Author Topic: Is one enough . (Read 17546 times)

don heath · « **Reply #60 on:** June 30, 2009, 08:44:01 PM »

A thought... For the northern climes where most members of this forum live. .223 is minimum as a survial round. It is marginal as a man stopper (ask the troops in Iraq- that's why the 6.8 SPC came about), and marginal for shooting deer. Also, If you need too many special types of ammo you have zero'ing issues! (ie it isn't practical to carry 55grn HP for AP , and 77grn SP for deer and 80grn VLD's for long range! I was forced into this with the 7.62- 200grn FMJ's for elephant. 200grn sp for buffalo or lion, and 150grn millitary ball or Norma Plastic point for other use...now how many clicks on the sight was that again?

) Whilst I am very fond of the .308 for general applications I have tried three 'compomise' rounds that I am impressed with. 6mm Norma BR, 6,5 Grendal and the 6.8 SPC. I have used the 6BR most and it impresses me with both it's killing power on small antelope up to Kudu and it's long range performance (shooting targets out to 600m). 105grn Bullets for all applications. Just something to think about...

Travis Morgan · « **Reply #61 on:** July 01, 2009, 03:29:33 AM »

Don,

You might be interested in reading the July 2009 issue of Shooting illustrated; there's and articly by Bryce M. Towsley entitled, "Knockout Punch", wherein he compares the .223, 6.8, and .308 fro home defense, using three different shooters on several different drills.

His results reaffirm my thoughts that the .308 is the way to go; the recoil, for an experienced shooter is pretty negligable, while the knockdown power is substantially more, as is barrier penetration. Frangible and varmint bullets popular for .223 are also widely available for .30 cal., as well.

P.S.~If you need some help over there, gimme a holler!

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #62 on:** July 01, 2009, 04:56:29 AM »

Years ago i read alot on stopping power , 9mm compared to 357 , 38 compared to 45 etc . it all boiled down to if you wanted a revolver every thing was compared to the 357 and the auto was compared to the 45 acp . The light came on ! either the 357 or the 45acp had to be the best as they were what people compared everything to .
The 308 seems to hold the same position in rifles FSD .

Travis Morgan · « **Reply #63 on:** July 01, 2009, 05:12:12 AM »

Never forget the .45 Colt! You can load it up or down, from target to magnum velocities. AFIK, all the major maufacturers make double action revolvers chambered in .45 Colt. Personally, I prefer Rugers for both double and single actions, though I'd not sneer at a Smith. Though it won't take the abuse that a Ruger will, the Smith will allow you to load hot enough for everyday use with no problems. If you think you need to shoot low .454 end loads, use a Ruger or, better yet, just get a .454!

mannyrock · « **Reply #64 on:** July 01, 2009, 05:52:05 AM »

Well Don, for goodness sakes, I wasn't talking about having one gun to hunt in Africa.

The subject of this post is the one gun to have in the U.S. in a long term survival situation.

Yes, I am a big .308 Winchester fan, but if you are limited to one and only one gun, then the .308 is not the one to have. The vast majority of your game food here would be small game. Plentiful supplies of lightweight, cheap, ammo would be of paramount importance. And although the .22 LR is not excellent for everything, it is one of the few cartridges that is "good enough" for just about anything short of true big game, which won't last long in significant numbers anyway in a survival scenario. There is a reason that the vast majority of trappers in Alaska carry a .22 rifle as their one and only gun. It is key to survival.

The only other reasonable choice here would be the .223, or (if you can carry the ammo weight) a 12 gauge shotgun. :-)

Best regards,

Hodr · « **Reply #65 on:** July 01, 2009, 07:03:10 AM »

My brother in law gave me 50 traps for "display use only" when the laws changed. He also taught me how to set, bait and skin critters. If evrything caves in, those along with Ranger Survival school will be my extra guns.

blindhari
Sgt Ranger
It's supposed to be tatooed on my lower back

Travis Morgan · « **Reply #66 on:** July 01, 2009, 11:09:37 AM »

Where? All I see is a tatoo that says, "Property of Jimbob!"

teamnelson · « **Reply #67 on:** July 01, 2009, 11:38:44 AM »

Travis, I believe there's a don't ask don't tell policy here on GBO.

Oldshooter · « **Reply #68 on:** July 01, 2009, 12:10:23 PM »

Hodr · « **Reply #69 on:** July 01, 2009, 02:19:31 PM »

Travis,
I have a ranger badge tatooed in the same place my father did, I earned the right in 1966, my father of course was an original he earned the right as a combat medic with Darby.

Jimbob is a cousin. but he and I were never that close

blindhari

don heath · « **Reply #70 on:** July 01, 2009, 07:57:38 PM »

Mannyrock- appreciate this which is why I sugested a smaller cal than .308. From my experieance in africa, and survival situations in Africa, you need to carry the minimum calibre for the worst situation- ie in Africa, a 9,3x 62 (a .308 is too small for lion and elephant!) and sure- a bit of prudence usually enables one to avoid confrontations with dangerous wildlife...but not always!

Using an air pistol to harvest doves, we kept 6 men going for 10 days without having to fire a shot from our centre fire rifles.

Perhaps in the states and canada, a powerful handgun for defence and a light rifle for hunting is ok...but it's like hammers...you can hit softly with a big one if you need to do a little job, but you cannot make a little hammer do a big Job no matter how hard you try! You can shoot rabits with a 6mm and still have food but you will be hard pushed to shoot an elk at 200m with either a .22lr or even a .223 - but a .308 will do it easily and a good 6mm with the right bullets in a pinch. A bigger rifle open up the options as to what animals you may hunt and at what ranges, and ultimately reduces the number of rounds you need to carry.

Travis Morgan · « **Reply #71 on:** July 02, 2009, 01:57:46 AM »

BTW, that 9.3X62, unless I'm mistaken, equates to something like a .338 Federal.

don heath · « **Reply #72 on:** July 02, 2009, 03:11:11 AM »

No, up a (little) bit from the .35 Whelen. Dangerous game loads are 286grn@2400fps, general use load is a speer 270grn at 2300fps. Why download the speer? Becuase then it shoots sub moa groups 1" high at 100m when the 286grn soft is dead on at 50, and a 270grn bullet at that speed is enough for all plains game from Eland down , and if you shoot something small (like a duiker) it doesn't blow it in half! (like a .375 H&H with 235grn bullets at 2800fps does!)

Travis Morgan · « **Reply #73 on:** July 02, 2009, 04:01:12 AM »

How the heck do you pronounce, "Duiker", anyway?

don heath · « **Reply #74 on:** July 02, 2009, 08:02:21 PM »

Di ker...emphasis on first sylable. there are a bunch of them ranging from 10lbs to 25lbs live weight

Badnews Bob · « **Reply #75 on:** July 03, 2009, 04:14:48 AM »

I really don't see what this thread has to do with sustainable living.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #76 on:** July 06, 2009, 01:44:19 AM »

Well i started it so let me say that in the case one had to limit their guns what would work ? It could be we are limited in the future by law , we could be limited by space due to travel , limited do to world events ie you may have a retreat that you can go to but are limited to what was stashed there . Many in the future may be limited by cost of the weapon and the cost of ammo. Consider a single sgot shot gun and shells is better than a mini-30 without ammo .

don heath · « **Reply #77 on:** July 06, 2009, 02:51:31 AM »

To which my answer was no, a shotgun is great, but not ideal. a .22 lacks the power for a true survival weapon and most of what you can do with a .22 you can achive with an air rifle...A very accurate, yet reasonably leightweight centre fire rifle wins every time.

Also, conventional looking! I have a Steyr Elite 08. Great F class rifle- but looks exactly like a snipers rifle! (which is exactly what it is) and it weighs 12lbs without silencer and ammo. Too much of a good thing. Yes it folds so it's easier to hide. It's lugable -but not exactly easy to carry! My 7lb 9,3 would be a much better choice for a survival rifle. A mini mauser like the CZ or short Sako actions matched to a decent barrel...looks like a hunting rifle, shoots like a snipers rifle out to at least 300m...hits hard enough to take big game, accurate enough to take head shots on small game (if you need to waste the shot). Loud enough sound signature to signal for help, yet easy to silence if you don't want to advertise your presence.

If you are limited to the number of firearms you may carry or own, there is no such thing as 'cost effective'. There is only good and sub standard. I rely on a rifle for protection almost daily in Africa. There is no 'good enough'! Making do with sub standard kit is for those who couldn't think ahead.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #78 on:** July 06, 2009, 04:12:17 AM »

I can assure you that a 22 cal. air rifle does not come close to a 22 rifle . You may accomplish at 15 yards with an air rifle what you can do at 75-100 with a 22 rifle but that might still be a streach . BTW my air rifle is a RWS mod 34 . You can go to the pre charged but due to pellet weight it is still a limited weapon . The concept of 10 equal vel. shots with nothing more than 10 pulls of the triger only exist with a 22 rifle.
The 22 lacks the power for defense that we can agree on . But it has worked in the past.
The shot gun is a comprise that will do many things well if not best . The one thing the rifle offers is long range . How much is that needed ?

Dee · « **Reply #79 on:** July 06, 2009, 01:09:35 PM »

Quote from: don heath on July 06, 2009, 02:51:31 AM

To which my answer was no, a shotgun is great, but not ideal. a .22 lacks the power for a true survival weapon and most of what you can do with a .22 you can achive with an air rifle...

What a bunch of crap! We're not talking about hunting here, we're talking about SURVIVAL in a worst case scenario not of our choosing. Why spend a fortune on a some damn high dollar air rifle that you won't be able to maintain in a survival situation i.e. PARTS! AND! A 22 WILL GET THE JOB DONE if used properly. In 20 years of Law Enforcement in AMERICA! I saw a lot of men sent to the great beyond with a 22 caliber round. MOSTLY REVOLVERS! And I never saw a man carry a load of shot off of any size at close range. The shotgun is the ULTIMATE stopper in defense situations. BEEN THERE, SEEN IT, AND DONE IT!
You can buy a GOOD RELIABLE 22 for a lot less than those high dollar AIR RIFLES, and use the rest of the money saved for ammo.

A very accurate, yet reasonably leightweight centre fire rifle wins every time.

If you are limited to the number of firearms you may carry or own, there is no such thing as 'cost effective'. There is only good and sub standard. I rely on a rifle for protection almost daily in Africa. There is no 'good enough'! Making do with sub standard kit is for those who couldn't think ahead.

You rely on a rifle almost daily in Africa because "you choose to put yourself in harms way HUNTING", not because you were put there by some calamity. Making do with what one can afford and sub standard have nothing to do with long term survival. You obviously are a man of means, but not everyone here is. That does not make them WRONG OR SOMEONE WHOM COULDN'T THINK AHEAD. Your analogy is arrogant and out of context! We're not in Africa in the bush. We in America, and most likely in TOWN.

Chappers · « **Reply #80 on:** July 06, 2009, 01:26:40 PM »

A few years ago on Australia day some ------ decided to be cool to drive around town with his mates and shoot any aboriginals they came across.... with a air rifle. Most cases it was the distance of just 3meaters or less, wounds ranged from a couple of centimetres to just under the skin. think one person did not even know he was shot till a few days later. So after that i would not rate the air rifle as a defensive tool only to use for birds and small game but saying that i have seen pics of goats taken with the humble air rifle.
A .22lr rifle and common sense would help you in most sticky situation

mcwoodduck · « **Reply #81 on:** July 06, 2009, 02:28:20 PM »

I agree with Dee.
The air rifles are neat and fun toys. Yes toys that can be deadly but still toys. My last day in Norfolk one kid was peeved at another and rode his bike home to get his BB gun, a pump up rifle and shot the other kid the BB went through the ribs and into the heart and the boy was dead before the fire department could get there 6 to 8 blocks away.
If you need to hunt in a populated area and are worried about over penitration to gather small animals (Rabbit, squrrels, rats, opossum, raccoon, skunk) or small birds ( dove, quail, pigeon, or song birds) If you think you are going to deter or stop someone from trying to take what supplies you have (food, fuel, water, $, or other items) your mistaken. As Dee said nothing beats the power of a shotgun for defense.
a 22 rifle gives you the ability to vary ammo from quieter than air rifle to standard stuff that works great on up to meduim game.
the advantage the 22 has is it can be reloaded quickly. Even my single shot rim fire can be loaded faster than any air rifle for fast follow up or a second target. A shot at a rabit for me usually gets another to move.
A shotgun for the same reason is a great tool. From bird shot to buck shot. I have used buck to shoot a woodcock when deer hunting.
Got lucky and took the whole head off only but it was a good body to eat and in a survival meat is meat.
But if something were to happen tomorrow. You would use what you have and what you have ammo for in what ever role you need it to do. Yes it would be great to think about what you want to have and use it acordingly

don heath · « **Reply #82 on:** July 06, 2009, 08:24:35 PM »

Dee - you have obviously not worked in an environment where many people get shot with shotguns! In a 3 month period one of our kill teams shot 86 poachers. Most were asleep when the shooting started - ie they were taken cold. 5 manged either to return fire or run after a center hit with a 12 guage and OO buck at ranges of under 20 paces - and remember - they had to wake up first! Not high odds but enough to make me question a shotgun with buckshot as the ultimate stopper. One of our police anti terrorist teams favoured the 12 guage with Brenneke slugs...I attended the autopsies of a few they had killed. All one shot stops and oh boy what a mess - but the sample size was only 5 - and that does not make for a statistically significant test.

Re air guns - The bb guns are toys. The traditional spring powered air rifles 'Peleties' I used as a kid, are fine for birds but not for fir. I really got an eye into what a 'powerful' air rifle can achieve on a visit to Russia- I was looking at the forensic charicteristics of some speciality assasination rounds that had cropped up ... and they showed me a body of a man who had taken an air rifle pellet- gone through winter cloathing, gone through him and stuck in the jacket at the back. A 29grn .20 pellet at 1250fps....Then I got a few UK gun magazines- an awful lot of their hunting of quite large animals is done with air rifles- all silenced. I went home with a Diana .48 in 177 That kills bunnies out to 30m happily.

don heath · « **Reply #83 on:** July 06, 2009, 08:32:39 PM »

There is also a world of difference between a man having to walk and a man with transport or a safe base. As I mentioned in the other thread on this, I used a 10 guage shotgun as a house gun and ambush breaker in the truck during our dissident war - but no ways I wanted to carry that thing or the shells further than from the truck to the house!

Arrogant? Yup, I suppose. But then, I have lived and fought through two civil wars, the ‘rhino’ war and a tour in Iraq. In the first two wars, I never had the luxury of fighting when the odds were not better than at least 4 to 1 against us- and often worse. I have survived- abet with three bullet holes in me and an ear drum blown by a land mine. I have lived through an economic collapse that saw inflation reach over one billion percent, and lived in a city where water and electricity supplies collapsed. I am no Guru on survival, but I do have a fair amount of unique experience…

pastorp · « **Reply #84 on:** July 07, 2009, 12:49:13 AM »

don, I for one, did not think your posts were arrogant. But rather just the typical understated, dry sence of humor , that is so typically brittish.

I found your comments interesting, and with a ring of experience. I enjoyed your posts and hope you continue to contribute.

Of course, your experiences differ from ours here in the US. Which gives your posts a interesting prespective.

Concerning air rifles. The owner of our air rifle shop in Anchorage, AK tells me he has several customers that use the 38 & 45 caliber air rifles to hunt carabou in the arctic. You guys that think air guns are only toys might do a search on big bore air guns.

Regards,

no guns here · « **Reply #85 on:** July 07, 2009, 12:58:32 AM »

Well, I freely admit that I don't have experience in this area. I do have the luxury of sitting back and trying to think soberly about decisions like this. Therefore I submit the following...

A .22 LR is not an adequate self-defense round. Is it better than throwing rocks? Yep. Would I want to get shot with one? Nope. Has the .22 LR killed folks? Yep under ideal conditions (or luck) for the shooter and less than ideal conditions (unlucky) for the target. Will it kill deer? Yep, again with good conditions and shot selection. I have an old bolt Remmy that was traded for in 1952 by my grandfather, the old indian woman that he got it from had fed her family venison for 15-20 years by shooting out her kitchen window at deer in her garden.

A shotgun is not the be all and end all in defensive or offensive weapons. Even lite body armor will defeat a good portion of a shotguns effectiveness. It is quite effective at taking small game. It can be used for big game. There isn't a deer, caribou, elk or moose alive that can't be made dead with the appropriate slug from a 12 or 20 gauge. Ammo is heavy and limited in range.

In my mind the appropriate weapon for most manner of self defense and foraging would be bolt action rifle in just about any caliber from .223 to .308/.30-06. One must consider ammo availability. Unless you are stocked and prepared to reload your ammo, you probably wouldn't want a .240 Weatherby or a .277 numbnuts whatchamacallit.

I would much prefer a semi-auto over the bolt if I could get around the maintenance issue. Preferably I will ensure that I don't have to do a "one gun fits all scenarios" situation. I am consciously trying to ensure that I have at least one of the most common calibers. At least if I "find" ammo, I'll have something to shoot it with. My next two purchases will be in the .44 mag and .45 LC chamberings or maybe a 9mm. I try to keep at least 100 rounds on hand for all my centerfires. I know that isn't much but I have to have some. I add to the stash as I can. Later this month I will add over $500 of ammo to my stash. I'm getting there. I think my plan of having more than one gun available is the prudent plan. If I HAVE to choose one to carry in NA I would choose my AR-15 at this time. Good range, decent power, good accuracy, plenty of capacity. I can't see being in the one gun scenario. I would have my 1911 on me too at a minimum.

When we travel in the US I have an 11-87 12 gauge in a case in the back. I don't need it while driving. IF I get into a situation where I need it, it is there. The wife or kids can get to it while I'm driving if needed.

Lots of options. I think a good survival gun for everything except self-defense would be a TC G2 with several barrels.

Maybe I'm crazy but if you prepare for the situation... you won't be limited to one gun. That's what PVC and silicone are for, right?

NGH

Dee · « **Reply #86 on:** July 07, 2009, 06:20:00 AM »

Well don heath, not to get into a peeing contest with you but, I have seen LOTS of shotgun wounds, suffering a minor one myself. I am NOT a fan of 00 buck but, did and do like #1 and #4 buck in the magnum version. It truly IS a fight stopper. Densor pattern, and more hits of 25 caliber or better. Having ran an SRT that some call SWAT, and a tactical K-9 unit I know a little about what I'm talking about also.
I have not had YOUR experience as far as eco collapse, and I appreciate your incite, but my point was, and is, some have to do with what they can afford. It is not a matter of being furnished anything with most here.
When still active I was FURNISHED with what I wanted to carry, and the ammo. I PREFERED a gas operated shotgun with #4 buck for in house searches, and an M4 for the street. We are talking about folks whom live on a budget and cannot equip an arsenal.

don heath · « **Reply #87 on:** July 07, 2009, 07:53:45 PM »

Dee

Accepted- And we all gravitate towards what we have personally used and trust to work. Most PH's in Africa would never trust a rifle as light as a 9,3 or .375 for dangerous game. I used one becuase I had to on the buffalo culls and grew to love and trust it's capabilities.

Re Budget- When I was still a 'civil servant' (what a joke) I was usually too poor to even pay attention, but- I was lucky and lived long enough to learn. Buy good guns! I owned an old landrover, and frequently got a long walk as a result. I always owned a quality revolver, and an absolutely reliable rifle. I bought a few others that quickly got sold again- a Cogswell and Harrison .404 that you couldn't load 'eye's off', a couple of medium bores that were not accurate enough etc. My point is - when you are talking about "survival" you have to define priorities. A quality rifle and decent handgun are far more important than an SUV or this months cable TV subscription...Something I always did was deliberately never own a TV, and used to spend the money I saved there on 'essential kit' that my mates couldn't afford.

On a budget? I had a quick look on Gunbroker.com and found a nearly new CZ 527 Varmit in .223 with nikkon scope for $700 and a smith m60 for $400. I am sure with a bit of effort one could do better. And yes $1100 was 4 months wages when I retired from the civil service! and appreciate that in these times of recession money is tight, but my limited experience of America is that even folks on food stamps seem to manage to own a TV and often have a car!

don heath · « **Reply #88 on:** July 07, 2009, 08:20:29 PM »

One vital point that many 'survivalist's' forget is the old saying...In the land of the blind the one eye'd man is king. If you are talking about a semi urban environment, some night vission system and a solar powered battery recharger is almost essential. It doesn't need to be gen III, it just needs to work (but a bit better than the Gen I russian junk I aquired). I had a late vietnam era starlight scope that was more than adequate. Never mounted it on a rifle, but being able to see a problem before it occured save alot of ammo and stress!

NB - in a rural environment I have never felt the need for night vission. A good quality set of 7x50 Bino's have served me and many other Rhodeisan officers just fine, BUT African night skies are very clear with many more stars than I have ever seen in the north. Even on a moonless night there is enough light to get away with using bino's. (and if it is cloudy then there is a thunder storm and nobody is mooving anway). Thinking of my moose hunting in Sweden and some of the USA trips, I would think that some sort of NVG is essential there in all settings.

other glass- I bought a second hand Leupold shortly after leaving government- a decade later I still use it, although now I have a few new ones as well. A good scope is as important as the rifle. Bino's? I was very well served by el cheapo bushnells for many years. Never did like the Stiener with the fixed focus that I 'aqured' off the visiting US military. You need to be able to force the focus to look through things- the Stieners (and a pair of Ziess fixed focus that came as a gift last year) do not alow me to search through the bush- the focus automatically gravitates to the closest object not the furthest.

Dee · « **Reply #89 on:** July 08, 2009, 03:00:18 AM »

I too have played with all these combo's and agree that a quality pair of bino's is not only valuable at night, but does not need batteries. In a survival situation a solar powered battery charger as you suggested would be as cumbersome as the 12 gauge you spoke against.
I would also agree that welfare recipients here in the states always seem to find the money for TVs, but one must also add beer to the shopping list. The fact that their on welfare most times indicates that there is a lack of proper order of priorities, and perhaps the best way to learn valuable lessons is to do so on an empty stomach.
I have read posts here where folks were experiencing hard eco times, and typing about them while they described hiding their vehicles from the repo boys, and mixing another drink at the same time. Go figure. Still, feeding a family at the PRESENT for many is a priority that cannot be denied, and budget stretches simply will not allow for a high dollar firearm that may or may not become necessary. One must "adapt" what one has.
I suppose I have been a "survivalist" all my life, and have never been happy or felt secure with out proper, equipment, but I also have been blessed with opportunity in that regard due to my chosen past vocation, and demonstrated abilities.