if you need a gun for foraging, so do MILLIONS of other people, a great many of whom will be very willing to kill YOU. No WAY you can know who's what, so the only prudent action will be to evade everyone that you can, and be ready to kill anyone that you can't. Regardless of how "remote" you THINK your retreat area is (assuming that you can actually GET there, in good health) it can certainly be reached by motorcycle, boat, skidoo, etc, plus less than a day's walk, by anyone in MANY towns or cities. Such vehicles go a LONG ways on very little fuel, which they can easily haul along. If such a rider finds a truck or tractor or car with 15 gallons of fuel, he's good for several hundreds more miles, too.
only bozos "think" need shtf gun, not combat.
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
TRY getting sand, mud, etc out of a lever action in the field sometime, in a big hurry, in the rain, snow, or darkness, as easily as the same thing can be done with an AR-15. 
Need a vice, screwdrivers, all kinds of help to detail a M94 winchester, and yes, they DO jam up, rather badly, from debris in their actions. Their tubular mag is also VERY easily damaged, to the point of non functioning, when you have to dive prone to avoid being shot.
Need a vice, screwdrivers, all kinds of help to detail a M94 winchester, and yes, they DO jam up, rather badly, from debris in their actions. Their tubular mag is also VERY easily damaged, to the point of non functioning, when you have to dive prone to avoid being shot.anyone who'd choose a bolt over an AR15, for shtf, is
a frigging idiot. Normally, it's done either out of FANTASIES about nobody being able to get within half a mile of you, or never having to hit more than one man. Either that, or it's some cheapskate bozo, not wanting to spend more than the $50 his Mosin-Nagant costs. Yeah, he's REALLY going to be highly skilled-capable, with THAT sort of outlook on what real survival ability costs.
a frigging idiot. Normally, it's done either out of FANTASIES about nobody being able to get within half a mile of you, or never having to hit more than one man. Either that, or it's some cheapskate bozo, not wanting to spend more than the $50 his Mosin-Nagant costs. Yeah, he's REALLY going to be highly skilled-capable, with THAT sort of outlook on what real survival ability costs.
makes sense to me
that old vid of the garand vs. the springfield demonstrates this, even though in prone they were biasing against the bolt action more than needed. Auto can obviously shoot once, if needed, but other rounds are on tap should fast repeat hits be necessary.
can bolt actions get it done? Sure. Is there a better choice? I'd say yep. No sense in having a whole arsenal for practical purposes either.
that old vid of the garand vs. the springfield demonstrates this, even though in prone they were biasing against the bolt action more than needed. Auto can obviously shoot once, if needed, but other rounds are on tap should fast repeat hits be necessary.
can bolt actions get it done? Sure. Is there a better choice? I'd say yep. No sense in having a whole arsenal for practical purposes either.
Joined
·
10,279 Posts
Consider the fact that a bolt is all some people can afford and that 'clunker' can be used to get a better rifle. Sure, the auto is better in all respects but I wouldn't feel unarmed with a 1903 Springy or a 303 Enfield etc. Marksmanship, survival skills and tactics will overcome the shortcomings of the BA rifle.
RIKA
RIKA
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
You know I was going to give a more detailed answer about what to do in such a scenario, but then I thought that this is simply another case of the thread starter sculpting the situation to fit the point he was about to make in his posting. It is somewhat comical that you insist on fitting the scenarios to your current point of view from one day to the next because it makes it appear as if you flip/flop much more than would be possible in a lifetime for even a flip/flop master such as John Kerry.
I will though give apretty simple answer. Simply put answer would be, you never need an auto gun as a survival weapon. A semi auto is ok for many situations; a bolt action for others. A bolt action most assuredly would be the rifle of my choice for a situation in which I did not have access to tools and or spare parts for the semi auto. I would prefer to have both if possible. One thing about the bolt action: any decent bolt action out there will likely out live any semi-auto with regard to whether or not it suffers a major mechanical failure. Bolt actions are the proverbial brick outhouses of the repeating firearms world.
I will though give apretty simple answer. Simply put answer would be, you never need an auto gun as a survival weapon. A semi auto is ok for many situations; a bolt action for others. A bolt action most assuredly would be the rifle of my choice for a situation in which I did not have access to tools and or spare parts for the semi auto. I would prefer to have both if possible. One thing about the bolt action: any decent bolt action out there will likely out live any semi-auto with regard to whether or not it suffers a major mechanical failure. Bolt actions are the proverbial brick outhouses of the repeating firearms world.
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
By the way, do you think a bolt action rifle like a high end sniper rifle is cheap? That is what I would prefer in a .308 caliber in a survival situation where I would likely have no access to spare parts. Of course a nice semi auto in .308 would also be nice, maybe a nice AR-10.
Joined
·
4,648 Posts
A well placed round doesn't really care what type of action launched it. A fatal shot is a fatal shot. Doesn't really matter if it was from a single shot, a bolt, a lever, a semi auto, or a full auto.
A round that is well placed will do the job.
one hit from a well placed round is worth more than all the misses in the world from an auto.
:devil:
A round that is well placed will do the job.
one hit from a well placed round is worth more than all the misses in the world from an auto.
:devil:
Joined
·
2,620 Posts
What I find curious, is that a hit anywhere from a .22 will be fatal, but a bolt action in a caliber like .308 is incapable of killing anyone. Aslan is correct, a hit is a hit is a hit. The rifle / action that fired it doesn’t matter to the terminal ballistics.
Joined
·
7,387 Posts
I'm trying to decode this sentence fragment:
Does it mean: "only bozos think they need a shtf gun and not a combat gun" or "only bozos think they'll need a shtf gun for anything but combat" or what exactly?
Joined
·
7,387 Posts
How is this harder to carry than a CAR-15, or any semiauto of similar power?
Even sticking with plain-jane factory loads, it launches bullets from 90 to 180 grains, with anywhere from 150 to 1250 ft/lbs of energy. It breaks 2000 fps with a lot of those plain-jane factory loads, meaning it will defeat soft armor. And it's also more powerful, quieter, and has more subsonic and supersonic factory loadings available for it than a CAR shorty, btw. And with it's 16.5" barrel you don't have all those pesky NFA "register it or go to prison" issues. I've considered shortening the stock some so it wouldn't look so odd, but it's stunningly comfortable to shoot as-is, so I haven't bothered.
And if you want to take full advantage of those subsonic loads mentioned above, a compact Abraxas suppressor (1" by less than 6", and 3 1/2 oz) makes it literally BB-gun quiet. So you can deliver more than 400 ft/lbs on target, with a gun that's BB-gun quiet and as small & light as a lot of rimfire guns:
Certainly wouldn't be my choice for a combat gun, but for hunting, foraging, etc, it's fantastic. And since your sentence-fragment makes no sense in any application of the rules of English, that shouldn't be an issue anyway.
So no, a semiauto capable of all that isn't "at least" that handy & carryable.
Joined
·
2,479 Posts
John, in "Melvinese" I think it means both plus at least a dozen other meanings us stupes are too lazy cheap and Ignorant to understand 🙄 🤔😆
Joined
·
10,750 Posts
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Join the discussion
