Canada searches for next Polar Bear gun

[xl_target]

Personally, I'd feel under gunned using a .303 (or a .308) against an animal that large.
A 12 gauge with slugs, absolutely... and in cold weather like that, I want a pump.
A bazooka would be better

However, those boys have successfully been using the .303 for many years and one hopes they know what they are doing.

[Hammerhead]

So basically a Polar Bear hunting rifle , a bit shiny an little expensive . How many in mags ? 10 May be .

[xl_target]

The Sako T3 CTR has a 10 round magazine.

Quite a bit different from your Polar Bear rifle, eh Haji?

[kshitij]

Just out of curiosity, are any handguns effective against an animal that size? Something like the 10mm Glock 20?

Added in 11 minutes 46 seconds:
Did some reading up on the glock20. Sharing a part of the article,
"As an open carry gun, the G20 has a loyal following among outdoorsmen as a good defensive weapon against all sorts of two and four-legged creatures. So much so that Denmark outfits their Sirius Patrols in Greenland with the G20 to defend against polar bears.

And that, my friends, is where the G20 has found its niche: as an uber-reliable gun that can take any abuse you throw at it while shooting a hard-hitting round that will incapacitate large angry targets in a hurry. The G20 in 10mm isn’t entirely suitable for urban conflict (unless it is), but it’s the perfect hiking companion."

Reading a couple of review on this particular hand gun is almost making me change my loyalty from the glock21 to the glock20

[xl_target]

Kshitij, It is not my intention to make light of your post but you really have to take what you read on the Internet with a grain of salt.
People talk about 10mm like it is the equivalent of a nuclear bomb. "You just point it at the bear and pull the trigger and instant bearskin rug for your fireplace".
Unlike a lot of articles you will read from Fanboi's on the Internets, the 10mm is really nothing special.

So much so that Denmark outfits their Sirius Patrols in Greenland with the G20 to defend against polar bears.

quote from here
The author makes it sound like that is their only weapon. Really, they don't have rifles? Poor guys!

According to Wikipedia:

The weapons carried also reflect the harsh conditions. Among the equipment used by the Sirius Sledge Patrol is the M1917 Enfield bolt-action rifle chambered in .30-06 Springfield, known in Danish service as the Gevær M/53 (17), and the Glock 20 pistol chambered in 10mm Auto.

The reason for changing their sidearm is their previous Pistol M/49 sidearms chambered in 9×19mm Parabellum proved insufficient against the polar bears encountered.[9]

Hmmm! Really?


Lets look at some numbers.
A standard 10mm 200 gr. bullet has a muzzle energy figure of 490 ft-lbs.

In comparison:
A 44 magnum 240 grain bullet produces a muzzle energy figure of 767 ft-lbs
A .357 magnum with a 158 gr bullet produces 548 ft-lbs of energy.
.357 Sig with a 125 gr. bullet puts out 506 ft-lbs of m.e.
.40 S&W with a 155 grain bullet puts out 475 ft-lbs.
A 45 ACP with a 230 gr bullet puts out 365 ft-lbs.
a 9mm Luger cartridge with a 115 grain bullet puts out 335 ft-lbs of muzzle energy.

The above results will vary with the load. Obviously, more powerful loads will produce more muzzle energy. I'm trying to keep it at SAAMI specs.
Terminal performance will depend on the bullet shape and construction.

Now lets look at rifle ballistics.
The .303 British round with a 168 gr bullet will put out about 2406 ft-lbs of m.e.
The .308 Winchester round with a 180 gr bullet will put out 2640 ft-lbs of m.e.
Even the lowly .223 Remington will put out 1282 ft-lbs with a 55 grain projectile.

So you can see that as far as muzzle energy goes, handguns suck compared to a rifle.

Full disclosure, I've never seen a Polar Bear in the wild, only in a zoo. I've also never shot at any bear, so I have zero hunting experience on bears, much less a monster like a Polar Bear.

[aadhaulya]

I just love it when some one talks about a .308 and 30.06 as I have read in some places that the 30.06 is slightly more powerful than the .308. I feel happy that my decision of buying a 30.06 was a good one even though the rifle was more expensive than the .315 and the ammo for 30.06 is very very expensive in India.

Atul

[ckkalyan]

Bear Guns...

This one says it all - I think!?



Or slightly more seriously and specifically Polar - The Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan Toklat .454 Casull by hickok45

[Commonwealth_of_PA]

Yeah, that G20 is a sidearm, last resort.

People do carry large handguns in Alaska if they are fishing or working and will not have a rifle (or 12 gauge) on them all the time. But my experience is Grizzly territory, not Polar Bear. I'm sure Two Rivers has an opinion on such things.

Here is an interesting article:

https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l ... list&c=108

He seems to make a lot of sense, but he is a bullet salesman so take it with a grain of salt. He sells deeply penetrating bullets for typical self defense guns to be used as a last resort against bears for people that do not have "sufficient" handguns. Pay less attention to what he says people could get away with using, and more attention to what he actually carries and uses himself. When he goes out there he brings enough gun for the job.

[xl_target]

I think it was last year that we had a story about a young guy in Alaska who killed a bear with 5.45X39 ammo.
Of course, with the AK74's 30 round magazines, he had a lot of those little steel cored pills. Then there is a well documented story set in Northern MN of a lady who killed a black bear with a pistol, in .22 short, by shooting it through the ear.

That shouldn't be taken to mean that the 5.45X39 or the .22 short is a viable bear cartridge.

It would definitely be interesting to hear what Walt has to say about bear medicine in different parts of Alaska.

[TwoRivers]

Whatever you are carrying at the time when surprised by a bear. With bears varying in weight from around 250 pounds for an arctic grizzly, to 1000 pounds or so for a south-eastern brownie, it should be obvious that what will easily do for the one, won't be ideal for the other.

Before going into cartridge recommendations, I'd like to emphasize 1. bullet placement, 2. bullet performance, 3. caliber

Alaska natives traditionally have used calibers that would be considered inadequate by non-native hunters. The .22RF (I can't vouch for any polar bear ever killed with one, but have handled a big polar bear skull with a .22 Short RF bullet imbedded in the upper palate.), the .22 Hornet, .25-20 WCF, .25-35, and then the .222 Remington where popular calibers, with an occasional .30-40 Krag. The fairly rare "big bore" was a .30-30 Winchester. But the hunters usually did not go after bear, but hunted seals and caribou, while not passing up the occasional bear. At the same time the .33 WCF, the .35 WCF and .405 WCF were popular calibers among non-natives. So was the .348 WCF later on.

Those who went after polar bear hunted with their (sled)dogs. The dogs would keep the bear busy and at bay, allowing the hunter to pick his shot. In the 1970's there still were three elderly brothers in the small coastal village of Wainwright who hunted in the traditional way. They all used the .220 Swift and specialized in head shots. Those bullets totally shattered the brain case of the skull and turned the brain into mush, with the bullet disintegrated. Instant "lights out". As an aside, while at the time the .220 was only occasionally loaded by Winchester and nearly impossible to find, the little co-op store in the village had hundreds of boxes on the shelf, at 20-year old price.

During WWll the Alaska National Guard was equipped with M1917 Enfields, and the .30-06 started to make inroads. Hunters going after polar bear, using snow machines instead of dog teams, started using these rifles. Nowadays the preferred calibers are mostly .223, .22-250, .243 WCF, .250-06 Remington, with an occasional .270 WCF. Here in the interior there seems to be no definite preference among the indigenous hunters, though the .223 and .308 Winchester probably are tops in popularity. Magnums are seldom seen, though the .358 Norma Magnum is quite popular among indigenous hunters in Canada's Yukon Territory.

Caliber, or cartridge, recommendations:

A guide I know recommends the .300 Win Mag for his clients, while backing them up with a .500 N.E. His reason being that most hunters who buy a bigger gun for their bear hunt can't handle the recoil, and the .300 Mag is about the limit most hunters can handle without flinching. My own recommendation is the .338 Win Mag if you plan to hunt everything Alaska has to offer, though most complain about the recoil. Another acquaintance, whose life's purpose seems to kill bears , apparently thinks that a .500 N.E. is barely adequate, the .458 Mag is not, and likes the heaviest bullets he can find. I have a hunch that he is really afraid of bears, and a bad shot. A writer in south-east Alaska, were the bears are big, recommends somethings like a .40 caliber magnum with a light and fast bullet. While I consider him pretty much an idiot otherwise, I tend to agree with him on that issue. Bears are not thick-skinned or particularly heavy-boned; even though they don't die quickly, and usually take a dim view of being wounded. As to the You-Tube comments, black bears can and will take you on when wounded, I know of two occasions where wounded blacks, both with hind legs paralyzed with a spinal shot, dragged themselves towards the shooter. And blacks have been known to stalk, maul, and kill people. Get yourself between a sow and her cubs, and she is nothing but a bear. Also, a solid bullet with flat point is not needed to shatter a bear's skull; but a glancing shot can carve a deep crease in the skull and expose the brain without killing the bear. He'll flop on his back waving all four feet, and then he'll be up and at you, or head for the bush. On the other hand, buck shot, with the gun's muzzle not six inches from the head, flattened out against the skull without doing damage otherwise. Recoil on those 12 gauges was normal, the powder had not deteriorated. I also know of a 300 grain Nosler Partition bullet fired from a .375 H&H that did not break a big brownie's jaw with a glancing shot.

So, bears can and have been killed instantly with small calibers hitting the right spot. That usually makes the news, but not the ones wounded without being recovered. But polar bears know they are on top of the food chain and consider humans just a different prey. All bears are tremendously fast, and most encounters are sudden and unexpected, with no chance to pick your shot. It's usually a case of getting too close to a bear guarding his kill, or getting between a sow and her cub. Add the fact that bears don't die quickly, and usually can tell who hurt them, and will try to retaliate. I know a case were an arctic grizzly took 26 hits from a .222 Remington and 27 from a .223, fired by two young teenage idiots, before cashing in his chips.

Plenty of bears have been killed, and wounded, with the usual common military calibers. Plenty have been wounded with bigger calibers. It's the where you hit them that counts, more so than what with. That really applies to all hunting. The difference is, bears can and will really hurt you, with encounters unexpected and very sudden. So, when in bear country, carry something a bit bigger than what your quarry would require. When bears can be encountered I like to carry my 9.3x62; though in recent years I have taken to carrying a .375 Ruger, stainless and Hogue stock, when going after bear, mostly because I don't want to subject my custom-stocked favorite to the saltwater air and slippery sharp rocks.

As to the Canadian Rangers' choice of cartridge, they won't be alone, and a surprise bear attack on the ice is not that likely, unless you are poking around on jumbled ice ridges.

[xl_target]

Thanks Two Rivers, for the addition of this information.
It certainly is thought provoking to think that native Alaskans could be so casual about the caliber they used on an animal as big as the Bears found in Alaska.
The .303 and the .308 are veritable cannons compared to some of the calibers that you have mentioned here.

[ckkalyan]

Thanks Two Rivers, for the addition of this information.
It certainly is thought provoking to think that native Alaskans could be so casual about the caliber they used on an animal as big as the Bears found in Alaska.

Thank you TwoRivers for the amazing anecdotes, fascinating!

xl_target, loved your comment - the Alsakan's are either very casual or very CASULL?!

[hubel585]

quote- ''feel under gunned using a .303 (or a .308) against an animal that large''


I agree...I'd rather try to run them down with snow machine, than shoot at big
dangerous bears with 308/303 or less than 458 anything. They could take
all the P-14/M17 Enfields and put our 585 HE in them.

There are 5 585s up in cold areas now, and soon to be more. Ed