Is this a practical sidearm in case of an up close Bigfoot encounter?

[BlackRockBigfoot]

My recon kit bag as pull tabs on the zippers, but I want an easier way to open it under stress.  

 

That and I will be wearing gloves throughout much of the winter....if we ever get any winter that is....

[norseman]

3 hours ago, MIB said:

 

You missed my points.      Lets try again.  

 

1) We are not on opposite sides.   I absolutely don't go into the woods unarmed.  

 

2) If you are going in after bigfoot, hunting to kill one, rather than focusing on self-protection, a rifle is preferable to any handgun. 

 

3) The .500 is a poor choice of handgun for defensive use.    The gun is heavy, almost 3 (25 oz vs 69 oz) times the weight of my S&W .44 (329PD).    This requires a lot of extra consideration regarding holsters.   Even with a good bandolier holster, I find that much weight fatiguing after a half day.   It is not particularly shootable.  The recoil makes quick follow up shots nearly impossible to deliver accurately.  

 

I absolutely agree, better to have it and not need it than the other way around.    True for seat belts, PFDs, condoms, and handguns.   Probably other things as well.   Probability of a problem may be low but the consequences of having one are extreme.

 

FWIW, I like the 10mm but mine is a single action revolver, not semi-auto.   When I go to the woods, I generally pick one of a pair of .44 revolvers.    One is around 25 ounces but is un-fun to shoot, the other is 45 ounces and, while "peppy", is shootable.    The only time I don't take them is when I grab my .454.   It's a beast to shoot, not as painful as the light .44, but it makes bigger holes through things.   

 

MIB

 

 

 

I agree with you that some hand cannons become unwieldy defeating the purpose of a pistol. 

 

I do not agree that they would not do something that requires defensive action. I think they are quite capable of premeditated kidnapping and predation. Possibly when the lack of a long gun is observed?

 

I commend you on your insatiable appetite for Elmer Keith’s creation! 50,000 rounds! Wow! I own two pistols (Super black hawk 7.5 and a 3.5 Ruger Bisley) and a Rossi Winchester 92.

[NatFoot]

I have several Glocks, all in .40.

 

I eventually settled on a .357 mag S&W revolver. It's what I take with me when I'm camping (except the one time I was freaking out and @norseman was on the other end of my PMs, lol) or traveling on the road or visiting family in WV.

[MIB]

37 minutes ago, norseman said:

I agree with you that some hand cannons become unwieldy defeating the purpose of a pistol. 

 

I think your Marlin guide gun is a better choice than some of the very heaviest handguns.   I had the stainless version for 5-6 years and regret selling it.

 

37 minutes ago, norseman said:

I do not agree that they would not do something that requires defensive action. I think they are quite capable of premeditated kidnapping and predation. Possibly when the lack of a long gun is observed?

 

I think .. guess .. assume .. that if/when they're going to do something like that, it is ambush, and you simply won't have time to respond regardless of what you are carrying.  

 

37 minutes ago, norseman said:

I commend you on your insatiable appetite for Elmer Keith’s creation! 50,000 rounds! Wow! I own two pistols (Super black hawk 7.5 and a 3.5 Ruger Bisley) and a Rossi Winchester 92.

 

At the moment, I only have 2, a Super Blackhawk with the short 4-5/8" barrel and a S&W 329PD .. 4".    Plus a 12" TC barrel but I have not shot that yet.   I'd like another but I'm not sure what I want, the presence of the .454 eliminates a lot of .44s I'd otherwise "need".  I haven't owned one of the 10.5" barreled Rugers in a long time so that's a maybe.  I'd like to add another rifle, it's been a decade or two since I owned one.   My first was a Winchester 94 trapper.   It would allow me to shoot ammo too long to cycle through the '92 or the Marlin 1894.   I'm waffling between a Ruger 77/44 and a Marlin 1894 Cowboy or SBL.  The bullet I used in the winchester is out of production so I don't need the extra length.   

 

Most of those rounds downrange were in the late 80s.   A nearby store carried commercial cast 236 grain BB SWCs in boxes of 250.  I was going through about 800 rounds per week back then 'cause that's all the brass I had.   Problems on the home front, divorce looming, couldn't fix it, so time in the hills doing a lot of what "St Elmer" did, whacking rocks very far away, was good therapy.   I'd usually also go through about 600 rounds of .357 in a weekend.    Pretty sure I kept the local economy afloat single-handedly.   I don't shoot near as much anymore.    Not even close.  

 

One neat .44 thing ... a few years ago Sierra made some non-cataloged 165 grain hollowpoints for CorBon for .44 special ammo.   I picked up 500 on clearance via a distributor.   Sierra sent me some data.   They said pistol only, not rifle, for fear of the core separating and leaving the jacket in the bore.   Kinda looking forward to finding time to load those, then go get into some sort of grief or other with them.

 

 

[langfordbc]

12 hours ago, MIB said:

 

I like big bore revolvers.    I've owned 35-ish .44 magnums since college, couple .41s, half a dozen .45 Colts, a .454, and a .480.    I've put at least 50,000 rounds through my .44 magnums.

 

I have fired the .500 **once**.    I didn't like it.   It's one I don't think I need.   Understand conservation of momentum.   When you fire that 500 grain bullet, the rifling rotates it one direction.    That means the gun rotates the other.   This is true of all rifled barrels, any sort of gun, but the .500 S&W is the only one where I could actually see and feel the gun rotate around the axis of the bore.    The porting of the barrel is quite effective in controlling muzzle rise but has no noticeable effect on the "backwards" component of recoil.   When I fired, it felt like my wrist, like for a split second, my wrist bones and the hand-ward end of my arm bones were slightly fluid.    The gun came back, **hard**, while rotating, and while the porting did its stuff, so the muzzle did a crazy, incredibly fast figure 8 in the air.    Like I said, I didn't like it.   I handed it back to the owner, said "thanks", and went back to whatever else I was doing.    Might be the only handgun I've shot / handled that I have no desire to own.

 

This is exactly the sort of feedback I was hoping for. I have no expectation that shooting this gun is going to be "fun", but I'm still looking forward to taking it to the range. Your description gives me a very good idea of what I should expect. Thank you. It came along at a price that I couldn't say no to, and if I decide to sell it, I will easily make a 50% profit.

 

12 hours ago, MIB said:

 

 

My thought, honestly, is that's a foolish line of thinking: I don't think they are going to do anything that gives you a need to kill them defensively and if you are going on offense, looking to kill one, take a rifle.  

 

MIB

 

 

Just to clarify, I wasn't asking a serious question. I was just looking for general input on this revolver - which you very descriptively provided! 

[norseman]

 

[norseman]

19 hours ago, MIB said:

 

I think your Marlin guide gun is a better choice than some of the very heaviest handguns.   I had the stainless version for 5-6 years and regret selling it.

 

 

I think .. guess .. assume .. that if/when they're going to do something like that, it is ambush, and you simply won't have time to respond regardless of what you are carrying.  

 

 

At the moment, I only have 2, a Super Blackhawk with the short 4-5/8" barrel and a S&W 329PD .. 4".    Plus a 12" TC barrel but I have not shot that yet.   I'd like another but I'm not sure what I want, the presence of the .454 eliminates a lot of .44s I'd otherwise "need".  I haven't owned one of the 10.5" barreled Rugers in a long time so that's a maybe.  I'd like to add another rifle, it's been a decade or two since I owned one.   My first was a Winchester 94 trapper.   It would allow me to shoot ammo too long to cycle through the '92 or the Marlin 1894.   I'm waffling between a Ruger 77/44 and a Marlin 1894 Cowboy or SBL.  The bullet I used in the winchester is out of production so I don't need the extra length.   

 

Most of those rounds downrange were in the late 80s.   A nearby store carried commercial cast 236 grain BB SWCs in boxes of 250.  I was going through about 800 rounds per week back then 'cause that's all the brass I had.   Problems on the home front, divorce looming, couldn't fix it, so time in the hills doing a lot of what "St Elmer" did, whacking rocks very far away, was good therapy.   I'd usually also go through about 600 rounds of .357 in a weekend.    Pretty sure I kept the local economy afloat single-handedly.   I don't shoot near as much anymore.    Not even close.  

 

One neat .44 thing ... a few years ago Sierra made some non-cataloged 165 grain hollowpoints for CorBon for .44 special ammo.   I picked up 500 on clearance via a distributor.   Sierra sent me some data.   They said pistol only, not rifle, for fear of the core separating and leaving the jacket in the bore.   Kinda looking forward to finding time to load those, then go get into some sort of grief or other with them.

 

 

I agree. The Marlin guide gun is very handy. It’s my favorite. But it rides in the scabbard. If something goes sideways on the trail? The horse or mule is taking the guide gun back to the trail head. Which could be 30 miles away. I’ve had this happen to me more than once. You could be on foot with whatever you have on your body. That’s the downside for myself. Albeit with my health I’ve been moving away from horses.

 

I think a practiced human is very capable of drawing and firing a pistol in tenths of a second. I don’t care how big or fast or smart Bigfoot is..... Thats a legitimate threat to anything on the planet. I personally think that with the right loads a .44 mag is enough. And can be bought in a very handy package. A roughly 1/2 inch hole blown clean through something is going to give it a really bad day. And .45 LC is right there as well.

 

https://www.garrettcartridges.com

 

Winchester’s are nostalgic, but Marlins are the AR of the lever gun world. They are supported well, easy to work on, and durable. I can pull the bolt on my guide gun with the aftermarket take down screw with my fingers in seconds. It can be done in the field. My 92 is a gunsmith job, albeit I did it myself but it’s complicated and requires taking apart little pins and screws. 
 

Shooting is truly one of my joys in life. Having vertigo for a while I haven’t been doing it. But it’s getting better and I miss it.

 

 

[Huntster]

In a political environment where one can carry whatever "guns" one would like (like my home in Alaska), I have found that the best "arsenal" is:

1) A rifle

2) A defensive sidearm

3) A 22 revolver

4) And a flare gun

 

The defensive handgun, unlike the others, should be carried upon one's body at all times unless in a sleeping bag (and then it should be within reach or in the bag with you). The reason is because you never know when you will finally need it to defend your life, surprise encounters with adversaries can happen at any time, and wise potential predators can be expected to use the element of surprise against you. Therefore the defensive sidearm should be as light and handy as possible, yet as powerful as needed to fight your way to safety or to your rifle, which is vastly more powerful than a good defensive sidearm.

 

The S&W 500 is simply too big, heavy, and cumbersome to carry as a reasonable defensive handgun. Even if backpacking, and thus not able to carry both a rifle and defensive sidearm, a smaller, lighter handgun still fills the needs of a defensive firearm. Both a 44 magnum revolver and a 10mm semiautomatic project enough energy and firepower to stop, redirect, or buy time against an attack by a large North American predator. However, if one cannot take the rifle, the S&W 500 would serve as well as the 44 mag or 10mm. It would just be a bit heavier cumbersome, and expensive..........especially to feed ammo to it. 

 

The rifle both features more energy than handguns and effective, accurate range. The 22 revolver provides the ability to effectively deal with vermin and opportunistic small game meals, and the flare gun provides both signaling capability as well as last resort predator defense. That's right, Larry Kaniut, who has published at least four books on Alaska bear attacks, has discovered that every use of a flare gun to defend against a bear attack that he discovered during the course of his research resulted in a successful and immediate spend of the attack. I believe he found four such cases, all accidental or happenstance events. Olin, who manufactures the most popular civilian flare guns, actually markets bear flares specifically designed to use against animal attack. The flare guns are plastic (in order to conform to federal firearm laws, since they use 12 gauge projectiles) which makes the very light. The gun and flares therefore, are mostly bulk, not heft. Since most of my wilderness travels are by a vehicle of some sort, carrying all my gear is not much of a problem. If I'm packing everything, I'll either take only the rifle or only the defensive sidearm, nd possibly both, depending on the primary purpose of my trip.

 

Oh.......Thank God and the American Founding Fathers for the right as a free man to carry whatever firearms I desire or need. This is the only real estate on Earth where one can do so, and the political and legal class are working hard to end that here as well.

[Kiwakwe]

On 1/4/2020 at 5:03 AM, Huntster said:

Oh.......Thank God and the American Founding Fathers for the right as a free man to carry whatever firearms I desire or need. This is the only real estate on Earth where one can do so, and the political and legal class are working hard to end that here as well.

Maine is pretty good in that regard, for being a lower 48...recent constitutional carry. Closest you can get to the old wild west on the E coast with a decent amount of room. 

[RedHawk454]

Yes.  Learn how to use the trigger in double action.  

[beerhunter]

How about a .30-06 semi-automatic rifle?

 

 

 

[Huntster]

I had friends who cut the barrels of Remington Model 7400 semi auto 30-06 rifles down to 16", installed pistol grips designed for Remington 870 shotguns in place of the buttstock, and got 10 round magazines from Sportsman's Guide. They were dedicated bear baiting bow hunters, and carried these slung shorty rifles up into the trees with them because of BIG grizzly trouble. They were essentially the size of WWII "grease gun" submachine guns, but shooting 30-06 energy. 

[BlackRockBigfoot]

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

I had friends who cut the barrels of Remington Model 7400 semi auto 30-06 rifles down to 16", installed pistol grips designed for Remington 870 shotguns in place of the buttstock, and got 10 round magazines from Sportsman's Guide. They were dedicated bear baiting bow hunters, and carried these slung shorty rifles up into the trees with them because of BIG grizzly trouble. They were essentially the size of WWII "grease gun" submachine guns, but shooting 30-06 energy. 

That's pretty cool.  They cycled ok with the pistol grips?

[7.62]

6 hours ago, Huntster said:

I had friends who cut the barrels of Remington Model 7400 semi auto 30-06 rifles down to 16", installed pistol grips designed for Remington 870 shotguns in place of the buttstock, and got 10 round magazines from Sportsman's Guide. They were dedicated bear baiting bow hunters, and carried these slung shorty rifles up into the trees with them because of BIG grizzly trouble. They were essentially the size of WWII "grease gun" submachine guns, but shooting 30-06 energy. 

I could be wrong because it was years ago but I thought mine came with factory 16" barrel.

I remember buying it used and it was the carbine model 7400 30-06

It was a good brush rifle for deer hunting .  

[Huntster]

11 hours ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

........They cycled ok with the pistol grips?

 

I think so, but I've had Remington 7400's and 740's, and I found them either unreliable or inaccurate, but for what they buikt them fir, I bet they were fine. I remember the guy who came up with the idea wanted to build one on the Remington 760 pump action platform, but I never heard how that worked out.

6 hours ago, 7.62 said:

I could be wrong because it was years ago but I thought mine came with factory 16" barrel.

I remember buying it used and it was the carbine model 7400 30-06

It was a good brush rifle for deer hunting .  

 

I had. carbine model 7400. It had an 18" barrel.