T Nation

If You Could Own 1 Gun and 1 Rifle

[quote]JD430 wrote:
Glock 17. Most common pistol in the US(for replacement parts) and reliable as can be anyway.

The AR15’s common usage makes it a front runner for replacement parts and the ammo is certainly plentiful.

However, the M1A’s ruggedness and the vast superiority of the .308 cartridge over the .223 put it high on the list.

But if I really had to choose only one rifle it would be the AK47, despite my affinity and years of reliance on the AR platform. You can bury it, shoot the hell out of it without cleaning, smash somebody over the head with it and it will keep running fine. The magazines are also indestructible and plentiful and it is stupidly simple to work on. Hands down, the weapon for really bad times.[/quote]

Problem would be ammo availability.

Two good additions to make on an AK. Makes up for some of the inaccuracy.

http://www.tech-sights.com/ -
I have one for my SKS. Way better than stock sites. Will be getting one for AK when available.

http://www.rifletech.com/yugobrake39-a.htm
I have one for SKS but haven’t used it yet. Get’s good reviews though.

And one for additional reliability
http://www.nokick.com/AK_Valmet_Gailil_Recoil_Buffer_p/ak1b.htm

[quote]dhickey wrote:
JD430 wrote:
Glock 17. Most common pistol in the US(for replacement parts) and reliable as can be anyway.

The AR15’s common usage makes it a front runner for replacement parts and the ammo is certainly plentiful.

However, the M1A’s ruggedness and the vast superiority of the .308 cartridge over the .223 put it high on the list.

But if I really had to choose only one rifle it would be the AK47, despite my affinity and years of reliance on the AR platform. You can bury it, shoot the hell out of it without cleaning, smash somebody over the head with it and it will keep running fine. The magazines are also indestructible and plentiful and it is stupidly simple to work on. Hands down, the weapon for really bad times.

Problem would be ammo availability.

Two good additions to make on an AK. Makes up for some of the inaccuracy.

http://www.tech-sights.com/ -
I have one for my SKS. Way better than stock sites. Will be getting one for AK when available.

http://www.rifletech.com/yugobrake39-a.htm
I have one for SKS but haven’t used it yet. Get’s good reviews though.

And one for additional reliability
http://www.nokick.com/AK_Valmet_Gailil_Recoil_Buffer_p/ak1b.htm[/quote]

The accuracy knock on the AK is way over-stated. Hitting a bad guy at 200 yards or so is not any type of problem whatsoever if your skills are decent. I think our understanding of shooting has been influenced too much by bench rests and “grouping” competitions. I’m not pissing on marksmanship, it is the building block of all firearms skills. However, the reality is the vast majority of fighting you would ever do would be well inside the range of an AK. You can also get very rugged, relatively inexpensive eastern bloc optics which magnify its potential for accurate hits. If you went with a Dragunov, you would have all the accuracy you could ever need at a fairly low price. The AK can also be had in very compact configurations for very confined work. All of this is coming from a guy who lives and dies by the M4 too.

There is a great amount of 7.62x39 circulating around this country, but I will concede that a dastardly political move could cut off most of the supply with the stroke of a pen.

Those ring sights look pretty good if you favor those over notch and post but I dont know about those buffers. I dont think you would need anything like that to increase the AK’s reliability.

Don’t know much about guns but I dig’em.

How come you guys are opting for revolvers over double-action pistols?

I always thought the 1911 .45 was cool. Any weapon that’s in the armed services for as long as that one was had to be a good firearm.

As for rifles, I can see the bolt-actions, but if, as someone said, if we’re talking end of the world type shit.

But for everyday use, especially being that I’m not a hunter, I’d probably go for a solid 12 gauge shotgun.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Don’t know much about guns but I dig’em.

How come you guys are opting for revolvers over double-action pistols?

I always thought the 1911 .45 was cool. Any weapon that’s in the armed services for as long as that one was had to be a good firearm.

As for rifles, I can see the bolt-actions, but if, as someone said, if we’re talking end of the world type shit.

But for everyday use, especially being that I’m not a hunter, I’d probably go for a solid 12 gauge shotgun.
[/quote]

I think the rationale is parts availability and reliabilty. The few parts to wear out, the better. Military use includes maintenance, servicing parts, and eventual replacement. When this is not an option a revolver, bolt action rifle, or pump/break action shotgun are probably the most reliable long term.

[quote]JD430 wrote:
dhickey wrote:
JD430 wrote:
Glock 17. Most common pistol in the US(for replacement parts) and reliable as can be anyway.

The AR15’s common usage makes it a front runner for replacement parts and the ammo is certainly plentiful.

However, the M1A’s ruggedness and the vast superiority of the .308 cartridge over the .223 put it high on the list.

But if I really had to choose only one rifle it would be the AK47, despite my affinity and years of reliance on the AR platform. You can bury it, shoot the hell out of it without cleaning, smash somebody over the head with it and it will keep running fine. The magazines are also indestructible and plentiful and it is stupidly simple to work on. Hands down, the weapon for really bad times.

Problem would be ammo availability.

Two good additions to make on an AK. Makes up for some of the inaccuracy.

http://www.tech-sights.com/ -
I have one for my SKS. Way better than stock sites. Will be getting one for AK when available.

http://www.rifletech.com/yugobrake39-a.htm
I have one for SKS but haven’t used it yet. Get’s good reviews though.

And one for additional reliability
http://www.nokick.com/AK_Valmet_Gailil_Recoil_Buffer_p/ak1b.htm

The accuracy knock on the AK is way over-stated. Hitting a bad guy at 200 yards or so is not any type of problem whatsoever if your skills are decent. I think our understanding of shooting has been influenced too much by bench rests and “grouping” competitions. I’m not pissing on marksmanship, it is the building block of all firearms skills. However, the reality is the vast majority of fighting you would ever do would be well inside the range of an AK. You can also get very rugged, relatively inexpensive eastern bloc optics which magnify its potential for accurate hits. If you went with a Dragunov, you would have all the accuracy you could ever need at a fairly low price. The AK can also be had in very compact configurations for very confined work. All of this is coming from a guy who lives and dies by the M4 too.

There is a great amount of 7.62x39 circulating around this country, but I will concede that a dastardly political move could cut off most of the supply with the stroke of a pen.

Those ring sights look pretty good if you favor those over notch and post but I dont know about those buffers. I dont think you would need anything like that to increase the AK’s reliability.
[/quote]

I really dislike the notch and post sight on the AK. I can shoot my Win Model 94 with a notch site just fine, but the AK’s really bother me. It’s mostly that I can’t get a good cheek weld. I would either need to lower/trim the stock or raise the sight. A good peep site would probalby be the biggest improvement in accuracy for me. I am not real big on optics at this point. I like iron sights just fine.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

…How come you guys are opting for revolvers over double-action pistols?

I always thought the 1911 .45 was cool. Any weapon that’s in the armed services for as long as that one was had to be a good firearm…

1911s are single action.[/quote]

Oh. whoops. See. Learn new shit every day.

[quote]dhickey wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Don’t know much about guns but I dig’em.

How come you guys are opting for revolvers over double-action pistols?

I always thought the 1911 .45 was cool. Any weapon that’s in the armed services for as long as that one was had to be a good firearm.

As for rifles, I can see the bolt-actions, but if, as someone said, if we’re talking end of the world type shit.

But for everyday use, especially being that I’m not a hunter, I’d probably go for a solid 12 gauge shotgun.

I think the rationale is parts availability and reliabilty. The few parts to wear out, the better. Military use includes maintenance, servicing parts, and eventual replacement. When this is not an option a revolver, bolt action rifle, or pump/break action shotgun are probably the most reliable long term.[/quote]

Ahh ok.

The only thing with revolvers is that I’ve read that under stress, they can be difficult to load. I.e. when faced with a life and death situation, your hands tend to shake, making reloading very difficult.

It’s something that I would think about.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
dhickey wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Don’t know much about guns but I dig’em.

How come you guys are opting for revolvers over double-action pistols?

I always thought the 1911 .45 was cool. Any weapon that’s in the armed services for as long as that one was had to be a good firearm.

As for rifles, I can see the bolt-actions, but if, as someone said, if we’re talking end of the world type shit.

But for everyday use, especially being that I’m not a hunter, I’d probably go for a solid 12 gauge shotgun.

I think the rationale is parts availability and reliabilty. The few parts to wear out, the better. Military use includes maintenance, servicing parts, and eventual replacement. When this is not an option a revolver, bolt action rifle, or pump/break action shotgun are probably the most reliable long term.

Ahh ok.

The only thing with revolvers is that I’ve read that under stress, they can be difficult to load. I.e. when faced with a life and death situation, your hands tend to shake, making reloading very difficult.

It’s something that I would think about.[/quote]

I think all guns are more difficult to load than to unload:)

[quote]dhickey wrote:
JD430 wrote:
dhickey wrote:
JD430 wrote:
Glock 17. Most common pistol in the US(for replacement parts) and reliable as can be anyway.

The AR15’s common usage makes it a front runner for replacement parts and the ammo is certainly plentiful.

However, the M1A’s ruggedness and the vast superiority of the .308 cartridge over the .223 put it high on the list.

But if I really had to choose only one rifle it would be the AK47, despite my affinity and years of reliance on the AR platform. You can bury it, shoot the hell out of it without cleaning, smash somebody over the head with it and it will keep running fine. The magazines are also indestructible and plentiful and it is stupidly simple to work on. Hands down, the weapon for really bad times.

Problem would be ammo availability.

Two good additions to make on an AK. Makes up for some of the inaccuracy.

http://www.tech-sights.com/ -
I have one for my SKS. Way better than stock sites. Will be getting one for AK when available.

http://www.rifletech.com/yugobrake39-a.htm
I have one for SKS but haven’t used it yet. Get’s good reviews though.

And one for additional reliability
http://www.nokick.com/AK_Valmet_Gailil_Recoil_Buffer_p/ak1b.htm

The accuracy knock on the AK is way over-stated. Hitting a bad guy at 200 yards or so is not any type of problem whatsoever if your skills are decent. I think our understanding of shooting has been influenced too much by bench rests and “grouping” competitions. I’m not pissing on marksmanship, it is the building block of all firearms skills. However, the reality is the vast majority of fighting you would ever do would be well inside the range of an AK. You can also get very rugged, relatively inexpensive eastern bloc optics which magnify its potential for accurate hits. If you went with a Dragunov, you would have all the accuracy you could ever need at a fairly low price. The AK can also be had in very compact configurations for very confined work. All of this is coming from a guy who lives and dies by the M4 too.

There is a great amount of 7.62x39 circulating around this country, but I will concede that a dastardly political move could cut off most of the supply with the stroke of a pen.

Those ring sights look pretty good if you favor those over notch and post but I dont know about those buffers. I dont think you would need anything like that to increase the AK’s reliability.

I really dislike the notch and post sight on the AK. I can shoot my Win Model 94 with a notch site just fine, but the AK’s really bother me. It’s mostly that I can’t get a good cheek weld. I would either need to lower/trim the stock or raise the sight. A good peep site would probalby be the biggest improvement in accuracy for me. I am not real big on optics at this point. I like iron sights just fine.

[/quote]

Nice thing about a peep sight is move your eye close to the rear sight (so you look right through it) and just use the front sight for a moving target

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
dhickey wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Don’t know much about guns but I dig’em.

How come you guys are opting for revolvers over double-action pistols?

I always thought the 1911 .45 was cool. Any weapon that’s in the armed services for as long as that one was had to be a good firearm.

As for rifles, I can see the bolt-actions, but if, as someone said, if we’re talking end of the world type shit.

But for everyday use, especially being that I’m not a hunter, I’d probably go for a solid 12 gauge shotgun.

I think the rationale is parts availability and reliabilty. The few parts to wear out, the better. Military use includes maintenance, servicing parts, and eventual replacement. When this is not an option a revolver, bolt action rifle, or pump/break action shotgun are probably the most reliable long term.

Ahh ok.

The only thing with revolvers is that I’ve read that under stress, they can be difficult to load. I.e. when faced with a life and death situation, your hands tend to shake, making reloading very difficult.

It’s something that I would think about.[/quote]

Yeah, probably not the best for CQB. Just fine if you are off to the woods like I would be. You could apply the same criteria for a shotgun. Even my 11-87 with a mag extension as long as the 28" barrel only holds 10+1. After that you better have a lot of time to reload.

I’m surprised no one else is picking a 22. Ammo is plentiful and the ruger semiautos are very reliable. also very accurate. I can hit a 2’x 2’ target with mine at 100 yards. It would be very easy to take small game with it at distances in the 30 yard range.

Anything farther than that I use my Ruger, or Remington 308s. but it all depends on the why. End of the world or just can have two. one thing to consider is the cost and availibility of ammo. you don’t get good without practice.

If you’re thinking ahead ARS have 22 conversion kits as do 1911s, glocks, sigs, and Browning high Powers. I’m sure there are others. Most run in the 200$ to 300$ range.

A few weeks ago on the Outdoor Channel they had a DPMS 3 gun competitor shooter extolling the virtues of the 22 for serious practice. He does most of his rifle and pistol work with the 22 conversions to save on ammo cost and the physical beating of shooting a few thousand pistol rounds a week. He said he had tendonitis, but the 22 gave him needed rest and recovery.

so if you look at it this way, I’ll take my Kimber Grand Raptor and the 22 conversion kit and my AR15 in 223 with a conversion kit. As long as it’s allowed, I’ll slap on the 6.8 upper and now I have a high power rifle at about 243 power or so.

[quote]tom63 wrote:

I’m surprised no one else is picking a 22. Ammo is plentiful and the ruger semiautos are very reliable. also very accurate. I can hit a 2’x 2’ target with mine at 100 yards. It would be very easy to take small game with it at distances in the 30 yard range.

Maybe he didn’t notice that Varqanir wrote, on the previous page:

One thing that nobody has mentioned yet is the fact that you can get a .22 conversion kit for the .45, which allows you to practice a whole hell of a lot for very little money. Plus, if you ever have to shoot a squirrel or a rabbit for meat, a .22 is going to be more appropriate to the task.
[/quote]

:stuck_out_tongue:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Varq’s pick, with provisos: a Ruger Redhawk and Marlin lever-action carbine, both in .45 Colt.

For versatility, it’s hard to beat the AR platform. By swapping upper receivers you can conceivably go from .22LR to .50BMG, and damn near everything in between.

Regardless, I wouldn’t have an AR, because I don’t like the way they look and feel. I feel great affection for my own rifle, which I can’t imagine feeling for an M4 or an M16.

Ditto for anything in the Kalashnikov line. The AK is pretty much the Isuzu pickup truck of the firearms world. It’ll run forever, no matter what you do to it, it’s tough as hell, and ugly as sin. Practical accuracy is minute-of-enemy soldier with the crummy iron sights at as far out as you can hold. Nothing to write home about, but it gets the job done. Kind of like fucking a fat chick.

I’m obviously partial to the M14. It’s as rugged and beautiful as the AR is flimsy and the AK is ugly. And it is deadly accurate out to farther than you can see your target with the naked eye. I have lots of ammunition, plenty of magazines, and a complete set of spares for it, down to the last pin and spring, so in the highly unlikely event that something broke or came loose, I could replace it.

That said, if I absolutely had to choose something else, I would choose the Steyr-Mannlicher Scout rifle in .308. Any rifle conceived by the late Colonel Jeff Cooper has much to recommend it, and although it’s not as aesthetically pleasing to my eye as the M14, it’s light, ergonomically perfect, plenty rugged for the task, and ridiculously accurate.

It’s a bolt-action, which means both that it’ll be relatively safer from the predations of the hoplophobic scumbags in Congress for a while (until they start banning “sniper rifles”), and also that it’ll keep shooting for years and years and years without having to have any parts replaced.

It also means that you can fire Hornady Light Magnum 180-grain loads that are the ballistic equivalent of the .30-06, and that would beat the shit out of an M14 receiver. It can also fire small-game-appropriate underpowered loads that wouldn’t cycle the action of the semiautomatic rifle.

As to that, I’ve been playing with some blue plastic West German NATO practice rounds originally made for the G3. They’re accurate out to 300 yards, are about as loud as a 9mm, and absolutely no recoil. Perfect if you ever have to take small game with a .308.

For the handgun, I’m definitely prejudiced toward the venerable old 1911 .45 automatic, for both sentimental and practical reasons: it was the first firearm I ever owned (twenty-five years ago), it fits my hand perfectly (which is rare), and it has never failed me. One thing that nobody has mentioned yet is the fact that you can get a .22 conversion kit for the .45, which allows you to practice a whole hell of a lot for very little money. Plus, if you ever have to shoot a squirrel or a rabbit for meat, a .22 is going to be more appropriate to the task.

It looks like you’ve already got your .357, which is a very good choice, although if I were to choose a revolver, AND if I had plenty of ammunition, AND if I had reloading equipment and plenty of brass, I’d go with a 4-inch stainless Ruger Redhawk in .45 Colt.

This weapon has all of the ballistic advantages of the .45 automatic, and all of the reliability advantages of the double-action revolver. It’s incredibly strong, and can handle ridiculously heavy loads (more powerful even than the .44 magnum) that would ruin the frame of a Colt or Smith revolver.

You can load your .45 Colt cases with 185-grain Winchester Silvertip bullets and just enough powder to approximate the .45 ACP, and have yourself a superb defense round.

Or you can load them with 300-grain Speer jacketed flat nose bullets and considerably more powder, and have a round that will kill a bull elk or a grizzly bear.

Or, you can load the case with a light bullet and very little powder, for your jackrabbits and squirrels. Or birdshot, for rats and rattlesnakes.

Combine the Redhawk with a stainless Marlin .45 Colt lever action carbine, and you have the ultimate post-apocalyptic survival firearms platform. With these two weapons, you can take out anything on the North American continent, from mouse to moose, with one caliber. Just make sure you have a good Dillon or Hornady press with plenty of brass, primers, powder, and bullets, or a supply of lead (junkyard car wheel weights and fishing sinkers are a good source), smelter and molds, for casting your own.

Hell, if you were really resourceful, you could probably even concoct your own black powder, since the .45 Colt was, after all, originally a black powder round. The guns won’t mind (especially not if they’re stainless), just be sure to clean them extra-specially well (black power is corrosive and burns dirty).

Which brings me back to your situation, Gregus. Since you have already chosen your revolver, why not get yourself a Marlin carbine in .357 Magnum? It would be nowhere near as effective as a .308 or a .45 Colt on larger animals at longer ranges, but for wild pigs and mule deer at 100 yards (or ninjas and zombies at up to 300) you’d be all set.[/quote]

Dude, thanks for the tons of good info. You know i was looking to get the .44 or .45 revolver but the old schoold shooter felt i would be better off with a .357 s&w 686 for all around versatility. Overall i sometimes regret not getting the .44 or .45

I also did alot of drills with the M14 and thought it was a very solid rifle.

[quote]tom63 wrote:
I’m surprised no one else is picking a 22. Ammo is plentiful and the ruger semiautos are very reliable. also very accurate. I can hit a 2’x 2’ target with mine at 100 yards. It would be very easy to take small game with it at distances in the 30 yard range.

Anything farther than that I use my Ruger, or Remington 308s. but it all depends on the why. End of the world or just can have two. one thing to consider is the cost and availibility of ammo. you don’t get good without practice.

If you’re thinking ahead ARS have 22 conversion kits as do 1911s, glocks, sigs, and Browning high Powers. I’m sure there are others. Most run in the 200$ to 300$ range.

A few weeks ago on the Outdoor Channel they had a DPMS 3 gun competitor shooter extolling the virtues of the 22 for serious practice. He does most of his rifle and pistol work with the 22 conversions to save on ammo cost and the physical beating of shooting a few thousand pistol rounds a week. He said he had tendonitis, but the 22 gave him needed rest and recovery.

so if you look at it this way, I’ll take my Kimber Grand Raptor and the 22 conversion kit and my AR15 in 223 with a conversion kit. As long as it’s allowed, I’ll slap on the 6.8 upper and now I have a high power rifle at about 243 power or so.
[/quote]

I love my 22 , but your choice is one handgun and one rifle

Correct me if I’m wrong but i always considered a 22 to be a useless pistol. Mostly completely inadequate for hunting and certainly not good for self or home defense. Isn’t it more of just a target plinking gun?

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[quote]Gregus wrote:
Correct me if I’m wrong but i always considered a 22 to be a useless pistol. Mostly completely inadequate for hunting and certainly not good for self or home defense. Isn’t it more of just a target plinking gun? [/quote]

I don’t know much about guns, but I’m thinking anyone who gets a clip unloaded on them is going to be dead, regardless of the caliber. Though, I could be wrong.

[quote]Gregus wrote:
Correct me if I’m wrong but i always considered a 22 to be a useless pistol. Mostly completely inadequate for hunting and certainly not good for self or home defense. Isn’t it more of just a target plinking gun? [/quote]

A suppressed .22 makes a good hunting tool for small game while staying incognito.

Damn Varq, you beat me to it. I was also going to suggest the .45 (Long) Colt with the Marlin 198(2? whatever they made before the 1894) except with the Ruger Vaquero (not the new vaquero) because of the stainless steel receivers in both of them. My dad does a lot with the SASS (Single Action Sharp Shooter or Cowboy shooting) and has a Uberti lever action with a brass receiver - he can fire heavier loads out his Vaquero’s then he can with the Uberti.

In any case 1 caliber to reload, very versatile - with a 4" barrel on the Vaquero you can get 1100 fps at the muzzle with a 200 gr jacketed hollow point (possibly more if you get creative) and a 405 gr going 1350 fps at the muzzle - or as was mentioned much lighter loads.

Not easy to conceal either though… lol