AK Moose 2024

[4cMuley]

Totally not relevant but funny - I read this title as someone shot or is wanting to shoot a moose with an AK. My mind = “hell yea, brother”

Carry on

 

[WMR]

Is a 5 round, 44 special revolver too 'small' or underpowered for a AK backcountry carry gun?

Buffalo Bore makes a fairly powerful 44spl hard cast load. Probably too much for a Charter Arms Bulldog, but good in a Smith 696. A guy could probably do a lot worse.

 

[Fortboy22]

Buffalo Bore makes a fairly powerful 44spl hard cast load. Probably too much for a Charter Arms Bulldog, but good in a Smith 696. A guy could probably do a lot worse.

I have the S&W 396 Airlite Ti Mountain Lite... I'll have to dig up load capacity recommendations.

​

 

[Yellowknife]

Careful getting too heavy on those "Ti" guns. I don't know about the 396, but the N Frame 329 (.44 mag) can seize up the "internal lock" system under recoil with heavy cast bear loads. If it happens, the gun is out of the fight until completely disassembled.

 

[Fortboy22]

Careful getting too heavy on those "Ti" guns. I don't know about the 396, but the N Frame 329 (.44 mag) can seize up the "internal lock" system under recoil with heavy cast bear loads. If it happens, the gun is out of the fight until completely disassembled.

Yes, I have read warning reports on this same potential issue, but I have also seen responses that suggest for this particular S&W ti revolver, that the 'caution' is a bit exaggerated. So, you had it happen to your 44 personally? Obviously, I have some trial and error testing to do on mine. Although, it may just be a good excuse to "need" a new pistol

 

[WMR]

I see from the BB website that the Smith 396 is one of the handguns they tested the Heavy 44 Spl load in. The say it's OK for all 44 Spl revolvers except the Bulldog.

 

[Yellowknife]

Yes, I have read warning reports on this same potential issue, but I have also seen responses that suggest for this particular S&W ti revolver, that the 'caution' is a bit exaggerated. So, you had it happen to your 44 personally? Obviously, I have some trial and error testing to do on mine. Although, it may just be a good excuse to "need" a new pistol

I've witnessed it one day with with my brothers 329PD shooting 300+ gr load's. We got it running again, but it took some time at the bench to get that frozen lockwork disassembled and puzzled back together. He reverted to 240 gr loads, and it's worked since.

Obviously it's a N Frame vs L Frame comparison, and even heavy .44 spls aren't in the same the league as mag loads... so may not be an issue at all

 

[wyosam]

Before you go loading up your handgun with heavy rounds that “probably” won’t lock it up, remember that there are plenty of reports of bear attacks beings stopped with 9mm. I’d be curious to see actual situations where a well placed shot with a decent bullet wasn’t enough.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AKnatv907]

Before you go loading up your handgun with heavy rounds that “probably” won’t lock it up, remember that there are plenty of reports of bear attacks beings stopped with 9mm. I’d be curious to see actual situations where a well placed shot with a decent bullet wasn’t enough.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are a few amazing elders in AK that have used a ruger mini 14 for all their bear hunts. Being able to shoot well seems to be pretty key. I've carried a Ruger redhawk but the things a tank, now I just try to have my main rifle close to me

 

[Patrick Finney]

I watched this Vortex video the other day and thought it was pretty interesting. The conclusion for those that don't have the time to watch it is that the 10MM is only marginally better than the 9MM for bear defense. The shooters ultimately recommend that a person use the handgun that they are going to practice the most with. I don't know if it settles any debate, and obviously, they aren't shooting at live bears, but it seems to suggest that a 9MM would do the job. Shot placement is paramount, of course. I'd be curious to hear what others think of the video.

 

[Robinhood21]

I had a Glock 20 10mm with a lone wolf barrel and hard cast bullets last trip. It actually jammed a couple times which was very unsettling. I sold it shortly after returning. Ended up picking up a Taurus Raging Hunter in 454 Casull.

I don’t plan on dropping my 300RUM to pull out my revolver. I figured if it comes down to drawing the pistol, I’d be lucky to get off 5 rounds by the time a bear is already on me.

 

[wyosam]

I had a Glock 20 10mm with a lone wolf barrel and hard cast bullets last trip. It actually jammed a couple times which was very unsettling. I sold it shortly after returning. Ended up picking up a Taurus Raging Hunter in 454 Casull.

I don’t plan on dropping my 300RUM to pull out my revolver. I figured if it comes down to drawing the pistol, I’d be lucky to get off 5 rounds by the time a bear is already in me.

Make that 2 rounds. I practice with a lone wolf barrel in my Glock, but for protection I run the stock barrel. I’ve never had it jam with my bear loads, but it has once or twice with others in the lone wolf barrel. The not fully supported factory chamber isn’t without a purpose.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ddavis_1313]

Make that 2 rounds. I practice with a lone wolf barrel in my Glock, but for protection I run the stock barrel. I’ve never had it jam with my bear loads, but it has once or twice with others in the lone wolf barrel. The not fully supported factory chamber isn’t without a purpose.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’m carrying a XD 10mm. No jambs yet…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jdub17]

No matter what you are shooting, rifle or handgun, I believe caliber is less important than how well you shoot that particular firearm.

 

[ddavis_1313]

Must be some last minute packing and dialing in gear. This thread has been quiet for a week… lol

Just finished up organizing and packing gear. I’m certain I will go through it one more time to triple check. Only thing left is to pack clothes for myself and wife in dry bags, pack the tent, guns, and sleep system. I sure feel like I’m forgetting something…. As for now all my gear I’ve packed barely half way fills up a 10,000 cubic inch duffle. And there sure isn’t much left…. About the only comfort upgrade we are taking are helinox folding chairs lol.

I’m not ocd enough to list out every time thing I’m taking nor weigh it all out but my rough estimation has us at 125 pounds all in with every piece of gear we are taking minus what we are wearing. Plus ~250# raft/raft gear that we are renting. Packing that raft is gonna suuuuuuucccckkkkk….. lol

I’ve e-scouted the best I can and have multiple areas saved on onX maps for possible vantage points along the river that I’m hoping give my wife and me vantage points. I have a scapula I need to trim around the base that I’m taking to use to take with me and hopefully will have a wooden boat paddle as well. I also have a megaphone bought from a wonderful member here that’s going.

I still need to watch a few videos I have saved and write notes in my rite as rain journal to keep with me concerning calling sequences and strategies. I’m sure there will be a few more notes I’ll scribble down.

Nerves are for sure starting to set in…. By far the wildest and most remote hunt I’ve ever done. Just happy to do it with my wife! She’s just as excited as me!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ddavis_1313]

Just had an ah-ha moment with measuring moose spread using my scope. It’s a front focal plane nightforce in mils. Never needed to measure with it and I’m new to mils but figured out the math and man is it easy.

1. Range animal

2. Multiply yardage by .036 (mil per yard). This will give you the total inches in each mil at that yardage.

3.
Option A - use scope to measure total mils and multiply number of mils by inches per mill at calculated yardage.

Option B - if in an antler restricted unit (50” moose example) divide 50” by inches per mil and make sure antler spread is wider than number after dividing.

Ex. Animal is 480 yards.

480 yards x .036 (mils per yard) = 17.28 inches per mil

Option A above - 3.5 mils x 17.28 = 60.48” spread

Option B above -

50” divided by 17.28 inches = 2.89 mils. Moose is over 2.89 and is legal.

For safe reason I would either round up to 3 mils to be sure or divide 55” by 17.28 inches to be on the safe side which equals 3.2.

Obviously it’s hard to measure to precision on a live animal with a scope but this method will help a lot if anyone needs a way to help field judge. This method will only work with a front focal plane scope and the math above only works with mils. I’m sure it will work with moa as well in a front focal plane scope if you figure out the math. Mils are just so much easier.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bmrfish]

Just had an ah-ha moment with measuring moose spread using my scope. It’s a front focal plane nightforce in mils. Never needed to measure with it and I’m new to mils but figured out the math and man is it easy.

1. Range animal

2. Multiply yardage by .036 (mil per yard). This will give you the total inches in each mil at that yardage.

3.
Option A - use scope to measure total mils and multiply number of mils by inches per mill at calculated yardage.

Option B - if in an antler restricted unit (50” moose example) divide 50” by inches per mil and make sure antler spread is wider than number after dividing.

Ex. Animal is 480 yards.

480 yards x .036 (mils per yard) = 17.28 inches per mil

Option A above - 3.5 mils x 17.28 = 60.48” spread

Option B above -

50” divided by 17.28 inches = 2.89 mils. Moose is over 2.89 and is legal.

For safe reason I would either round up to 3 mils to be sure or divide 55” by 17.28 inches to be on the safe side which equals 3.2.

Obviously it’s hard to measure to precision on a live animal with a scope but this method will help a lot if anyone needs a way to help field judge. This method will only work with a front focal plane scope and the math above only works with mils. I’m sure it will work with moa as well in a front focal plane scope if you figure out the math. Mils are just so much easier.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nobody said there’d be math


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wyosam]

Just had an ah-ha moment with measuring moose spread using my scope. It’s a front focal plane nightforce in mils. Never needed to measure with it and I’m new to mils but figured out the math and man is it easy.

1. Range animal

2. Multiply yardage by .036 (mil per yard). This will give you the total inches in each mil at that yardage.

3.
Option A - use scope to measure total mils and multiply number of mils by inches per mill at calculated yardage.

Option B - if in an antler restricted unit (50” moose example) divide 50” by inches per mil and make sure antler spread is wider than number after dividing.

Ex. Animal is 480 yards.

480 yards x .036 (mils per yard) = 17.28 inches per mil

Option A above - 3.5 mils x 17.28 = 60.48” spread

Option B above -

50” divided by 17.28 inches = 2.89 mils. Moose is over 2.89 and is legal.

For safe reason I would either round up to 3 mils to be sure or divide 55” by 17.28 inches to be on the safe side which equals 3.2.

Obviously it’s hard to measure to precision on a live animal with a scope but this method will help a lot if anyone needs a way to help field judge. This method will only work with a front focal plane scope and the math above only works with mils. I’m sure it will work with moa as well in a front focal plane scope if you figure out the math. Mils are just so much easier.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Works in a second focal plane as well, just have to be at the correct (usually full but not always) power for the reticle to be accurate. One more step, but if I’m measuring with my reticle, scope is going to be on max power anyway. I don’t like the FFP weight penalty, and I’ve not found one with a reticle that is of any use at low power.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ddavis_1313]

Nobody said there’d be math


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

True. But I’d rather not have Alaska fish and game use math by adding up the fees for a game violation for shooting an under sized moose! Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ddavis_1313]

Works in a second focal plane as well, just have to be at the correct (usually full but not always) power for the reticle to be accurate. One more step, but if I’m measuring with my reticle, scope is going to be on max power anyway. I don’t like the FFP weight penalty, and I’ve not found one with a reticle that is of any use at low power.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is true. But that’s a lot of trust to be dialed to exact precision if it’s not max. I have a scope that is less than max. Just didn’t want anyone to assume this rule works for any and every scope.

And you’re also right about low power. Mine is 4-32x50. Until you get past 10 you’re holding center mass in canter of scope. Lololol. But I didn’t build it for close range in mind.

It’s not a bad scope for sub 30 ounces. My entire setup is 9.5# which I’m pretty happy with considering it’s a .30 cal magnum with a 26” m24 bull barrel. I would love to add a 7 pound gun to the arsenal that has similar down range accuracy. But not in a long action magnum. Recoil is no fun! lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk