Terminal ballistics for large bears

[arthury]

In a defensive situation against very large bears in the northern woods (like interior and coastal grizzlies), some tend to think that a different type of terminal ballistics is required.

Having conversed with people in Alaska, it appears that bullets which can penetrate deeper through sinewy bears with thick bones; especially, their skulls would give the human a higher chance of survival than expending ones during a close range encounter. The ones that are recommended again and again are the hard cast ones. The intent is to provide deep penetration and break bones if the bullet meets with the bones.

I guess we have to take into consideration that these components in a large bear is vastly different from a human:

1. thickness of skin vs the thin skin humans
2. thicker and stronger muscles
3. stronger and harder bones
4. thicker trunk
5. skull that has a much thicker frontal area and it is angled to provide a deflective plate

Has anyone studied and provided any data for this? I think it is very useful for fisherman, hunters, hikers and photographers working in the woods.

[ICANHITHIMMAN]

In a defensive situation against very large bears in the northern woods (like interior and coastal grizzlies), some tend to think that a different type of terminal ballistics is required.

Having conversed with people in Alaska, it appears that bullets which can penetrate deeper through sinewy bears with thick bones; especially, their skulls would give the human a higher chance of survival than expending ones during a close range encounter. The ones that are recommended again and again are the hard cast ones. The intent is to provide deep penetration and break bones if the bullet meets with the bones.

I guess we have to take into consideration that these components in a large bear is vastly different from a human:

1. thickness of skin vs the thin skin humans
2. thicker and stronger muscles
3. stronger and harder bones
4. thicker trunk
5. skull that has a much thicker frontal area and it is angled to provide a deflective plate

Has anyone studied and provided any data for this? I think it is very useful for fisherman, hunters, hikers and photographers working in the woods.

I have seen it discussed on other fourms. The discussions always turn to a bullet like the TSX,solids or swift Aframe in a very large bore or a shotgun.

[Failure2Stop]

Moved to hunting

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[LOBO]

Garrett Cartridges .45-70 loads using hardcast bullets out of Marlin Guide Guns have accounted for more than their share of large bears, and African dangerous game.

http://www.garrettcartridges.com/4570540tech.html

http://www.garrettcartridges.com/chamberpressure.html

[arthury]

Garrett Cartridges .45-70 loads using hardcast bullets out of Marlin Guide Guns have accounted for more than their share of large bears, and African dangerous game.

http://www.garrettcartridges.com/4570540tech.html

http://www.garrettcartridges.com/chamberpressure.html

Yes, I am familiar with Garrett's ammo and his articles. That's was my starting point after I read his articles.
One thing I am not understanding is that his idea is to make the rounds go through the large cape buffalo, bear, or whatever instead of allowing the round to dissipate all of its energy into the animal. There is even a cape buffalo that was shot under its chin and the bullet passed thru the animals and exited from the rear if read the safari stories in his website.
That seem to run contrary to the way we understand when we're discussing antipersonnel ammo.

I understand that his intention is to break bones when the bullet meets with bones but isn't good for the bullet to be unstable (i.e. tumble) after it passes the thick skin and fat layers?

Any thots?

[glocktogo]

Yes, I am familiar with Garrett's ammo and his articles. That's was my starting point after I read his articles.
One thing I am not understanding is that his idea is to make the rounds go through the large cape buffalo, bear, or whatever instead of allowing the round to dissipate all of its energy into the animal. There is even a cape buffalo that was shot under its chin and the bullet passed thru the animals and exited from the rear if read the safari stories in his website.
That seem to run contrary to the way we understand when we're discussing antipersonnel ammo.

I understand that his intention is to break bones when the bullet meets with bones but isn't good for the bullet to be unstable (i.e. tumble) after it passes the thick skin and fat layers?

Any thots?

Any bullet designed to expand or tumble after impact would possibly fail to penetrate deep enough to damage the vitals. keep in mind that ammo designed for large dangerous game is engineered for two things that happen to go together. When confronted with an attacking animal, you're not going to have an optimal shot. Your bullet may need to penetrate a lot of non-critical shin, bone and muscle before getting to the vitals. You can't afford a failure. Even when taking optimal shots as a hunter, you want through and through penetration. This gives a greater opportunity for pneumothorax and hemothorax to stop the game, and it makes tracking blood trails easier.

Heavy, hard cast bullets with a flat nose profile are going to do the most damage while managing full penetration on bear sized game. Rounds like Buffalo Bore 45-70 and Brenneke slugs in a 12ga are favored by bush guides for this reason.

[anthony1]

In a "defensive" encounter with a large bear your gonna need luck more than any specific bullet type.

[Denali]

I was born, and have lived most of my 52 years in Alaska, these bear bullet threads are just to ridiculous to be taken seriously. We have a word for the type of person, who is always looking for the magic bullet with which to kill the death ninja bears that are coming under cover of darkness for them, we refer to them as "cheechakos!"

You don't need a study of terminal ballistics for charging bear, you are not going to be shooting a charging bear while fishing, hiking, or wrapped up in your sleeping bag, if you are being charged by an Alaskan brown/grizzly, you are either going to be thanking God it was a false charge(99,999%), or you are going to get mauled, and as a consequence your bullet selection will be largely meaningless, because you will be(if physically able)shooting at contact distance.......You want some sage advice? Invest in bear spray, use common sense n bear country, and stay out of the way of the charging moose...

[DDM4LV1]

I was born, and have lived most of my 52 years in Alaska, these bear bullet threads are just to ridiculous to be taken seriously. We have a word for the type of person, who is always looking for the magic bullet with which to kill the death ninja bears that are coming under cover of darkness for them, we refer to them as "cheechakos!"

You don't need a study of terminal ballistics for charging bear, you are not going to be shooting a charging bear while fishing, hiking, or wrapped up in your sleeping bag, if you are being charged by an Alaskan brown/grizzly, you are either going to be thanking God it was a false charge(99,999%), or you are going to get mauled, and as a consequence your bullet selection will be largely meaningless, because you will be(if physically able)shooting at contact distance.......You want some sage advice? Invest in bear spray, use common sense n bear country, and stay out of the way of the charging moose...

personally, I am in the "camp" that does not want to risk finding out if it is gonna be a "bluff'...are you serious, maybe those who live in and amongst them can report that most are, who wants to wait until the last minute to find out...OK, bear standing at a distance looking aggressive, "popping" jaw and the like , rearing up...one thing...but once it makes tracks towards me & mine...fire away, bluff or not.

[Ridgerunner665]

I've never dealt with grizzlies...but I've been around blackies all my life.

I did find this somewhat amuzing though and thought I'd share it...it kinda goes along with some of the comments above.