Inexpensive SHTF Rifle Suggestions

[Handsome Rob]

Not giving you a hard time either, but I think you've got no experience with firearms & are talking out your hole.

[Handsome Rob]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6qWlSB6eOI

[Guest kylexander]

Alright, I think there is a difference in many's opinions of what a SHTF situation entails. Murphy's law should be a general rule of thumb, and the 6 P's tell us that preparedness is everything.

 

A general purpose rifle is without a doubt the ideal weapon for general preparedness. Jeff Cooper had a lot to say about a general purpose rifle, and while many argue about the finer points of the ideal rifle, it is hard to argue against the general idea of a lightweight, compact, reliable weapon in a general purpose caliber.

 

A thirty-thirty is a good caliber. Some might even consider it general purpose. I think a lot of old timers just aren't realizing that this round is not as available as it once was. Case in point, it is not issued to military or police. It will not be abundant. In keeping with that idea, 7.62 and 5.56 nato as well as 9mm parabellum are your best bet. 5.56 would be most easily found as a rifle round, but it is by no means a general purpose round. Living in military town, you hear a lot from people coming back from deployments, and there is a general consensus that 5.56 is not an ideal combat round, and it would not be an idea defense round for defense against large, predatory animals, i.e. bears.

 

The lever action is a proven design, but in terms of reliability, it does not come close to a bolt action. Moving across rugged terrain, you are likely to beat up your rifle at some point. Given a situation with no end in sight, staying within a small AO and using up a dwindling supply of food is not realistic. The lever action is one of the most complicated actions internally. A dent to the tube, hyper extension or bend in the lever would make the gun less effective if not useless. It is not and never will be as reliable as a bolt action or as durable in rough situations.

 

Reloading a tube is never going to be fast. In a realistic long-term SHTF scenario, it is likely you will encounter a fire fight. In that situation, quick reloads are an important part of a bigger picture that demands clean shots and quick reloads under pressure. In no way will a lever action be ideal once the tube is dry. Detachable mags are a simple solution to a serious problem that will give you an equal advantage in a pinch. Stripper clips can succomb to bending or warping and quickly become more of a pain. They also rattle.

 

If you consider inexpensive, 300$ for a base rifle is still a better option than a bottom line AR. Considering my idea, you are all in for $500 with mags, synthetic stock, and optics. This is still a better deal. The bolt should be a staple in any SHTF rifle. AR's are nice, but I don't think anyone will argue their relability, ease of cleaning, or ability to eat anything you feed it in any situation are superior to a bolt or an AK for that matter.

 

If I missed anything, I apologize. Having owned and fired ARs, AKs, levers, and bolt actions, I'll take the bolt any time that my life depends on it. 30-30 is rarely going to down a bear in one shot or hit a target outside of 200 yards effectively... in that sense, it is NOT a general purpose round. A short length barrel, synthetically stocked, bolt action rifle fits the bill for nearly any SHTF scenario...

 

As an added aside, having a milsurp bolt action carbine gives you a decent rifle you can use out of the box. Improving on it for a few hundred dollars still keeps it worlds cheaper than an AR or AK with the same benefits, and improves it all the more.

Edited November 12, 2013 by kylexander

[Guest kylexander]

Might I also add that using less ammo is key when ammo is at a premium. If the round doesn't always do what you need it to do with one shot, it should be out of the running.

[Handsome Rob]

Again, I don't think you've ever handled or shot firearms & you're talking out of your hole.

I'm betting you learned ballistics from watching 'Shooter'

 

If the 5.56 is so poor, why do NATO nations still insist that it's fine? If .30-30 is so poor &a unavailable, how is it that Walmart ALWAYS has it? My local gas station ALWAYS has it & I've yet to find it at more than $.75 per round??? How is it that the .30-30 has killed (many times over) EVERY SINGLE animal in the US, reliably & consistently since 1891??? Lever guns unreliable? How about all the Winchester 1873s that are STILL going? The gun that won the West earned it's reputation for a reason.

 

Another question.......What in the hell are you actually expecting to happen? Because I'll bet you everything I own that it ain't gonna.

[Guest kylexander]

I think you're a stuck up, old, crotchy guy who thinks his time with firearms makes him an expert, which I can already tell that you are not. Governments are stubborn. Replacing rifles they bought previously in large orders is not something they look to do. Your statement seems to assume that governments... and NATO, know best. That is laughable. Why is it that they also chose 7.62x51 as a nato round... hell, I'll tell you... to get the job done... something that 5.56 does not always do.

 

Walmart is not going to be open in a serious SHTF scenario, and 20 or so boxes is not going to last you very long. I never said lever guns were unreliable, I simply said they weren't as reliable as a bolt action. Given that they have more parts and the action is more complex, that should be a given. I think that perhaps you have never worked on either action, and only fired them.

 

30-30 has killed a lot of different species. That is not being debated. A 22 short could kill anything alive. That doesn't mean it does it reliably and with few shots...

 

Betting that "it" is not going to happen is a big mistake, and history has seen that philosophy fail time and again. Plan for the worst, hope for the best. Those lever actions were all probably taken care of and rarely left their safes. Show me several lever guns that have survived combat, and I will show you 10 fold more bolt guns that have done the same.

 

This was never intended to be a flame war. It was intended to discuss what guns that are inexpensive would be most useful. I am starting to think that I have probably worked on more actions than you have fired. You seem to be stuck in your ways because a 30-30 lever gun has served you well for so long. It would definitely work in a pinch... that does not imply it is the best choice.

[Guest kylexander]

On a more intricate discussion... the rifle that won the west could have been any rifle. It was the most modern and capable of the day, being the lever action, that served this rule. Many animals had never been close to humans upon the conquering of the west... and those that had lived largely in conjunction with them and were hunted with weapons like the bow, spear, etc. I seriously doubt you know much about history, but consider for a moment that most of the animals in the west had never seen a firearm of any type, and had not yet developed a full evolutionary fear of humans and their weapons. Inside of 100 yards, the 30-30, albeit slow, is effective. If it hadn't been, they would not have used it.

 

No army that I know of with the exclusion of the Russians ever fielded lever actions shortly after the invention of the bolt rifle... I wonder why? Could it be that combat demanded a more reliable weapon, with a more effective round?

 

I should add that I would not consider the bolt-action truly invented until the introduction of the G93 action, which set the standard for modern bolt guns.

Edited November 12, 2013 by kylexander

[79troublehead]

Well, That went well, didn't it?

[whitewolf001]

I think you're a stuck up, old, crotchy guy who thinks his time with firearms makes him an expert, which I can already tell that you are not. Governments are stubborn. Replacing rifles they bought previously in large orders is not something they look to do. Your statement seems to assume that governments... and NATO, know best. That is laughable. Why is it that they also chose 7.62x51 as a nato round... hell, I'll tell you... to get the job done... something that 5.56 does not always do.

 

Walmart is not going to be open in a serious SHTF scenario, and 20 or so boxes is not going to last you very long. I never said lever guns were unreliable, I simply said they weren't as reliable as a bolt action. Given that they have more parts and the action is more complex, that should be a given. I think that perhaps you have never worked on either action, and only fired them.

 

30-30 has killed a lot of different species. That is not being debated. A 22 short could kill anything alive. That doesn't mean it does it reliably and with few shots...

 

Betting that "it" is not going to happen is a big mistake, and history has seen that philosophy fail time and again. Plan for the worst, hope for the best. Those lever actions were all probably taken care of and rarely left their safes. Show me several lever guns that have survived combat, and I will show you 10 fold more bolt guns that have done the same.

 

This was never intended to be a flame war. It was intended to discuss what guns that are inexpensive would be most useful. I am starting to think that I have probably worked on more actions than you have fired. You seem to be stuck in your ways because a 30-30 lever gun has served you well for so long. It would definitely work in a pinch... that does not imply it is the best choice.

 

Um, that's NOT true, like at all... the 7.62 was adopted first under NATO, the Brits were one of the first to have a rifle roll out which was the FAL, the Spanish were right there with them with the CETME and the US with the M14. Some nations in the UN were weary of it as it being "excessively" too powerful but it was adopted nonetheless. The US then decided to go and do their own research during the 1950's in conjunction with ArmaLite that would ultimately introduce another less expensive NATO cartridge which other nations then adopted which was the 5.56x45mm. To say that the round is "impotent" is highly incorrect, a problem that many soldiers saw during conflicts that made it impotent against soft targets was the usage of M855(SS109) which would just pin-hole the target, there was no fragmentation at all or yawing until roughly 8" of penetration. The 5.56 cartridge is less adequate for longer ranges as the light bullet doesn't carry enough kinetic energy to deliver a one shot stop. Within 200 yds though using a standard 55gr ball round which WILL fragment as it was designed to, I have no doubts that it could facilitate a one shot stop though pending distance you may have to follow up with another shot. If one were using anti-personel rounds the percentage of a one shot stop will more than triple but that's not to say it WILL put the threat down in one shot, just more LIKELY.

 

I agree with your statement in that for a SHTF weapon, that WalMart isn't going to be open but again, understand this, you live in Tennessee, one of the biggest gun states per capita in the union, you WILL find 30-30, granted not near as much as 5.56 or 7.62 but it will be around.

 

Comparing the lethality of a .22 to 30-30 is just asinine... shot placement is key but going off the military/police standard, lets put a round of each into a target in the center of mass and see which one produces more damage. Mass+Speed=Force and last I checked 30-30 travels at 2200ft/s(average) and weighs 150 grains compared to .22lr 1200ft/s and 30-40gr.

 

Not to trying be an @$$, just pointing out the flawed logic in your theories. ^_^

Edited November 12, 2013 by whitewolf001

[McGarrett]

Kyle, it seems your request for suggestions has turned into an argument to convince others of your views. There are a lot of great options out there that fit your need for an inexpensive SHTF rifle. If you truly want to hear the other's opinions you might do better just taking in what they are suggesting instead of attempting to tear them down. 

 

I have run across a lot of knowledgeable guys on the forums here at TGO. Whether it be an AR platform, levergun, M1, bolt action, etc I am sure many can speak from experience about firearms they either currently own or have owned in the past, or that they may have used during military service or on the job as an leo. To effectively make use of this vast knowledge one may have to set aside his own views for a minute and consider what is being said. "Wisdom is the reward you get for a lifetime of listening when you'd have preferred to talk." Doug Larson.

 

Good luck with your quest for a .308 SHTF rifle.

[gregintenn]

If you already know so much, why are you asking for suggestions? $300 probably won't get you a reliable rifle with the characteristics you've named. You might consider saving some more money and getting a Springfield M1a or a Steyr Scout rifle. Buy all the ammo you think you need to single handedly whip whatever army or mob you are planning for. I'm not sure where you plan to "scrounge for ammo" but most people I know who own it wouldn't be very receptive to your idea.

 

I'm always entertained by the new guys who know more than the rest of us. How old are you? Late teens I'm guessing.

Edited November 12, 2013 by gregintenn

[dcloudy777]

Wow, this pretty quickly went from a pretty decent discussion about general purpose rifles into gun store commando prattle.

 

I'm looking for a 13 shot .45ACP pistol that weighs less than 12 ounces, fits in a pants pocket, and has soft recoil and a really good trigger.  Oh, I'm not looking to spend more than about $250...

 

:squint:

[nightrunner]

This thread reminds me of the saying about cars. Cheap, fast, reliable. Pick two because you cant have all three.

You can have all the characteristics you want for a rifle but it wont be cheap. Or you can compromise on something else. If you could have it all, everybody would have it.

Also, Mad Max was a movie not real life or an accurate look into the future.

[jcluff]

Also, Mad Max was a movie not real life or an accurate look into the future.

Heresy! I fully expect to be running from bands of hooligans trying to toss me into a thunder dome.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[broox]

Break a deal, Face the wheel.

[RichardR]

Who I ask who among us doesn't dream of being refered to as "Lord Humongus"?

[TrickyNicky]

Who I ask who among us doesn't dream of being refered to as "Lord Humongus"?

Well if its coming from the ladies.... .... ..

[nightrunner]

Im personally waiting to finally bag a mutant-zombie-biker-man-bear-pig

[Handsome Rob]

Manbearpig is REAL! I'm suuuper serial.

[Guest 5Legion]

Check out the Howa 1500 Ranchland. Holds 5+1 in 308, handy, and more accurate than I can shoot. Nice trigger and smoth bolt. Love mine, in fact. I sold my Ruger Gunsite after shooting one. Can be had for under five bills if you shop around on GB.

[Guest kylexander]

I do want opinions, but when I was asked to justify my views, I was attacked time and time again as being a firearms enthusiast in theory. The comparison of 22 short to 30-30 was to speak on the idea that any round will do the job if necesaary and used in the right way. It was not a comparison of ballistics or a propostion that the 22 was in any way superior to the 223. I don't agree with the idea that 223 is superior to 308, but I will say either round is superior to 30-30 as a general purpose round. I have taken on a lot from others' opinions. The opinion that I have never shot or owned a firearm though is a step to far and a blatant attack without cause. 223 is not a general purpose cartridge, and, having fired it, I am not impressed with its stoppping power. As far as I am concerned, I have gained all the opinions necessary to further develop an opinion of my own.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

[Guest kylexander]

I think it is funny that people are insulted because one guy kept pushing that the 30-30 was the best all around cartridge of all time and that other's feel inclined to argue against quoted statements that never occured. If you think a 30-30 is the best huntung/combat round... use it. That doesn't mean it is a good suggestion. Assuming new people to the forums know nothing about firearms is fuuny too. I didn't know being a long term member in these specific forums was paramount to undersranding weapons, or I never would have joined.

223 is an underpowered, small round. Get over it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

[Handsome Rob]

Get over yourself.
.223 is nowhere near an underpowered round. Have you actually, really, truly seen what the NATO 5.56 round does to a person? IN person? ......

Didn't think so.

I and many others here have done so. Personally & extensively.

I have never said that the .30-30 is the 'perfect' all round cartridge, I just simply opined that it was very capable, affordable & widespread. I also only opined that the rifles fit every one of your criteria, removable magazine excepted. They're rugged, reliable, well proven, adequately powerful & fit your price point.
I became argumentative simply because you were obviously looking for an argument & I'm nothing if not obliging.
Also, just to clarify a point: I'm 39 years old, a lifelong hunter & a British Army infantry veteran. I was an armorer.
Please don't lecture me further on my lack of firearms knowledge. I was doing it for a living in stressful & real SHTF situation while, I assume, you were still on the tit.

[TrickyNicky]

Just to throw it out there, when your talking about getting a Nagant and cutting off this or that to lighten it up, then still have to remount a front site, have you considered just ponying up for an M44 or type 53? You can get one of either plus a fairly decent start on an ammo hoard for $300. Plus they're compatible with the archangel stock.

No need to cut up a classic rifle when what you want has already been available for almost 70 years.

Now that you mention cleaning one up, I wonder what a really competent gunsmith/machinist could do to smooth out some of the sharp edges in the Nagant action. As the receiver sits one could probably jewel the bolt and still not see much improvement.

[Guest kylexander]

Alright robtatoo, can we just agree to disagree. We are 6 years apart. I guess your aditional 6 years give you a superior opinion.

The 5.56, at least by many American servicemen's standards, does not have the stopping power to be ideal for combat in the middle east. It is a good round for what it was conceived to do. That is, allow a flat trajectory and easy, quick follow up shots. It is ideal for an automatic weapon and when ammunitions are in no short supply.

30-30 is not available where I am. We had 3 months with not a lick of 30-30 to be found. It is also not very useful beyond 125 yards. I love lever guns and I like 30-30 for hunting deer here around Clarksville. I just would prefer a round that has more stopping power at greater distances.

I appreciate your opinion and your input. I still feel there was no cause for you to go on the attack and assume so many false ideas. I have shot deer with .223 and watched them run for kilometers before dying. I just don't believe it would have been the case with a heavier round with more power. Edited November 13, 2013 by kylexander