Critter defense ammo

[Double Naught Spy]

Bear skulls are not so much hard to penetrate as they are hard to hit. The skull itself, in particular the brain case, is a fairly small subset of the overall notion of what is seen as the head, completely with all the fur. I have no doubt that people shoot a lot of fur trying to hit the heads of bears, not realizing that the skull isn't as large as the extent of the fur.

This link shows a pic of a black bear head, relative position of the brain, and the dotted outline is the perimeter of the bony skull and mandible for a bear facing you, as during a charge. Note how much larger the head is than the actual skull and how small the brain is relative to the skull and to the head.
https://thefiringline.com/forums/attachm...1230728059

This notion of wanting a good penetrating round such as a hard cast non-expanding round or fmj to stop bears has always bothered me. We pick ammo for hunting that is supposed to penetrate well enough to reach the vitals and cause a lot of disruption to those vitals and to bring about a quick kill. Non-expanding ammo and most FMJ don't have the reputation of doing a lot of tissue damage to bring about a quick kill, yet that is what people want to stop a charging bear. I am of the mindset that a round penciling through with more penetration isn't as apt to stop a bear quickly.

I understand that people want something that will go through bone. I guess that if you only get one shot, and that shot hits the humerus, that you want the bullet to still penetrate a good ways and hopefully eventually stop the bear. The opposite side to that is that if it doesn't hit a big bone like the humerus, it will not do nearly the damage of a good expanding bullet and isn't as likely to stop a bear quicker.

[NugginFutz]

OP: If you want to see what's worked for dozens of Grendel hunters, you can look back on this chart set that was compiled from a long running (3+ years) survey. Several ways of looking at what animals were taken with which loads from what distances.

Grendel Game Animal and Varmints Kill Tote Thread

and the detailed source of that data is read here:

Grendel "knock-down" survey.

[montana]

Bear skulls are not so much hard to penetrate as they are hard to hit. The skull itself, in particular the brain case, is a fairly small subset of the overall notion of what is seen as the head, completely with all the fur. I have no doubt that people shoot a lot of fur trying to hit the heads of bears, not realizing that the skull isn't as large as the extent of the fur.

This link shows a pic of a black bear head, relative position of the brain, and the dotted outline is the perimeter of the bony skull and mandible for a bear facing you, as during a charge. Note how much larger the head is than the actual skull and how small the brain is relative to the skull and to the head.
https://thefiringline.com/forums/attachm...1230728059

This notion of wanting a good penetrating round such as a hard cast non-expanding round or fmj to stop bears has always bothered me. We pick ammo for hunting that is supposed to penetrate well enough to reach the vitals and cause a lot of disruption to those vitals and to bring about a quick kill. Non-expanding ammo and most FMJ don't have the reputation of doing a lot of tissue damage to bring about a quick kill, yet that is what people want to stop a charging bear. I am of the mindset that a round penciling through with more penetration isn't as apt to stop a bear quickly.

I understand that people want something that will go through bone. I guess that if you only get one shot, and that shot hits the humerus, that you want the bullet to still penetrate a good ways and hopefully eventually stop the bear. The opposite side to that is that if it doesn't hit a big bone like the humerus, it will not do nearly the damage of a good expanding bullet and isn't as likely to stop a bear quicker.

Yes, but I shot a relatively small deer with a 338 Win mag using a 250 grain Sierra Game King bullet that exploded on impact. It was a horrific wound, but didn't penetrate far enough for a quick kill. It ran over a mile before I tracked it and put it out of it's misery. If that had been a charging grizzly, I would have been in a world of hurt. A bullet needs to penetrate and be able to hit vitals. When using a handgun, most people in Montana or Alaska will use a hard cast, FMJ or solid copper bullet.. Grizzly are big animals and it requires a strong bullet to penetrate. Like I stated before, this topic can get get quite heated.

[A5BLASTER]

Yes, but I shot a relatively small deer with a 338 Win mag using a 250 grain Sierra Game King bullet that exploded on impact. It was a horrific wound, but didn't penetrate far enough for a quick kill. It ran over a mile before I tracked it and put it out of it's misery. If that had been a charging grizzly, I would have been in a world of hurt. A bullet needs to penetrate and be able to hit vitals. When using a handgun, most people in Montana or Alaska will use a hard cast, FMJ or solid copper bullet.. Grizzly are big animals and it requires a strong bullet to penetrate. Like I stated before, this topic can get get quite heated.

That maybe true. But the OP clearly stated he is on the eastern seaboard and no grizzly's, black bears only.

Something maybe most aren't thinking of when they suggest what kind of bullet to use for bear/lion/wolf/bobcat defense in the grendel.

If you have to use the grendel to defend yourself the animals adrenaline is up and can withstand pain more then it could if it was shoot while unaware of you. Like while hunting.

So to me if I was going to choose a bullet to defend myself in this type of situation, it would not be the typical hunting bullet normally seen in grendels. So that for me rules out any cup and core are bonded bullet.

It also rules out any bullet lighter then 123 grains, so I keep circling back too 127 LRX bullets.

I hope OP keeps us updated on what he chooses and hope he never has to test it.

[montana]

That maybe true. But the OP clearly stated he is on the eastern seaboard and no grizzly's, black bears only.

Something maybe most aren't thinking of when they suggest what kind of bullet to use for bear/lion/wolf/bobcat defense in the grendel.

If you have to use the grendel to defend yourself the animals adrenaline is up and can withstand pain more then it could if it was shoot while unaware of you. Like while hunting.

So to me if I was going to choose a bullet to defend myself in this type of situation, it would not be the typical hunting bullet normally seen in grendels. So that for me rules out any cup and core are bonded bullet.

It also rules out any bullet lighter then 123 grains, so I keep circling back too 127 LRX bullets.

I hope OP keeps us updated on what he chooses and hope he never has to test it.

Wolf, lion, bobcat, yes, bear no. A self defence shooting with any bear will be a frontal charge. I want a bullet that is going to penetrate a lot of animal that is facing me. For a handgun, I want a solid that will penetrate. In a rifle, I also want a bullet that will penetrate. A self defence shooting is going to be different than a typical, long range hunting type shooting, normally. I prefer a firearm I can run fast and accurate with quick follow up shots, rather than a slower more powerful one in a self defence type scenario. Like I stated before, this topic can get heated with many different opinions, "but in my opinion the best firearm ammunition set up" is the one a person feels the most confidant with.

[grayfox]

Regarding hard cast or fmj or etc, I think this is due to this immediate situation being more of a "dangerous game" one than a strictly hunting one. In cases where you're looking at shooting dangerous game, the bullets tend towards the deep penetration, stick-together styles rather than mushrooming.

I'm more of a student in all of this b/c never have had to face such a charge. Even a black bear confrontation in the Eastern US is pretty rare, a dog or coyote pack however... well, Idk just all guesses on my part, but a wounded animal or some kind of pack attack, might be more probable. In those cases a well-performing handgun with several rounds in the mag might be a better choice -- at least for those scenarios.

[montana]

Regarding hard cast or fmj or etc, I think this is due to this immediate situation being more of a "dangerous game" one than a strictly hunting one. In cases where you're looking at shooting dangerous game, the bullets tend towards the deep penetration, stick-together styles rather than mushrooming.

I'm more of a student in all of this b/c never have had to face such a charge. Even a black bear confrontation in the Eastern US is pretty rare, a dog or coyote pack however... well, Idk just all guesses on my part, but a wounded animal or some kind of pack attack, might be more probable. In those cases a well-performing handgun with several rounds in the mag might be a better choice -- at least for those scenarios.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3ma0vm

[Growler]

The best defence is paying attention and being able to quickly respond. The survivors response of, "it came out of nowhere and it happened so fast there was no time to respond" is quite common.

^ This sounds smart

In my limited opinion (everybody has one), you might be better served by bringing a 3 gun competitor buddy with you than trying to have the perfect bullet. Perhaps the next best thing would be optimizing your carry system for rapid use. If you are alone, surprised, charged, and aren’t carrying ready to fire immediately, getting even one shot off may be next to impossible.

Last time I was surprised by a bear (black bear cub in CO mountains), it was less than 10 yards. I should have heard it, but was moving too fast and making too much noise of my own. I screamed like a little girl and ran like hell, apparently in the right direction. Never saw the momma, and that’s probably why I’m here today. The adrenaline was ridiculous, what little coordination I have vanished, and aiming would have been a real trick (assuming momma bear decided to appear and charge). Manipulating a safety would have been extremely difficult. All I had on me was a day pack. I listen a lot more now, move slower, and pay more attention to my surroundings.

A single point slung grendel pistol or (considering adrenaline) a simple lever carbine would be better than nothing, but without a buddy similarly equipped, I would most likely have been bear food if momma bear saw me as a threat.

[A5BLASTER]

Wolf, lion, bobcat, yes, bear no. A self defence shooting with any bear will be a frontal charge. I want a bullet that is going to penetrate a lot of animal that is facing me. For a handgun, I want a solid that will penetrate. In a rifle, I also want a bullet that will penetrate. A self defence shooting is going to be different than a typical, long range hunting type shooting, normally. I prefer a firearm I can run fast and accurate with quick follow up shots, rather than a slower more powerful one in a self defence type scenario. Like I stated before, this topic can get heated with many different opinions, "but in my opinion the best firearm ammunition set up" is the one a person feels the most confidant with.

Ok I think everyone including myself is failing to see your point because you just said the same exact thing I said.

[montana]

Ok I think everyone including myself is failing to see your point because you just said the same exact thing I said.

You stated:

That maybe true. But the OP clearly stated he is on the eastern seaboard and no grizzly's, black bears only.

Something maybe most aren't thinking of when they suggest what kind of bullet to use for bear/lion/wolf/bobcat defense in the grendel.

.

I agreed except with bear, meaning black and Grizzly are a concern for bullet penetration, not just Grizzly.

[A5BLASTER]

You stated:

I agreed except with bear, meaning black and Grizzly are a concern for bullet penetration, not just Grizzly.

Let me repeat myself. Since you were so kind to cherry pick my words.

The OP said NO grizzly's. So black bear only eastern seaboard.

Like I said already we both said the same thing.

[montana]

^ This sounds smart

In my limited opinion (everybody has one), you might be better served by bringing a 3 gun competitor buddy with you than trying to have the perfect bullet. Perhaps the next best thing would be optimizing your carry system for rapid use. If you are alone, surprised, charged, and aren’t carrying ready to fire immediately, getting even one shot off may be next to impossible.

Last time I was surprised by a bear (black bear cub in CO mountains), it was less than 10 yards. I should have heard it, but was moving too fast and making too much noise of my own. I screamed like a little girl and ran like hell, apparently in the right direction. Never saw the momma, and that’s probably why I’m here today. The adrenaline was ridiculous, what little coordination I have vanished, and aiming would have been a real trick (assuming momma bear decided to appear and charge). Manipulating a safety would have been extremely difficult. All I had on me was a day pack. I listen a lot more now, move slower, and pay more attention to my surroundings.

A single point slung grendel pistol or (considering adrenaline) a simple lever carbine would be better than nothing, but without a buddy similarly equipped, I would most likely have been bear food if momma bear saw me as a threat.

The easiest way to get distracted is hiking with a group of people. In a group, people tend to focus on each other rather than what is going on around them. Every step in the woods exposes a new picture and a possible hidden animal. If walking in a tight vegetated "forested" area, move slower. Keeping your head on a swivel and look for possible blind spots. Keep a look out for tracks, scat and other signs of animals. I have never been surprised by any predator while walking in the woods, "but if it does happen" it will have been my mistake and I will probably scream like a girl too

[montana]

Let me repeat myself. Since you were so kind to cherry pick my words.

The OP said NO grizzly's. So black bear only eastern seaboard.

Like I said already we both said the same thing.

If I miss understood your post, I apologize. Not the first time for me. I thought you were making a point that a black bear did not need the same bullet selection as a Grizzly.

[Double Naught Spy]

Yes, but I shot a relatively small deer with a 338 Win mag using a 250 grain Sierra Game King bullet that exploded on impact. It was a horrific wound, but didn't penetrate far enough for a quick kill. It ran over a mile before I tracked it and put it out of it's misery. If that had been a charging grizzly, I would have been in a world of hurt. A bullet needs to penetrate and be able to hit vitals. When using a handgun, most people in Montana or Alaska will use a hard cast, FMJ or solid copper bullet.. Grizzly are big animals and it requires a strong bullet to penetrate. Like I stated before, this topic can get get quite heated.

I am sorry you picked such a lousy bullet for your caliber. There are better bullets that don't explode. Your example is harder a representative sample of anything.

Wolf, lion, bobcat, yes, bear no. A self defence shooting with any bear will be a frontal charge.

Nope. That isn't the absolute you present. It may be a frontal charge, but remember that "self defense" includes defense of others. Also, threatening animals that are circling intended prey will not be presenting a frontal shot. As with the the moose attack video you posted where the shooting was NOT a front charge.

[montana]

I am sorry you picked such a lousy bullet for your caliber. There are better bullets that don't explode. Your example is harder a representative sample of anything.

I never said there weren't better bullets. The point is to pick a good bullet that will penetrate.

Nope. That isn't the absolute you present. It may be a frontal charge, but remember that "self defense" includes defense of others. Also, threatening animals that are circling intended prey will not be presenting a frontal shot. As with the the moose attack video you posted where the shooting was NOT a front charge.

Seriously, bears will circle you if they are going to charge ??? Perhaps the bears are a little different in Texas than in Montana,lol. The moose did do a frontal charge, if you watched the video. In any case moose are big animals and deep penetration is preferable to expanding, low penetrating bullets.

[Constitutionalist]

A fmj would likely land you in jail, most states don't allow them for hunting and I'm sure a warden would find some reason too get you for useing it for defense from a attacking bear/bobcat/lion/wolf.

If you're killing game in self defense I would assume it's not in season. FMJs would the least of your problems. If it is in season (and you have a tag) you should be carrying an appropriate weapon because you're hunting it. BTW we hunt bobcats with .22WMR and 17WSM. They only weigh 35-40lb max and a Grendel with a soft point would ruin the hide. If I was going to use one of my Grendels to hunt bobcats or coyotes- I would prefer an FMJ (legal for those species in Michigan). And I know several guys in Alaska who hunt wolves with ARs. (5.56mm ARs) A Grendel with an expanding bullet would make a fine wolf or mt. lion rifle. The only thing where you need to think about "special" ammo choices in a Grendel for self defense is bear and maybe moose. And now we're back to trying to break bones and penetrate.

JM $0.02

John

[Constitutionalist]

Bear skulls are not so much hard to penetrate as they are hard to hit. The skull itself, in particular the brain case, is a fairly small subset of the overall notion of what is seen as the head, completely with all the fur. I have no doubt that people shoot a lot of fur trying to hit the heads of bears, not realizing that the skull isn't as large as the extent of the fur.

This link shows a pic of a black bear head, relative position of the brain, and the dotted outline is the perimeter of the bony skull and mandible for a bear facing you, as during a charge. Note how much larger the head is than the actual skull and how small the brain is relative to the skull and to the head.
https://thefiringline.com/forums/attachm...1230728059

This notion of wanting a good penetrating round such as a hard cast non-expanding round or fmj to stop bears has always bothered me. We pick ammo for hunting that is supposed to penetrate well enough to reach the vitals and cause a lot of disruption to those vitals and to bring about a quick kill. Non-expanding ammo and most FMJ don't have the reputation of doing a lot of tissue damage to bring about a quick kill, yet that is what people want to stop a charging bear. I am of the mindset that a round penciling through with more penetration isn't as apt to stop a bear quickly.

I understand that people want something that will go through bone. I guess that if you only get one shot, and that shot hits the humerus, that you want the bullet to still penetrate a good ways and hopefully eventually stop the bear. The opposite side to that is that if it doesn't hit a big bone like the humerus, it will not do nearly the damage of a good expanding bullet and isn't as likely to stop a bear quicker.

If the bullet hits the humerus on a charging bear, it will likely never die from that wound. At best all you did was break the leg (hopefully slowing it down) and the bullet passed through and maybe caught a little of the hindquarter. You need to aim center of head or worst case- chest; and he's coming at you- he's not broadside. If you shoot a bear broadside and claim self defense you'll be back to getting a ticket.

You missed a significant point in my post- ".480" Ruger and ".450" Marlin" My bullets will start out larger than most 6.5mm bullets will reach expanded. Also, with a flat meplat you'd be amazed the wound channels they create- even if they don't hit heavy bone. Another point: Before I bought my .480 I saw where a 400gr LFN passed completely through a buffalo and two other cases with Alaskan grizzlies. With one bear- two shots broadside were through and through (he was hunting grizzly- it was not self defense). The other bear- the shooter shot the bear three times during the charge. The first two went in the chest and were found under the hide on the hindquarters; and one went in the nose and out the back of the skull. I want big holes going all the way through whatever is in the way.

Lastly, when I was in college the Wildlife Department had a grizzly skull with a .30 caliber bullet embedded in the skull just above and between the eyes. It also had a round .30 calliber hole in the right side of the cranium (and the left side of the cranium was gone). You're not going to kill a p'ed off bear with lung or even heart shots- at least not before it kills you. If it takes the animal 30 seconds to die, you'll probably beat it to the Pearly Gates.