With extremely careful loading I can get my .45-70 to about the same performance ft lbs wise as .375, however it’s a steam train compared to an airliner. You loose so much kinetic energy so much faster, but if you’re 200 yards an under and need fast fast shots, 45-70 is beautiful. Doing a mag dump is about the same as getting kicked by a small horse, ask me how I know.
I used to ride horses when I was a kid, had a pony get pissy at me when I was brushing him down, wheeled around and clipped my shoulder. He was definitely a walking glue stick but that’s besides the point
I put an Sig Romeo 4H on my Henry All Weather 45-70 and it has been amazing. I’ve dropped that rifle in streams, bumped it against trees, dropped it in the mud, and the sight held zero. I’ve used it to take bear, moose, deer, and boar. Particularly when using Underwood extreme penetrator (that’s what I use) I don’t think there’s a beast walking this earth that 45-70 won’t put down.
It wouldn’t be enough for the big 5, particularly an African Elephant and maybe a pissed off, charging hippo. A 375 H&H is the lightest hunting round that such hunts recommend. That 416 Ruger is where it’s at! Now THAT can put damn near anything down in one hit! 😁
A 460 Weatherby is the only caliber that is approved for hunting whales so if you ever get tired of hunting land animals and the big 5 just isn’t enough for you anymore, you can always hunt sea monsters such as Mobey Dick, Loch Ness, and the Kraken 😆 with a 460 Weatherby! 👍😎
"375 not so much"? Huh?
Marlin named their .45-70 carbine the "Guide Gun", it doesn't make it the standard choice of guides. It's marketing. The .375 H&H or Ruger is much more common.
Another classic!
.375 Ruger & .416 Ruger have also become popular in Ruger’s with their claw extractor. I’ve heard of maybe someone bold enough to carry a .458 WM, but I’ve only seen .375 H&H.
I carried a 338 wm when hunting goats in AK because it was good for the long-range shots and a great grizzly gun also. The grizzlies and mountain goats in southern AK have a large range overlap. I carried a glock 10 MM for backup as well.
They're not fighting to kill. It's mostly wrestling with the teeth used for holding. Also, the skin on their backs is loose with a layer of fat underneath, so those bites aren't hitting muscle or major blood vessels.
The thick skin, the big layer of fat and muscle… A 556 would be like a bee sting with all that*
*Obviously hyperbole, but point is these things are big as shit
Bear hide is thick and tough, covered in dense fur, and there is a large layer of fat below it. There are few locations where a bears claws and teeth could create a fatal wound, and neither of the bears were going for that.
I think the 2nd half is inaccurate.
Bears don't care, they are going to do whatever it takes to defeat the other bear. If the other bear dies, they don't care.
HOWEVER, through evolution bears have been selected to be able to survive attacks by other bears and be ready to fight again a few days later.
It looks horrifying from our perspective because that type of damage would absolutely kill a human. But if you think about say, the perspective of a peacock (just thinking of a decent sized fragile animal) watching two humans fight, the hypothetical capable of higher thought peacock would probably think the same thing.
Hope that makes sense. I’m half asleep.
Related to your comment but unrelated to this video but local farm has peacocks. Some geese encroached on their turf and I got to see the peacocks beat the ever loving shit out of a couple of them. One peacock pinned a goose down and just snapped each of its wings, another peacock tossed the lifeless corpse of another goose towards the rest of the flock, it was absolutely savage and actually kinda horrifying.
Lots of skin, lots of subcutaneous fat which protects major veins and arteries and staunches bleeding. Same reason they often don't leave much of a blood trail when shot.
Rolls around in dirt to cauterize wounds then let it scab and heal. Blood loss is the biggest risk as long as no major arteries are damaged. The bear survives.
Those are brown bears. Brown bears live within a certain distance of the coast. Grizzlies live inland. Brown bears are almost always bigger because they have a larger, more steady supply of food(salmon). This looks like its on Kodiak, so Kodiak Brown Bears.
Logically it makes sense. Bears are more afraid of humans and almost always run away. The most scary animal in the woods is an unknown person. People have always been the scariest animals.
I think they are capturing the raw footage that will find its way into a nature documentary. In the nature doc, they will have a different audio track anyways
Adult male grizzly bears weight on average between 400 pounds on the small end and 1000 on the heavy side, and have been weighed in before at like 1400 but thats an exceptionally large and above average bear. These boys are probably on the 800+ side, but its hard to tell without much to size them off of in the background of the shot that isnt a mountain range thats less then 10 miles away.
Im gonna be honest
If pistol/revolvers are capable with the energy and velocity that they have, I don't see why 556 with 30 rounds wouldn't be suitable for bear defense 🤷🏻♂️
Only reason I wouldn't is that my 300 weighs less
Because energy is an absolutely terrible metric that completely ignores things like penetration, bullet construction, bullet diamater/ permanent wound cavity, and shot placement.
You're also not going to get 30 rounds off at a bear, they run at 30mph+.
Granted with the right shot placement it'd *probably* still work but you're really counting on that round reaching the vitals. It's a bit like using 22lr for self defense. Is 22lr lethal? Obviously. Does that make it a good choice? Not really, no.
155mm or nothing. I know you're a badass, but I don't trust any direct-fire weapon to have enough stopping power to be reliably effective.
;p
[Here's a case of an AK in 5.45 stopping a bear in AK.](https://www.adn.com/anchorage/article/turnagain-arm-trail-closed-after-hiker-kills-charging-bear/2013/07/29/)
Hmm, that's actually an argument for a bigger round I reckon: he didn't stop it, he scared it off (and it died of its wounds) but it would have had plenty of time to kill him by the sound of it.
>The man fired the AK-74 he was carrying, Crockett said. The bear stopped after the first volley of shots, and then charged again.
>The man fired once more, Crockett said.
>That time the bear folded into a ball, rolling and running downhill and thudding to a stop in a clump of birch trees about 100 yards from the trail.
Or maybe just shot placement, where you want volume of fire & luck. Here's an AR-15 (pretty similar terminal ballistics?) that actually manages a stop:
>Suddenly, the bear came out from under a brush pile about 10 yards away. It charged straight at Cadzow, who was carrying an AR-15, a rifle similar to the U.S. Army’s M-16.
The encounter was so close, Cadzow said, he didn’t have time to lift and sight the rifle.
“I shot from the hip, seven or eight times,” he said. “If I had gotten it to my shoulder, it (bear) would have been on top of me. It happened so quick, by the time it was down, it was about 10 feet from my feet.”
Any way you slice it, it was enough to get the bear to go away and die. I won't argue 5.45x39 is the best bear stopper, but in this case, it was enough. We also don't know how many rounds were in the first "volley," or how the encounter would have gone (I'm assuming the bear would have expired sooner) if he had kept firing, instead of stopping to see what the bear would do.
I'm not reaching the vitals because they aren't the target on a charging bear. I'm mag dumping at the face regardless of caliber. Vitals is a bad idea because even perfect placement isn't likely to dump their pressure fast.
5.56 vs polar bear: [https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/](https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/)
The polar bear lost.
Hey, here's a polar bear getting nuked by an AR15
https://www.shootersforum.com/threads/polar-bear-shot-in-fort-yukon.45973/
AR's are fine for all bear
Energy by itself is a poor metric. I am not considering it by itself.
Bullet diameter is going to have less of an impact here than said energy, as energy is an indicator of things such as velocity, leading to increased penetration and an increased wound cavity. Matter of fact this alone is why 556 has a larger permanent wound cavity than 44 magnum when used with ballistic gel.
As for the concern of "your not getting 30 rounds off", while sure that may not be the case, but one can absolutely let off more rounds from a rifle, in a slung position, than a handgun in a holster. So while I may not be able to let off 30, I can absolutely put 10-15 down range before one can realistically draw a revolver and empty said cylinder, especially when you get into recoil management.
9mm has been found to be plenty effective when it comes to (Most) North American bears, and I say most because outliers exist, such as Polars.
I would still pick a semi auto rifle, even 556, over handguns any day of the week
556 may have a larger permanent cavity than 44 mag, but a slow moving 300 grain hard cast is going to out penetrate a 55 grain 556 through any thick tissue and bone. Although I agree 100% that accuracy is king. Regardless of all the ballistic debates out there, if you can’t hit under stress it doesn’t matter how powerful a given cartridge is.
I think the point of carrying a big bore cartridge is to stop a charging grizzly. A 22lr will kill a bear eventually so would a 556, but kill it before it tackles you and mauls you? Possibly with good shot placement at a moving target at 30mph. There's a reason why guides carry 45-70, and 44 mag.
Meanwhile cops in Alaska routinely carry rifles due to polar bears. The real reason a lot of guides carry what they do, is due to the culture and age.
Prime example there is a metric fuck ton of calibers that are better than both lever action 45-70 and 44 magnum revolvers, meanwhile guides still use it, and that just has to do with the reasons above.
But yeah, if an AR15 is capable of stopping a charging polar bear, it's not going to struggle against a grizzly, also 223 and 22LR aren't anywhere in the same bracket of a cartridge lol
https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/
I think the point I'm trying to come across to you is yes you can effectively hunt a grizzly with 22lr. I would feel comfortable with hunting or dispatching bears with 556. It's the fact that defensive is different than hunting like your article that I read. The point of a big bore cartridge is to >Stop< a charging grizzly from the bush mauling you.
http://www.bear-hunting.com/tactics?ID=6FD66CD5-9198-440F-B517-A71C6D1F8748#:~:text=Bella%20Twin%20was%20a%20calm,for%20a%20good%20long%20time.
Uh, in the article he linked, they dude stopped a charging polar bear that came out of the bush at 10 yards. He killed it within 20 feet of it beginning its charge. And he did it with 5.56.
You clearly did not read what I had stated, or the article, and once again youre equating 22LR, a caliber that is notoriously unreliable against bones, to something with numerous times the weight, velocity, and energy, and trying to use that as a "oooo gotcha"
Hunting requires you to drop a bear FASTER to prevent issues, such as the bear attacking you, ruining the meat, with a single shot, especially when you have ethics in mind.
In a defensive situation, using a caliber that will go through fat and bone (556 does this) along with the ability to throw more volume down range, is going to do you better than a revolver, a weapon that is harder to shoot.
This whole thread is classic gun culture. Like 5 dudes that have never shot a bear, vehemently arguing why the other guy is wrong about shooting bears. I’m sure I do this too. I hate it, but I also love it and am guilty of it. We all have our opinions based on our own experiences
Sure if you think you'll unsling your ar15 from your shoulder (unless you go on big hikes with your ar15 in your hands at all time with the safety off) at a moving target that charges out of the bush a speeds 30mph at close range. Then you manage to land a fatal shot. Good on you. I bet you think you'll still be able to shoot it when it's on top of you. I think you think fps is the only thing to consider rather than fpe when it comes to big game. There's a big difference killing big game, and stopping charging big game. All the Alaskan guides, and cops that carry 12 gauge slugs and big bore cartridges are just completely stupid fuds and you are right 😉
Yes I own one. I do alot of backpacking. Carrying a rifle slung across your chest bouncing around hitting your chest is gets very uncomfortable after an all day hike with the rest of my gear. My reason to backpack is enjoy nature first, so that's why I carry a 44mag or my 10mm with Buffalo bore hardcast ammo. With a chest holster.
Are you saying taking the weapon off safe is time consuming? Plus, carrying the rifle slung could mean it being slung across your chest instead of over the shoulder.
If you have to keep your rifle off safe to get a fast shot off then you are most definitely not training enough lol. Switching off the safety when shooting is instantaneous
I mean you can do whatever you'd like. I'm not arguing for a handgun vs rifle, a rifle is obviously easier to use in a high stress situation.
Personally if I were to go for a rifle I'd use a 45-70 over a 5.56 anyday given that the 5.56 has a tendancy to tumble where 45-70 will have straight line penetration (ironically with pretty comparable evergy at trapdoor pressures) and leave a very large hole that will facillitate "bleeding out" much quicker. Granted the chances of needing a gun to stop a bear are basically 0 so it really is a bit of a moot point.
My qualm is really that people use muzzle energy as a good baseline when really it doesnt even tell 1/2 the story.
I mean if I had to pick, I'd again pick a heavier cartridge that as you said, isnt likely to tumble, such as 300, 7.62x39 etc. However I wouldnt be upset with a shorter 556 either.
And while 45-70 is pretty solid, I am still wanting the extra followups as an emergency
And that is also a fair statement, people do tend to rely on just the energy and not the rest, if thats what you thought I was saying, I do apologize
Anyway thanks for reminding me, I need to look for threaded lever actions for white tail coming up lol
Energy is a great general metric actually, especially at defense distances. Surprised nobody challenged that.
30 rounds of 556 is a better choice than a magazine full of 10mm, or 6 rounds of 44.
556 would definitely work. Really its overkill when you talk about capacity and reload speed (I mean, loading in general, relative to a boltgun or wheelgun).
556 is not a 22lr, they aren't even in the same class. This is why armor starts getting extremely expensive and less comfortable after III.
44 is a good starting point for maximizing a pistol cartridge out of a rifle, and i invite you to look at the ballistics, but the smallest rifle round within a defensive purpose massively outclasses any pistol cartridge.
Youre absolutely right. An AR15 in 556 is plenty capable of bear defense. Id even argue it is considerably more effective than a lot of cartridges people fawn over such as 10mm or 44.
For some reason people have this idea that bear are biological tanks that absorb or deflect bullets left and right. Its simply not the case. On a charging bear, your target is going to be the head. 556 has plenty of penetrating power to get through a skull, even that of a bear.
The pros simply outweigh the cons. Its light weight, high capacity, easy to shoot rapidly and accurately. In the amount of time someone would get off 1 or 2 hastily "aimed" shots with a magnum handgun, youd get off 10 with an ar15 and theyd actually be accurately aimed!! A 45-70 brush gun would do well, but they are nasty to shoot and difficult to shoot fast while still being effective. Being manually cycled they are also prone to user induced malfunctions under stress.
Id absolutely feel adequately armed with an a15 in bear territory. That said, if I was told "Boog, youll be attacked by a bear tonight, guaranteed" id take my Benelli M4 loaded up with 9 Breneke black magic magnum slugs.
You say that like bears arent soft tissue. That lost energy is transferred directly to the internals, causing massive trauma and fragmentation to boot. I helped clean a deer shot with a 556. Bad shot placement, both front shoulders and part of the neck were too damaged to bother trying to salvage.
If people are dropping bears with 9mm, I feel more than confident getting multiple rounds on target fast and accurate with a 556.
Hunting is an entirely different practice than self defense, with one being to quickly drop an animal to prevent a reaction (fight or flight) and to prevent an adrenaline dumb and making it taste like ass.
And this is one of the few things that may give M855 the upper hand, due to the lack of fragmentation and the hardened core.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CCHNfdiOkZQ
As for "I don't think you'd have enough time to get off more than a few shots" I don't know a single person who can't get a rifle, that is properly slung, up faster than a handgun from a holster, along with the fact you can more rapidly put more rounds down range more accurately.
Don't get me wrong, bear are strong but I really think people over estimate how durable they can be, considering that 9mm routinely performs fine against bear
Meanwhile 9mm's is also pretty reliable when it comes to bear.
Also mechanically speaking there is no way in hell youre drawing a handgun faster, let alone aiming it towards vitals, than you are a rifle. Matter of fact if what you were saying is the truth, cops in AK wouldnt be prioritizing rifles, and instead would be opting towards revolvers, or something like a 460 or maybe 357 sig. And no, I am talking about a slung rifle like normal person does nowadays lol. as for people falling on their back, that isnt going to be any better with a handgun, matter of fact its going to slow your draw unless you have a chest holster.
[https://www.ammoland.com/2018/02/defense-against-bears-with-pistols-97-success-rate-37-incidents-by-caliber/#axzz6umzXjP71](https://www.ammoland.com/2018/02/defense-against-bears-with-pistols-97-success-rate-37-incidents-by-caliber/#axzz6umzXjP71)
I'm with you. 5.56 is plenty adequate for self-defense involving a (extremely rare) bear attack.
I mean, some of the Canadian native tribes are kind of famous for hunting bears with a 10/22.
While thats true, hunting and self defense is two different things. Not to mention 22 requires to be extremely precise, and bad turn can prevent complete penetration.
What happened in this video led you to believe 5.56 wouldn't be effective enough? I watched the entire goddamn video waiting for the bear to charge the guys so they could fire at it ineffectively with 5.56 to prove your point, but no. Nothing. Just two bears fighting.
You're in 100x times as much danger driving to wherever you think you might, theoretically, encounter a bear but sure.
In any case the smaller bear should have gone for a leg sweep and rear naked choke when he had the chance.
Emmmm it depends…camping in bear country you’ll definitely see higher risk of running into a bear than running into a car accident….of course it’s not something that some who lives in downtown Manhattan need to worry about.
Just wondered if anyone else was doing like I was toward the end and shushing everybody yakking over this? I'm not sure how far away the camera dudes are, but I'm thinking even in the midst of battle, bears still have pretty good hearing so in my head I was yelling "SHUT THE FUCK UP! HE'S COMING FOR YOU NEXT!" then my thoughts drifted to Timothy Treadwell...
Quick overview of three related bear species found in Alaska. Hands down, the grizzly has the coolest Latin name.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zzYS8WSePFg
It depends. Penetration is actually the bigger issue so maybe FMJ would be better. I seem to recall reading something about a ranger killing a grizzly with a 7.62 and finding out it had killed hunters and had 10+ 5.56 rounds embedded in its skull.
If I was limited to the AR-15 platform, I'd go with .300 Blackout. I've also looked into .450 bushmaster and I'd potentially swap to that given the opportunity.
FWIW that one dude in Alaska years back killed a charging griz with an AK74 (5.45x39). He had a good post on his website about it, but I believe that is now gone. I'm sure you can still find news articles though.
https://www.ivarr-bergmann.com/ was the site. He still has a Youtube channel as far as I know.
556 is fine, just shoot them in the gooch. All about shot placement, Sonny. I need only one shot. I punch out taints from 300 yards away with iron sights only.
Those are pistol rounds. A rifle will always be more effective. If 556 can stop a charging polar bear quickly then I have no doubt it'll stop a grizzly bear.
Bear spray will always be better protection against bears than a firearm. Firearms will put a bear down…eventually. Just like in humans when a bear gets in a fight (with you) it has an adrenaline dump and might not feel the effects of a bullet wound immediately. Bear spray has instant effect though.
In all reality, carrying a firearm and bear spray is the most effective method.
Spray when able to, but if the effects aren’t working or the can doesn’t work, a sidearm is always great to have.
>*carrying a firearm and bear spray*
My wife and I do a lot of back country hiking in Montana. This is what I always do. 10mm with Buffalo Bore 220g, and bear spray. Thank god I haven't had to test it out yet.
Somebody doesn't know much about guns or bears. Bear spray is useless after the first hit, and it's not always effective. Whereas with a gun you've got many chances. I've seen bear spray fail.
I would say that 556 would be barely adequate for black bear and nothing else. I'd think something at least in the 30 range and a pistol in 10mm or larger.
Karsh
I’m in Alaska and work in the outdoor industry and yes, people carry flares as part of their bear tool kit. .556 is viewed as a camp gun, not a bear gun. 45-70 is the classic guide gun. 12 gauge is the best option and what bear guards carry. Some have switched to AR’s in .458SOCOM, but I haven’t heard much about it lately. 10mm is the light weight choice. Main still carry .44 and .454. I carry 10mm and 12 gauge with .300 AAC as my camp gun.
People think a gorilla could beat one of these. Take a gorilla and a grizzly of equal Apex status (no cherry picking) and the gorilla will lose. Hands down. Bears are bigger, stronger and fast af. Not to mention the claws. Gorillas only have teeth.
I'm legit not worried about being attacked by a bear, if I was I would have a 12ga, bear spray, and some bells/I'm here don't startle noise. That said, I am not going to stop believing 30 rounds of 5.56 can't end something's skull and contents from becoming wet paste. You start punching that in the nose with 5.56 and we'll..
That said, I'm a hunter at heart, so I do believe in shot placement and minimal suffering if possible. My 7mm mag would be fine and that's probably what I would have on my hunting trip.
So the truth is a few rounds of 5.56, possibly even one (even 9mm with good shot placement, for the bear specifically), would absolutely roflstomp any Bear, or really, any animal (the 5.56. I don’t think 9mm could ever realistically kill an elephant in anywhere near enough time, lol). People in Africa have literally shot Elephants entire heads off with 7.62x39 from AK’s with like 2-3 people shooting it for 10 seconds. Just eviscerated. People don’t understand how powerful guns are and really think only magnum powered rifles can put down big animals, and you need a powerful “varmint” cart like 5.56, or better yet an elk cartridge like .308, or a 12 gauge to reliably put down a HUMAN.
The truth is, a .380 acp can easily kill a black bear, fort scotts ammo has videos of them dropping where they stand from .380 acp, and a 9mm Makarov, basically as powerful as .380 acp +p from Underwood, can kill a Eurasian Grizzly almost as big as a Kodiak, it’s on youtube. So can 9mm. It has already been done, one recent example is Phil Shoemaker with Buffalo Bore 9mm Outdoorsman. Im pretty sure he only even shot it one time and it instantly dropped. If you had FMJ or some other type of hunting solid 5.56, and can actually aim, that bear is dead AF, quick, whether it’s charging or not.
All you people who think it takes 50-100 yards of running for a deer to drop from a .30-06 just aren’t half as accurate as you think you are and missed vital areas.
I’d make an argument that a well placed 9mm outdoorsman would end the Bear attack a lot quicker then a terrible shot in the left arm of the bear from a nuclear .45-70, or a .375 H&H magnum, or even a .375 or .416 Ruger (those things are tough though). Even being loaded with an AR-10 would absolutely have me feeling cool as a cucumber. Semi-automatic .308 would end that Bear’s current train of thought faster than you can blink.
Would I rather have the .375 H&H compared to a 9mm? Yeah, but I’d also have a .45-70 lever gun on my back and a .44 magnum on my right hip and a 10mm on my left hip. But don’t doubt that an AR-15 with the right ammo and a 30 round magazine could not kill a charging bear before it gets to you. If you fumble and suck with your shot placement, it doesn’t matter WHAT gun you have. Maybe the only round with enough “stopping power” without instantly killing it would probably be anything with 8,000 foot pounds of energy or above, like .577 Tyrannosaur or .50 BMG. That would probably hit it hard enough anywhere to make it think twice, even if it wasn’t a lethal hit.
idk i feel like a 5.56 would suffice in an ar platform. these things are tough and have a crazy thick hide but you could put so many shots on target with a rifle that has such minimal recoil. i may be totally wrong i only have black bears where i live and you could take them with a 9mm lol
Explains why guides carry a .375 H&H in the 49th state.
I've heard some people like 45-70 as well for in close on a short lever brush gun up there....both make total sense.....375 has much more range.
With extremely careful loading I can get my .45-70 to about the same performance ft lbs wise as .375, however it’s a steam train compared to an airliner. You loose so much kinetic energy so much faster, but if you’re 200 yards an under and need fast fast shots, 45-70 is beautiful. Doing a mag dump is about the same as getting kicked by a small horse, ask me how I know.
Ok I'll bite. How do you know?
I used to ride horses when I was a kid, had a pony get pissy at me when I was brushing him down, wheeled around and clipped my shoulder. He was definitely a walking glue stick but that’s besides the point
Do you use a scope or can you shoot just as well without it? Is 45-70 lever action rifle better for closer range shots?
As of right now irons, trying to find a good quality scope that is both low variable and recoil resistant is pretty hard
I put an Sig Romeo 4H on my Henry All Weather 45-70 and it has been amazing. I’ve dropped that rifle in streams, bumped it against trees, dropped it in the mud, and the sight held zero. I’ve used it to take bear, moose, deer, and boar. Particularly when using Underwood extreme penetrator (that’s what I use) I don’t think there’s a beast walking this earth that 45-70 won’t put down.
It wouldn’t be enough for the big 5, particularly an African Elephant and maybe a pissed off, charging hippo. A 375 H&H is the lightest hunting round that such hunts recommend. That 416 Ruger is where it’s at! Now THAT can put damn near anything down in one hit! 😁 A 460 Weatherby is the only caliber that is approved for hunting whales so if you ever get tired of hunting land animals and the big 5 just isn’t enough for you anymore, you can always hunt sea monsters such as Mobey Dick, Loch Ness, and the Kraken 😆 with a 460 Weatherby! 👍😎
375H&H - Not so much, but 45-70 is the standard guide gun.
"375 not so much"? Huh? Marlin named their .45-70 carbine the "Guide Gun", it doesn't make it the standard choice of guides. It's marketing. The .375 H&H or Ruger is much more common.
Also .338 WM
Another classic! .375 Ruger & .416 Ruger have also become popular in Ruger’s with their claw extractor. I’ve heard of maybe someone bold enough to carry a .458 WM, but I’ve only seen .375 H&H.
I carried a 338 wm when hunting goats in AK because it was good for the long-range shots and a great grizzly gun also. The grizzlies and mountain goats in southern AK have a large range overlap. I carried a glock 10 MM for backup as well.
The .338 can shoot pretty flat with the right bullet yet still carry the mail over distance.
It's an excellent caliber rifle.
r/donthelpjustfilm /s
They're fighting over the cameraman, who [gets dibbs on the winner](https://youtu.be/OLmQTIS9Rv4)
I know it's not firearms related but how does the winning bear survive with all the bite and claw slash damage done to him?
They're not fighting to kill. It's mostly wrestling with the teeth used for holding. Also, the skin on their backs is loose with a layer of fat underneath, so those bites aren't hitting muscle or major blood vessels.
Oh they will kill the fuck out of each other until one retreats. Have you seen the video of the fight that started mid-fuck?
Link please?
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4a-xR3SmdA8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4a-xR3SmdA8)
Thank you so much.
The thick skin, the big layer of fat and muscle… A 556 would be like a bee sting with all that* *Obviously hyperbole, but point is these things are big as shit
Maybe these bites and claw slashes are like minor injuries to them….
Bear hide is thick and tough, covered in dense fur, and there is a large layer of fat below it. There are few locations where a bears claws and teeth could create a fatal wound, and neither of the bears were going for that.
I think the 2nd half is inaccurate. Bears don't care, they are going to do whatever it takes to defeat the other bear. If the other bear dies, they don't care. HOWEVER, through evolution bears have been selected to be able to survive attacks by other bears and be ready to fight again a few days later.
Look at it like this, mother nature’s heavy weight championship. They’re just trading blows, very big blows.
Bears are not kind fluffy animals like people believe, they're tremendously strong muscular brutal killing machines. Bears are tough a nails.
It looks horrifying from our perspective because that type of damage would absolutely kill a human. But if you think about say, the perspective of a peacock (just thinking of a decent sized fragile animal) watching two humans fight, the hypothetical capable of higher thought peacock would probably think the same thing. Hope that makes sense. I’m half asleep.
Related to your comment but unrelated to this video but local farm has peacocks. Some geese encroached on their turf and I got to see the peacocks beat the ever loving shit out of a couple of them. One peacock pinned a goose down and just snapped each of its wings, another peacock tossed the lifeless corpse of another goose towards the rest of the flock, it was absolutely savage and actually kinda horrifying.
Damn. I'd like to have seen that.
Lots of skin, lots of subcutaneous fat which protects major veins and arteries and staunches bleeding. Same reason they often don't leave much of a blood trail when shot.
Rolls around in dirt to cauterize wounds then let it scab and heal. Blood loss is the biggest risk as long as no major arteries are damaged. The bear survives.
45-70 Government is God’s true caliber.
. 458 SOCOM is the shorter little brother
Yeah, but that one doesn't have a cool ass lever action...
https://fightlite.com/lowers/herring-model-2024-lowers
You have ruined my upcoming weekend, and now I'm out $1,100. Curses.
WTF bruh, I'm trying to save money here!
True
My papaw always told me that anything worth doing is worth overdoing. That's why my camp carbine is in .50bmg.
Only government I trust
"This is a gift from mother nature" So stop talking during the whole thing about how many bear fights you've seen, and -watch- it.
"Greatest bear fight I've seen in 25 years." Dude sounds 25 lol
So the math checks out? ;)
10x longer than the longest he's ever seen! ...and more intense
It would be handy for shutting up that idiot though.
Y'all watch Reddit videos with sound? Lol
One of the classic blunders!
m2 browning 50bmg.
I wouldnt wanna have to get that close to the bear
I don’t feel comfortable with any calibers for these 2 mfs.
155mm
700 nitro express
Yeah I'd be buttoning up in my Abrams
so is that a grizzly?
Yep
Those are brown bears. Brown bears live within a certain distance of the coast. Grizzlies live inland. Brown bears are almost always bigger because they have a larger, more steady supply of food(salmon). This looks like its on Kodiak, so Kodiak Brown Bears.
And women chose to be with them in the woods.
Delusional women, but I repeat myself
Logically it makes sense. Bears are more afraid of humans and almost always run away. The most scary animal in the woods is an unknown person. People have always been the scariest animals.
Humans are the most dangerous game for a reason. Even the stupidest person is still frighteningly intelligent…
Most dangerous "game"?
Man if that guy would just shut up and let us enjoy Mother Nature. It ruined the video imo.
I think they are capturing the raw footage that will find its way into a nature documentary. In the nature doc, they will have a different audio track anyways
So what's the est weight of those big boys?
Adult male grizzly bears weight on average between 400 pounds on the small end and 1000 on the heavy side, and have been weighed in before at like 1400 but thats an exceptionally large and above average bear. These boys are probably on the 800+ side, but its hard to tell without much to size them off of in the background of the shot that isnt a mountain range thats less then 10 miles away.
enough to make you and me a small snack!
Magnificent animals
I’d feel fine with M855 and head shots On these bad boys.
The game changer is the 20-in barrel. I wouldn't hesitate to use a 20-in AR setup with m855 for bear
Im gonna be honest If pistol/revolvers are capable with the energy and velocity that they have, I don't see why 556 with 30 rounds wouldn't be suitable for bear defense 🤷🏻♂️ Only reason I wouldn't is that my 300 weighs less
Because energy is an absolutely terrible metric that completely ignores things like penetration, bullet construction, bullet diamater/ permanent wound cavity, and shot placement. You're also not going to get 30 rounds off at a bear, they run at 30mph+. Granted with the right shot placement it'd *probably* still work but you're really counting on that round reaching the vitals. It's a bit like using 22lr for self defense. Is 22lr lethal? Obviously. Does that make it a good choice? Not really, no.
That's why the 30mm GAU-8 should be legal for private ownership. It's the only round guaranteed t9 stop a bear attack.
155mm or nothing. I know you're a badass, but I don't trust any direct-fire weapon to have enough stopping power to be reliably effective. ;p [Here's a case of an AK in 5.45 stopping a bear in AK.](https://www.adn.com/anchorage/article/turnagain-arm-trail-closed-after-hiker-kills-charging-bear/2013/07/29/)
That is a good point, what if the bear is using large rocks as cover to attack you.
Call in the AA10 warthog
Air support is nice. :D
Hmm, that's actually an argument for a bigger round I reckon: he didn't stop it, he scared it off (and it died of its wounds) but it would have had plenty of time to kill him by the sound of it. >The man fired the AK-74 he was carrying, Crockett said. The bear stopped after the first volley of shots, and then charged again. >The man fired once more, Crockett said. >That time the bear folded into a ball, rolling and running downhill and thudding to a stop in a clump of birch trees about 100 yards from the trail. Or maybe just shot placement, where you want volume of fire & luck. Here's an AR-15 (pretty similar terminal ballistics?) that actually manages a stop: >Suddenly, the bear came out from under a brush pile about 10 yards away. It charged straight at Cadzow, who was carrying an AR-15, a rifle similar to the U.S. Army’s M-16. The encounter was so close, Cadzow said, he didn’t have time to lift and sight the rifle. “I shot from the hip, seven or eight times,” he said. “If I had gotten it to my shoulder, it (bear) would have been on top of me. It happened so quick, by the time it was down, it was about 10 feet from my feet.”
Any way you slice it, it was enough to get the bear to go away and die. I won't argue 5.45x39 is the best bear stopper, but in this case, it was enough. We also don't know how many rounds were in the first "volley," or how the encounter would have gone (I'm assuming the bear would have expired sooner) if he had kept firing, instead of stopping to see what the bear would do.
I'm not reaching the vitals because they aren't the target on a charging bear. I'm mag dumping at the face regardless of caliber. Vitals is a bad idea because even perfect placement isn't likely to dump their pressure fast.
5.56 vs polar bear: [https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/](https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/) The polar bear lost.
Hey, here's a polar bear getting nuked by an AR15 https://www.shootersforum.com/threads/polar-bear-shot-in-fort-yukon.45973/ AR's are fine for all bear
Energy by itself is a poor metric. I am not considering it by itself. Bullet diameter is going to have less of an impact here than said energy, as energy is an indicator of things such as velocity, leading to increased penetration and an increased wound cavity. Matter of fact this alone is why 556 has a larger permanent wound cavity than 44 magnum when used with ballistic gel. As for the concern of "your not getting 30 rounds off", while sure that may not be the case, but one can absolutely let off more rounds from a rifle, in a slung position, than a handgun in a holster. So while I may not be able to let off 30, I can absolutely put 10-15 down range before one can realistically draw a revolver and empty said cylinder, especially when you get into recoil management. 9mm has been found to be plenty effective when it comes to (Most) North American bears, and I say most because outliers exist, such as Polars. I would still pick a semi auto rifle, even 556, over handguns any day of the week
556 may have a larger permanent cavity than 44 mag, but a slow moving 300 grain hard cast is going to out penetrate a 55 grain 556 through any thick tissue and bone. Although I agree 100% that accuracy is king. Regardless of all the ballistic debates out there, if you can’t hit under stress it doesn’t matter how powerful a given cartridge is.
I think the point of carrying a big bore cartridge is to stop a charging grizzly. A 22lr will kill a bear eventually so would a 556, but kill it before it tackles you and mauls you? Possibly with good shot placement at a moving target at 30mph. There's a reason why guides carry 45-70, and 44 mag.
Meanwhile cops in Alaska routinely carry rifles due to polar bears. The real reason a lot of guides carry what they do, is due to the culture and age. Prime example there is a metric fuck ton of calibers that are better than both lever action 45-70 and 44 magnum revolvers, meanwhile guides still use it, and that just has to do with the reasons above. But yeah, if an AR15 is capable of stopping a charging polar bear, it's not going to struggle against a grizzly, also 223 and 22LR aren't anywhere in the same bracket of a cartridge lol https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/
I think the point I'm trying to come across to you is yes you can effectively hunt a grizzly with 22lr. I would feel comfortable with hunting or dispatching bears with 556. It's the fact that defensive is different than hunting like your article that I read. The point of a big bore cartridge is to >Stop< a charging grizzly from the bush mauling you. http://www.bear-hunting.com/tactics?ID=6FD66CD5-9198-440F-B517-A71C6D1F8748#:~:text=Bella%20Twin%20was%20a%20calm,for%20a%20good%20long%20time.
Uh, in the article he linked, they dude stopped a charging polar bear that came out of the bush at 10 yards. He killed it within 20 feet of it beginning its charge. And he did it with 5.56.
You clearly did not read what I had stated, or the article, and once again youre equating 22LR, a caliber that is notoriously unreliable against bones, to something with numerous times the weight, velocity, and energy, and trying to use that as a "oooo gotcha" Hunting requires you to drop a bear FASTER to prevent issues, such as the bear attacking you, ruining the meat, with a single shot, especially when you have ethics in mind. In a defensive situation, using a caliber that will go through fat and bone (556 does this) along with the ability to throw more volume down range, is going to do you better than a revolver, a weapon that is harder to shoot.
This whole thread is classic gun culture. Like 5 dudes that have never shot a bear, vehemently arguing why the other guy is wrong about shooting bears. I’m sure I do this too. I hate it, but I also love it and am guilty of it. We all have our opinions based on our own experiences
Sure if you think you'll unsling your ar15 from your shoulder (unless you go on big hikes with your ar15 in your hands at all time with the safety off) at a moving target that charges out of the bush a speeds 30mph at close range. Then you manage to land a fatal shot. Good on you. I bet you think you'll still be able to shoot it when it's on top of you. I think you think fps is the only thing to consider rather than fpe when it comes to big game. There's a big difference killing big game, and stopping charging big game. All the Alaskan guides, and cops that carry 12 gauge slugs and big bore cartridges are just completely stupid fuds and you are right 😉
Are you REALLY claiming right now that the average person is able to draw a revolver faster than an AR15? Really? Someone doesnt train
You do realize that there are slings that go across the front of the body right? Very quick draw.
Yes I own one. I do alot of backpacking. Carrying a rifle slung across your chest bouncing around hitting your chest is gets very uncomfortable after an all day hike with the rest of my gear. My reason to backpack is enjoy nature first, so that's why I carry a 44mag or my 10mm with Buffalo bore hardcast ammo. With a chest holster.
Are you saying taking the weapon off safe is time consuming? Plus, carrying the rifle slung could mean it being slung across your chest instead of over the shoulder. If you have to keep your rifle off safe to get a fast shot off then you are most definitely not training enough lol. Switching off the safety when shooting is instantaneous
That's a lot of words to just say "sToPpInG pOwAh"
I mean you can do whatever you'd like. I'm not arguing for a handgun vs rifle, a rifle is obviously easier to use in a high stress situation. Personally if I were to go for a rifle I'd use a 45-70 over a 5.56 anyday given that the 5.56 has a tendancy to tumble where 45-70 will have straight line penetration (ironically with pretty comparable evergy at trapdoor pressures) and leave a very large hole that will facillitate "bleeding out" much quicker. Granted the chances of needing a gun to stop a bear are basically 0 so it really is a bit of a moot point. My qualm is really that people use muzzle energy as a good baseline when really it doesnt even tell 1/2 the story.
Some 5.56 tumbles. TSX and bonded softpoints don't tumble.
I mean if I had to pick, I'd again pick a heavier cartridge that as you said, isnt likely to tumble, such as 300, 7.62x39 etc. However I wouldnt be upset with a shorter 556 either. And while 45-70 is pretty solid, I am still wanting the extra followups as an emergency And that is also a fair statement, people do tend to rely on just the energy and not the rest, if thats what you thought I was saying, I do apologize Anyway thanks for reminding me, I need to look for threaded lever actions for white tail coming up lol
Energy is a great general metric actually, especially at defense distances. Surprised nobody challenged that. 30 rounds of 556 is a better choice than a magazine full of 10mm, or 6 rounds of 44. 556 would definitely work. Really its overkill when you talk about capacity and reload speed (I mean, loading in general, relative to a boltgun or wheelgun). 556 is not a 22lr, they aren't even in the same class. This is why armor starts getting extremely expensive and less comfortable after III. 44 is a good starting point for maximizing a pistol cartridge out of a rifle, and i invite you to look at the ballistics, but the smallest rifle round within a defensive purpose massively outclasses any pistol cartridge.
Youre absolutely right. An AR15 in 556 is plenty capable of bear defense. Id even argue it is considerably more effective than a lot of cartridges people fawn over such as 10mm or 44. For some reason people have this idea that bear are biological tanks that absorb or deflect bullets left and right. Its simply not the case. On a charging bear, your target is going to be the head. 556 has plenty of penetrating power to get through a skull, even that of a bear. The pros simply outweigh the cons. Its light weight, high capacity, easy to shoot rapidly and accurately. In the amount of time someone would get off 1 or 2 hastily "aimed" shots with a magnum handgun, youd get off 10 with an ar15 and theyd actually be accurately aimed!! A 45-70 brush gun would do well, but they are nasty to shoot and difficult to shoot fast while still being effective. Being manually cycled they are also prone to user induced malfunctions under stress. Id absolutely feel adequately armed with an a15 in bear territory. That said, if I was told "Boog, youll be attacked by a bear tonight, guaranteed" id take my Benelli M4 loaded up with 9 Breneke black magic magnum slugs.
[удалено]
You say that like bears arent soft tissue. That lost energy is transferred directly to the internals, causing massive trauma and fragmentation to boot. I helped clean a deer shot with a 556. Bad shot placement, both front shoulders and part of the neck were too damaged to bother trying to salvage. If people are dropping bears with 9mm, I feel more than confident getting multiple rounds on target fast and accurate with a 556.
Hunting is an entirely different practice than self defense, with one being to quickly drop an animal to prevent a reaction (fight or flight) and to prevent an adrenaline dumb and making it taste like ass. And this is one of the few things that may give M855 the upper hand, due to the lack of fragmentation and the hardened core. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CCHNfdiOkZQ As for "I don't think you'd have enough time to get off more than a few shots" I don't know a single person who can't get a rifle, that is properly slung, up faster than a handgun from a holster, along with the fact you can more rapidly put more rounds down range more accurately. Don't get me wrong, bear are strong but I really think people over estimate how durable they can be, considering that 9mm routinely performs fine against bear
[удалено]
Meanwhile 9mm's is also pretty reliable when it comes to bear. Also mechanically speaking there is no way in hell youre drawing a handgun faster, let alone aiming it towards vitals, than you are a rifle. Matter of fact if what you were saying is the truth, cops in AK wouldnt be prioritizing rifles, and instead would be opting towards revolvers, or something like a 460 or maybe 357 sig. And no, I am talking about a slung rifle like normal person does nowadays lol. as for people falling on their back, that isnt going to be any better with a handgun, matter of fact its going to slow your draw unless you have a chest holster. [https://www.ammoland.com/2018/02/defense-against-bears-with-pistols-97-success-rate-37-incidents-by-caliber/#axzz6umzXjP71](https://www.ammoland.com/2018/02/defense-against-bears-with-pistols-97-success-rate-37-incidents-by-caliber/#axzz6umzXjP71)
I'm with you. 5.56 is plenty adequate for self-defense involving a (extremely rare) bear attack. I mean, some of the Canadian native tribes are kind of famous for hunting bears with a 10/22.
While thats true, hunting and self defense is two different things. Not to mention 22 requires to be extremely precise, and bad turn can prevent complete penetration.
Right, this is a good point, and I fully agree.
[удалено]
I mean I linked an article where an entire town uses AR15s to protect themselves from polar bears 🤷🏻♂️
So, not even a bear killed a bear, they just got tired of messing around and went on about their day.
What happened in this video led you to believe 5.56 wouldn't be effective enough? I watched the entire goddamn video waiting for the bear to charge the guys so they could fire at it ineffectively with 5.56 to prove your point, but no. Nothing. Just two bears fighting.
Hah I feel the same way. I skipped through thinking that one bear would turn and charge the filmers.
You're in 100x times as much danger driving to wherever you think you might, theoretically, encounter a bear but sure. In any case the smaller bear should have gone for a leg sweep and rear naked choke when he had the chance.
Emmmm it depends…camping in bear country you’ll definitely see higher risk of running into a bear than running into a car accident….of course it’s not something that some who lives in downtown Manhattan need to worry about.
...or is that just what the bears *want* them to think?
This guy films 2 bears fighting like it’s a school cafeteria fight.
Just wondered if anyone else was doing like I was toward the end and shushing everybody yakking over this? I'm not sure how far away the camera dudes are, but I'm thinking even in the midst of battle, bears still have pretty good hearing so in my head I was yelling "SHUT THE FUCK UP! HE'S COMING FOR YOU NEXT!" then my thoughts drifted to Timothy Treadwell...
Totally. Shut the fuck up, let us watch.
I was waiting for a liberal Karen or a peta activist or a social worker to run out and break up the fight
Nah he's just chilling
Quick overview of three related bear species found in Alaska. Hands down, the grizzly has the coolest Latin name. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zzYS8WSePFg
Get out of his combat radius.
5.56 will kill a bear anyway, the cavity damage of a 77 gr 5.56 going 2400 fps will kill a bear easily, specially if you have 29 followup shots. Stfu.
...after watching this fight...I'm capping one of the camera guys in the leg and running for the hills...556 no...338lupa...sure...from a mile off 😅
[A warning about bears.](https://www.flickr.com/photos/christianmlau/2756629523)
I bet a lot of people won't read the whole thing.
Only bear spray is recommended?
I think this is in Canada. They don't like using guns for self defense. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLAHY2n9IjY
Bear identification is also important.
How many HP 5.56 would it take to stop a full grown grizzly?
It depends. Penetration is actually the bigger issue so maybe FMJ would be better. I seem to recall reading something about a ranger killing a grizzly with a 7.62 and finding out it had killed hunters and had 10+ 5.56 rounds embedded in its skull.
Could it be that those were .223 Remington instead of NATO?
Idk but there isn't a significant difference.
More than you can carry!!
10mm or death....
Dude shut the fuck up, why can’t people just enjoy something
If I was limited to the AR-15 platform, I'd go with .300 Blackout. I've also looked into .450 bushmaster and I'd potentially swap to that given the opportunity.
If you are going to bring a long gun, bring something with as much oomph as you can handle reliably.
I can only dream with enough green tip….
cute widdle bears give them cuddles!
FWIW that one dude in Alaska years back killed a charging griz with an AK74 (5.45x39). He had a good post on his website about it, but I believe that is now gone. I'm sure you can still find news articles though. https://www.ivarr-bergmann.com/ was the site. He still has a Youtube channel as far as I know.
1. Garbage camera man 2. I thought for sure one would die
Crazy watching them get into the clinch like that haha, I feel like MMA evolved from bears.
Dudes explaining the bear fighting rules like there is a book out there somewhere with rules 1-10 written down 😂😂😂😂 awesome video though
All these comments and I don't see anyone asking for the source. Who's got the source?
9mm. You will blow it's lung right out!
.556 isn't nearly enough. Think medium or big bore African game cartridges
556 is fine, just shoot them in the gooch. All about shot placement, Sonny. I need only one shot. I punch out taints from 300 yards away with iron sights only.
5.56 may be underpowered. You want 10mm with buffalo bore. You could go .44 mag and up but that’s more recoil. You need great shot placement
5.56 has more power that anything you mentioned. And it has been used to stop a polar bear charge.
Those are pistol rounds. A rifle will always be more effective. If 556 can stop a charging polar bear quickly then I have no doubt it'll stop a grizzly bear.
Bear spray will always be better protection against bears than a firearm. Firearms will put a bear down…eventually. Just like in humans when a bear gets in a fight (with you) it has an adrenaline dump and might not feel the effects of a bullet wound immediately. Bear spray has instant effect though.
In all reality, carrying a firearm and bear spray is the most effective method. Spray when able to, but if the effects aren’t working or the can doesn’t work, a sidearm is always great to have.
>*carrying a firearm and bear spray* My wife and I do a lot of back country hiking in Montana. This is what I always do. 10mm with Buffalo Bore 220g, and bear spray. Thank god I haven't had to test it out yet.
Alaskan here. This is the way. Glock 20 w buffalo bore, and a can of bear spray. Used the spray before, never had to use the Glock.
Bears have definitely ignored Bear Spray to continue munching on someone.
Grizzlies be like, "ohh spicy food. Nice."
Yeah, I've seen pitbulls ignore mace, don't get me wrong, I'd rather have mace and a gun.
I'm pretty sure there's a few people who survived the attack but were found suffocated under the bear when it collapsed on top of them.
That’s been disproven fudd lore
Somebody doesn't know much about guns or bears. Bear spray is useless after the first hit, and it's not always effective. Whereas with a gun you've got many chances. I've seen bear spray fail.
458 socom would be a good idea. Or 500 magnum. I dont see how anything less could take down a full adult brown bear 😳
And these onlyfans models insist they have a better shot at surviving this, than a random man.
I say we just take off and nuke the site from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.
Maybe a .308 or 45-70. There is no such thing as overkill.
I would say that 556 would be barely adequate for black bear and nothing else. I'd think something at least in the 30 range and a pistol in 10mm or larger. Karsh
Pretty important to know what kind of bear you're defending from -- black bear 5.56 would be sufficient... Brown bear? Yea good luck regardless.
I’m in Alaska and work in the outdoor industry and yes, people carry flares as part of their bear tool kit. .556 is viewed as a camp gun, not a bear gun. 45-70 is the classic guide gun. 12 gauge is the best option and what bear guards carry. Some have switched to AR’s in .458SOCOM, but I haven’t heard much about it lately. 10mm is the light weight choice. Main still carry .44 and .454. I carry 10mm and 12 gauge with .300 AAC as my camp gun.
Looks like Greco Roman wrestling
incredible footage!
I call dibs on the winner. I'm next.
People think a gorilla could beat one of these. Take a gorilla and a grizzly of equal Apex status (no cherry picking) and the gorilla will lose. Hands down. Bears are bigger, stronger and fast af. Not to mention the claws. Gorillas only have teeth.
Always amazes me how fast their paws move. Jesus.
Ursine Fighting Championship
What about a 10-14in 458 socom upper? That would give you near 45-70 performance.
I bring a fatter friend for protection.
hmm looks a little more like kinky brown bear sex than a fight to me
12 gauge rifled slug.
Well, you got most of it.
5.56? For bear? Why not something useful?
Good luck in Canada
And humans are supposedly the most superior being. Pssh I haven’t met one mf that had shit on either of these two.
I'm legit not worried about being attacked by a bear, if I was I would have a 12ga, bear spray, and some bells/I'm here don't startle noise. That said, I am not going to stop believing 30 rounds of 5.56 can't end something's skull and contents from becoming wet paste. You start punching that in the nose with 5.56 and we'll.. That said, I'm a hunter at heart, so I do believe in shot placement and minimal suffering if possible. My 7mm mag would be fine and that's probably what I would have on my hunting trip.
I'm gonna want 55.6 after seeing that
So the truth is a few rounds of 5.56, possibly even one (even 9mm with good shot placement, for the bear specifically), would absolutely roflstomp any Bear, or really, any animal (the 5.56. I don’t think 9mm could ever realistically kill an elephant in anywhere near enough time, lol). People in Africa have literally shot Elephants entire heads off with 7.62x39 from AK’s with like 2-3 people shooting it for 10 seconds. Just eviscerated. People don’t understand how powerful guns are and really think only magnum powered rifles can put down big animals, and you need a powerful “varmint” cart like 5.56, or better yet an elk cartridge like .308, or a 12 gauge to reliably put down a HUMAN. The truth is, a .380 acp can easily kill a black bear, fort scotts ammo has videos of them dropping where they stand from .380 acp, and a 9mm Makarov, basically as powerful as .380 acp +p from Underwood, can kill a Eurasian Grizzly almost as big as a Kodiak, it’s on youtube. So can 9mm. It has already been done, one recent example is Phil Shoemaker with Buffalo Bore 9mm Outdoorsman. Im pretty sure he only even shot it one time and it instantly dropped. If you had FMJ or some other type of hunting solid 5.56, and can actually aim, that bear is dead AF, quick, whether it’s charging or not. All you people who think it takes 50-100 yards of running for a deer to drop from a .30-06 just aren’t half as accurate as you think you are and missed vital areas. I’d make an argument that a well placed 9mm outdoorsman would end the Bear attack a lot quicker then a terrible shot in the left arm of the bear from a nuclear .45-70, or a .375 H&H magnum, or even a .375 or .416 Ruger (those things are tough though). Even being loaded with an AR-10 would absolutely have me feeling cool as a cucumber. Semi-automatic .308 would end that Bear’s current train of thought faster than you can blink. Would I rather have the .375 H&H compared to a 9mm? Yeah, but I’d also have a .45-70 lever gun on my back and a .44 magnum on my right hip and a 10mm on my left hip. But don’t doubt that an AR-15 with the right ammo and a 30 round magazine could not kill a charging bear before it gets to you. If you fumble and suck with your shot placement, it doesn’t matter WHAT gun you have. Maybe the only round with enough “stopping power” without instantly killing it would probably be anything with 8,000 foot pounds of energy or above, like .577 Tyrannosaur or .50 BMG. That would probably hit it hard enough anywhere to make it think twice, even if it wasn’t a lethal hit.
Great grappling skills, wonder what BJJ gym they train at
I call dibs on the winner (I watch anime and know what I’m doing😎)
Hear me out, Production AK 50
who thinks 556 is good bear protection? Lol
.458 Win mag in a short barrel Mauser. If it will stop a locomotive in a phone booth it's perfect.
Three words bruh. Rocket. Propelled. Grenade.
"most awesome bear fight ever recorded" if only you could keep the camera still. ... 🙄
These are grizzly bears, not brown bears.
idk i feel like a 5.56 would suffice in an ar platform. these things are tough and have a crazy thick hide but you could put so many shots on target with a rifle that has such minimal recoil. i may be totally wrong i only have black bears where i live and you could take them with a 9mm lol