Side arm while pig hunting

[otto_kretschmer]

Originally Posted by Gretch

If you are not going to take advice why ask the question.......

One need only a brain the size of a golf ball to decide between a 9mm and a 45.

And the pig will tear your ass up in any event.

A lot of the advice is junk and out of scope of my question. Did you miss my story of the WW2 combat vet choosing the 9mm? He also ditched his M1 Garand for a M1 carbine.

Anyway... I'm going with the 45 and 200 gr lead semi wad cutter as per Higgins advice. I've been shooting that load for decades. This is not a theoretical exercise.

[Gretch]

Taking Higgins advice it the smart move. Good for you.

[id10t]

Originally Posted by otto_kretschmer

if anyone has read or watched Game of Thrones, this is how the king, Robert Baratheon, dies

Rednecks here in Florida use dogs and duct tape. Catch the hogs, tape 'em up, take 'em home and corn feed 'em for a month before slaughter.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by Superman

When I finally acted on Jeff's suggestion of a single-action .45 Colt, THEN I understood. It is not the large-frame version that Jeff would likely choose for pig-hunting, but it can still spew a 255-gr Keith bullet at around 1000 fps. Plus....the ergonomics of it are such that it practically points itself. This is my "just in case" spoon in the woods. I think he said it would go through a deer lengthwise.

But yeah, the .45 ACP is also a good choice. Also, it spews projectiles at a faster rate and holds more than six.

Funny, but over the years, I have actually settled upon the smaller framed Single Actions like yours, shooting "mid range" loads identical to what you describe, as my "woods bumming" combination. They are just so light and handy we really don't even know they are there, which is very attractive on multi-day sojourns with backpack. Any .44 or .45 caliber Keith type semi wadcutter, out of a .44 Special, Magnum, or .45 Colt at 1000-ish fps will indeed shoot lengthwise through a large deer. I've done it often enough to satisfy myself that it works. Unless I'm hunting elk, or black bear, I never grab the large framed guns and stoke them with the heavier loads. We just don't need 'em.

Originally Posted by otto_kretschmer

Thats where I'm leaning right now. I shoot my 45 much better with thousands of rounds thru the pistol. And the safety is more secure.

That's a huge part of this as well - pick the one you shoot the best.

As an aside, I really wish I could get heavier semi wadcutters to feed well in my 1911's. I've just never been able to get them to work reliably. The 185's and 200's are dead reliable, but going up to what I would use in the .45 Colt just really throws a wrench in the spokes. There are, however, 230 grain "truncated cone" solids available that I hear cycle just fine. I've just never used them, so I can't personally recommend them to others.

Another aside, that "truncated cone" shape was developed by the Germans during WWI for use in their Lugers. Hollow points and soft points had, by then, been barred from military use due to their overly destructive nature. These truncated cone bullets were seen as a "cheat", or a "workaround" skirting that rule, and were every bit as destructive as those that had been banned. As a result, any German caught carrying the truncated cone rounds was deemed to be in violation and summarily executed on the spot. The Allies really wanted to discourage their use... They were that effective...

[jbryan]

In my earlier days in the military, I had a number of fellow Instructor Pilot buddies that wound hunt wild pigs on motorcycles. Once they got one cornered, usually in a briar patch, they would craw in there on hand and knees to finish the pig off. The must have pistol of choice was a 1911 .45 for the close-in work. Kinda like a Tunnel Rat in Vietnam. Some exciting days those were...

[Rick Lee]

I've been looking for a reason to buy a Glock in 10mm or .357SIG, but those calibers are kind of overkill for CCW and not fun to shoot in small, light guns. But I'd think they'd be great for having out in the bush. I've never seen either caliber in factory-made SWC though.

[Gretch]

https://www.sgammo.com/product/9mm-luger-ammo/100-round-box-9mm-luger-115-grain-flat-nose-fmj-ball-winchester-m1152-active-

Jeff, your opinion of this stuff, vs the original black talon, in the same caliber?

[Superman]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

..... They are just so light and handy we really don't even know they are there....

.

It's my favorite handgun, just on ergonomics alone. My hand just loves to hold it.

[svandamme]

Pig shootn ain't a story of elegance, it's a story of shootn a lot and reloading a lot.
There are more pigs waiting to be culled then you can afford ammo to shoot em.

So if you worry a 9mm handgun won't do, you are right, it won't, it shouldn't even be a debate. bring more rifles, or at least a rifle shoots semi auto, with box magazine, and plenty of magazines to feed it.
And the bolt gun you mentioned, that is the backup

[3rd_gear_Ted]

Guns have been around a while, but purpose bred dogs have been doing the job a lot longer and way better.
I'll take my 90 lb Boxer, (whom were bred for close quarter combat with Boars) over a side arm any day.

Being on your own in their environment with one of them critters is a huge risk.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by Gretch

https://www.sgammo.com/product/9mm-luger-ammo/100-round-box-9mm-luger-115-grain-flat-nose-fmj-ball-winchester-m1152-active-

Jeff, your opinion of this stuff, vs the original black talon, in the same caliber?

That's the stuff I've been referring to - "truncated cone", a FMJ with a flat nose. This is, essentially, the design the Germans developed in WWI that proved so deadly effective. It's kind of the "Keith style semi-wadcutter" of the autoloader world. This is what I would choose if going with a semi-auto for pig hunting. Is it available in .45 ACP as well? Oh, and I would absolutely choose this over the old style Black Talon. The Black Talon might have been a decent hollow point (and a victim of its own vastly over sold hype), but it's never going to penetrate like these flat nose FMJ's. Remember- penetration, penetration, penetration...

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by 3rd_gear_Ted

Guns have been around a while, but purpose bred dogs have been doing the job a lot longer and way better.
I'll take my 90 lb Boxer, (whom were bred for close quarter combat with Boars) over a side arm any day.

Being on your own in their environment with one of them critters is a huge risk.

Have you actually done this?

I have never hunted boars with dogs, but I've sure chased my share of black bear with them. The operative word here is dogs - plural. At least four or five. The only way dogs survive close encounters with black bears, when they bring them to bay or tree them, is by working as a team and constantly having a different dog jumping in while the bear is focused on killing the one in front of him. Even then, I have seen dogs severely injured by black bears. I've never seen one bad enough to have to put it down, but the houndsmen I hunted with assured me that happened more than they liked.

If you have a pack of 90 pound Boxers at your disposal, by all means, yes, they would present some formidable opposition to a wild boar. Your lone dog, by himself, would be killed in short order by any sizable boar. The notion that having him with you in wild boar country affords you better protection than having a sidearm is simply foolish, and would cost him his life. He may engage the boar long enough for you to make your escape, but he will pay for that with his life.

[Superman]

That makes sense. As much as we admire the loyalty and the teeth of a courageous dog, they are domestic animals. A 90-lb dog is way bigger than a raccoon, but that would be a fair fight. Maybe. If the dog was unusually quick and mean.

I like Stijn's idea. Semi-automatic high powered rifle with box magazine.

[Bill Douglas]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

The only way dogs survive close encounters with black bears, when they bring them to bay or tree them, is by working as a team and constantly having a different dog jumping in while the bear is focused on killing the one in front of him.

My Border Terriers like to use this technique when hunting rogue dogs such as pit bulls. Once the pit bull runs out of steam they hit him like a swarm of bees - all over him. I think the dogs see it as a "right to self defence" thing LOL

[vash]

i've taken a lot of hogs with a bow.

100% of them have been scared sheetless of me. they run. is it scary? yea, sometimes. but i have never been charged or even eyeballed by a hog. they run. you just have to be smart and not corner one.

javalina? i only really know what the butt-end looks like. they haul arse when they see a human.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

That's the stuff I've been referring to - "truncated cone", a FMJ with a flat nose. This is, essentially, the design the Germans developed in WWI that proved so deadly effective. It's kind of the "Keith style semi-wadcutter" of the autoloader world. This is what I would choose if going with a semi-auto for pig hunting. Is it available in .45 ACP as well? Oh, and I would absolutely choose this over the old style Black Talon. The Black Talon might have been a decent hollow point (and a victim of its own vastly over sold hype), but it's never going to penetrate like these flat nose FMJ's. Remember- penetration, penetration, penetration...

What are your thoughts RE: lightweight, fast bullet vs heavy, slow bullet (for instance 115gr vs 147gr 9mm)?

My thought is that a heavier bullet will have better penetration.

[flipper35]

Originally Posted by aigel

When I started hunting, I always carried a sidearm. But after a couple seasons of schlepping it all over gods earth hunting in wilderness and public land in CA, I got tired of it and since I never needed it, I stopped. Whenever I feel I need to be armed, I make sure I have the rifle ready.

My .300 win mag is certainly an extreme example. It was what I had at the time as my all around "kill anything in NA" gun. It was loaded with Cu 120 grain bullets, IIRC. I'd definitely recommend a 30 caliber bullet. My friends generally hunt pigs with .270, 30-06, .308 and the like. If you stand hunt over a feeder in TX at close range where you can pick very clean shots, a .223 may do the trick. I'd wait for a broadside neck or chest shot, or a quartering away chest shot. I'd stay away from quartering to or head on or facing away shots. The shoulder of the pig can be very tough, with a bunch of scared up gristle that's tougher to penetrate than your average furry creature's shoulder. The heads are also pretty thick and have a very sloping angle, so a head shot from the front often glances off.

I would always prefer broadside shots. At close range, I'd go for the neck (to maximize the meat yield), further away, for the middle of the chest.

I still carry a sidearm, but that is for the racoons with distemper or rabies and other critters that i don't need to use the 30-06 on. Sometimes I take a small .22 revolver or semi-auto for rabbit and squirrel.

[Gretch]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

That's the stuff I've been referring to - "truncated cone", a FMJ with a flat nose. This is, essentially, the design the Germans developed in WWI that proved so deadly effective. It's kind of the "Keith style semi-wadcutter" of the autoloader world. This is what I would choose if going with a semi-auto for pig hunting. Is it available in .45 ACP as well? Oh, and I would absolutely choose this over the old style Black Talon. The Black Talon might have been a decent hollow point (and a victim of its own vastly over sold hype), but it's never going to penetrate like these flat nose FMJ's. Remember- penetration, penetration, penetration...

Perfect.............. what I have been told and great to have you confirm it............

changing out my personal defense loads to these......... the black talon goes back into inventory for "old times sake"

Thanks again.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by masraum

What are your thoughts RE: lightweight, fast bullet vs heavy, slow bullet (for instance 115gr vs 147gr 9mm)?

My thought is that a heavier bullet will have better penetration.

You are absolutely right. Assuming similar construction, of course. A lightweight solid might penetrate better than a heavy hollow point, for example. The solid will always win the penetration contest, and the heavier for caliber the better.

"Sectional density" is the fancy ballistician's term for describing how much a bullet weighs relative to caliber. For example, a 200 grain bullet in .30 caliber will have a much higher "sectional density" than a 200 grain bullet in .45 caliber. With less frontal area for the same weight, or in other words more weight relative to its cross section, the .30 caliber will significantly out-penetrate the .45 caliber. I guess this is kind of intuitively obvious, but it does bear mention.

I have always liked heavy for caliber bullets. I'm a big fan of reliable, deep penetration. I've found it to kill more reliably, and to give me more shot options than a rapidly expanding, shallow penetrating bullet. Oh, the latter can kill spectacularly on broadside lung or high heart (my preference) shots. It will, however, fail miserably on that "Texas heart shot" (up the poop chute from behind).

[fintstone]

I remember in my youth watching an old farmer butcher a large hog in a pen. He put a 22 long rifle up against its head and shot it....and shot it and shot it. It did not slow it down much...and thrashed around wildly, screaming. If the farmer had been in the pen, it would have been pretty rough. He finally finished it with an axe. The entire thing was horrible, but taught me that a head shot with a small caliber was not the answer for an old hog.