Any Choices Other than .308/.223?

[Sheridan]

In almost everything I read on the net or in the gun rags, it seems the only choices for a SHTF/TEOTWAWKI rifle are in .308 or .223.

I know all the arguements about the availability of cheap ammo, surplus rifles in these calibers, etc. But I would hazard a guess that most gunny guys already have something in the middle range of choices (i.e.- 25-06, 7x57, .260, .270. .280. .30-06. 7 mm Rem.) that would be serve well in these types of scenarios.

When you're trying to raise a family, there's seldom extra money floating around to spend on another rifle, scope, and other accoutrements. Using something you already own would result in a significant cost reduction for acquiring a new rifle and ammo, or dies and components, if you reload.

On the other hand, I ran some quick numbers last night thinking about this. If you buy enough components to load 1000 rounds, using semi-premium bullets (i.e.- Nosler Accubond or Barnes XBT), the cost is around $625 ($380-400 for bullets, ~$25 for primers, two pounds of powder @ ~$25/pound, and $15/100 for brass).

If you have to spend that much on ammo components to get up to 1000 rounds (the minimum the "experts" say you should have), would you be better off to buy an inexpensive .308 or .223 and surplus ammo, or just bite the bullet rolleyes: ), keep your old faithful shooter, and roll your own?

 

[Mr. Chitlin]

I don't load blasting ammo for my 223 or 308 any more. I can buy 223 for 10 cents a round, and 308 for around 15 cents a round (surplus) so it isn't worth it to load. When the South Afrikan M193 was still available, it could be purchased for $279/2700. I loaded up on several cases of it. 7.62x51 Portuguese and Austrailian surplus is now available for around $160/1000. Now, the only reloading I do in these calibers is my hunting ammo, and a couple hundred rounds gets me through the season. I haven't bought bulk bullets in a while, but I was buying the 150 grain Remington PSP-CL in 1000 bulk. They weren't too expensive. Primers run ~$15/1000, and a few cans of powder should get you going for probably 200-300 dollars.

For SHTF ammo, I don't think I would personally load premium bullets. FMJ or bulk bullets would do just fine for me, but to each his own.

In the situation you described, I'd rather have a few hundred of the caliber that you own on hand than no ammo at all.

 

[lee n. field]

~$25 for primers, two pounds of powder @ ~$25/pound, and $15/100 for brass).

You're paying too much for powder. You're paying too much for primers.

You wouldn't be buying 1000 cases. You'd be buying 100-200, or using 100-200 range scavanged cases, and reloading them.

 

[DMK]

In almost everything I read on the net or in the gun rags, it seems the only choices for a SHTF/TEOTWAWKI rifle are in .308 or .223.

What's wrong with 7.62x39? At $70-80 a case it's certainly economical and most rifles in this caliber are affordable and tough.

If you have to spend that much on ammo components to get up to 1000 rounds (the minimum the "experts" say you should have), would you be better off to buy an inexpensive .308 or .223 and surplus ammo, or just bite the bullet ( ), keep your old faithful shooter, and roll your own?

IMO, the whole SHTF rifle thing is pumped up to sell magazines and feed the Iwannacoolgun epidemic.

If you can stock up on a decent quantity of reliable ammo, have a potent, robust and reliable weapon and most importantly, if you are good with it, then you are a potent adversary to anybody wishing to plunder and pillage in your neck of the woods.

Take the money you'd put into a new rifle and divert it to stock up on secure shelter, water, non-perishable food, first aid supplies, fuel and training.

 

[HankL]

DMK One of the main considerations for the type of application you mention is the availability of ammo. On a battlefield, .223, .308 and 7.62X39 come to mind as good calibers to be shopping for.

 

[Sheridan]

DMK,

There's nothing wrong with something in 7.62x39. I think it's actually a rather valid choice for many of the engagements likely in the scenario I posed.

However, while I don't have one, my understanding of this round in particular, and rifles chambered for it in general, is that it doesn't provide the requisite accuracy for opportunities much beyond 150-200 yards; those that are better covered by the .308s and .223s.

Then again, it's been my experience that most rifles are more accurate than can be taken advantage of by most of the people firing them.

 

[DMK]

However, while I don't have one, my understanding of this round in particular, and rifles chambered for it in general, is that it doesn't provide the requisite accuracy for opportunities much beyond 150-200 yards; those that are better covered by the .308s and .223s.

Optics or better sights would help a lot to get an AK to hit a target out that far. However, I think you hit the real problem though with this statement.

Then again, it's been my experience that most rifles are more accurate than can be taken advantage of by most of the people firing them.

Be aware of the man with only one rifle and lots of practice!

The only issue x39 has might be whether it has enough "umph" at 300 yards and out. However, this is a problem that would be shared by .223/5.56 also.

It sounds like a "full power cartridge" like .308 or something similar is what you want if you live out in the wide open spaces and think 300+ yard shots will be a requirement for you.


BTW: What calibers do you have on hand? Maybe one of them is quite adequate for your needs.

 

[JamisJockey]

Guns you're likely to already have....

7.62x39 comes immediately to mind. Its cheap, there is buttloads of it available, and with the huge popularity of the SKS and AK rifles, there may be some available for barter and trade.

Next, 30-30. Its almost ridiculous how many people own a 30-30 and have a couple boxes of ammo. If you're forced to scrounge, barter, beg or steal this would probably be something you could find easily.
30-06, for the same reasons as 30-30.

.357 lever action. Shoot one, load one. Will kill 2 and 4 legged critters. And shars ammo with pistols. Most will take .38, which gives you three available ammos (.38, .38 +p, .357mag) to choose from. Very common, too.

And don't count out the old faithful .22lr. Cheap as all get out (under $10 for a generic box of 500 rounds), common, and versatile. A child or non-shooting person could easily be accurate with one. Not the first defensive choice, but you can easily store thousands of rounds, and most usually own several guns in this caliber.

Anything that uses magazines means you have to have a good supply of those magazines. Load one shoot one ability, or stripper clips would beat detachable mags in the longrun, IMHO. Leverguns seem like the logical choice, or possibly the SKS.

requisite accuracy for opportunities much beyond 150-200 yards

If SHTF or TEOTWAWKI why draw fire? Survival is the name of the game. 150-200 yards + means you've got time to escape hide or evade.

 

[benEzra]

However, while I don't have one, my understanding of this round in particular, and rifles chambered for it in general, is that it doesn't provide the requisite accuracy for opportunities much beyond 150-200 yards; those that are better covered by the .308s and .223s.

That's generally a function of ammo brand and optics rather than any inherent qualities of the cartridge. The main limiting factor on many 7.62x39 rifles is the sights. With a scope, my SAR-1 will do about 2.5 MOA with Norinco or Wolf ammo, which is decent. Trajectory is more of a challenge (as with the heavier .308 loads) since bullet drop becomes more and more of a factor past 300 yards.

 

[russlate]

We have two examples of 7.62x39 performance.

One is the Stockton schoolyard where Patrick Purdy used ball. No one not hit in a vital organ died. 30 out of 35 shot - 86% survival rate. Equivalent to pistol calibers.

The other was Tienamen square. Hollow points/soft points used. We can only guess, but survival rate was low, we think.

7.62x39 is the cheapest ammo around. Buying it in soft point doesn't add that much. If it is anywhere close in effectiveness to 30-30 pay the few extra bucks for the "hunting ammo".

223 ball in the old loading tended to break at the cannelure on striking flesh. Ball and HP/SP IIRC were about the same range, but apparently no longer from the shortened M4.

7.62x51 NATO ( 308 Win ) is expensive. Even thinking of pulling ball rounds and reseating soft point gets expensive. But over time, you can take it in several easy steps, if you have reloading equipment.

Just in my humble opinion, the best all around light recoiling/high effectiveness caliber is the 7x57. 175 grain ball killed hundreds if not thousands of elephants in the hands of W.D.M. "Karamojo" Bell. If you see an FN49 in 7x57 for sale, it's one of the sweetest semi-auto Main Battle Rifles ever made. I've got 200 rounds of 175 ball on hand for mine. Gotta get back into reloading to build up a good supply of 139 soft points.

In over my head so don't take my ramblings as anything more than one man's opinion.

PS: Just got a Savage 99 in 308, to go along with my FAL/Imbel clone. I want a CZ527 carbine in 7.62x39, and a CZ550 mannlicher stocked 7x57, and the mannlicher stocked CZ527 in 223 is a downright gorgeous piece of art.