Roughest, toughest, durable rifle ever built?

[spartacus2002]

But for the price issue, an M1A would fit your requirements perfectly.

 

[spurrit]

rE: CZ GUY AND MILO

Most terrorists do NOT get the concept of aiming. If you had EVER shot an AK-47, you'd know they are more than adequate to engage enemies within 500 yds. Personally, I don't care for them, but, in the scenario we're looking at, they are ideal. FYI, they can also be rebarelled in common calibers. Not sure which, but I think .308 and .30-06 would work.

 

[Lee F]

I'm not to join in on the elk hunting or terrorist discussions about AK's, but you need to rid yourself of the easy to repair illusion right now. I have a thread going in the gunsmith section now about trying to repair AK fire control problems. As we speak Tapco, one of the largest US AK parts suppliers, is back ordered until sometime in March for US made fire control parts. AK parts have never been plentiful in the US and finding another AK variant may or may not yield interchangeable parts. They are only three or four reliable sources for AK piece parts and they operate on a feast or famine cycle. I will freely admit that a five year old could install the correct parts if they were on hand. I’ll also admit that if you can find an AK that wasn’t butchered coming into the US it will be reliable and durable. Still nothing with that many moving parts will provide long-term service like a Mauser, Enfield, or Mosin Nagant.

 

[Domino]

Most terrorists do NOT get the concept of aiming. If you had EVER shot an AK-47, you'd know they are more than adequate to engage enemies within 500 yds. Personally, I don't care for them, but, in the scenario we're looking at, they are ideal. FYI, they can also be rebarelled in common calibers. Not sure which, but I think .308 and .30-06 would work.

Their comments were about the inapropiate comments you made in your previous post and not your opinion on a SHTF rifle. But, what exactly makes you the counterterrorist expert here? I assure you that the terrorist in Iraq shooting at civilians and troops with Al Kadish rifles are aiming to hit their targets. Thats just about the only type of small arms engagements bieng used in Iraq right now by terrorist, the rest is virtually all bombings.

The only reason the AK-47 is been reproduced as much as it has is because of the proliferation of Russian arms that was done on a massive scale during the Cold War. Terrorist around the world use whatever is available and not what is best as they have very limited resources. The AK-47 is a fine weapon but I believe the 7.62X39 is poorly adequate for large game at distances over 100 meters. Any cartridge thats got a 150-200g bullet and sends it around 2500-2800 fps would be just fine for large game IMHO.

 

[capnrik]

Here is my vote.....

 

[Marshall]

I wonder why Wal-Mart dosn't sell 7.62x39

The Chinese will take care of that soon.

 

[Red Tornado]

A few people mentioned a Mauser, rebarreled to 30-06, with aftermarket peep sights. That's trying to make it an 03A3.

Of the suitable guns I have, I love the M1, the SKS, and the Mosin, but I'd go with the 03A3. Not claiming it's the be all, end all, but it would be my choice. Great sights, 30-06, proven, etc.

I could make an argument for the M1 and SKS also, and wouldn't feel undergunned or unloved with either one. BTW, Wal-Mart around here sells 7.62x39. But they have a lot more 30-06.
RT

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I'd have to go with some form of Mauser '98 rebarrelled to whatever the commonly available caliber was in my area - probably .308 or .30-06 in North America. Although I would also take a look at the SMLEs in .308...

Semi-autos have come a long way in terms of reliability and durability; but they have more moving parts and are more subject to ammo-related issues than bolt guns are.

 

[armoredman]

Hmm, didn't mean to start anything - who is Walter Mitty, and why am I supposed to be fantasizing about him, anyway? Sicko....
I am thinking the SKS will fit the bill for now, as 7.62x39 is a decent mid range cartridge, but light for deer and other large game. In the mean time, I have two Mosins, another on the way soon, and some ammo, which is definately better than harsh language.....
Who started this whole elk, thing? We have no elk in Tucson, not that I am aware of, unless I am hunting at the zoo....
Wouldn't mind an Enfield, but since the majority seems leaning towards a Springfield 1903 or a Garand, I may began the saving/looking for one soon.
Thanks, all!

PS, That whole lever rifle idea has merit too .....why do I see a whole buncha guns in my future??? Yeah, like that's a bad thing....

 

[Kurt]

An actual milsurp Mauser, or AK style would be two very good places to start for the rifle you seek.

While I don’t believe you mentioned reliability, it was certainly implied by your words. In that case, I would NOT choose the Remington 700 series of boltguns, due to it’s extractor design and the real history of problems occasionally found there.

Lever guns need not apply due to their less-strong buttstock/receiver junction.

 

[444]

"444, I think you're getting too caught up in what the best "elk rifle" would be. "

So what is the excuse for all the other people who responded to this thread and chose a bolt action rifle in either .308 or .30-06 ?

 

[Boats]

My survival rifle is a Marlin .357 Mag Carbine. Why? Because it is tough and light and the ammo is literally everywhere. Did I mention that it is short and handy too? In a pinch, it could be concealed, in the open it is unimposing in that it doesn't scream out "INSTANT DEATH." though it is perfectly capable of such. With the right ammo it is .30-30 equivalent at any range I'd likely hunt at, still put a serious hurt on someone in soft body armor, through backside deformation if nothing else, and it can make a surprisingly high volume of fire for at least a short while. I am working on getting a reflex sight and scout rail. Plus as someone mentioned, I get my revolver with compatible ammo in the bargain. Plus at $300.00 if I crack the stock on someone's noggin, I am not going to cry about my loss and maybe duct tape would fix it right up.

I have a Garand, a few bolts in various calibers and am working on an AR-15. I'd still take the carbine because I've actually humped those other rifles and really like a six pound rifle that is "good enough" for most applications of a rifle. I also don't harbor many illusions of surviving any shoot-out unscathed fighting all by myself.

 

[Texian Pistolero]

I have no strong feelings here, but I recall that the Israeli's converted a slew of 98 Mausers to 7.62 NATO/ .308 Winchester.

If you could find a copy of that "done well",

(and frankly, I don't know if such exists,)

then that rifle would meet your specifications.

Experts, come back.

 

[Fred Fuller]

One of the South American countries rebarreled some 98s in 7.62 NATO also, IIRC, dunno who.

I have one of the Israeli 98s in 7.62 converted into a pseudo- Scout several years ago. Loads with stripper clips, has backup irons, light, short, accurate, powerful, mechanically simple, minimum of parts and easily detail stripped, parts easily replaced if necessary and widely available. It's a very user friendly rifle. I think it would fill the bill nicely. YMMV,

lpl/nc

 

[KaceCoyote]

I think really, you shouldnt expect to hit a man at 500 yards with an AK. Not because the rifle is somehow unable to do it, but because the ammo just cant do it. For big game, I wouldnt trust an Ak beyond a hundred yards.


That said, even a cheap AK with a cheap supertough removable(with retainable zero) optic should be able to pop medium game out to about 200 yards with relative ease. I think in this context the AK is best compared with the marlin 336 than the M1A. The calibers make a one to one comparison tough.

as to the firecontrol business on the Ak, that seems simply -outrageous- considering there are atleast five companies offhand who will be happy to help you get parts for your AK. I've never had any problems, any getting parts for mine save the real nice polymer magazines.


Anyone mentioned a dragunov yet? Light, tough as an Ak, chambers a .308, is accurate out to 700 yards, comes with super tough neverdie optics, easy to work on and maintain, magazine fed to boot. A nice one can be had for about 650 bucks, optics included.

 

[Lonestar.45]

444, to answer your question "So what is the excuse for all the other people who responded to this thread and chose a bolt action rifle in either .308 or .30-06 ?"

They never stated the reason they chose it was because it could shoot an elk at 400 yds. That scenario, for probably most people on this board, in a survival situation or not, would never present itself. Talk about a "Walter Mitty fantasy". To most people, that would be one.

 

[brickboy240]

I'd have to say the SKS and the 98 Mauser are tops. The Mosin Nagant is a close third.

The Lee Enfield is tough too, but it loses ground on the Mausers for the cheesy extractor spring. The 03 Springfield loses ground, because of its two piece firing pin and flimsy front sight.

-Brickboy240

 

[444]

"That scenario, for probably most people on this board, in a survival situation or not, would never present itself. Talk about a "Walter Mitty fantasy". To most people, that would be one."
Well, that may be true. However, I wasn't answering the question for most of the people on this board. I was answering the question as if I was the guy asking it. The fellow asking the question lives in Arizona. The vast majority of Arizona is wide open country. Arizona also has big game animals that range from at least three different spiecies of deer, to bear, to elk. Since the question if geared toward "survival" this changes the complexion of the situation a little more. This isn't hunting. This isn't about being sporting. It is about reducing any animal you see to possession.
Moving on, the question basically asks for a rifle that suits two purposes. The primary purspose is hunting and the secondary purpose is personal defense. It would be appropirate to look at the primary mission first. Ok, so what rifles are normally used by hunters ? If you went to Arizona and polled 100 serious, successful hunters, what kind of rifle would they say they used for hunting ? I have never done such a poll, but my guess would be a bolt action rifle. Assuming this is true, it stands to reason that the best rifle for the primary purpose is a bolt action rifle. But, will this still fulfill the secondary purpose also ? Well, bolt action rifles have seen a lot of military combat including WWI, and WWII. Bolt action rifles are still used today in military combat. So, I think we could get by with a bolt rifle for the secondary purpose also. It wouldn't be the absolute best rifle for this, but it would work.
He also sts that cost is an issue. This leaves out the expensive .308 MBRs.

Just one man's opinion.





When someone asks a question like this, I actually put some thought into it and resist the urge to simply name my favorite gun. The gentleman whole posted the question lives in Arizona. A lot of Arizona is wide open country. Arizona boasts big game animals

 

[cookekdjr]

Pcf said:
My idea of a "survival rifle" and yours probably differ, but have you thought about a .22LR

1. Durability, it's not easy to break a quality firearm if your not abusive. A 1000 rounds of link 7.62 weighs in at 70lbs, 5.56 is close to 40lbs. Don't have a weight for .22lr but they're not heavy and small in size.
2/3/4. Nothing is more common or available in the US.
5. Available in every shape, size and style
6. Being proven in combat, doesn't translate to ideal on or off the battlefield.
7/8. no problem there
9. Go to an ER and ask how lethal .22lr's are. Whitetail dear and smaller are very doable with a .22
10. at $8.70 for five hundred rounds it doesn't get much cheaper.

You know, he may be right. As I read the criteria, I kept thinking about a bolt action or lever action .22. Its probably what I would choose.
David

Edited to add: seeing 444's post, I realize our topic-starter lives in Arizona. He may need more range than a .22lr can offer.
D

 

[rbernie]

444

Your response was not ill-thought-out nor inappropriate, save for one detail. The original poll asked for weapons that had an established military pedigree. Maybe you could stretch that to include the Rem700, but given the tenor of the question most folks interpreted that to mean "a rifle that has seen former use as a front-line battle weapon". In that light, the only bolties that qualify are the Enfields and Mausers and such - not the Savages and their ilk from the local WallyWorld.

Frankly, if I had to choose one 'go-to' survival rifle based on my criteria - I'd pick a .223 CRF boltie carbine with a good receiver-mounted peep sight. Why?

1) 223/5.56 NATO is probably the most ubiquitous round out there
2) 223/5.56 NATO will do less meat damage than a larger-bore on small/mid-size critters (which are likely to be the majority of your diet)
3)223/5.56 NATO is still large enough for anti-personnel use (unlike 22LR beyond 50yards or so)
4) The resulting rifle and ammo would be light enough to carry for 10-15 miles a day and not kill me in the process
5) I'd feel comfortable that the rifle would be rugged enough for extended use in an environment without maintenance facilities

But that's not what ArmoredMan asked for, so that's not what I suggested to him.

 

[saltydog452]

'MSR'..Main survival rifle?

What pcf said.

Guess it depends on whatever it is that you are trying to survive.

My choice would be a Marlin 39. Its quiet with std velocity ammunition. More accurate than I can shoot. Easy to clean from the breech. Ammo easy to find and carry.

salty.

 

[jwhisler]

I wonder why Wal-Mart dosn't sell 7.62x39

They sell it here in WV.

I bought a box of Remington express, 20 rds. for $14.95

then kicked myself in the @$$ when I went next door and saw just as good ammo from Dunhams Sports for $2.50/20 rds.



I'd have to say a 22 mag. The ammo is a little more expensive than the 22lr but not by much

 

[AZ Jeff]

The original poster talks about "survival", and then everyone chimes in about this or that rifle, without asking a key question--survival WHERE?

Survival in the middle of Fallujah requires a different choice than survival in the Northwest Territories of Canada.

Everyone clamoring for a combloc weapon probably would do well in surviving in Iraq (if they had the right combat skills), but would probably be dead shortly if they intended to HUNT GAME with that same weapon. Likewise, a bolt action sporting rifle or converted military rifle would do well in hunting big game, but would be rendered ineffectual in lone gunman scenarios in downtown Fallujah.

Personally, I would not want to be "on my own" in Fallujah (or the like) with ANYTHING, since I would outgunned no matter what if I was a one man band. On the other hand, I figure my chances are decent in upper Canada with any normal big game rifle.

 

[Cosmoline]

AZ has a good point. That was my thinking behind the Romak-3. It's excellent for battle or hunting.

 

[spurrit]

CZ and Milo.......

:banghead: CZ guy and Milo, :banghead: you knowest not *** you speak about. Idig. personnel(muslim) REFUSE to aim their rifles because they figure that if a bullet hits you, but they weren't aiming at you, God did it. That's why it's so easy to arrange a meeting with him for them! If you had ever shot anything but your mouth, and tried out an AK-47, you'd realise that they are surprisingly accurate. Also, most parts can be made by hand for this rifle. No gas rings to get eaten up w/ sand, etc. You can, literally, drop one in the mud, hose it off, and shoot it!