I would assume that within 150 yards or so the 9.3 would be a better bet. I've never been grizzly hunting, so I don't know typical ranges in which bears are shot.

I suspect that the 300 w with 200 or even 220 grained bullets would work well.

I've asked to compare these two b/c I own both, but I think these two cals serve as a good bellwether for the big and slow vs. small and fast argument. I'm wondering where those that are in the know regarding grizzly sit.

Thanks for the input fellas.

Either choice is a good choice, I'd opt for the 9.3 but the 300 with 200 grain bullets will get it done, very well at that.

Do you have experience hunting grizzly? The reason I ask is b/c I'm curious to know what distances shots are typically taken on bigger coastal and inland grizzly. Thanks for the input.

I've always wanted to go grizz hunting and I've even prepared a couple of rifles for the day in which I get to get my hands dirty... I'm just curious what the ideal grizz cal and rifle is. Also, is big and slow better than small and fast? Is a 9.3 or 450/400 etc. better than a 300 weatherby or 7mm super rail gun magnum?

Thanks.

I certainly don't have a lot of experience on bears, but I have used both cartridges on moose.

I'd think either driving a TSX should be deadly. A 9.3 should work well for almost any bear hunting as I'd think most shots would be inside of 200 yards. With a 250g TSX out of the 9.3 you should be able to hold dead on and pull the trigger. Penetration and expansion with that bullet for me on moose was very good. I like the idea of using the .300 on a bear since one can drive a 180-220g TSX at terrific velocities with 100% weight retention and excellent expansion. On moose my .300 worked very well for I think better than half a dozen bulls.

It would seem that anymore I'm only interested in my 30-06 and .375 H%H. I've used both on moose and the -06 on bears and been very happy all around. This last spring I took my .375 out and didn't come up with anything but felt I was more than adequately covered.

I should add that I have taken brown bears at 35, 150, 15, and 250 yards.

I'm no expert - I've only recently taken one brown bear at 65 yds. - but I will say that they can absorb a tremendous amount of lead. Last month I shot mine with a .338 Win. Mag., with the first shot put exactly through the heart & both lungs, & then four more good hits before the animal quit trying to get up & run. Whatever you use, be sure to use a good heavy-for-caliber premium bullet - I used a Swift A-Frame, but would also recommend Barnes, NorthForks or Woodleighs.

quote:

Originally posted by Frank Beller:
I'm no expert - I've only recently taken one brown bear at 65 yds. - but I will say that they can absorb a tremendous amount of lead. Last month I shot mine with a .338 Win. Mag., with the first shot put exactly through the heart & both lungs, & then four more good hits before the animal quit trying to get up & run. Whatever you use, be sure to use a good heavy-for-caliber premium bullet - I used a Swift A-Frame, but would also recommend Barnes, NorthForks or Woodleighs.

Maybe next time use that double 577 and see if he tries to get up.

This is all god info for me, and the best I can tell, bears can be shot at really all sorts of distances. It seems that you guys think that neither cal really has much of an advantage over the other.

Again, I've never hunted grizzly, but I think I would feel more comfortable with a 9.3 or 375 in thicker country. That said, I also think it's possible I may have to pass up on a longer shot that I wouldn't with my 300. Of course, if bears aren't really ever shot at greater distances than 200 yards, I'd take my 9.3, or maybe even my 404 Jeff loaded with 400 grained pills going 2,300 fps.

Would my 404 or a 416 etc. be even better than a 300 weatherby or a 9.3x62?

In my my mind the 9.3 seems ideal (basically b/c hauling around a big 404 seems unnecessary if the 9.3 works. It's been used on hundreds of eles and cape buff, surely it's big enough for grizzly), but maybe the 338 win mag is a good compromise between the two...? I'm selling my 338 win mag, so we'll leave that out of the discussion.

Thanks guys for good info.

madden,

I've never shot one of the beasts, but I suspect members with experience will point a finger at bullet placement first, choice of caliber second.

I would not likely not shoot the 300 Roy only based upon nothing more than long distance shooting is what it was designed for; however, it has obviously been used successfully since its introduction.

good luck.

I've shot both.
An interior Grizzly with a .338 win mag using 250 gr Barnes Bear Claw bullets at a distance of about 100 yards.
Three shots and he was still moving all shoulder/vital hits.
A 10 foot Kodiak Brown using my .300 WBY with 200gr Nosler Partitions he wasn't moving after first shot, but I poured three more into him for insurance all in the vitals, the distance was 180 yards.
Every shot on game is a little different.
I've been told from guides with lots of big brown/grizz under their belts that an adrenaline filled bear is a completley different animal and makes one seem nearly bulletproof at times.
Glad I didn't have to find out.

quote:

Originally posted by maddenwh:
Do you have experience hunting grizzly? The reason I ask is b/c I'm curious to know what distances shots are typically taken on bigger coastal and inland grizzly. Thanks for the input.

I've always wanted to go grizz hunting and I've even prepared a couple of rifles for the day in which I get to get my hands dirty... I'm just curious what the ideal grizz cal and rifle is. Also, is big and slow better than small and fast? Is a 9.3 or 450/400 etc. better than a 300 weatherby or 7mm super rail gun magnum?

Thanks.

Ironically, I've never shot a griz with a rifle, I shot an interior griz at 12 yds with a homemade longbow back in 1985 in BC Canada. I have hunted on the Penninsula of AK and been within 30 yds of 9+ foot coastal bears that being said I would not shoot one of these honorable critters with nothing less than a 338 and if I were to use a scope it would be a 1.5x5 Leupold because I would not shoot one unless he was very close, 50yds or less.

i've always used a 375 with 300 grain nosler partitions. My bears have ranged anywhere from about 75 yards to about 400. depends on where you are going, the country varies a great deal from rainforest to wide open tundra. first - find out where you're going.

Most people I've talked to say for Brownies: "More energy than a 30-06, and no less than 30 cal."
Either of your rifles choices accomplishes this, so whatever your most accurate & comfortable with, I'd use.

The 300 Weatherby w/ 180 gr Barnes Triple Shocks would be just fine. I sight mine in at 4" high at 100yds, This gives me 5" high @ 200yds, 2" high @ 300yds, 9" low at 400yds.... This bullet has amazing penetration w/ excellent expansion - Usually about a quarter size exit hole, and I haven't recovered one yet. I think Mr. Weatherby made a deal w/ the devil when he invented this cartridge, because it (w/ proper bullet placement) just kills things very quick.

Due to the fat & hair, jelly belly bears just don't bleed well - even w/ big holes. "Keep shooting until they stop moving" is the best insurance policy. There is no worse feeling than crawling alone into thick brush on your hands and knees, trying to recover a wounded bear.

Either calilber will work on brown bears and I like the Nosler Partition, been using them for decades and they've never failed me. Shot placement is everything IMO and I prefer to break them down as fast as possible.
A good heavy bullet through both shoulders will usually put them out of commision pretty quickly but as mwm464 stated.....keep shooting 'til they stop moving because you never know how each bear will react.

I of course know that shot placement is king. I suspect that an appropriately placed shot in the brain with a 243 would do the job (assuming one shoots like Annie Oakley and is stupid enough to try it). Perhaps I should have clarified the question by specifying a shoulder or lung shot.

I guess the best answer would require more info., like what the terrain is etc. Also, I guess comfort level, as mentioned earlier, plays a big factor.

I thought I'd get a few more heated arguments as the bigger slower vs smaller faster argument usually stirs folks up more on the African forums etc.

I guess good bullet construction/selection, good S.D., and good shot placement matter most.

That said, at 150 yards, which works better on the same shoulder shot... Just trying to stir the pot a bit.

I would prefer the 9.3 at typical shots at Br Bear the 300 would be fine.

quote:

Originally posted by maddenwh:
I of course know that shot placement is king. I suspect that an appropriately placed shot in the brain with a 243 would do the job (assuming one shoots like Annie Oakley and is stupid enough to try it). Perhaps I should have clarified the question by specifying a shoulder or lung shot.

I guess the best answer would require more info., like what the terrain is etc. Also, I guess comfort level, as mentioned earlier, plays a big factor.

I thought I'd get a few more heated arguments as the bigger slower vs smaller faster argument usually stirs folks up more on the African forums etc.

I guess good bullet construction/selection, good S.D., and good shot placement matter most.

That said, at 150 yards, which works better on the same shoulder shot... Just trying to stir the pot a bit.

Bringing a 243 to a bear fight is a good way to wind up as bear poop.

The best rifle to take is the biggest rifle you can shoot well. Personally, I would start at 338 mag and would prefer a 375 or 416. Ranges are generally within 150 yds, after that, bringing down a brownie becomes super tough.

John

I've just come back from Africa where I used my 9.3x62 on a number of plains game critters at ranges from 25-237 yards and in weight from 30kg to 750kg..

I used the 286 Woodleigh PPSN which did NOT expand below 2,300fps impact velocity. Apart from that the 9.3x62 was a death ray. Bullet placement saved the day even after I discovered that the Woodleighs would not expand. RNSP next time for sure

Make sure you test what you take on something that equates to whatever a grizzly is made of.

Testing on feral goats did not reveal the lack of expansion I was to witness in Africa. Mind you, the bullets did not fail. I got all my animals.

MWM464 seems to have a good elk or deer /bou set up .. No reason to have a rifle sighted more than 2"high @ 100 yards . The primary goal in hunting dangerous game is to get close enuf so it is dangerous ...... The 9.3 is indicated here .. However since you have doubles ,Those are what you should bring .. The 470 would be ideal . It may have changed , but I think the record bear was shot with a 450#2 .....

quote:

Originally posted by gumboot458:
MWM464 seems to have a good elk or deer /bou set up .. No reason to have a rifle sighted more than 2"high @ 100 yards . The primary goal in hunting dangerous game is to get close enuf so it is dangerous ...... The 9.3 is indicated here .. However since you have doubles ,Those are what you should bring .. The 470 would be ideal . It may have changed , but I think the record bear was shot with a 450#2 .....

I did have doubles before I had to sell them when I lost my arse in the market (can't figure out how to change that deal at the bottom of my posts). Instead of a 470 sxs, I'm shooting a 404 Jeff cz, and instead of a 9.3x74r double, I'm shooting a 9.3x62 cz.

I suspect that my old 9.3 Chapuis would have been a great bear rifle.

Have not shot a bear myself. Went north of Nome last Sept to do just that. Extremly open country! Took my 9.3x62 CZ550 with 286 gr Partitions. My buddy took his 300 WSM with 180 TTSX. He did shoot his 8-1/2' Grizzly. I had better seats to the whole affair than Jack Nicholson @ an LA Lakers game with my Zeiss 15-45 spotting scope. I was about 600 yds away across the canyon. Knowing something was wrong the bear came out of the willows and stopped in the open to look around. My buddy was 156 yds upslope with the cross hairs tight behind the shoulder. First shot passed through the lungs, left to right, with the bear doing a Judo roll practically in place. On his feet instantly but Dan cycled the bolt and shot the 2nd shot so fast I never even heard the 2nd shot due to the "bang" from the first. Second shot, again left to right, hit the spine and DRT the bear. Bullet mushroomed perfectly, loosing one petal and stopped just under the right side off hide. Dan still has that bullet.

In your place, I feel either caliber will suffice just fine. Several things would cause me to choose one over the other.

1. Which rifle, in a pinch, do I feel the most comfortable with. Which one do I instinctly handle and shoot better?

2. Which caliber would I "want" to shoot the bear with for nostalga.

3. Which rifle do I baby and which one do I not care if it gets dinged, wet, rusted, etc, due to the elements.

Answer those questions for yourself and IMHO, you will have your answer.

Alan

quote:

Originally posted by maddenwh:
I of course know that shot placement is king. I suspect that an appropriately placed shot in the brain with a 243 would do the job (assuming one shoots like Annie Oakley and is stupid enough to try it). Perhaps I should have clarified the question by specifying a shoulder or lung shot.

I guess the best answer would require more info., like what the terrain is etc. Also, I guess comfort level, as mentioned earlier, plays a big factor.

I thought I'd get a few more heated arguments as the bigger slower vs smaller faster argument usually stirs folks up more on the African forums etc.

I guess good bullet construction/selection, good S.D., and good shot placement matter most.

That said, at 150 yards, which works better on the same shoulder shot... Just trying to stir the pot a bit.

Me personally, I prefer a shoulder shot when they are close in, say under 100 yards, if they are over that, then I would shoot the lungs/heart. The extra distance would give me enough time to put one in the shoulder should it be needed. I would hate to have to go after a pissed off brownie in the alders or willow thickets, knowing he might be waiting for me.

Seems pretty split between the 9.3 and 300 weatherby, but no votes for the 404 Jeffery?

This post was really more of a hypothetical and not so much about what I should take, but more about what is ideally better.

From what I hear from those that have experience, I would probably opt for my 9.3. I'd take the 404, but I get the impression that grizz hunting can be extremely physically taxing. I think hauling around a heavier 404 might weigh me down.

That said, I guess it's probably no more grueling that ele hunting, and I'd certainly opt for my 404 in pursuit of elephant. Also, the QD scope I'm putting on my 404 might come in handy. I'd probably feel better chasing up a wounded bear with an open sighted big bore.

quote:

Originally posted by maddenwh:
That said, I guess it's probably no more grueling that ele hunting, and I'd certainly opt for my 404 in pursuit of elephant. Also, the QD scope I'm putting on my 404 might come in handy. I'd probably feel better chasing up a wounded bear with an open sighted big bore.

I'd disagree with the comparison between elephant hunting and brown bear hunting. Certainly it is possible or probable that you will walk much further hunting elephants, but I'd be willing to bet the accomodations, weather, and terrain would be much more hospitable in elephant country than brown bear country.

In no way am I attempting any kind of slight against elephant hunting. I am quite sure it is hard work and although I have never been, I am booked for Botswana in 2011.

Certainly it is quite possible to take a wonderful trophy bear on a blue sky gentle breeze, birds singing day. I'd expect the opposite.

Also, if you like your 404 or think your 9.3 is pretty, or your walnut stock on the Weatherby is admired far and wide, I'd recommend leaving them out of the bear hunt. Sure you could keep a very pretty rifle in good shape on an incliment weather bear hunt. Maintaining a walnut stock finish on the Alaska Peninsula or the North Slope can be done but it will require possesing the proper tools and time to do it. On the other hand, a stainless/ synthetic is much more worry free and that leaves time to attend to your hypothermia, blisters, flu, bruises, torn ligaments, cold food, wet sleeping bag, flattened tent and bad attitude.

The .300wby I hunt with is the stainless synthetic version.
I don't believe anything is stainless on Kodiak.
I watched rust, stains and blemishes developing before my eyes in the harsh marine climate.
I consider them badges of honor.
Snow, sleet, rain, hail and even one sunny day was what I had for climate on my bear hunt.
And alders....did I mention alders?

This was the area of my bear hunt in 2001

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by maddenwh:
That said, I guess it's probably no more grueling that ele hunting, and I'd certainly opt for my 404 in pursuit of elephant. Also, the QD scope I'm putting on my 404 might come in handy. I'd probably feel better chasing up a wounded bear with an open sighted big bore.

I'd disagree with the comparison between elephant hunting and brown bear hunting. Certainly it is possible or probable that you will walk much further hunting elephants, but I'd be willing to bet the accomodations, weather, and terrain would be much more hospitable in elephant country than brown bear country.

In no way am I attempting any kind of slight against elephant hunting. I am quite sure it is hard work and although I have never been, I am booked for Botswana in 2011.

Certainly it is quite possible to take a wonderful trophy bear on a blue sky gentle breeze, birds singing day. I'd expect the opposite.

Also, if you like your 404 or think your 9.3 is pretty, or your walnut stock on the Weatherby is admired far and wide, I'd recommend leaving them out of the bear hunt. Sure you could keep a very pretty rifle in good shape on an incliment weather bear hunt. Maintaining a walnut stock finish on the Alaska Peninsula or the North Slope can be done but it will require possesing the proper tools and time to do it. On the other hand, a stainless/ synthetic is much more worry free and that leaves time to attend to your hypothermia, blisters, flu, bruises, torn ligaments, cold food, wet sleeping bag, flattened tent and bad attitude.

No where did I ever say my guns were pretty. My weatherby is a vangaurd stainless synthetic submoa... essentially something I'm not afraid to get dirty. I'm not one of those folks that likes to take pictures of my guns more than use them.

I wasn't matter of factly comparing grizzly hunting with ele hunting. I was simply trying to say that a lighter rifle might be a better bet whilst hunting grizzly. I've never been, but have fiends that have. They've all said that you cannot really ever be in good enough shape before you go i.e. as much as one may try, you'll still be winded.

I was just stating that my 8 pound 9.3 would likely be a better choice than my 10 pound 404 for practical reasons.

This is getting a bit off topic as I was really more interested in what you guys (those with experience) thought the best cal for grizz is. However, you all bring up an important point regarding rifle weight and weather resistance,

Perhaps we should broaden the thread to discussing the ideal cal and rifle construction and weight as well. I assume light weight, synthetic stocks with stainless barrels are preferable. I can't imagine taking up a $20,000 double in those conditions and then having to haul it around the mountains at the same time. I've done quite a bit of elk hunting at elevation in Colorado, and I know the value of a light weight rifle.

Yup, I lugged my 10.25 lb 375 H&H up and down the mountains last year. I'll be lugging my 11.25 lb 500 Jeffrey this year. I figure if I can lose 10 lbs off of me, I can carry another pound of rifle lol ... Nothing like hunting in the Rockies to whip yourself in shape.

I appreciate your advice on the stainless/synthetic for Alaska though. I wouldn't mind a South Gate 300 Weatherby in a good synthetic stock.

Chuck

hmmmmm.....without sounding off, suppose the experience I've had is on-going. meaning I live a subsistence lifestyle. I've used most every caliber that is reasonable to hunt with from a .30-30 on up to a .375RUM. My 9.3x62 is now my preferred carry gun. I generally hunt them in close and closer the better. Furthest shot could have been 150yds or abit more with the RUM. Closest could have easily have been no more than 30 ft. I've used just about every kind of bullet commercially made an now stick with my reloads. Barnes,Noslers,Woodleigh,Swift and have some but never killed a thing but targets is the Norma Oryx

Most times they just drop after the hit but there is a few times the hit is wrong and not thru both shoulders and the damn hunt really begins. Sold most of my rifles an did not for one care for the 300 win mag or the RUM....Remingtons mind you. I do favor 2 particular rifles currently and they are a pre-64 aught six and a VZ24 9.3x62 both with peeps and front sights are fiber optic and a white bead. 200 grainers and 286 are preferred.

I've a 9.3x64 that Timan built for me but still have to get her rust blued...that will be a hell of a gun!

just ramblin, must of been a good day.
regards,

.. The trick is to NOT wound your bear but to DUMP your bear ...I didn,t know you had the 404 .. . That changes things alot ....... With the 40 plus calibers the lung shot some one related their friend got on a bear with their 300 WSM would have produced an upside down bear ,that may have got up but not like they do with the 30s. If you can shoot your 404 as well as you can your 9.3 then bring it . If you want to save the wood stock, put a synthetic on it for the hunt . . Grease the steel up like a pig and have at er... Actually I would Corrosion Block the steel and shine it up when you got home ... Lots of synthetic stocks available for the CZ. . GS HVs are availabe inb.423 . That would be the bullet for everything , but for bear especially ...Not that the factory Hornady 404 ammo would not work .. BUT ,,,,,,BROWN BEAR ARN,T ELEPHANTS ..

quote:

Originally posted by grizz007:
hmmmmm.....without sounding off, suppose the experience I've had is on-going. meaning I live a subsistence lifestyle. I've used most every caliber that is reasonable to hunt with from a .30-30 on up to a .375RUM. My 9.3x62 is now my preferred carry gun. I generally hunt them in close and closer the better. Furthest shot could have been 150yds or abit more with the RUM. Closest could have easily have been no more than 30 ft. I've used just about every kind of bullet commercially made an now stick with my reloads. Barnes,Noslers,Woodleigh,Swift and have some but never killed a thing but targets is the Norma Oryx

Most times they just drop after the hit but there is a few times the hit is wrong and not thru both shoulders and the damn hunt really begins. Sold most of my rifles an did not for one care for the 300 win mag or the RUM....Remingtons mind you. I do favor 2 particular rifles currently and they are a pre-64 aught six and a VZ24 9.3x62 both with peeps and front sights are fiber optic and a white bead. 200 grainers and 286 are preferred.

I've a 9.3x64 that Timan built for me but still have to get her rust blued...that will be a hell of a gun!

just ramblin, must of been a good day.
regards,

.

Sorry to hijack but ... Grizz I can,t wait to see pictures of your 64 .... I found a GREAT load for mine ,75 gr IMR 4350 285 gr Orynx.. avg.vel 2650 fps and I have 8 reloads on some of the brass at that load . Only a tiny trim so far ... The 64 IS AWESOME ... Mine with that load is alot more fun to shoot than my 62 was with a 285 @ 2400 fps ....

quote:

Originally posted by maddenwh:
No where did I ever say my guns were pretty. My weatherby is a vangaurd stainless synthetic submoa... essentially something I'm not afraid to get dirty. I'm not one of those folks that likes to take pictures of my guns more than use them.

I wondered if I came off a bit harsh last night and it seems I did. Sorry about that. I didn't intend to.

quote:

wondered if I came off a bit harsh last night and it seems I did

you must have just been talking to mark

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by maddenwh:
No where did I ever say my guns were pretty. My weatherby is a vangaurd stainless synthetic submoa... essentially something I'm not afraid to get dirty. I'm not one of those folks that likes to take pictures of my guns more than use them.

I wondered if I came off a bit harsh last night and it seems I did. Sorry about that. I didn't intend to.

Not at all... I was just being defensive. I don't have any knowledge about grizzly hunting whatsoever. I'm just always interested to hear from the experts. Reading books is great, but hearing direct from you all is better.

I would take my sweet shooting CZ 9.3X62 loaded with Nosler 286gr Partitions with complete confidence in the rifle and load. My confidence in myself and my guide would be the question.

quote:

Originally posted by gumboot458:
.. The trick is to NOT wound your bear but to DUMP your bear ...I didn,t know you had the 404 .. . That changes things alot ....... With the 40 plus calibers the lung shot some one related their friend got on a bear with their 300 WSM would have produced an upside down bear ,that may have got up but not like they do with the 30s. If you can shoot your 404 as well as you can your 9.3 then bring it . If you want to save the wood stock, put a synthetic on it for the hunt . . Grease the steel up like a pig and have at er... Actually I would Corrosion Block the steel and shine it up when you got home ... Lots of synthetic stocks available for the CZ. . GS HVs are availabe inb.423 . That would be the bullet for everything , but for bear especially ...Not that the factory Hornady 404 ammo would not work .. BUT ,,,,,,BROWN BEAR ARN,T ELEPHANTS ..

Actually considered putting a synthetic stock on my 9.3. I've got sort of an all purpose 35 whelen right now, but if I rig up my cz 9.3, then I won't need the Whelen.

I've got dies etc. on the way for the 404, but I did buy a box of the Hornady solids for pig fodder and brass. I assume solids aren't the best bet for grizzly.

quote:

Originally posted by maddenwh:
I'm just always interested to hear from the experts. Reading books is great, but hearing direct from you all is better.

If I read correctly I believe you infered I am an expert.

Don't ever do that again!

I was speaking generally, but I won't make that mistake again! Besides, expert is a relative term.

Reread your post too... sure wish I had a pretty walnut stock on all my rifles. Then again, I'd have to dump it before heading up to Alaska.

I assume it's the salt air and humidity that eat guns alive.

As I mentioned earlier, I have e a factory wood stock on my cz 9.3 and haven't changed it b/c I have a synthetic stock and stainless barrel on my remington 35 Whelen. It is a bit redundant to have both guns though and am considering weatherproofing the cz. I just hate to get rid of a good 35 whelen.

.. So why get rid of a good rifle ?????? Havn,t you heard of spares ?

I have not shot a big brownie, but have used the 300 wby on an interior griz and a book size black bear. Griz 80 yds blackie 35 yds. Both one shot kills.

I have a wood stock on my 1895 XLR 45-70 and have no intentions on changing it to a plastic stock. I think people make too much about wood not holding up in Alaska, as long as you take care of it you should have no issues with your wood stock.
Now if your hunting in SE Alaska, that could change things a bit, the annual rainfall down there is staggering comapred to the rest of Alaska.

I only have the experience of one brown bear hunt. 4 of us went to Alaska in 2005 and all took bears. 3 eight footers and I got lucky and took a 9 footer.

8 footer shot with 300 Win Mag 4 shots 180 grain noslers distance about 150 yards.

8 footer shot with 338 Win mag 250 grain Noslers distance about 200 yards. 5 shots

8 footer shot with 375 Weatherby 300 grain Noslers 80 yards 1 shot DRT.

All above factory loads.

9 footer shot about 40 yards 404 Jeff 400 grain Swift A Frame 2 shots. My bear I shot second time as it was going into thick alders after first shot albeit slowly. Second shot stopped it right there. Bullets loaded at about 2350 no bullets recovered.

Guides carried 338 or 375 and suggested 338 or better for clients.

All else being equal I would take the bigger caliber. I also did not want to shoot a brown bear from a long distance thus I took a 404. It is stainless with a McMillian stock so it held up well to the soggy weather.

BigB

quote:

Originally posted by M70Nut:
I have a wood stock on my 1895 XLR 45-70 and have no intentions on changing it to a plastic stock. I think people make too much about wood not holding up in Alaska,
Now if your hunting in SE Alaska, that could change things a bit, the annual rainfall down there is staggering compared to the rest of Alaska.

..
.
.
.... I like the staggering part .... .. If you seal a wood stock enough so it doesn,t soak up tons of water , you arn,t really seeing the wood , you are looking at and holding the protection of the wood which often times is plastic , so you still have a plastic stock ,yer just foolin yerself thinkin it is wood ..... Some people think there wood stock is real light weight .. Those are usually very open grain sticks of lumber that soak up moisture like a sponge ............
.
. I have seen guys miss and wound because the wood stock on their rifle swelled up and shifted poi.. I,ve seen it happen several times ... On a trophy hunt that is expensive , why bring wood ??????? Laminated stocks are great.
.
. Barnes quit making the 350 gr TSX .423 bullet . But GS Custom does make them in a little lighter weight which is even better ... Zooming out of your 404 @ 2650 fps it would be perfact for about any situation you could end up in with your bear 10 feet - 300 yards you won,t find a better , and probably not nearly as good a bullet for about anything , but brown bear especially ..