I have taken assault rifles to war, and I can tell you first hand that they do not provide the reliable one-shot stops against even a man sized target that you need against a charging bear.

It isn't about volume of fire unless the bear is armed and you want to keep it's head down. It's about one good round that will stop it before it can hurt you...after it is already close enough to make you feel threatened.

QFMFT

deleted

2 cents worth, observations and questions (not necessarily in that order)

Since it seems like a lot has been indulged here, sorry I can't pass on this.

1.I think it is fair to say the answer to the original question is: None
2.Basically, anyone able to carry a handgun in Canada isn't going to be in big bear country.
3.Anyone in such an area, even flying over the bush is going to carry a rifle if possible.
So Strange, are you just jerking our collective chains to get us barking?

It makes me think of something that was supposed to be serious, I found absurd when I saw it.
Years ago (50's and early 60's) the then world famous archer, Howard Hill, made a few movies about big game hunting with a traditional longbow.
A few of the highlights include:
A cameraman getting mauled by a large lion after Howard put 3 shafts into him.
Getting a Cape buffalo rather upset and on the rampage.
Going from being the hunter to becoming the prey after planting several choice shafts into a mother polar bear in an icefield. (it seems like a few of them got bloody besides the bear) Look it up for a hoot.

Granted all the above could and probably has been killed by arrows over the past several millenia.
BUT, during all that time guys were figuring out ways, better, faster and surer ways to kill. Do it farther or do it closer.
Guess work, trial and error, trying and dying, success and failure, all to improve killing without getting killed.
May I pontificate?
Between trying and dying something grand was learned, little sharp sticks worked pretty good on small to medium sized critters that were bad for running away.
The atlatl helped and the bow was even better.
But WHOA, that big hog can sure get mad when I get arrows in him. Maybe my big knife on a stick since he CAN outrun me.

All in good fun Strange. Just a question though, after all these years of Alaskan hunters using big caliber guns to kill large bears, why do you think they would carry the extra “Metal” if they could have just as easily done so with small or medium caliber guns?
Some carry very large caliber (.44 Magnum +) handguns as backup, but I don't think unless they are seriously persuaded of their own superiority they are going to take the chance of becoming a meal rather than getting the bearskin rug.
Can the small ones do it? It's possible.
If not, how fast can you run? Most of us would rather have the margin against the bears advantages.
Live and learn or die and forget about it.

Question 2
What type of thigh holster can I get for a Tavor?

If I were looking for that type, I think Alexander Arms' Beowulf would be a bit closer to effective on ursine anatomy.
If I were going in that area, I would look for something more rugged though.

Im not talking about shooting arrows at a bear though, Im talking about middling him in a hail of semi auto rifle fire of armour piercing rounds.... its a bit different.

What you're "talking" is nonsense, that's the point people are attempting to make. A 5.56mm rifle, firing AP or not, is -totally- unsuitable for use against bears. Slims has taken FULL AUTO 5.56mm weapons to war, has shot them at adult human males (say 150-200lbs) and had it fail to stop them. What on Earth makes you think that a round which does not reliably stop a 200lb man is going to reliably stop a 2,000lb bear?! A bear weighs 10x what a man does. A bear is much heavier-skinned than a human, likewise has thicker fat, heavier bones, and larger organs.

That last bit is important. A .22-caliber hole (which is all that AP would produce) in a bear's Heart or Lung (note; not LungS, since it wouldn't be able to penetrate that far) WILL NOT STOP THE BEAR. A bear's heart beats 6-30 times per minute, and it's the size of a basketball. What this means is that a .22-caliber hole, or a number of such holes, will not bleed the animal out quickly enough. By the time a bear so injured -did- die, it would have had the perfect consolation of having mostly digested its' tormentor. I'd rather shoot it with the bow, personally, since the arrow has enough sectional density to get to the vitals, and a large broadhead to cause massive loss of blood.

This leaves aside totally, of course, the fact that AP ammo is totally illegal for hunting, in Canada and everywhere else I'm aware of.

Even if it wasnt instantly killed though, surely putting 10 or so rounds into the bear is going to make it stop and try to retreat. I cant think any animal is stupid enough to keep attacking an enemy that is taking it to pieces.

Which shows that you're about as knowledgeable about Grizzley Bears as you are about guns. When something hurts a Grizz, it doesn't run. It demolishes whatever's hurting it. This is why Bear Spray is orders of magnitude hotter than "people" pepper spray; it has to be able to utterly incapacitate the animal. You don't "scare it away" or "hurt it until it leaves." You either incapacitate it (ie render it physically incapable of attacking you), or get knawed on.

If the 5.56mm was CAPABLE of "taking it to pieces" you might have a point. Since the 5.56mm IS NOT CAPABLE of doing so, you have no point.

I repeat: A bear is:

10x larger than a human.
Several times denser than a human.
Capable of absorbing -MUCH- greater damage than a human, while retaining what Slims would call "combat effectiveness" far greater than that of a human.
Infinitely meaner, more aggressive, and more destructive than a human.

Why in God's name would you regard a round that is not capable of reliably incapacitating a human (200lbs) would be even remotely suitable for use on something TEN TIMES LARGER?! Bears attack people for 4 reasons:

1: Competition for food. If Yogi thinks you're after his Salmon, he'll be perfectly happy to fight you for it, just like he'd be perfectly happy to fight another 2,000lb bear. If he's willing to throw paws with something his own size, how do you think he'll visualize a human, 1/10th his weight?

2: AS food, ala Grizzley Man. If a bear wants to eat you, it is perfectly capable of doing so. Enraging something that wants you for lunch (say by firing several underpowered, underpenetrating light rifle bullets into it) is a terminally STUPID thing to do.

3: Surprise. Surprising a bear is the 2nd-worst thing you can do, because it puts the bear on the defensive and is perceived as encroachment on the bear's territory. Bears don't negotiate with interlopers, they just mangle them for awhile. Big males will frequently play with corpses, much as cats will.

4: Surprised...WITH CUBS. The absolute, 103% WORST PLACE TO BE is near a mama bear with young. Anything which approaches their young is seen as a threat -to- their young, and Mama will, at that point, totally destroy the threat.

In none of these four scenarios is "scaring it away" or "hurting it until it stops" a workable option. This 2,000lb animal wants to destroy you, not taste you to see if you're good to eat. Bears aren't sharks. When they go after something, it's because they want to obliterate and/or eat it. An apex predator which sees food it wants will not be denied, short of being outrun or physically incapacitated.

No, no... keep going.

That might be a worst case scenario for sissies like you. So there I was...humping along the Appalachian Trail this summer when I rounded a bend and surprised a bear with cubs. My ninja stealth allowed me to get within 10 yards of them. Armed only with my pocket knife (RC 57-60) and my chest hair (RC 48-50), I was able to stand my ground and scare the bear away. True story.

Give me an M4, 30 rounds of green tip ammo and a 6 pack of PBR and I not only would have killed it, I would have successfully invaded France.

Oh, shit... I just choked on my Pepsi.

...

France? Pussy.

Honestly, bear spray is the best choice. They can't see very well before it and 8M Scoville units is sure as hell going to stop it from smelling anythng

The bear you saw was a black bear.

It may well have weighed less than you, been shorter than you, and black bears are particularly skittish, they generally flee any loud noise or intimidating display, it's safer that way when you only weight 150 lbs. I have frequently chased bears out of garbage cans near campsites and hunting cabins.

That is not the same thing as a grizzly bear, which is about the same size/weight as a small car. You do not, ever, stand down a grizzly (at least not more than once).

Well, the bear isnt the apex predator. Humankind if the apex predator!

The main thing I was thinking is what kind of a gun could this man have carried that could have killed a bear, but also he could have carried his camera equipment. Maybe he would have been able to carry a rifle at the same time as the camera... that would be better than being unarmed.

Nevertheless, if people hunt elephants with AK47's(which in fact they do) I think such a gun can easily kill a bear. An elephant is much stronger and more durable than a bear is.

Tell that to the bear. To him, you're an hors d'erve.

Dipshit poachers "hunt" elephants with AK's by spraying whole family groups down with full-auto fire, then waiting 3-5 days and watching for buzzards. The elephants die, all right, but days later and in horrible pain. They also frequently kill poachers in the immediate aftermath (splat!). The AK round will penetrate to the vital organs, but only just: the animal dies days later of infection and pnuemonia, not shock/trauma or swift blood loss. Again, not the kind of thing you want when a bear comes boiling out of the laurels at 10 feet. Again, if these crazed ideas of yours worked, Alaskan professional hunters and guides would be using them already. They aren't. There's a damned good reason.

I mean look - I undersand a big long rifle would be the best thing for taking a pop at a bear... but the premise was something that the guy could carry with his camera equipment while he was alone in the wilderness. I wasnt saying a Tavor was the best weapon, just in my view that it should do. I think most people do agree that it COULD stop a bear but a rifle would be the best weapon of choice. So this guy would probably have to find a rifle that was quite light and sturdy for the job. I dont think IMI make any rifles, but there are many other manufacturers of close to the same quality.

In terms of Apex Predator's - there is surely no predator anywhere on earth as vicious , as brutal, and feared as man? I think a lot more bears get killed by men than the other way round.

Dont try to steal my thunder.

Actually, although it is a little off topic, I think in many cases grizzlies DO fear men... simply because they link man to death. I saw a show where a guy stayed out in the wild and looked after young abandoned bears.... a couple of times bigger bears would get in position to attack the younger bears, until they saw the man (who only carried a noise grenade and a long wooden stick) and the bigger bears would run off.

I think I'd say again - most animals with any intelligence learn to fear man as the most violent and deadly of all predators.

edit

If the guy did need a rifle I found there is an IMI one he can use.

the IMI Timberwolf only weights 5 1/2 lbs and can fire .38 or .357 bullets - certainly enough to drop a bear.

I suppose an ordinary rifle would be okay, but if you have a very dangerous animal attacking you, you would want the best possible reliability, accuracy, and power in your metal.

dude, no offense, but reading your posts makes me glad to live in a free country- you appear to have no idea at all about guns, other than what you found on the net, apparently somewhere filled with other people that know nothing about guns... and you know nothing about bears either.... it reminds me of listening to a junior high student try to impress his friends with his vast sexual knowledge..... for the record, cause I asked several guys that lived and worked in alaska, as I sure as hell did not know shit about a bear outside of a zoo, bear mace is the answer for someone who does not know guns, a twelve gauge with slugs is the answer for someone who does.... neither will always save your ass if the bear feels like eating you.....and BTW why are you such a pathetic IMI fanboy????

Reliability, accuracy and power. A revolver chambered in .44 mag sounds about right. Can't beat a slug .429" in diameter, travelling at 1,500 fps, and delivering 1,300 ft/lbs of energy, All in a reliable handgun package.

Check out Smith's line of .44's. They're a business with a good rep for a reason.

Category - Large Frame (N)

If you really want to satisfy your IMI cravings, here's a rare Timberwolf in .44 mag.

Timberwolf (IMI) Rifle, .44 mag, RARE : Pump at GunBroker.com

That is about the most ignorant thing I've ever read about firearms ever.

Since you obviously have no experience with guns, or useful knowledge about them, why do you insist on posting about them? I'm honestly curious.

Ive actually watched some video's on Youtube where bears have charged people and then turned and fled when a hand gun was fired at them. Obviously the bear instinctively fears the gunshot and knows it can spell death.

As for knowing nothing about guns... I dont live in a country where they are widely available nor would I have one if they were (unless I was in a wilderness with savage animals on the loose). It is well known that IMI make the best guns in the world... since everyone has said a rifle was the best gun to kill a bear with, it makes sense that you'd want the best rifle available.

But I have never been talking about "hunting" bears, simply a weapon to use in self defence if the bear attacks you.

IMI doesn't make the best guns in the world, Smith and Wesson does, didn't you ever see Dirty Harry?

Things move on though, dont they?

Self Defense. Better to have something easy to carry with you than something that requires an extra shoulder strap--IE a RIFLE. (Considering he's already probably got a camera around his neck, I don't think adding a rifle strap would be anywhere comfortable.) Chances are, the easier it is to carry, the more likely he is to bring it a long. A pistol is usually, by far, easier to carry than a rifle. Thus, a pistol is more ideal for "bear defense" than a rifle. (I still think Bear Spray may be the #1 option.)

Second, if "it is well known that IMI makes the best rifles," I'd expect to see it being said by a reputable gun source, i.e. Massad Ayoob, Todd Jarrett, Pat Rogers.

Finally, please to take a minute to consider the information and advice offered by people here. These people KNOW guns, and it would behoove you to listen.

This thread is hilarious.
SF, why would you take a chance with the pretty. semi-cool looking thigh-strapped gun, when a killing machine charges you full speed?
I would bring the biggest baddest thing I could find, that shoots the biggest, heaviest, most penetrating pieces of metal. That and a secondary weapon, and bear spray.
Point is, at 10 yards the bear is on you in 3 seconds at the most. How many shots do you reckon you'd be able to fire with that thing? How many would hit? Maybe one, if you're lucky. How many would slow the bear down? Probably none.

Listen to people who know guns, and who have shot guns at things.

Fuck carrying my own "metal," I'm just gonna carry Walt on my chest in a Baby Bjorn rig.

It repels bears and people lacking a sense of humor at the same time.

Useful little bugger, a'int he?

I think the .475 Wildey Magnum handgun that Charles Bronson used in Death Wish 3 would be a perfect primary weapon for the modern light infantrymen as well as a useful sidearm for avid backpackers that may find themselves in bear country.

Subject matter expert right here.

Maybe the Bureau of Bear Statistics never got around to showing those results to the rest of the bears...

Bears fear loud noises. They're unusual, and always mean something bad - lightening, falling trees or rocks, floods, etc. It doesn't have anything to do with the gun, a black bear can be chased off with loud clapping & whistles (I've actually done this) - unless they've been highly socialized.

The difference is when the bear actually feels it has something to gain from mauling you - defending cubs or pushing you off a kill (or say a salmon stream). Once it makes up it's mind that it's going to kill you, you need something big enough to stop the bear, because it isn't going to stop unless you make it.

For something "well known," I find it odd that you, admittedly not an expert in guns, rather than any gun owner, enthusiast, or professional I have met in real life or interacted with online, are the only one to say it. Don't get me wrong, they make some good stuff; the Jericho is a nice pistol and and the Uzi is the world's most popular submachine gun, but for every gun they make, I can find something that is objectively better in several ways.
Then you don't want to use a small rifle, you want a shotgun or big game round. Big game rounds are only going to give you one shot, but if you want something as hilariously impractical as a bullpup in 5.45, at least go for something that has a chance for stopping a bear in one shot Shiloh Rifle Get it in .405 Winchester, it was good enough for Teddy Roosevelt.

I'm starting to feel a Hall of Fame thread here, and not because Strange Famous is wrong, but because he is so deliberately arrogant in his error. I mean no offense to you, man, but you're continuing to demonstrate your basic misunderstanding of the power of firearms.

Rather than asking a question to individuals with five, ten, fifteen different weapons who have likewise actually seen grizzly bears, taking their advisement and acknowledging it, he's single-handledly declared that everyone who actually owns a gun in this thread is wrong.

Are you familiar with the North Hollywood shootout? It's a great example of how little it takes to weaken a firearm's stopping or killing power.

While bear skin and insulation is not directly equivalent to ballistic plates and body armor, perhaps you may begin to see the problem. Even if a bullet penetrates the skin, a fast moving round will continue only a few inches before stopping. On an animal as heavy as most motor vehicles (and not hollow, either).. this is largely ineffective. Even if your "spray and pray" scenario occurred, you're also misinformed in believing that fully automatic fire is accurate. Under the stress of having a full grown motherfucking grizzly bear chasing you, I highly doubt that even a trained marksman could land all or most of his shots.

North Hollywood shootout - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pfft. Lightweights.

Epic thread.

mobile bear stopper

http://www.oldfartsgaming.co.uk/usta...92_GRENADE.jpg
http://gracethespot.com/wp-content/u...ct-tape-3m.jpg

oh my

Actually, if you look at this sensibly... a rifle probably gives you two shots if the bear charges... (although it will flee at the first crack of a gun in most cases)

A assault rifle gives probably 30 shots. The bear is a lot bigger than a man certainly but he doesnt have much muscle and fat around the head and throat. Under stress, I think rapid fire is more valuable... either the bear will drop or flee.

If you are HUNTING a bear a rifle may be the best weapon for a measured and careful shot... if this beast chrages you it would be better to spray him around the head with automatic fire.

Okay... you have been told the realities of the situation by men with experience in handling and using guns.... you have been told the truth as related by people who have actually been to the place you are talking about.... and been told about real world bear attacks....... you have been directed to multiple sources on the effects of different rounds on different things...... you have even had combat vets tell you that you are full of shit.....

Flame Removed