O.k., so Steve asked over on the thread about the recent bear attack in B.C. just what might constitute a "bear rifle". Well, you guys know me... I might like to talk about guns every now and then... So, rather than dilute that thread, I thought I would share my opinion on the matter.
There are as many opinions regarding what might constitute a "bear rifle" as there are bear hunters. My choice is not definitive, but it did work for me. While I've shot a number of black bear (when they presented an opportunity) with whatever I had in my hands at the time when out deer or elk hunting, I always carried this when out after the big guys. It's a Winchester Model 70, one of the reintroduced "pre-64" models produced in the early '90's. I actually traded a real pre-'64 in the same caliber (and got a pretty good wad of cash in addition to this rifle) that had just become too valuable. That, and the stock just killed me, with too much drop at the comb along with a checkered steel buttplate. Scoping it meant holding my cheek way too high up, almost off of the comb, so the darn thing got a pretty good "running start" at me, much like a Mike Tyson upper cut.
I've equipped it with a Leupold 1.5 x 4 power scope, which is perfect for those river bottom alder thickets where we often go after these animals. I don't think I've ever actually turned it up off of its lowest setting. Anyway, I like the synthetic stock for the constant rain out on the coast where I used to go. I only wish it were stainless steel as well, but that was not available when I purchased this rifle. Without further ado:
My caliber of choice is the grand old .375 Holland and Holland Magnum, dating from 1912. Pretty much the original belted magnum, the belt actually serves a purpose on this one, as it serves to provide positive headspace on its extremely tapered case. That taper serves a vital role as well, allowing this to feed like butter from a magazine, and then the extract easily as well (which is often a concern on straighter walled cases in extreme tropical heat).
The traditional bullet weights are 235, 270, and 300 grains. 235 spitzers for open country lighter big game, 270 spitzers for bigger animals (like elk and moose), and 300's (usually solids, with round nosed soft points as an option) for the really big stuff up close. Myself, when Sierra introduced their 300 grain spitzer boat tail, I saw it as a "do all" for everything (except in places where my guide demanded I used solids).
Here is a loaded round and the 300 grain Sierra alongside a typical 180 grain (also a Sierra boat tailed spitzer) .30-'06 for comparison. I get just under 2,600 fps using IMR 4350 or Winchester 760, so it's right there, velocity wise, with the typical 180 grain .30-'06 load, but offers a very useful increase in bullet weight. Tough bullet, too, as I have never succeeded in recovering one from an animal. Full penetration, all the way through, always an exit wound regardless of the size of the critter or the angle at which I shot it (including the ubiquitous "Texas heart shot" on some elk-sized animals).
All in all just a fantastic hunting cartridge. I have two other rifles so chambered, a K98 Mauser with the traditional three leaf shallow deep vee rear sight and big white bead front, and a #1 Tropical Rifle with a Skinner peep sight. Those two are my "Sunday going to meeting" rifles, used when I travelled out of country and wanted to show up with something fancier than a "plastic stocked" M70.
I'll probably never use any of these again, but I will always hang onto them. Too many memories. Besides, my sons will get them when I'm gone. Here are all three, with the Winchester (in the middle) wearing, temporarily, absolutely the wrong stock for its intended purpose. Kind of a short-live union, it's long since back in the composite stock.
