Hollow point or hard cast bullet for my.44

[Redhawk1]

Larry Gibson, Federal makes hard cast loads, not just  Garret, also Cor-bon makes hard cast loads.  If you are going to go into bear country, it is not a big deal to order your ammo ahead of time. It is called preparing ahead of time, I thought most people do that now days.

And no where did I say only hard cast bullets are needed to kill a bear. But they sure beat the hell out of a JHP, anyone worth a darn can understand that.

As for the so called Myth, it was about bullets found under the hide where it did not penetrate the bone. Nothing to do with only hard cast bullets will kill bear. Just trying to keep you on track here.

[efremtags]

Larry, you should take a basic english class as you obviously have not mastered the english language and now you are pissing me off as well as others,

Point about 12g, 357 and muzzle loader was referencing instances where bullets may stop just under the skin, which you claim is a myth not factual. Never said these weapons were not effective, so I don't get your point. These were all first hand experiences with people I hunt with on deer and wild boar. I finished my statements noteing they were off topic, I was specifically  addressing your comments.

Get a life loser.

[Ak.Hiker]

Elmer Keith did not have any problem putting down one ton bulls with brain shots using several of his 44 Magnums. The loads he tested were the 240 grain Norma JSP, Remington 240 JSP, and the Winchester 240 JHP. While they all did the trick none of them had the penetration of his cast Keith load. Also the Winchester JHP opened up right away making the largest entrance hole and had the least penetration. In some of his Gun Notes he had good things to say about the Norma and Remington 240 grain JSP bullets.

[buck460XVR]

both will work  --for jhp I like Gold dots--xtp is also fine ///cast is my normal choice -as I cast

+1. Especially since we are talkin' black bears in the lower 48. My suggestion is to use whatever YOU feel most confident with....that way when then bear is using your arm as a appetizer, you have no one else to blame for bullet failure. Since facts and not internet chatter show bear spray to be many times better at deterring bear attacks at close range than any caliber handgun, iffin I was really concerned, that is what I would carry.

Maybe I'm foolish, but I have hunted/hiked in Black Bear country my whole life(I'm 55), this includes walking to and from deer stands in the dark thousands of times with only a bow......and never once did I feel the need to carry a backup for protection against them. This includes areas where the DNR has released problem bears that were trapped elsewhere in the state. The risk of being killed driving to and from my hunting areas is a thousand times more likely to kill me than a random attack from a Black Bear, but I still get in my truck and go.

[Redhawk1]

That may very well be true, and we all know 97% of all black bears are more afraid of us then we are of them. There is the one time chance you run into that 3%, and I want to be ready for it.

I have been walking in the woods and have come up a black bear, for a few tense seconds, but it sure felt nice knowing I had a good gun in my hand if things went wrong, but thankfully it never came to that.

[Ole Man Dan]

In the past I've killed my share of deer with 240 XTP, but I switched to 250-265 WFNGC and shoot my handloads.  I use my loads on everything from rocks & stumps to rabbits, deer & hogs. It became my everyday load of choice. I don't load mine real hot.  I try to stay around 1200-1250fps.  This load range will also stop a bear.  (My experience is bears generally don't want anything to do with men.  I also know that like men there are some bears that might hunt you, under some circumstances.  A heavy loaded .35 Whelen & either a .44 or .45 Colt are my items for comfort.)

[Larry Gibson]

Larry, you should take a basic english class as you obviously have not mastered the english language and now you are pissing me off as well as others,

Point about 12g, 357 and muzzle loader was referencing instances where bullets may stop just under the skin, which you claim is a myth not factual. Never said these weapons were not effective, so I don't get your point. These were all first hand experiences with people I hunt with on deer and wild boar. I finished my statements noteing they were off topic, I was specifically  addressing your comments.

Get a life loser.

Gotta love the personal comments.  Says a lot about you.

To address your point. What does stating "12g, 357 and muzzle loader was referencing instances where bullets may stop just under the skin, which you claim is a myth not factual" have to do with a mastery of the English language? 

Here is what i said to you; " I'm not sure of what muzzle loaders or 12 ga slugs you're using but I'm sure there is always a case or two of failure.  However I'll bet there's a hell of a lot more successful users of such.  Also you might want to remember that we're talking self defence against 2 legged varmints and maybe bears here, not hogs.  Question; what is the most often recommended weapon and ammo to use when in real bear country (Alaska)?  The answer is a shotgun with slugs.  That is recommended because it works.

I'm also not sure of what .357s with 125 gr SP/HPs has to do with a discussion of .44s."

I do not find anywhere in that wherein I refered to your statement specifically as a "myth".  Could you please show us since you obviously have a mastery of the English language.  Now if you do go back and reread the posts you'll find what I said to RedHawk1 not you, was; "I have been shooting .44s and hunting with them since '68 and seriously doubt any .44 jacketed HP, even the 180s, will flattem out just under the hide.  I've shot too many of them into too many critters to believe that myth."  That is my experience and I stand by it.  I will admit I've not shot any hogs in the brisket with one.  However this is about shooting bears and two legged varmints not hogs in the brisket.  had it been about shooting hogs in the brisket then I would have deferred to your obvious expertise.  How many bears have you shot with a .44? How many two legged varmints have you shot with a handgun?  I have shot both along with numerous other animals. If you want to disagree then by all means do so. That is what a "forum" is about. It is a discussion, not total agreement with each other.  I offered an alternative opinion to Scott. If you don't like it that's just too bad.

Larry Gibson

[Larry Gibson]

Larry Gibson, Federal makes hard cast loads, not just  Garret, also Cor-bon makes hard cast loads.  If you are going to go into bear country, it is not a big deal to order your ammo ahead of time. It is called preparing ahead of time, I thought most people do that now days.

And no where did I say only hard cast bullets are needed to kill a bear. But they sure beat the hell out of a JHP, anyone worth a darn can understand that.

As for the so called Myth, it was about bullets found under the hide where it did not penetrate the bone. Nothing to do with only hard cast bullets will kill bear. Just trying to keep you on track here.

RedHawk1

Obviously your opinion of who is "worth a darn" is what is important here.  What works obviously isn't.  I've stated both work but you and efrmtags obviously think only a 300+ hardcast WFN .44 bullet will kill a bear or two legged varmint.  Since I'm obviously "not worth a darn" and my opinion, along with the others here who have expressed the same, are "not worth a darn" then you win, ok?  You carry hard cast and I'll carry hardcast or SPs or HPs because I'll carry what I have with me in my .44s with complete confidence.  It's just my preference to use a good 240 gr SP or XTP when in serious bear country, but then I'm "not worth a darn" so you got it bub.

Larry Gibson

P.S.: I guess I'll consider myself to also be "not worth a darn" right along with Elmer (as was noted earlier)  because he used lots of the factory .44 Magnum SPs, the puny 240 gr ones at that, to kill far more critters than you or I will.  I consider that good company.

[corbanzo]

The biggest factor I see between the two, is there is a slight chance where a kill shot with a cast bullet would be somewhat deflected by bone if using a hollow point.  Against the fast mountain cats, I would rather have a hollow point for more of a wound channel for a possible faster kill, where larger bones aren't as big of a problem.  Any time there are bears involved I would rather have a hardcast.  I have seen some black bear skulls and bones that would make you take a second guess about your hollow point. 

I know hollow points have been use to kill lots of bears, the difference is when you are getting charged you have the big skill and those big shoulders pointed right at you.

[Redhawk1]

Larry Gibson, it does not have to be a 300 gr. hard cast bullet only. Why not get over that. You keep harping on that. I use 240 hard cast just as well. I also would use a JSP. Not a hollow point.

You want to compair yourself to Elmer Keith, I don't think so. Look at his bullets, and what he was famed for, it sure was not hollow point bullets.

Like I said, I have used hollow point bullets, when I was hunting a long time ago. But from my actual experience, they did not perform well or any where close to what I wanted from a hunting bullet. There are better choices for hunting, JSP and hard cast. I am talking game bigger than just deer.

Also there is a difference in stopping a charge or just hunting. When you are hunting, you pick your shot, most of the time. If you are charged, you don't get much of a choice, and relying on a hollow point bullet to reach the CNS to make a stop. And in my opinion the JHP does not offer the best chance for that. It does not take a lot of field experience to figure that out.

[Redhawk1]

 Keith-style bullets
Keith was also responsible for a number of bullet designs still popular today, and collectively called "Keith style" bullets. These bullets were based on the semi-wadcutter design, but using a wider than normal front surface, and convex sides. These changes increased the volume of the bullet outside the case, thus allowing more room inside the case, needed for large loads of slower burning powders. These bullets remain popular for both target shooting and hunting. When shooting paper targets, they cut a relatively clean hole in the target, yet provide more case volume and a better ballistic coefficient than a flat front wadcutter. When used for hunting, the heavy bullets provide excellent penetration; they are often used on dangerous game, for which more reliable penetration than is possible with expanding hollow point or soft point bullets is required. The relatively sharp edges of the flat nose and shoulder cut tissue, rather than pushing it aside like a typical round nosed bullet, which results in more tissue damage and faster incapacitation of the target.

[Larry Gibson]

RedHawk1

"Me think thou doe'st protest too much".....you already won.  I was not follish enough to compare myself to Elmer, only said I was in good company.  Perhaps there in lays the problem; neither of us are wrong but just misunderstanding what is said by each other.  However you have won, you are right as always, ok. There's no need to further argue your point.

Larry Gibson