Gun Hub Forums banner
21 - 39 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Back to .22s. I agree with tstar. Nylon 66. Still have mine and love it. Wish I would have bought 2!!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,187 Posts
devildog1972 said:
Back to .22s.
Finally! :wink:

If someone started a thread on "Favorite Vanilla Ice Cream?", within four posts, someone would be listing his favorite brand of chocolate. :roll:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,505 Posts
Snake45 said:
devildog1972 said:
Back to .22s.
Finally! :wink:

If someone started a thread on "Favorite Vanilla Ice Cream?", within four posts, someone would be listing his favorite brand of chocolate. :roll:
It's a basic attitudinal thang Sanke ol'boy. Some folks view a FORUM as a disciplined college of the old school where discussions are led by aged wisdom corrupting innocent youth and other folks view it as the cracker barrel by the roaring fire in the middle of a bad winter where folks gathers to shoot the bull.

Me, I try to restrain myself, but I'm a notorious drifter...wish I had the money for a Nissan GT-R, sigh.

Geoff
Who has been around since the BBS was hot stuff and a shell account was next to impossible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
979 Posts
Since I already have the 10/22 I'd feel the most confident with it. However, I am considering either a .17 HMR or a .22 magnum in a bolt gun. I think, for my purpose, the .22 mag bolt gun would be on my short list.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
.22lr conversion unit for the fighting rifle. 3/4 lb, $200, and you get to train with the same gun with which you fight. try carrying a backpack, fighting rifle and 22 rifle. :) How will you use a gun that you don't have with you, hmmm? how can you know that it will be ok to not have the fighting rifle, if it's shtf? You keep the gun in centerfire mode, unless you see a specific reason to use the 22 unit.

If you are smart, your main rifle is sound suppressed, so the subsonic 22's sound like a BB gun. After the rimifire problem is solved, you immediately swap back the parts to centerfire, in case of need. It takes 20 seconds. You should be out of sight, have cover, and have a sidearm, of course. funny how it's ok to have the fighting rifle out of action for 1/2 an hour while you clean it, but it's just "impractical" to have it be "out of action" for 20 seconds, while you swap calibers. :) your 1022 does NOT handle like your M1A! :)

if you add a trigger job, folding stock, scope, ambi safety, cheekpiece, sound suppressor, optical sight, night scope, luminous sight inserts, etc, to the fighting rifle, you are also adding it to your ".22 rifle", if you have this conversion unit. Really quickly, that can make a difference of several thousand $ in costs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,940 Posts
.22lr conversion unit for the fighting rifle. 3/4 lb, $200, and you get to train with the same gun with which you fight. try carrying a backpack, fighting rifle and 22 rifle. :) How will you use a gun that you don't have with you, hmmm? how can you know that it will be ok to not have the fighting rifle, if it's shtf? You keep the gun in centerfire mode, unless you see a specific reason to use the 22 unit.

If you are smart, your main rifle is sound suppressed, so the subsonic 22's sound like a BB gun. After the rimifire problem is solved, you immediately swap back the parts to centerfire, in case of need. It takes 20 seconds. You should be out of sight, have cover, and have a sidearm, of course. funny how it's ok to have the fighting rifle out of action for 1/2 an hour while you clean it, but it's just "impractical" to have it be "out of action" for 20 seconds, while you swap calibers. :) your 1022 does NOT handle like your M1A! :)

if you add a trigger job, folding stock, scope, ambi safety, cheekpiece, sound suppressor, optical sight, night scope, luminous sight inserts, etc, to the fighting rifle, you are also adding it to your ".22 rifle", if you have this conversion unit. Really quickly, that can make a difference of several thousand $ in costs.
Gee, I'm going to need a wheelbarrow to carry all that...

I think I'll just defend in place.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,759 Posts
One time... in Band camp prison... I made a suppressor for my tactical shiv.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,241 Posts
A couple .22 rifles were purpose built for that situation.

The classic AR-7 is excellent with the collapsibility into the stock. Or the USAF over under survival gun, which while bulkier has a shotgun barrel too.

Used AR-7s, or later follow on versions, are around and used to be very cheap when I'd run across them. No idea what the last couple years have done to their prices though.

New ones by Henry Arms have an MSRP of around $280 for basic black or $345 with camo finish paint job.

http://henryrepeating.com/rifle-survival-ar7.cfm

http://henryrepeating.com/survival_guntests.cfm

The Springfield M-6, based on USAF M-6 combo gun:

http://www.gunshopfinder.com/springfield/M69201.asp

Cal. .22 LR/.410 shotgun
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Any place that's too cold for a .22 is a place where it makes no sense to be living. :) I'd pick the Marlin Papoose if you insist on it being .22 only, but an M4 with a .22lr conversion unit makes far more sense, since it offers 7-8x as much power, much more penetration and range, along with the .22 capability. The Papoose would get the nod because I can have a retractable buttstock, a 6" barrel, a 4" long suppressor, and still have it be concealable, under my arm, on a sling, under my coat. If it's not going to have a lot of range and power, I want it to at least be capable of being sneaky! :)

The AR-7 has several design flaws. the rear sight is nothing more than a piece of sheeting, with a hole poked in it. It "adjusts" by loosening a screw, wiggling the sheeting around, and then tightening the screw. The front and rear sights are not on the same part of the gun. the aluminum is pot metal. Take it apart and reassemble it again a few times and you'll have enough slop in the parts fit that your accuracy will be nearly non=existent. It won't float very long if it's assembled, and its offset stock design makes it slow to hit with. the papoose shares the lack of a forend, but it can be added later. If you add a forend to the aR's barrel, you forfeit the ability to stow the barrel and action inside of the buttstock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
The AR-7 is a very imperfect rifle. They’re too light to really stabilize. Many need the magazine’s feed lips played with to run truly reliably. And under the best of circumstances, they’re really not all that accurate. But they are exactly what they NEED to be, and not much more

The Armalite and early Charter AR-7’s floated all day long, they sealed up very well. Newer ones don’t seem to seal up all too well. As for the sights, they are adequate, not great. And for putting together and taking apart, it won’t significantly loosen up unless you have a habit of shooting the snot out of your AR-7 and never check the barrel nut. It’s a very specialized tool, it’s not a general purpose .22lr rifle for everyday use. You sight it in, an stow it until you need it. As an ultra lightweight survival rifle, it really has no peers. As a general purpose .22lr, it sucks.

If you need something to be compact, but more robust and accurate than the AR-7, then seek out one of the Taurus/Rossi 62’s with the 16” barrel. It’s a fast pump action take down rifle that weighs just over 4lbs. They’re not all that cheap anymore. When you find one, expect to pay somewhere around $300.00. But they work and work and work, shoot straight, and break down into a very compact little case.

For a general purpose .22lr, the 10/22 is really hard to beat. The design is VERY robust, they’re superbly reliable, rather accurate, and any accessory imaginable is available for them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
I bought a Charter Arms AR-7 off a California department store table in 1973 for $15 when the store was getting ahead of the curve and dumping all its firearms. With the stock capped, the length of pull is too long, the trigger is awful, the accuracy is at best 2 inches at 25 yards, and I doubt I'd get another if it did manage to sink, but it has never failed to fire or eject in all these years. Granted, it's not much fun to shoot, so I don't, much, and neither have I tried to break it down below its major components.

The AR-7 does have its place in interim SHTF (not yet completely without any laws), I think, particularly in places that frown on pistols. There it sits in its stock, should you be asked, plain as a slab of cheese, and "only a .22," but it can be assembled pretty quickly and even fired without the stock if necessary, and it beats a clenched fist or a table lamp. It might help you make your way to a better firearm, anyway. I'm not even sure it's legal in some of the most restrictive states, but you'd have a much easier time talking your way out of legal trouble with this than something much more evil, like a pistol.

I think a scoped Ruger Mk III would be better if you can get away with it legally - a smaller package and more accurate. Here's the place for the suppressed 22 LR we were discussing in the downed pilot survival thread. I think I'd add a few inexpensive rabbit-sized traps to the mix, if I really wanted to be sure to have meat on the table, though.

I had a Nylon 77 - like the 66 but with the more desirable detachable magazine. At least I thought it was more desirable, until Remington told me my accuracy problem was damage to interior bearing pieces from the longer 10-round magazines. I'd still like to have one of those 66s, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
how you figure that?an alloy supprssor weighs 3/4 lb Carbon 15 is 4lbs, .22 unit and spare mag weigh a lb. the optics add at most 3lbs. Still lighter than any 308 battle rifle (which has MUCH less utility) and the 223 and 22 ammo are much lighter, than .30 cal (or 357 or 32-20) too. on top of being many x more likely to be replacable. Currently, prices of AR's is ridiculous, but that won't last. Check out the price of Knight or Springfield 308's lately? and I mean BEFORE this bs price gouging started, too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
If I had to use a rimfire to subsist to survive?
The best stalking rifle I could afford.
Problem is would there be anything to shoot To eat after a SHTF?

If you had to make a first accurate shot then get a scoped keystone arms Cricket?
I figure youd have only one or two shots and what animal your shooting is going to haul tail.
So possibly a small shotgun? As a single #4 shot might be more effective than a inch off the mark miss with a rimfire?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,505 Posts
10/22. Simple, rugged, reliable, parts are common.

Second choice, any good old-school bolt action in good condition.
I second that, I cannot count the rounds I've put through my 1972 vintage 10/22.

Geoff
Who recommends you keep it simple and basic.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,759 Posts
t-star, et. al.,

t-star is 100% CORRECT. = I have a "put together from spare gun-show parts" NYLON 66 in PLAIN BLACK.
(It has assorted pieces from at least 3 junk boxes. = I assembled it to carry in a farm PU, circa 1980 & that I would NOT "cry over" if it was stolen. - IF my much beloved & "FANCY" Remington Speedmaster "Deluxe Grade" WAS stolen, I would shed tears. = DOWNRIGHT PURTY STOCK, with more stripes than the average tiger has!!!)
Note: I must have "looked through" at least 20-30 Remington pump-.22s at a school chum's gun-store in AR to find MINE.

You just CAN'T KILL that CRUDE & 100% UGLY THING. = The "plastic .22" is the ENERGIZER BUNNY of the .22 LR World.

yours, sw
 
21 - 39 of 39 Posts
Top