mark sullivan's videos and what they mean to me with a handgun.

[mk454]

just thought i'd stray a bit from which caliber is better and thought i'd open up a discussion on a topic hopefully, soon, near and dear to my heart.  bear hunting with a handgun, or better yet, backing up my bow with a handgun (though a guide would be present i'm sure).  anyway, i just got mark's two latest videos and i'd rather not discuss whether we like his style or not, though i do, but some of the truth's evident in them.  his dvd where he talks about shots, stopping game, etc. was very very good.  very eye opening.  i opened a guns and ammo i had gotten a while back where they asked a bunch of the "gun writers" on shot placement on different animals.  of course, the charging cape buff shot came up and sure enough a bunch weighed in with what mark proved to be false in his video.  he goes from clip of the charge to explaining what and where he shot.  it was most illuminating.  the bottomline i got from them is that obviously most of these writers certainly haven't done what they said they did or they'd be dead.

now how's this apply to me or anyone else that might square off with a large bear.  first, no matter whether it's a lever action .45/70, a .375 H&H, or a .44 mag.  you aren't gonna stop one charging unless you either 1) hit the brain or 2) get lucky and turn the charge.  bears are known for turning more so than the dangerous african game but seems to me that you're not gonna stop a buff with a shot to the chest, head, but only the brain.  it doesn't take much to penetrate to that brain and wouldn't matter whether you were using a .454, a .500, or a .41 with some good hardcast bullets.  so i realized i need to be better with my pistols and i went to the range with the .454's and the ruger single six and made immense progress on my shooting in just one day using my regiment.  anyway, i just thought i'd throw out the question of how big is big enough and does it really matter what's the back up, be it a rifle or a pistol if you can't hit the cns system.  i think a rifle like a guide gun is better b/c most will shoot with it better, but i'd imagine you'd give up nothing with a .44 mag and garretts if you can HIT THE BRAIN.  chest shot aint gonna cut with anything on a charge.

comments please.

[mk454]

thought i'd just also ad, that i read gary reeder's comments on his bear hunt with a .45lc, i believe, where he had a very close run in with a bear and felt the .45 wasn't adequate as he almost met his maker.  after the sullivan videos all i could say in my head was, no wonder the bear didn't go down, it wasn't a cns shot and it wouldn't have mattered what he was shooting as it wouldn't have stopped that bear dead on where it was hit.

 

i also got a book that talks about the different bear maulings and fatalities in the book.  the amount of hunters killed with large bore rifles that didn't stop the bear and were subsequently killed illustrated that i think mark is on to something and they obviously weren't shooting or hitting the right spot.  they certainly weren't undergunned.

[WL44]

I have yet to hunt buff, but certainly intend to someday. Not to disagree, just to add another little piece of info to blurr the edges a bit more 

I too have read all the "down the nose" shot stuff - buff specifically now. I've read the book "Nyati" - specifically on hunting buff and various other articles, books etc. where it's come up.

In the most resent copy of Magnum Magazine (the South African magazine "for hunters and shooters") there's an article written by Brian Marsh, a well known PH who knew the likes of Taylor and Capstick and who, if I recall, was the largest single source of inforamtion for Capstick's book "A man Called Lion".

Anyhow, Marsh says:"The right place to shoot a charging buffalo is in the bottom of the 'V' where the neck joins the chest. Properly placed, this should take the fight out of him, and although he will stil keep coming, he will be dying on his feet, so if you jump out of his way he will not try to hook you as he runs by, and will not turn to come back. Do not listen to those who tell you, as many have told me, that the only place to shoot a charging buffalo is in the brain. A buffalo's brain is the size of a tennis ball and its head will be bobbing up and down as it runs at you. Need I say more?"

This was in response to a question about hunting buff, received from a lady PH who was planning an unguided / solo hunt for buff.

Just to keep the discussion as confusing as it should be 

Wim

[mk454]

i agree that some very high profile hunters that did a lot of writing did make many recommendations, but if you get the chance, get the sullivan video and you will see why i'm starting to doubt much of this talk.  in his videos, buffs and hippos not shot in the brain, whether it is in the chest, below the brain in the head or anywhere else don't even notice the shots.  one or two buffs were blasted pretty good, lost there footing and fell over, then bowing out to a brain shot but the only times that happened was when they were shot very very close to the brain and got a little stunned, however, this was with a 600 grain nitro, no pistol bullet or smaller medium bore is gonna do that.  check the videos out.  very interesting.

[Qaz]

 This topic should open the flood gates with all the keyboard experts.
  I have been mock charged by two large black bears. Speaking from experience, I did not have time to unholster a pistol before they were right in front of me. In this case a 22lr would have been as effective as a 44mag. Had I had a rifle in my hand and a round chambered, I would have probably gotten off a shot, a brain shot would have been shear luck. People can say say anything they want, but until you experience just how quickly and quietly a bear can move when they want to, you will never understand.
 Mk454, you are wrong on two counts; a 44mag shot from a pistol is not the same beast shot from a lever action carbine, a rifle length barrel makes a big difference. Second, you have to hit the skull to make a brain shot. In that case a 357 or a 44mag would be more effective than a 454 or 500mag. It has been my observation that 99.9% of the people shoot the smaller calibers much better. Good luck using a pistol for back up while bear hunting with a bow. My choice would be a rifle in the hands of someone I trust with my life.

Qaz

[safetysheriff]

where are you buying mark's video(s), what are the titles, and what do they cost?

thanks,

ss'   

[mk454]

you can buy the videos at www.nitroexpresssafaris.com, inmho, they are the most realistic, most truthful african hunting videos i've seen.  opinions vary but he is a cocky, confident guy, and while i'm usually turned off of that, i'm thinking he's one of the few that has a right to be.

anyway, oaz, i see what you're saying, but my point was not that the leverguns, doubles etc, don't have more power, but that that extra power is meaningless in a charge if you don't hit the brain, and yes, that's why i have hardcast downloaded .45 rounds.  the extra power the .454 has over the .41, .45, or .44 mag is used by me for trajectory and not punching through a skull, that doesn't take a whole heck of a lot.  my point was exactly that, yes i'd obviously have a guide ready with a rifle, that's how these things are done, however, my point is everyone talks about how a rifle or something huge is the answer, i'm agreeing with sullivan that the answer is something you can hit the brain with is the ONLY 100% answer to a charge. 

[Sverre A.]

"Second, you have to hit the skull to make a brain shot. In that case a 357 or a 44mag would be more effective than a 454 or 500mag. It has been my observation that 99.9% of the people shoot the smaller calibers much better"

 
For me (not afraid of a .454) - it doesn`t matter how 99.9% shoot.

If I should choose between a .454 or a .357 - I would go for .454.  Much more power to penetrate a skull.
 

[jpsmith1]

I'd opt for the most powerful handgun that you can hit effectively with.  All the power that a .500 packs is completely useless if you do not hit the bullseye.  An accurate shot with a .357 will do far more killing than a flincher with a .500.

That simple truth out of the way, lets get into a stickier truth.  Mark Sullivan, Brian Marsh, Capstick, and all pro hunters are exactly that PROFESSIONALS.  You are probably deluding youself that in the event of a charge from bow range, you can

1> Drop your bow AND RELOCATE YOUR RELEASE AID
2> Unsnap and draw your handgun.
3> Acquire a firing grip
4> Align sights (cocking hammer if needed)
5> Fire!

Most of us, and I include myself in this group, will be too busy soiling themselves to even remember that they have a handgun.

Now, when travelling on foot in bear country, I will never be without a handgun.  Depending on my mood, I'll carry a Ruger .357 Security 6 or a Ruger Bisley in .45 Colt.  Both loaded with the biggest, heaviest hottest loads that I can shoot.  Recoil in these handguns isn't an issue to me and I can shoot them well.

[mk454]

i realize they are professionals, i also realize a bear can be upon you in less time than it would take to drop your bow.  however, i have a couple videos of bowhunters that were charged out in the open by a bear from greater than 30 yards so that is like saying carrying a concealed pistol is pointless b/c a mugger won't let you know he's gonna pull a gun on you from 20 yards, maybe, maybe not.  however, if you can't use it you can't, if you can then it gives you at least a chance.  i know my shooting, i know how i shoot in idpa, i also know how well i shoot myFA83 and how fast i can draw and get acquisition on the sights, but that really wasn't the question, i'm responding to those that say a handgun is useless and to carry a rifle.  i can draw and get sight acquisition faster with my 83 than with any of my rifles b/c that's how i practice, and i practice more with the 83 than my guidegun.

[jpsmith1]

I was just making a generalization.  Most people do not have the dedication to building skills that you do.  Many people have the idea that just strapping an iron on their belt is like putting up a shield around themselves.  I know, I used to be one of them, then I realized that I couldn't hit a D**N thing with my .357 and would have been better off with my bare knuckles.

I also engaged in an intense practice regimen and learned to shoot.  If you have the skills and the presence of mind to deploy a handgun in the most extreme of situations, then it's better than a sharp stick.

Rifles are GENERALLY easier to hit with under those type of situations due to longer sight radius and the fact that most people shoot rifles more than handguns.  Rifles also tend to pack a bigger punch.  There are a good many people who don't understand that handguns are viable hunting and self defense weapons because they cannot hit with one.  My dad has gone through 3 or 4 good handguns because he can't hit anything with them.  I inherited one and will NEVER part with it.  It's the most accurate revolver that I've got.

So, YES, a handgun will stop a charge given an adequate load and accurate shot placement.  If a person can do that, then a handgun is nothing but extra weight.

[mk454]

interesting point that i wholeheartedly agree with.  my second model 83, a 6" field grade in .454 was purchased used.  or should i say bought. it had never been fired.  i bought it off a guy that had got it in alaska when he was working in the oil fields there.  he carried it with him bowhunting. he said he had no use for it in texas. the thing had never been fired, yet he carried it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  i pushed some corbon 320's through it and it needed to have a different sight blade installed as it was several inches off at 7yards.  this would have done him nooooooooooo good.  LOL.  anyway, my cousin bought a ruger .44 blackhawk from my uncle who had bought it in the late 70's or early 80's i believe.  he took it hunting a couple times and he sold it b/c he said it was horribly inaccurate and neither him or his hunting buds could hit anything with it.  he talked about it like it was defective and that if my cousin wanted it he could have it for $150 bucks and perhaps a gunsmith could fix it to shoot somewhat decent.  well, after about 20 minutes at the range sighting it in, novel idea isn't it?, it was clangning the gongs at 100 yards quite regularly and shot just fine.  it amazes me the number of people that buy a gun and don't even sight it in or carry it for defensive purposes and haven't even shot it!!!!!!!!!!!!