Survival Rifle

This thread seems to have turned into a best 'assault' rifle thread. The ability to engage multiple targets quickly is not nearly as important in a survival situation than the ability to drop a target (such as a deer) quickly and efficiently, without having to search through 200m of forest for a wounded animal.

Sorry, but in a survival situation, a rifle designed for hunting is much more useful. In the real world you will be using such a firearm for taking game more than self-defence. I'd rather have a rifle that is capable of putting a single powerful round consistently in the same place, and be confident it will take down game at range. As Jeff Cooper once said, 'You can't miss enough to win'.

Speaking of Col. Cooper (possibly the single most influential figure in modern shooting), he specified what he considered to be the requirements for the perfect 'Scout' rifle, which seem to cover the requirements of the survivalist. These are

*A maximum unloaded weight, with accessories, of 3.5 kilograms, 3 kg optimal.

*An overall length of 1 meter or less.

*A forward-mounted telescopic sight of low magnification, typically 2-3 diameters. This preserves the shooters' peripheral vision, clears the ejection port of the rifle, makes possible the use of stripper clips to reload the rifle, and eliminates any chance of the scope striking one's brow during recoil. Cooper has stated that a telescopic sight is not mandatory.

*Ghost ring auxiliary iron sight

*A "Ching" or "CW" sling.

*A standard chambering of .308 Winchester/7.62 mm caliber

*A bipod is desired but not mandatory

The firearms manufacturer Steyr built a rifle to meet these requirements, called the Steyr Scout Rifle. I think this should be considered before a Go-faster assault rifle for real life.

I whole heartedly agree with paddy on the Coopers scout consept. Alltough i'm personally not a fan on Extended Eye Relief optics, i think that is up to personal preferences.

I do not advocate 7.62x39 as a survival caliber unless you have the ability to load heavy enough loads to take out deer/moose sised game (no factory ammo is up for that task). But if you plan on a carrying a long on the way to your hideout, an AK or a SKS might be good for the bugout...

This whole topic breaks down like this.
How skilled are you with any rifle?
How much money are you looking to invest?
What will the rifle be used for.

As a general all around rifle, a 22lr would be best choice by far.
Cheap ammo that's availible anywhere.
Flat shooter, long range, power.

For a seasoned shooter, a 30-06 would be a good choice.
Long range, great power, accurate, ammo readily availb.e.

For extreme shooters, extreme long range situations, a CheyTac M-200CIV is the only way to go.
Easy to shoot, incredible range, extreme power, civilian availble on this model only, accurate out to 1500 yards.
Ammo is expensive, and not readily availble, however if you can afford the rifle, and handle it, then you can afford the ammo.

As for practice, an airgun is indespensible.
Far greater accuracy than that of most rifles, by the untrained shooter.
Dirt cheap ammo, no recoil, legal by anyone to own, and the best way to get someone ready for a 22Lr.
By the way, you do not need a firearms license to own an airgun over 500fps, unless state law requires it.
Illinois residents such as myself cannot purchase any airgun over 700fps to date through online transactons, however several stores still carry airguns here, 1,000fps and beyond.

For my own preparations, I've aquired these firemarms:

Mossberg 835 "Ulti-Mag"... handles just about every 12 gauge shell made, and with a rifled slug, can be an excellent short-range deer gun.

Browning Lever Action 30-06... Though 'technically' a bolt action/lever actuated rifle. Affordable, available 'common' caliber for general large game and long range shooting. VERY accurate.

Ruger 10/22, bull-barrel, 4X scope... general 'food getter' with the venerabel .22LR

For side arm I have the Glock-22 in .40 S/W (for two-legged varmints) a 9 mm conversion barrel/mags (just in case a 9 mm is needed) and an American-Arms 22 LR conversion kit. It's basically 3 pistols in one, conversion takes just seconds.

Future Considerations will be a 44 Magnum Revolver/Rifle Combo
(possibly a Ruger Blackhawk and Henry 'BigBoy' Lever-Action)
I just like the 44 Caliber alot, but really only usefull in my AO (Wind River Mtns). Plus it's an easy setup for reloading brass.

I'm also toying with the idea of a Ruger 'Ranch' Rifle (Mini-14) just to have a functional .223 firearm (I just don't like the AR-type 'ray-guns' they have always seemed to me to be 'dirt magnets') much for the 'just in case' reason as the 9mm pistol. .223 and 9mm are not my favorite calibers - but they are probably the most common available (AFTER the .22LR of course).

This armory is purely for my own 'Bug-In' scenario (a network of hunting retreats in the Mountains). But if the circumstances require a solo trek, I would have to say "One sifle + one sidearm", The rifle would need to be the .22LR simply because this will feed you. Alone and on the move, you won't have the luxury of tending a large game hunt, but rather subsist on squirrels, rabbits, grouse, etc. Ideally you would have some method of sound suppression device, though being sub-sonic, the 22LR can be loud enough to alert anyone nearby. For a sidearm, I's suggest something adequate for self defence, something in the 9mm-40-45 caliber range.

[edit on 23-7-2007 by Tattau]

[edit on 23-7-2007 by Tattau]

Originally posted by northwolf
I do not advocate 7.62x39 as a survival caliber unless you have the ability to load heavy enough loads to take out deer/moose sised game (no factory ammo is up for that task). But if you plan on a carrying a long on the way to your hideout, an AK or a SKS might be good for the bugout...

NorthWolf, I strongly disagree with you about the stopping power of the 7.62x39mm round. Don't believe the hype that so many magazine writers put out about the latest and greatest super-boomer magnum.

Don't know what kind of deer you have in Norway but the 125 grain loads are fine for every species of deer in North America except moose. The 154 grain loads are just fine for moose and other large critters. Several Alaskan guides even use the SKS for grizzly. The down range ballistics of the SKS round with 125 grain bullets exceed the much loved .30-30 WCF round with 170 grain flat nosed bullets past 150 yards and the 154 grain bullets overtake the '30-30 at 100 yards. The .30-30 has easily bagged every game animal in N. America withing 150 yards and the 7.62x39mm has about 90% of the muzzle energy of the .30-30 with a better shaped bullet. A faster heavier bullet rarely takes the place of good hunting skills.

My brother shot an 800 lbs elk with a 123 grain bullet at 100 yards and we recovered the bullet lodged against his far shoulder blade. The big bull elk took a couple of staggering step and crashed into the brush dead as a doornail. A .308 Winchester or .376 Steyr may give you a little better range and stopping power but a well placed shot from an SKS round below 200 yards will take any antlered creature in North America. They are all being taken with bow and black powder guns every season in the US and neither of them can make the energy of the SKS round.

crgintx;
I'm from Finland and at least out here hunters (and the hunting law) concider the 7.62x39 as a decent deer caliber, but not up for moose or bear in factory loads. .30-30 and other "yank" calibers are not in wide spread use her. Majority of Mooses are shot with either .308 or 7.62x51R.

But i agree that 7.62x39 will drop a deer or even a moose wit max two shots 90% of the time and i would most certainly use it in a life or death situation, but to use it in recreational hunting is a no no for me... And unless you are in very tight bush you may want to have an effectie range past 100m...

Otherwise i really like the caliber, i've carried a Sako Rk-95 chambered in 7.62x39 during my military service and it's an outstanding combat caliber.

A semi auto rifle .223 (5.56) or .308 (7.62). If you're going to have 1 rifle, it needs to do double duty hunting/self defense. Semi-auto/magazine fed is a must for self defense. Also, if you can hit your enemy outside their maximum effective range you cut down your chances of casualties. What does this mean? AR15 or M14 any day over AK's.
In the hands of a skilled shooter an AR15 or M14 has a 200 yard range advantage over most AK's.

Best Weapon IMO: Patriot Ordinace P415-18 POF
Tack driving accuracy w/ AK like reliability

I wouldn't want any set-up I couldn't hit a man sized target at 600 yards reliably with. Effective ranges: AK47 300 yds, RPG 500 yds, AT-4 350 yds, M203 300-400yds.

Oh, if it was designed to kill people, it'll take out most animals just fine.

Originally posted by Exmar
A semi auto rifle .223 (5.56) or .308 (7.62). If you're going to have 1 rifle, it needs to do double duty hunting/self defense. Semi-auto/magazine fed is a must for self defense. Also, if you can hit your enemy outside their maximum effective range you cut down your chances of casualties. What does this mean? AR15 or M14 any day over AK's.
In the hands of a skilled shooter an AR15 or M14 has a 200 yard range advantage over most AK's.

Best Weapon IMO: Patriot Ordinace P415-18 POF
Tack driving accuracy w/ AK like reliability

I wouldn't want any set-up I couldn't hit a man sized target at 600 yards reliably with. Effective ranges: AK47 300 yds, RPG 500 yds, AT-4 350 yds, M203 300-400yds.

Oh, if it was designed to kill people, it'll take out most animals just fine.

I'm not too fond of having only one gun. The possibility exists that you may need parts, in which case you could find yourself in a unpleasant predicament. One must also figure in where you plan to survive and the type of target to be shot.

I like the .22LR because they're generally easy to come by, light, and ammo is soooo inexpensive. Unfortunately it doesn't offer much in the way of survival firepower, nor will it be sufficient for hunting larger prey.

A .223 would offer both, however the rounds are a little more costly thus higher overall costs.

Perhaps a 9mm carbine would be a better solution, such as the Olympic K9?

I'm not too fond of having only one gun. The possibility exists that you may need parts, in which case you could find yourself in a unpleasant predicament. One must also figure in where you plan to survive and the type of target to be shot.

I agree, I own a POF AR15 .223, Rem M700 PS .308, Mini 14 .223 (they are crap), Glock 22 40 S&W, Ruger 10/22. I should get rid of the Mini 14 (did I mention they are crap?) and get a 12 gauge pump Rem or Mossberg.

I was thinking if I could have only 1 for all situations it would be an AR15.

I like the .22LR because they're generally easy to come by, light, and ammo is soooo inexpensive. Unfortunately it doesn't offer much in the way of survival firepower, nor will it be sufficient for hunting larger prey.

Ruger 10/22 best little rifle ever! When I was a kid in Oregon some of the poorer kids in middle school would poach deer with a 22lr. You can take a small deer w/ a 22 if you're close and your shot placement is good. Don't do a heart shot, just behind and slightly lower than the ear, lights out.

Perhaps a 9mm carbine would be a better solution, such as the Olympic K9

If you like 9mm carbines maybe pick up a used Marlin 9mm camp carbine. Marlin discontinued them but they are a good rifle and w/ a silencer they would be quieter than a silenced K9. Excellent silenced rifle in short range night situations.

Still, if you are going with a AR type rifle like the K9, might as well go with a .223 version so you have the longer range. Survival usually includes defense at some time, you want range on your side not your enemy's.

reply to post by ~Vixen~


9mm Parabellum is not a good caliber for hunting and barely adequate for self defense even with hollowpoint ammo. I'd favor .357 magnum, 44 Magnum or .45 Colt in a revolver and lever action carbine of 16"-20" barrel length if I had to choose a single caliber for both pistol and rifle. If you insist on having semi auto, go with .45 ACP. Standard ball ammo for .45 ACP would be a much better small/medium game getter than even 9mm hollowpoint.

Here's a neat system that will allow you to convert a semi-auto pistol to a carbine so that you can use the same magazines for both carbine and pistol.

www.mechtechsys.com...

Shot gun is easy to reload the shell, 9mm is a universal hand gun round, bow is nice to have too, I like a heavier gun also for trouble, and there is nothing like a 50 cal with a good sight. You pick off the bad guys at long range. NVGs will help a lot too. Tons of ammo/guns stashed in different locations is a good bet. 22L is cheap and you can have 10,000s of cheap rounds.

I only have a Glock 22, browning 12 gauge, and an old winchester 44/40 rifle.

[edit on 22-8-2007 by Xtrozero]

As much as possible I try to stick to fairly "universal" rounds. My collection:

S&W Tac40 9mm pistol
Glock 17 9mm pistol
Remington 597 .22LR rifle
Marlin 7000 .22LR
Mossberg 500 Cruiser 12GA
Saiga 12 12GA
Armalite M15A4 .223
Stag 15L 5.56 NATO
Vector AK 7.62x39
Yugo SKS 7.62x39
Barrett M82A1 .50BMG

I'd choose a .357 Magnum over the 9mm any day of the week especial since you can fire .38 special cartridges from any gun chambered for .357 Magnum. The same holds true with the 44 Magnum which will chamber .44 Special and the .45 Colt variants, the .45 Casull and .460 S&W Magnum.
You can walk into any Walmart and most bait and tackle shops and find the following rounds:

.45 ACP .38 Special .357 Mag
.30-30 WCF
.30-'06 Govt
.308 Winchester
.45 Colt
.223 Winchester
.270 Winchester

A hotloaded .38 Special P+ round from a .357 Magnum revolver will easily out perform the hottest and heaviest bullet loads commercially available for the 9mm by a wide margin. The .357 Magnum from a rifle comes very close to the 7.62x39mm in short range ballistic performance. The US Army is returning to the .45 ACP as it's primary sidearm round after the 9mm disappointing performance in CQB in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The US military has cycled between the .355-357 bullet calibers and the .45 caliber for more than 100 years now. The 9mm might be an effective round for law enforcement duties but the .45 ACP has proven superior to it in combat effectiveness time and time again. Many LE agencies have moved up to the .40 S&W auto as their service round as a compromise between the two.

Everyone praises the plastic gun but give the old G-model 1911 any day. If you want more power from it just switch the barrel to the .460 Rowland or .400 Corbon and you have moved past a .357 Magnum in power. I'd much rather have a bullet that incapacitates with the first hit then have to shoot a second or third round into the intended target.

If i had to pick a survival weapon i would pick the MP5 it is accurate for its size , compact, able to be silenced, common ammo and reliable.

As a side arm i would choose either a glock 17 or a glock 22 or a 357 revolver.

Originally posted by donotdoit
If i had to pick a survival weapon i would pick the MP5 it is accurate for its size , compact, able to be silenced, common ammo and reliable.

As a side arm i would choose either a glock 17 or a glock 22 or a 357 revolver.

1. The MP5 is not a rifle, it's a sub-machine gun.

2. It's effective range is about 100m if you're lucky.

3. Range would be dramatically reduce if suppressed (around 25m for the MP5SD).

The MP5 was designed to kill people at close quarters, not kill game at realistic hunting ranges. It also costs the bloody earth. You would be much more well off with a good bolt action or semi automaic hunting rig with a decent scope and some high quality ammo.

Yur choices of side arms are veering towards self-defence from humans. The .357 would be the only real choice of the three if it came down to defence against large animals at close range. I'd probably go for a .44Mag if this was my concern, but maybe that's just me.

Ok if it was only one, gun I would pick the ak-47. It kills anything big enough to die (elephants have been killed with an AK-47). It defeats body armor better than the 5.56, and it kicks the crap out of vehicles way better than the 5.56.

Originally posted by downtown436
Ok if it was only one, gun I would pick the ak-47. It kills anything big enough to die (elephants have been killed with an AK-47). It defeats body armor better than the 5.56, and it kicks the crap out of vehicles way better than the 5.56.

That's a lovely sentiment, but unless you get a lot of elephants driving vehicles while wearing body armour in your neck of the woods, then I'd steer clear.

Has every one forgotten that this is a SURVIVAL rifle we're talking about? There is the world of difference between a weapon that is designed to kill animals for meat (like a Steyr Scout Rifle) and one that is designed to cut a human in half in a smart, soldier-like and uniform manner (like an AK47).

Personally I feel that the M1A Scout rifle and M1A Socom from Springfield Armory would make good survival rifles good cartridge 7.62x51 and smaller than the Standard M1A which would be an excellent rifle to have in its own right. For those of smaller stature I would suggest anything in 7.62x39 or 5.56. I use and M1A and the wife uses a AR 15 with collapsable stock so it works out. Springfield also makes or made the M6 survival rifle, it is and over under with .22lr and a .410 guage shotgun.

i noticed that none of you mentioned a .17 calibor rifle they are smaller than a .22 but more powerfull and accurate and a little bit quieter. i have one, i can hit a poker chip from 100 yards away with one shot. it has a range of about 300 yards.

Originally posted by northwolf
But if you plan on a carrying a long on the way to your hideout, an AK or a SKS might be good for the bugout...

yeah exept the only thing is that an sks or an ak are not very accurate. i mean i emptied a whole clip trying to hit a bowling pin from about 30 yards and missed every shot, and im not a bad shot.