You've probably never seen the Ruger Alaskan in .454 Casull.Quote:
Originally Posted by 68Charger
This thing would put away a rhino.
http://www.shootingtimes.com/handgun_reviews/rgrRH/
Printable View
You've probably never seen the Ruger Alaskan in .454 Casull.Quote:
Originally Posted by 68Charger
This thing would put away a rhino.
http://www.shootingtimes.com/handgun_reviews/rgrRH/
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamhunter
Paul at the Thornton Gander Mountain has to wipe my drool off of the case every time I go in there.
That is a Motherfucking Cannon.
I still don't think I'd trust anything short of a howitzer against a charging Alaskan Grizz. If it is intent on killing you, you probably aren't going to make it no matter what you have, but it would be enough for some hope.Quote:
Originally Posted by iamhunter
Honestly if I ever find myself face to face with a bear I'm going to feel undergunned with anything less than a 7mm Mag ... and probably going to wish I had a Ma Duce.
That said, .357mag should be fine for 99.9% of your backwoods needs (frankly the limit of 6 or so shots will be a bit of a determent if you find some "free range weed farmers" which are a greater threat than bears or cougars.)
I have a S&W 29-2 that I keep telling myself I need to prep for backwoods, but honestly unless I'm going way deep into the woods where I feel the chances of meeting a bear are greater I'll probably stick with my .40 in the woods.
For cougars, feral dogs or feral humans it'll do the trick.
seen it, never shot one.. also have handled a .500 S&W..Quote:
Originally Posted by iamhunter
Basically any handgun powerful enough, recovery time is too long..
I knew someone that was charged by a Grizzly near Juneau, emptied a .44 Magnum into the bear, he survived- but said he'd never use a handgun as his 1st choice again, he felt very lucky to have survived.
This is an extreme example: http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/g/giantbear.htm
that example has been exaggerated in other stories.. but even the Moose in this territory can be very dangerous.. I've seen bull Moose you could park a VW bug under! Normally docile, under bad circumstances they kick in all directions & their hooves are massive.
you could go for months up there and never be forced to defend yourself- but if you are forced- I'd rather have something better than a handgun.. That Ruger Alaskan is better than pepper spray, tho [Coffee]
Zundfolge has it right- around here, your worst threat you could ever face is one that will shoot back...
My dad shot a massive bull moose in canada with a .300 win mag shooting 220gr handloads. Dropped it at 100yds. Waited 15-20 mins and started walking up to it. Moose got back up from the dead and started charging. Took 6 more shots all in the heart and lungs. Finally dropped again 10 yds away and was still "alive". Pops is very lucky to be alive, still carries a bullet he dug out of his heart on his keychain.Quote:
Originally Posted by 68Charger
I would not feel undergunned with a .357, but my ideal wilderness sidearm is a Glock 20.
If what's after me survives 15 rounds of 10mm, then I'll draw my blade and start humming my death song.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 68Charger
No doubt. My fiance grew up in Nome, Alaska and some of the stories are scary to say the least.
I've known some wildlife photographers who shoot up there and they usually travel with a partner, who's sole purpose is to carry around a high power rifle.
BUT for your day-to-day protection against wildlife, including grizzlies, I think the Ruger Alaskan is probably your best bet.
It's not exactly a practical to go on a day hike with a .338 Lapua Remington 700 slung across your back :p
They're here. I've run into large black bear on the trail, mama/cubs, and a mature mountain lion looking up a rocky outcrop at me.Quote:
Originally Posted by DD977GM2
I never owned a .357 Magnum and carry a 1911. I've never felt the need to draw it in the backcountry.
No, but probably a fair bit of fun. [M2]Quote:
Originally Posted by iamhunter