Long gun selection for apocalypse
 

One of the apocalyptic scenarios is a breakdown of society, where one may have to defend his family and resources from looters, etc. as well as hunt for food. For home defense, I chose a handgun and a reliable shotgun. For hunting small game and pest control, I chose a bolt-action (for reliability) 22 LR. The 22 LR cartridge is ubiquitous and cheap.

For a high-power rifle, I have in mind, again, a bolt action for the same reliability, but I'm wondering what would be the best round to use. Assuming that the local dealer is closed and looted out, there would be trade, re-loading and scrounging for more rounds. What would you choose? A hunter round like the 30-06 or 30-30, or a military round like 7.62? Any of these would hunt; I think I'm more concerned about replacing and/or re-loading, and the price of a stock. I'm leaning towards the 7.62 since a lot of brass may be laying around.

I'm actually very curious about this question as well. I was just thinking this same thing the other day.

.308 Win.. I've seen enough pumpkins and watermelons after a 308 hit them to understand why it's such a popular hunting round and why some police departments use them for sharpshooters. I imagine it's the most ubiquitous round out there, unless you anticipate lots of yahoos with AKs in your post-apocalyptic world. It's also interchangeable with 7.62x51.

In a post apocalyptic situation, you may need to be mobile instead of staying in one place. Due to that, I'd choose an AR15 with a TA01 on a Quick detach mount, carry along a .22LR conversion kit and an optic zeroed for the .22LR, and make sure I pack 75gr hunting rounds if I ever need to take white tail deer.

While carrying some sort of Remington 700 (7lbs plus weight of scope) in .308 is also ideal
you'd have to figure in the weight of ammo and the like.

If you're staying put in one place, then rock on.
==================================

You could always check out the Colt SP901, a 5.56/308 convertible AR15 due to hit the market mid this year.

Any modern high power round would likely do to bring down deer and black bear, which would be the wild game where I live (upstate NY). What I have in mind is if the societal disruption lasted a year or more; there's the need to replenish the rounds. I would need to do one or more of the following in order to keep ammo:

1. Buy enough stock to last a long time
2. Reload my own brass
3. Trade for more (trade food, my labor, et.)

It's the trading/scrounging that I'm thinking of. I have a neighbor that stocks 30-06 and .243. There's no point in trading if the neighbors don't have the right caliber. I'm not sure trading is even a good alternative. I certainly wouldn't trade away rounds unless I needed something critical like an antibiotic. Maybe I should just forget about trading/scrounging and just make sure I can reload the rounds that I have?

How many rounds would you keep on hand? A couple hundred for hunting and another couple hundred for defense? I'm thinking that if there's a firefight where I expend more than a couple hundred rounds, I'm probably toast anyway.

---------- Post added at 01:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:48 PM ----------

KirStang, I'm assuming that I'll be stationary. I have a defensible home in the mountains. I'd be defending against raiders/refugees from the City. I can feed my family here; on the road, we'd just be another group of refugees.

I honestly don't think much wild game would be around for long in a true oh shit situation...It would be hunted out very, very quickly.

I also believe more dangerous than the immediate risk of starvation will be all the other starving people determined not to die of hunger. Even a very moderate amount of preparation ($20 spent on 40 pounds of rice) will ensure that your food supplies outlast the vast majority of the unprepared population....And hungry people don't typically sit around politely waiting to die.

With that in mind I think I would elect a 5.56 platform for a rifle if I have to pick a do-it-all weapon.

I like the 5.56 because it is 'big enough' for most game in a pinch, is adequate against people, is easy to carry and is abundant. An AR-15 is one of the best defensive rifles on the market. Also, 500 rounds of 5.56 will last a long, long time.


Again thinking along the lines that people will be more dangerous than hunger in a complete breakdown, I would choose a basic handgun in a popular caliber to supplement my rifle.

Still on the people are dangerous line of thought: Even a .22 is noisy enough to attract attention so I would rely on snares for most of my small game collection. Plus, snares have the added benefit of working for you while you are off doing other things. Squirrel poles are extremely efficient in this regard. If you really want a good, survival appropriate small game weapon buy a nice pellet gun. They are quiet, effective against most small game, inexpensive and reliable.

I used to have a thing for .45 colt and I had planned on simply reusing and reloading those cartridges...Then I realized that for the same weight and expense I can buy more 5.56 than I can shoot in a survival situation...remember that you won't normally be blazing away so consumption will be less than a round a day. Like McGeedo suggests, If you get in a gunfight you will win or die long before you go through a basic load.

I own shotguns but don't think they are particularly good for SHTF situations. Chiefly this is because of limited range, very limited combat effectiveness (unless you are inside a building) and the large size/weight of the cartridges which severely limits the number of rounds you can carry with you. I'm not saying a shotgun won't be effective, just that it isn't ideal.

I have a scoped 7.62 battle rifle which I don't expect to get much use out of either. I don't think there will be much game around so the extra 'oomph' won't help me; If I have to shoot someone it will be in defense, so I doubt I will have a need to play sniper; I can carry a much more limited quantity of ammunition; I am much likely to keep an m-4 type weapon on my person than a heavy .762 rifle.

Survival will depend on keeping a low profile, finding food where others can't and being able to defend yourself and your resources against others less fortunate. It won't be about becoming the great white hunter, Mad Max battles, bartering (unless you are bartering away your food surplus), etc. Communities will be very important, but they have to be the right kind of community...If the other members are not self-reliant they will decrease your odds of survival.


Sorry, I am very, very sleepy. I will try to clean this post up a bit after a nap.

My $0.02 (cdn): it's probably highly likely that an "apocalyptic" collapse would be a global economic collapse, which in itself would likely be as a result of a global ecologic collapse.

We're talking failing systems within the biosphere, affecting such things as: migration patterns, weather, sea level, seasonal temperatures, crop yields, fish stocks, etc.

I'd say be prepared to be highly mobile. That's what I'd do.

Be ready to be a nomad.

It's interesting that a couple people have talked about mobility. Here's why I don't think mobility is a good idea.

Regardless of the reason behind the societal collapse (financial, war, eco...) the upshot is that large cities will become uninhabitable. Industry will collapse. Retail and service businesses will collapse. How far they fall and how long they take to recover is arguable, but for some period of time there won't be any food in NYC and there wouldn't be any acceptable currency to buy it if there was any to be bought. So a LOT of very desperate people are going to be on the road. The more violent you are and the closer you are to the leading edge of the wave, the better will be your chances. After a couple weeks, the leading edge will have passed me by and the rest will have starved. The ones who will continue eating over the long term are those who can hunt, stay warm and maybe grow something. America will revert to the early 18th century if the disruption is longer than a few weeks.

To me, being mobile means being a scavenger. And the scavenge will run out. The last grocery store will be stripped, the last gas will be siphoned, and the last of the scavengers will be looking to set themselves up in a way similar to the way I'm already set up.

Anyway, thanks for all the comments. I think my decision on the long gun caliber is whatever sporting round of about .30 that I can most inexpensively stock and equip to reload.

Yeaa... I live in a city. Assuming they don't burn my building down, I'll wait until the initial panic dies down before leaving the city with my canned food, water, medical supplies and firearms at 3:00am.

Eh. America will become the next North Haiti if the disruption is longer than a few weeks. The game animals will be gone in a month. Those that can farm, will. Those that can't, will take. I sincerely doubt that most of the folks with the foresight to prepare themselves for the end of the world (by getting all sorts of cool survival training and stockpiling food, fuel, weapons, etc) will make it 3 months before they get gut shot by some random dude while out hunting.

---

I am going to agree with Kirstang and Slims in saying that an AR that can run both 5.56 and 223 Rem would be solid choice simply because its versatile. It may not be ideal for hunting larger animals, but the AR is well suited to handle most situations including acquiring a tricked out bolt gun from someone else.

---------- Post added at 09:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:35 PM ----------

I bet it is, seeing as how 90% of Canadia's population is living within 90 miles of the US border.

Exactly. I'd like to see you Southerners follow us up into The Great White North.

Don't try to turn this around on me. You know damn well that I was referring to YOUR invasion plans. A murderous blitzkrieg of polar bears and lumberjacks hidden behind a flannel veil of long "o" sounds and politeness.

Well, then, you better damn well hope it's global warming that gets us in the end, and not an ice age....

I sort of disagree. For a couple weeks, urban areas would resemble Haiti or New Orleans, but without massive aid the population in place would begin to die off or leave. I think the only reason that Haiti is still a massive refugee camp instead of a cemetery is the aid.

^^^^^^
This.

I would point out that he has limited choices in ny state, and any weapon he does not own before trouble and train with is likely useless- for NY try an SKS- verastile, ammo is cheap and thus so is training, and stripper clips make for an very fast reload... not as fast as a high cap magazine, but in ny, you are pretty well looking at 10 as a limit without tracking down grandfathered 30 rounders, and those will be pricier than they are worth- an AR is great if you are very precise and or have 30 rounds, but in a combat, unless you have the experience, and often if you do, countless studies show that that headshot aint happening- and the heavier slower 7.62 x 39 round will put em down in one very often, which matters when you got only 10 to work with....

Good points, though the vast majority of 7.62x39 brass that I've seen cannot be reloaded. Something to consider.

If you're stuck with a 10 round limit and don't mind dealing with stripper clips, you might also consider an old M1 Garand. Old issue Garands aren't very expensive. Being chambered in 30-06 means finding ammo will never be an issue.

price though- around here 4 bucks a box for 5.56 steel case or 7.62X39 steel case- and for reloading you can easilly get brass cases, and even berdan primer removers, and converters to make it all work - the garand is great, but finicky on what ammo it likes, without an adjustable gas plug, bent op rods ensue, and ammo in 30/06 is available , but no more so that 7.62 x 39 at this point- and its 16 bucks a box- steel cased, if available was 12 last time I checked.... and if he doesnt shoot it he wont know it, and wont be good enough when it counts, if it counts......
this is also why I like a 9mm pistol - shoot it if you wanna survive having to use it- If the OP can afford the ammo, the go with god on the garand- ps the garand it at least 700 bucks last time I looked, the sks maybe 300 if you do badly......once again, with the 10 round limit, if you can afford it, then no worries, but know the costs first...

I usually hate these types of threads because the discussion is largely masturbatory and they only serve to put gun owners in a bad light.

Turns out I used to be all Cap't Y2K (still am, but in a less Road Warrior kinda way) but I'm starting to think a good .22 LR rifle is all you really need. The rest can be found on the bodies of those that play hero or bartered for by those dimwits who stockpiled guns instead of MREs or antibiotics or booze. The United States is absolutely loaded with firearms. You'll have little problem coming across them assuming scared softies do what they do best: get desperate and turn violent. You won't need firearms nearly as much as the nutjob Armageddon romantics suggest. Instead of wasting tons of money on guns and ammo, put it into training. Training makes the things you do have more useful. It is also substitute for many items. What good is a $1000 rifle if you've never shot it at 300 yards? All the time I run into guys who have $3000 rifles and can't do a single goddamn pull up. Priorities, man.

Think about the kind of things you'll need to know; the tasks you'll have to perform. Do you know how to bandage a gunshot wound? Splint broken bones? How about basic mechanical and electrical repairs? You'll need these things more often than your rifle. Water/food/medicine are things that should be on the list way above weapons. Consistent training will keep you alive, not the White Man's Magical Talisman of an Evil Black Rifle.

...

To stay on topic? I've got a .30-06 bolt, .308 bolt, M1A (M14), AKM, M4, numerous slide shotguns and pistols/revolvers. If I had to take one, it'd be my M4. I've trained on it the most. If nothing else, I know that I can defend myself with it should I run into crazed mohawk'd Walt-with-a-Spear type.

On a budget? A SKS or Mosin Nagant or other WW2 surplus rifle would be a great sealed-PVC-pipe-in-the-back-yard TEOTWAKI rifle.

Thanks to everyone for their thoughts and comments. Thanks to Plan9 and others for their thoughts outside the weapons choice.

The armory:
Bersa .380 ACP - Cheap but reliable, and cheap ammo. No plan to reload; buy more ammo instead. Purpose is to be armed 24/7.

870 in 12 GA. - Cheap, relatively, and reliable. Home/close-in defense and game hunting. No plan to reload, just stock up a bunch of #6 and a few slugs.

SKS - Cheap and reliable. Big game and long range defense. Maybe set up to reload, if that's cheaper than a large stock of ammo.

Henry 22 LR - Not cheap or practical, but sure looks good over the mantle, and gets small game, too. Stock tons of ammo.

Repro black powder rifle (haven't picked it yet). Great over the mantle, too. I assume that the technology to make BP and cast .40 slugs would come back before primers and smokeless. This is the really-long-term survival gun.

Thank you. This is probably the best post I have yet read on Tilted Weaponry.

There is another option. There has been too much violence, too much pain. None here are without sin. But I have an honorable compromise; just walk away. Give me the pump, the oil, the gasoline and the whole compound, and I'll spare your life. Just walk away. I will give you safe passage in the wasteland. Just walk away and there will be an end to the horror.

My god, I love you.

Remove the sexual undertones and connotations and the feeling is mutual.

I wonder if there is some kind of cult that plans suicide in a TEOTWAWKI situation. They'd leave plenty of resources that'd last at first.

But seriously, I think diplomacy would be very important in the end of the world scenario.

Is that what happens when a stranger fucks you in the ass, Walter? You get all touchy and can't handle simple bonhomie?

You mean like Kool-Aid and gauzy white robes? I'm pretty sure you wouldn't want anything that Heaven's Gate had stocked in their pantry, brah.

Whoosh.