After finding a number of tracks over a period of time, I think I've got an area narrowed down that I'm going to take a little more time to explore.

I'm going hunting in a few weeks and want to know what you think related to caliber/firearm. I'm not looking for best, but rather whether I'm taking enough. I've been reading about Giganto and other "possible" related animals and wonder if taking a .44M lever-gun and revolver will be enough to take one down (if bf are real animals at all). I would expect to be within 100 yards, and also expect to get off several shots (I'm not going to let one fly and wait to see the reaction, but try to get off three quick shots). Obviously I will have to assume where the vitals are, at least somewhat. I also have to assume everything else about it's size/proportion, etc. I don't know if I'm hunting a 300, 800, or 1200 lbs animal.

I'm using a mix of 225 grain (lever revolution) and 300 grain Hornady bullets.

I'm not interested in an "ethical" debate, or whether it is "right" or "wrong", so if that's the intent of your response I'll likely just ignore it.

Ace, you sound pretty sure you are going to be close to one. Good luck. If you are within 100 yards and getting off 3 shots to center mass of the chest or back, you should be able to bring down a big animal with a .44 mag rifle, but just barely. Not so sure the handgun will give you all the velocity that the rifle will, with the longer barrel you get a couple hundred FPS more.

If I were gunning for one I would take the .44 mag as side arm only, but my rifle would be my semi-auto 30-06. Five very fast shots, 165 grain bullets, and twice the FPS as the .44 mag.

I'm not sure they're real. If they are, and that's what leaves 17" footprints I *think* they would find where I'm going a suitable place to spend some time. If they aren't real, I guess I'm going camping, not hunting

The revolver is just something I wear in the woods, and if I have to run it might work better than the lever-gun. It's also on my cartridge belt, so it makes it convenient to carry the revolver when I carry the lever-gun, 'cuz that's where the extra ammo is!

Ace personally I wouldn't depend on a .44 mag to take down anything larger than a black bear effectively. Sure, there's been cases where it's taken down "A" brown bear and "A" cape buffalo but that's NOT the norm. As a matter of fact that is the cartridge that "Buggs" claimed to have taken down tow of them in Texas with... but do you believe his story? If you do believe it, remember he says he was extremely close to them, the second only a few feet away when he took his shot.


Just do us a favor and don't come back with a story like this guy has to tell...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ABGIJwiGBc...feature=related

Wow, that was nuts.

Expecting and getting are usually two very different things.

After learning the lesson the hard way, I learned that multiple shots are standard operating procedure with all hunts and quarry. Even if you don't actually need it, always put a 2nd round into the quarry, or at least be prepared for such (round chambered, weapon aimed, finger on trigger).

I once hit a large black bear with a 30-06 (180 grain Nosler Partition, 2650 fps) at 125 yards while it stood on two legs looking at me. I aimed for center-of-mass at his chest and squeezed off well. It blew him over so violently his back feet went over his head. The thrashing about was remarkable. I knew it was a good hit, and I stood there watching the results.

Then the bear got up and ran about 20 yards into the brush faster than I ever imagined it could after such a wallop.

It was after the bear disappeared into the brush that I realized I was standing there with an unchambered rifle lowered down, and that I now had to go rummaging about in the brush after a wounded bear.

I gave him 5 quiet minutes to lay down and die, then went after him. There was a lot of blood at the first place he stopped to lay down. After seeing that, I figured he was dead nearby.

I was wrong. Again. I was able to follow his blood trail for over a quarter mile. He eventually ran into a muddy slough, fell into the water, came out the other side, and the bleeding slowed tremendously. I lost his trail after another 100 yards.

At first I thought, "Dumb". A week later or so a friend told me that it was a classic case of buck fever, and in retrospect, I had to agree. While the initial shot was taken in good form, I failed to focus on the follow up shots while I stood mesmerized by the bear's thrashing.

I shot another large black bear this past spring. This time I was using a 338 WinMag, 225 grain Swift A-Frame, 2700 fps. This time the bear was just a few feet from brushy cover and about 50 yards off. It was a quartering-to shot, and he went down hard. Again, the thrashing was significant, and the bear literally took a flying leap back into the brush like superman. Even though I never took the rifle from my shoulder and re-cocked immediately, there was no time/opportunity for another well placed shot.

After 20 seconds or so I could hear his death moans. I still gave him the standard 5 minutes to "stiffen up". There was no blood showing at the shooting site, and the brush was so thick where he flew back in that I left the rifle on the beach and drew my revolver to go after him with (I never would have done that if it was a brown bear).

I found him dead just 20' into the brush. Unfortunately, the round had gone all the way through him (I really wanted to retrieve that bullet...........it was the first time I'd used 225 grain A-Frames; I usually use 250s).

My advice is to use the big guns every time. You never know if you'll get the opportunity for the second shot, and with the heavy artillery, the first shot has the greater chance of eventually killing the quarry, even if it takes a few minutes.

Just make sure you save one round for your trip to Fiddlers Green.

Well, I like fiddle music...

Huntster, I like lever-guns especially for follow up shots, but that's just me I guess. Although I've had my share of bolt-actions, I always found that chambering and staying on target was easier and more quickly done with a lever-gun.

Ace,

If you haven't already you might want to look at my discussion on firearms in the Bear Spray thread (at least I don't have to repeat any of it):

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?sho...33&start=33

There are a couple of other firearm threads you may be aware of (which may or may not be helpful):

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=17269

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=3385

My personal advice would be to *not* try to attack them unless you are fairly certain you are actually going to be attacked (i.e., if they intimidate, leave fairly quickly). This is not meant to start a debate, and you are free to ignore me. The following is meant as technical advice (or something like that).

Assuming you are an expert marksman with that pistol, and assuming you are unaffected by the large influx of adreneline one is likely to experience, there is some possibility of hitting the target at the upper end of the range you describe. For ordinary people, I would guess I wouldn't recommend trying to fire at less than thirty feet or so because the chance of missing will be quite high. You could try to simulate/train-for this by running a half mile, immediately shooting at a target at 100 yards, and then repeating the process without stopping until you drop. Eventually you will get shaky from adreneline and feel the effects of exhaustion and you will be able to gauge your skills better.

Assuming this is a six shot revolver I would not advise on three shot spreads as basically the bullets are the only things giving you an edge and therefore keeping you alive, and when you have to reload you will be living on borrowed time. Carefully aimed single shots would probably be best, unless you have several other armed people with you. A 44 Magnum will have quite a bit of kick and I would guess second and third shots would be decreasingly accurate. Expend bullets like they cost $10,000 and you better have a large collection of speed loaders for this gun. This isn't like hunting 'Bambi', and frankly a tiger or bear would be a safer animal to try this on as they are far less intelligent, and probably not as durable. I think that will become apparent if instead of disappearing into the woods the 600-1000lb hominid charges at you at 30+mph.

Assuming you don't miss, depending upon where you hit it the result may be instantly fatal (the reports that exist indicate it usually isn't), or as others have described with lesser animals it may just lope off into the brush. If it does, you won't find it unless it collapses as it can move several times faster than you in almost any rough environment. Whether you hit or miss, while you are tracking it or while walking out and you won't know when something is going to jump on you, grab you from the brushes, nail you with a thrown 30 pound rock, hit you with a 12' tree branch, etc. Oh, yes, there may be more than one of them, especially after all the shooting starts. Did I mention trying this at night in the presence of one of these animals would be a good way to get killed as they have almost all the advantages at night? The fun continues when any of these creatures next meet a human being out in the wilderness, but that won't be your problem.

If you are set on attempting 'evidence collection', my advice would be to have a high powered rifle and ammunition (rated for bear, preferably more as I would guess the manufacturers of weaponry probably inflate their claims like everyone else), a 44 Magnum sidearm (or two), and perhaps some other automatic handgun with a larger capacity magazine (primarily as a mild deterrant and noise maker if all else fails). Prior to going in the field get lots of bullets and practice loading under the worst possible conditions (for example, in pitch dark with your hands shaking with fear while trying to run down a slipery hill side -- better keep the safeties on). Attempting this alone would be very ill-advised, so you need someone else with excellent skills similarly equipped, and you should also have another person (whom you keep in contact via quality radios) with a vehicle within or near cell-phone range as a emergency backup. Backup as in calling for help, not as in saving you and getting in trouble as well. The field team should *never* split up, as your job is to be an extra pair of eyes to each other. You are not so much hunting these animals but trying to keep alive while they hunt you, if they choose to do so after you point a gun at them.

BTW, not knowing if this is on private or public land, which state you are in, what hunting seasons might be in play, etc. you probably want to take a close look at any appropriate regulations before trying this. And, of course, one has to be careful to not accidentally shoot the wrong hominid (whichever one that is).

Keep it safe out there,

P.F.

Thanks PF. The revolver is "backup" I guess you could say. I have a Marlin lever-action that I'm using offensively and a Ruger Blackhawk I'd use defensively, both chambered in .44mag. I've read most of the other firearm related threads and that's why I didn't post in the "best gun" threads. I have a .44M lever-gun (rifle) and revolver. They both take the same ammo and are easy for me to shoot (they're mine and I practice, so I'm proficient, and maybe above average, with both).

I can "borrow" bolt-actions if I want, but I don't really want to as they aren't mine and I'm not as proficient. I've owned bolt-actions, but don't now (which again is probably "best", but again I'm looking more for "is 44M enough"). I own several semi-auto pistols and an AR-15 but I don't think those semi-autos I have are up to the task. So, that leaves the two .44M I have, one rifle and one revolver.

My plan is to scout an area that "on paper" would be excellent. There have been a number of footprints *relatively* close over the years that I've found and based on that I am going to try to spend a few days really combing the area and concentrating on one specific area in the evening/night/morning, mostly sleeping during the day. I have above average tracking skills and feel if doing my homework pays off I'll be in an area that should produce. I'm also bringing a camera, game camera and giving specific instructions to a couple people as to my location. If I'm not back on a specific day I'm likely dead (how dramatic!).

All of that being said, I'm not sure I believe in them. I do like the outdoors, enjoy tracking, and enjoy hunting/shooting, so it'll be a good trip regardless. If they are out there, and if I'm lucky enough to get close enough, I'm going to pull the trigger. I don't care if it makes for a dangerous situation, or if it makes for an untimely death on my part. I'm going out with the intent to clear up the "is it real question", if I have to die trying. I'll have the rifle, pistol and knife. If I am only successful in p*ssing one off, when my body is found it'll have BF blood, hair and flesh all over it.

If however there were a number of people more educated than me (seen one, *know* their size, etc.) say "Man, you're way outgunned", I'd reconsider. Again, I don't know if I even believe, so maybe I'll look back on this post and think it was really stupid later on.

I tend to agree with Huntster on this topic, mainly bc he has the real field experience of shooting big bears, which I think may be the closest animal to a Bigfoot.

You may want to consider either a semi-auto .30-06 as a minimum, or just about anything bigger. I had a .300 magnum rifle for a while, but got rid of it, since I only hunt in Florida, so it's way more gun than I need, and it kicked the sh*t out of me when ever I shot it anyways, but that would be my first choice if I was seriously gunning for a BF.

Beyond those two, there is the .338, .407, and a half dozen other shoulder bruisers you could take.

Roger that. I had a .300 Win-Mag but it was too much for me and where I hunt. The shots are a lot closer and I really needed a 'brush gun'. I even took the scope off my .44M lever-gun because it was overkill. I could borrow a .300 Win Mag, almost exactly the same gun I had, with the same scope I had... Maybe .44M isn't enough...

I would have to agree with Hunster and P. Fisherman. So many times I've played out the scenerio in my mind and while I have never taken dangerous game I have encountered many feeding black bear while fishing (rod) on the trail (AK) and they would slowly, reluctently lumber off into the forest. This came to be a "comfortable" situation after a while. Then one day a large one was loitering near a friend's stringer of Coho as a smaller one approached and was just floored at the sudden speed and violence of his attack. It really made me rethink the whole situation and how close to these bears I had gotten.

While commericial fishing (on a boat) we watched a brown bear on shore from about 50 yards and I just couldn't believe the size and potential of that animal in front of me. To correlate that to something along the lines of a Sas... It's hard to imagine.

I've been watching this lately

http://www.hunttv.com/video/latest/26 (min 1:20)

The speed and distance covered is just plain hairy

The biggest caliber I have is 30.06, in my current "take the shot" scenerio Sas is in a large clearing at 100yds or more, observed to be alone and I'm IN my vehicle!

I don't have .44 out of a rifle ballistics at hand but my guess is that it would be too close for my comfort level!

If you haven't, search youtube for bear charges!

Good Luck!

Remember Ace, if they are real, they are primates. They are smarter than bears and probably travel in family groups. There will be others you DON'T see.

Right. They are primates, not bears; I meant the animals closest to them in size, not intelligence or speed or strength.

The chance is good that there may be two or three together, so you need to be ready to take a few fast following shots if need be.

If they are real, they are primates.

If you shot a gorilla, what would the outcome be, if it were in a family group? If you shot at one and hit it, would it likely charge, retreat, etc.? What would the others do?

In my mind they are animals, if they exist at all. If they are animals and hurt they'll likely flee and then die, or turn on me. If there are more, I would think they would scatter. What would happen if you heard gun shots and saw someone fall? Would you rush toward the shooter, or run away looking for cover? I know I have no experience, as most don't, but I don't buy the "mess with one" and get the whole family scenario. I just don't think they're that smart, conniving, etc. I thin they'll run for cover just because of the sound. I think the one shot could be a p*ssed off rampaging ape of some sort, but I just don't think the others will be that smart, or cunning, or hiding in the bushes for me when I get back to the truck.

You are probably right about that.

But what if you're not?

Yeah, I know Robert. Really, what's going to happen is I'll be remotely camping and that's it. I won't see or hear anything and I'll never know. If however I do find out, it'll be a gamble and one of those things that happened to pioneers or adventurers I guess. I'll have a great story to tell or no one will know my name. Again, I expect I'll just have some relaxing days and sleepless nights, which is what I call fun.

Just be sure to take a video camera to document your stay...a la "Blair Witch"....

What about a 12 gauge slug for close range defense?

Devastating, but poor accuracy over 50/60 yards.

And if you can't take the recoil of a 300 WinMag, forget the 1 1/2 oz Brenneke slugs. That's about 650 grains at nearly 1900 fps.

I'm not much affected by recoil, but those things just hurt........

In any event good luck hunting Ace. Hope you come back with a trophy or two!

use what ya got.

heck, it prolly dont exist nohow so shootin a myth with a 44 mag is just as good as having the latest "geegolly 847double nitro latte enhanced, with pez dispenser, eight dollar a round, and i have it cause im better than you, and richer", shoulder cannon.

good luck

Good point.

Yeah, don't sweat it, take what ever you want, and relax. Most likely you won't see anything at all, but do take a good camera, video is best cause it has sound too.

You said you have an AR 15? Does it shoot the military round, or just the .223? The military round is quite a bit hotter.

I would think popping 30 of those into a BF within 100 yards would bring it down.

lot of an ar's effectiveness depends on barrell length.

like myself, lots of folks just buy the little 16 inch carbine. this makes for much less muzzle velocity than the milspec 20 or the 24 barrells(which are amazingly accurate). the entire philosophy of the 5.56 round beguns to be undermined when you willingly shoot something that cuts max speed.

full rifle runs out rounds a lot faster.

huge difference in bullet weights also.

its ok for a man-stopper, police and military have dropped many many folks with them.

many dont know that there is a difference in 223 and 5.56 nato. the milspec carries higher pressures. using milspec 556 in a rifle marked .223 is unadvised. (oops someone just said that)

The cartridge casings for both calibers have basically the same length and exterior dimensions.
The 5.56 round, loaded to Military Specification, typically has higher velocity and chamber pressure than the .223 Rem.
The 5.56 cartridge case may have thicker walls, and a thicker head, for extra strength. This better contains the higher chamber pressure. However, a thicker case reduces powder capacity, which is of concern to the reloader.
The 5.56mm and .223 Rem chambers are nearly identical. The difference is in the "Leade". Leade is defined as the portion of the barrel directly in front of the chamber where the rifling has been conically removed to allow room for the seated bullet. It is also more commonly known as the throat. Leade in a .223 Rem chamber is usually .085". In a 5.56mm chamber the leade is typically .162", or almost twice as much as in the 223 Rem chamber.
You can fire .223 Rem cartridges in 5.56mm chambers with this longer leade, but you will generally have a slight loss in accuracy and velocity over firing the .223 round in the chamber with the shorter leade it was designed for.
Problems may occur when firing the higher-pressure 5.56mm cartridge in a .223 chamber with its much shorter leade. It is generally known that shortening the leade can dramatically increase chamber pressure. In some cases, this higher pressure could result in primer pocket gas leaks, blown cartridge case heads and gun functioning issues.
The 5.56mm military cartridge fired in a .223 Rem chamber is considered by SAAMI (Small Arm and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute) to be an unsafe ammunition combination.

http://www.winchester.com/lawenforcement/n...aspx?storyid=11


the 5.56/223 may be marginal(its all about placement) as a deer round except in places where the deer are only about 80 pounds(much like the little rice eating brothers it was used on in a country far far away)

if thats what ya got and you trust the rifle, then by all means, dont let some internet forum convince ya to go buy an elephant gun.

but ill say, if ya got an ar, you can get any number of calibers for it. just google somehting like ar 15 uppers.
i was particuarly impressed with the 500 beowulf upper i saw for it.(drool)

I knew you could do that, but I did not know it might affect accuracy. That's good to know. My rifle is still on backorder, it is (will be) chambered for the 5.56 military spec round, but I have 450 rounds of .223 that I have already purchased to shoot.

I guess I need to find some of the military stuff and see if there is a significant difference in accuracy.

Where I live the deer don't get much above 100 lbs, with 80-90 about average.

I have a mil-spec, 20" heavy barrelled rifle, scoped, bi-pod. Although I could certainly put the lead downrange, and relatively accurate I think the big guy would start moving real quick after the first couple "stings". After the first couple shots I think I'd be chasing the target with the next 25 shots.

The AR is a nice rifle, but mine is a bit heavy and I put a collapsible stock on it so I could get a more adjustable length of pull and it's too heavy in the front if you're not shooting it from a prone position with the bi-pod. If you're trying to shoot from a standing position a 16" is easier, especially a M4 with a lighter barrel than my 20" heavy barrel.

I really don't think the .223/5.56 is up to the task.

Sorry, it was an inside joke... just read the last four lines of this poem and you'll get it.

Halfway down the trail to Hell,
In a shady meadow green
Are the Souls of all dead troopers camped,
Near a good old-time canteen.
And this eternal resting place
Is known as Fiddlers' Green.


Marching past, straight through to Hell
The Infantry are seen.
Accompanied by the Engineers,
Artillery and Marines,
For none but the shades of Cavalrymen
Dismount at Fiddlers' Green.


Though some go curving down the trail
To seek a warmer scene.
No trooper ever gets to Hell
Ere he's emptied his canteen.
And so rides back to drink again
With friends at Fiddlers' Green.


And so when man and horse go down
Beneath a saber keen,
Or in a roaring charge of fierce melee
You stop a bullet clean,
And the hostiles come to get your scalp,
Just empty your canteen,
And put your pistol to your head
And go to Fiddlers' Green.

Ace,

> If they are out there, and if I'm lucky enough to get close enough, I'm going to pull the trigger.
> I don't care if it makes for a dangerous situation, or if it makes for an untimely death on my part.
> I'm going out with the intent to clear up the "is it real question", if I have to die trying. I'll have the
> rifle, pistol and knife. If I am only successful in p*ssing one off, when my body is found it'll have
> BF blood, hair and flesh all over it.

Yes, I actually had a similar idea when I was a teenager involving Honey Island Swamp. Get dropped off, shoot any aggressive swamp apes that drop by with a 44 Magnum (come on, if it will go through an engine block...), enigma solved. Of course, at the time I had a bit more animosity about the subject than now. As far as the CSI guys finding post mortem "proof", that hasn't happened so far, and I would guess "bear attack" would be the most unusual notation made on a death certificate in such a case. People generally rise to the level of their maximum incompetence.

> If however there were a number of people more educated than me (seen one, *know* their size,
> etc.) say "Man, you're way outgunned", I'd reconsider. Again, I don't know if I even believe, so
> maybe I'll look back on this post and think it was really stupid later on.

Well, there are many factors beyond just size and firepower that complicate that question. A 44 Magnum should do a lot of damage, and ultimately may be fatal with most shots. For close in defense its far superior to a .45 or 9mm. Whether that is going to stop it immediately or soon is another issue. It depends on where you hit it, how many times, etc. Even wild boar can take more than a half-dozen rifle shots to kill at close range, and they are much smaller. Frankly, speed, stealth, strength, and stamina are the key issues, and every human alive is generally going to be severely outclassed. A chimpanzee is many times stronger than a human being and can pretty much rip a person apart (though they seldom attack). A gorilla is stronger yet, and these creatures are much, much larger and stronger than a gorilla, at least as durable as a bear (probably more), extremely fast, fully adapted to the dark, and is pretty much king of its domain. I find the stories of them killing bears (including swinging them into trees or tearing them apart) plausible. The chance of encountering one is slim, and if you do they are usually going to have you somewhat figured out (weaponry, skills, etc.). Generally if you see or hear them its because they want you to know they are there. If someone shoots at it the chances of hitting it at range are slim. If you do hit it they may not go down. If it doesn't go down its either going to escape or try to kill you.

In terms of rifles, I can't remember exactly, but it seems like there have been a few times where they have been shot with a 30-30 or 30-06 and either just kept going or been knocked down and then ran off. Generally these stories get lumped into the categories of "hoax" or "paranormal". If a bear did this, no one would have much of a problem believing it, but the thought of big hairy monsters being almost bullet-proof is too much for most investigators to stomach. A few times they have allegedly been shot with a rifle and apparently died on the spot, but most of these stories are suspect for other reasons -- such as failure to produce a body.

Check here for more information. Use Archive.org if you find any dead links:

http://lawnflowersjerkyandbigfoots.com/bigfootshootings.aspx

http://www.highdesertbigfoot.com/Shooting-Cases.htm

Lets consult the Magic 8 Ball. [Shakes]. It says "The Odds are Not Good." 8)

> If you shot a gorilla, what would the outcome be, if it were in a family group? If you shot at
> one and hit it, would it likely charge, retreat, etc.? What would the others do?

Well, gorillas would probably be scared more by the noise than anything else. But gorillas are relatively gentle plant eaters. This is not simply a bipedal gorilla, and if it were we would have had them in zoos 150 years ago. They are a bit like the great apes, a bit like us, and in part unique (at least in this age). As mentioned in my Bear Spray thread comments, BF know what guns are and are not very intimidated by them, as far as we can tell. I believe that if fired upon they would either charge or seek cover, depending upon the circumstances. I don't think we have many stories of people firing on them and getting charged, and probably for good reason. We also don't have any serious stories of them being shot at and someone actually producing a body, also probably for good reason. In a forest environment, there is no shortage of cover and they can move fast enough to make accurate shooting difficult or impossible in that situation. The others (if present) would either charge from the sides or behind, or move into position to do so. Certain members might be expected to flee, others to defend, depending upon their role in the group. In chimpanzees even frail, very elderly females have been known to physically intercede between violent fighting males, so courage is not lacking even in that species.

> In my mind they are animals, if they exist at all. If they are animals and hurt they'll likely flee
> and then die, or turn on me.

Wounded animals don't necessarily flee, they also can attack. Many animals are more likely to attack if wounded than if left alone. People are the same way. Primates are very social animals, even non-primate predators can work as teams, often using diversionary tactics. Assuming that these creatures are alone, and not intelligent enough to work together is unwise. They are not just apes adapted to eating fruits and vegetables in a tropical rain forest, they are long-distance hunter-gatherers and that makes them much like us. Intellectually, think of the most knowledable outdoorsman imaginable, and then take away most higher intellectual activities (mathematics, poetry, etc.) and distill all concentration down to survival skills. Put that in a body capable of dismantling a truck or house by hand without breaking a sweat. Now, step on his toes.

> If there are more, I would think they would scatter. What would happen if you heard gun
> shots and saw someone fall? Would you rush toward the shooter, or run away looking for
> cover?

It depends on the individual, the circumstances, and what goes through one's head at the time. Obviously, human beings often run towards danger to resolve a problem or to assist others. In great apes, individuals help each other, including attacking dangers. They do not always run away from danger. Supposedly bears are learning to run towards gunfire during hunting season for a free meal, and BF have been reported to do much the same.

> I know I have no experience, as most don't, but I don't buy the "mess with one" and get the
> whole family scenario. I just don't think they're that smart, conniving, etc. I thin they'll run
> for cover just because of the sound. I think the one shot could be a p*ssed off rampaging
> ape of some sort, but I just don't think the others will be that smart, or cunning, or hiding in
> the bushes for me when I get back to the truck

It would be one sure way to make sure you didn't come back and do it again... to them. Someone comes to your property, shoots at you, kills your brother, and then starts checking all the rooms before he leaves... if you *can* stop him, wouldn't you? Whatever forest or swamp you are in, that's their home, or at least one of their homes. If you come into their home and try to kill them, don't expect them to do nothing about it. In the end, you might want to consider the possibility that they have as much of a 'right' to kill humans on sight as we do to kill them. In general, they don't, and its certainly not for lacking the capability. This simply is not a tactical decision (or else we would be missing a lot more joggers), its probably a moral one as well. If you give them a reason to rethink that decision, there could be consequences. But that's beyond the scope of what you asked to discuss.

Hope this is helpful,

P.F.

Fullybird, I knew exactly what you were talking about, and appreciated it. I thought it was a funny response actually.

PF, you're right. If someone came to my neighborhood and shot up the place they wouldn't do it a second time. I was posting so I could feel more comfortable about taking the shot from a firearm/bullet perspective.

I've been hearing about the animal for a number of years and found some stuff in the woods that makes me uncomfortable. I'm pretty black and white. I found prints with five toes that were about 17" long. What makes those. Well, I don't believe in bigfoot, but something makes those tracks, and when and where I found them, it wasn't some dipsh*t walking around in the woods trying to hoax people (that's probably less likely than an yet discovered primate in the woods). There aren't any professional basketball teams in my area. So, I sort of have to find out. Because, it can't be footprints and there not be a bigfoot, but I don't believe in them, so what could it be. So, I'm at a place where things aren't black and white and it makes me uncomfortable. Again, I'm sure I won't see anything, but if I do, and I realize the target I'm just going to keep shooting until it or me/them are done. If it's as smart as some people think (which I'm not so sure I'd agree) then I guess I'll wish I didn't take the shot. If it's real and I take the shot(s) I'm not coming home empty handed. I've got a couple more weeks of scouting/planning time before I head out.

The .44 Remington Magnum has been used successfully on every species of animal in North America. It is by no means the best, not even for a handgun. There are a number of variables you should consider.

- barrel length
- intended range
- accuracy/capability
- reliability

The .44 Remington Mag really shines inside 50 yards (it's breathing hard at 100 yards for big game), which is what you said your expectations would be. Are you a handloader or are you buying factory ammunition? I am assuming you are a handloader if you are using the LEVERevolution bullets. The most important question is if you can handle the firearm under stress, or do you simply want a big bore? What type of handgun/rifle are you going to be using (ie: make/model)?

I know a few folks who carry a .44 Remington Mag for bear defense, mainly black bears. The only real problem with the .429" and .430" bullets are the poor section density comparatively speaking. Most bullets in this caliber up to 300 grains are often lightly constructed.

One more thing you should consider is if the 300 grain rounds will work with your revolver if you have not tried them. The OAL changes and a member at the range I frequent needed a conversion kit for his .44 Rem Mag so that he could fire the 300 grain rounds as they were too long.

And yes, a .44 Remington Magnum will kill very well within 25-50 yards on bigger critters. It would not be my first choice of cartridge going after something big, but keep in mind that shot placement is the most critical aspect of a kill.

In all of this I am assuming you are talking about the .44 Remington Magnum, not the .44 Russian, .444 Marlin (for a rifle, as there are no wheelguns in that cartridge), etc.

Marlin 1894
Ruger Blackhawk

Hornady factory Leverevolution, 225 grain
300 grain hand loads (Hornady bullets) specifically handloaded for my rifle

I can handle my lever gun under stress better than average. The revolver, probably better than average. I'm not much for bragging, but my firearm skills have developed over 30+ years. I've been shooting Marlin levers since before I started grade school. In fact I have the first Marlin .22 lever gun my grandfather bought when he got out of the Navy, which was given to me over 30 years ago, so I'm pretty familiar with them.

My first Marlin lever was the model 336; 30/30. It almost shot itself. Never had a scope on it, but I could hit whatever I wanted with it.

A 30/30 has little use in Alaska. Even if you're going hunting for deer, you're in coastal brown bear country. You really ought to be carrying a 30-06 or bigger (I recommend bigger).

I sold it and bought a more appropriate weapon.

The Marlin shown below is my latest and last levergun (I also have a Browning levergun in 22 caliber). It is in 450 Marlin caliber. This is, essentially, an elephant/cape buffalo/hippo/brown bear/whatever carbine. With custom ammo, it will knock the Sam Hell out of any creature on Earth. The gun nut writers are still playing around with this and the 45-70 trying to see what the limits are. It has an 18" barrel, is light and easy to carry, is easy shooting, built for custom reloading, and is simply built for hunting the biggest, most dangerous animals on Earth at close range. I don't hunt with it. I hunt with more appropriate rifles. I have this for the times I'm around salmon streams in brown bear country and I'm not actually hunting the creatures (IOW, this is strictly a self defense weapon, but who knows?: Maybe one day I'll shoot a bear from a tree with it.............)

Why bother with the 44 Remington Magnum when something like this is available for so little money?

Because I don't live in Alaska, and already have the .44Ms.

If I were shopping today, I'd still buy the .44M because having the pistol and lever-gun use the same ammo is really great. Riding in the truck, hiking, camping, hunting, and having two firearms with one pistol/cartridge belt is hard to beat.

I'd love to have a .45-70, but there isn't anything around here that I'd need that much gun; although, maybe there is something out there for which I would need the .45-70

Ace,

> I was posting so I could feel more comfortable about taking the shot from a
> firearm/bullet perspective.

Obviously, I went a bit beyond the original question, hopefully to good purpose. My point is that if a creature is defenseless, even a very large animal, you could probably quickly kill it with a .22 in a vulnerable spot. In my opinion, these aren't those type of creatures.

> I've been hearing about the animal for a number of years and found some stuff in the woods
> that makes me uncomfortable. I'm pretty black and white. I found prints with five toes that
> were about 17" long. What makes those. Well, I don't believe in bigfoot, but something makes
> those tracks, and when and where I found them, it wasn't some dipsh*t walking around in the
> woods trying to hoax people (that's probably less likely than an yet discovered primate in the
> woods). There aren't any professional basketball teams in my area. So, I sort of have to find
> out.

I am not even sure if pro basketball players actually have feet that long... anyone know? Did you take photos or (the inevitable question) make casts? The relative width of the foot (width/length) is key to figuring out if it is BF. Humans (if I remember right) are 1/3 or so (check your own foot in case I'm wrong). BF tends to be nearer 1/2 or more. If its 0.45 or higher its not Shaq out hunting bare foot. If you check the relative foot depth, try to measure your own impressions at night (assuming that's when you think the tracks were made) as compressability can change with conditions. A BF track that size would have roughly twice the surface area of a normal person, so if the tracks are twice as deep as yours that would mean four times the mass, etc. This is very hard to gauge accurately, as ground often is not very compressed by the average person.

If it is a hoaxer (not likely, but you never can be sure) they may have been idiotic enough to have done a costume as well. You don't want to get into the headlines by plugging the latest Youtube film star.

> I've got a couple more weeks of scouting/planning time before I head out.

Well, you've got a lot to think about, feel free to ask questions. Oh, and keep Biscardi's number on speed dial, 8)

P.F.

Excellent choice in firearms. Marlins need no introduction, and the Ruger Blackhawk has gained a nice reputation for reliability. Although a .44 Rem Mag isn't my first choice as I've stated before, I certainly won't harp on you for your cartridge choice - I'll give you my opinion and knowledge as a ballistician. It'll get the job done on most critters within 50 yards. Realistically, a 100 yard shot is not advisable even with LEVERevolution in a .44 Rem Mag case. You want something that will penetrate the vitals, and with the velocity lost with the .44 at 100 yards isn't the best idea for anything over 500 lbs. I do like the 300 grain choice, that would be the bullet I would personally use. The SD of the bullet still isn't great, but I'm assuming you are not shooting ridge to ridge in the mountains.

Here is one more problem. If you are hunting elk for example, you want to shoot when it is broadside. The reason being it will take out (hopefully) both lungs. If it is facing you and you decline a head or neck shot, chances are you will only take out one lung. An elk can go an awful long ways before succumbing to the shot. Similarity, you can expect a Sasquatch to have similar anatomy to a human. If it is facing you, you want to aim for center mass. A headshot is not advisable. However, if you CAN get a headshot off then it will drop it immediately. I think, however, the head would be quite possibly the most important part of the Sasquatch. A .44 Rem Mag is gonna mess its head up pretty good. But as any hunter will tell you, you can't always pick your shots.

Aim for the vitals, the heart, the lungs, the spine, the head will all result in a better chance of bringing something big down. Do NOT go for gut shots or pelvic shots. I can tell you a hundred reasons why not, but take me at my word. Unless it is completely unavoidable, do not go for that area.

Oh, PLEASE do not shoot at the head. It is a poor choice (smaller target and lots of hard bony slanted surfaces) and it will destroy the evidence you are trying to get.

Don't forget to plan for getting the evidence out. If you can't take the whole thing at least try to get the head, a foot and a hand. The head is most important to compare with other known hominoids. It would be great to get a pelvis but if the thing is too big go for the head. That will be heavy enough, no doubt.

Who am I kidding. What are the chances, IF this thing is real.

Just...please...not the head.

The tracks I found were wide. Half width of length more so than quarter width. I found one print that was very wide and the others I found in stride were longer, less wide, but still wider than what I considered normal.

It wasn't a hoaxer...it just makes no sense. If I took you to the area, you'd agree. It would be less likely a hoaxer than an unknown North American primate. I was in an area that gets almost no foot traffic (meaning it was me, my brother, and one other person I took a year or two later in that area). I've been back a few times and you have to hike in, off trail to a place that doesn't offer even a level place to camp. It could have been something I guess, maybe multiple tracks overlapping, or something, but it just makes no sense to be a hoaxer.

Biscardi's the first person I'd call!!!

Although the head would likely be the most important part, I'm sure it could be reconstructed. What I'd like to do is take a position overlooking where I think I'd likely see one and shoot it center mass or in the head/spine. I'd put three rounds into it was closely as possible. Three to the chest, knowing I'd hit heart/lungs. If I was "perched" above it though, and close, I'd shoot it in the head/spine. I'd cut off it's hand I think, just because it'd probably be easiest and haul ass out of there. I'd take as many photos as possible, before and after cutting it up.

Thing is, the more I've read or "talk" with people with more experience, the more apprehensive I am of doing this. Again, I don't expect to see anything (although again, I think I've got a good spot to go). If I do see something though, I keep being told I won't (or it won't) be alone.

I suggested earlier not to shoot the head. In my last post I mentioned shooting the head regarding dropping it quick at close range, a self-defense scenario. I agree, the head is without question the most important part.

A spinal shot will drop it for good, but that is a risky shot to take. Head shots aren't ideal, and a .44 slug would mess up a lot of important stuff (to science).

The best advice I can give you is prepare for the worst. Know and be attentive to your surroundings. I wouldn't say every Sasquatch has one or more others lingering nearby. If that IS the case, don't run. I don't know who else you could bring, but when going after big game, especially potentially dangerous game, it is always advisable to be with someone.

Either the Marlin or Ruger scoped, or irons?

I took the scope off the Marlin, it didn't make sense in the places I hunt for deer, sub-100 yards. I can guarantee a hit in the head at 100 yards with iron sights (now doesn't that sound egotistical!). I can guarantee I can put one in the brain on a paper target the size of a head at 100 yards (that sounds better). The Ruger has the stock iron sights.

Source:



Shaquille O'Neal is 7'1" tall and weighs 375 lbs.

That's interesting. I would think a person's (pro b-ball player for instance) would have bigger feet based on shoe size. I figured Shaq could make the 17" footprints, but I guess not. I wonder if anyone has 17" feet?

Edit: and if he only weighs 375 whatever made the prints I found was BIG, cuz they were deep.

Did any of ya'll see that pic of Shaq careening into the stands during a game? It was hilarious because people were scattering and diving outta the way as if a plane was about to crash there. No one wanted to try to break his fall. Self preservation kicked in PDQ.

Any time this idea of hunting BF with a gun comes to mind, I always have Monkeyboy63's encounter come to mind. Then I pray I don't have nightmares that night of being in his shoes that night. As I recall, he was camping and had his .45ACP along for just-in-case. He had the misfortune of having a 7' BF come check him out during the night. He said he was waaayy undergunned for that encounter. He also fired several shots into a nearby fallen tree the BF was standing next to and the BF basically just stood it's ground. YIKES!

I know your taking what you already have, but personally, I'd rather have my 870 loaded with Brenneke Black Magic Slugs or a .454 Casul rifle/revolver combo. Big calibers for possible encounters with big crypto-monsters.

Good luck on your hunt and please stay safe!

427 lbs. if he is carrying his wallet.

I'm not sure that intelligence has that much to do with it, I've actually had this happen to me with birds. I 'winged' one and it cried out and before I knew it I was being dive bombed by a flock.

Also this video might give you some food for thought. The creature shot here is probably one quarter, one third and possibly one fifth the size of the commonly described BF. Also this animal is not often described as having "massive muscles" as BF is described.

If you count the first shot that made the creature tumble into the brush and the following shots, there were four shots made before the creature reached the shooters, and there were at least three shooters, maybe four. I doubt that all of the shots hit their target, in fact it looks to me like it was only the very first shot and maybe the one just before the creature knocks over one of the shooters.

Get the evidence out? Are you kidding me? Somebody who posts " something made those tracks but I don't believe in bigfoot, so what was it" has plans to gather evidence? Spare me. Ace, with your vibe going in, you have 0.0% chance of shooting anything except one of your Skoal-dipping idiot buddies. Hopefully.

Good luck Ace...I say go for it! Remember your follow up shots even if you think you don't need them. Also remember to have an "exit" plan to include defense. I would suggest at least one other person to do nothing but defend you and watch your exit. Bigger the better in caliber and grain, handguns for last defense.

Mmmm, Skoal...


Edit: by the way, I've collected evidence, written detailed reports, but evidence/reports don't prove anything. Skoal on the other hand, that proves something