Author Topic: 22 rifle vs pistol (Read 6505 times)

teamnelson · « **on:** February 06, 2010, 09:02:37 PM »

Here are the parameters for this exercise:
- the caliber is .22.
- you will be on foot with only what you can carry for the rest of your life.
- this is an EOTWAWKI scenario.
- your mission is to live, not overthrow a dictatorship or fend off zombie hordes.

If you could only have either a rifle or a pistol, which would you take? why? Identify pros & cons. Is there a particular weapon you'd choose?

I'll start ... I'd take a pistol, specifically a revolver, preferably a 9 or 10 shot double action with a 5" or longer barrel. The Taurus 94 & 96 come to mind as do the various S&W 17, 18, 63, 617, etc. Why? cause I can have it attached to my body all the time in such a way that both hands are free to do other things, yet I can bring the weapon to use quickly if necessary. Its also lighter, and easily concealable. Revolvers are less prone to failure that semi-automatics, and less fussy about ammo. No stocks or gas tubes to break, no springs or tubes to dent. I know I'd give up some velocity, and the longer sight radius of a rifle. I also limit my capacity as semis and rifles often use large capacity magazines. But I've shot handgun silhouette enough to give me confidence that I could probably hunt small game at reasonable distances. It does limit me in a man on man or group scenario, so my plan would have to be to avoid those, or use my revolver smartly to gain a more potent weapon with longer range & capacity.

How would you roll?

Bigeasy · « **Reply #1 on:** February 06, 2010, 09:25:14 PM »

Well, I would have to go for a Ruger 10/22 auto. A spare parts kit, a good multi function sling, and a low power optic sight along with back up peep sights. For either hunting or self defense, I think the added range and precision of a scoped rifle would be of great benefit, especially when attempting large game, or keeping undesirables back to a safer, longer distance. Along with a parts back-up kit, I think the 10/22 is a pretty light weight, compact, reliable and simple weapon. With a good sling system, it can be carried so as not to be obtrusive. Another consideration is that if things are really that bad, you probably do not want others to hear your shots when hunting or defending yourself. The 10/22, or any rifle for that matter, is a lot better suited to a home made silencer then a revolver.

Larry

Victor3 · « **Reply #2 on:** February 07, 2010, 12:01:35 AM »

TN, you and my Dad think alike. He carried one of these for decades before he passed...

It's a Sears version of the High Standard Double-Nine. Aluminum framed 9 shot double action (the one above is a backup he bought in case something happened to the one he carried). It was always with him whenever we went out. He figured it would do most of what he needed a handgun for, and liked the light weight and ability to use anything from Stingers on down to snake shot and CB caps in it.

Me, I'd opt for a Ruger MKII with tapered 6" bbl. Pretty light, accurate enough for small game, and in my 25 years' experience with MKII's, super reliable with most any standard or HV ammo. You don't often need to take them apart for cleaning unless you're shooting a lot (in a survival situation you'd need to conserve ammo), and when you do field strip them, no tools are required. I'd rather have an auto if I might need to shoot at people with it.

A rifle is nice, but think about how often you have to remove it from your person to do daily tasks as opposed to a handgun in a holster. Also, a rifle is generally seen by others, possibly causing them to assume you to be a threat rather than someone to make nice and maybe partner up or barter with.

A handgun can be made into a useful rifle with a field-expedient stock, but it's harder to go the other way 'round.

hunt-m-up · « **Reply #3 on:** February 07, 2010, 01:29:45 AM »

Rifle, 10/22, Marlin 70 or 795...
Just bought one of the 795's for my daughter for Christmas. Very light, put a sling on it, very efficient use of ammo, one shot--one meal, reliability that is time-tested, a couple extra mags and you're good to go.

Almtnman · « **Reply #4 on:** February 07, 2010, 01:43:24 AM »

I would carry my old Ruger single six, since I have carried it as a woods walking gun for many many years. It would be easier to conceal if I went to an area that was populated and easy to carry in the Bianci holster that it's been carried in. It could be placed in a backpack if necessary and it has a regular 22 cylinder and a 22 magnum cylinder, so there are two options of calibers in my one pistol.

hunt-m-up · « **Reply #5 on:** February 07, 2010, 01:52:23 AM »

Single six is definitely a fine piece with the two cylinder option, some day I will own one, for now I'm content with my Buckmark

bilmac · « **Reply #6 on:** February 07, 2010, 02:15:01 AM »

This would be a real hard choice. I love my 10-22, and my single six, but I have trouble making hits with the single six when I don't with a bigger revolver. No such problem with the 10-22, I shoot even my little unmodified rifle pretty good.

That said I still might opt for the 6 shooter depending on the situation. If I knew there was going to be a lot of human interaction and competition for resources then I think a handgun that is always fastened on the belt may be a better choice. If I was able to find a piece of wilderness country where human contact was rare and I could see anyone coming and their may be chances for bigger game then I would take the rifle.

I do kind of see a trend here even with a brand new thread. The name Ruger is being used a lot.

Badnews Bob · « **Reply #7 on:** February 07, 2010, 04:17:49 AM »

Yep Rugers are gonna hold up to anything. My single six or my .22-45 one will be on my belt when I need them.

Duane · « **Reply #8 on:** February 07, 2010, 11:39:07 AM »

Ruger single six gets my vote

mannyrock · « **Reply #9 on:** February 07, 2010, 11:52:21 AM »

You wrote: "Revolvers are less prone to failure that semi-automatics, and less fussy about ammo."

As to durability, give me a break. Both the Remington Nylon 66 and Ruger 10/22 have been documented on several occassions to shoot over 100,000 rounds without a jam or failure. No revolver could ever do that. And, these rilfes are practically indestructible. Drop your revolver in the sand, or on a rock surface a few times, and tell me if you can ever get it to work again. And, whose gonna "tune" that revolver for you??

Yes, the revolver can shoot .22 shorts better: but then, who cares???

teamnelson · « **Reply #10 on:** February 07, 2010, 11:58:49 AM »

Still standing by revolvers being a stronger action than a semi-automatic, but you're welcome to your opinion. As to whether a revolver could not fire 100K rounds without a jam, yeah that's pretty certain. Without an ammo related failure, no, not making that claim. Without a weapon related failure, guessing there's evidence to suggest that a revolver can do what you claim a 10/22 or nylon 66 can do.

Almtnman · « **Reply #11 on:** February 07, 2010, 01:02:50 PM »

I can't fathom firing my single six for 100,000 rounds in a EOTWAWKI scenario. If it's a true EOTWAWKI, I think a long bow, some snare traps etc for food sources would be a better option on not giving away your position and just use the 22 as a last resort. As someone else posted on here, how many hours in the day are you going to have the 22 rifle in your hands? It would be kind of difficult splitting firewood or doing similar chores with one in your hand whereas a pistol in a holster is right there at all times. I'm not kicking the rifle, (rifles are good and carry one if that's your preference) but just sit back and think, you can't have it in your hand at all times and leaning up against a tree is not the same as having a sidearm strapped on your side. You could always sling the rifle over your back doing hard chores, but can you get to it as fast as you can a pistol in a holster?

Duane · « **Reply #12 on:** February 07, 2010, 04:28:59 PM »

I own both a ruger single six and a 10/22 HANDS down the single six is gonna out last a 10/22 first of all you need a ater market bolt buffer or after 5000 round metal wear starts to play a roll .Nylon 66 give me a break plastic junk . And no a 10/22 droped in the mud is not gonna fire trust me .Its no ak47 .

45-70.gov · « **Reply #13 on:** February 07, 2010, 05:02:27 PM »

ruger single 6....probly

this was the stupidest gun i ever saw
now me and my son have one

it is amazing how accurate
and with the 50 round clips has the throughly spray and pray option

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4IK8EV6g3Q
a few more trips to the range and i may swap the single 6
[actually will keep both the 44 mag is for any one says otherwise]

vacek · « **Reply #14 on:** February 07, 2010, 05:16:59 PM »

Sometimes the correct answer is "It depends"

And in this case it depends on the individual... the gun he/she is most familiar with for shooting accurately and for maintaining.

Lurker · « **Reply #15 on:** February 07, 2010, 07:45:49 PM »

It depends, is a really good answer...

In a survival situation, leaving your expended brass laying around, isn't a really good idea. It isn't a smart thing to do to leave evidence, of your presence, laying around...! I would rather keep a lower profile...

The Ruger 10/22 is a really reliable rifle. The Ruger Mark 1 and Mark II are reliable firearms. Both of the Rugers, rifle and pistol, need brass catchers from my point of view...!

For a pistol, I would prefer the Smith and Wesson 617, that has a ten round 22 LR cylinder in it.

Bill

don heath · « **Reply #16 on:** February 07, 2010, 08:05:47 PM »

I'd go with the revolver. Preferably a single 6 with both cylenders....22mag is a viable self defence round in a push, and .22LR good enough for small game hunting.

A handgun is not an option for survival...it is one of the essentials like some means of making fire and a decent knife. A rifle is mighty nice to have, but if you don't have one, you will be wider awake and more inclined to use the 'flight' mecanism when danger threatens rather than 'fight'...and as most animals have leanred..even lion and elephant, flight is by far and away the best answer to danger.

Sometimes you cannot flee and have to fight...but almost always when some enemy (rabid wolf, bad guy etc,) has managed to get within say 20 paces of you...and usually that is at such a time when your guard is down...when you are asleep, on the 'loo' or concentrating hard on some task which you are unused to..like starting a fire with sticks...Smart bad guys don't ever atack a man who is awake and watching for them.

Couger · « **Reply #17 on:** February 07, 2010, 10:42:45 PM »

Quote

...... I would have to go for a Ruger 10/22 auto. A spare parts kit, a good multi function sling, and a low power optic sight along with back up peep sights. For either hunting or self defense, I think the added range and precision of a scoped rifle would be of great benefit, especially when attempting large game, or keeping undesirables back to a safer, longer distance. Along with a parts back-up kit, I think the 10/22 is a pretty light weight, compact, reliable and simple weapon. With a good sling system, it can be carried so as not to be obtrusive. Another consideration is that if things are really that bad, you probably do not want others to hear your shots when hunting or defending yourself. The 10/22, or any rifle for that matter, is a lot better suited to a home made silencer then a revolver.

The "end of the world as we know it ..... " And however much anarchy and lawlessness along with it ......

I might be tempted to go with a Mk II version of the M22/45 - with a Tactical Solutions (out of Boise, ID) aluminum upper assembly, 8 inches in length if its offered ......

Otherwise I'd seriously consider the Ruger ~~Challenger~~ CHARGER "pistol" if not the M10/22. If I could get away with it (legal), esp in a SHTF scenario I'd put that ~~Challenger~~ CHARGER on a folding Choate stock. A "can" would be a nice addition.

Couger · « **Reply #18 on:** February 07, 2010, 10:45:03 PM »

ADDED: I have to agree that the best answers begin with ...... "It depends ..... !!"

mannyrock · « **Reply #19 on:** February 08, 2010, 08:01:10 AM »

The Remington Nylon 66 is a plastic piece of junk? Sorry. NOT. Do your research.

The Remington is made of a polymer nylon, that is almost indestructable. Remington use to show that you could drive over the rifle with a truck, and that not only would it not break, it would shoot fine.

The only reason that Remington stopped making this rifle was that the casting mold finally wore out, after selling many hundreds of thousands of them. It was hugely successful and popular rifle. But, you had to grow up in the 1960s to know this.

I guess people are either rifle guys or pistol guys. Give me an ultralight, semi-auto .22 carbine any time. I can't hit squat with a pistol.

And, look back at history. From the earliest frontier days, through the closing of the West, if people lived in dangerous areas, or had to travel throught them, and they only had enough money for one gun, they sure didn't choose a pistol. It was either a rifle or a shotgun.

Regards, Mannyrock

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #20 on:** February 08, 2010, 08:11:54 AM »

My Ruger SP-101 with a 4 inch bbl ( a 5 in bbl would be sweet ) It should last for ever . Its small . Mine shoots well enough to collect food with .
The only draw back is long term ammo storage with a heel type bullet . The main reason the 22 mag, and 17's don't use one .

teamnelson · « **Reply #21 on:** February 08, 2010, 08:34:00 AM »

Quote from: SHOOTALL on February 08, 2010, 08:11:54 AM

The only draw back is long term ammo storage with a heel type bullet . The main reason the 22 mag, and 17's don't use one .

SHOOTALL, you've posted something about this before. Could you explain here about the heel type bullet drawback? I get the feeling lots of folks figure you can treat .22 ammo pretty rough and not worry. You're making me think keeping it boxed and dry is the right plan.

mcwoodduck · « **Reply #22 on:** February 08, 2010, 08:49:04 AM »

With this being a carry everything senerio.
I would go for a Bolt action rifle with Iron sights. If you mount a scope on it OK but I would have good Iron sights on it in case the scope crapped out. I am picturing my CZ 452 Lux as the rifle.
It has really good iron sights that are simple and adjustable
rail for a scope,
sling swivels that I replaced the eropean swivels and added Uncle mikes studs and now wears a 1" leather sling.
Feeds from a box mag and I have three 2 - 5 round and one plastic 10 round. With the open top of the action I can single load ammo easy.
I have 3 10/22's in different configuration. But would leave them for a the bolt action gun for these reasons.
1) the 10/22 gets gunky and needs to be cleaned and is not very forgiving once it gets that gunky. A rag or the sleave of your shirt will clean the chamber and bolt.
2) lots of small springs that are a pain to get back into the action in field conditions. With the bolt you have the bolt and the action.
Not talking about failure of parts as that can happen with any gun.
3) some 10/22 magizines are fickel with ammo and will not load CB's easy. Again you will e foraging for ammo as well and a tube fed bolt action is made to shoot shorts through long rifles.
4) the longer barrel and sight radius of the rifle will give you better chances of hunting success on a survival senerio.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #23 on:** February 08, 2010, 09:09:16 AM »

TN , The Heel type bullet is a weak joint if you will . The seal is less that ideal . It has been made for 150 years or so and most likely is the most sold bullet so the idea of changing is not a good one as many rifles would be obsolete . And ammo co's would loose millions . To prove its weakness its easy to bend out with finger pressure . In the tube mag and in a pocket they are often bent a little causing a way for moisture to enter . They can also be comprised by heat and to a degree cold . The air inside expands and contracts moving past the bullet case joint. This movement can also cause a leak and passage of moisture . If the design was an effective one then more rounds would use it today . I have read this in several publications over the years . With 3 kids shooting 22's I tried to buy cases at discount . Over the years i found that 22LR rounds would go bad if stored in out buildings . Granted some brands would hold up better than others . One poster said you should store in a zip lock bag ,, maybe so . I have also read that some up north use the 22 mag to head off this problem . Anyway anytime talk turns to survival i feel it nessary to offer this if for nothing more than for those who have never considered it to at least be aware of the potential for failure .
I see a survival situation as one with moisture , dust, heat or cold being a problem , at least one or two

woodchukhntr · « **Reply #24 on:** February 08, 2010, 09:32:27 AM »

I don't see anybody considering single-shot rifles here. Something like the Stevens Favorite would be a good choice. It is simple with no clips to be lost or damaged or no tubular magazine to get damaged. It keeps to the KISS princible. I wouldn't expect to need a lot of firepower for survival, so a single-shot .22 is really all that is needed. If More firepower is considered necessary, a combination gun like the Savage 24 would fill the bill in .22 LR/20 Ga., although it is considerably heavier and bulkier.

Couger · « **Reply #25 on:** February 08, 2010, 09:32:47 AM »

For what its worth ..... I believe I recently saw a handgun being made by the same company that makes the punie "Crickett" .22 rifles.

I've never actually been impressed with those too-small (in my opinion) Crickett rifles, but would be intrigued with a single-shot bolt pistol - for those only interested in a "foraging" gun.

BTW, a .22LR with a 12 or 10inch barrel still gives approximately 97% or 94% of maximum .22LR performance - according to Marc White (author and owner of Sound Technologies - silencers).

woodchukhntr · « **Reply #26 on:** February 08, 2010, 10:06:39 AM »

Couger, you're right! Maybe a T/C Contender is the way! If you start with a pistol frame and a .22 10" barrel, and then get the carbine stocks and a 16" or even 21" carbine barrel, you could have a great setup. The black plastic stock set weighs less than the wood one, so you could have a very lightweight setup.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #27 on:** February 08, 2010, 10:18:04 AM »

Be careful switching back from rifle to pistol .

woodchukhntr · « **Reply #28 on:** February 08, 2010, 10:31:43 AM »

Yeah, it is verrrry ilegal to have a less-than 16" barrel on when the carbine buttstock is attached!

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #29 on:** February 08, 2010, 10:33:43 AM »

Some post its illegal to switch from rifle back to pistol . I would check with ATFaE if not sure .