Ideal Survival Rifle

I'm saying that picking a round/bullet that'll do what I need it to do, is not going to stop me from shooting a deer or trying to shoot through cover. Saying an FMJ CAN"T is false, but no, it is not ideal. Neither is a hollowpoint for a lot of combat applications, and AP ammo is, arguably, a step further.

I regularly hunt with lead semi-wadcutters, so I technically come in on the third, forgotten middleground on the bullet spectrum. Haha.

It's also well documented that I don't have a problem picking a round based on the general performance/not changing bullet types 30 times for 12 different tasks. Evaluate it on the whole, have a paln for using x bullet type one W,Y,X target types, and go about not being dead yet. That's my take.

 

Legion489, there is a difference between an Open Tip Match and a Hollow Point. As to effective rounds when hunting game, exactly what game are you hunting?

Last I knew there was only one game animal that posed an equal or greater threat at distances that made Hollow Point Projectiles far less efficient than those of OTM construction. While I appreciate nitpicking, there are times when kinetic energy and penetration are far more relevant to proven performance at the task at hand, neutralization & elimination are not exclusive terms. JMO.

 

The versatility of FMJ rounds can always be greatly improved with the use of a pair of side cutters, knock the ends off and you have workable SPs. We most certainly did that with 1000s of rounds of F4 here and the hogs generally didn't know that they were not being shot with fancy and expensive SPs. That said this is in 7.62 not 5.56. Back when I was in the trade I happened into several K of Norinco 5.56 with 55gn FMJs bought some Winchester bulk pack 55gn SPs and there you had some budget hunting ammunition, again many swine and goats got topped so. I am still using a bag of pulled 55gn FMJs as a weight bag...LOL

 

Feel free to take the nit picking and whining up with Brokor/BTPost who were claiming that the military used hollow points. And yes hollow points and open tip match are both technically "hollow points". If you doubt this, feel free to call the bullet makers and ask them, as they should know what they make. The difference is one is designed for expansion and the other for accuracy and not expansion.

 

Then there are a few curve balls, like the Speer 130gnHP, originally a match projectile and in the 80s sold as such. Then they ended up in some special run rounds by Winchester (who have only made this loading commercially available in the last couple of years but which has been in use by Govt since the 80s) and one finds they kill like little flying hand grenades.

 

Of Seirra Game King, which is SUPER accurate at sight it, but disintegrates without penetrating...

 

Hold a box of 50 -.22 rimfire, 50 -12 gauge, 50- 5.56 and 50-30 cal .308 etc. set them on your counter side by side . Now Imagine or try to carry 300 rounds of each one.

 

150 grn. Nosler ballistic tip 30 cal, Went thru 1st. pig and exploded hitting pig #2 in the lower ribs,shoulder and neck 2 for 1 Baby!

 

For my military type rifles and pistol calibre carbines/sub guns I stick with FMJ for the most part. In my mind it reduces the chances of the failure to feed issue and it's a bit cheaper. In 5.56mm I use the 55grn and also load some 52 grn BTHPM. For 7.62 and 30-06 I use the military loads. I have LC match for both for when I wanna make smaller groups 7.62x39mm I use Rooski ammo 99% of the time in both AK and AR platforms with no issues thus far. I do have 1k of brass cased stuff I loaded with a 123 grn ballistic tip type bullet for hogs mainly.
For pistol ammo I load either round nose lead or semi wadcutter for practice and JHP for carry ammo. I use the same weight of bullet for both and there isn't enough difference in group size to bother mentioning. Bear in mind I don't shoot/practice for bulleye type matches rather I use the IDPA style.
For the pistol calibre sub gun stuff it's all ball ammo. Reduces the FTF issue and it's cheaper in volume.
My ammo may well end up feeding several different weapons other than the ones I currently own PSHTF. I need for it to work in any weapon I may come across, or that a team member may bring in.That's why I stick to the mil issue guide lines. As far as lethality of this bullet over that, well, Europe and islands in the Pacific are filled with the markers of men killed by FMJ rounds. If Man is indeed an animal like many profess, then the question of whether FMJ ammo is suitable for killing an animal has been answered..

 

Every time I see this discussion I get the same feeling. Playing scenarios. There simply is not one best survival gun . If you were stranded on the top floor of a 100 floor high rise with only stairs available to get down what would be the best weapon? How about the great plains where a meal of antelope is 400 yards away? how about the thick tangles of the Everglades or the mountains, or the swamps of new Orleans, big city urban areas, dense hard wood forests of the mid west? Africa, Alaska, south pole? the desert, Michigan.

The m-16 was designed with smaller fast munitions in mind. One of the biggest complaints of soldiers in ww1,ww2,and the Korean conflict was running out of ammo. So the AR-15 is designed so the person carrying it can carry more ammo. The BAR. was a great rifle but ate ammo in a huge way. The magazines were huge. the Garrand again, a great rifle but limited ammo on a person required resupply. Battle rifles are great for battle, they are the best. 30-06, .308 7.62 etc. but they are heavy ,bulky and not practical if you are on the run on foot with no resupply. I have them because Im dug in. Not running. Already bugged out. We live or die here. If we are forced out it is by vehicle or not at all.

I trained with guys who fought in Iraq and Afganistan. They all said about the same thing. The M-4 was better for patrolling, recon, house to house, close range combat. They also liked Shotguns and sniper rifles. Anyone attacking my place would be at a huge disadvantage because I am not limited to what I can carry. They are. I can use a 30-06 while they are 400 yards out. Switch to the AR if there are a lot of targets or they are closing fast. Shotguns and hand guns at close quarters. And ammo in cans in the bunkers.

I guess my point is this is almost pointless to discuss. There are merits to discussing the differences in calibers and the strong and points of them. The .22 wins in how many you can carry. The .50 bmg wins in stopping power. Everything else is in between . It always boils down to where you are at any given moment in time. A good hand gun will serve you well in the city and do no good on the great plains. That 338 long gun with the 1000 yard scope will not help in an enclosed starway in a 100 story high rise.

 

Should you not compare 12 gauge (buckshot) to 9 other artridges by volume? Just because you shoot them all at once does not mean that you are not firing essentially a 9 shot burst.

 

Perhaps I'm a little confused? What am I doing door kicking if my goal is survival? Evasion and Escape is a far more successful concept when attempting to survive, than Close Quarter Combat. It may be lonely in them there hills, but Y'all shall live allot longer than mixing it up within the 300 yard kill zone. The only critter that can be relatively certain of dealing you a mortal wound farther away than arms length, is carrying a projectile weapon.

About this how much can you carry philosophy: Which weighs more, Two 7.62 NATO Rounds or 30+ 5.56 NATO rounds? As to the 22 LR, how many thousands of rounds would it take you to neutralize even an onion skin paper at 800 Meters? (approximately 875 yards) So to toss in a trick question on what rifle/cartridge should be considered ideal for a survival rifle; what weighs more 210 rounds of 5.56 NATO or 100 Rounds of 7.62 NATO? (answer, they are almost identical)

So I'm going to revert back to a rifles utility, maintainability, and mechanical accuracy potential as the most important considerations as "Ideal for a survival rifle".

 

I carried 100 -30-06 rounds and 210 5.56. The large magazines for the 30-06 were bulky, took up space and made travel difficult. 210 5.56 fit nice in the 6 pouches of my molle vest with one in the chamber. But even then 210 rounds? what if I have to shoot a small bird for food? a squirrel? I have looked at the conversion kits and frankly they are not accurate enough for me. The question really should be what are the best choices for bugged out versus bugged in. resupply or no resupply. Nothing beats a .22 for small game but is limited to 100 yards and under which covers most shooting situations here in my AO. I WOULD NEVER CARRY ONE WHILE PATROLLING but would use mine to take everything up to deer for hunting. There is no long term rifle that is better suited to feed you in an area like mine. Battles are a completely different game. Whether dug in or attacking , or caught out in the open crossing someone elses turf etc. Big bore rifles and shotguns require heavy ammo and a way to get it to the gun quickly. Its called logistics, resupply. I was the Field support unit for the West Michigan Volunteer Militia and a huge part of my job was keeping the unit fed and armed. It was no easy task to meet the guys at a gps point or grid coordinates with cans of ammo for varying rifles and hand guns. We practiced this over and over. A survivalist with a plan can move from cache to cache, resupply to resupply. The truth? an empty gun is a club and today's dont even make a good paddle. I am also a 40 year hunter and have taken all types of game except for bear , elk and Moose. To me ? the best survival rifle is the one with ammo after a couple years in the bush. I mean the difference between bugging in and bugging out is the real question. Everything changes. I have heard all the Ideas from a fully stocked van or horse cart, atv. trucks cars, hand carts and yes the assault wheelbarrow ha ha ha . carry more stuff and not run out. I would challenge anyone to take a 100 rounds of 30-06 against the same weight in .22 long rifle and feed yourself long term. Who runs out first?

The the same question can be asked for a gun fight. 100 rounds 30 cal or shotgun versus 210 rounds of 5.56 ? who runs out first? which one doubles as a small game weapon? can any of these really be used for taking small birds and rodents? To me survival means being the last man who is armed and supplied. The last man who can feed himself. Again this brings me back to bug in versus bug out. My wife is crippled and can not walk more than a half mile a day then requires two days of medication and rest . Our path is set. We stay here. On our private lake where we control the logistics, resupply, where we can garden, hunt , fish, and raise live stock. I will use all of the weapons discussed here as they each have their purpose. I cant do any better then that. So to me? there is no best survival rifle. Our .22 rifles will be used for hunting. The AR-15 rifles for patrolling and fighting. The 30-06 rifles are for long range sniping and fighting. Shotguns are for close quarters if we get overrun and have to fight near the house or even inside. Hand guns are for last resort or to get us to a shotgun or rifle. Scenarios are the variables that change everything. The scenario changes around every corner if you are on the move. To be on the move is to be patrolling with no resupply except what you find along the way. I would go with my Anderson build AR carbine 300 rounds and a .22 PISTOL . with 300 rounds. I could go a long way with that set up. However I would see that option as a fools errand, to be out in a strange area , on foot with what I can carry.

 

Kingfish, the mag pouch that holds 3 of your 5.56 AR Mags, started it's Military career holding 2 of the 7.62 M14 Mags. The best movement is slow, silent, and undetected. Giving away your position to fire a shot for small game isn't a prudent maneuver. The tactics found in "SNIPER TRAINING: FM 23-10" can go a long way to keeping you alive in a hostile environment. When you hunt, even if you don't know it, you use the same techniques as a SNIPER. Reflection should confirm that big game hunters are ambush hunters. (just like SNIPERS) Most of the time it is better to fade away leaving nothing but footprints. Gunshots draw attention, the more of them you make the easier it is to triangulate your position.

 

Due to the above posts is why I choose the .17 HMR
Reason being ,
I did a volume test, and found that the .17 HMR is 1/5th the volume of a .223.
Though it lacks the energy at distance , it's a very accurate caliber in my experience .
Any injury due to this bullet is going to need serious attention due to fragmentation.
Though it doesn't sound like a big gun when fired 2550 FPS is nothing to sneeze at compared to half that in a .22 (1225 FPS even .22 mag 2000 FPS.
My .17 HMR accuracy out shines any gun I've ever owned.
Men have taken deer and every other small game and non game animal with the .17
Placement is very important , no matter what you use .
Practice is vital no matter what you use.
What does the ammo cost to practice with?
How much can you cary, if your on foot indefinitely ?
How much big game will be left a month or so after SHTF ?

 

@ M118lr ,Hence the suppressor on the .22 makes it silent. The .22 is still and will be for decades to come the very best small game getter up to Deer. There is no comparison except maybe a suppressed .17 hmr. . Like Arleigh I can take deer with .22 WITH EASY HEAD SHOTS AS MY 981-t IS DIME SIZE ACCURATE AT 30 TO 40 YARDS. I did all the tests and they have been posted here. Great penetration on head shots on mature deer. There is no better game gathering weapon than a suppressed .22 rifle. Except maybe the same in .22 magnum or 17 hmr. But the .22 is Cheaper to buy and stock deep than either so it wins in numbers as well. EVERY survivalist Should have a .22 Rifle and as many rounds as they can comfortably store. We have three lifetimes worth. Cost versus any other ammo was miniscule in comparrison.

 

Here is one of my every day scenarios here on the lake. A dozen or more Geese come up into the yard bugging. This happens almost every day of the year until the lake freezes over. More in the Fall and spring. But here it is. I have a small blind set up near my little boat launch area where the Geese come up and also 20 yeards from the shallow flats where they swim and eat shallow water creatures and weeds. What would be the most efficient , quietest, cheapest way to kill one? Answer .22 suppressed . head shot right through the eyes at 20 yards and if I miss ? oh well they dont even fly off. We are on the Great lakes flyway and are visited by thousands of Geese every year. I have the same thing with Raccoons, wild rabbits and squirrels right here on my 10 acres. I am surrounded by thousands of acres of federal forests full of small game but stingy on deer. I take deer over bait (apples) which we grow here. I use a cross bow for that until the bolts and broad heads run out. Then will use the .22 from the same sets at 20 yards with head shots . Quiet , accurate, deadly. I defend with the big stuff. Never waste 30 cal hunting. Never waste my defensive ammo on taking game. It is too expensive to stock deep enough to have that luxury. The .22 is the work horse.

 

I'd argue a bow on all of the Kingfisher qualifications on cost, quietness, and efficiency.