Which handgun cartridge is generally considered mininum...

CZ_

New member
... for defense against an agressive Mountain Lion?

I'm inclined to think a hunting .357 magnum load (158 or 180 grain) might do the trick. Most large mountain lions, from what I've seen are not much over 200 pounds, with the average probably closer to 150. Not sure on the exact size of Mountain Lions, these are ballpark guesses. I'm sure there are some shooters that would prefer something bigger (.41 or .44 magnum). What would the consensus be on TFL?
 
I would lean towards something with at least 180 gr bullets.

Cats don't have real thick hides like bears.

357 would do, but 41 or 44 mag would be better, with a slightly "warm" 45 Colt load being my choice.

I once followed a Cougar track to the base of a tree, where it ended. I looked straight up and there he was, looking down at me, about 20 feet up. It was not Cougar season, but the safety on my .338 rifle was silently clicked to the fire position. After the hair on the back of my neck stopped standing on end, and I realized the Cat wasn't going to pounce on me, I just walked away and let him be.

Afterwards, I realized that tracking him to the base of the tree probably wasn't the smartest thing to do. I had no intentions of shooting a cat. But my curiousity "made me" follow him.

This was the same year that a game warden was "attacked" and bitten up pretty bad by a big female Cougar.

I think a big, fat bullet moving at moderate speeds would be all you need.

You mentioned "agrressive". Most cats run from humans, or hide from them. But we are building our houses farther and farther out, into territitory inhabited by wild animals. Most of the time it is our aggression which forces animals to react in a harmful manner.

Out in the wild, most people will never see a cat, but the cat will see them and choose NOT to interact.
 
RogerC . . .

Your great story frankly scares the hell out me, sitting in Virginia at my PC. I am sure the second you looked up and saw that cougar twenty feet above you was the L-O-N-G-E-S-T second of your life.

No matter how many years ago, I am glad you are safe and sound.
 
It was one of those moments when everything around you seems to blur, and time stands still.

I remember thinking that my Elk hunting partner was over on the next ridge waiting for me, and that if the cat jumped me, I'd get no help from him. That and the fact that I'd have some explaining to do to the game warden if I killed it :)

I think the cat was probably keeping just far enough ahead of me that I couldn't see him, and then he decided to "tree" himself rather than cross a road. There was 2 feet of snow on the ground, but the road had been "driven down" by trucks.

Trust me, I'll not do that again.

p.s. The trip turned out great. My partner nailed a 6x6 Bull
about 3 hours later!
 
Last edited:
I've read posts whereas a Cougar somewhere in the great
state of Oregon took six .357 magnum 125 grain JHP's (I
believe ?) to the stomach area, and was still coming at
the hunter. So, I would suggest either a .41 or .44 magnum,
or a .45 LC; all with a minimum of a 5" barrel.:) :cool: :D

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
 
Ala Dan,

Shots in the stomach area wouldn't seem to be a good indication of the stopping power of a round, but agree that bigger is better.

Was reading several articles on cougar attacks, and the consensus of all of these was that large carnivores have only two modes of looking at other animals : danger or food. Once an area has comletely stopped all hunting of (for example) cougars, within a few years, they will no longer consider humans as danger, the only other classification they have is then "food".
In essence abolishing hunting season on these animals will lead to more attacks on humans, with children and women being the most vulnerable to attack.
 
Well, I'm no cat hunter, but, I've watched Animal Planet enough to know that, if, and when, these things decide to attack ... whatever the reason ... they are FAST and without mercy.

If it were me, I'd be far more concerned about the gun. I'd want a reliable semi-auto with a fairly heavy bullet as I am far more accurate with semi's than revo's. For a handgun, I'd go with Glock 20, and wouldn't turn down an experienced DE in .44 or .50 (although I'd shoot the .44 far more accurately than the .50). At least with the G20, I can try to put 11 rounds into him, and I can probably do that quicker with the G20 than with any other handgun, before he starts to gnaw on me.

In fact, if I were to go after any dangerous game, it would be with a rifle, AND a Glock 20 for backup. If I saw cub tracks, I'd probably make my way in the other direction with haste.

I know others will say, for any dangerous game, a .44mag revo would be better, but .44 mag slugs hitting all around the critter won't do me any good. Give me a Glock 20 with a 3.5 lbs connector and I feel like I'm just on another USPSA course.:D
 
.454 Casull. If you're in a pinch, maybe the new Ruger cartridge (.480?). Where aggressive animals are concerned, my idea of bare minimum is maximum. You get one chance, if you don't get it right, you just make it mad or wound it.
 
A few basics about animals with teeth that can hurt you. Firstly, one is NOT shooting to kill, one is shooting to STOP. It's exactly the same parameter as self-defence against two-legged aggressors. However, animals are MUCH harder to stop, given that a central-nervous-system (CNS) hit, to brain or spine, is difficult to achieve when it's charging at you, and your fight-or-flight reflex has just gone into overdrive! African experience has proved time and again that, absent a CNS shot, the ONLY way to stop a charging animal is to break down the bone structure so that there is no platform left to provide mobility. This means that one's defensive load must penetrate deeply, and must be powerful enough - and big enough! - to break bone and scatter splinters, etc. through the body cavity.

This tends to rule out the lighter hollow-points. They can - and all too often do! - break up on heavy bone, and their expansion tends to limit their penetration. The .357 Magnum 125gr. referenced in an earlier post to this thread is a good example. Hitting an animal in the stomach will hurt it and make it mad, but it does nothing to break down the bone and muscle structure that it's using to close with you!

Personally, I'd recommend the heaviest caliber you can control in aimed, rapid fire. For me, this is the .44 Magnum in a revolver. I would NOT trust a semi-auto in this application: not only are the rounds available in a semi-auto format less powerful, but the scenario assumes that one is out in the bush, and therefore the handgun will be exposed to dust, dirt and general debris, which means that reliability is a key factor.

Having picked the caliber, I would then go for the most penetrative, damaging round that I could handle in that caliber. I prefer the Garrett Hammerhead loads in my Ruger Redhawk. These have awesome performance on many types of dangerous game, and I am very confident in their performance. (They have literally stopped a charging grizzly in its tracks! - an amazing performance from any handgun round.) I suggest that interested parties check out the field reports at http://www.garrettcartridges.com/default.asp - well worth the reading!

Alternatives to the Garrett, especially in other calibers, would be the ammunition from Buffalo Bore, Cor-Bon, and the Federal CastCore .44 Magnum load.

I know that some will complain that such rounds are too powerful for a cougar, for example. So what! Any round that can shoot right through a cougar, front-to-back, taking out any and every bone structure it encounters along the way, and leaving a half-inch hole through the length of the animal, is going to do that cougar no good at all! In the same way, I want a round that can penetrate BOTH shoulders of a bear, cougar, angry mother moose, or whatever is threatening me. To heck with "too powerful" - it's my a** on the line, and I'm going to pound the living heck out of whatever (or whoever!) is endangering it, until such time as I'm sure the threat has passed.

Let me close with the immortal words of Clint Smith of Thunder Ranch: "Shoot what's available, as long as it's available, until something else becomes available!"
 
.357 magnum is about all I can comfortably handle of the magnum rounds. The .44's just kill my hand, and while .41's aren't quite as bad, they are too rare and expensive to get around here. I think I'll go with the 180 grain hunting loads, at least it gives me the maxinum penetration in .357 magnum caliber.

Plus, all my large revolvers are chambered in .357 magnum, so it works from a logistics point of view as well.
 
Personally, I'd recommend the heaviest caliber you can control in aimed, rapid fire. For me, this is the .44 Magnum in a revolver. I would NOT trust a semi-auto in this application: not only are the rounds available in a semi-auto format less powerful, but the scenario assumes that one is out in the bush, and therefore the handgun will be exposed to dust, dirt and general debris, which means that reliability is a key factor.

Excellent statement and I agree except about a revolver being more reliable, particularly when exposed to dust, dirt and general debris, than a semi-auto. I won't bother engaging in the debate with you ... suffice to say, in this area, I whole-heartedly disagree. As well, while .50ae may not be as powerful as .454, to insinuate that .50ae is not enough power is a little extreme.

Also, presuming you wish to hit the animal with, not only, heavy, accurate shots, but, as many as you can in as short of time as possible, unless you're shooting an 8-shot .357, a Glock 20 or DE will allow you to fire 1 to 4 more rounds before having to reload, AND, unless you're real good with speed-loaders, reloading a semi is faster. Anyone know if you can get hi-cap mags for the DE?

If I were not so much better with a semi, Glock 20, in particular, the only way I'd choose a revolver over a proven semi is if I were a FAR better shot with the revo. In fact, I'd go to a 25yds range and set up two 8" targets and repeatedly, putting up new targets each time, shoot a revo and a semi for the guns capacity without reloading and time each. Then I'd count up all my hits on all the targets for each gun and divide them by the total time for each gun. The bigger number wins. If you wanted to, you could factor in reloading time in which case you'd just shoot one gun for, as many rounds as you have mags or speed-loaders (whichever is least) so you end up shooting both guns with the same amount of reloads ... again, total hits divided by total time yields your save-my-@ss factor.

If, for you, the bigger number is with the revo, then you've selected the best gun for you. Although, as I've mentioned, I would not trust a revo when there is a chance that dust, dirt, and general debris may get into the gun.:D

If I were a frequent (more than once a year) dangerous-game hunter, particularly if I were going after grizzly once in a while, I'd probably buy a DE XIX with the .50, .44, & .357 components and load appropriately for each trip ... practicing with each, as previously indicated, at least once a month. In AK, load 'er up with the .50's, unless someone convinces me that the .44 is worth the extra round (if I can get hi-cap mags, all bets are off). Otherwise, .357, unless I think, for some reason, I might need .44.

Otherwise, I'd stick with a Glock 20 and hope for the best.
 
Deuce, wise words, and I agree with much of what you say - that's why I carry semi-auto's for defence! However, I think there are a couple of points worth debating, and I'd be interested to hear your views.

Firstly, the energy of the G20 rounds is relatively low in comparison to what one can get in a revolver. If my memory serves me correctly, the maximum energy in 10mm. is about 600-650 fpe in factory loads. The Garrett Hammerheads are vastly more powerful - 1200 fpe for the 310gr. load, 1400 fpe for the 330gr. Also, the penetration of the Garrett bullet is vastly superior to most conventional ammunition: I'd refer interested parties to the penetration tests run recently at the Linebaugh Seminar: http://www.sixgunner.com/linebaugh/penetration_test.htm. They didn't test semi-auto loads, but it's interesting to see the relative performance of many common hunting and animal-defense loads. They didn't test the Garrett .44 Magnum ammo, either - only the .45-70 - but details are available on the Garrett website (see my previous post for link).

Secondly, I would question whether magazine capacity is of real-world relevance here (unless, as Jeff Cooper would say, one is planning to miss a lot! :) ). If something dangerous is charging at you from close range, you have only a few seconds - sometimes less than that - to hit it, and hit it hard enough to make it stop its attack. I think that 6 rounds in a revolver will be sufficient - if you haven't hit it with 6 rounds, you likely won't have time left to reload!

Another VERY important point is the issue of muzzle-contact defence. I've experienced this personally while hunting in Africa, and while it's unusual, it's by no means as uncommon as many think. If the animal reaches you, wounded or not, and is trying to give you several new body apertures, you might well have to press your gun against the animal to fire (it might be jammed underneath the beast!). If a semi-auto is forced "out of battery" in this situation, it may well not fire or function. A revolver does not suffer from this handicap, and this is a potentially life-saving distinction.

Finally, on the reliability issue: this is hotly debated, and I've had experience with both types of weapon. I generally don't have any problem with semi-auto's, but have found that on an extended hiking trip, they are prone to accumulate dust and dirt inside the slide rails, behind the grip (the famous "Glock gap"), in the magazine well (and inside the magazine itself), etc. It's no more difficult to conduct field maintenance on a pistol than on a revolver: but I find that any dirt is much more visible and "obvious" on a revolver, making it that much easier to remember to strip and clean it regularly! I therefore opt for the revolver in this type of application. (In support of this position: how many handgun hunters - excluding the single-shot boys - use semi-auto's, and how many use revolvers? I think the latter dominate by about ten-to-one at least!)

I'd be interested to hear your feedback.
 
Preacherman, first, let me say how pleased I am that we can discuss our opinions as men rather than, as I so often see, as insecure little boys.:rolleyes:

As for energy, I don't suggest, for one second, that, in comparable loads, a semi can generate as much energy as a revo. As you know, and I'll state in case some trolls don't, any semi will "soak up" some of the energy produced by the fired cartridge. Having said that, and back to my original point, I'm a far better shot with a semi, AND, my "weaker" loads (again, if I were a regular dangerous-game hunter, I'd be packin' a DE in .357, .44, or .50 as appropriate so, depending upon the situation, the energy out of a DE won't be so much less than your .44 revo) will find their target far more frequently than from a revo. I, personally, believe that 10-11 10mm Cor-bon penetrator rounds hitting the target will be far more effective than 0-1 .44mag or 0 .454 rounds hitting the target ... AND, that's very likely how I'd shoot. This is most likely due to my USPSA experience with my G34. I don't have a G20 yet (backordered), but, I did get aquainted with a rental for 100 rounds and I shot it nearly as well as my G34, AND, I intend to get a 3.5 lbs connector for it so I expect, aside from slower follow-ups, very similar results. I do own an Anaconda and a 629 (as well as a 686) ... both fine guns to be sure and they'll either go to my grave with me or to my children. But, the sad truth is, I'm nowhere near as accurate, or fast, for that matter, with them as I am with a semi. I have shot a DE .50 and, while I, currently, have no need for such a gun, it was quite manageable, and reliable, and I would not hesitate to buy one for the purpose I've already indicated.

I guess I should have clarified a bit. I WAS suggesting that a semi might be a better gun for this situation due to higher capacity. Given that capacity is, or is nearly, the same, whichever you shoot better is fine (despite our differences of opinion on reliability). I believed one of your points supported this argument as I believe that you agree that "as many heavy loads in as short of time as possible" is a good thing, AND, even 7 is better than 6. You mentioned that capacity may not be a "real world" issue. However, if they made a nice double-bbl handgun in .44 or .454, would you rather have that or your revo? Maybe you'd rather have the dbl-bbl, I don't know (I wouldn't mind having one for kicks;) ). But, I'm sure, given this situation, and given that we agree that one should be prepared to fire multiple shots to "breakdown the animal", I would expect many to take 6 over 2. So, despite the fact that, in any given situation, you may only get a chance to use 1, 2, 6, or whatever, I'd rather have as many as is reasonable to carry. I would also expect, again, I'm NOT a dangerous-game hunter (yet;) ), that each time you hit the animal, you may slow him down just a bit, AND, that by continually firing, you may slow him down so much that he's eventually crawling toward you. Regardless, I'd still want the higher capacity, and, for me, more rapid-fire, of a semi so misses won't be so devastating.

If something dangerous is charging at you from close range, you have only a few seconds - sometimes less than that - to hit it, and hit it hard enough to make it stop its attack.
Again, speed of multiple accurate shots being my main concern, I'd take the G20 every time (unless I bought a DE for this purpose). The fact of the matter is, if I thought I could be in danger, I could practice with my Anaconda or 629, but, if I thought that were necessary, I either wouldn't go or I'd buy a DE ... just that simple.

As for "muzzle-contact", I had never thought of that. I suppose it's something worth considering. For me, my accuracy and speed with a semi still outweighs. If I were to use a revo to cover that situation, I'd probably be far more likely to encounter that situation.

As to the popularity of revos for hunting. I won't try to suggest that semi's are, across-the-board, better hunting handguns. Again, whatever you shoot the best, you should use. Most of those people, I expect, don't use those handguns to hunt dangerous game. I'd guess 90%+ for whitetail/black bear and 10% for anything else. That's not to say that, given the opportunity, that they wouldn't use their revos for dangerous-game, just to say that, in most cases, it wasn't a consideration. And, therefore, capacity, AND, likely, accuracy and speed, are not as much of an issue. Personally, aside from the folks who are just dead-set on revo's and think semi's are the devils-work, I would expect that if DE's went for about $500, you'd see a lot more people buying 'em and using 'em for hunting. However, still not nearly as many as revo's for one simple reason ... most people are not "into guns" anywhere near enough to consider that the myth that revo's are inherently more reliable than semi's is actually backwards. AND, I used to be the same way. It wasn't until I had a debate with some other guy online until I really started to think about it and realized my mistake. Frankly, if you're only into hunting guns and you want to get a handgun, which would you buy, a $500-$600 SRH or SBH or a $1200 - $1500 DE (that, likely, most of your buddies write-off as Hollywood BS)? Hell, I'd probably buy the revo ... if anything, just to avoid the sh!t I'd get from my buddies. While there are other semi's worth considering, they're prices aren't much better and they certainly don't have anywhere near the popularity. And, as you've mentioned, a 10mm doesn't quite stack up for dangerous game. However, I expect more and more people to buy these for whitetail and such ... there must be a reason they're backordered.:confused:

You had mentioned that the dirt shows up better on your revo so you remember to clean it. I would suggest that you may not have time to clean it from the time it gets dirty to the time you need it. I don't know how you're getting so much dirt in your semi's. But, if I had to take my 629 and one of my semi's and put them both in sand and trash 'em around, I'd put far more trust in the semi than the revo. AND, that's basically, the military's perspective as well. As you said, this is a hotly debated topic (depending on the board you're on). I won't say that I'm right and you're wrong. I will say that I once held a very strong, what I thought was common-sense, belief that revo's were inherently more reliable than semi's, and, I believe the opposite to be true now. I came across another guy who, I thought, put it quite well ... "revo's take neglect better than semi's, however, semi's take abuse better than revo's" ... meaning, if you don't clean and lube your semi, you'll likely have problems, however, if you drag a revo and a semi through the mud, the semi will be more reliable.

I think, when it comes right down to it, I am far more comfortable with a semi than a revo and as long as I can get a semi which I think offers "enough" power, I'll take that every time (unless it's a sh!tty gun). And, unless someone like you (I don't mean that in a bad way at all) presents me with a "show-stopper", I'm not likely to change my mind. I've shot both, and I prefer the semi's across-the-board. Even my favorite rifle is my BAR and I own 2 bolts and 2 levers.

I also think that, when it comes right down to it, you're far more comfortable with a revo, at least for dangerous game, than a semi. And, unless someone like me presents you with a "show-stopper", you're not likely to change your mind.

The bottom line is, if two guys go into the brush after identical cats with identical temperment, one with a semi, and one with a revo, and each shoots his gun very well, then both will likely fare well. Aside from the reliability issue, I would only suggest that if the revo were a .357 6-shot and the semi were a G20, that the guy with the semi would have better odds due simply to capacity. If the .357 were an 8-shot, I'd say the odds get much closer. If anyone feels that they wouldn't need the "extra" rounds, then they're free to make that choice. Put another way, if I could shoot a revo so much better than a semi that I'd likely get 6 hits with the revo vs. 1, 2, even 3 or 4 hits with a semi, I'd definately take the revo.

Take care.
 
I'd favor power over capacity, .44 Magnum over our hypothetical Glock 20. But I definately would take a G20 over a .357. The power levels are too close for the capacity trade off.

But I'm avoiding the running-target scenario. I have no experience with mountain lions, but I'm assuming that you would encounter them stationary at a slight distance more often than running straight at you. So I'd prefer a gun-and-ammo combo which would favor a first-shot-stop on further away animal than follow-up shots on a running one.
 
Thanks for the feedback, Deuce. Again, you speak wisdom! We're actually pretty much on the same side when it comes to reliability - I carry semi-auto's on a daily basis for defence, and am not afraid of their reliability. I agree with you that if I could get a "packable" semi-auto in a heavy caliber, I would very seriously consider switching to it. I don't count the Desert Eagle in that category because it makes my Redhawk look like a snubby by comparison! A bit too big and heavy for convenient carry, IMHO... Do you suppose that we could persuade Gaston Glock to make a "Glock 44" in .44 Magnum, or a "Glock 50" in .50 AE? Full-size, of course, as per the G17/G22/G31, perhaps with the 5¼-inch barrel of the G34/G35? Single-stack mag., perhaps with 8 or 9 rounds? Nice thought!

I also agree that ten or twelve rounds of 10mm. high-velocity is a heck of a lot better than a 6-shot .357 Magnum, which I simply would not trust as an effective "stopper" on dangerous game. The 10mm. in full-power loads is basically equivalent to a .41 Magnum revolver round, and I've seen it used on whitetail at out to 50 yards (from a Glock 20) with great success. I've also read about the Motor City Madman shooting a warthog at a claimed 135 yards with this gun and the Cor-Bon 135gr. hollow-point round. This is VERY impressive: being from Africa originally, and knowing how "tough to kill" the warthog is, I'm very impressed with any handgun round that can perform like this. However, in the light of my experience on heavy, aggressive animals, I'm sure you'll allow me my preference for a heavier round, deeper-penetrating and with more shock power. Let's hope that neither of us ever has to use our sidearm in such a situation!

As to the "contact distance" issue: I've seen this twice, once involving myself and an unsociable zebra, once involving a friend and a lion. I'd plugged the zebra three times with a rifle, and it showed no signs of life - until I put my rifle against its flank and squatted next to the head for a photograph. It was apparently not in a photogenic sort of mood, and proceeded to try to rearrange my features with its teeth and hooves. I used my .44 Magnum, pressed against the neck, to end its remonstrations. (Best cure for constipation I've ever discovered!)

In the second incident, my friend emptied his rifle at a highly annoyed lion which had objected to his trying to collect an impala which he'd just shot - apparently, the lion had also been stalking this animal, and reckoned that he had the stronger claim. My friend's rifle was a .270, which is NOT recommended as a lion-stopping caliber... He ended up using a 1911 in .45 ACP to dispute ownership of the impala, and had to fire three rounds to the head at muzzle-contact distance to resolve the issue in his favor. (He will never again have full use of his left arm...) Afterwards, from his hospital bed, my friend solemnly informed me that in future, the lion could have anything he liked! He also mentioned that at muzzle-contact range, his first attempts to fire did not work, as the slide had been forced slightly back, out of battery. He had to relax the pressure on the weapon to get the slide back into battery before it would fire. How he had the presence of mind to do so while feeding his left arm to the lion, which was lying on top of him at the time, is one of those things at which one can only wonder...
 
Amazing stories Preacherman!

I'll certainly afford you your choice of caliber. My leanings toward the G20 is for my intended use which is MN woods gun and maybe a whitetail or two.

I know what you mean about the weight of the DE. However, for .44 and, more importantly, .50, that weight's kinda nice when you're shootin'. Personally, I'd be OK with it.

Now, don't laugh ... but, I actually sent a letter to Glock offering two ideas for new guns. One was basically a 9mm Glock exactly the same size as a Kahr MK9, which, I believe, would darn near corner the market. The other, would be a new 11mm ... Glock would design the cartridge which I intended to generate 800 - 1200 ft/lbs with a 250 - 350 gr bullet. I expressed how I would like to see the new Glock 11mm with not much longer than a 5" bbl, if that long, and weighted as to reduce felt recoil similar to the G20.

I've heard no response after a few months now.:(

I'm guessing your friend is one of very few who have actually killed a lion with a 1911 .45ACP.:eek:

Take care.
 
Back
Top