What guns would you take on an expedition to Alaska?

Lucca1 · Mar 2, 2015

What about a good ole lever action .30-30 carbine? With loadings from mild 125gr up to Buffalo Bores 190 gr (https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_detail&p=222), seems like a good alternative to a 44 mag. During the last ammo craze, the .30-30 was one round that was easy to acquire. I know the .30-30 is questionable beyond 150-200 yards, but a good portion of your time would be spent trudging through dense forest and brush. I have never shot a 45-70 but I would imagine that with a .30-30, quick follow-up shots would be much easier.

trickg · Mar 2, 2015

PapiBarcelona said:
5.7 would be the last gun I'd take for Bear protection, ammo barely knocked the paint off a .22 swinger plate.

I think also choosing good stopping power is training to shoot well under stress and train how you plan on carrying it.

Seems pointless to carry a big .500 if you can't even get it out ready without dropping half your gear and fumbling around.

Carrying a big heavy revolver on your side for hours also gets heavy, annoying. If you are in and out of equipmemt, bumps into everything.

Good points there. I think you are on the mark with the big revolver, but I think that a Ruger Alaskan would be a good choice. It's gotta be fairly big for the calibers it's available for, but it's compact enough to not be a huge hindrance. I'd rather deal with the weight and have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

dendog · Mar 2, 2015

Nothing less than a .44 in bullet size. Some S&W 629's and a Marlin Lever Gun in at least .450

fidelity · Mar 2, 2015

traveller said:
That is why I was asking whether there is a single report of a 5.7 being used. Seems ill suited for the task.

There is data from fish&wildlife that hikers using spray are less likely to get mauled than hikers using guns for protection. I would take both.

Most fatal bear attacks have single victims. If you stick together, you can use more than one tool simultaneously.

Yup, in complete agreement. Safety in numbers (I never camped alone when out there and we did things to mitigate the chance of bear encounters), and bear spray first. If I needed to use a gun, I would want something that slows or kills the bruin quickly, not a day or two after the mauling.

duckslayer56 · Mar 2, 2015

Being from AK, If I had to choose only 2, I'd go with an 06 and a 12 gauge. One for big game, one for small game.

I got charged a couple years ago on Kodiak. Me and my hunting partner were walking down a dry river bed and came up to a bend. As we walked around the corner a sow with 3 cubs (about the size of a labrador) stood there. Between her and us was a dead deer carcass. We tried to ease back around the corner but she spotted us and instantly charged. I'd estimate she was proably 60-70 yards away when she started, She was 15 feet away from us (the point at which my buddy shot her with a 300 RUM) before I think I could have even cleared a revolver from my holster and gotten an accurate shot on her.

I don't even carry my 44 up there anymore for bear protection. I know from that experience that I don't practice enough with it to even consider it a good idea for bear protection. If I'm in bear country I carry a 12 gauge with brenneke slugs, or a rifle.

I've been around a lot of brown bears while fishing, for the most part they don't pay any attention to you as long as you give them space, and don't keep any food around you. The hair on the back of my neck is always standing up when they're around, and I try to keep an eye on them. The bears on the salmon streams could probably be persuaded to leave you alone with pepper spray if they started getting ornery. I don't think anything but a bullet would have stopped that kodiak bear though. We had the worst bear encounter scenario you can imagine on that hunt. We surprised her, she had small cubs, and she had a kill that she was heading to, she meant business when she charged.

Don H · Mar 2, 2015

Did a 100+ mile canoe trek on the Salcha River in AK. The guide flew us and a canoe in and dropped us off. We would canoe the river until we crossed the first road and call him from the local roadhouse to pick us up. There was no evidence of civilization until the last few miles of river. When the guide dropped us off he insisted we take his Winchester 12 gauge pump and slugs, reluctantly we took it.

When we finished we went to the roadhouse for a beer and waited for our ride. The bar tender asked if we'd seen any grizzles, we hadn't. He told us there had been a woman killed by a grizzly just up river a few miles two weeks earlier. Guess that was the reason the guide insisted.

I vote 12 gauge and slugs.

Minuteman · Mar 2, 2015

PapiBarcelona said:
5.7 would be the last gun I'd take for Bear protection, ammo barely knocked the paint off a .22 swinger plate.

I think also choosing good stopping power is training to shoot well under stress and train how you plan on carrying it.

Seems pointless to carry a big .500 if you can't even get it out ready without dropping half your gear and fumbling around.

Carrying a big heavy revolver on your side for hours also gets heavy, annoying. If you are in and out of equipmemt, bumps into everything.

I can understand your reluctance to consider the 5.7 an effective self defense round if your only experience is how much paint it removed from a .22 swinger plate. I'm truly surprised the 5.7 round didn't completely penetrate the .22 swinger, it's such light steel, I know 9mm will destroy those plates and 5.7 should cut through them like butter.

If you have time, read the horrible accounts of the tragedy at Fort Hood, where a psycho jihadist killed many unarmed Soldiers in the name of allah - his words, not mine. The point to learn is how devastatingly effective that round is.

Many people underestimate the effectiveness and power of modern handgun ammunition. In this video a man is attacked by a full grown moose, and kills it with a few shots from a glock handgun. I've read that it was a 9mm, but I'm not sure, and it it could have been a .40, .45, .357 or even possibly 10mm; I suspect all would have had same effect because shot placement and penetration count most:

I for one would much rather have a military grade handgun with 20 (or 30 rounds) tested to endure harsh environment, including freezing conditions of Alaska, over most any other firearm. Especially considering the weight advantage of this polymer pistol. Don't forget, you'll have a couple buddy's also armed with this incredible pistol by your side. Bear, moose, elk, and mountain lion attacks are still pretty rare - I like my odds with a proven, high capacity 5.7 pistol.

duckslayer56 · Mar 2, 2015

another note, a guide up in AK recently posted a pretty funny, yet true statement. He said: "A guy asked once what the best bear rifle was for a bear charge....I told him the one in his hands. If you got a bear in front of you and a gun in your hands, congrats you've got a bear gun."

traveller · Mar 2, 2015

Minuteman said:
I for one would much rather have a military grade handgun with 20 (or 30 rounds) tested to endure harsh environment, including freezing conditions of Alaska, over most any other firearm. Especially considering the weight advantage of this polymer pistol. Don't forget, you'll have a couple buddy's also armed with this incredible pistol by your side. Bear, moose, elk, and mountain lion attacks are still pretty rare - I like my odds with a proven, high capacity 5.7 pistol.

I think you expect a lot from a 23-28gr projectile. Until there are reports of someone taking down a bear with it, I would consider it an experiment.

fabsroman · Mar 2, 2015

Minuteman said:
I can understand your reluctance to consider the 5.7 an effective self defense round if your only experience is how much paint it removed from a .22 swinger plate. I'm truly surprised the 5.7 round didn't completely penetrate the .22 swinger, it's such light steel, I know 9mm will destroy those plates and 5.7 should cut through them like butter.

If you have time, read the horrible accounts of the tragedy at Fort Hood, where a psycho jihadist killed many unarmed Soldiers in the name of allah - his words, not mine. The point to learn is how devastatingly effective that round is.

Many people underestimate the effectiveness and power of modern handgun ammunition. In this video a man is attacked by a full grown moose, and kills it with a few shots from a glock handgun. I've read that it was a 9mm, but I'm not sure, and it it could have been a .40, .45, .357 or even possibly 10mm; I suspect all would have had same effect because shot placement and penetration count most:

I for one would much rather have a military grade handgun with 20 (or 30 rounds) tested to endure harsh environment, including freezing conditions of Alaska, over most any other firearm. Especially considering the weight advantage of this polymer pistol. Don't forget, you'll have a couple buddy's also armed with this incredible pistol by your side. Bear, moose, elk, and mountain lion attacks are still pretty rare - I like my odds with a proven, high capacity 5.7 pistol.

I think you are missing several points here.

The Fort Hood shooter was not out there killing charging grizzly bears. He was out there shooting cowering humans. Of those he killed, nobody was charging him.

Next, a grizzly is NOT a human. A grizzly is 800 to 1,000 pounds of muscle, thick bone. long claws, and big teeth. Look at the videos I posted. One bite from a medium sized grizzly and the man was dead. Read about bear attacks and how those claws shred through skin. If they cut an artery, you are definitely a goner. However, just getting mauled in the middle of nowhere could be a death sentence in and of itself.

Your moose video is somewhat hilarious, and I have seen it before. The moose isn't even close to a full grown bull moose, and it merely sauntered up to the snowmobile. A grizzly charge is a lot different than that and it happens a lot faster than that. I would hunt for trophy size moose with a .30-06 IF grizzly weren't in the same area.

I'm not sure a 5.7 or any other handgun would be adequate for a single shot kill on a large grizzly unless the shooter got very, very lucky with a head shot. Now, take a look at the penetration of a 5.7 in ballistic gelatin and compare that to something like a .300 Win Mag. You can also look at the ballistic data for a 5.7 and compare it to other large handgun rounds.

Something that is very important when hunting large game, is the delivery of kinetic energy to the target and the ability for the bullet to make it all the way through the animal. The ideal bullet would deposit every last drop of kinetic energy into the animal and come to rest just on the opposite side of the animal's hide, creating a massive wound channel through the animal's body with the vast majority of the wound channel in the middle of the animal.

5.7 is a great self defense round when you are defending yourself from humans.

When a bear is breaking down my door, I'd take something a little more stout than a 5.7. Probably .454 Casull or .50 S&W.

We aren't talking inner Baltimore City here, but Alaska. Wonder what the odds are of running into a grizzly are versus running into another human in the outback of Alaska.

Now, if you are in Fairbanks, Alaska, probably best to load up for charging humans.

fidelity · Mar 2, 2015

Right on. An AR rifle isn't adequate to hunt grizzly (and often borderline for even MD whitetail) because the chance of killing quickly in 1-2 shots is small. A 44 mag revolver has more energy at the muzzle than an AR rifle or pistol which has more energy at the muzzle than a 9mm which has more energy at the muzzle than a 5.7 round from a handgun. A 5.7 projectile from a pistol has less mass and penetration than a 5.56 round from a rifle, which is not a for sure bear killer in the time a mauling might be finished. Yes, the 5.7 has been used to massacre others at Ft Hood (about 1/3 died that were shot), but a higher proportion died from 22lr and 9mm rounds at VA Tech. Horrible tragedies, both, but nothing to inform for grizzly defense in Alaska.

Duckslayer56's encounter sounds like those I've heard of. You'll only get 1-2 shots and they need to stop the threat immediately. The FiveSeveN is likely a highly flexible tool for other purposes, and I do agree in a party with others, it would be nice to have with the light, easy to pack, relatively potent ammo.

BradMacc82 · Mar 2, 2015

Even with a direct skull shot - I'd be willing to bet the run of the mill 5.7 ammo is going to deflect and not penetrate the skull. Grizzly skulls have a nice angle for bullet deflection of light rounds. The heaviest 5.7 round I see usually is the 40gr Vmax loading.

That being said, if that 5.7 was my only option I'd make it work - or die trying.

Minuteman · Mar 2, 2015

B

fabsroman said:
I think you are missing several points here.

The Fort Hood shooter was not out there killing charging grizzly bears. He was out there shooting cowering humans. Of those he killed, nobody was charging him.

Next, a grizzly is NOT a human. A grizzly is 800 to 1,000 pounds of muscle, thick bone. long claws, and big teeth. Look at the videos I posted. One bite from a medium sized grizzly and the man was dead. Read about bear attacks and how those claws shred through skin. If they cut an artery, you are definitely a goner. However, just getting mauled in the middle of nowhere could be a death sentence in and of itself.

Your moose video is somewhat hilarious, and I have seen it before. The moose isn't even close to a full grown bull moose, and it merely sauntered up to the snowmobile. A grizzly charge is a lot different than that and it happens a lot faster than that. I would hunt for trophy size moose with a .30-06 IF grizzly weren't in the same area.

I'm not sure a 5.7 or any other handgun would be adequate for a single shot kill on a large grizzly unless the shooter got very, very lucky with a head shot. Now, take a look at the penetration of a 5.7 in ballistic gelatin and compare that to something like a .300 Win Mag. You can also look at the ballistic data for a 5.7 and compare it to other large handgun rounds.

Something that is very important when hunting large game, is the delivery of kinetic energy to the target and the ability for the bullet to make it all the way through the animal. The ideal bullet would deposit every last drop of kinetic energy into the animal and come to rest just on the opposite side of the animal's hide, creating a massive wound channel through the animal's body with the vast majority of the wound channel in the middle of the animal.

5.7 is a great self defense round when you are defending yourself from humans.

When a bear is breaking down my door, I'd take something a little more stout than a 5.7. Probably .454 Casull or .50 S&W.

We aren't talking inner Baltimore City here, but Alaska. Wonder what the odds are of running into a grizzly are versus running into another human in the outback of Alaska.

Now, if you are in Fairbanks, Alaska, probably best to load up for charging humans.

Have you read any detailed accounts of this horrible incident? Yes, the shooter was charged by unarmed veterans determined to stop him: http://m.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-N...ng-trial-Details-emerge-about-victims-shooter

I agree; one shot from a 454 casull or nearly any rifle is much more powerful (if it hits) than a 5.7 round. I'm saying I'd prefer 20 or maybe 30 rounds of 5.7 to 6 or so rounds from a revolver or lever rifle - especially when you consider you'll be carrying the gun and very unlikely to ever actually shoot it. We are also taking about ALL possible uses of any firearm carried, not just gigantic man eating Grizzlies.

Obviously we differ on this decision, I respect your opinion and this is why I poised the question. Thanks.

:-)

N

Test

What's up with this symbol.

fabsroman · Mar 2, 2015

Minuteman said:
Have you read any detailed accounts of this horrible incident? Yes, the shooter was charged by unarmed veterans determined to stop him: http://m.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-N...ng-trial-Details-emerge-about-victims-shooter

I agree; one shot from a 454 casull or nearly any rifle is much more powerful (if it hits) than a 5.7 round. I'm saying I'd prefer 20 or maybe 30 rounds of 5.7 to 6 or so rounds from a revolver or lever rifle - especially when you consider you'll be carrying the gun and very unlikely to ever actually shoot it. We are also taking about ALL possible uses of any firearm carried, not just gigantic man eating Grizzlies.

Obviously we differ on this decision, I respect your opinion and this is why I poised the question. Thx.

You will not get off 20 to 30 rounds at a charging grizzly. Most bear maulings happen because you surprise the bear or you get to close to cubs. If you can see the bear from a long ways off, you usually avoid it.

I have actually killed decent sized deer with a .300 Win Mag and a shotgun, both with Barnes X bullets in them, and not all of the deer dropped in their tracks. I would guess about 50% of them dropped where they got hit.

If you really want to know what handgun should be used in Alaska, all you have to do is ask the guides that depend on the handguns for the sake of their lives. My brother in-law was one of those guides and he has a Ruger Alaskan in .454 Casull. Until you and I are in Alaska killing grizzlies and see just what it takes to put one down from a rifle, this is all speculation and internet wondering. Albeit, I have actually seen what damage rifles and shotguns actually do on living, breathing animals.

If this is about a race across Alaska where traveling light is necessary and you have a 5 man team, why would you give all 5 members of the team a 5.7? Give one or two of them a high powered rifle capable of taking down a bear without any speculation about whether or not the round will work. Give another a .22lr for game. Give another a 5.7. Give another a 12 gauge shotgun. Everybody gets a single gun. If anybody is tired from carrying the heavy high powered rifles or shotgun, they can swap it around.

If this is about true survival and I was only able to take 2 guns with me, one would be a 12 gauge shotgun because I can kill plenty of everything with it within 50 yards of me and a high powered rifle. 12 gauge with #4 shot works pretty much just as well as a .22lr for harvesting small game and way better on birds. However, you can throw slugs in it and kill some big game out to 100+ yards which you cannot do with a .22lr.

See, now we have the debate all fired up once more. lol

HeatSeeker · Mar 3, 2015

Colt Python .357
Remington 742 .308
Remington 870 Slug Gun

Not sure if these would be the best, but these are what I have in the cabinet.

Minuteman · Mar 3, 2015

I'm suggesting a handgun is better in part because its easier to carry, quicker to employ in an emergency if you only have seconds to defend yourself.

Mostly to reduce weight, also to simplify logistics and be able to crossload ammo if needed. This thread is about an expedition, covering many miles in a small group; much like the TV show mentioned in the OP. Not talking about a hunting trip, or long term survival situation. If that were the case hunting guns definitely a better choice. You can assume every member of the team can just take another persons specialty gun and shoot it well. I don't think I would even attempt to shoot a high powered rifle zero'ed to someone else at large game unless it were very close or I had to protect our lives.

If the 5.7 didn't exist, I guess I'd go with a high capacity 9mm revolver; perhaps something like the 8 shot S&W 929.

Doctor_M · Mar 3, 2015

I'm with a lot of folks... I would do a .300 Win Mag or similar for a long gun, but I kind of like the idea of a 3 in chamber long barrel Judge for a side arm. With .45 colt it will pack a decent punch, but with the added benefit of being able to take small game with .410. I'd throw in some chamber adapters, and you have a functional .22 as well. Versatility would be key since you don't know what you are going to need in the bush... and carrying 20 guns probably isn't a good option.

trickg · Mar 3, 2015

duckslayer56 said:
Being from AK, If I had to choose only 2, I'd go with an 06 and a 12 gauge. One for big game, one for small game.

I got charged a couple years ago on Kodiak. Me and my hunting partner were walking down a dry river bed and came up to a bend. As we walked around the corner a sow with 3 cubs (about the size of a labrador) stood there. Between her and us was a dead deer carcass. We tried to ease back around the corner but she spotted us and instantly charged. I'd estimate she was proably 60-70 yards away when she started, She was 15 feet away from us (the point at which my buddy shot her with a 300 RUM) before I think I could have even cleared a revolver from my holster and gotten an accurate shot on her.

I don't even carry my 44 up there anymore for bear protection. I know from that experience that I don't practice enough with it to even consider it a good idea for bear protection. If I'm in bear country I carry a 12 gauge with brenneke slugs, or a rifle.

I've been around a lot of brown bears while fishing, for the most part they don't pay any attention to you as long as you give them space, and don't keep any food around you. The hair on the back of my neck is always standing up when they're around, and I try to keep an eye on them. The bears on the salmon streams could probably be persuaded to leave you alone with pepper spray if they started getting ornery. I don't think anything but a bullet would have stopped that kodiak bear though. We had the worst bear encounter scenario you can imagine on that hunt. We surprised her, she had small cubs, and she had a kill that she was heading to, she meant business when she charged.

I really like this post - this is from someone who has literally been there, done that, got the T-shirt, up to and including being charged by a sow Kodiak bear. That's real-deal credibility, and advice to be taken seriously.

Everyone talks about making sure they have a big caliber handgun when they are planning a hunting trip to Alaska, ostensibly so they can protect themselves from a big bear if the need arises, but it makes sense that your biggest advantage would come in making sure you've got a big rifle handy.

Mr H · Mar 3, 2015

Assuming once again, that it's something that we are already rumored to own (and portability isn't an issue)...

12ga
1911
Mini Thirty

If carriage becomes a 'thing', then I consolidate with one of the following combos

GP100
Rossi 94 lever
(both in .38spl/.357)

Or

SP239
HiPoint 9mm carbine

or

Uberti SA revolver
Circuit Judge
(.45 LC)

I think I would lean toward the final option, since .410 could be used for small game.

Kelson1066 · Mar 3, 2015

Mossberg Pump Action 12ga (slugs, bird, and buckshot)
Mosin Nagant (Tested Proven will work in bad weather)
S&W in 357

I'm going for simplicity and functionality. Fewer parts means fewer things that can go wrong.

What guns would you take on an expedition to Alaska?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Guns 'n Drums

Member

piled higher and deeper

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Member

Active Member

The one with two L

Ultimate Member

piled higher and deeper

Ultimate Member

Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Member

Certified Mad Scientist

Guns 'n Drums

Banana'd

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics