300 Weatherby for small black bear?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nearly every year my boss hunts in Maine for black bear. He always gets one, too! Last year, his male bear weighed in at 262 lbs after field dressing. His rifle is a Marlin lever gun chambered for 35 Remington shooting 200 grain core-lokt bullets. This is a deadly outfit for black bear anywhere that they can be hunted.

My suggestion is to stay clear of that Weatherby because of ammo cost, recoil, and overall length/weight of the rifle.

Good hunting to you.

Jack
 
No, you don't need it. But, use it if that is what you want to do. Just keep in mind that the recoil requires some concentration that might be better used on something else in the process.
 
What bullet are you describing as a 180 SBT?
Bullet choice is your only factor in using the 300Wby. I'd suggest something with a controlled expansion feature to prevent over expansion. While bears may be of similar weight to deer, their build and bone structure is different and probably requires some attention in bullet selection. I'd lean toward an "elk" type bullet. The bears I've killed or seen killed were at close range with 30/06 using 180 grain Hornady interlocks and 12 gauge "forster" type slugs. Both types of projectiles produced one shot kills and complete penetration on 150-250# bears.
 
I reload and don't notice the recoil that much so neither of those factors really bother me. After firing a 700 Nitro, I don't notice much recoil anymore. :) I also tend to feel more comfortable with longer rifles. That might be weird, but the Weatherby just seems like the perfect size and weight for me. I wouldn't mind having one in a slightly smaller caliber, though. To answer the bullet question I've been loading with 180gr soft point boat tails. I've tried some bonded core bullets in the past but on deer, a Sierra does the job just fine. I've recovered several expanded projectiles and the expansion seems to be just as good if not better than Core Lokt Remington rounds, but again I've never tried it on a bear.

What makes bear hunting more close range than deer hunting? I know baiting is legal here so I'll most likely go that route but I've never been so I wouldn't mind some tips on what to expect on my first bear hunt. If I'm going to be closer than 150yds I might just take the M1. I also have a few mosins, long and short, but I'm not sure how much I trust their accuracy. I seem to be lucky to get 1.5" groups at 100yds with my mosins but my M1 does 1" groups with no problem at all. I have an Enfield and a Mauser too, but out of all my military rifles the M1 is the only one I trust to perform as well as my hunting rifles.

My M1 loads consist of Max powder weights with either a 165 or 180gr projectile. The adjustable gas plug has allowed me to load my Garand to modern 30-06 standards.
 
Last edited:
Everything I've read or seen talks of hunting from a stand or maybe sneaky-snaking. Generally, fairly thick vegetation. So, most folks talk about close range. 30 or 40 yards or less; up to maybe 100 or so at most.

But I'm not a bear hunter. :)
 
when I hunt bears I do so over bait. I've jumped them a few times with the truck but for the most part you'd never know where they were until you're right on top of them.

I've only ever spotted one bear from a distance and he was on the opposite side of a VERY deep, VERY Steep chasm. I doubt I'd have taken the shot even if it had been in season at the time.
 
Last edited:
As a fellow NC member, and one that hunts bear I gotta tell you that I would consider another mount. I would venture to say that most bears here are taken with a 30-30. We hunt with dogs rather than stand hunt (most dog bears in NC) so a short lever gun with relatively light recoil gives a lot of advantages when it comes to follow up shots or quick loading/shouldering after walking in or hopping out of a truck. I would recommend picking up a cheap lever gun in 30-30, .35 or .44, toss a scope on with see through mounts and put a bear in the freezer. Sounds like a good excuse to buy a new rifle! That 300 will do job but for our small bears it may be a little unnecessary when you can shoot cheaper and more comfortably. Not to mention the abuse that a bear rifle can take when you are climbing through the thick junk they tend to take you through. Just my .02
 
Back in 1978 I shot a small black bear and blew his lungs clean out of a wide open chest With a 300 Wby. He still went 50 Yds. I never took That rifle for Bear again. Its over kill. A 30 or 35cal. Lever rifle or even a 12 Gage slug will do just fine. A good blood trail helps for tracking. My top choice is a 12 Gage rifled slug gun with Remington Slug Hammers.
 
Last edited:
Your friend is right. Even at that, a .375 H&H is on the cusp of black bear rifle classification.

Now here's the reality: long before belts appeared on cartridges, North American hunters killed everything on our continent including polar bear with 7x57's, .30-40 Krags, .30-30 Win's, '06's, and with the .303 British, among others.

My friend killed an Alaskan griz with a .300 Wby.

I fish where black bears grow huge, and I mean huge. I have seen several 400 pounders in the Eastern Sierra. 500 pounders ain't uncommon. I have used a 1911A1 with 230 grain +P ammo, a Sig P-229 in .40 S&W with 180 grainers, and this season I'll use a GP-100 with 180 grains bullets while fishing in black bear habitat. I have never felt vulnerable carrying a .45 ACP or a .40 S&W in black bear country. Were I to hunt them, I'd use a .308 Win. But I have no desire to kill a bear. I do have desire to prevent a bear from killing me.
 
Another NC resident here, planning on hunting bear this season. I'll be still hunting, no dogs(bear hunting with dogs isn't quite as popular up here in the mountains).

I'll be taking a .308 with a 16" barrel, loaded with 150 gr Sierras. I think that's plenty of gun for anything that's walked through NC since the last ice age.
 
They opened up bear season for this year in my county in Georgia. Doubt I will waste money on a tag considering I saw one bear 4 years ago and have only seen one bear track this year.
 
reynolds357,

Take a fishing trip in the Eastern Sierra up around Mammoth Lakes or Bridgeport. You ought to see about one a day, maybe far more than that. I'm not sure what a nonresident bear tag costs. But if I were going to hunt them, that's where I'd go, or maybe the Angeles National Forest. Black bears roam the streets of villages in the Angeles at night. And a game warden told me that black bears in the Angeles are among the fattest in the state because they don't hibernate much because of warm weather and the ski resort dumpsters are fast food restaurants for them.

A lady I know who lives in a village in the Angeles saw one about ten years ago. Her description of it would place it firmly in the huge category. And they're mostly liberals up there that don't hunt them. My game warden friend wanted me to buy a tag a kill one. I told him definitively, "No way." I've hunted and fished the High Sierra and I've hunted throughout the Rockies. I've never hunted mountains as rugged as the San Gabriels. Besides that, the San Andreas fault runs through the San Gabriels.

http://www.americansouthwest.net/california/san_gabriel_mountains/

This guy lived in the Angeles: http://articles.latimes.com/2001/may/16/local/me-64078
 
Sans soucis,

Regarding the "liberals" who don't hunt bear in California. I am not a liberal but I can assure you that many liberals do hunt. It's funny when people make hunting a political stance which it is not. Making a case based political affiliation concerning outdoors in a state that has tens of millions of acres of spectacular, pristine and extremely varied outdoors venues seems flawed to me. Perhaps another state may be more like what you describe. There are over 38 million inhabitants in California, a majority is liberal, unfortunately. The tide changed in 1982 when the majority was republican. All those people who hunted then and their children, still hunt now.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top