Be it warranted or not, I find myself thinking from time to time about how things might be if our socio-economic system crashed, and we wound up fending for ourselves just to survive. There are many possible avenues by which we could get just there, so I don't think it's entirely ridiculous to make at least some mental notes ahead of time. I won't mention the particular faith, but one of the major churches in the United States seems to be doing a helluva lot of preparing for just such an occasion.

And so, when I ponder such events, I find myself wondering which of my rifles I would equip myself with if I had to leave all but one in "safe keeping" somewhere.

My choice would be about the most common, unassuming one of the bunch: My Remington 700 ADL in 30-06.

I've taken to varmint hunting these days with my 270 and this 30-06, both of which have 3 to 9 power scopes. I've decided to do this because I asked myself the question: "What am I really doing when I go into the field in search of crows and groundhogs?" Answer: I'm honing my shooting skills, perhaps to asuage that primal call to keep the hunting abilities sharp. Now I've eaten a lot of crow in my time (figuratively!), but I don't eat groundhogs in this land of plenty venison. So I varmint hunt with my game rifles. It's no big deal to make a 400 yard shot on a groundhog with a 24 power scope mounted on an ultra flat pea-shooting twenty pound rifle. But if and when killing a deer at 350 yards ever stands between you and your family's starvation, you're not likely to accomplish it with your run of the mill varminting rig. Learning to hit tiny targets with your game rifle is conducive to good big game hunting, which may someday be conducive to eating.

So I no longer varmint hunt with pea-shooters! It really serves no large purpose, other than entertainment. And for that matter, I do find it entertaining to disembowel a rodent with a big game rifle.

My Remington 700 has a newly refurbished Leupold 3 to 9 power scope mounted in Leupold rings. The mount is the Redfield JR type, which has the windage adjustable rear ring. The factory iron sights are in place, and the medium height rings allow the scope to clear the rear sight. In the unlikely event that the Leupold would ever fail, all that would be needed to get the rifle back into action would be to use a flat screwdriver or reasonable substitute to loosen the rear ring screws, and the the scope could be removed, allowing access to the iron sights.

The 30-06 is the most popular rifle caliber in the world, bar none. Ammunition for it is more available than any other centerfire rifle chambering out there. I love my 270, and would be very want to take it instead, but the omnipresence of 30-06 ammunition and 30 caliber projectiles, plus the aught-six's uncanny ability to use just about any rifle powder you're likely to find makes it the only choice for a "dooms day" rifle chambering in my opinion. I could lay in a goodly supply of ammo for a lesser known chambering, but supplies are subject to being lost, or prematurely depleated. So the "thirty caliber ball cartridge of 1906" is the best choice, I believe...

My rifle is a 1972 model, and so has a wood stock and blue finish. I would imagine a stainless finish and synthetic stock would make for a better choice, but I'm concerned only with what I currently have. I don't think that the stock and finish would be a real problem, though. For eons, soldiers of all nations have carried wood stocked blue steel rifles into battle with good results.

Though I favor the Winchester Model 70 action, especially the pre64's, I have to admit that what the 30-06 is to rifle chamberings, the Remignton 700 is to rifle actions. Parts would be the easiest to come by, and knowledgable smiths easier to find, it would seem.

Lastly, though it may sound a bit melodramatic, such a rifle could be pressed into service (and would serve aptly, I believe) as a long distance anti-personnel rifle--yes, a sniper rifle if the occasion called for it. This would be one of my reasons for choosing a 3 to 9 power scope over a 2 to 7 or fixed 6 power (though either would probably serve quite well).

All this and a .357 Magnum revolver, which is another thread ...

My thoughts, my opinions...

Dan Newberry
green 788

[ 10-18-2002, 19:42: Message edited by: green 788 ]

I'd have to say the 1 rifle I'd get and keep would be something in 7.62 that was semiauto. Like an SKS or something similar. I would fit it with a scope the 3 x 9 makes the most sense to me as a good all around scope and it would have QD rings for obvious reasons.
If limited to something I owned then my 243 BDL would be it.

In such extreme circumstances, shouldn't you stick with the military cartridges: 7.62 NATO, 5.56 NATO, and 9mm? You'd be guaranteed a supply of ammo and even replacement weapons.

I'm with Slingster, a scoped M1A might be just the ticket.

Anything from a 22lr on up is better than nothing....

Regards, Bill

In a pinch like this I would go with a Ruger Mini-30 and a Tasco Red-dot type scope. All the effectiveness you would ever need for short shots. The M1A would be an excellent choice, again with a simple dot-type of sighting system, but a lot more costly.

I will have to concede that the .308 win might be a better choice than the 30-06, due to NATO ammo availability.

I like the M1A idea, especially a scoped M1A, but as mentioned, they're a bit pricey for some of us.

I think we can agree on the the 30 caliber criteria. I've considered trying a mini 30 Ruger in the past, but the mini 14's I've owned were horridly inaccurate. Will the mini 30's do much better?

Dan

Steyr Scout in 308.

I am going to go with the crowd on this one and go with the M1A Loaded. Plenty of ammo available and the cartrdige itself has nearly the versitility of its longer brother. The M1 is accurate and reliable. Good time tested design. Take that and a .45...
Only other possibility for me would be my Wingmaster 12 gauge cause there ain't much that can't do either, except when you get past 100 yards.

I base the popularity of the '06 on the data published by the major reloading manufacturers, RCBS in particular. The 30-06 loading dies have been thier number one sellers for the last few decades, and the 2001 numbers were no different.

The .223 is second, and the .308 is third, and the good old 270 is fourth, nice to see...

Jack O'Conner had said that he never ventured into any remotely civilized part of the world where 30-06 ammo couldn't be found.

My corrospondence with folks in Europe has inclined me to the understanding that the 30-06 is as popular over there as the 8 x 57. That's anecdotal, to be fair.

Dan Newberry
green 788

If had to be out of the rifles I own,

it would be my stainless synthetic Ruger MK 11 30/06. It has a leupold 3-9x40 on it, but I would neally swap it with one of the 2.5x compacts I have on a couple of my other rifles, it's a tougher scope and would still be able to hit game out a fair way no worries at all. To be honest I shoot better with these low magnification scopes than all my other higher powered stuff. I would also paint the stainless barrel flat black.

[ 10-19-2002, 01:51: Message edited by: PC ]

Dan- At present I have a very similar rifle-

and would be happy with it if it was the only one I had to use for your scenario but I have to agree with some other points that have been made.
As much as I love my 30.06, in bad times I would want the .308- more surplus Ball ammo around than what's left of the surplus military 30.06.
If I could pick the .308 that I wanted, I would agree with Bob Mehaffey- StyerScout in .308 would be the best. But you bring up a valid point- a Remington700ADL in .308 would be the easiest to have serviced.

For those of you that would pick the Ruger Mini30 with a RedDot sight- been there done that!
Lucky to group 12"@100yds. with any surplus ammo. It will hold 3"@100yds with good SP factory ammo.
I sold it!

When I was in the service, I was qualified with both the M-14 & M-16. I'd pick the M-14 any day. But, M1As are expensive, heavy, bulky & tough to mount a scope on- well (except for the new M-25). Of course if you were in the service you wouldn't be caught dead shooting a scoped rifle unless you were on a sniper team with a spotter!

I have enough supplies to keep my 30.06 happy for many years to come but if I had to pick something I could get ammo for it would be the .308StyerScout.

Let's hope it never gets that bad!

Having survived a two month outting in the far east that was not expected there is something to haveing a rifle that will use the easiest round to come by,when I was able I retrieved an SKS that wasn't needed by the other party any longer,no one seemed to notice when it was fired,but the one time I fired the 22 I had all kinds of company trying to horn in.With all that in mind if shtf I'll go with the M1A Scout,If I have the time to catche a group it will include a 22,45,and 9mm.

There is only one MAJOR flaw in everyones logic for a Doomsday Rifle...and I have thought about this issue for more years than many of you are alive. One day it struck me that the ultimate Doomsday rifle is and MUST be the very lowly .22 Long Rifle.

When all of you stop laughing at my position long enough to catch your breath, I want you to take this very simple test. Go get two bricks (1,000 rds) of .22 LR ammunition and weigh it.

Next go get 1,000 rounds of 223 or .308 or 30/06 and weigh this.

Still not convinced?

OK, imagine this scenario: Whatever wonderful plans and preparations you have made for doomsday survival...you have to leave it. FAST.

All you can take is your ONE rifle, which each of us has already chosen, and a back pack.

OK, put on your back pack and start filling it up with as much as you can walk away with. Let's say you will have to move 12 miles to be safe.

How many .223 rounds are you going to put in there? How many 30/06? What about your food supplies? Your medical supplies? Your clothing, tools, blankets etc?

Get the picture, my friends?

Sure a .22LR is piss poor hunting cartridge. It won't reliably kill anything of any size. To kill yourself a deer, you may have to shoot one 6 times and follow it for two miles before it dies. But you can do it. Not clean. Not pretty, but you'll live.

Think it out. If it's survival, you can carry enough .22 LR ammo to keep you shooting for years. Or if you just gotta have your .308...you'll probably be throwing spears and rocks in 3 months.

Don't get me wrong. I LOVE the 30/06 and .308 and 223. But when you do the math and stop day dreaming about survival in the comfort of your own living room........they don't fly.

OK, flame away. I'm braced for it.

All one needs for all game:

If I had to grab one rifle out of my safe right now for this scenario, it would be my bushmaster. I know what the AR clones can do, they are accurate and can drop a person. As for carrying alot of ammo, if I'm getting the hell out of a town because SHTF, than I'm not looking for a fight. I'll carry enough ammo with me to hopefully get me out of town(with reserve). I can find ammo somewhere or I'll find another weapon.

I'm with pecos, I'd go with a 22. Not only can you carry 1000rds pretty easily, but it will only cost you in the US about $20. A hundred dollars will buy you a lot of ammo.

Now for what rifle, oh geez there are so many that shoot well. I'd be tempted to say a Ruger 10/22 but I think a bolt action would be a better choice for long term reliability.

The reality is that there may be another depression, but the mad max doomsday scenario ain't going to happen, too many businesses will be losing money and I think there would be more of people helping others to get back on their feet than roving bands of skinheads.

Here's another question- Is this just an American phenomena or do other countries have a a lot of survivalism planning going on?

Pecos,don't know how the marines felt about it,but first time over the damn thing was a piece of junk,they did and have continued to toimprove them,But haveing talk to my step son who is back from Afangastin{?} he didn't have may good things to say about it.
But I do follow your line of thinking on the 22,all my team carried one in the alice as a last resort or aid for E&E,take a brick of the CCI quick shot and a brick of solids and it would see you through till you could round up some thing bigger.

Pecos- all the original M-16s were horrible- the first two big improvements were to replace the bolt carrier with a chrome molly bolt carrier and to put a forward bolt assist on the side of the receiver. If the damn thing got a grain of sand in it the bolt carrier would jam against the inside of the receiver housing. The new models in the 60s with the two improvements were called the M-16A1- they also changed the pickle-fork flash suppressor to an enclosed flash supressor.
The M-16A2 has the new faster 1-7" twist barrels so it can shoot the heavier 62grn bullet.

Here's a little history on the piece of junk.
(and I'm a grunt who had to carry one for a year)

M-16

Capt. Jack - I don't know the time line exactly of the M-16s and their problems in Viet Nam. I do know that there were some SERIOUS problems with the early M-16s and you are probably one of the poor devils who got stuck with them.

I think my boss, who spent 13 months fighting NVA, with the Marines, never had any problems. I think he got over there just in time for Khe San and some of those fun battles.

Anyway, you're certainly correct the first bunch of M-16 were junk.

Personally I would feel a lot better about shooting thru all the jungle with some nice 150 gr. .30 caliber bullets than trying to chop my way thru with the little 55s. But as most fellows have described the combat there, engagements were usually spray and pray...and the side that could spray and pray the hardest usually won the battle. And THAT was where the M-14 fell short because the guys packing it simply ran out of ammo too fast and in the end they were doing all the praying while their buddies were doing the spraying.

I forget what they told me the normal ammo load out was between M-14 and M-16 soldiers, but for sure the M-16 boys were going to have ammo long after the M-14 boys ran out, all things being equal.

Personally, I've never owned an AR or M-16 and have no desire to have one. They feel like junk to me and with earmuffs on where you can hear all the plastic and crap clunking around in the gun when it fires...they even SOUND like junk.

But then I'm from the old fashioned school of thought who still believe God intended rifles to be made of wood and steel. I never picked up a composit rifle or pistol that I didn't hate and have no intention of ever owning any of the breed.

Glad you made it home Cap'n Jack in spite of the bad guns.

Cap'n glad to see some else thought they were junk,did you find yourselfs keeping the cleaning rod put together and taped to forend like we had to do,to clear jams,got so bad there for awhile that any time we were going out I would take the basic load one by one and drop them into the chamber to make sure to would fit.

My choice may be novel, but I think you could keep it fed pretty easy: A lightweight .300 Win. Magnum with several of the chamber inserts. I would choose .308 for "surplus" military ammo, .30/30 for sheer availability of commercial sporting ammo, and .30 carbine for a small game load and lightweight.

Fireplug

Pecos,
As I began reading this thread about 30-06's, 308's, and 223's, I was wondering when someone would hit the nail on the head with the 22LR. You absolutely read my mind.
As much as I can't stand Bill Ruger for siding with the anti-gunners, having a 10-22 and a mark 2 ruger and about 3 bricks of ammo, you could definately do some serious asskicking.
A lot of people underestimate the effectiveness of a 22LR in a combat situation or hunting enviornment, but for the senario proposed, it couldn't get any better.
Obviously obtaining a M16 and a Berretta 92 would be of high priority down the line, due to the extreme availability of ammo, but not something you want to hoof out the door with when the SHTF.

Someone mentioned about the dependability of the 10-22 or lack there of. I've put 2 bricks at a time through mine without cleaning and never had one malfunction or misfire. That's pretty damn good if you ask me. Very similar numbers I've done with my Mark 2 with the exact results.

The 308 is a great round for making long shots with in high wind, but isn't necessary and adds considerable bulk and weight to your SHTF pack. The 223 is half the size and capable of taking out personel reliably out to 600 yards. Now, I invite the flame for that last statement.
I just know some of you are saying Bull Sh@! on the 600 yard number, but being equipped with a 1000 yard Bushnell laser rangefinder, that's a an easy shot with wind conditions less than 5MPH. With a little more wind, it starts getting tricky, but you wouldn't want to stand around long to let me get my second shot at you. An employee of mine and I set up on the top of the rimrock canyon that overlooks the Crooked River here in Prineville, and routinely made shots at 760 yards on a 16oz pop bottle, with an average hit ratio of about 7 out of 10. He was shooting a Savage in 223 with a BSA scope and I was using my Remington 700 VLS, slightly customized, with a Simmons 6.5-20 power scope. Obviously at that range, the 223 doesn't display a significant amount of knockdown power, but it would kill or mame just the same.

DaveJames- this pic is for you- notice the toothbrush- remember the blivit bags they brought the water out in- gotta keep the dirt out of your weapon somehow...



For those that wondered how much ammo we carried?
Everyone in my company carried 500-700 rounds of .223. Everyone in the squads also humped 200 rounds for the 60. I carried 1-2 claymores, 3-HE gernades, 2-WP gernades, 3-smokes, batteries, tripwire, 5# C4, 4days of C-rations & LRPS, 9qts.water, hammock, ponch, steel pot, 4prs.socks, playing cards, writing tablet, envelopes, etc... My battle ruck normally weighed 115#- our normal Search&Destroy patrol was 30days.
The company normally humped 8-12klicks a day. We normally had some kind of contact every day. We usually set up an ambush every night. Our AO was the QueSonValley 30 miles south of DaNang, NW of ChuLai- favorite playground- HeipDuc

TriggerGuard- I don't have a problem with the .223- I think it's a great varmint round- I just hated it for a battle round when the .308 was available. We had a few guys humpin 12ga. pumps w/OO & slugs. We also had M-79 Thumpers, M-72A1 LAWS, etc...

..nothin better than a Cobra comin in on the dinks with miniguns & rockets smokin!

Sgt.Krohn

Damn Cap'n that brings back some memories You marines sure liked to go heavy

Interesting topic.

The 22lr is a good choice in terms of noise and economy. A 10/22 and Mark II would be about as good as it gets for long term anything. I'm not too sure about how far most people will get when it comes to hunting for food(unless you live very close to large populations of game). My non-hunting brother said he was interested in what type of hunting gun to get prior to Y2K(what's that?). I told him to get a 12 ga shotgun. I laughed at the idea of using the fuel to drive outside the city and shoot a rabbit(or whatever) to bring back to his 6 kids and wife! If you think this is a real possibility, I would think you'd be MUCH better off stocking WATER, food, fuel, personal goods, and replacement items now.

I would think time might be better spent hunting for those that were making it hard to get food, water, fuel, etc. or protecting your family from those who are hunting you!!! Game populations would vanish almost immediately as would your water, food, fuel, etc. and other meanie-weanies may just want some of yours since Wal-mart may just be closed. For that kind of use, an AR-15 and Rem 870 would be very handy.

[ 10-21-2002, 20:19: Message edited by: Nebraska ]

I served my time and i was in the infantry for 3 1/2 years and I have no desire for a m-16 or mattels greatest toy, make mind a FAL

Even some well used No. 4 Enfields are "minute of 5 gallon bucket" at 600 yards, with issue sights yet.

What are the parameters for this TEOTWAWKI rifle?

My plan is to lay low in Zulia.

When I quit seeing traffic on the Internet, CNN, DirectTV, the phone's dead, no electricity, and water running low, I'll have a decision to make; stay down here with the beautiful women, cheap rum, and available fresh food; or go up through Colombia, Central America, and Mexico to see what brand of weapon you're clutching in your cold dead hand.

Frankly at that point a survey won't do either of us any good.

The only weapon I have here is a Browning 12 Ga. O/U, but the beauty of this country is that my set of Pings will probably trade real good for whatever weapon the Guardia Nacional has on hand.

I'll probably lay low for a while, let the wife do the shopping since she blends in good. Me, I'll sit in the apartment behind the multi-lock door and the bars on the windows and balcony. I'll be using my size 9 1/2" black Luccese ostrich quills to keep the cucarachas at bay, and wait for better times.

DS Arms SA-58, considered by many to be the finest semi-auto 308 FAL type rifle.

The original question was what would you want to be armed with if the socio-economic system crashed and you found yourself in a survival situation. That is what they call a SHTF (shit hit the fan) situation on some of the other forums. Or a worst case situation TEOTWAWKI (the end of the world as we know it).

Some have replied that a rifle in 308 or 30-06 would be a good choice because they are common calibers and the ammo would be readily available. Also lots of surplus ammo.

So if the socio-economic system has crashed WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO BUY THIS AMMO? If the system has crashed then Wally World and Oshmans and your local gun store will be out of ammo in a day or two. And the government aint going to give away any of the surplus ammo that they may or may not have stored somewhere.

Now the second part of the question. This rifle is for survival. Does this mean survival in the sense of hunting wild game to feed you and your family, or survival in the sense of keeping those hungry, angry, roving bands of unprepared people from taking the things that you have so carefully and thoughtfully collected and stored for just this type of situation?

Well if you plan to live off the land good luck. If the population of the U.S. started killing all the wild game animals for food, it would all be gone in a couple of weeks.

So it looks like the most probable use for your survival rifle will be for self protection. Think back to the LA riots. The stores that did not get looted and burned were the ones with owners defending their property with weapons that gave a clear visual deterrant to the rioters.

How about this plan. Arm each adult member of your family with a sport utility rifle. That would be an AR15, AK47, SKS, Mini 14, or something similar. Keep several cases of ammo on hand. Keep enough stored food to feed your family for a couple of months. And then don't discuss any of this preparation with anyone other than like minded family, friends, or neighbors who you would trust to form a coalition with in a survival type of situation.

Lets all pray that none of this will be necessary.

IMO, a SHTF rifle should not be geared for procuring food, but for protecting your self and loved ones. The main reason is that there is much more food available in vegetable form than animal. You'll get more energetic return for the amount (read as weight) of food. In addition, animals for food would be in short supply in no time flat. That being the case, I'd have to selected something along the lines of a .22lr or .223. Both of which would kill an animal if the opportunity arose.

the 308 and the 22lr.,both will kill anything ,especially the 308.the 22lr kills more people than any other ound and the 308 will take a elk at beyond most normal ranges that anyone can do...7.62 nato is -the round to go ith,rounds available in every config. and military rounds abound for a cheap price..308 is the round to beat,it'll take anything on this continent....so,will the 22lr with the right shot placement...

I'll be humping it with my .308 Mauser Scout w/Leupold 2x fixed, my USMC K-Bar, compact binoc's, MedPac (old Corpsman),and the the trails other little nessecities.


"Check your six"

[ 10-26-2002, 18:21: Message edited by: CharlieinKansas ]