Man kills charging bear with .454 Casull
Greg Brush, an Alaskan fishing guide, was ambushed with no warning by a charging bear. All he had time to do was pull out his .454 Casull and fire as fast as possible, while falling backwards after tripping on a branch. The Anchorage Daily News reports:
He drew a Ruger .454 Casull revolver. There was no time to aim, barely time to squeeze the trigger. He’s not sure whether he got off two shots or three, but one proved fatal.
“Total luck shot,” he said.
“It doesn’t get any closer. He slid by me on his chin when I shot him,” Brush said. “I was backpedaling as fast as I could. I wasn’t even aiming. I tripped over my own feet as I pulled the trigger.”
He estimated that the animal weighed 900-plus pounds, and was 15 to 20 years old. It had grass packed in its molars and little fat on its bones.
“It was starving to death and saw an opportunity,” Brush said.
I sometimes get asked what should be carried in bear country. I always say the same thing: “I know nothing about bears but if I was in bear country I would want a .44 Magnum by my side”. I despair when people say they would rather carry their 9mm or .40 S&W Glock because they can get off more shots! This story perfectly illustrates that you may only get off one or two shots at a charging 900 pound beast! A 9mm round is not going to do much good.
Greg was most likely carrying a Ruger Super Redhawk. The Low-Glare Stainless model has a 7.5″ barrel and is available chambered in .454 Casull or .45 Colt. It has a MSRP of $992.
Big thank you to Don for emailing me the link.
UPDATE: Commenters point out that he was using the Super Redhawk Alaskan. This snub nosed .454 Casull has a 2.5″ barrel . It also has a MSRP of $922. Thanks guys for the correction.
Tom Gresham has an interview with Greg on his Gun Talk show. Thanks to Jake for the link.
Holy Bejeebus! That is some seriously scary stuff. I wouldn’t want to be attacked by a 900 lb woman never mind a 900 lb starving grizzly. I hope readers of this blog realise just how lucky this guy was to survive.
But, no doubt, I’m sure most of the comments will be ‘Kewl! .454 Casull FTW!!! I used it on Xbox and it is super awesome, etc.’
Still based on this story, I’m sure a lot of dweebs will run out and by a Ruger Alaskan even though they live in a big city and the nearest bear is at the local zoo.
On a final note, you should have called the story ‘A Brush with Death’ (His name is Greg Brush…geddit?…No?…Ah forget it.)
It could have been a Super Redhawk Alaskan. ( http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/FAProdView?model=5301&return=Y ). I use a 9.5 inch Super Redhawk and believe me it can get heavy. The Alaskans were designed with this type of use in mind. Recoil can be a bear but its worth it if you need it.
I received the e-mail that had pictures. If you’ve not seen the pictures then Google the title of this Blog entry.
Many years ago I had a man who guided hunts in bear country tell me a shotgun in a scabbard was his bear defense weapon of choice. He said to make the first shot bird shot to take out it’s eyes. He claimed the blind bear would then stand on it’s rear legs in pain and anger, giving you a good heart shot.
If this is the same incident they were talking about over on the Ruger Forum (www.rugerforum.com) last week, Greg’s gun was the snub-nosed “Alaskan” version of the SRH. Comment threads on this shooting can be found in both the “Ruger Revolvers” and “The Lounge” sub-forums at Ruger Forum.
Tom Gresham interviewed Greg Brush on 8/23 for his weekly radio show Gun Talk. As far as the gun used, Greg says he used a Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan that he was carrying in a belt holster.
Among many things that the news report above doesn’t tell you, is the fact that his gun jammed after the 5th shot … the massive recoil of the first 4 shots had caused the the 5th bullet to push out of the crimp on the casing, and it creeped forward enough to jam the gun as the bear was moaning less than 10 feet away!
Anyhow, it’s a great interview … you can find it here: http://guntalk.libsyn.com/
I heard an interview with him. He was carrying the Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan (2 1/2 inch barel).
I’m going to assume (dangerous) that the 454 Casull is at the top end of the firepower spectrum.
But, between the 45LC and the 44 Magnum, which is the harder hitter?
Thanks.
He was interviewed by Tom Gresham for the 23AUG09 show(podcast available) and said that it was the Ruger Alaskan in 454.
SpudGun, heh heh, I should have used that title!
“Among many things that the news report above doesn’t tell you, is the fact that his gun jammed after the 5th shot … the massive recoil of the first 4 shots had caused the the 5th bullet to push out of the crimp on the casing, and it creeped forward enough to jam the gun as the bear was moaning less than 10 feet away!”
That’s my problem with the “super guns” in these calibers. Plus I’ve been to the range when people were firing them and watched them not able to control the damn things (they rent a .500 at an indoor range by me) I think people need to get enough gun for bear, but that also means gun they can control. If the guy hadn’t hit the bear with the first couple and needed that 5th we’d be having a different conversation.
I avoid bear country, but for a delicate fellow like myself prefer a rifle as primary defense backed up with a 44 (though to be honest I’d probably carry my .45 because I’m stubborn) but I’ll take a 30-06 over a wrist breaker for a griz any day.
from a 2.5″ barrel does the .454 offer much, if any, advantage over the .44 Mag?
I’m too lazy to look up all the grains and FPS tables, but I would imagine it’s also to do with powder. If you’re pushing a heavier, larger bullet at similar velocities to a .44 Magnum, then it’s going to do more damage obviously, even in a shorter barrelled pistol.
Like Rob Taylor above, I avoid bear country and hate standing next to someone at the range using a ’super gun’. Though I would imagine that in an angry bear attack situation, you probably won’t even notice the recoil.
If I did have to go into bear country, well that would be a different matter. It’s here you’d get into a size / weight / ease of use issue and the Ruger Alaskan sounds like a good compromise.
If size / weight / ease of use wasn’t an issue, then I’d probably take a FAL or M14. And yes, in a panic bear attack situation, I’d unload all 20 rounds into that mutha as my trousers turned brown. (NB when I mention ease of use, I’m talking about going through heavy woods with not a lot of clearance for the barrel).
As always, keep up the astounding work Steve, love da blog.
i heard the interview on Gun Talk and what a amazing story it is. Emagine that Bear running towards you and in the blink of a eye having draw and fire at it. Thank god the gun did not jam on the second shot.
Highly reccomend downloading last weeks Gun Talk podcast and having a listen.
B Woodman,
I shoot and reload a lot of both .45 LC and .44 mag. In a modern wheelgun I feel they have close to identical potential. The bullet diameters are only .023 different on average (.452″ vs .429″, slight variation depending on bullet type) and the case volumes are comparable as well. My experience is that with the same weight bullet you get about the same recoil and velocity, but you better make darn certain that your .45 LC revolver is actually rated for the pressures you intend to generate. Traditionally they were not, which is why the advent of the .44 mag was a big deal. The cartridge isn’t a whole lot different but the guns were built to handle heavy loads from the start, and there’s not much chance of accidentally cambering a thumper in a 19th centruy piece since they didn’t exist yet. There are arguments out there claiming that the .45 LC has the potential for more power in a modern revolver, but I’m skeptical that whatever slight numerical gain you can squeeze out of it isn’t an advantage over the ubiquity of .44 mag ammo, you can buy it anywhere. I feel ok in the woods with my .44 mag with stout 310gr Oregon Trails. Our bear are smaller than those in Alaska and assuming I didn’t poop myself and could hit the thing I think the .44 mag would do fine.
-Don
Lived in Alaska for 32 years and always carried a .44 magnum and 870 shotgun.
Without witnessing it, it is almost impossible to believe how fast these animals can move.
There have been instances where 10 hits from high powered rifles did not stop a charge of 100 yards until the bear was within a few feet.
A .454 is a longer version of the .45 lc and has more power than a .44 mag. A .460 is a longer .454 and has almost as much energy as a .500 mag.
Are there any carbines in .454? I’ve heard of a lever gun in .500 but a short barreled .454 would be pretty handy
Rob, I am sure there are, although I cannot think of any.
A .45-70 carbine would probably be what you want. A wide variety of loads is available with weaker loads for the old guns and powerful loads for modern guns.
I’ve always been leery of the 45-70, people say it’s a real bruiser and I learned my rifle shooting on the .223. How manageable are carbines in 45-70? I guess I’m off to the gun store circuit to find out?
Rob, have a read of the comments here:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/03/15/hr-handi-rifle-in-45-70-government/
I don’t think you could expect much less recoil in .454 than a .45-70!
jeff quinn at gunblast.com has reviewed this revolver in both 454 casull and 480 ruger, and decided the 480 ruger made more sense for it’s intended purpose.
http://www.gunblast.com/Ruger-480Alaskan.htm
that is to say, since you’ll be shooting at animals that are 20 meters away at most, the high pressure, high velocity, high recoil of the 454 casull were far less useful than the lower pressure, lower velocity, and bigger heavier bullets of the 480 ruger. especially with the 2.5 inch barrel.
jeff has a lot of experience with big revolvers, and has mentioned several times in his reviews that the most powerful rounds, the stuff over 44 magnum, can often jump crimp and tie up the cylinder.
jody, thanks for the link. interesting.
Shoulder fired weapons are better- hands down. Bear spray will save you in a panic situation better that any handgun. That said, I own an Alaskan. It punishes the web of your hand and has tons of unused powder. Out of a 7-8″ barrel it is 150% of the 44 mag. Out of the Alaskan it is still about 140% of the energy of the 44 mag at 50 ft. Rounds are 3-4 bucks apiece. It will shoot 45 Long Colt as well as the 454. If you have to have a handgun on your belt in backcountry its still one of the top choices.
I own several pistols including a Raging Bull 454 Casull. Comparing a 44 magnum with a 454 is like comparing a 380 with a 45 ACP. A 454 hits about like a good 30-30 rifle and with the best Hornady Ammo is close to double the power of my 44 Magnum. I love the 44 magnum, but you can’t comare it to a 454 Casull for raw power. Guns you can compare are the 500 and 460 S&W which hit harder than the 454.
I live deep in the wooded mountains where bear, mountain lion, and moose roam. The most dangerous four-legged creature BY FAR is a cow moose with a calf that feels threatened. True, she’s not a carnivore and won’t eat you, but you’ll be just as dead. The speed and athleticism of an angry moose is chilling.
Short barrel super-powerhouses never made any sense to me at all, all that unburned powder and lack of performance, not to mention not being any fun to practice with.
I venture into remote mountainous regions and after 30 years experience I carry three firearms for problem solving. Primary is a Remington 870 loaded with 3 inch magnum 00 Buck, secondary is a Ruger Blackhawk 44 Magnum with 7.5″ Barrel, and last, but not least, is my Glock 10mm.
If I could only have one firearm in a survival situation, it’d be the 870 BY FAR.
A STARVING 900lb bear??????? 900lbs? STARVING???? Did the bear really attack? Witnesses? Who weighed the bear? The Ruger Alaskan is actually pushed as the fantasy gun for killing a bear as you are peacefully hiking a forest trail.He might have killed a bear but it was no accident.He probably got close to the bear to induce a charge so he could kill it.That’s why he bought the gun in the first place,to kill a big bear!!!!!!! I have a 500,454 and 44 but mine will never get to kill a big bear.Why not? I’m not out there looking for bears to attack me. Jim
Jim, have you ever been to Alaska?
When Capt. Kirk and myself are on holiday we prefer to use phasers set on “vaporize”. With no remains we can avoid those nasty encounters with the annoying DNR folks. We are being forced to use new ones next year that can be set to “roast”. Oh well at least dinner will be no problem. See you in a couple of light years!