what do you guys consider minimum for always stopping a bear at close range?

can you please recommend one for north-american grizzly and one for european brown bear

Steffen--whatever you can handle. you never have enough gun. I personally like the .378 weatherby, course the recoil does not bother me much, at lesst i can keep the shots within 3 inches on paper.

quote:

Steffen--whatever you can handle. you never have enough gun. I personally like the .378 weatherby, course the recoil does not bother me much, at lesst i can keep the shots within 3 inches on paper.

of course, a .577 NE would probably be a killer but i was thinking of a relatively light and easy-to-handle rifle.

do you think a 9.3x62 will do?

I like the Remington 673 in 350 Rem Mag. Perfect, quick handling for bear country. Best, Starcharvski.

IMO, a minimum stopping rifle for grizzlies would start at the .338 WM using 250 grain bullets.

Mine is a .358 STA with a 270 grain North Fork bullet at 2900 fps. Good shooting.

quote:

Originally posted by Steffen-9.3:
what do you guys consider minimum for always stopping a bear at close range?

can you please recommend one for north-american grizzly and one for european brown bear

I think a .338 Win. Mag. loaded with 250-275 grain premium bullets or other cartridge in the same class is sufficient. For close range, a heavily-loaded .45/70 with the 350-grain Speer or tougher bullet will do a great job! The Russians use a .35-caliber round made by necking up the 7.62X54R case for brown bear. I would expect this to perform like a .35 Whelen......

quote:

Originally posted by Steffen-9.3:

quote:

Steffen--whatever you can handle. you never have enough gun. I personally like the .378 weatherby, course the recoil does not bother me much, at lesst i can keep the shots within 3 inches on paper.

of course, a .577 NE would probably be a killer but i was thinking of a relatively light and easy-to-handle rifle.

do you think a 9.3x62 will do?

Of course it will. Use the toughest expanding bullets you can get!

quote:

Originally posted by Steffen-9.3:
what do you guys consider minimum for always stopping a bear at close range?

can you please recommend one for north-american grizzly and one for european brown bear

9.3x64 with 286 Nosler Partitions.

quote:

Originally posted by Steffen-9.3:
what do you guys consider minimum for always stopping a bear at close range?

I cringe at that word always. And then to add the modifier minimum is just looking for trouble.

Why is it that way? Why do so many folks always go for the cheapest or bare (no pun intended) minimum? Or even less?

It seems pervasive on the internet nowadays. Like the newby on the professional welder's forum, asking if it's possible to weld steel girders from a highrise building with a chinese welder he bought off e-bay that plugs into the toaster outlet in his kitchen.

The mind boggles.

375 H&H - 300 grain North Fork 2600 fps should work.

Roland

A .338 Win Mag and a Nosler 250 gr Partition going 2800 fps.

I've never even seen a bear in the wild(none in texas)but imho its going to come down to being cool headed and a good shot more so than caliber. A head shot with a 270 would probably drop one cold in his tracks. Other than that, I'd say big bore.

quote:

I've never even seen a bear in the wild(none in texas)

last year i stumbled across a brown bear at 20yds and i was armed with a single shot .222
needless to say, i felt quite undergunned.

The new 375 Ruger or 375 H&H should fill that bill easily.

.450 Marlin or HOT .45-70 in a Marlin guide gun with Ashley ghost ring sights. Easy to carry, fast follow up shots (if needed), serious medicine.

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by Steffen-9.3:
what do you guys consider minimum for always stopping a bear at close range?

can you please recommend one for north-american grizzly and one for european brown bear

A Ford F-550 4 x 4 with 3" schd. 80 brush guard here and a Unimog similarly set up there. But if you don't either handy, a 458 Win Mag is plenty of energy, cheap and common.

well i'd either opt for a 375 H&H or a 450 marlin with some heavy bullets loaded fairly hot

Whew now that would scare the crap outta me! Too close for comfort.

Real stoppers to me would start @ 375H&H & go up in bore size. I could probably make do w/ a 338-06 or a 35whelen & heavy bullets, but would feel a whole lot better using a 416rem. 404jeffery or 416rigby.

I think he wants to know if a 9.3X62 would work as a bear stopper. The heavy for caliber .366 bullets (285 and up) have excellent sectional density and make pretty good holes. You don't need super magnum velocities on bear either. In fact, you'd like the bullet to stay inside (opposite side you shot from) the bear so as to deliver all the bullets energy directly to the bear.

I've never hunted brown bear, but have tagged some black bears with a 35 Whelen and a 350 673 remington magnum. Both worked great. I used the 673 remington as my guide gun when I guided for elk in CO, and I absolutely loved it. I used it for elk, bear, and the possibility of running into a mountain lion (never did). I imagine that the significant increase in energy and diameter that the 9.3 has over the 35 cals would be sufficient for killing brown bear. All that said, bullet placement is really what matters most. You could, in theory, kill a coastal brown bear with a 22 if you placed it right. Go with the 9.3, it's a great cal.

My Remington 870 pump 12 ga, holds eight rounds total, and use a good quality rifled slug. I can load it with my left hand, while still keeping my right hand griping the gun and finger on the trigger. I shot competitive trap and skeet, (doubles in trap) with an 870 and I can work the gun EXTREMELY quickly.

quote:

Go with the 9.3, it's a great cal.

I'm sure that 9.3 will do the job on a bear hunt. Good shot placement will make sure that the bear won't attack any more.

The minimum for a 100% stopping rate is a small nuclear device, since 100% stopping rates are almost none-existent.

quote:

Originally posted by Steffen-9.3:
what do you guys consider minimum for always stopping a bear at close range?

thats a tall order.
100%?

Steffen-9.3,
I think that a 30-06 and heavy bullet (180/220grs) is in both case enough, 9.3 is ,BMHO, more than enough.
If your question is concern the hunt, the EU mathod is normally at the blind, hight, close, sometime more a cottage than a blind. When the bears that are regularly feeded arrivve the hunter has all the time to shoot at it aiming properly. normal shooting distance within 50 meters.

I'm trying to recall the reports written by American friends but I do not remember if the preferred method of hunt is staking or at the blind. But I think that a 9.3x62, properly placed of course (if you shoot in a feet finger you do not have any stopping power effect), is always more than enough.

Steffen-9.3,

Don't underestimate bears, maybe this will give you a better idea?

The event,



I was tracking this bear for about 5 hours, eventually caught back up to him on a salmon stream, spotted him coming out of the brush at about 130 yards on top of a more or less 20†high bank, he was getting ready to go in the stream, pretty stealthy and fast these bears.

I shot him through both lungs & heart and broke his left shoulder by exit of the bullet. The bear tumbled of the bank in the water, he was spinning around, then came back up and was trying to get back up the bank, I shot him two more times in the spine and it was all over.

Amazing after skinning, I put my hand in the wound of the first shot, the heart was entirely mush. The whole killing was done in less than 10 seconds still after taken heart and lungs out he tried to get away, tough they are.

He was an honest 8.6 with a Skull 24 13/16 he was a good looking bear, a well proportioned mature boar.

Rifle: Ed Brown – 375 H&H – Ammo Federal Premium 260 Grain Accubond – 2700 Fps – Nosler Accubond performed flawlessly.

Roland

A 380gr .375 cal Rhino bullet comes to mind... Only if we could get them in Canada....

That word always won,t work for me either.
Bears are alot tougher than people and I just saw a show about gangsters and baby face nelson lived for quite awhile and actualy drove a car with 17 rounds in him, mostly 45ACP from a tommy gun.
Lived long enough to kill 2 g-men too.
If I were I would like a 358 Norma Or bigger.
For close range bear defence A lever 45/70 or 450 marlin...tj3006

" Always" is a tough one but a .458 win and up in terms of energy should knock down a bear even with a poor shot giving time for another.. I like the idea of a well working lever with a stout cartridge for quick shooting though. When I was a kid fishing on some streams around the mouth of the copper river in Ak one of the group carried a single shot 12 guage with everybody having a few rounds in their pocket. Looking back I don't think it would have been real effective. Part of the fun was seeing the Bears

A minimum would be a 30-06 with a 200 gr. Nosler. That would suit me just fine, and I would be very confident with it..

The .338 with 250 gr. or 300 gr. bullets would be a good choice as would a .375 with 350 gr. RN Woodleighs.

Caliber is not a good criteria to use, but most do just that. More important is bullet placement, and bullet construction and they carry equal weight.

I have really enjoyed the wealth of information that has been presented on this topic. Although I didn't make the original post, I certainly appreciate the opportunity to contemplate the information from so many knowledgable members of our gun culture.

I am retired now, but in my prior life, I was a lay-Coroner. I have investigated the cause and manner of death in many human shootings. I have seen the results of a variety of different calibers on human targets, by being at the scene of the shootings, being present at many autopsies as well as attending many training seminars on this topic. Some observations which might apply to this discussion:

1. There have been more civilians (non-military) killed by .22 caliber bullets than any other caliber.

2. To properly evaluate reactions to being shot, it is prudent to eliminate victims that are under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol.

3. Many shooting victims give up the fight because they have seen enough movies and TV shows to know that when they get shot, they are supposed to fall down, or fall backwards, or go flying across the room and through the window, or stagger and gasp, and maybe roll their eyes.

4. Victims that have been hit in the central nervous system go down instantly.

5. Victims that are hit in the cardio-vascular system do not necessarily give up the fight immediately, unless they have watched enough TV to know that they should. But they do very often die at some point in the future, and often, they do a great deal more harm prior to that point when they die.

6. Victims that are hit in the knee, leg bone, spine, pelvis, hip, etc. usually go down immediately. Thus, the loss of mobility reduces the potential for additional harm.

Now where do we go with this information?

A. It should be assumed that bears are not on drugs or alcohol.

B. Bears, if shot with a .22 caliber or other relatively small caliber firearm, may eventually die, but not necessarily prior to doing a great deal of harm to the shooter.

C. Bears hit in the central nervous system will probably stop all aggresive action immediately, even though they have not watched TV/movies about what they should do.

D. Bears shot with a large caliber firearm where the projectile only damages the cardio-vascular system will probably die a little sooner, but can still do a lot of damage to a human prior to the bear's demise.

So the point to all of this is that it is desirable to use a firearm that, if the shot is properly (or luckily) placed, will provide the destruction of bone, joints, spine, skull, etc. as well as the destruction of the cardio-vascular system. Because the central nervous system is relatively narrow and small, and well protected by very tough muscles, AND, the bear is probably in motion, a shot to this system will be a result of luck. Obviously, there is a great degree of either well practiced skill, or a greater degree of luck involved in shot placement on a charging bruin. If the bear ends up with a shoulder or two that are non-functional, it's level of aggression may remain very high, but the ability to manifest and deliver that aggression will be less effective because of it's reduction in mobility.

So, included in the overall discussion, it seems prudent to consider not so much the death of the bear, but the immediate incapacitation of the bear. Whatever caliber is selected, it seems desirable that it has the ability to deliver bone crushing effects so that if the shooter is lucky enough to hit "bone," the bear may be slowed enough that additional shots can be more precisely placed.

I also followed up on the salmon fishermen that had the a bear encounter in Alaska about four years ago. Although the gentleman with the shotgun had made a better selection of defensive equipment, he didn't plan very well because he couldn't remember whether he had a round in the chamber, thus he elected to throw the shotgun at the bear, and seek "refuge" in the river. He had two companions that were both armed with 9mm handguns. They both emptied their guns into the bear. Not the best selection of equipment, but there were some very lucky hits that damaged the shoulders of the bear, and thus the bear retreated, and ultimately died. (If I was not religious before this event, I certainly would have become very religious following it).

In 2003 I shot a nice black bear at 60 yards with a very hot 45-70 with hardcast bullets. The bullet entered behind the left shoulder, went through both lungs, clipped the heart and exited through the right front shoulder completely destroying that shoulder. The bear ran another 50 yards, made a very tight circle at which point I put a second round through the lower chest. The bear flipped over on its side, very dead. Upon cleaning the animal, we learned of the internal damage as well as the structural damage to the shoulder. The bear was running dead but it didn't know that it was supposed to fall down (obviously a lack of watching training films and movies on TV).

When I started writing this I certainly did not intend to go on at such length. I appreciate the patience of each of you and I hope that the information and observations are taken in the spirit intended, and that is, to apply some prior experience and observations to the questions at issue.

To sum it up - When in bear country, carry the largest and most powerful rifle that you can competently handle.

Best of luck to all that have such memorable encounters.

I've never hunted bear. But I would go out full of confidence with a 35 Whelen/310gn Woodleigh, or a 9.3x62/320gn Woodleigh. With well placed shots of course.

I would also say there is not a "minimum" that will "always" do what you need.

I find my 375 H&H with 300g bullets comforting while moose hunting among very large bear tracks...

I continue to be amused by the gun-writers going on about the caliber you need to hunt something. Somehow they always overlook the other things that may also be encountered (or out there hunting!)

Ultimately you will want what you are comfortable and capable with.

Cheers,

Dan

I would feel comfortable with a .30Gov't06, and 180 gr. Nosler Partitions in Big Bear county. The rifle would be my old favorite a Pre'64 Model 70 Featherweight with a 2X7 Leupold scope. Now if I were hunting these beast, a Pre'64 Model 70 in .375 H&H Magnum with 300 grain Nosler Partition, or a old West German Mark-5 Weatherby in .340 W.M. with the 250 grain Nosler Partition would be at hand.

quote:

Originally posted by Steffen-9.3:

quote:

Steffen--whatever you can handle. you never have enough gun. I personally like the .378 weatherby, course the recoil does not bother me much, at lesst i can keep the shots within 3 inches on paper.

of course, a .577 NE would probably be a killer but i was thinking of a relatively light and easy-to-handle rifle.

do you think a 9.3x62 will do?

I would have no problems using my 9.3x62. A poorly placed shot even with a .577 will not do the job.

A light, fast hadling CRF rifle tuned by a good smith chambered in 458 Win mag shooting 450 grain Kodiaks. Either good irons or a scope of no more than three power.

Joe

For consistently stopping an enraged bear (weighing 1000+ lbs in case of large brown bear etc) i would not be happy with a 9.3X62. Its basically a 35 Whelen, more or less. And while the 9.3 has been used a LOT on cape buff, it's not used to stop charges, although adequate for a calm, well placed shot.
I would want a .404 jeffrieys or 416 rigby at minimum; these are sensible minimums for cape buffalo

quote:

I would have no problems using my 9.3x62. A poorly placed shot even with a .577 will not do the job.

Non lethal shot placement with a .577 can knock down a elephant giving a chance for a less rushed lethal shot. I wouldn't hunt bears with one and would feel fine with a 9.3x62 but the question is "always", not sure that is possible but more energy is going to get one closer to that goal. Yes, shot placement means everything but that's easier said than done when something is coming to eat you. I'd still wouldn't take a elephant gun bear hunting though.

SD Shooter

Great post.

You have reenforced my long held feeling that bears on crack that like to watch TV are the worst kind to run into!

Always is a bad word. The only real answer to that would be some sort of artillery or a chain gun. Not likely to be at hand fishing on a salmon stream. Would have to 2nd the biggest you can shoot well theory.