How Big a gun do you need to take down a angry Grizzly?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not interested in anecdotal evidence.
 
If I was worried about a charge I would use a 12 gauge. 338 doesnt give you anything on a angry grizz that a 30-06 dont. Even a 375, the hole diameter difference is miniscule. A 308/270 will penetrate the same as the others on grizz. 308 is the most accurate gun around.

If your such a bitch you need a howitzer to hang in the woods I woulda enjoyed ass raping your family in front of your face before scalping your bitch ass back in the day. They been killing brownies up in alaska with 30-06 for a 100 years you dumb fuck! What do you suppose a 308 wont do a 30-06 does? You ever wonder why all rifle matchs are won with 308s???????? Its not cause their all abunch of ***s compared to your bitch ass, I guarantee you that.



Ok,, that was unexpected,, well not quite,, it is Sherdog.. Im not going to address the language but I will point you toward a "basic" site that explains what hydrostatic shock is.. Now before you read this please keep in mind Im referring you to this site so you can see how energy = mass x acelleration.. The energy produced by a magnum is what im saying is needed to improve killing power.. Weather its pushing a 180gr bullet 3400fps or a 300gr at 2350fps,,,

The faster you push mass the nastier the damage.. NOT sectional density..

heres one on stopping power.
Stopping power - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Enjoy
 
Ok,, that was unexpected,, well not quite,, it is Sherdog.. Im not going to address the language but I will point you toward a "basic" site that explains what hydrostatic shock is.. Now before you read this please keep in mind Im referring you to this site so you can see how energy = mass x acelleration.. The energy produced by a magnum is what im saying is needed to improve killing power.. Weather its pushing a 180gr bullet 3400fps or a 300gr at 2350fps,,,

The faster you push mass the nastier the damage.. NOT sectional density..

heres one on stopping power.
Stopping power - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Enjoy

Call me a skeptic but scientificiously speaking I'm not convinced. I'm pretty sure hurling a large rock would do more damage than a puny little bullet.
 
Ok,, that was unexpected,, well not quite,, it is Sherdog.. Im not going to address the language but I will point you toward a "basic" site that explains what hydrostatic shock is.. Now before you read this please keep in mind Im referring you to this site so you can see how energy = mass x acelleration.. The energy produced by a magnum is what im saying is needed to improve killing power.. Weather its pushing a 180gr bullet 3400fps or a 300gr at 2350fps,,,

The faster you push mass the nastier the damage.. NOT sectional density..

heres one on stopping power.
Stopping power - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Enjoy



I think you guys are wrong about energy transfer, it even says its highly skeptical in that wiki source. The FBI doesnt believe in energy transfer.

killing comes down to penetration and bullet hole size.

Ill have to refrain digging up more sources till after next week as Im crippled by last week of school. Go over to glock talk caliber corner and most any wounding factor has been discused at length. LAter

Acroding to FBI:
Mechanics of Projectile Wounding
In order to predict the likelihood of incapacitation with any round, an understanding of the mechanics of wounding is necessary. There are four components of projectile wounding.6 not all of these components relate to incapacitation, but each of them must be considered. They are:
(1) Penetration. The tissue through which the projectile passes, and which it disrupts or destroys.
(2) Permanent Cavity. The volume of space once occupied by tissue that has been destroyed by the passage of the projectile. This is a function of penetration and the frontal area of the projectile. Quite simply, it is the hole left by the passage of the bullet.
(3) Temporary Cavity. The expansion of the permanent cavity by stretching due to the transfer of kinetic energy during the projectile's passage.
(4) Fragmentation. Projectile pieces or secondary fragments of bone which are impelled outward from the permanent cavity and may sever muscle tissues, blood vessels, etc., apart from the permanent cavity.7,8 Fragmentation is not necessarily present in every projectile wound. It may, or may not, occur and can be considered a secondary effect.9
Projectiles incapacitate by damaging or destroying the central nervous system, or by causing lethal blood loss. To the extent the wound components cause or increase the effects of these two mechanisms, the likelihood of incapacitation increases. Because of the impracticality of training for head shots, this examination of wounding relative to law enforcement use is focused upon torso wounds and the probable results.
 
See what you guys made me do? Fucking around here on the sherdog again!!!
Seriously though, the more you guys look into energy transfers and other wounding characteristics outside penetration and bullet hole PERMANENT cavity, you see how often the shit gets debunked. Martin Fakler is also the man on this subject. A surgeon that studies all sorts of gunshot wounds back in nam. Most people dont even like hydrostatic shok claims and hardly allow bullet pressure wave, its not even close to proven, only holes, penetration and vital hits!

Terminal Ballistics

Terminal Ballistics
 
redneck.jpg


this big
 
I think you guys are wrong about energy transfer, it even says its highly skeptical in that wiki source. The FBI doesnt believe in energy transfer.

killing comes down to penetration and bullet hole size.

Ill have to refrain digging up more sources till after next week as Im crippled by last week of school. Go over to glock talk caliber corner and most any wounding factor has been discused at length. LAter

Acroding to FBI:
Mechanics of Projectile Wounding
In order to predict the likelihood of incapacitation with any round, an understanding of the mechanics of wounding is necessary. There are four components of projectile wounding.6 not all of these components relate to incapacitation, but each of them must be considered. They are:
(1) Penetration. The tissue through which the projectile passes, and which it disrupts or destroys.
(2) Permanent Cavity. The volume of space once occupied by tissue that has been destroyed by the passage of the projectile. This is a function of penetration and the frontal area of the projectile. Quite simply, it is the hole left by the passage of the bullet.
(3) Temporary Cavity. The expansion of the permanent cavity by stretching due to the transfer of kinetic energy during the projectile's passage.
(4) Fragmentation. Projectile pieces or secondary fragments of bone which are impelled outward from the permanent cavity and may sever muscle tissues, blood vessels, etc., apart from the permanent cavity.7,8 Fragmentation is not necessarily present in every projectile wound. It may, or may not, occur and can be considered a secondary effect.9
Projectiles incapacitate by damaging or destroying the central nervous system, or by causing lethal blood loss. To the extent the wound components cause or increase the effects of these two mechanisms, the likelihood of incapacitation increases. Because of the impracticality of training for head shots, this examination of wounding relative to law enforcement use is focused upon torso wounds and the probable results.


I went to glock talk as you suggested and found this thread.
New evidence of hydrostatic shock? - Glock Talk

Im not going to pull the parts out that support my way of thinking.. They have a very good discussion going on there,, with the poster named English addressing all questions better than I ever could...

Something I wanted to throw into their conversation but didnt want to create an account just to ask was the vacuum bullets create and how it effects pressure.. I think a great way of illustrating this is a tank that has been shot with a sabot round.. Most of the crew gets sucked out the exit hole.
 
I went to glock talk as you suggested and found this thread.
New evidence of hydrostatic shock? - Glock Talk

Im not going to pull the parts out that support my way of thinking.. They have a very good discussion going on there,, with the poster named English addressing all questions better than I ever could...

Something I wanted to throw into their conversation but didnt want to create an account just to ask was the vacuum bullets create and how it effects pressure.. I think a great way of illustrating this is a tank that has been shot with a sabot round.. Most of the crew gets sucked out the exit hole.

I think if hydrostatic shock were to work it creates a wave (that cant be measured) and disrupts blood vessels and eventually CNS. Were talking about a wave in soft tissue/bone/dense connective tissue and all sorts of tissues of differeng tuffness. Its VERY questionable but they do debate it. KE does do damage I just dont think it does measurable death damage.

The importance of this is that we all know bullet diameter and penetration DEFINETELY kill!

338 lapua and such are excellent long rang killers and very accurate. The cost of ammo is extremely prohibitive. When your talking wacky 375HH and other big bore africa calibers your talking about 4,5 dollar and up for EACH round! Fuck that, only folks messing around with that shit are loaded. Its not the guys carrying around cheap 270s and 30-06 in the back bush of alaska that kill brownies all the time.

On a 10-25,ooo dollar safari, I can see those guides "requireing" a big special gun on their big special 25,000 hunt. Even though, alaska fish and game, on their own site, say a 270 or 308 well placed is more than enough to get the job done. Ive looked at enough penetration studies to know for certain the 308 and 270 will go through tons of shit and come out the other side. If you hit center of mass (heart and pericardial lung area), that eventually goes on to bust up the spine, animals gonna drop. Well placed shots happen with practice and knowing your rifle. Maybe its possible to make good shots with buffalo bores and im sure rich guys can, but regular joes been smoking african and alaskan animals of all sorts for a 100 years with medium bore...
 
I have been to the Alaskan Wilderness a few times for the specific purpose of observing bears in the wild, including the grizzly. Bear safety is a big deal out there. You get a lot of anecdotes. Generally bear safety conists of literally yelling "HEY BEAR" while you walk on the path so you don't walk up and surprise the bear, because thats likely to prompt an attack. It also teaches you how black bears eat carrion so if you play dead it'll still eat you, while grizzly will maul you a little to make sure and then leave you alone.

That being said, I read this in a book - so I take it with a bit more trust than some crazy alaskans story. It told a few stories - about how black bears if they aren't starving are kind of little-bitches, and you can hit them and frighten them off enough to get away. But then it came to how hard it is to actually kill a large grizzly by shooting.

The book described a hunter who shot a bear with a .458 caliber rifle. The bear ran off. He knew it would bleed out so he followed it. The blood stain details elude me, but basically the trail of blood was big. It was a significant smear from a large gun. How far did the bear get? Try four miles.

Then he found the bear, still alive, semi-comatose. So the answer is that you can shoot a bear with something thats pretty close to a .50 caliber rifle and it has enough life in it to run for four miles and not die for awhile yet. Don't fuck with bears.

Also, speaking to the fact that I've seen bears at a distance on less than 6 feet without caging (but on a raised observation deck), and about 100 meters (unfortunately) on the ground, during these two trips - let me tell you this. You realize instantly that if the bear is starving, and decides to fucking kill you; its over. A juvenile is an insanely monstrous beast that embodies hunger and consumption. Really a sort of powerful experience.
 
I have been to the Alaskan Wilderness a few times for the specific purpose of observing bears in the wild, including the grizzly. Bear safety is a big deal out there. You get a lot of anecdotes. Generally bear safety conists of literally yelling "HEY BEAR" while you walk on the path so you don't walk up and surprise the bear, because thats likely to prompt an attack. It also teaches you how black bears eat carrion so if you play dead it'll still eat you, while grizzly will maul you a little to make sure and then leave you alone.

That being said, I read this in a book - so I take it with a bit more trust than some crazy alaskans story. It told a few stories - about how black bears if they aren't starving are kind of little-bitches, and you can hit them and frighten them off enough to get away. But then it came to how hard it is to actually kill a large grizzly by shooting.

The book described a hunter who shot a bear with a .458 caliber rifle. The bear ran off. He knew it would bleed out so he followed it. The blood stain details elude me, but basically the trail of blood was big. It was a significant smear from a large gun. How far did the bear get? Try four miles.

Then he found the bear, still alive, semi-comatose. So the answer is that you can shoot a bear with something thats pretty close to a .50 caliber rifle and it has enough life in it to run for four miles and not die for awhile yet. Don't fuck with bears.

Also, speaking to the fact that I've seen bears at a distance on less than 6 feet without caging (but on a raised observation deck), and about 100 meters (unfortunately) on the ground, during these two trips - let me tell you this. You realize instantly that if the bear is starving, and decides to fucking kill you; its over. A juvenile is an insanely monstrous beast that embodies hunger and consumption. Really a sort of powerful experience.

Oh I agree, internet grizzley bears are the meanest nastiest creatures alive. 50 cal bullet dont faze them, 30-06 will just bounce of their skulls, etc...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top