Never understood why one would carry a pistol when they could carry a rifle. The 10 mm struggles to reach 750 ft/lbs while the lowly 30-06 makes 2800 to 2900 ft/lbs easy. The 300 magnums pulls 4000 ft/lbs and the larger 338 Winchester which I feel is about perfect for elk does about the same with a heavier bullet. If you’re in bear country carry something that can take on a bear. If your in big bear country where we’re talking Grizz and Browns carry far more than you need. If the law allows and I don’t see why it wouldn’t if you’re recovery a wounded animal, I’m carrying a rifle.
Why not carry both? Plus a Buck knife.
My Smith and Wesson .460 does just fine thank you very much. It can deliver 4000 ft pound delivery of a slug too. And all in a handy dandy pistol that can be brought to bare much faster than a rifle.
It turns out, you don't need thousands of ft/lbs of energy to be effective.
Pistols are simply handier, and on you when they are needed, instead of leaning against a tree, or slung over the shoulder.
Over a hundred cases of pistol defenses against bears - they are 97% effective. Caliber is simply not that important, for a number of reasons.
Here is a recent case: Bear shot three times from 460 yards, with a .338 magnum. One shot to neck, hit nothing vital. One shot to chest, only holed one lung. One shot to shoulder, did not break shoulder.
Rifle then jammed in such a way the shooter could not clear it quickly. Large Grizzly boar charged the hunter and his sister (from 460 yds!). They retreated, got out of the way. The bear followed them until the hunter shot it and stopped it with his revolver, a Taurus 5 shot in .454 Casull, as I recall.
“Never understood why one would carry a pistol when they could carry a rifle.”
They’re easier to bring to bear, no pun intended, quickly in a situation like this. Increased ammunition supply could also be a factor. Most bolt rifles hold 3 or 4 rounds and are much more difficult to center on target quickly. Follow up shots are also much, much slower.
There’s more to the question than just muzzle energy here. If that were the sole factor a lever gun in 45-70 would be an obvious choice. But when 600 pounds of angry bear is closing in on you at 30 MPH an auto loading pistol in 10 mm with hard cast bullets designed for deep penetration is not a bad option at all.
L
Many grizzly attacks have been ended with 9mm, unexpectedly. I was quite surprised to learn of this.
Seems to be the quantity of rounds pumped into the animal. As more arteries are opened, the blood exponentially drains from what was previously a closed system.
The Glock 40 in 10mm holds fifteen. A very good choice for sudden attacks where there’s only a few feet between you and the bear.
Why carry a pistol instead of a rifle. When one needs both hands to accomplish the task at hand.
A pistol doesn’t get in the way like a rifle when doing work.
A pistol doesn’t get left behind leaning on a tree laying on the ground.
As proven many times a good quality handgun in appropriate caliber with proper bullets is very effect against bears.
Yes I have shot and killed bears with rifles, shotguns and handguns.
..... old custom mauser with controlled round feed and custom bottom metal 5+1 capacity with irons and a boonie-packer sling in 35 Whelen (225gr) has been my primary hunting rifle since I was stationed in Alaska 70’s and the lower 48 states for Elk & Mule Deer. I’ve relied on it for every hunt but have never been charged or threatened by a bear. When dressing out game and hunting I will try an have at least 3 in the hunting party and in bear or cat country 2 of us are on watch while one is cutting. A 5 inch stainless ruger redhawk in 44 mag is my sidearm in bear or cat county , loaded with 240gr Hardcast fodder..... I love my 35 Whelen & 44 Magnum.......