I was watching some old U.S. Airforce survival instructional films. The oldest of the old, when running down the survival gear, mention a 1911 pistol and two spare "clips". This being referenced not only as a personal weapon, but a piece of survival gear meant to handle all sorts of things.

Which got me thinking. The old 1860 Army was once considered fit for most anything, and the Single and Double Action Colts in .45 Colt and .44/40 explored the world and the west. A standard .45 ACP isn't that much lighter and slower than the old .45 Colt standard loads and should beat out the 1860.

Obviously a magnumized .45 Colt is a different matter.

But, would our old friend the 1911, loaded with standard FMJ ammo- or some sort of specialty ammo - suffice to dissuade most furry creatures and also, up close, fell one for dinner?

I would think so. I carried a 1911 for the last 20+ years of my career and killed a lot of injured deer with it. I believe deer with a broken leg or two are harder to drop than an uninjured deer because of the adrenaline, and the .45, with 230 gr-jhp usually penetrated the chest cavity, when that was the shot I had to take, and killed quickly. I have read of a number of people who have hunted deer with a 1911, and while that wouldn't be my first choice, under 50 yards, it would work if you could hit what you needed to. For feral dogs and such, it would be great.

The only .45ACP I carry in the woods is a S&W 625 revolver. I just don't like semi-auto loaders out in the woods. That is one place I just prefer a revolver. It is not a place I expect to have a need for rapid fire and extra magazines.

I suppose it depends on how big and what type of dangerous game is in the area you are walking through. While certainly not the best load for small - medium Bear, I suppose a few well placed shots might get the job done on a smaller Bear, wolf etc. For Larger dangerous game I would opt for something a bit more powerful like a 44 Magnum.

I personally carry my M65 with BB 180 grain hard cast .357 Magnum ammo, but where I hike and explore the Black Bears are small to medium sized and still mostly fear humans. If I were in Alaska a 44. Magnum would be minimum.

I have a cabin in the mountains of Virginia. There are some really big bears around my land. I routinely carry my Kimber TLE RLII when I am out in the woods and would not be afraid to carry it in Alaska. 8 rounds of 45 acp is way more than ANY living thing can stand, period end of story. First choice for cape buffalo...not a chance in H E double el...but I wouldn't be afraid if that was all I had either. First choice for a survival pistol...depends what I am trying to survive. Not really a good gun for squirrel, but definitely works good for taliban!!!!

Trying to stop a charging grizzly with a 45acp would be the end of your story

__________________
Forged From Freedom

Um, have you read "Alaska Bear Tales" or "More Alaska Bear Tales"?

Not to take anything away from the .45 ACP, but I would respectfully have to disagree with your statement.

__________________
Been up since before breakfast

tbgunner beat me to it...

__________________
Been up since before breakfast

A few points to interject. 1) The gun you have with you is your survival gun for the duration of the emergency. 2) In WWII fliers in the Pacific had available to them 1911 magazines of 45 ACP shot shells and 45 ACP flares, which greatly expanded the 1911's usefulness in the role. 3) Concerning bears, in October 2011 a mentally ill man in Muskingum County, Ohio released his collection of exotic animals, then killed himself. When a sheriff's deputy was investigating, a full grown male Grizzly Bear, was looking for food or his owner or whatever and the deputy drew his Glock in 40 S&W and killed the non-excited bear in one shot. So the auto handguns will do a reasonably good job on getting anyone out of hot water!

When I walk in the woods I carry a 1917 on a lanyard. When I was younger and Backpacked in the hills I carried a alloy framed 1911 with a 1 magazine each of ball, HP, and shot shells. This was just as a sidearm, If I was planning to hunt for a major portion of my food I took along a single shot 20 gauge and about 15 or 25 assorted rounds.

I have used the 45 ACP, or ballistic equivalent, on several game animals. It worked well. I did not use a 1911 but a S&W revolver but I see no reason the self loader would not do as well if tuned for the loads in the magazine.

Kevin

__________________
Unshared knowledge is wasted.

"I personally carry my M65 with BB 180 grain hard cast .357 Magnum ammo, but where I hike and explore the Black Bears are small to medium sized and still mostly fear humans."


Me too, except I have two of them.


I also carry my S&W 1006 with Underwood ammo.


I did use my Colt LW Commander to deter an aggressive Doberman a few years ago. Nothin says "WHOA"!! like a couple of Hornady FMJ's at five yards.

Hmmm.... Ever shoot a dog running at you who had evil intentions? You'd be surprised what God's creatures can "stand" and just how long they can stand it.

Some have mentioned using .45 shot shells.
From personal experience, I would advise against using shot shells in any semi auto gun.
It can create a very nasty jam up when one of the shot shells comes apart during recoil inside the gun. Hundreds of little rat shot pellets will get into every nook and cranny inside the gun rendering it useless.
Don't do it!

I've used and carried 1911's for many years. They are accurate, dependable firearms (mine anyway). The .45 ACP cartridge is a good compromise between effectiveness and controllability. Would it be my 1st choice against big critters? Not at all...large bore revolvers with the term "magnum" in their name are a better choice, or a large bore rifle is even better. But if it is all I had, then I would take it and not worry.

__________________
No good deed goes unpunished.

I carry this 45 in the mountains if I think I might need a gun.Its light and packs flat.

".45 as a woods gun"....
Gator...I will go with a yes.

1. Forest of Argonne.
2. Belleau Wood
3. Iwo Jima
4. Jungles of Viet Nam

Fraction of the "woods" this round was
successfully used.

Truth be told, there's nothing I'm likely to find in the woods in Ohio that a .45acp couldn't deal with, given a competent level of marksmanship and a modicum of good judgment.

As I said in another thread, my Son-in-Law carries a 1911 when he helps work his dad's farm.

To date, he has taken two feral hogs that presented themselves.

As cmort said, around here, I would not feel undergunned.

__________________
Music/Sports/Beer fan

I live in Ohio too. I shot a Doe with a Gold Cup at about 15yds, it
snuffed it proper. Having said that, I could have done the job with my K-22 at that distance. The only other use in the "woods"
I got out of a 1911, was to shoot a few holes though my cabin
to run 12/2 wire for new generator. So barring escaped zoo
animals I feel real safe with my K-22 in the woods of SE Ohio.
When handgun hunting in Ohio I use 44 mg or 45 Colt.

A 255gr / 1075 ft/sec round is certainly good for Oregon Wildlife and I like it in my SW 625 for woods carry.

Outside the city limits....I like something with a longer cartridge case.


Always, use enough gun.


Su Amigo,
Dave

__________________
"IN GOD WE TRUST"

I sometimes carry a 45 ACP when I'm out in the country. I usually follow Jeff Cooper's advice and load a 200 gr. lead SWC at about 950 fps. Not up to a magnum load but it cuts a full size hole and penetrates really, really well.

I have killed a running buck and lots of other "edible" critters with my 1911 45acp. Some with jacketed HP's and others with cast. I always cast and shoot 230 gr. truncated cone bullets. I saya away from the lighter ones.

__________________
S&W Accumulator

I'd rather swap out the 1911 for the 629 when heading into the wild.
but, if no other option presented itself, you can do worse than 45 acp

__________________
it just needs more voltage

It depends on what You expect to run into in the Woods.
If I were in Bear Country I would have My 44 Magnum.

With a stiff load in a truncated cone round, why not?...unless you're expecting Grizzlies. Does everyone really live in grizzly country or what?

The military has carried the .45 ACP in the bush in the worst conditions imaginable. I don't think I'd hunt with it but for dispatching injured animals or even defending against most aggressive animals it should work well.

__________________
"He was kinda funny lookin'"

I think you hit the nail on the head with this one. Not ideal but can do the job if you do yours.

Not withstanding I don't think the US army expected there soldiers to run into Kodiak grizzlies with any frequency to be worried about, and even then I believe it still could penetrate a grizzlies skull if you were a good enough shot.

John.

As a matter of fact yes...it was a chow that probably weighed in at 75 pounds or so. A single 22 stinger was all he could stand and that was just until he hit the ground {about a half a second} He wasn't "standing it" after that.....

I cant believe all you guys are scared to walk around in the woods with 8 rounds of 45acp at your side....somebody blow fairy dust up your skirts or what????

We'd have to see about that,but I'm game....that is if the bear will do it too. I have to admit, I do have a weakness for excitement and it's getting harder to find any these days....and yes, I did read the Alaskan bear books on a plane home from there. As I recall the problem with most bears not being stopped was that they were shot in the face. That wont even kill a horse...you are not hitting what it takes to stop him.
Put those same rounds in his throat or chest and he will have a hard time trying to maul somebody if he cant breath. 8 rounds of 45 slugs in the throat or chest and you think he wont stop??? You're kidding right??? Again, first choice...no, but stand there scared with a 45 in my hand??? No.

Depends on the woods. Typically 8 rounds of 45 is fine......assuming you got all 8 hits and all 8 were in the vital areas and not a leg or an arm.. It depends on your woods. And what resides in them. I'm Pa IF you see a bear it's usually 200 - 400 pounds. They're not big...as bears go. Other places a 700 lbs bear is considered scrawny.

Wasn't there a guy who used 6 shots of 454 before the bear dropped! Much more energy and penetration then a 45.

When I go camping I bring a 45. It's not a 1911 and I have more ammo but it is a 45. However, that's not my primary SD firearm. My primary is a semi auto with 30 rounds of 7.62x39. It has nothing to do with fear, I just don't want to find out that this particular animal needed more then 8

Now that was funny, right there. I don't care who you are!

__________________
James L. "Jim" Rhiner

Jeff Cooper once cited a case in a little Colt book printed in the 1930's. I later found a copy in a gun shop and read the entire thing. It's called, "Colt on the Trail" and had personal accounts from customers who'd used Colt arms outdoors.

Cooper referred to a bear called "Old Patch" who had to be shot by an angler that it attacked. He emptied his magazine and fed four more rounds singly until the bear was dead. But the 1911 did kill that bear.

Other bear cases involved similar loads from other guns. One case involved a British lady in India who borrowed her husband's New Service .45 (not a .455). She was coming down from a machan and her rifle was momentarily out of reach when a sloth bear came for her. The .45 killed it.

Other examples involved a .38-40 SAA and a .44 Special, I think. I don't want to dig out the book and check just now.

In non-defensive use, a turkey was taken with a .38 Official Police. I think the range was some 50 yards.

If the gun and the shooter are accurate enough, most of these cases could be solved with a .45 ACP.

Jeff wrote to me about killing a small deer in Central America with a .45 auto loaded hot with 215 grain SWC hard lead bullets. Said the venison was muy sabroso. I still don't know what sabroso means. I think it's like delicioso. Is Cal-Mex here? Maybe he'd know.

If you have a tight modern .45 auto and the ammo you want for the need, yes, I think one will usually suffice. If the original intent of the question was to answer whether the USAF - issued gun with two spare mags of GI ammo would suffice, maybe. I'll tell you this: I sometimes drew a .45 auto instead of a .38 in the USAF, because the .38 ammo was so weak. That was the M-41 ball round. Our NCO in charge of one armory took unit funds and bought us some .38 Hi-Velocity ammo off base. I felt much better with it in my gun, but the .45 would still be a better stopper.

At close range, the shot-loaded survival round would probably kill snakes or maybe squirrels or rabbits, but I wouldn't trust it beyond a very few yards. A ball round would do better. I hope a ball round would kill a porcupine or a beaver. An effective ambush might net you a deer. I'd sure try to carry additional ammo. Depending on where you had to bail out, a leopard or tiger might have to be killed, or a bear. That'd take luck and a sound knowledge of the animal's anatomy, but might be doable.

John Taylor said that he killed an African lion outside his tent with a Webley MK .VI 455 and MK VI military ammo. That was a 265 grain FMJ RN bullet at some 600 FPS. I think a .45 ACP would be better.

Cooper mentioned another way to get groceries with a .45. In WWII, he was a Marine officer on a Pacific island. He'd shoot bats with his .45 and trade them to the natives for lobsters they'd catch in the ocean. Both sides thought that was a good deal.

Mostly, in a survival situation, I'd try to snare birds and small game or use a deadfall trap. And some bailout kits in parachute seat packs held M-4 or M-6 survival guns. Those used .22 Hornet ammo and the M-6 also had a .410 barrel under the Hornet bbl. Those would be preferable for food gathering.

If I was taking a.45 to the woods now, it'd be a stainless Colt or Springfield copy that would shoot well with the chosen ammo. I think I could get game with it. But I really prefer a stainless .357 revolver with some .38 rounds as well as .357 loads.

Those Western grouse that sit still in a tree well within pistol range would provide a meal to a good shot with a .45. And you'd hopefully have some fishing gear. A pole could be cut if you had lures and line.

If you had a friend attacked by a croc, alligator, or caiman and know just where to shoot, I think a FMJ .45 bullet would kill one. That spot on the head is hard to hit if you're the one being attacked.

I saw a pic of Sasha Siemel's wife with a caiman she'd killed with an arrow. I guess a .45 bullet would do as well.

I'd use Buffalo Bore 45 ACP +P OUTDOORSMAN ammunition and would be absolutely comfortable with it.

Here's a good article about handguns and rifles vs. bears.

“Stopping” bears with handgun or rifle cartridges

I use their 9MM +P OUTDOORSMAN as well as the .38SPL +P OUTDOORSMAN for the woods/hiking/camping/etc. and feel very safe against all kinds of intruders. Well, minus dinosaurs. But anyway, I haven't had to use it so far and I hope I never will, so I can't give you firsthand real life experience on that...

__________________
Jorge

[QUOTE=Texas Star;138880554]


Jeff wrote to me about killing a small deer in Central America with a .45 auto loaded hot with 215 grain SWC hard lead bullets. Said the venison was muy sabroso. I still don't know what sabroso means. I think it's like delicioso. Is Cal-Mex here? Maybe he'd know.

sabroso....Tasteful (tasty)

when I was in Alaska I was some what surprised that most carried something in a 357 more then anything else .. but when in the woods there a long gun was the best weapon to have hands down and most people always carried one .. 30-06 and the 308 probably the most common ..

On Kodiak Island I wouldn't trust a hand gun of any caliber against one of the brown bears there !!

The only scary animals in the woods around me are the 2 legged variety ..

the 44 or 45 I'm sure would do the same quality work ..

When I was up there they all said a 12 ga. shotgun loaded with rifled slugs was the "best" thing for bear...I couldn't believe it!!! I would ask them, "do you know how many whitetail deer I have hit square in the chest with multiple 12 ga. slugs and had to track them to recover...if I found them at all??? I have tracked several big bucks that were hit good and never found them...and that is what those folks call "best" for big bears???

As a doc once put it "Location, location, location!". I know good friend who shot a posom three times center of mass with a 9mm and had to kill it with a pitch fork and I have another good friend that fired 2 shots from a heavy rifle and the third in the head to take a big adrenaline high bear down.

Just because it's possible to shoot something with something really weak doesn't mean you should out of your way and not pack the appropriate gun with you, it just makes no sense.

John.

Yes, with a 45-70. The slug went through both lungs and the dog had enough fight left to run 30-40 feet and bight the end of the rifle hard enough to put teeth marks in the barrel. I'm glad the dog blamed the rifle and not me for shooting him as I'm sure he could have reached me if he wanted to.

Peter Capstick and his PH once shot a lion 11 times before it died. And, yes, it was trying to bite them. Calibers used were .375 H&H and either .470 or .500, I forgot which. Most shots were well placed, too. Very sobering.

Along the way, they discovered that the rather pompous PH's old ammo had some misfires.

I talked with a cop who shot a man four times in the chest with a .44 Magnum. The man ran for over a block before collapsing. The officer went to a .357. Figured it was lighter to carry and would work as well.

Extreme things like this happen. I want a Star Trek phaser. Never seemed to have any stopping failures...

According to Colt, a .45 ACP will do the job,



But all you really need is a .25 -

__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

Sorry Brad...that is a Colt .38 Super!

__________________
No good deed goes unpunished.

That does it. I'm going to town tomorrow and order one of them there .25s. No sense packing extra weight around.

Dang that fine print!

__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

I wished I'd have read the fine print before I went and bought these. Oh well
gordon

Attached Images

DSCN1581.jpg (75.2 KB, 44 views)

__________________
better have that checked

The .38 Super was indeed then touted as a good emergency gun on big game. I had a high school chum whose dad bought a Super to protect himself from bears where he camped and hunted.

Note that the ad says that the Super . 38 had a velocity of 1200 FPS. Usually stated as 1300. How old is that ad? The Super .38 appeared in 1929. Was it ever loaded to just 1200 FPS?

Today, I doubt if most .38 Super loads reach even 1200 FPS. I think a Plus P 9mm is as good or better, given the better bullet designs loaded in 9mm. Today's answer to the matter is the .357 SIG if you want an auto giving those sort of ballistics that the Super was intended for.

As for the .25, it'd be very interesting to learn the details of that adventure! The little Bayard auto pistol made in Belgium had an ad that showed an explorer with one by a Cape buffalo! To be fair, that little gun came in .380...

If you read Jack Higgins's recent novels, you'd think the Colt .25 with those dreaded hollowpoint bullets is a real sledgehammer.

As a primary hunting weapon no. As a close range weapon of opportunity/self defense/survival (10 yards) on non adrenalin pumping animals it works well. I haven't tested it on many, the biggest a 100lb hog in the skull almost fully penetrated with a Federal hydrashok, a 200 gr cast would have, I think. It dropped fast. It is a good choice when going to check trail cams or fill feeders & I have yet to find a holster for a larger than 3" revolver in 357+ that carries as well. It's hard to beat a Ruger speed 6 snub when using a few rat shot first. I have no doubts it would easily drop a whitetail @ 25+/- yards. If the gun is an old friend you are familiar with & good ammo Heck yeah. I've never been charged by a griz, I feel left out. The only wild animal that ever drew my blood was a chipmunk.

I basically agree, but I've worn both a Colt .45 auto (and a .38 Super Match and Browning and Beretta 9mm pistols) as well as .357 revolvers with four inch barrels, and if the holster is well chosen, one won't feed much difference. The correct, sturdy belt DOES make a difference

I mostly used Bianchi's River belt and the El Paso equivalent, both nicely basketweave stamped and lined. Holsters were Bianchi's Model 5BHL or Safariland M-29, or El Paso equivalent. Guns were S&W M-64 (a .38, but same size as the .357 M-65), M-66, Ruger Security-Six (six-inch bbl.) and Ruger GP-100. Going to an N-frame .357 or a .44 does make a difference, but not as much as some think.

The guns were worn well back on the right hip, and were comfortable during long hours in a car or when on foot.

If concealment is needed, the Bianchi Shadow and other holsters allow carrying a .45 or the other autos mentioned.

I do agree that three-inch .357's have merit, and the 145 grain Silvertip bullet achieves about 1200 FPS at the muzzle. I understand from a detective who looked at some police shootings here, that this bullet is VERY effective on soft-skinned targets.

I've never been wounded by a chipmunk, but don't feed them or squirrels. I was tagged pretty badly on a thumb by a walleye that I was trying to unhook. I am confident that a .45 ACP will kill a chipmunk. You are well armed for emergencies of that order. I killed that fish with cold steel, a Randall Model 3 with six-inch blade. It was more than adequate for a fish of that size, maybe three pounds.

Whether it's true or not I heard of a guy the shot a black bear in the knee with a .25 acp and bought himself enough time to get away.

Killing one? I would be really interested on how you go about doing that! I don't even know if you could reliably pierce the skull of a bear at typical hunting ranges, maybe they got real close and hit a soft spot on the skull?

John.