help needed

[slim 1,525]

Gravity and the ability of one to estimate range.

Range estimation is one of the toughest skills for a rifleman to master. It takes a lot of practice and is more "art" than science. The good news is most of us won't have occasion for shots way, way, waaaaaay out there so we won't have to worry too much about it.

Modern, high velocity rifles take a lot of the guess work out of ranges but it is still there in spades. Just not to the same degree as a rifle with a muzzle velocity of 1200 fps. Tripe the muzzle velocity and range estimation gets easier.

Exactly. The good news about AR-15s (and 5.56mm) is even with a 16" M-4 style configuration your zero will allow you to hit man-sized targets out to almost 400m without a sight correction or adjusted aiming point. A 20" barrel will get you all the way there no problem. You'll hit a little low, but who cares. Anyone hit in the groin or thighs with a 5.56 is having a bad day.

If you adjust your sights or aim at the top of the target you can get out to 500 and 600m no problem. Closer targets, hold a little lower and you'll be fine. Farther, hold a little higher. 5.56 will do the job.

Flat shooting rounds are nice!

I can reliably shoot dinner plate size groups at 600 yards with either my M1, M1A or either of 2 AR target rifle with iron sights, no scope. That is enough to classify "expert" which is 82% or better scores.

Those are again, target rifles made for that purpose at precisely known ranges. Theya re not cheap rifles.

You can get a decent AR-15 for $750 and it'll shoot consistent groups out to 600m no problem using cheap Wolf ammo. But, the shooter has to know what they're doing!

For you folks new to shooting, don't worry. It's really not that hard to learn. But you have to practice, practice, practice. Shooting is like riding a bicycle. You'll never forget how. But, riding up hills is a lot easier when you've been practicing.

Actually modern snipers have a spotter with them that do this

Optimally, you should have a spotter with you at all times. If SHTF you really don't ever want to be alone. Think about Timmy and Lassie. They were always together and if something happened to Timmy (which something ALWAYS happened to Timmy!) Lassie could go get help. Well, in our scenario Lassie can shoot her M-16 too!

A rifleman doesn't so much need a spotter as they need more riflemen working together with them. When you're at the range it's nice to have a spotter to help you make corrections and call your shots. But, out in the sh!t, better to have two (or more) shooters working together to engage multiple targets simultaneously. It's amazing what a couple of guys can accomplish when they know what they're doing.

You can literally make them disappear in a matter of seconds.

Practice, practice, practice!!!

For storage all mine are

Mine are in various places and conditions as well. I'm not too worried about rust and dry storage, etc. I simply keep mine leaned up against the wall or in a closet (in cases!) or whatever. I don't have a lot of space in my little apartment so that's just the way it works for me. Kind of out of options.

They do need a good cleanin more often that way. Just a good excuse to play with my rifles!

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I keep the elephant rifle in the kitchen in case elephants come to trample our flowers. So far it has worked perfectly, no elephants have trampled our flowers! More guns, less crime!

Seriously, if I were just starting now in DCM matches I would go for the AR-15 right off. when I satarted shooting the "mouse gun" was not even in the league to compete. After they came out with the A2 model they started showing up and all the old shooters laughed at them until they cleaned our clocks a few times and then we were looking to buy one!

I am an old #### so I still like walnut and steel and heavy rifles that push back when you shoot them, but you cannot beat the value of a target grade rifle out of the box or being able to modify it and add dozens of gizmos, switch cartridges, barrel lengths and types, etc. without a gunsmith. The M1 and M1A are great, great rifles. And they are capable of outstanding accuracy but to compete you are looking at spending upwards of $2000, even $2500 to get them shooting as they can. You can compete with an AR for half that. You can be unbeatable for $2000 with an AR. My fully tricked out A3 match rifle cost less than $1500 and is "out of the box" except for the sights which I attached myself.

[slim 1,525]

You can't buy skill. But, you can take a little skill and put that on top of some great equipment.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

You can't buy skill. But, you can take a little skill and put that on top of some great equipment.

True.

I was shooting skeet with my dad once, each of us using our M12 Winchesters. we were crushing the targets and as usual giving each other the beans. If we nicked a chip off one we would say "You are going to count THAT????" The guy shooting with us had a Perazzi, he was a new shooter (you can tell, you do not have to ask) and was missing nearly all the targets. He asked my dad to try the gun and he crushed two pair of doubles back to back.

He handed the gun back, said it was "broken" and told the guy to take it back and trade it for a Remington 870 and 400 cases of shells.

I often miss shooting with him.

Edited November 4, 2011 by Gary and Alla

[visaveteran1 33]

I carried the M-16 in Nam as a rifleman (or Cavalryman actually) and I am not a fan of the "black rifles." It did, and still does, feel like a Mattel Toy gun, especially after using the M-14 in Basic Training. In Nam they did everything wrong with the M-16. No cleaning kits; flawed cheapo mags that required us to only put in 16 or 17 rounds ; dirty ammo for a gun that requires clean ammo; and a cheesy bayonet most of us tossed and bought Randall Bowies, in case if we had to get in Charlie's face. The M-16 is not made for bayonet fighting, so right off you give up a big plus for rifles like the M-14 which had a solid bayonet and were very good for bayonet fighting...plus the butt of the 14 was lethal as a striker.

Today, a lot of "tactical wannabees" and fighting weapons hobbyists keep adding more ####### on it...lasers, lights, red dots, rails, one point slings, "tactical forends, blah blah blah. And they don't even opt for a real rifle...they go with the CAR-15 like carbines. In Nam, the only thing worse than the M-16 rifle was the CAR-15.

The only thing you can say about the M-16/M-4 rifle is it's light weight and so is the ammo. Only problem is, frail little people with big heavy rifles and ammo keep kicking our azz. They don't have lasers, lights, red dots...just iron sights and a moldy leather two point sling...maybe. And their bayonet, in a statement of good battlefield design, is well made and versatile.

Truth is, most of the SOG, Delta, Black Ops, and behind enemy lines types do not use M-4s.

If the SHTF event occurs, as it will in some manner and for some duration, I want a pump scattergun and a couple good auto pistols. A rifle that shoots 400 meters doesn't seem like what I'll need as the mobs stroll down my street and try to take things from me (including my life) or act like animals (literally) with my wife and family.

If I choose to carry a rifle, it might be something like the Kel-Tec SU-16 Charlie version. I've done my time with Eugene Stoners creation, which unfortunately, the Army took and screwed up and bastardized it, and continues to do so.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I carried the M-16 in Nam as a rifleman (or Cavalryman actually) and I am not a fan of the "black rifles." It did, and still does, feel like a Mattel Toy gun, especially after using the M-14 in Basic Training. In Nam they did everything wrong with the M-16. No cleaning kits; flawed cheapo mags that required us to only put in 16 or 17 rounds ; dirty ammo for a gun that requires clean ammo; and a cheesy bayonet most of us tossed and bought Randall Bowies, in case if we had to get in Charlie's face. The M-16 is not made for bayonet fighting, so right off you give up a big plus for rifles like the M-14 which had a solid bayonet and were very good for bayonet fighting...plus the butt of the 14 was lethal as a striker.

Today, a lot of "tactical wannabees" and fighting weapons hobbyists keep adding more ####### on it...lasers, lights, red dots, rails, one point slings, "tactical forends, blah blah blah. And they don't even opt for a real rifle...they go with the CAR-15 like carbines. In Nam, the only thing worse than the M-16 rifle was the CAR-15.

The only thing you can say about the M-16/M-4 rifle is it's light weight and so is the ammo. Only problem is, frail little people with big heavy rifles and ammo keep kicking our azz. They don't have lasers, lights, red dots...just iron sights and a moldy leather two point sling...maybe. And their bayonet, in a statement of good battlefield design, is well made and versatile.

Truth is, most of the SOG, Delta, Black Ops, and behind enemy lines types do not use M-4s.

If the SHTF event occurs, as it will in some manner and for some duration, I want a pump scattergun and a couple good auto pistols. A rifle that shoots 400 meters doesn't seem like what I'll need as the mobs stroll down my street and try to take things from me (including my life) or act like animals (literally) with my wife and family.

If I choose to carry a rifle, it might be something like the Kel-Tec SU-16 Charlie version. I've done my time with Eugene Stoners creation, which unfortunately, the Army took and screwed up and bastardized it, and continues to do so.

My experience with them is strictly on the target line so I cannot comment on battle conditions and rifle competitors are generally mush more familiar and better trained with their rifles than conscripts. We called them "black rifles", "mouse guns", and "Made by Mattel" rifles.

The M-16 was a joke in target competition before 1983. The barrel was too thin and flexed to easily, pull a tight sling on an old M-16 and you moved the point of aim several inches at 200 yards and a couple feet at 600 yards. They were unreliable, hardly a life threatening thing in a target match, but in timed rapid fire it means you may as well throw down the rifle and go home. I can say that if it could not cut it in a DCM match it should not be in the hands of men getting shot at for their country. Not to mention the sight adjustments were ludicrous.

The A2 change all that. They were reliable, had heavy barrels you cannot bend with a sling, good sights that adjust easily and accruately all the adjustment is taken in the rear sight. They were accurate, very accurate. at first we still laughed but then they kept showing up on the top of the scoreboard and they kept multiplying on the line until now they completely dominate.

I would imagine they are now a better battle rifle than you had in 'Nam, VV but I have to admit a love for the M14 myself and I would recommend them to new shooters IF they can pay the freight, they are not a cheap rifle either to buy or make shoot really well.

The M14 is my favorite target rifle, the M1 a close second but I have to admit the M14 is the superior gun. I keep the M1 and an old Winchester M52 Target with the military looking stock as they were my rifles in High School that I used for competition on the rifle team. I will keep them.

[visaveteran1 33]

My experience with them is strictly on the target line so I cannot comment on battle conditions and rifle competitors are generally mush more familiar and better trained with their rifles than conscripts. We called them "black rifles", "mouse guns", and "Made by Mattel" rifles.

The M-16 was a joke in target competition before 1983. The barrel was too thin and flexed to easily, pull a tight sling on an old M-16 and you moved the point of aim several inches at 200 yards and a couple feet at 600 yards. They were unreliable, hardly a life threatening thing in a target match, but in timed rapid fire it means you may as well throw down the rifle and go home. I can say that if it could not cut it in a DCM match it should not be in the hands of men getting shot at for their country. Not to mention the sight adjustments were ludicrous.

The A2 change all that. They were reliable, had heavy barrels you cannot bend with a sling, good sights that adjust easily and accruately all the adjustment is taken in the rear sight. They were accurate, very accurate. at first we still laughed but then they kept showing up on the top of the scoreboard and they kept multiplying on the line until now they completely dominate.

I would imagine they are now a better battle rifle than you had in 'Nam, VV but I have to admit a love for the M14 myself and I would recommend them to new shooters IF they can pay the freight, they are not a cheap rifle either to buy or make shoot really well.

The M14 is my favorite target rifle, the M1 a close second but I have to admit the M14 is the superior gun. I keep the M1 and an old Winchester M52 Target with the military looking stock as they were my rifles in High School that I used for competition on the rifle team. I will keep them.

Astute comments Gary and I yield to your experience and expertise handling target quality rifles. I know there has been an incremental process to fix and upgrade the Stoner guns. I can not argue there is improvement and they shoot well in target scenarios, but I still dislike the basic design. It requires continual cleaning and maintenance...some of us do that with all our guns and some don't. And in war zones, those things become more difficult. Aside from the cleaning deal, I dislike the charging handle and the seemingly useless "forward assist." It is a problem for me because if the magazine is not fully seated, you can pull the charging handle and think you've racked a round in the chamber...but you have not. Later, when you pull the trigger, all you get is "click!" I saw this in Nam. There was not a solid magazine well "snap" when you inserted a magazine. You HAD to smack it several times just to make sure. With the M-14 you knew you chambered a round. You could feel it and see it. And it was easy to pull back on the handle and confirm you had, indeed chambered a round. I much prefer a real rack style handle like the M-14 has to lock and load.

I've lost touch with the 556/223 debate about ammo but I still struggle shooting what is basically a "22" round. I am not an expert but I think bigger rounds cycle better but I know the ammo experts can do their alchemy magic and get a lot out of smaller rounds.

In Vietnam, upon occasion, a squad out on ambush would open up on a stray NVA soldier...maybe a scout or just out alone looking for water. I was amazed at how many rounds we would put through them before they'd drop. Granted they might be running and just held up by adrenaline and momentum and nerves firing off their last shot of electric pulse, but still I was amazed by what I saw at times. I believe bigger rounds, by shear impact force, would take them down quicker. But I know there are those that fully support the smaller, dynamic bullets that are supposed to tumble and cause a lot of trauma. All I know is what I witnessed. That was a long time ago. Hopefully, the ammo is more effective today, but I ask myself, what would I prefer to shoot FMJ? A .223 or a 308? I'll take the 308 if I'm in combat and had a choice.

So Gary, I'm with you on the M-14. Great gun and you can hit things way down range with just the iron sights. It comes from a great lineage of guns from WWII. The ammo is proven and I never heard anything about bad magazines. Like the AK-47, it is solid, reliable, works dirty and is a real bayonet friendly weapon. Yes, they don't come cheap.

[baron555 934]

Like I said, my M-14 would be my SHTF rifle.

And, the current AR-15 is nothing like the early M-16

####### Culver described the issues in great personal detail over on his and Gloria's forums website.

[slim 1,525]

I missed the party again... I was too busy Appleseeding!

He handed the gun back, said it was "broken" and told the guy to take it back and trade it for a Remington 870 and 400 cases of shells.

Along the lines of the best advice I've ever heard on shooting.

I often miss shooting with him.

Shooting with family is priceless. Wonderful, wonderful time at the range and afield. Timeless memories for sure!

If the SHTF event occurs, as it will in some manner and for some duration, I want a pump scattergun and a couple good auto pistols. A rifle that shoots 400 meters doesn't seem like what I'll need as the mobs stroll down my street and try to take things from me (including my life) or act like animals (literally) with my wife and family.

As Phil and Gary have already pointed out, all the "issues" with the M-16 have been pretty much fixed with the A2. Sure, it's still not a big, heavy, beefy rifle like the M-14s but it makes up for that with it's ability to put accurate, aimed fire downrange very, very quickly.

I like the scatterguns quite a bit too and will keep one on my kit. I have a shotgun scabbard on the side of my ALICE pack. It will be with me. But, I'll be carrying my AR-15A2.

Astute comments Gary and I yield to your experience and expertise handling target quality rifles. I know there has been an incremental process to fix and upgrade the Stoner guns. I can not argue there is improvement and they shoot well in target scenarios, but I still dislike the basic design. It requires continual cleaning and maintenance...some of us do that with all our guns and some don't. And in war zones, those things become more difficult. Aside from the cleaning deal, I dislike the charging handle and the seemingly useless "forward assist." It is a problem for me because if the magazine is not fully seated, you can pull the charging handle and think you've racked a round in the chamber...but you have not. Later, when you pull the trigger, all you get is "click!" I saw this in Nam. There was not a solid magazine well "snap" when you inserted a magazine. You HAD to smack it several times just to make sure. With the M-14 you knew you chambered a round. You could feel it and see it. And it was easy to pull back on the handle and confirm you had, indeed chambered a round. I much prefer a real rack style handle like the M-14 has to lock and load.

I've used them in mud, sand, cold weather, hot weather, dirty, clean.... they work now. All the "issues" you discuss are a thing of the past. Your training and personal preference will lead you to the more venerable rifles but my training and preference takes me toward the Stoners and away from the beasts of yesteryear.

I run my rifle dirty and reload via the forward assist. I give it a good tap and I can send the bolt forward. They have a thing now called the Magpul B.A.D. lever and it's quite handy in doing quick reloads. It's amazing to watch how quickly an AR operator can sustain aimed, accurate fire on a target. Someone with an M-14 can engage nowhere near the same number of targets.

I'm with you on the difference between the "real rifle" and the "toy guns." But, for zombie control, I'd rather have the ability to take out multiple targets quickly over hitting one really solid. Hence, the AR over the shotgun and also the AR over the M-14. I've shot several M-14s and M-1s and they're fine implements of battle. But, my training and preference dictates I carry a mousegun.

I've lost touch with the 556/223 debate about ammo but I still struggle shooting what is basically a "22" round. I am not an expert but I think bigger rounds cycle better but I know the ammo experts can do their alchemy magic and get a lot out of smaller rounds.

In Vietnam, upon occasion, a squad out on ambush would open up on a stray NVA soldier...maybe a scout or just out alone looking for water. I was amazed at how many rounds we would put through them before they'd drop. Granted they might be running and just held up by adrenaline and momentum and nerves firing off their last shot of electric pulse, but still I was amazed by what I saw at times. I believe bigger rounds, by shear impact force, would take them down quicker. But I know there are those that fully support the smaller, dynamic bullets that are supposed to tumble and cause a lot of trauma. All I know is what I witnessed. That was a long time ago. Hopefully, the ammo is more effective today, but I ask myself, what would I prefer to shoot FMJ? A .223 or a 308? I'll take the 308 if I'm in combat and had a choice.

For zombie control I'd almost rather have a .22LR with 30rd. mags than my shotgun. Sure, the shotgun will work, but at 100 yards, I can engage several targets in a crowd. With the shotgun (or even an M-14) I'd be engaging less targets.

For me, it comes down to target engagement vs. target elimination. Without a doubt, shotguns, .45s, M-1s, etc., are going to completely eliminate a threat in short order but how many threats can they engage in 30 seconds? With an AR you can, quite literally, single-handedly engage HUNDREDS of targets with decent effect. I'm looking at the zombie hoarde, not necessarily Charlie walking through the bush.

[baron555 934]

For zombie control I'd almost rather have a .22LR with 30rd. mags than my shotgun. Sure, the shotgun will work, but at 100 yards, I can engage several targets in a crowd. With the shotgun (or even an M-14) I'd be engaging less targets.

For me, it comes down to target engagement vs. target elimination. Without a doubt, shotguns, .45s, M-1s, etc., are going to completely eliminate a threat in short order but how many threats can they engage in 30 seconds? With an AR you can, quite literally, single-handedly engage HUNDREDS of targets with decent effect. I'm looking at the zombie hoarde, not necessarily Charlie walking through the bush.

I can't see how using an AR will give one the ability to engage more targets than my M-14? Care to elaborate?

And Copes is now offering a 100 round magazine for the M-14 !!!

And I don't know how I let this slip.......but my SHTF shotgun would most likely be my Saiga 12. I have 5, 10 and 30 round magazines for that.

Imagine......a semi-automatic, auto loading 12 GA shotgun? Saiga 12.....I have two! (Always need a backup). Check 'em out!

[visaveteran1 33]

For zombie control I'd almost rather have a .22LR with 30rd. mags than my shotgun. Sure, the shotgun will work, but at 100 yards, I can engage several targets in a crowd. With the shotgun (or even an M-14) I'd be engaging less targets.

For me, it comes down to target engagement vs. target elimination. Without a doubt, shotguns, .45s, M-1s, etc., are going to completely eliminate a threat in short order but how many threats can they engage in 30 seconds? With an AR you can, quite literally, single-handedly engage HUNDREDS of targets with decent effect. I'm looking at the zombie hoarde, not necessarily Charlie walking through the bush.

I can't see how using an AR will give one the ability to engage more targets than my M-14? Care to elaborate?

And Copes is now offering a 100 round magazine for the M-14 !!!

And I don't know how I let this slip.......but my SHTF shotgun would most likely be my Saiga 12. I have 5, 10 and 30 round magazines for that.

Imagine......a semi-automatic, auto loading 12 GA shotgun? Saiga 12.....I have two! (Always need a backup). Check 'em out!

The Saiga is an impressive shotgun and I have to tip my hat to the Russians for the non traditional design that offers a lot of firepower with magazines and drums instead of mag tubes. It is an "outside the box" shotgun that brings back memories of the VERY outside the box Rhodesian-made "Street Sweeper" shotgun. The Saiga's are, of course, not cheap. I just today bought my son a Remington 870 Express 6+1 for $330. I bought one for myself about 12 or 13 years ago for $245. That's impressive that Remington has kept a sweet shotgun like the 870 at such an affordable price over the years. And I do like to rack that 870 and it shoots pretty fast for a pump.

Kel-Tec is another example of a company building guns outside the box with success. Their new shotgun is pretty cool and once they get some bugs out, it will be a good seller I think.

Baron, you have a great arsenal. Nice choices.

[visaveteran1 33]

I missed the party again... I was too busy Appleseeding!

Along the lines of the best advice I've ever heard on shooting.

Shooting with family is priceless. Wonderful, wonderful time at the range and afield. Timeless memories for sure!

As Phil and Gary have already pointed out, all the "issues" with the M-16 have been pretty much fixed with the A2. Sure, it's still not a big, heavy, beefy rifle like the M-14s but it makes up for that with it's ability to put accurate, aimed fire downrange very, very quickly.

I like the scatterguns quite a bit too and will keep one on my kit. I have a shotgun scabbard on the side of my ALICE pack. It will be with me. But, I'll be carrying my AR-15A2.

I've used them in mud, sand, cold weather, hot weather, dirty, clean.... they work now. All the "issues" you discuss are a thing of the past. Your training and personal preference will lead you to the more venerable rifles but my training and preference takes me toward the Stoners and away from the beasts of yesteryear.

I run my rifle dirty and reload via the forward assist. I give it a good tap and I can send the bolt forward. They have a thing now called the Magpul B.A.D. lever and it's quite handy in doing quick reloads. It's amazing to watch how quickly an AR operator can sustain aimed, accurate fire on a target. Someone with an M-14 can engage nowhere near the same number of targets.

I'm with you on the difference between the "real rifle" and the "toy guns." But, for zombie control, I'd rather have the ability to take out multiple targets quickly over hitting one really solid. Hence, the AR over the shotgun and also the AR over the M-14. I've shot several M-14s and M-1s and they're fine implements of battle. But, my training and preference dictates I carry a mousegun.

For zombie control I'd almost rather have a .22LR with 30rd. mags than my shotgun. Sure, the shotgun will work, but at 100 yards, I can engage several targets in a crowd. With the shotgun (or even an M-14) I'd be engaging less targets.

For me, it comes down to target engagement vs. target elimination. Without a doubt, shotguns, .45s, M-1s, etc., are going to completely eliminate a threat in short order but how many threats can they engage in 30 seconds? With an AR you can, quite literally, single-handedly engage HUNDREDS of targets with decent effect. I'm looking at the zombie hoarde, not necessarily Charlie walking through the bush.

Slim...I honor your working experience with the modern M4 rifles. I have zero experience, so if you say they work, I hear you. My experience was such that my trust was badly broken. Kind of like when you buy a car that's a lemon, you'd never buy another...even 20 years later, though the car may now be great.

I like the shotgun scabbard carry method attached to your gear. VooDoo makes a few interesting shotgun items. They have a cool carrying case but not cheap and not really a SHTF item...maybe for the range or basic transporting. But they do make a scabbard too, I think. Anyway, I like the concept.

For Zombies, I'd love to get my hands on some frag grenades...or a 90mm recoilless rifle with some beehive rounds!

Glad to see we're all prepared...just in case.

[baron555 934]

Baron, you have a great arsenal. Nice choices.

Tnx, they all have their purpose and are fun in their own way.

For Zombies, I'd love to get my hands on some frag grenades...or a 90mm recoilless rifle with some beehive rounds!

Try 12 GA Flechettes rounds for your 870, superb for clusters of Zombies!

Glad to see we're all prepared...just in case.

[slim 1,525]

I can't see how using an AR will give one the ability to engage more targets than my M-14? Care to elaborate?

And Copes is now offering a 100 round magazine for the M-14 !!!

First off, the recoil is so great on the M-1/M-14 that follow up shots take about twice as long as they do with an AR. We're talking milliseconds here, but that time adds up when engaging multiple targets. Then you factor in swinging that heavy, long barreled rifle around and you're adding a few milliseconds in there as well.

Next, look at mag swaps. Sure, you can get pretty quick with you M-14 mag swaps but it's nowhere near as fast as with an AR.

Compare 20 round mags to 30 round mags. Mag changes are less frequent and when necessary, are done more quickly. I know you can customize mags to whatever you want, 40s, 50s, 100rd drums... but what's the basic load going to be?

And lastly, how are you going to move around with all that ####### on? You're basically getting 1/3 MORE shots with an AR and the weight is so much less you can carry about TWICE as much ammo.

And I don't know how I let this slip.......but my SHTF shotgun would most likely be my Saiga 12. I have 5, 10 and 30 round magazines for that.

Imagine......a semi-automatic, auto loading 12 GA shotgun? Saiga 12.....I have two! (Always need a backup). Check 'em out!

I've got a few more things to take care of but once I get those lined out, Saiga-12 is on the list.

The Saiga is an impressive shotgun and I have to tip my hat to the Russians for the non traditional design

Uh.... it's a pretty traditional Russian design!

that offers a lot of firepower with magazines and drums instead of mag tubes. It is an "outside the box" shotgun that brings back memories of the VERY outside the box Rhodesian-made "Street Sweeper" shotgun. The Saiga's are, of course, not cheap. I just today bought my son a Remington 870 Express 6+1 for $330. I bought one for myself about 12 or 13 years ago for $245. That's impressive that Remington has kept a sweet shotgun like the 870 at such an affordable price over the years. And I do like to rack that 870 and it shoots pretty fast for a pump.

I think we're going to see a lot of "outside the box" contraptions for shooting shotgun shells. A simple slam fire pipe system works just fine and there are some really cool early warning devices/booby traps that use a 12ga shell.

There are a bunch of 870s (etc.) out there and I wouldn't be surprised if people carry them everywhere. They will probably be to our SHTF as the AK is to the rest of the world.

Kel-Tec is another example of a company building guns outside the box with success. Their new shotgun is pretty cool and once they get some bugs out, it will be a good seller I think.

I really like that one. I haven't seen any yet but once they're available I'll probably find the cash for one and do a little "field research."

Slim...I honor your working experience with the modern M4 rifles. I have zero experience, so if you say they work, I hear you. My experience was such that my trust was badly broken. Kind of like when you buy a car that's a lemon, you'd never buy another...even 20 years later, though the car may now be great.

I like the shotgun scabbard carry method attached to your gear. VooDoo makes a few interesting shotgun items. They have a cool carrying case but not cheap and not really a SHTF item...maybe for the range or basic transporting. But they do make a scabbard too, I think. Anyway, I like the concept.

For Zombies, I'd love to get my hands on some frag grenades...or a 90mm recoilless rifle with some beehive rounds!

Glad to see we're all prepared...just in case.

I understand what you're going through. The original M-16 was a piece of #######. And today, you can't just take a M-16 and expect it to run flawlessly no matter what. It's a finicky rifle and the parts have to be matched up right. Sometimes even the ammo has to be matched for it to work well. But, once that combination is figured out, it'll run all day long.

The military version of the M-16A2 and the M-4s will fire the M-855 all day long in just about every condition imaginable.

I'm fighting the same battle now with Wolf, Bear, Tula, etc., Russian ammo. Everyone thinks it's ####### because, well, it used to be #######. About 10 years ago it was lacquer coated and the specs weren't too tight. It would gum up a rifle, fail to fire, fail to extract, break extractors, all types of problems. But, they've tightened up their tolerances, switched to a polymer coating and it's now pretty accurate ammo that's reliable as all get out.

And it's cheap!

For shotgun ammo I like the Dragon's Breath. Good for crowd control and pyschological operations as well. "Oh sh!t, I'm on fire!!!"

On a related note, I bought another AR last night. I got a DPMS 16" lightweight carbine last night. Almost like the CAR-15 but a little longer barrel to be legal and whatnot. I figure this one will be for my wife. The other new one was supposed to be hers but this one is a tad lighter so she'll probably get this one.

Edited November 8, 2011 by slim

[visaveteran1 33]

Flechettes for the 12 ga...I like it! Off to Google some buying sources right now.