Which side arm makes most sence

[DMTJAGER]

As they are all within +/- $100 of each other which of these three sidearm for all threats one may encounter while hunting or packpacking of both the two and for legged threat variety makes the most all around sense in terms of both practicality of actual use and economics. I can only really afford one and I do reload and have dies for two of the three calibers, brass and bullets for all three calibers:
Glock G40 MOS 6" 10mm
S&W 6" SST 629 44mag
Taurus Raging Hunter 6.75" in 454 Casull
I shoot my current HGs a lot at least 1x weekly so I am willing to put forth the time to get good with a HG that recoils more than my 45acp's or my 357's.

Should add odds are VERY unlikely I will find myself hunting in grizzly country anytime in the next 5 years at least. But finding myself in the company of wolves, Mt lions and black bears are sure things. Currently I carry my 18+1 P320 or 13+1 5" XD45
My gut is telling me the G40 is my best all around choice but would like the input form those who carry more powerful HGs than a 9mm or 45acp while in the woods regularly.

 

[Dioni A]

I think you should just use that 320 for everything. Functionally speaking a bigger hand guns is less effective in any defensive situation. Buy more ammo and practice that much more.

Also listen to this.

 

[Nine Banger]

Another vote for p320 or compact version in chest harness under your bino harness.

 

[Ferrulewax]

9mm

 

[flyfisher117]

Why the G40 instead of a G20? Even the G20 is big and bulky when fully loaded. My little G19 is much easier to shoot and carry.

 

[Choupique]

I started carrying a p365 on my hunts. Can hold 17+1 and is dramatically smaller and lighter than any 10mm or .44 or anything like that.

I'll take my chances with 13 or 18 9mm rounds. I figure my most likely threat is 2 legged anyway.

 

[mtnbound]

Glock 19

 

[grfox92]

I am switching to a Sig P365 Macro for next year. I've carried an M&P 10mm for 2 years now and there is no way I'm carrying that heavy thing around another season.

Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

 

[gentleman4561]

Use the funds that would be spent on a new gun to buy 2,000 rounds of 9mm and practice a ton. Far more useful.

 

[Rjk300]

I think you would get the most use/practice with the g40. Three or four of the guys I hunt with out west have them and carry in a thigh holster. We chose the g40 because the barrel is long enough to allow for whitetail hunting in Ohio if we want. My daughter will shoot it but like said already preferred the g19 so that’s her carry gun in the woods. I have a Taurus tracker 44 mag and it just recoils to much for me I much prefer my s&w29 silhouette since the size of it tames that recoil. I have no experience with a 454 but a friend in AK got rid of his and carries a 44 with low recoil loads.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bpa556]

None of them. Why tote a giant handgun when a compact will do the job? 3 1/2” barreled pistol in whatever caliber you choose will work fine and not be a giant pain to carry.

I prefer .40 or .45, but currently carry a Glock 19 because that’s what Uncle Sam issued to me. A decently hot defense round in 9mm is effective and much easier to put rapid, accurate, shots on target than the first two.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TaperPin]

As they are all within +/- $100 of each other which of these three sidearm for all threats one may encounter while hunting or packpacking of both the two and for legged threat variety makes the most all around sense in terms of both practicality of actual use and economics. I can only really afford one and I do reload and have dies for two of the three calibers, brass and bullets for all three calibers:
Glock G40 MOS 6" 10mm
S&W 6" SST 629 44mag
Taurus Raging Hunter 6.75" in 454 Casull
I shoot my current HGs a lot at least 1x weekly so I am willing to put forth the time to get good with a HG that recoils more than my 45acp's or my 357's.

Should add odds are VERY unlikely I will find myself hunting in grizzly country anytime in the next 5 years at least. But finding myself in the company of wolves, Mt lions and black bears are sure things. Currently I carry my 18+1 P320 or 13+1 5" XD45
My gut is telling me the G40 is my best all around choice but would like the input form those who carry more powerful HGs than a 9mm or 45acp while in the woods regularly.

Having packed a 44 mag, the lighter weight of the 10mm is probably why it’s gained a lot of acceptance in Alaska. A big handed friend has a 454 as his AK backup bear plinker, but damn it has a lot of kick - too much for me.

I can see why a light 9mm is a popular choice - it works for 99.999% of anything a person would run into. In grizzly country I’ll have a rifle.

 

[yfarm]

While I love my G20 if not in grizz land my G43 (X) look alike or Buckmark is in a kenai. Carrying extra weight for a low likelihood event seems pointless. Sure like the design of the 48 though. Buckmark works well for grouse.

 

[IDVortex]

I carry a FN509 in griz country and not stress over it.

 

[hiker270]

I've got a Glock 19 9mm, a Glock 20sf 10mm, a Ruger Redhawk 44 mag and a Freedom Arms 454 Casull along with other various models and calibers. I shoot handguns a lot, spent many years shooting IHMSA Silhouette with both the Ruger 44 and the FA 454. Love both of these handguns. That being said when archery hunting I carry the Glock 9mm unless I'm in Montana in grizzly country the Glock 10mm. I shoot both the Glocks very well and prefer the extra number of rounds over the big bores in a defense situation.

 

[The Harbor Master]

Don't underestimate 9mm. Hard cast 9mm can and will penetrate plenty deep enough for bear vitals. Will hard cast 10mm penetrate better? Probably. Will you have a way better hit vs miss ratio with the 9mm? Also probably.

I went down the rabbit hole of 9mm vs 10mm vs .357 vs .44 etc... I settled on sticking with my glock 19. I'd rather make 90% of my shots with 9mm than 25% with a 10mm. Of course you can learn to shoot a 10mm or .44 very well, but I think weight and lack of recoil for 9mm is hard to beat.

That said, I also look for reasons to justify buying a new gun whenever I can, haha. Good luck!

 

[DangerRanger]

Glock but the 40 is freaking huge

 

[Snowwolfe]

As an avid handgun hunter I would never carry one for “threats” when I have a rifle in my hands.
Now if you are hiking or backpacking it’s a different situation. My choice would be a 10 mm or short barreled revolver in 44 mag or 45 Colt.

 

[Beendare]

Glock 19

agreed...unless you are hunting around Yellowstone...or in Alaska...a nine is just fine.

G19, Shield or any of the reliable compact 9mm loaded with Hard cast rounds like the Flat nose FMJ Underwood.

 

[mtnbound]

agreed...unless you are hunting around Yellowstone...or in Alaska...a nine is just fine.

G19, Shield or any of the reliable compact 9mm loaded with Hard cast rounds like the Flat nose FMJ Underwood.
View attachment 788916

I have lived and hunted in Grizzly country for almost my entire life and went down the path as most folks. Started with a big caliber revolvers but honestly could get maybe one round off and not necessarily on target with them. So I went to the G20 10mm and then the G29 10mm and liked them both but the grip size often left me with a less than ideal trigger engagement, so I did grip jobs on them which helped but still wasn’t 100% comfortable with them in a true defensive situation. So I started looking at .40 and .357 caliber Glocks. Loved the .40’s hated the .357. So I carried a .40 for several years. Then my wife started carrying and shooting a 9mm and would frequently out score me, which made me try a 9mm and I immediately noticed my first round and subsequent follow up rounds were faster and more accurate so I started carrying a 9mm. Just like the small rifle caliber topic; reduced recoil means increased hit rates and especially in a self defense situation it’s rounds on target that matter. I have proven this to many shooters using the “Now drill”.