survival firearm??????????????

straitshot said:
The .270W is better than the .30-06... or is it the other way around? I forget. 9mm vs. .45 ACP- even Uncle Sam can't end the debate. Whichever arm (and type of ammo!) a person has on them has limitations for survival use. It's a matter of understanding those limitations and adapting to them.:)ss.
Click to expand...

9mm vs .45........

I hear AMU is testing another service pistol.... THANK THE LORD!!!!!!!!!!!
 
I do personally know a guy (friends father) who killed a black bear with a .22 lr pistol. It was climbing through a screen door and he had the gun in his hand because he "heard something on the porch". One shot to the head and it dropped like a sack. Now, even he said if he had known it was a bear he would not have picked up the .22, he was thinking more like racoon. The .22 will kill, no doubt about it, but it is mighty weak medicine for any large game.

The number of encounters in which you will have a decent shot at small game make the
.22 a prime choice for feeding yourself in the wilderness. The weight of the firearm and ammo make it a good choice as a survival gun. The .22 pistol or revolver in addition to a centerfire big game rifle is a very versatile combination. My dad had the habit of bagging grouse with his .30-06 while deer hunting, not exactly ideal.

If you want big game/small game, and defense verastility then carry a 12 ga pump and appropriate ammo. You pay for it in that your ammo load will be limited and the gun itself is big.

I like the .357 magnum revolver for the PA woods. With .38 wadcutters I can take small game and it can be uploaded with hotter ammo for deer and defense. Mac

Edited to add: I normally carry the .357 loaded with Federal 158 grain semi-jacketed flat points, deep penetrating defense or black bear load. I´m going to hunt small game with it I´ll load 3 wadcutters and have them set to go first. I carry extra wadcutters on speed strips for single loading. I also carry 2 or 3 speedloaders with +P 38 special. I figure if I need to load that fast it´s because I´m in a gunfight. I normally carry an assortment of ammo in two of the Case Guard 18 round ammo wallets, including a few .38 shotshells.

If defense is your only concern the Glock 17/19 gives a very high firepower to weight ratio. A 115 grain 9mm bullet weighs half as much as a 230 grain .45. Someone jsut thought, "yeah, but it only does half the damage!" I still don´t buy it and I´ll take my chances.
 
Great story Mac, here is another.

> By Jim Mann
> The Daily Inter Lake
>
>
>Two aggressive grizzly bears have been shot, one by a hunter and one by a
>Fortine homeowner.
>
>A Kalispell man shot a stalking grizzly bear in the Swan Mountains and a
>Fortine man shot a grizzly at close range, narrowly escaping as the bear
>charged from a chicken coop.
>
>James Beeman picked up a .410-gauge shotgun when he went outside his
>Fortine-area home to investigate a commotion from his chicken coop around
>4 a.m. Sunday.
>
>Wearing a headlamp and expecting a skunk, Beeman saw two bear cubs run
>from the damaged door of the chicken coop. Then an adult grizzly bear
>emerged with a chicken in its mouth.
>
>The bear dropped the chicken and charged from 15 feet. Beeman fired, with
>the muzzle of the gun roughly three feet from the bear, which crumpled to
>ground, dead at Beeman's feet.
>
>It turned out to be an astounding shot, considering a .410 is a light gun
>and the shell contained a light load typically used for quail hunting.
>
>But it hit the bear squarely in the nose, the only soft, vulnerable place
>on a grizzly skull. Pellets likely penetrated the length of the nasal
>cavity to the brain. The wad from the shell was imbedded in the bear's
>nose.
>
>"What's the likelihood of that?" said Ed Kelly, Montana Fish, Wildlife and
>Parks warden captain in Kalispell. "I know guys with .375s who couldn't
>have made a kill like that. He's just a lucky, lucky guy."
>
>Kelly said the shooting was a "justifiable case of self defense."
>
>The bear was a 350-pound female.
 
Well, there you have it Chris! The .410 is adequate for grizzly...

My brother-in-law dropped a grizzly running perpendicular to him with one shot. He fired at the shoulder and the bear ploughed right in and lay motionless, as in no movement whatsoever. This just does not happen. They watched it for a long time not really believeing what they were seeing. Finally they appraoched it, rifles at the ready, it wasn´t breathing, but it was getting dark and the wind was blowing the fur around so it was hard to tell. No blood on the animal. BIL placed his muzzle on the bear and gave it a shove with his foot. The bear suddenly let out this long gaaaaaawf and he just about soiled his underware. Then he noticed a trickle of blood coming out of its ear. The bullet went in one ear and came out the other. If I´m going to scramble a grizzly brain I want a 300 Weatherby too. Mac
 
"what is your survival firearm ?" This is how the thread started, with a simple question. It reminds me of the advice I got on writing college term papers - "Limit the subject!" This isn't a criticism; I might well have asked the same question. The reality is though that anytime firearm performance, ballistics, is mentioned, everyone has an opinion. There are some opinions here that are not based on empirical evidence. As a life member of the NRA, I've been reading the National Rifleman for nearly 50 years. There are two articles from way back that, although they don't answer the question, may give pause for thought. One was home defense in which the argument was that a pistol is a poor choice. Any shotgun at close range is more accurate and deadly than any pistol. It is more accurate and the sound of a shell being chambered in a pump will most times be the end of a threat. No. 6 shot will not kill anyone through two layers of sheet rock, but any pistol round will. Your family is safer if you use a shotgun.

If I remember correctly, in the average police shootout, 11 rounds are fired (between the good guy and the bad guy) at less than 15 feet and no one is hit. So, a pistol in your bedside table is a extremely dangerous tool to yourself and your family. But, relating numbers of bullets fired to numbers of dead people on the ground, the 9MM Luger is the most lethal round in use. This came from nationwide police statistics when someone was killed by a firearm when the police were involved.

Back to the original question. The answer is, it depends. Alaska is special, so a firearm choice there is different than most of the rest of North America. In fact there are places there that the law requires you to carry adequate firepower.

The most important determination is: Are you an excellent shot? If you are, a .22 if adequate. My uncle, whom I used to hunt with, has killed a mule deer with his Hi-Standard .22 M&P. He's in his 90s now, but I've seen him take down three running mule deer with his 30-06 in just a few seconds. He was an excellent shot. If you're not an excellent shot, carry a shotgun if you really think you need a survival firearm. What does it take to become an excellent shot? For me it took about 750 rounds a week for weeks on end with a rifle. I only became a fair shot with a pistol. Where I live now (Australia) it's a moot point for me. When I'm back in the (NW) US, I doubt that I would carry any of my firearms outside of camp. There are more important survival tools to carry. There are mountain lions and bears there, but no credible evidence that they are a threat to me. Survival in the real world means being rescued. I don't expect Armageddon or roving bands of terrorists. Camp security is a different matter, and probably worthy of a separate thread.
 
I'm not trying to start a pissing contest- I'm just questioning. If people think that is starting such a contest, then I have my concernes.

First, the clown with the .44 wasn't a friend, we just buy ammunition at the same place. Please note the pronoun- it gives you my opinion of the guy.

Second, I'm not doubting that it is possible. There is a confirmed taking of an elephant, and moderately credible but unsubstantiated claim about a cape buffalo, taken with a .22. But I'm questioning it's regularity, based on the fact that I've got the skull of a moose hanging on my wall, and that is a lot thicker than a human skull, like the one I have on my desk. I've got to say that based on real world results in defensive shootings and failed suicides with the .22 and the number of people who've had is slide without doing serious damage, that I can't imagine that it would be even less successful on a moose. And I won't even discuss a body shot.

So I guess my question is, what was it's success rate? A survival situation, or ethical and honorable hunting practices, calls for a round that can take the game you intend to shoot with no more than two rounds and kills or weakens the animal due to blood loss and shock within a few hundred yards. Ignoring the ethical issues, if you have a .22 in a survival situation, the only time I'd ever suggest trying to go after anything but small game and smaller varmints is defensively. Anything else, while in theory possible, isn't a sure enough thing- wasting ammunition and meat is a waste of finite resources. When the poo has it the fan and a survival kit is now something real world rather than a mall ninja's wet dream, just as in Vegas, the house is favored. The deck is stacked and marked, and the stakes are too high to throw them away on long odds.

Survival isn't about what you could do, in theory, maybe, if the situation is perfect, and the gods are smiling. Survival is about what you can do, every time.
 
"i am sorry fella's about such a broad question. i was talking about being in the woods and outdoors."

With that in mind, I figure my "survival" guns would be whatever I carried while farting around in the woods (I can't think of anything else that would put me in the woods having to "survive".
What I usually go out with is a Ruger single six, most often with the magnum cylinder in (for whatever reason it's more accurate with magnums), and a Mosin Nagant M38. The .22 is great for an impromptu "lunch hunt", and the Mosin does great for hogs and such (hogs being legal to hunt year round).
 
in the average police shootout, 11 rounds are fired (between the good guy and the bad guy) at less than 15 feet and no one is hit.
Click to expand...

Problem here is assuming that police (or crooks) are gun people. We use to reuse the silowet targets left buy the local police and prison guards after they shot qualifications since there were only a few holes in the good parts.

They would joke we were better armed and we would reassure them we were better trained to.They couldn't believe we ran 65 round shotgun drills for fun and wined they had to shoot 35 rounds (slow fire) to qualify.

One Detective shot off the tip of his pointer finger of the left hand qualifying with a snubie.
 
Bernoulli said:
... Survival in the real world means being rescued...
Click to expand...

Then it makes sense for you to own/carry nothing but a flare pistol. I don't subscribe to the idea that anyone owes me "rescue". My own creed of personal responsibility says that I will survive or perish by my own skills/preparedness, or lack thereof. I got this from my father and grandfather.

My personal favorite for a survival firearm is, and always has been, the antiquated .20 ga. shotgun. Or .62 caliber musket depending on the load in the pipe. I prefer lighter actions with few parts to get dirty/ misalligned/ broken. This points to the older bolt action and breakovers. I seldom need to speed load, but through practice I have learned to reload, reacquire my target, then fire as quickly and accurately with these single shots and box magazine fed shotguns as most people can with pumps and autoloaders. The plus is lower recoil and less weight of both the shotgun and it's ammunition over the venerable 12 guage shotgun, and much more versitility and power than those moose/grizz killing .22's. My typical ammo supply while afield is two ten round belt pouches. Sometimes I leave one at home and put three preloaded in the box magazine in my hunting bag.

Now, I don't frequent the plains of Africa or the Alaskan tundra. My choice is sufficient for my environment. Home defense is a different matter. I have a pump 12 guage (.72 caliber) with a shorter barrel and quick acquire sights for that.

Codger
 
Codger,
Sounds to me like you'd do well with a (very reliable) Rem 870 even though it isn't a single. I like them because they take very little maintenance and the magazine can be reloaded with a round in the tube. If you reload, the payload can be reduced to be as pleasant as a 20 gauge. I've used mine for Trap/Skeet and fired a lot of 12 ga Win AA light target rounds in a relatively short period. Four rounds of Trap/Skeet equals 100 shotgun rounds, that's typical for me, some guys shoot much more. Then just load a round of 00 Buck in the magazine and cycle the action and you have a very different tool in your hands.

IMO though, for a survival firearm, 12 or 20 ga shotgun rounds are just too bulky. It would be a good gun for a short foraging trip from a base camp, but would not be a good choice if you needed to carry all that ammo all the time.

$.02
 
I was wondering, did the old Alaskan tell where he placed his shots on the moose?
Around here, there are a few people that will take deer with a .22 when the cubards get bare. They place the shot behind the ear, it is usually fatal or it is a miss. Guess they don't want to drag a poach to far.

A few months back I was looking for an ss M6 in .22 hornet to keep in the trunk of my car with the BOB, and found out they don't make them, so I settled on the 10/22 all weather. My work is 40+ miles from home, with 2 small rivers and 2 large rivers to cross if the bridges go. The BOB is for that trip, 1 or 2 nights if needed. 100 stingers and 100 solids should be plenty for the trip.
 
According to an old 1993 article in a NRA publ, the avg police shooting takes up to 3 shots against the bad guys- but that I guess the shots may have increased since then...
Back to topic- ANY gun is better than no gun...
As for survival designs- the AR7 by Charter is somewhat dodgy...My friend bought one because it was in a James Bond movie (Stop laughing- don't tell me you did'nt buy a Ber M92 because of Die Hard.)...The AR7 barrel face gets shot peened by the bolt, and magazine is atrocious- jam o matic.. The design is also poor because the bolt feed to barrel path is not well supported in terms of the ctg path control/design- it is very easy to jam the tip of the bullet on the upper barrel chamber rim (WHAT is that?!- When you get it-you will understand)...He's lucky if he gets of 2 or 3 shots in a row...After about 50 rounds, the parts need to be cleaned...The spare mag was a total joke- the feed ramp was so narrow; there was no way to insert 22lr ctgs into the mag...AR7 to me- is more like a single shot rifle- and don't even think about touching the mag when firing...Nice concept tho- really breaks down very nicely...Just wondering how James Bond fired it without jamming. Heh heh...
 
led4them said:
I was wondering, did the old Alaskan tell where he placed his shots on the moose?
Around here, there are a few people that will take deer with a .22 when the cubards get bare. They place the shot behind the ear, it is usually fatal or it is a miss. Guess they don't want to drag a poach to far.
Click to expand...

I don't have any idea on moose but whitetails depend on the orentation of the deer. Facing you dead on, don't take the shot with the deer looking at you, if it lowers it's head center of the forehead. Broadside, between the eye and the ear hole, straight in or just under the ear hole will bring it down also. Quartering away behind the ear, quartering towards don't take the shot unless it is at a pretty good angle, then aim for the back corner of the eye closer to you. Straight away, base of the skull where the spine meets the skull.

This is for information purposes only and I do not advocate shooting deer with anything less than a 223 and appropriate controlled expansion bullets. However this is a survival forum and if a 22 is all you have and the deer is sufficiently close, I would take the shot. Before anyone asks, yes this is experience, I went through a real rough time in my life with a wife and a baby, and I have no regrets. Chris

BTW I really don't care how good a shot you are, you will loose a percentage of deer you shoot with a 22.

EDIT: A whitetail moves and jerks it's head all the time and it is real easy to watch one jerk it's head through the scope just as the sear breaks which means a wounded or missed deer. If you are shooting almost anything but a 22, behind the shoulder in the heart lungs is the place to shoot them, a deer's brain is a small tricky shot. Chris
 
I just wanted to toss another thought into the pool concerning an 'all-purpose' woods gun. The Marlin 1894 .357 magnum makes a very handy and fairly lightweight tool to run around with. The .357 Mag really does become a different beast when fired out of something like an 18" barrel and approaches .30-30 ballistics. This is definitely suitable for something like deer out to around 100-125 yards, and would still work well for defense against two-legged nasties. It can also fire .38 special rounds, which would work just fine for small game procurement in a pinch. The can be reloaded into some low-power rounds for extra assurance that meat won't be wasted.

Something to think about!
 
Now THAT'S the best compromise I've heard in here so far. Power for medium game, follow-up shots not a problem, enough punch to discourage the dangerous stuff (particularly with ten rounds on hand,) easily good enough for killing people if that's your concern, and light loaded .38s will probably not make instant soup out of the small stuff.

That's it, that's the one for me. I have been meaning to buy one for a while, and now I'm decided.

Except...up here, should it be in .44 instead??? OH NO!!!

But in all seriousness, the .357 will do me. I'm going to go buy one.

Good call Spooky!
 
If you've never heard one of the .357 Mag carbines, stand by. Definitely wear hearing protection, preferably foam plugs and ear muffs. These are really loud. .44 Mag carbine is only necessary if you're into overkill.
 
Spooky,

+1 on the .357 carbine. I have a Rossi 1892 16.5 inch Trapper and it is a great gun. There is a big difference between shooting the .38 and .357 out of it. The .38's feel like a big .22 and the .357 feels like a mild .30-30. They are just plain fun to shoot. Mac
 
runningboar said:
This is for information purposes only and I do not advocate shooting deer with anything less than a 223 and appropriate controlled expansion bullets. However this is a survival forum and if a 22 is all you have and the deer is sufficiently close, I would take the shot. Before anyone asks, yes this is experience, I went through a real rough time in my life with a wife and a baby, and I have no regrets. Chris

BTW I really don't care how good a shot you are, you will loose a percentage of deer you shoot with a 22.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I hear ya, and I'm no fan of the .223 either. My daughter could shoot the AR very well for a 9yo, but I made her use the mini-30 for her first hunt.

I won't go into to the time a buddy shot a little deer in the liver with a .22 and I had to finish it with a rock, caveman style (his knife was so dull it wouldn't cut).
 
ras said:
If you've never heard one of the .357 Mag carbines, stand by. Definitely wear hearing protection, preferably foam plugs and ear muffs. These are really loud. .44 Mag carbine is only necessary if you're into overkill.
Click to expand...

I can't say I have but if they are louder than the .357 maximum loads that have gone through my gp-100, or than a shorty m-14 with a muzzle brake, I will be pretty surprised!

I would consider the .44 mainly on account of the amount of bears up here...but I think 10 hot .357s would probably be discouraging enough.
 
Personally a 12ga fan - I have my mossberg 500 Mariner (nickel/teflon anti corrosion version) with speedfeed stock. Shot and slug allows for a variety of situations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top