I was squirrel hunting, not bear hunting. After that either a BIG handgun(it has to begin with a .4 and throw at least 250gr or more), which may not be an option in Ca. Or a minimum of a .358Win loaded with 250gr Speers for deer(or bear)and go up from there. Otherwise it is .340wby for caribou(or bear) .375H&H for moose(or bear) and .45-70 for anything else in thick bush(and bear).
When with a pack, they still aint heavy, they're my brother.

Sadly, The hand cannon is indeed, not an option in Canada.

I carry a 6.5 Gibbs most often when backpack hunting, as I am generally hunting sheep, goat or mule deer. If I am backpacking and not hunting (usually scouting trips) I usually take my 45-70 Marlin as a camp/trail gun.

All of my backpacking hunting occurs in areas with the highest densities of interior G-bears in North America. I have also worked in the bush for over 15 years in those same areas, mostly without benefit of self protection from G-bears. I have had MANY close encounter of the Ursus kind over the years...some pretty hair raising. I also own many large calibre rifles, so the fact I don't always carry one in bear country is not due to a lack of them in my gun case.

I do not disagree with those that prefer to carry bear rifles on a sheep hunt...to each their own. I once met a guy in the middle of nowhere (literally), packing an 11.5 pound 358 STA while hunting for Stone sheep. Seemed a little odd to me, but heck, I guess this guy's respect/fear of bears outweighs his desire for a lighter rifle on a 50+ mile backpacking trip, or for a little extra reach in the event of a longish shot opportunity on a ram-of-a-lifetime! There ain't anything wrong with that.

But I certainly don't think the same way. I carry what makes the most sense to me, depending on the terrain, the length/difficulty of the trip and the quarry I seek. Usually that means I carry a light rifle in a flat shooting calibre. Don't get me wrong, presence of bears is considered and factors into my decision making (see below), but does not dictate the answer. If I happen to get into a jackpot with a bear, I'll still be WAY better off than if I was packing pepperspray.

The bottom line is that I'd usually rather have the right rifle for my primary objective, and let the chips fall where they may in the unlikely event of a mishap with a bear. Most of my buddies feel the same way, and individually I am sure we all have spent more time in grizzly country than 99.5% of the hunting population ever will.

There are always compromises involved, as every single situation is different (ie. there is no "one right answer"). As I mentioned, I pack a 45-70 when strictly backpacking, as its primary purpose is self protection and it comes in a light and handy package. Also, if I am backpacking into a nasty spot where there is known to be an exceptional number of bears, or where one has been spotted recently on a gutpile or in someone's camp, then that factor gets some additional weighting in my decision and could result in me packing my 300 Winnie or 375 H&H for that particular trip.

Boet, your 6.5x55 is perfect medicine for use in most backpack hunting situations...assuming you're hunting sheep and deer sized game. Whether you are comfortable packing that gun into bear country is a very personal choice that will also really depend on a number of trip specific factors in the end. While some may critisize the decision to take a light calibre like that into bear country, I just wanted to make sure you know that A LOT of very experienced guys do it all the time, with full knowledge (arguably some of the best, first-hand knowledge) of the actual risks involved.

Just my 0.02c Canadian, for whatever that's worth,
Canuck

my choice for this is a ruger 77 in 30-06 ,composite stock, 3x9 leupold scope. fairly light, great all around caliber, flexible scope. gets it done for me. but I agree with a ) having a gun 1st b) one you trust and are familiar with.

I think people worry about bears too much!
Canuck has the right idea IMO. Bring your 6.5 and go hunting. It might be wise to use a heavy well constructed bullet of your choice, just in case you have an close encounter, but I wouldnt worry too much about it.
I think you will find that most locals that hunt in bear country use 270's, 30-06's, 308's, etc.

I certainly agree to a point.....much depends on what all you are hunting. If sheep is the main quest well, then carry a sheep rifle.........but, in northern BC I have been on hunts where you had tags in your pocket for sheep, goat, moose, elk, grizzly etc etc.

In that case, I usually carry something bigger than a .270. Yes you set your priorities, but you never know what is going to pop up around the bend or what is waiting on your moose or elk kill.

Thanks for the help guys
I guess what I was hoping to hear, was that I could just put a synth stock on my 7x64 or continue to use the 6.5.
I know nada about bears but know that my more capable rifles are just too pretty to take rock climbing.
I´ve got a 300h&h in the works that I could stock in plastic(goes against the grain a bit) do you think that would be a better compromise??

Why use plastic??? Only the fiberglass/kevlar stocks are worth considering if voices in your head says you must have synthetics. The cheap plastic stocks are no better than wood. In fact, wood is often better than plastic.

Belive me, I found out the hard way. When making a rifle for backpack hunting reindeer in the Norwegian mountains I had read too many ads from the rifle- and stockmakers that I automatically thought I had to have a synthetic stock.

When I purchased the plastic stock I found it to be heavier than my old wooden one, AND it was softer! What does it matter that the plastic will hold up better to a long fall or being run over by a tank when it is heavier and gives less accuracy? Do anyone really think that, when one subjects a rifle to such a treatment that a wooden stock would break, but a synthetic would not - that the rest of the rifle would be unaffected?

As to beeing impervious to weather, make sure your wood stock is bedded and has a proper oil finish (several layers), it will hold through your hunt without problems.

Life is to short to hunt with ugly guns!

.375 JDJ with a 20 inch barrel.

Well now,heres the thing.
Its not voices in my head that told me to get a synthetic stock (I call all those abominations plastic) its the voices on AR. But they dont get all the blame, i´ve been a mountaineer for years and when I look at my kit I cant believe the scratches. Somehow I dont mind scratching a synth stock but it burns my arse to scratch a nice bit of wood.
I think every man needs a dedicated mountain rifle,even if its ugly.

quote:

I think every man needs a dedicated mountain rifle,even if its ugly.

Truer words have never been spoken!

Cheers,
Canuck

Lightweight, impervious to moisture, no swelling, fully functional, all go and no show, and yes ugly.
But doesnt that make it a beautiful stock.

PS- The rams and bucks dont even know what fancy walnut is yet. SHH! dont spread this around

quote:

Well now,heres the thing.
Its not voices in my head that told me to get a synthetic stock (I call all those abominations plastic) its the voices on AR. But they dont get all the blame, i´ve been a mountaineer for years and when I look at my kit I cant believe the scratches. Somehow I dont mind scratching a synth stock but it burns my arse to scratch a nice bit of wood.
I think every man needs a dedicated mountain rifle,even if its ugly.

Well, then you are choosing a plastic stock for reasons of looks...

My point is that from a practical standpoint the woodstock will just as good, even better than most cheap plastics. The only drawback it that you have to apply som oil on the stock from time to time (easily done in the comfort of your own home). An advantage of wood is that it will be warmer to the touch than a plastic, this will help keping you from freezing and thus help to make steady shots.

Everyone need a dedicated mountain gun, I agree. Mine has a beautiful maple stock, it has been out in -25C, blizzards, rainstorms and unbearable heat. It has scratches, yes, but once a year I take some sandpaper to it and oil it up again, presto: just like new. And I dont have to use gloves to keep me from freezing like a buddy of mine does with his plastic...

PS- The rams and bucks dont even know what plastic is. Shh! Dont spread this around!

This is mine... Kimber 8400 Montana in 300 WSM. All-up weight (scoped with sling and three rounds) is a hair under 7lbs 3oz's (3.25 Kilos).

Beauty is as beauty does:

On my rifles that I use for hunting in crumby conditions I have fiberglass stocks. No they are not pretty.

I hunt in -25 and below all the time and I have never had problem with my hands freezing to the stock or getting cold just because it is a synthetic stock. I'd be much more worried about the metal than the stock. In those temps I wear a thin pair of silk or cotton gloves and then heavy insulated gloves or my moose hide/sheep skin lined gauntlets over top. Slip em off and use the thin gloves to shoot in. But I digress.......

Synthetic stocks are not for everyone, but I sure like em when I hunt in a snow storm, the pouring rain and then bright sunshine....all in one day.

One other thing.....I have seen a lot a lot of wood stocks get broken at the pistol grip over the years from getting dropped in the mountains or horse related incidents. I have never seen that happen with a synthetic stock, at least not yet anyways.

I'm sorry for Hijacking the tread but I just read a post that their is a limitation on hunting handguns in California. Will someone explain it to me.
Thanks
Dr B

With the proliferation of new lightweight and featherweight rifles, seems you can have your cake and eat it too,something that is light, flat shooting and good bear "medicine" as well. I have one .300 Winnie that's 5.75 lbs, shoots great and the recoil is modest due to a good brake, as well as a .338 RUM that's under 7. Although the .300 wouldn't be my first choice for grizz or brown bear (since I have the .338 I certainly wouldn't feel undergunned using it on a bear with a good quality 180 Gr. bullet if I needed to on a sheep hunt.

I'll second Canuck's sentiments.

Since the original question was about backpackin' calibers, take what works best for packin' first and be glad you have it. A light weight, stainless synthetic shooting tool in a moderate, flat shooting caliber sounds just fine with me.

But, if I was targeting something BIG, and travelling via "Shank's Mare", that's another story but still no reason to carry 11.5lbs of .358Mag.

I'm firmly convinced that the differences in most calibers - like .270 vs 7Mag, or .300 vs. .338, or .375 vs. .458 - are 90% the result of their effect on the SHOOTER, not the target and that's one of the reasons there are so many valid opinions out there.

Brad's rig is a perfect companion in my estimation! That's a beauty in the eye of this beholder!

I am from BC as well, so Grizzlies are around when hunting most large game. I have a Browning Ti In 300 WSM, with a 3x10x42 Swarovski - it weighs 6 3/4 pounds all ready to go. I have enjhoyed this rifle alot, it is a dream to carry.

Is a Magnum neccesary? Probably not, I thought long and hard about doing a lightweight 7mm-08- BUT now it would be virtually the same weight as my 300 WSM,

I use to have a Remington Mod. 660 in 350 Rem Mag. and thought it was the cat's meow. The only thing I didn't like about it was it seemed like I needed a holster for it cause it was so short and light. I now carry a Mod. 70 feather weight in 30-06 and shoot one load for everything. 180 gr. bullet at about 2700fps. Light, easy to carry and very effective.

I know that this example is a bit off of what you are asking, but, in another life, I was in the army wearing what was called, at the time, by the brass, foreign looking headwear. Well, we regularly went hunting,in search of the most dangerous game on the planet, for a week or more at a time, with 120+lb packs and 308 rifles. The rifle did the job! What I guess I am saying is that you will become accustomed to whatever load you hump, if you are in shape. Nowdays I ride as much as possible.

I have a shepp rifle from Weaver Rifles that should be delivered in the next month. I have two other rifles that he built for me and they are the most accurte hunting rifles I have ever shot.
It will be a 300 wsm, on a Borden Alpine action, Hi-Tech Sheep stock, a 24" rock Creek #2 barrel, a Rifle Basix trigger, Talley light weight one pice Ring Base, and ultralite Leupold. It will weigh around 6#.
I went with the 300 wsm over the 270 wsm is I would like to make a Brown Bear Hunt it next year.

Dr B

Heading to Alaska in just a little over 2 weeks, and I am carrying a Mod. 70 SS Featherweight in 30-06. I'm carrying Fed. Premium 180 TSX loads. The stock is a factory plastic work-over - glass bedded from tang to the end of the forend (filled with styrofoam and carbon arrow shafts). It weighs 8 lbs with scope and sling. It shoots "okay" - 2-3 inch groups at 200 yards - which is "caribou-killing" but maybe not just exactly what make my toes tingle. When I get some more money saved up, it'll go to McMillan to have one of their new graphite stocks fitted. Should save at least 8-10 ounces and may help the accuracy. I will use this rifle on any other trips where I may be backpacking unless specifically hunting bears. My plans are for this to be my "every-day", "do most anything" rifle.

You could probably save what I've spend and pick up one of the new Kimber Montana standard actions in 30-06, 300 Win Mag or 338 Win Mag.

I opted for the 30-06 because of the lesser recoil, greater magazine capacity, cheaper practice ammo, and lighter weight. I feel completely comfortable, going where I'm going (open tundra), with using this firearm to fend off a brown/grizzly bear if needed. The shot will have to be on target - but don't they always.

For bear hunting that I may get to do in the future, I will take my Mod. 70 SS 375 H&H in the McMillan (Echols Legend pattern) fiberglass stock. It's accuracy does make my toes tingle and it's action is as smooth as glass. It, however, weighs closer to 10 lbs with scope and sling - probably not the ideal for a Dall's sheep hunt.

Guys,

Excuse my ignorance here but how feasable is it to carry a back up weapon while mountain hunting? I'm thinking of a scenario where some have mentioned trecking out with a string of horses/mules etc.

In cases like this is a heavy camp gun included in the artillery?

FB

Camp Gun AK-47 is nice !

For what its worth, I'd set up the 7x64 in a lightweight synthetic stock if you want a dedicated backpack rifle. IMO, the 7mm offers more flexibility over the 6.5, both in terms of bullet weight and the greater case capacity allows you push a heavier bullet over further distances. Some would say it is more of an academic advantage, but I'd want every advantage I can get if I'm walking into a remote area and may be pressed to take a long shot.

In April, I and two friends did a +65km round trip up the Glaisnock River in Fiordland (New Zealand) after wapiti. We carried a Remington Titanium 7mm short ultra magnum between us to minimise the weight we carried. During this hunt, we travelled along the top of the mountain range glassing the valley floor - basically hunting from top to bottom. For those that aren't familiar with Fiordland, I can assure you the country is scary, EXTREMELY mountainous!!! I'm 34 years old and was reasonable fit after plently of training, however my knees were still swollen 3 weeks after I returned home - it was the most demanding hunt I've ever experienced.

If I were to do more packpack hunts after NZ wapiti, I's seriously consider setting up either a Titanium or a Kimber in a 7mm magnum. In the meantime, I'm trying to forget the pain and suffering from the last hunt.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Fallow buck
A backup in the form of a handgun is a good idea if allowed where you hunt and, can be a lifesaver.

Spartan
I´ve allways thought the 270 /7x64 /280, to be the ideal class of mountain rifle....the 6.5x55 is close enough and, I have a good one. The original question was BEARS. I know nothing about them and need a good compromise as I really dont want to pack a DGR when hunting mountain dwelling herbivores.
I´m leaning towards the 300H&H I´ve got halfway done. I intended using a beautiful classic stock but if I put a synth stock on it ....I dont know....its like sacriledge or something.
The more opinions I get the clearer it wil get I suppose

Sorry Boet, my need to express my opinion got in the way of me reading the question!! I have only spent one season in Alaska and I did come across a reasonable number of Brown Bears during that time, and therefore carried a 375 H&H just in case. During that time, we weren't backpacking so carrying a heavy DGR wasn't a big deal. While I'll leave it to the North American AR members to comment on issues related to bears, I can tell you that the 270 and 7mm Rem mag accounted for quite a few BB in at least one hunt camp in the mainland.

The point I did want to make is, based on my experiences, my priority (in terms of backpack hunting) would be to have a LIGHTWEIGHT rifle that is capable of performing at reasonable ranges. In this regard, I agree that the 270 /7x64 /280 would be up for the task.

Because ignorance is bliss and I do live in Australia and only need to worry about Koala bears and not Grizzly bears, I'd suggest a well placed shot with a premium bullet from any one of these calibres would be suitable against bear. Then again, I propbably won't get the chance to test this theory for myself.

As allways, its the variables that make it interesting I guess.
Planning is fun, but decideing which guns to leave behind when I emigrate is a bummer. I´m taking over:
35whelen
7mm rem mag
338 win mag
425WR
22lr
Just the backpack rifle to decide on now.
leaving behind:
7x57
303
375H&H
two of the following :6.5 swede;7x64 ;300H&H which I may complete and sell.....Its like deciding which puppy to drown

If I was packing for just a day in the woods probably my Remington 600 in .308 Win. would be the pick. I don't think my S&W .41 Mag would make me feel vey confident if I had to stop something pissed-off.

If I was hunting anything up through caribou my Browning 300WSM would go with me. If it was moose or grizzly / brown bear on the menu maybe my Sako in 375H&H.

I feel pretty good packing my 30-06 7600 Pump. I can shoot it quick and four or five 200 grain Partitions should handle most problems.

Hello Boet, I believe you have already had some excellent advise (one guide with 30yrs experience!) , but I'll still toss in my nickel. Having spent a bit of work and pleasure time in bear saturated country your rifle is the thing you need to worry the least about. How you act and keep camp in bear country will decide how and if yhou will have a confrontation with a ursus. Messy smelly camps and in attentiveness will always get you in trouble. Contact the local Fish and Game association for some pointers when you get here. And if the time ever comes that you need to defend yourself against a bear with your firearm, calm nerves and a sure shot will be a more deciding factor than caliber or cartridge. Though you may wish for a 20mm at the time. Good luck and happy hunting.

I am another of those that live/work/hunt/play in the great outdoors here in BC.

Due to the extremely wet weather that I am always being exposed to here I have been switching all of my rifles and handguns to S/S synthetic stocks or the black/grey laminate stocks.

I am one of under 900 Canadians (1/2 of which are here in BC) that legally carry handguns due to the type of work I do in remote wilderness areas.

I won't tell you what you should carry but I'll tell you what I carry.

For handguns I carry a G20 10mm if I'm out in the winter or jumping in and out of my truck alot (the handgun has to be unloaded in the vehicle). My main carry handgun when in grizzly country is a 7.5" Ruger Super Redhawk 454 Casull with 360gr @ 1520fps or 395gr @ 1420fps Cast Performance WLNGC's.

I have just purchased another 7.5" SRH 454 Casull that is being shipped to me right now and when it gets here I am sending my old SRH to Gunnar @ Armco in Prince George http://armco-guns.com/ (click on "What's new @ Armco) to get the barrel shortened to 4.25" and his new sight rib installed. That way I will have a short and long barreled high powered double action handgun that I will always have on me in the bush.

For rifles I have a thing for my blued synthetic stocked Rem 700 in 280 Rem but have gotten tired of constantly having to clean and oil it when I am on a hunt so it stays at home most of the time now.

So the rifles that I now take with me are my Marlin 1895GS 45-70, s/s synthetic stocked Rem 700's in 300RUM with 180gr Swift Scirroco's @ 3380fps and 200gr Swift A-Frames @ 3200fps or my 375RUM with 260gr Nosler Accubonds @ 3020fps and 300gr Nosler Partitions @ 2750fps both have Leupold VX111 4.5X-14X scopes on them and weight approximately 9.5lbs. I also installed Kick-Eez magnum recoil pads on both the RUM's.

I figured that if I can't carry a rifle that is only 2 lbs heavier than a light weight rifle I am abviously not in good enough shape to be in that remote of an area anyway.

I had a M-96 Kimber in 6.5 x 55 that I put a K-3 Weaver on. It was my Alaska airplane and helicopter gun for some 10 years. Light, easy to carry, shot well. Plenty in a pinch. Never had to defend myself, aircraft or what have you from a bear. There are all kind of rifles, you could drive yourself nuts thinking about it. Carry what you have and once you settle in, then you can really look at what you want or think you might need.

Not being a bear hunter maybe I should keep my mouth shut. But when I lived in Alaska and actually carried a rifle with me, I carried a Rem mod 660 in 308 w/2 3/4x Redfield and using 180gr bullets.

The thing I found is that I spent a lot more time carrying the rifle than shooting it. Also I really don't believe that the 180 gr Hornadys I used, when well placed, would do any animal any good, including a bear. Were I to take a 6.5x55, mine is a Win Featherweight w/ 1-4x Redfield, I'd give though to the bullet and make sure it was up to the task. I'd use a 140 Nosler partition or better bullet in it. Maybe in that case I would even go for the Barnes TSX if it shot well in my rifle.

I have killed a few black bears and the biggest problem I found with them was getting the bullet inside. A good shot with a bullet that doesn't make the trip is not real effective.