The best survival rifle

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wag and Vince44 may have the idea with the .44s: general .30-30 utility under 125 yds, but more ammo. Otherwise, most of the answers have been pretty good--for different "survival" scenarios. The .22LR posts have real merit, as do the 7.62x39 and .30-30 oriented suggestions.

I usually find these threads more interesting when some sort of "condition" is placed on the scenario..such as,

Given one of the following conditions/scenarios, you are quickly able to pick from one "sacthel" you've prepared - for that eventuality - before you are thrust into the scenario. Otherwise, you are suddenly thrust into an unknown condition for an indeterminate period of time "somewhere" unknown other than it is either

a) rural - and not generally due to social upheaval, at least that is not an overriding part of your survival concern...in which case:
- .22LR in a 10-22 with 25 rd mag or even my trusty Win 69A bolt (ca 1959) with 10 rd banana mag has great merit. The Win bolt (you can insert CZ or Rem, etc, of your choosing) never ever has failed beyond quick repair (jam)...and wouldn't be expected to in this scenario. Paired with 4-3/4 Single Six or 1911/.45 with .22 kit if rules allow a 2nd (side) arm.
- Honorable mention - Win .30-30 24" round bbl with tang peep, with a Single Six .22 on the hip.
or
b) It is a social disruption situation either of unknown location (not specified as urban or rural) re you're eventual whereabouts,
- 7.62x39 in the new Mini 30 Tactical (synthetic, 16") with above 1911 .45/.22 on hip if permitted.
or
c) It is a sitution due to social disruption and is specifically stated urban or rural...
- Urban - Beretta CX .40 carbine, paird with PX in same caliber if permitted.
- Rural - above mentioned Mini 30 Tactical, paired with a 1911 .45/.22. I might choose the Mini 30 this for the urban scenario as well if expecting regular need > 75 yds.
 
I thought the article was fairly straight forward.....
I would go with the .308 or .223 myself... :eek:
I live in a military town so those two calibers should be around :confused:

Lateck,
 
I was pondering... I think 4 guns would do for almost every scenario.
1) 22 pistol with medium barrel. Leaning toward Single-Six, but as long as its accurate and reliable.
2) 22 rifle. I like bolt guns like my CZ 452 because they're simple and accurate. 10/22 or Marlin Model 60 is also a good choice.
3) 44 magnum revolver 4-5 inch barrel. DA if possible.
4) 44 magnum lever gun. Medium length barrel.

All guns in stainless if possible. With that setup you have economy and power. Practically any predator, two or four footed, in North America can be dispatched with the 44 out of either weapon, and the carbine gives you range to approach large game. The 22s would be your bread and butter, I think.
 
Let's see, you're cold, haven't eaten in days, unwashed and out of your element and in no condition for a chase or trackin job. There is a 50 lbs dog or a deer or a cat or a whatever at 100 yards.......And you want a .22 in your hands? What about 150 yards? What about 200 yards?

LK
 
Easy. I wouldn't be hungry, I'd likely not be that cold, and the (fill in animal of your choice) would never know I was there unless I got careless. What I wouldn't be is out of ammo 6 months down the road, or weighed down by the 1000 or so rounds I could still be carrying around.
 
Their premise about ammo availability has never struck me a likely. After a few days of out and out survival, I don't think anyone in a city environment is going to find anything useful in any sporting goods store, let alone common ammo supplies.

I makes more sense to me to select a caliber that you reload for and ensure that you have stocked up on components. That way you can make it as you need it. Even if my home is flattened, I have enough ammo already made in every caliber I own that if I can get my firearms out, I've got more than I can carry ready to go with them.
 
RossiTrifecta.jpg


Rossi Trifecta: 20 ga, .243 and .22 lr, all in an easy breakdown package. Fits in a small backback and will take any 2 legged or 4 legged beast as needed. :D

Shooting .22 shorts in this is almost a silenced weapon. My bb gun is louder!
 
Easy. I wouldn't be hungry, I'd likely not be that cold, and the (fill in animal of your choice) would never know I was there unless I got careless. What I wouldn't be is out of ammo 6 months down the road, or weighed down by the 1000 or so rounds I could still be carrying around.
Click to expand...

You are over estimating your ability to shoot in a stressful situation, you are over estimating your ability to hunt, you are over estimating the amount of available critters remaining alive and your are over estimating the power of the .22. It's on the verge of being mall ninja like.

The facts are that a .22 will kill just about anything. It can do it in dramatic fashion. But all the stars have to line up right and in a catastrophe, severe economic downturn, etc etc things will go wrong. I suppose your the type that thinks you can center a shot in the brain pan every time in a SD scenario too? This is not going out in your buddies field at night with a 12 pack, a gun and a light a shooting a deer. This would be life and death and egos needs to be left at home.

Why in the heck anyone would think a .22 is fine for deer or any other critter over 20 lbs or over 75 yards away in survival when they wouldn't take it deer hunting is besides me. You tell me, in which situation is it more important to have enough gun?

The ability of carrying lots of ammo has merit but it's the only advantage to a .22. It's also why I say carry an accurate .22 pistol (and know how to shoot it beyond SD ranges) and a centerfire rifle or a shotgun.
 
Last edited:
Why in the heck anyone would think a .22 is fine for deer or any other critter over 20 lbs or over 75 yards away
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if anyone here believes that a .22 in LR or Mag is considered fine(enough) for game larger than maybe coyotes within a reasonable range. This is taking in to account our present beliefs and ideals though.
 
But in dire times of need, everyone is forced to adjust and make do with what we can. And in those times, sometimes bigger is not better. Sometimes bigger is less (less available ammo). The small .22 has taken larger game than coyotes and has defended many a man. And if the only available game on a given day were maybe a small rabbit or large squirrel, would you really want to hit it with that 7.62x--?
 
Everybody advocating only larger calibers is forgetting three things:

1) Most people don't have the income to store away a lifetime supply of ammo or reloading components for larger calibers (In fact, the overwhelming major don't reload!). On the other hand, I managed to accumulate several thousand rounds of 22lr during the worst part of the ammo shortage without breaking the bank.

2) In the event of a food-distribution breakdown, large game would be hunted to lower numbers very rapidly. There are lots of deer out there now. What happens when every Tom, Dick, and Harry that didn't die in food riots in the cities starts taking shots at Bambi?

3) If this is a lost-in-the-woods scenario, 60 rounds of .223 or 500 rounds of 22lr is going to be a darn sight better than 30 rounds of .308. The simple fact is, you can only carry so much, and you can only eat so much meat at one time or store it for so long. In a wilderness survival scenario, you're better off being able to reliably take the small stuff repeatedly than the large stuff a couple times.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top