Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   General Rifle Discussion (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f18/)
-   -   Which rifle will best satisfy my survival requirements. Or are my requirements crap? (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f18/rifle-will-best-satisfy-my-survival-requirements-my-requirements-crap-45249/)

package81 07-15-2011 09:02 PM

Which rifle will best satisfy my survival requirements. Or are my requirements crap?
 
I have been thinking about purchasing a survival rifle. I have a decent level amount of firearms knowledge but not enough to really know what would be the best choice. I also don't have alot of experience with firearms in the wilderness.

Below are all the characteristics that I would like in my survival rifle. Please note that I realize that I might not be able to get all of these characteristics in one gun. If you think that 2 guns could satisfy these requirements and still be reasonable and fairly lightweight, then by all means.

1. Capable of killing small and medium sized game.
2. Can keep me alive in moderate attacks/shootouts against..... cannibles/zombies/predators/chinese. I realize that I would get my ass handed to me in a shootout against anybody with experience or better equipement. I just want enough firepower to defeat or deter a mild to moderate attack. I plan on hiding most of this time and minding my own business.
3. Can carry at least 1000 rounds in my survival pack. Note: I am a large experienced hiker that can go 5-8 miles a day with a 90lb pack.
4. Can carry all required maintenance tools/products to keep the gun running for at least 20 years in wilderness. ***** increadibly important to me *****
5. If the action or other moving parts fail, I would like the gun to be able to still operate in single shot mode. i.e.... still be able to open the chamber and load manually and shoot single shots for hunting or defense. Basically, what kind of action fails the best...and doesn't leave the gun totally useless.
6. Would like killing ability out to AT LEAST 100yards. For hunting and protection.
7. Reasonably lightweight.

So far I'm leaning towards getting an AR15 with stainless 18" barrel. I'm just not sure if that is a simple enough weapon to fit my low-maintenance qualification. Will the action fail gracefully in an AR? Or will it become a paperweight.

I'm also leaning toward the Marlin Papoose 22lr in combination with an all stainless Ruger Single Six 7.5" barrel .357mag. Overall this is the lighter, cheaper option. The papoose will give me semi auto ability. What do you think is more likely to stand up to 20 years of low maintenance wilderness abuse. The AR or the "papoose with single six combo"? Or would a bolt action be better? I have heard that the milspec AR's are designed to never fail even with little maintenance and care. that makes me think that the AR is the smarter choice. Also the AR gives me more firepower and range. I wonder if the papoose would fail gracefully so that I could still operate it in single shot mode? Also, if my single six failed somehow, I'm pretty sure it would become a paperweight. If the cylinder wouldn't rotate or something? Anyway, maybe I'm over analyzing the whole "failing gracefully" thing. But I have just always wondered if certain guns would fail better than others and still give you the option for single shot. I suppose there is no gun that is immune to becomming a paper weight eventually. I know there are alot of questions here. Sorry this is so long. Please give me any input you can think of. Thanks.

cddbrowns 07-15-2011 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by package81 (Post 542143)
I have been thinking about purchasing a survival rifle. I have a decent level amount of firearms knowledge but not enough to really know what would be the best choice. I also don't have alot of experience with firearms in the wilderness.

Below are all the characteristics that I would like in my survival rifle. Please note that I realize that I might not be able to get all of these characteristics in one gun. If you think that 2 guns could satisfy these requirements and still be reasonable and fairly lightweight, then by all means.

1. Capable of killing small and medium sized game.
2. Can keep me alive in moderate attacks/shootouts against..... cannibles/zombies/predators/chinese. I realize that I would get my ass handed to me in a shootout against anybody with experience or better equipement. I just want enough firepower to defeat or deter a mild to moderate attack. I plan on hiding most of this time and minding my own business.
3. Can carry at least 1000 rounds in my survival pack. Note: I am a large experienced hiker that can go 5-8 miles a day with a 90lb pack.
4. Can carry all required maintenance tools/products to keep the gun running for at least 20 years in wilderness. ***** increadibly important to me *****
5. If the action or other moving parts fail, I would like the gun to be able to still operate in single shot mode. i.e.... still be able to open the chamber and load manually and shoot single shots for hunting or defense. Basically, what kind of action fails the best...and doesn't leave the gun totally useless.
6. Would like killing ability out to AT LEAST 100yards. For hunting and protection.
7. Reasonably lightweight.

So far I'm leaning towards getting an AR15 with stainless 18" barrel. I'm just not sure if that is a simple enough weapon to fit my low-maintenance qualification. Will the action fail gracefully in an AR? Or will it become a paperweight.

I'm also leaning toward the Marlin Papoose 22lr in combination with an all stainless Ruger Single Six 7.5" barrel .357mag. Overall this is the lighter, cheaper option. The papoose will give me semi auto ability. What do you think is more likely to stand up to 20 years of low maintenance wilderness abuse. The AR or the "papoose with single six combo"? I have heard that the milspec AR's are designed to never fail even with little maintenance and care. that makes me think that the AR is the smarter choice. Also the AR gives me more firepower and range. I wonder if the papoose would fail gracefully so that I could still operate it in single shot mode? Also, if my single six failed somehow, I'm pretty sure it would become a paperweight. If the cylinder wouldn't rotate or something? Anyway, maybe I'm over analyzing the whole "failing gracefully" thing. But I have just always wondered if certain guns would fail better than others and still give you the option for single shot. I suppose there is no gun that is immune to becomming a paper weight eventually. I know there are alot of questions here. Sorry this is so long. Please give me any input you can think of. Thanks.

AR-15 would be my best bet.

canebrake 07-15-2011 09:06 PM

Dido, a 22 caliber..............the AR-15. ;)

JonM 07-15-2011 09:10 PM

there are some vids of colt testing m4 carbines to failure. gas tube literaly explodes from excessive heat and the gun continues to fire manually cycling the bolt.

ar15 can also fire 22lr with a simple drop in kit means you can take deer sized criiters with super light easy to carry ammo.

do it all weapon i would go ar15. easy to get and carry spares highly reliable with easy lightweight spare parts. its actually very simple gun for a semi.

unlike bolt guns Ar15 parts from other AR tend to be simple drop in.

AR15 is a no brainer choice

package81 07-15-2011 09:12 PM

canebrake..... what do you mean by "Dido, a 22 caliber".

You think I should get an AR chambered for 22lr?

package81 07-15-2011 09:33 PM

JonM.... now that's good info that me and my pulse can use!!!! thanks man!

So the AR can essentially fire in "manual mode" if the gas tube fails? Could you always fire it in "manual mode" if you desire? I'm not very familiar with the AR action. It just seems like if you could fire it in manual mode all the time, you would prevent alot of the fouling from the gas tube and possibly prevent having to clean as often. that would be an incredibly valuable capability to only have to use the gas tube when you really needed to establish some firepower. I suppose that "manual mode" doesn't really work like I'm imagining though. it doesn't necessarily cause the gas tube to not be used?... you would only ever use it if the action failed to properly put another round in the chamber?......it's simply just to get the next bullet in the chamber and the firing pin back in case the recoil fails to do so?......

Could you use manual mode if other parts of the action fail? Just how many parts have to fail in order for the gun to become useless? just curious.

I wonder which parts would be the best to carry spares for? which parts are most likely to fail under low maintenance?

Rex in OTZ 07-15-2011 09:35 PM

one of two things
 
when it come down to makeing a choice you have one of two choices the real hunting gun you will use and the plinko matic fun gun.

when the chips are down a single round of scoped .243 winchester is going to do the job of 4-5 rounds of .223rem, its going to do it further and with more authority than the little black gun that poops in its own action.
hunters in my parts refuse to carry them as a wolf hunting gun because the condensation freezing up the gun rendering it unuseable during a hunt.

what it all boils down to in the end is your hunting and will be needing a hunting gun that works every time. its like takeing a trim hammer to frame a house, use the correct tool for the job.
the .223 is a varmit round, thats what it was initally designed to be and do till the military got ahold of it and perverted its use and has been wounding people ever since and not efficently at doing that either.

estrack2 07-15-2011 09:48 PM

Im planning using my AR-15 when the zombies arrive. 223 ammo is easy to find. I dnno about those other uses, but this is my zombie gun. (iron sight 30 rd mags.

Txhillbilly 07-15-2011 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rex in OTZ (Post 542189)
when it come down to makeing a choice you have one of two choices the real hunting gun you will use and the plinko matic fun gun.

when the chips are down a single round of scoped .243 winchester is going to do the job of 4-5 rounds of .223rem, its going to do it further and with more authority than the little black gun that poops in its own action.
hunters in my parts refuse to carry them as a wolf hunting gun because the condensation freezing up the gun rendering it unuseable during a hunt.

what it all boils down to in the end is your hunting and will be needing a hunting gun that works every time. its like takeing a trim hammer to frame a house, use the correct tool for the job.
the .223 is a varmit round, thats what it was initally designed to be and do till the military got ahold of it and perverted its use and has been wounding people ever since and not efficently at doing that either.

It all comes down to Shot Placement.No matter whether your using a 22lr or a 500 NE.
If you don't shoot a vital area,no matter how big a bullet you use.The animal will not drop in it's tracks,it will run off and die.

orangello 07-15-2011 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by package81 (Post 542143)
I'm also leaning toward the Marlin Papoose 22lr in combination with an all stainless Ruger Single Six 7.5" barrel .357mag. Overall this is the lighter, cheaper option.

I have an old Marlin model 60 that is very similar to the Papoose, just doesn't break down for carry; i like it and think it would be a good game getter for anything up to rabbitses. I also have a Ruger GP100, 6" barrel that could be used for larger game at close range.

If you are more worried about defense than hunting, maybe an SKS wouldn't be the worst idea. It and its ammo are heavier than the Papoose by a good bit, but it is VERY simple in operation and easy to maintain. .22LR ammo will surely be available, but i think there will be some 7.62x39mm for the SKS also.

I have personally wondered about setting up a cache of ammo at a secondary location rather than trying to carry it all, should i have to bail.


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:24 PM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.