SurvivalBlog.com

Rifles

Continuing with my previous article, I started to think about rifles. There are so many choices out there, and each has their fanboys who clutter the Internet daily with their endless debates—none of which gets anyone anywhere.

As I said in the other article, I dabbled a bit in 3-gun. I’m also former military, with combat deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq. I’m also a gun enthusiast, so I’ve owned or played with a wide variety of guns. I’m also a husband and a father, so I needed to consider what the wife and kids, along with the other people in my group, will wind up having to use in a SHTF scenario.

So, I went through rifle ergonomics and caliber considerations almost simultaneously, but I’ll deal with caliber first. I’m immediately discounting several rounds like .30-06, .45-70, .30-30, 6.8 SPC, .300 AAC Blackout, et cetera, because they are either rounds more appropriate for hunting or special purposes, or they are rounds not in widespread use.

So, will it be .308, .223 (along with their NATO counterparts– the 7.62 and 5.56), 7.62×39, or 5.45×45? I am a believer in the .308’s superiority to the .223. It shoots longer and more accurately, and it delivers much more at the terminal end. In a perfect world, it’s the right round.

However, I’m also a realist. It is unlikely my wife and kids will be able to carry a .308 rifle for any length of time for several years. It is also unlikely my wife and kids will be able to build up the endurance to withstand the recoil of a .308. The same is likely true of many people in my group, who are not experienced shooters (yet). I am also of the firm opinion that setting a dual standard for primary arms is a bad idea. The people who are the “odd men out” will find themselves behind the power curve, if push ever came to shove in a serious social situation.

Setting aside the .308, I’m left with the “intermediate” calibers. I deleted the 7.62×39 and the 5.45×45 next, because the geopolitical environment can rapidly shut down inexpensive and plentiful access to the ammunition. American-made ammunition for former Soviet rifles in prepper quantities is generally much more expensive. Additionally, much of the bulk ammo for these calibers is Berdan-primed and steel-cased, making it difficult to reload.

That left me with the .223. The ammo is ubiquitous in America for decent prices (during “non-crazy” times), and it shoots relatively softly. It’s also easy to reload. (Just watch out for the military crimp in surplus cases though.)

Turning to the rifle part of the equation, I’m going to discuss all of the rifles in the calibers I considered, simply to go over the ergonomics and why I arrived at the decision I made. Some may disagree with my decisions, and that’s fine. Do what works for you.

I owned an M1A for several years, and it was my “zombie rifle”. I outfitted it with a ***AMAZONamazon.com/Troy-Modular-Chassis-Flat-Earth/dp/B004YKZQO2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1427234386&sr=8-1&keywords=Troy+Modular+Chassis***Troy Modular Chassis and mounted AR accessories on it. I liked shooting it…a lot. The detractors for the M1A in its base configuration are:

• the cost of accessories to put optics on it (quality scope bases are at least a couple hundred dollars),
• the magazine release (it’s SLOW), and
• the safety configuration (you have to stick your finger into the trigger guard to turn it off).

In the configuration I had, it was even heavier to carry and slower to load. (Seating magazines is difficult in the Chassis without much adjustment to the rifle.) The charging handle is reciprocating, which means you can use it as a forward assist to ensure the bolt is in battery. However, it’s on the right side of the rifle, which means most people are going to hit it with their shooting hand. The M1A is also relatively expensive, as new rifles are in the $1400-$2000 range. I eventually traded this rifle away with some cash for an FN SCAR, which is even more expensive.

I owned a CETME for a couple of years, which is roughly analogous to the HK G3. (A debate exists as to which came first.) I liked the off-hand charging handle very much. I do not care for the safety (which is in the wrong position for me to sweep easily) or the magazine release (which has a paddle similar to the M1A that makes it somewhat slow to reload). The biggest issue I had with it was the fact that it scored my brass pretty severely, making me question whether it was safe to reuse. I have never found a satisfactory answer to this, but it’s something you should probably note if you consider this rifle. I also do not know whether the HK G3 does this to the fired brass.

I have not owned an FN/FAL and have only handled and fired one on one occasion. While it appears to be a decent rifle, the magazine release is also a paddle. (You may have noticed a theme—I don’t care for paddle releases. This is mostly because it makes the rifle slower to reload, because you generally have to grasp the magazine with your off hand and rock it forward as you hit the release. Yeah, there are high-speed reloads where you use the new magazine to hit the paddle and strip the old magazine, but that’s going to take a lot of time to master subconsciously.)

I have also not owned an AR-10 pattern rifle, which is the .308 AR. When I’ve handled them, I’ve often found that the bolt release and magazine release are in spots just different enough from the AR-15 rifle to throw me off. Your mileage may vary.

I briefly considered the AK-pattern rifle, as I considered their “normal” cartridges. Spares are generally not an issue with this rifle, because there are a large number of U.S. manufacturers of parts to get around import restrictions. My issues with the AK series have to do mostly with:

• accuracy (accurate rifles are difficult to find without paying large dollars),
• the safety (it’s a large stamped piece of steel on the right side of the gun, which you have to activate with your shooting hand), and
• the charging handle (while it’s reciprocating and acts as a forward assist, it’s also on the right side of the gun and requires you to use your shooting hand to manipulate it).

Former Soviet and Warsaw Pact guns are generally of mediocre quality, and you’ll pay just as much for a quality foreign-built AK with U.S. parts as you will for an AR, and you’ll pay more these days, actually, thanks to Obama.

Although I purchased a SCAR, I do not expect to outfit everyone in my group with one, as they are expensive; the lowest price I’ve seen on a new one is north of $2100. The same applies to other .223 rifles, like the AUG, SIG, Tavor, and FN 2000. I also dislike three of these four, as bullpup rifles are ergonomically complicated, and the ability to quickly change magazines is important to me (as you may have noticed).

In the end, I decided on the AR-15. It’s relatively inexpensive (S&W M&P-15 rifles are less than $700, in many places), and spare parts and accessories are plentiful and can be found at good prices. Spending around $100 for a stripped lower receiver (even after FFL transfer fees) can get you a full rifle for around $600, if you’re willing to put in the work, and maybe less, if you scout for your own parts. You can put together a “better-than-MILSPEC” rifle for much less than buying the high-end rifles from places like Black Rain or Adams Arms.

Ammunition is easy to get, and if you buy a chamber built for 5.56 ammunition, you can fire either military surplus or commercial .223 ammunition through it. Magazines are once again cheap and plentiful. There is little difference between magazines; the aluminum MILSPEC magazines work fine, if you switch out the followers.

Depending on your ammunition choice, you can use the AR-15 for hunting most game. If your preference is for heavier bullets, get a National Match magazine, so you can single load longer and heavier bullets.

In coming up with specifications for the group rifle builds, I’ve mandated a barrel length no less than 16” and a non-competition trigger and bolt carrier group. (I’ve found people can sometimes have issues with light triggers or with triggers designed for non-MILSPEC ammunition. Competition bolt carriers can wind up being too light to reliably seat the bolt, especially when the rifle gets dirty.) All rifles must have a muzzle brake or flash suppressor and a collapsible stock (to easily exchange rifles between members). All guns must also have iron sights available.

All other options are truly optional to the rifle’s builder or buyer, including optics, handguards, grips, sight configuration, et cetera. I want the primary users to be comfortable with their rigs and be able to optimize them for their personal use.

Again, this is not meant to be taken as the end-all/be-all in the caliber debate or the rifle debate. Everyone has their preferences and prejudices, and we all (for the moment) have the freedom to choose what we want to buy and shoot. However, I did go through a somewhat lengthy and deliberate process when making these decisions and felt it was worth sharing. I tried to eliminate bias and look at my personal situation rationally. I hope this provides a basis of discussion for you and yours.

It’s almost holy writ that preppers, looking at guns for defense, should buy a 12 gauge shotgun (preferably a pump), a .308 battle rifle of some sort (M1A and HK seem to be the most popular), and a 1911 in .45 caliber (debate on this rages).

For a while, I had all of these, along with some others. Then, I got married; then, I had kids.

I did not grow up around guns, really. My father had little to no interest in hunting, and I think we shot the guns we had maybe a dozen times while I was growing up. I have always been interested in guns, however, so I had plans to get them even before I became a prepper. Over the years, I have owned about four dozen guns of various makes and calibers. I bought guns without much of a plan and without much thought to their utility; I was the ultimate impulse buyer.

As my life went on and I accumulated the natural attachments of growing up with a wife and children, I started to reflect on being able to provide for them for the long term, even when things got really bad; I gradually became a prepper.

My wife wasn’t terribly interested at first. Then, she picked it up in a big way, as the signs of potential collapse became even more apparent. She didn’t grow up around guns either and didn’t really think about it until a few years ago. We have two boys– a young teenager and a preteen.

As I looked at what I had in my collection, it was obvious that what I had was inadequate, in spite of the relatively large number of pieces. I had some 1911s, a couple of plastic 9mms, a Garand, an M1A, a couple of ARs, and a couple of shotguns. I am a competitive shooter (USPSA) and had dabbled a bit in 3-gun. I am also a collector, so I have some WWII pieces and a few things I thought were “neat.”

Casting a critical eye on my collection, I had to make some hard choices on what to keep and what to trade to get what I really should have. I went through a decision-making process, which I think might be instructive to the readership here, and I would like to share it.

Handguns

My wife asked me to build her a 1911 a few years ago, because she likes the style and since I shoot them competitively she’s somewhat used to them. Since she’s not used to the recoil of a .45, which is what I shoot almost exclusively, we decided to build her a 9mm. I have a sweetheart load for the 9mm that’s soft shooting, especially in a steel gun.

That brings me to my first point—caliber selection. The caliber debate has raged for years and will probably continue long after I’m providing fertilizer for whatever grows where I’m buried. It’s pointless, because just about every handgun caliber is inadequate for its intended purpose—punching holes in something you’re trying to ventilate.

Handguns operate at relatively low velocities with a wide variety of bullet weights. Almost none of them deliver the appropriate shock to the target to instantly incapacitate it, regardless of anecdotal evidence to the contrary. In general, bigger and heavier bullets are better than smaller lighter ones. In general, faster bullets are better than slow ones. What this means is that a 40 grain .22 rimfire is inferior to a 440 grain .500 Smith and Wesson Magnum. Okay, we all get that, but the trade-off for a big bullet moving really fast comes down to capacity and recoil. The .22 rimfire will hold more cartridges in its magazine than the .500 will hold in its cylinder. The .22 will enable you to deliver fast follow-up shots because of the light recoil, while the .500 will not.

As you go from the extremes, you look at compromises and determine what you want. For me, I consider anything smaller and lighter than a 9mm 115 grain bullet to be marginal for human or animal targets larger than a medium-sized dog. I spend a lot of time advising people against a .380, simply because I believe a 95 grain bullet at a relatively low velocity is not adequate for self-defense. I also consider anything larger than a 230 grain .45 ACP to be a poor choice for self defense, because you wind up giving up the ability to deliver good follow-up shots and a lot of magazine capacity. I can get ten rounds of .45 ACP into a single stack magazine of practical size, while anything much larger is going to have less capacity. (Any of the magnum handgun calibers are commonly found in revolvers only and have a capacity of eight or less. Yes, I realize there are automatics in these calibers, but they are really little more than novelties and difficult to find spare parts and magazines for.) All of this led me to three basic calibers—9mm, .40 Smith and Wesson, and .45 ACP.

I am not a fan of the .40 caliber, simply because I find the recoil impulse “odd”. No offense to fans of the .40, but I don’t care for it. The .357 SIG, which is based off of the .40 case is also out for two reasons: 1) it’s a pain to reload, and 2) it’s the answer to an unasked question (if you want more velocity in a 9mm-sized bullet, go with .38 Super or 9mm +P+).

I am a huge fan of the .45 ACP, mostly because I shoot a few thousand rounds of it every year in competition. I have a load for the 200 grain semiwadcutter that’s a dream to shoot. The biggest obstacle for me with the .45 ACP as a standard caliber for my family is that I don’t think my wife and sons will be comfortable with the .45 ACP’s recoil for a few years, but I believe they can handle the 9mm’s recoil with little problem and a lot of practice.

So, that left me with the 9mm as the standard round for my family and the group of people with whom I will most likely share my preps when the Schumer hits the fan. After settling on the 9mm, I had to figure out the gun to ensure the ability to group-purchase spare parts and make sure the magazines are interchangeable. I’m still working through this, as I really think people should shoot a gun with which they’re comfortable. My plan is to have our group shoot a bunch of 9mms and choose one based on the best compromises I can make.

Although it pains me to say it, there is one gun I will probably advocate against, and that’s the 1911. The reason is that the original-pattern 1911 is capacity-limited (most flush-fit magazines are 10 rounds or less), and the 1911 has a somewhat “iffy” relationship with the 9mm cartridge.

Additionally, the 1911 requires a bit more “care and feeding” than many of the “wondernines” available today. I think Larry Vickers said it best when he said, “If you treat your pistols like we all treat our lawnmowers, then don’t get a 1911—get a GLOCK.” While I don’t abuse my pistols at all, a SHTF scenario may not allow you to spend lots of time maintaining your equipment. The more modern designs generally require less maintenance than most 1911s out there, which is why I’m advocating for them.* They’re also generally less expensive for like levels of quality.

Finally, my wife and one of my sons are both left-handed. The 1911 is simply not designed for a left-handed shooter. Magazine releases require cutting into the frame to make them for a lefty, and a slide stop for a lefty shooter doesn’t exist, as far as I can tell. The guns I settled on are generally ambidextrous.

For the purposes of our discussion, my intent is to present the following models for “peer review:”

• Smith and Wesson M&P 9L or Pro (the longer sight radius helps with recoil control and accuracy)
• Springfield Armory XDm 4.5
• SIG P320 (the modularity of the pistol is intriguing, and I just traded a .44 Magnum revolver for one with some extra magazines)
• FN FNS

You’ll note I left off some very popular brands, but I don’t shoot GLOCKs well; the grip angle messes up my natural index. HKs are generally too expensive, and I have too much negative history with the Beretta to like the idea of actually plunking down cash for one or more. I also left out double-action/single-action guns, because I don’t want to spend time training everyone on how to deal with that trigger pull.

I realize the 9mm is not a caliber some preppers would choose, but I made the choice after a lot of deliberation. I hope this sparks some discussion outside of the normal caliber debates. My next installment will talk about rifles.

*One of my gripes about people bad-mouthing the 1911 as a defensive gun is the fact that many instructors talk about the guns having stoppages during their classes, most of which deal with non-SHTF shooting situations, like using a CCW during a robbery on the street or in the home. During many of these classes, the guns shoot several hundred rounds with little to no opportunity to clean them. Most modern 1911s are built with tighter tolerances than the plastic guns do, so they gum up faster. When viewed in this light, the bad-mouthing is inappropriate. Most people who carry a gun on a daily basis are not going to go hundreds of rounds between cleanings, which means the stoppages induced by firing 600ish rounds before a cleaning won’t happen. In my competition guns (custom built and very tight), I can generally shoot a large match (300 rounds) without worrying about a stoppage of this nature. The bigger danger with a carry gun is the accumulation of lint and skin cells (depending on how the gun is carried), which can gum up any gun. Note to people who carry guns: clean them regularly, even when you’re not shooting them.