Mountain Lion Defensive Pistol

[FATAL125]

Get yourself a Bulge holster and start printing...

View attachment 1827570

I dont remember consenting to that picture...

There's cameras everywhere...


...and ceiling cats...

View attachment 1827573

WTF...

 

[Ura-Ki]

The .357 and 10 mm in their more powerful loads are equivalent in power. So if 357 is "barely adequate for deer" and inadequate for black bear, so is 10mm, assuming you are comparing the best possible bear loads for each. (The people purporting to prove that 10mm is better for SD against bear are always comparing a hot 10mm load with a shot or mid power 357 load. Or a 10mm with round flat nose bullets against a 357 jhp.) Either one can get into the brain of a black bear with a shot to the skull from the front with full power loads with bullets that are harddobe4 and RNFP. If it takes a .44 mag to do the job on grizzlies, that means neither the 357 or 10mm is adequate in grizzly turf. As for shooting a bear somewhere other than the brain or spine, it doesn't cause instant incapacitation. Meaning the bear can maim or kill you while dying if it feels like it. Most black bears will quit attacking and run if wounded. But not all. Most grizzlies would rather spend their dying seconds maiming or killing you, but a few will instead run when injured. If you expect to instantly incapacitate a bear shooting it in the shoulder, heart, or body you need a high power rifle to do that.

A rifle has limitations too. Many times an attack by a bear or cougar happens so fast or unexpectedly the animal has knocked you down and might be chewing on your arm while you struggle on the ground, your rifle still slung on your back. You probably won't be able to deploy the rifle. You can deploy a handgun faster, and also if struggling on the ground. If you are chopping wood you probably set rifle aside. But not your handgun. I think a rifle svcks for SD against bad people in the woods. The bad guy can be passing you on the trail, and just say hello and act like he is passing. Then punch you in the face and grab the rifle. The rifle is unconcealed, so its obvious how to negate it.

As for spray being the most effective-- I suspect most of the cases where people report a bear attack they stopped with spray, it was just a bluff charge the bear was using to chase the intruder away from his/her cubs, berry patch, or fishing spot. The sensible person with a gun would be waiting quietly, gun aimed at bear till it was optimally close. And the bear who was bluffing would stop and withdraw. So incident wouldn't be reported as a bear attack. I used to carry spray and a gun when walking my dog in an area I lived in Minnesota with many loose dogs, some dobermans. Biggest problem was when my b!tech was in heat. I must have sprayed dogs at least 30 times. Sometimes the dog sneezed. Not once was any dog affected enough to withdraw and leave my b!tch alone. Even when the dog got a full snoots worth from a foot away. And if there was much wind sometimes I couldn't even get the spray on the dog. Turned out that every brand of spray legal to sell to civilians or legal for civilians to own in MN was watered down stuff.

Got a good example for ya! Cousins and I got a once in a life time guided bear hunt in Alaska, Big Coastal Browns. We're three days into the hunt and haven't seen any decent or legal bears. Day four and my oldest cousin spots a great big hulking old man of a bear, grey face and all and decided he isn't wasting a hunt so he brings the 7 mm mag up to his shoulder and takes aim and lets fly, that big 170 grain solid smashed through the front left shoulder and into the boiler room, should be a dead bear, but it only made that monster madder then a full nest of hornets, and he got a charge on, right for my cousin who is half in awe and disbelief, the other half panic mode, and he lets another shot go, hits low in the chest, and that only makes that bruin even madder. Our Guide is packin a .338 Win Mag, and he is too far behind us to make any sort of safe shot, so I toss my .375 Weatherby Mag to my other cousin and he lets a 350 grain solid fly, hits that old geezer right square under the chin, right through the neck and blows out the spine, that big bear still got three more big steps in before he came crashing to the ground, maybe 50 feet from Mr. 7mm Mag! Even a rifle in the wrong caliber will have issue stopping a pissed off predator, especially a wounded bear that had lived as long as that old feller! I'm not saying my .375 would have done the job on the first shot, but it sure would have made that charge a hell of a lot harder and a lot slower! Same hunt, other cousin gets an awesome boar in his sights, cranks a big 465 grain .45/70 into the chamber of his old trusty Marlin and lets fly, hits his bear right square in the boiler room, no iffs ands or butts, that big boy dropped where he stood! Upon gutting and dressing him out, we found the mushroomed slug on the far side of the rib cage, along with several pretty good size chunks of rib and lung splatter all over the inside of the wound cavity, even better was the heart basically was obliterated, no wonder he dropped so fast! If this wasn't a hunt, and instead a survival ordeal, the first bear would have taken a head shot, and that would have been game over before it ever got started, that old bear would have been wondering how he was suddenly standing in the lush fields of heaven!

 

[orygun]

Hot .357 and hot 10mm are pretty similar to .41 magnum, still nowhere near the good old .44 (which I can't shoot quickly enough to use for defensive carry).

Apparently you have no experience with a 41 Magnum. It's much closer to the 44 and head and shoulders above the 357/10mm range.
Anyone comparing the 10mm to the 41 Mag are, as in @OldBroad44 's post, comparing a Buffalo Bore loading in 10mm to the 175Gr Silvertip or 210gr Remington "police" load for the 41, which are the equivalent to a 38 Special in a 357.

If it can be done with a 44, it can be done with a 41.

 

[oremike]

Apparently you have no experience with a 41 Magnum. It's much closer to the 44 and head and shoulders above the 357/10mm range.
Anyone comparing the 10mm to the 41 Mag are, as in @OldBroad44 's post, comparing a Buffalo Bore loading in 10mm to the 175Gr Silvertip or 210gr Remington "police" load for the 41, which are the equivalent to a 38 Special in a 357.

If it can be done with a 44, it can be done with a 41.

I'll agree that 41 Mag is above 357/10mm but it's not a 44 Mag. As they say it drag racing "there is no replacement for displacement". Elmer Keith and friends developed the 41 for when the 44 Mag was too much and the 357 Mag was not enough for whatever the task at hand.

 

[orygun]

I'll agree that 41 Mag is above 357/10mm but it's not a 44 Mag. As they say it drag racing "there is no replacement for displacement". Elmer Keith and friends developed the 41 for when the 44 Mag was too much and the 357 Mag was not enough for whatever the task at hand.

And missed the "middle point" by a bunch! That's the reason the police departments that adopted the 41 Mag didn't keep it for long.
That, and the gun was big and heavy.

 

[Bobbygun]

Here's mine... now you can think about it even more

View attachment 1827562

I was going to ask if you were a tall, bald, black man named "Hawk", but I think he just had a Python.

I almost bought an 8" Python at a pawn shop a few years back. It was there on consignment. I kinda knew the guy behind the counter and he asked - "What would you do with it?" When I couldn't really come up with a good answer, I saved myself a couple grand. I have a .44 mag Desert Eagle. Fortunately, there wasn't anyone there to kill the vibe when I purchased it. Of course, it was only $600, which was a steal at the time.

 

[DeanMk]

And missed the "middle point" by a bunch! That's the reason the police departments that adopted the 41 Mag didn't keep it for long.
That, and the gun was big and heavy.

The reason the .41 lost favour with LEO was because originally there were two loadings; The hunting round and the police round.
The hunting round's velocity was listed @ 1500 mv. Basically, the "full throttle" version.
The police round's veloity was 1050 mv. The "still-powerful-but-much-more-controlled" round.
Both shot a 210 gr, bullet. The hunting bullet was jacketed and the police round was a LSWCGC.
Instead of simply having Police issued the .41 Mag Police loads only, they were allowed to buy the rounds at their discretion, and their discretion was to buy the more powerful round, mainly due to a lack of education of what the rounds were built for.
The full power hunting rounds proved uncontrollable and many officers didn't like shooting them, liking them to .44 mag rounds, and simply went back to the .357.
Those officers that were lucky enough to actually use the police loading, while on duty, found them to be a very effective round.
The model 57 was an N-frame, same as the model 28. While it makes sense to attempt using the lightest sidearm capable of doing the job, any officer who'd been using the model 28 for any amount of time isn't going to feel any difference in how the 57 carries because it's essentially the same gun chambered for a more capable round.
You could cite the rise of the models 13/19 as ending the career of the model 28, but it was really just S&W trying to one-up Colt, as they had developed a slightly smaller and lighter gun (than the models 27/28) during the war, which was simply known as "the .357 magnum" (eventually would be renamed the Trooper model).
The problem with the K-frames was S&W found they were actually too light to use the .357 all the time, so officers were instructed to used .38 +P rounds for day-to-day use and only load the .357's for when more power was needed (likely, most just carried with 357, despite what they were told).
By the end of the revolver era, most officers were issued either a model 19 or a model 15, although they always had the choice to carry and use any gun they wanted to, as long as they could qualify with it.

 

[DunRanull]

For me at this point it would be a .357 or the ol .44 Redhawk. That is what I carry out in the hills, of course there is a 12ga, .30-30 or 7.62x39 close by... have shot a few bears with the 12 ga over the years.

 

[OldBroad44]

And missed the "middle point" by a bunch! That's the reason the police departments that adopted the 41 Mag didn't keep it for long.
That, and the gun was big and heavy.

Are the .41 mag revolvers actually designed for 41 mag? Or are the guns identical to .44mags except with cylinder chambers, forcing cones and bores slightly smaller? If the latter the .41 mag would be the same size as the .44 mag and would actually weigh more. ???

If the 41 revolvers are a little smaller and lighter overall, that would be an advantage of the .41 over the .44. At least for someone like me who prefers midrange .44 mag loads instead of full power loads for all routine SD carry in the OR woods, plinking, and recreation. 1000 rather than 1200 ft. lbs. Enjoyable to shoot for me with one hand with either hand. And with adequately quick follow-up shots, even shooting one handed. At least in standard guns like the unscoped 6" 629 Classic or 6" Anaconda .44. But if current .41 mag guns are just slightly modified versions of the equivalent 44 mag guns I see no point to them. I can get the somewhat milder recoil from just choosing the right mid-range .44 mag ammo. And I retain the versatility of being able to shoot full power .44mag loads for contexts in which I would use both hands on the gun anyway, such as hunting.

 

[OldBroad44]

Oops, my bad. I intended to say 9mm is barely adequate for deer (I know folks that use it in carbines, I personally find it lacking at distance). Hot .357 and hot 10mm are pretty similar to .41 magnum, still nowhere near the good old .44 (which I can't shoot quickly enough to use for defensive carry).

The benefit to 10mm is you have a dense and large round that penetrates, and you have many rounds before you save the last one for yourself if Mr. Griz is feeling particularly feisty! And more importantly, you have more rounds for the more real threat... other humans that may intend harm.

Ahhh. Plenty of people make that mistake but it didn't sound right coming from you, @clanhanson . Shoulda suspected a simple glitch.

 

[clanhanson]

Apparently you have no experience with a 41 Magnum. It's much closer to the 44 and head and shoulders above the 357/10mm range.
Anyone comparing the 10mm to the 41 Mag are, as in @OldBroad44 's post, comparing a Buffalo Bore loading in 10mm to the 175Gr Silvertip or 210gr Remington "police" load for the 41, which are the equivalent to a 38 Special in a 357.

If it can be done with a 44, it can be done with a 41.

What I should've said is: 357/10mm CAN be pushed to .41 mag equivalence, but .41 mag can push further if you don't mind punishing the frame a bit.

Cute lil giggling fella is back, aww

 

[DeanMk]

Are the .41 mag revolvers actually designed for 41 mag? Or are the guns identical to .44mags except with cylinder chambers, forcing cones and bores slightly smaller? If the latter the .41 mag would be the same size as the .44 mag and would actually weigh more. ???

If the 41 revolvers are a little smaller and lighter overall, that would be an advantage of the .41 over the .44. At least for someone like me who prefers midrange .44 mag loads instead of full power loads for all routine SD carry in the OR woods, plinking, and recreation. 1000 rather than 1200 ft. lbs. Enjoyable to shoot for me with one hand with either hand. And with adequately quick follow-up shots, even shooting one handed. At least in standard guns like the unscoped 6" 629 Classic or 6" Anaconda .44. But if current .41 mag guns are just slightly modified versions of the equivalent 44 mag guns I see no point to them. I can get the somewhat milder recoil from just choosing the right mid-range .44 mag ammo. And I retain the versatility of being able to shoot full power .44mag loads for contexts in which I would use both hands on the gun anyway, such as hunting.

N-frame is an N-frame is an N-frame.
Model 57. 48.1 oz.
Model 29. 48.3 oz.
Model 27. 46.6 oz.

All guns linked have same barrel length. Not sure why the .357 is lighter. Maybe the barrel is smaller.

When it comes to Cougar's though, I still think .38 Special is fine...

 

[orygun]

Are the .41 mag revolvers actually designed for 41 mag? Or are the guns identical to .44mags except with cylinder chambers, forcing cones and bores slightly smaller? If the latter the .41 mag would be the same size as the .44 mag and would actually weigh more. ???

If the 41 revolvers are a little smaller and lighter overall, that would be an advantage of the .41 over the .44. At least for someone like me who prefers midrange .44 mag loads instead of full power loads for all routine SD carry in the OR woods, plinking, and recreation. 1000 rather than 1200 ft. lbs. Enjoyable to shoot for me with one hand with either hand. And with adequately quick follow-up shots, even shooting one handed. At least in standard guns like the unscoped 6" 629 Classic or 6" Anaconda .44. But if current .41 mag guns are just slightly modified versions of the equivalent 44 mag guns I see no point to them. I can get the somewhat milder recoil from just choosing the right mid-range .44 mag ammo. And I retain the versatility of being able to shoot full power .44mag loads for contexts in which I would use both hands on the gun anyway, such as hunting.

I know of only one 41 Magnum revolver that isn't the same gun as the 44, but with smaller holes. Yeah, they weigh more because of that. The one exception is the Taurus Tracker in 41 Mag. There's another thread floating around here where I mentioned the Model 69 Smith, dreaming out loud for one in 41 Mag, instead of the 44 Mag chambering.
In reality, the 44 Mag is better than the 41 because of popularity. Guns and ammo are much more readily available in 44 and the ammo is less expensive.
The 41 operates at significant pressures, so there isn't much room for "scaling down" compared to the 44. And it's not like it's that much smaller, .410" vs. .429". The difference is just enough that a 41 case will slide snugly into a 44 case.

Cute lil giggling fella is back, aww

And this means what?

 

[clanhanson]

And this means what?

Oh, just saying hi to the shy member that's always applying laugh emojis to my posts regardless of content. Disregard

 

[OldBroad44]

An N-frame is an N-frame...

Not really. The 629 Classic has the heavy under lugged barrel. The 629 standard does not. Big difference in weight and totally different balance. There also are two different kinds of grip frames, with the square butt apparently weighing slight more than the round butt. Thats 4 different frame weights right there. Then in speaking of barrel lengths we often round to the nearest inch. And the 629 standards are available in 6" but the 629 Classics are made in 6.5", not 6". Then SW started selling standard barrel blue 29s under the name of "Classics", in spite of having already designated " classic" to mean under lugged barrels, blue or SS. If you search for 6" 629s on gun broker you will get a mix of 629 standard barrel 6" and 6 1/2" heavy under lugged barrel.

 

[DeanMk]

Not really. The 629 Classic has the heavy under lugged barrel. The 629 standard does not. Big difference in weight and totally different balance. There also are two different kinds of grip frames, with the square butt apparently weighing slight more than the round butt. Thats 4 different frame weights right there. Then in speaking of barrel lengths we often round to the nearest inch. And the 629 standards are available in 6" but the 629 Classics are made in 6.5", not 6". Then SW started selling standard barrel blue 29s under the name of "Classics", in spite of having already designated " classic" to mean under lugged barrels, blue or SS. If you search for 6" 629s on gun broker you will get a mix of 629 standard barrel 6" and 6 1/2" heavy under lugged barrel.

(geez louise)...fine, don't believe me. Go to S&W's website. Click on Revolvers. Click on N-Frame. Look through the selection of guns shown.
Those are all N-frame guns.
It will include the guns you mentioned.....do you know why that is?
BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL N-FRAME GUNS!
It doesn't matter how the gun is outfitted. THAT DOESN'T CHANGE THE FRAME SIZE.
A FREAKIN' N-FRAME IS A FREAKIN' N-FRAME!!

 

[OldBroad44]

(geez louise)...fine, don't believe me. Go to S&W's website. Click on Revolvers. Click on N-Frame. Look through the selection of guns shown.
Those are all N-frame guns.
It will include the guns you mentioned.....do you know why that is?
BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL N-FRAME GUNS!
It doesn't matter how the gun is outfitted. THAT DOESN'T CHANGE THE FRAME SIZE.
A FREAKIN' N-FRAME IS A FREAKIN' N-FRAME!!

Yes. Anything SW calls an N frame is an N frame as far as I know. One size. Just like 3" is one length .That goes without saying. But your giving a little list of three N frame revolvers with similar barrel lengths all that happen to be very similar weights seemed to imply more. Such as N frames of the same barrel length would be similar in weight. Or that if one N frame suits you and fits your hand the others will too.

For anyone wondering about those two issues, neither is true. Both the N frame under lugged barrel gun such as the 629 Classic and the N frame 629 standard without under lugged barrel are N frames. But the Classic weighs more and has a very muzzle heavy balance. The 629 standard in similar barrel lengths is significantly lighter and has a more grip heavy balance. In addition, the N frame guns can have either a round or a square butt grip frame. The round butt can take modern grips designed for either round or square butts. But the square butt frames can only take grips designed for square butt frames. There aren't many after market choices for square butt grip frames. I've been unable to find any that suit my hand, in spite of a hand that takes a men's medium in glove sizes.

 

[DeanMk]

Yes. Anything SW calls an N frame is an N frame as far as I know. One size. Just like 3" is one length .That goes without saying. But your giving a little list of three N frame revolvers with similar barrel lengths all that happen to be very similar weights seemed to imply more. Such as N frames of the same barrel length would be similar in weight. Or that if one N frame suits you and fits your hand the others will too.

For anyone wondering about those two issues, neither is true. Both the N frame under lugged barrel gun such as the 629 Classic and the N frame 629 standard without under lugged barrel are N frames. But the Classic weighs more and has a very muzzle heavy balance. The 629 standard in similar barrel lengths is significantly lighter and has a more grip heavy balance. In addition, the N frame guns can have either a round or a square butt grip frame. The round butt can take modern grips designed for either round or square butts. But the square butt frames can only take grips designed for square butt frames. There aren't many after market choices for square butt grip frames. I've been unable to find any that suit my hand, in spite of a hand that takes a men's medium in glove sizes.

You're the one who asked about weight.

 

[orygun]

There aren't many after market choices for square butt grip frames. I've been unable to find any that suit my hand, in spite of a hand that takes a men's medium in glove sizes.

I wear a men's size large glove and it's tight. I have very good hand strength.
I really don't like the way square but grip frame fits in my hand. I also do not like large grips. Smith and Wesson target grips almost feel to me like the first Glock 21 I picked up and that reminded me of a 2x4! The Hogue wood grips on my round butt J-Frame fit me so well the gun actually feels better under recoil than my 686 round butt with Altamonts on it. Neither gun's grips cover the backstrap.

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

Option 1:
-357 or larger pistol
-rearview mirrors on your cap. (lions prefer to attack from behind)
-large ball of twine

Method:
If you see a lion following you, throw the ball of twine (optional). Then while it's distracted playing with the ball of twine(unlikely)...shoot it! Tell the Ranger you attempted to get away by distracting the cat but you were forced to shoot it.

OR.....

Option 2:
-22lr pistol
-a hiking buddy that you don't much like (maybe a hipster or PETA member?)
-rearview mirrors on your cap. (lions prefer to attack from behind)

Method...use the 22 pistol to shoot buddy in the legs, run like he1l.

OR.....

Option 3:
-big ol' monster caliber revolver
-hiking buddy you sorta like (should be shorter, fatter, slower than you)
-rearview mirrors on your cap. (lions prefer to attack from behind)

Method... if you see lion sneaking up behind, turn and shoot it. If it attacks from the front, turn and run, then turn again and shoot it while it's chewing on your shorter, fatter, slower hiking buddy.

OR.....

Option 4:
-Pick up your best bud after telling your wife you're going "hiking"
-go to a breakfast buffet
-go to a good gun store and look at big revolvers
-go to a friendly bar

Method:
While you're chewing on waffles and bacon between hiking several times around the buffet, devise a story of how you chased off a mountain lion by sticking it with your knife, pick up your buddy's meal and bar tab so he'll back up your story. Tell your wife that you really don't think you can talk about now...and don't forget to add "all I could think of at the time, (sigh) was if I would make it home to you".
You're not doing anything wrong...
....After all, there really was some "hiking" and "Lyin'" involved

Large ball of twine FTW!