6.5-284 for Grizzly?

sharkathmi

sharkathmi

New member
I just watched a show on TV where the guy shot an alsakan grizzly at 400 yards with a 6.5-284.
He went on to say he was shooting 140gr bullets.
I took three shots to put the bear on the ground.

Now, I'd like to hear some of your thoughts on this.
I don't have a 6.5-284 but it appears to be a bit light to me.
Add that with the velocity (velocity loss) of the bullet at 400 yards...
I guess if yur gunna pop a big bear with a 6.5-284,
you might as well do it from a safe distance....
...like 400 yards.

What are your thoughts?
 
Originally Posted By: sharkathmi
I guess if yur gunna pop a big bear with a 6.5-284,
you might as well do it from a safe distance....
...like 400 yards.

That's about right! More like just killing a bear, not hunting the bear. IMHO.
 
For the most part you never shoot any bears at long range even with stuff like a .375 H&H Magnums and .416.

Bears are hunted at fairly close range with most shots being UNDER 100 YARDS. Bears are tough animals but they die pretty quickly if you put a medium to large caliber, heavy bullet through their heart/lung area. One way to do that is to use an accurate scoped rifle from about 40-75 yards.

In my opinion shooting at an uninjured (not already shot) Bear with any caliber rifle at long distance is shameful, unethical and unsportsman like.
 
Originally Posted By: sumrifle

In my opinion shooting at an uninjured (not already shot) Bear with any caliber rifle at long distance is shameful, unethical and unsportsman like.


What the What?

Never been bear hunting of any kind, so maybe I'm missing something?


Chupa
 
Thanks for your comments guys. I guess we are on the same page.

sumrifle - I'm with you that shooting game at long distances is more like shooting than hunting. I used to watch a show on TV hosted by Gun Werks, the ones that use Huskama optics on their rifle. I've seen them on TV shooting elk and mule deer at 900 yards!! Not much a stalk involved in those hunts. I guess that is why I hunt, to "play the game" with the critter and see if I can win. But that's just me.

Thanks for your comments.

Mark
 
I shoot the 6.5-284, I have two, one for paper out to 1000yds, the other for hunting light skined game at long ranges, as in Antelopes, Predators and Mule Deer. I would feel more prepared if I encountered a Grizz with my .44mag side arm.
Jim
 
I suppose it could be done, I've herd of them being taken with cartridges as small as the 257 Roberts.

If for instance I was after caribou and came across a bear, and happened to have a bear license, I would go for it but with extreme caution.

But to intentionally go after one with only a 6.5 and at long range too-boot, seems rather reckless and ill-informed, after all the power of the cartridge is very similar to a .270win. witch some call questionable for elk.

This sounds like it was just a stunt filmed for tv.
 
300 Win Mag should be the minimum for Griz.. When I was hunting in Canada my guide said for his Griz hunts that a 300 was the minimum. All the guides carried 338's.

Besides it now seems like the latest fade is the 6.5-284..

Justin I have killed a lot of elk with a 270 and 130 partitions.. Elk and Griz are two different things to hunt.. Guess this guy never heard of the term dangerous game..
 
Last edited:
Quote:If for instance I was after caribou and came across a bear, and happened to have a bear license, I would go for it but with extreme caution.
When I would go deer hunting on Kodiak Island, I would take my 338 Win Mag with 250 gr Partitions.
Not for the deer.
But for the critters that eat the deer!!
 
Inuits often take Polar bears with .243's and 25-06's. They absolutely want the best pelts possible. They would think of someone hunting bear with a 375 H&H the same way guys that come on here get talked out of coyote hunting with a 30-06... While I think 400 yards was way to long of distance, I think his rifle was plenty. If it had been an eskimo they would have only taken one shot and tracked the bear till it died, as white bear pelts are worth alot of money. I'm sure the 400 yard shot was a stunt, and one bullet at a decent range would have killed it, they probably wanted to see it drop on camera.
 
That's way too far to be shooting at grizzlies and the guide was wrong to allow it.

Had the bear been wounded and had to be sorted out of the willow/alder brush, would a 6.5 feel adequate for the job?

BTDT
 
Last edited:
They also shoot caribou with 22 lr, I think subsistance hunting on there part is a whole lot different than sport hunting, I would bring a 338 and try to get under a hundred yards. A griz up close is just as deadly as a cape buff and you don't see people shooting them with 6.5-284's.
 
The 44 mag on my belt would be... I don't care if I go to the woods with a 416 Rigby, I'm gonna have a back up revolver on my hip.

Considering that the 6.5-284 still carries more energy at 200 yards then a 500 S&W has at the muzzle, I still feel like its enough gun.

 
Last edited:
Yeah you can kill em with just about anything if you make good shot placement. I have killed 2000 lb steers with a 22 many times. People have also killed many bears with a bow and arrow, albeit usually witha gun to back em up.. It's that one time when the animal decides to charge that bigger is better.. In which case what caliber would you rather have? 6.5 or 338??
 
Your right as rain. A 140gr. 6.5 bullet is proven killer but a 300gr.bullet from 375 H&H is better on something that bites back.
 
I guess that I am fortunate enough to have been able to hunt some pretty big bears. To be quite honest, I never felt undergunned with a .270 Winchester or .30-06 (or even a bow). I have also never shot one three times. I have taken one black bear at 360 yards back when I was a youngster; green he was 6'1".
John
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top