Whats the longest shot you would take on a brown bear
- Thread starter bigrich954rr
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
ricka0
Well-Known Member
You guys need to head over to the other thread where folks are championing the .284 on Griz. Having see a Jynormous Black bear charge my father with a well placed 220 gr bullet out his '06, and taking two more well placed shots to drop it [And knowing a griz is much tougher than a Blackly] – I agree the 338 is on the light side. Perhaps my 338 Lilja/Allen/RUM would be barely minimal.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> Regarding GG breaking the old African rule on dangerous game, I haven't heard of wounded ground hogs charging those shooting them and killing them or pronghorn either, hence the 40 cal min on dangerous game doesn't apply.
[/ QUOTE ] </font> </font> </font>
You have not addressed my rejection of the obsolete rule, that rejects science and current technology. Modern bullets (Like Richards or the Accubond or a host of others) have been proven far superior to any of the projectiles of the [ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> ancient/obsolete African rule
[/ QUOTE ]
[/ QUOTE ] </font> </font> </font>
Indeed the cape buffalo is far thicker skinned than the griz, and the 375 RUM has numerous anecdotes of it's efficiency dispatching the creatures.
Check out my 375 RUM v. 416 Rigby page – it clearly reveals the 375 RUM is FAR Superior to the .416 in Energy, Path and Velocity right out the tube and things only get better as time goes on.
I'd love to embed the images here in lieu of hyper-links but a bug in the forum software prevents this. You can right click the link and "Open in new window". (We all have triple monitors right? )
http://groups.msn.com/ultralongrangehunting/375rumv416rigby.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=70
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> My partner's bear took five .375's at 28 paces, all from .375's. My bear stopped like he hit an invisible wall when the 350 grain A-Frame from my .416 Rigby hit him as he came at us - the shot was at 150, he was coming like a freight train.
[/ QUOTE ] </font> </font> </font>
The trouble with anecdotes like that is they may give you a good feeling but they can not be generalized. Jackie Gleason drank like a fish, smoked like a chimney, was obese and lived into advanced age. Using his lifestyle as an anecdote, we all need to hunt less and party more.
It also suffers from the logic problem of establishing the minimum boundary. Suppose I shoot rabbit rabbits with my 50 BMG - they drop like rocks – and I declare based on my experience that the 50 BMG is the minimum for rabbit rabbits.
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> Regarding GG breaking the old African rule on dangerous game, I haven't heard of wounded ground hogs charging those shooting them and killing them or pronghorn either, hence the 40 cal min on dangerous game doesn't apply.
[/ QUOTE ] </font> </font> </font>
You have not addressed my rejection of the obsolete rule, that rejects science and current technology. Modern bullets (Like Richards or the Accubond or a host of others) have been proven far superior to any of the projectiles of the [ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> ancient/obsolete African rule
[/ QUOTE ]
[/ QUOTE ] </font> </font> </font>
Indeed the cape buffalo is far thicker skinned than the griz, and the 375 RUM has numerous anecdotes of it's efficiency dispatching the creatures.
Check out my 375 RUM v. 416 Rigby page – it clearly reveals the 375 RUM is FAR Superior to the .416 in Energy, Path and Velocity right out the tube and things only get better as time goes on.
I'd love to embed the images here in lieu of hyper-links but a bug in the forum software prevents this. You can right click the link and "Open in new window". (We all have triple monitors right? )
http://groups.msn.com/ultralongrangehunting/375rumv416rigby.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=70
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="purple"> My partner's bear took five .375's at 28 paces, all from .375's. My bear stopped like he hit an invisible wall when the 350 grain A-Frame from my .416 Rigby hit him as he came at us - the shot was at 150, he was coming like a freight train.
[/ QUOTE ] </font> </font> </font>
The trouble with anecdotes like that is they may give you a good feeling but they can not be generalized. Jackie Gleason drank like a fish, smoked like a chimney, was obese and lived into advanced age. Using his lifestyle as an anecdote, we all need to hunt less and party more.
It also suffers from the logic problem of establishing the minimum boundary. Suppose I shoot rabbit rabbits with my 50 BMG - they drop like rocks – and I declare based on my experience that the 50 BMG is the minimum for rabbit rabbits.
sniper2
Well-Known Member
Ian you are entitled to your opinion and well you have killed one more Brown than I have!I agree the 416's are great old rounds would like to own one eventually.I wouldn't
want to hunt Browns close enough to put salt on his tail by any means!!I can push a 250gr. bullet out of my .338/300 RUM 3100fps (30" tube) with free bore, just glance at the ballistics on this round and chime back with the report how inferior my round is...
want to hunt Browns close enough to put salt on his tail by any means!!I can push a 250gr. bullet out of my .338/300 RUM 3100fps (30" tube) with free bore, just glance at the ballistics on this round and chime back with the report how inferior my round is...
Ian M
Well-Known Member
Sniper2,
I know a very serious brown bear guide who believes that with the proper gear and the right shooter, bears can be taken at several hundred yards. Particularly in the spring when they are feeding on the big flats. BUT, he is also aware that the shooter will have to have one hell of a killing cartridge since a poorly placed shot means his butt has to go into the alders to find the wounded and probably peed-off bear. He is interested in the .50BMG and the .338 Lapua, and maybe someday he will actually take some guys out to kill a bear out past 800 yards.
I guess I would suggest if he does do it to have two shooters like we do with the deer culling - one primary shooter and a backup ready to let fly immediately. Would it work - no idea.
I still like the idea of an invisible brick-wall type bullet for bears, any bear for that matter. Shot placement is everything, but hitting the bruin with total devastation is a nice thing to do from the old weak wobbly knees, heart pounding through your chest point of view. I been there, one or two charges is about enough - I have had more than that with black bears, seen grizzlies charge hard but they were footsnared, saw three big brownies come hard at us during my hunt in '04. Besides the two that came for breakfast I also saw one big old bruiser react to a mouth-blown bear call - we were 150 yards from shore in a Zodiac, that big guy charged us as hard as he could but stopped at the shoreline, then herded his girlfriend into the trees. He was very vocal, very ticked-off. I was so excited I didn't even take any pictures, watched him through my binocs instead. They are ugly creatures, guess I mentioned that already.
I will try to get the OK to pop the article into this site SAP.
I know a very serious brown bear guide who believes that with the proper gear and the right shooter, bears can be taken at several hundred yards. Particularly in the spring when they are feeding on the big flats. BUT, he is also aware that the shooter will have to have one hell of a killing cartridge since a poorly placed shot means his butt has to go into the alders to find the wounded and probably peed-off bear. He is interested in the .50BMG and the .338 Lapua, and maybe someday he will actually take some guys out to kill a bear out past 800 yards.
I guess I would suggest if he does do it to have two shooters like we do with the deer culling - one primary shooter and a backup ready to let fly immediately. Would it work - no idea.
I still like the idea of an invisible brick-wall type bullet for bears, any bear for that matter. Shot placement is everything, but hitting the bruin with total devastation is a nice thing to do from the old weak wobbly knees, heart pounding through your chest point of view. I been there, one or two charges is about enough - I have had more than that with black bears, seen grizzlies charge hard but they were footsnared, saw three big brownies come hard at us during my hunt in '04. Besides the two that came for breakfast I also saw one big old bruiser react to a mouth-blown bear call - we were 150 yards from shore in a Zodiac, that big guy charged us as hard as he could but stopped at the shoreline, then herded his girlfriend into the trees. He was very vocal, very ticked-off. I was so excited I didn't even take any pictures, watched him through my binocs instead. They are ugly creatures, guess I mentioned that already.
I will try to get the OK to pop the article into this site SAP.
sniper2
Well-Known Member
I am patiently awaiting your answer about the difference between your 416's and my .338/300 RUM...
Saulg
Active Member
Treadwell was a certified nut case...the betting pool from Natural Resources was not IF he was going to get it by a bear but WHEN .
In the latest issue of Guns & Ammo, the point Cooper makes about a pistol being a good defensive weapon against bears out to 50 yds is correct, but if you shoot the bear at that range you might be charged with unlawful death of the animal...that is still a fairly safe distance to be.
What would I use on bears, nothing smaller than a 9.3 X 74 or .375 H&H. Likely the .416 Rigby or the .400 H&H. They all have the power to stop a charge and the range to push out to 300 yds
At the fishing/hunting lodge by Hudson's/James Bay we use shotguns loaded with "Bangers", shotshells that shoot an explosive sound round, whose loud noise scares the bears off quite well...we can't have handguns for protection in Canada, so I just got into the habit of carrying my .425 Westley Richards bolt gun whenever, I set foot outside the cabin.
We'll scare off about 15 Polar bears a season from the cabins, they come for the garbage dump, 2 miles upwind of the cabins. Mind you we'll scare off each one about 4 or 5 times until they get the idea that they're not wanted. We burn everything that we can, but their sense of smell is so great that if a can has a speck of something inside they'll rip it apart to get at it. We have electrical sensor wire, that gives a shock to the animal and sounds an alarm, around the perimeter of the camp, and the camp is NEVER left unattended with food in the kitchen...yes, the cook is armed with either a shotgun and a Marlin lever gun in .41 magnum or a .45/70 Gov.
Life in the wilds, ain't it grand.
We have shore lunches, with the worst of the mornings catch. After cleaning the fish (we leave everything for the gulls) by the waters edge...we will not go back to that fishing site for at least a week, until the minuscule amount of blood on the rocks is washed or licked away, because the site will still be attractive to the bears sense of smell, and you don't want to surprise a Polar bear at their feeding, unless you want to become the dessert, as that then is when they are most protective, maybe even more so than getting between a sow and her cubs. I've done the first but not the second, so I can't tell you exactly which is the stupider to do.
In the latest issue of Guns & Ammo, the point Cooper makes about a pistol being a good defensive weapon against bears out to 50 yds is correct, but if you shoot the bear at that range you might be charged with unlawful death of the animal...that is still a fairly safe distance to be.
What would I use on bears, nothing smaller than a 9.3 X 74 or .375 H&H. Likely the .416 Rigby or the .400 H&H. They all have the power to stop a charge and the range to push out to 300 yds
At the fishing/hunting lodge by Hudson's/James Bay we use shotguns loaded with "Bangers", shotshells that shoot an explosive sound round, whose loud noise scares the bears off quite well...we can't have handguns for protection in Canada, so I just got into the habit of carrying my .425 Westley Richards bolt gun whenever, I set foot outside the cabin.
We'll scare off about 15 Polar bears a season from the cabins, they come for the garbage dump, 2 miles upwind of the cabins. Mind you we'll scare off each one about 4 or 5 times until they get the idea that they're not wanted. We burn everything that we can, but their sense of smell is so great that if a can has a speck of something inside they'll rip it apart to get at it. We have electrical sensor wire, that gives a shock to the animal and sounds an alarm, around the perimeter of the camp, and the camp is NEVER left unattended with food in the kitchen...yes, the cook is armed with either a shotgun and a Marlin lever gun in .41 magnum or a .45/70 Gov.
Life in the wilds, ain't it grand.
We have shore lunches, with the worst of the mornings catch. After cleaning the fish (we leave everything for the gulls) by the waters edge...we will not go back to that fishing site for at least a week, until the minuscule amount of blood on the rocks is washed or licked away, because the site will still be attractive to the bears sense of smell, and you don't want to surprise a Polar bear at their feeding, unless you want to become the dessert, as that then is when they are most protective, maybe even more so than getting between a sow and her cubs. I've done the first but not the second, so I can't tell you exactly which is the stupider to do.
Saulg
Active Member
Treadwell was a certified nut case...the betting pool from Natural Resources was not IF he was going to get it by a bear but WHEN .
What would I use on bears, nothing smaller than a 9.3 X 74 or .375 H&H. Likely the .416 Rigby or the .400 H&H. They all have the power to stop a charge and the range to push out to 300 yds
At the fishing/hunting lodge by Hudson's/James Bay we use shotguns loaded with "Bangers", shotshells that shoot an explosive sound round, whose loud noise scares the bears off quite well
We can't have handguns for protection or hunting in Canada, so I just got into the habit of carrying my .425 Westley Richards bolt gun whenever, I set foot outside the cabin. We are getting a used .375 Scoville Hawk built on a 1894 Winchester lever gun and that will probably be my walking around gun. Lighter than the .425 and might have a faster second shot, will have to test them.
We'll scare off about 15 Polar bears a season from the cabins, they come for the garbage dump, 2 miles upwind of the cabins. Mind you we'll scare off each one about 4 or 5 times until they get the idea that they're not wanted. We burn everything that we can, but their sense of smell is so great that if a can has a speck of something inside they'll rip it apart to get at it.
We have electrical sensor wire, that gives a shock to the animal and at the same time sounds an alarm, around the perimeter of the camp, and the camp is NEVER left unattended with food in the kitchen...yes, the cook is armed with either a shotgun and a Marlin lever gun in .41 magnum or in .45/70 Gov.
Life in the wilds, ain't it grand.
We have shore lunches, with the worst of the mornings catch. After cleaning the fish (we leave everything for the gulls) by the waters edge...we will not go back to that fishing site for at least a week, until the minuscule amount of blood on the rocks is washed or licked away, because the site will still be attractive to the bears sense of smell, and you don't want to surprise a Polar bear at their feeding, unless you want to become the dessert, as that then is when they are most protective, maybe even more so than getting between a sow and her cubs. I've done the first but not the second, so I can't tell you exactly which is the stupider to do.
What would I use on bears, nothing smaller than a 9.3 X 74 or .375 H&H. Likely the .416 Rigby or the .400 H&H. They all have the power to stop a charge and the range to push out to 300 yds
At the fishing/hunting lodge by Hudson's/James Bay we use shotguns loaded with "Bangers", shotshells that shoot an explosive sound round, whose loud noise scares the bears off quite well
We can't have handguns for protection or hunting in Canada, so I just got into the habit of carrying my .425 Westley Richards bolt gun whenever, I set foot outside the cabin. We are getting a used .375 Scoville Hawk built on a 1894 Winchester lever gun and that will probably be my walking around gun. Lighter than the .425 and might have a faster second shot, will have to test them.
We'll scare off about 15 Polar bears a season from the cabins, they come for the garbage dump, 2 miles upwind of the cabins. Mind you we'll scare off each one about 4 or 5 times until they get the idea that they're not wanted. We burn everything that we can, but their sense of smell is so great that if a can has a speck of something inside they'll rip it apart to get at it.
We have electrical sensor wire, that gives a shock to the animal and at the same time sounds an alarm, around the perimeter of the camp, and the camp is NEVER left unattended with food in the kitchen...yes, the cook is armed with either a shotgun and a Marlin lever gun in .41 magnum or in .45/70 Gov.
Life in the wilds, ain't it grand.
We have shore lunches, with the worst of the mornings catch. After cleaning the fish (we leave everything for the gulls) by the waters edge...we will not go back to that fishing site for at least a week, until the minuscule amount of blood on the rocks is washed or licked away, because the site will still be attractive to the bears sense of smell, and you don't want to surprise a Polar bear at their feeding, unless you want to become the dessert, as that then is when they are most protective, maybe even more so than getting between a sow and her cubs. I've done the first but not the second, so I can't tell you exactly which is the stupider to do.
Ian M
Well-Known Member
Sniper2,
Sorry about that, blew right by me. Bottom line for me is that I do not know diddly about your .338 cartridge but I expect it would do a fine job. I mentioned that the guide is thinking .338 Lapua or .50BMG, those are the biggest cartridges he knows of. He is confident that either cartridge, particularly the .50 will do the job.
As for comparing a hot .338 with a 300 grain bullet vs a 350 A-Frame out of my .416 Rigby, all I know is that the RIgby did a heck of a job the one time I fired it at a big bear. After that experience for some weird reason I have no interest in a fast bullet, I want a slammer. I have no doubt that your .338 cartridge will do a fine job - a lot of guys hunt bears with much smaller cartridges than the .338 or .416 with confidence.
At one point I thought that blasting a big bear from several hundred yards makes sense - after my trip that interest went away. Good luck with your plans to hunt a big bear with your rifle, no doubt it will work great.
Sorry about that, blew right by me. Bottom line for me is that I do not know diddly about your .338 cartridge but I expect it would do a fine job. I mentioned that the guide is thinking .338 Lapua or .50BMG, those are the biggest cartridges he knows of. He is confident that either cartridge, particularly the .50 will do the job.
As for comparing a hot .338 with a 300 grain bullet vs a 350 A-Frame out of my .416 Rigby, all I know is that the RIgby did a heck of a job the one time I fired it at a big bear. After that experience for some weird reason I have no interest in a fast bullet, I want a slammer. I have no doubt that your .338 cartridge will do a fine job - a lot of guys hunt bears with much smaller cartridges than the .338 or .416 with confidence.
At one point I thought that blasting a big bear from several hundred yards makes sense - after my trip that interest went away. Good luck with your plans to hunt a big bear with your rifle, no doubt it will work great.
It's mounted 9'6" on all four feet walking towards us. chest shot 458 win mag 26 inch barrel 510 grain round nose soft point. Chest shot and blew out the butt cheek. Shut it down. Same gun and 510 round, big bull African Elephant forhead shot dead. The modern african big five all dropped in one shot. We considered 500 solids for Cape buffalo. It didn't matter. I've got a friend with a 458 Lott or the other guy with the 460 Weatherby. At some point it doesn't matter. I own a .458 American also.
I really think that the best guns are the 416's. They are legal for all african animals.
Really unless your out on kodiak island or some coast or maybe on a river you don't have to take a long shot. I never want to wound an animal and it run off and die. I have a buddy that used his .338 lapua and got a big brown at 400 stepped off. They have the video. Classic heart lung broad side. 275 gr
I really think that the best guns are the 416's. They are legal for all african animals.
Really unless your out on kodiak island or some coast or maybe on a river you don't have to take a long shot. I never want to wound an animal and it run off and die. I have a buddy that used his .338 lapua and got a big brown at 400 stepped off. They have the video. Classic heart lung broad side. 275 gr
sniper2
Well-Known Member
Ian I do not know how fast you push the 350 A frame but a couple of my ballistics programs say at 2500fps it will produce 4856 ft/lb energy at the muzzle. My .338/300 pushing
a 300gr Barnes at 3050 will produce 6196 ft/lb energy at the muzzle.To be fair I ran the ballistics on the .416Wby
with 400gr Hornady at 2720 fps and the energy was 6570 ft/lb
at the muzzle.All these rounds should be effective on large animals anywhere.Having said this I have the utmost respect for you shooting the Brown at such close quarters and look forward to reading your story.
a 300gr Barnes at 3050 will produce 6196 ft/lb energy at the muzzle.To be fair I ran the ballistics on the .416Wby
with 400gr Hornady at 2720 fps and the energy was 6570 ft/lb
at the muzzle.All these rounds should be effective on large animals anywhere.Having said this I have the utmost respect for you shooting the Brown at such close quarters and look forward to reading your story.
Do not put you eggs in the energy basket there is no substitutes for frontal area [bore diameter]and penetration on large and dangerous game Martin Fackler of the Army Wound Ballistics Lab list foot pounds of energy as meaningless and the only two factors that are of importance and inorder of importance is 1-penetration and 2-size of the permeant wound channel.A 4 bore Elephant rifle of yester year had more muzzle energy than what is used today but because of the soft lead projectile its penetration was limited and its effectivness was not as good as what is used today with far less energy.I have shot the big bears and a 338 bore is certainly adaquate with proper bullets but no matter the energy it is still no 416
sniper2
Well-Known Member
Then you are saying that the .45 Long Colt would be better bear medicine (.452 dia) over a partition or other high quality bullet coming out of a .338 with ample energy to penetrate and generate wound channel damage, since energy is
meaningless.I have a question for you and Mr.Fackler, what causes a projectile to have the ability to penetrate an object??? I do like the ballistics of the 416 WBY...
meaningless.I have a question for you and Mr.Fackler, what causes a projectile to have the ability to penetrate an object??? I do like the ballistics of the 416 WBY...
lerch
<strong>SPONSOR</strong>
Doesn't energy equal penetration??
