I haven't had a chance to work out at a shooting range lately--the Rabbit Creek Range is no longer a preference--so I'm feelling a bit gun itchy, what with Christmas coming on and the bears in their dens.
My topic of "brown bear bullet placement" is inspired by reading comments in other forums regarding bullets and placement. Seems like they mostly like the usual suspects for bullets, the Barnes, A-Frame, and others not quite solids but with little loss of weight from expansion, etc.. I go along with that. The vaunted Noslers get short shrift in that lot, it seems.
But when it comes to brown bear, at maybe 20 and 50 yards, they are talking from experience about no frontal head shots, avoiding quartering shots, and using less powerful ammo on a brown bear with water-soaked hide. Otherwise, if the wise choices are made, hunting with the 30-'06 and even 200 gr. is adequate.
Maybe I'm biased by what calibers I have--12 ga. 5-A, .375 Ruger Alaskan--but I don't quite by the tongue-in-cheek notion that the calibers get bigger the closer you get to Anchorage, saying that rural Alaskans are comfortable with the 30-30 and .270, etc.. Someone saw a documentary of an Esquimo shooting a polar bear with a .22, etc..
Where are the old-timers who recommend a shotgun for hiking, back-up, and follow-up shots on brown bear? Where is the emphasis on bullet placement to break down bones? I'm remembering one Alaska author who advocated shooting the "hump" just above the sholder blades. My style is more like being familiar with your gun enough to have confidence in a well-placed shot within a short time, or at least centering my shots and firing repeatedly to break him down.
Maybe I should just ask a specific question: When charged by a large brown bear from 30 yards, do you go for breaking bones, like a shoulder, or a chest shot?
Season's Greetings, bookburn