Full auto?

[22many]

In a realistic situation of a SHTF how many of you guys would convert your rifles to full auto? Generally I dont agree with a rifle being full auto (it is cool though) mainly because you are wasting alot of ammo. But, I have seen situations where it is helpful. I will admit, if it were me, and society has fallen, I would convert at least 2 of my rifles. I wouldnt do it now as its against the law but if there was no law and it came down to survival then I would.

Read More

 

[coctailer]

In a realistic situation of a SHTF how many of you guys would convert your rifles to full auto? Generally I dont agree with a rifle being full auto (it is cool though) mainly because you are wasting alot of ammo. But, I have seen situations where it is helpful. I will admit, if it were me, and society has fallen, I would convert at least 2 of my rifles. I wouldnt do it now as its against the law but if there was no law and it came down to survival then I would.

Full auto doesn't have a good purpose unless you are in combat and operating in a squad.

For average "Joe American" full auto would be a detriment vs an asset.

 

[toobigtofail]

I think the intimidation factor of having full auto is pretty strong, but the practical value of it is low, at least in a SHTF scenario.

 

[The B]

FA is extremely useful in certain CQB situations, and extremely useful as a suppressive or area denial tool. nobody will advance against belt-fed automatic fire- they'll move on to the next driveway.

either way, and especially for CQB, FA requires a huge amount of training. it is, as other say, next to useless in the hands of somebody not trained to competency.

to answer the question- absolutely, in the right scenario (total collapse, suspension/dissolution of law and order), and if i can do it right. simply pulling/filing the disconnector or some other cheesy method is NOT going to help you- you'll end up with a weapon that'll fire 2-3 round bursts and then malfunction. the weapon needs to be properly timed to actually work, and that requires OEM parts and the know-how to execute the modifications required to install them.

 

[TonsOfOregonBrass]

in a SHTF situation, My full autos would stay on semi. You cannot hit anything. and you are going to have a finite supply of ammo. 30 rounds takes 1.5 seconds. The belt feds are nice, but you cannot feed them for long. 1000 rounds goes really quickly. so unless you have your own manufacturing plant, and supply lines you will not be able to sustain the belt feds for long. i can put 1000 rounds though an m16 in a couple hours of lea-surly shooting at the range. actively engaging someone is going to drive your round count up significantly. and you are opening yourself up to return fire every time you are changing magazines.

Slow well placed shots would be much better. In a SHTF scenario i would rather have a hunting rifle that i know i can hit you as far away as possible. But that is just my opinion.

 

[1970camaroRS]

In a SHTF situation, a good powerful bolt gun with a scope and plenty of practice will be more valuable than a rifle in full auto. Keep your distance, stay unseen, shoot only when absolutely necessary. A semi auto will keep you going if you fail at staying away from danger long enough to get away.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Even if I knew how to, I wouldnt.
My rifles and their parts are designed to be reliable semi-autos. I wouldnt do anything to jepardize their reliability.

 

[Just Jim]

I can see a use for full auto if you have an original gun made for full auto. While an above poster has it right that full auto ain't good for long range accuracy on a hand held weapon it does have it's uses on a tripod. Just opinion of course

jj

 

[Stumps]

I think an SBR would be better than having full auto. The problem I see with being prepared to convert your rifle in case of SHTF is that you are not yet in that time, so possessing the factory parts to make the conversion will get you into trouble right now. Preparing for SHTF is one thing, but being stuck in jail when everything kicks off would not be good. My rifle will function fine with the shorter barrel. If there were to be a collapse, and no more laws, my AR pistol would find itself wearing a buttstock. Having the shortened length would allow for easier handling from a vehicle as I make my way to my hiding spot. I have enough rifles to designate one as vehicle gun. But seeing as there is no great collapse upon us, my pistol will stay a pistol and my rifles will live comfortably in the safe.

 

[The B]

I think an SBR would be better than having full auto. The problem I see with being prepared to convert your rifle in case of SHTF is that you are not yet in that time, so possessing the factory parts to make the conversion will get you into trouble right now. Preparing for SHTF is one thing, but being stuck in jail when everything kicks off would not be good. My rifle will function fine with the shorter barrel. If there were to be a collapse, and no more laws, my AR pistol would find itself wearing a buttstock. Having the shortened length would allow for easier handling from a vehicle as I make my way to my hiding spot. I have enough rifles to designate one as vehicle gun. But seeing as there is no great collapse upon us, my pistol will stay a pistol and my rifles will live comfortably in the safe.

this is the kicker, and it's why my guns will most likely stay un-converted for the duration after a collapse or government coup. i'm not doing a gangsta-mod.

SBRs are plenty handy, and not just for vehicles. i'm all about SBRs right now, and my everywhere-gun is a 10.5. the only way i could possibly be happier with it as an everything-gun would be if my selector clicked over just one more time.

--

much like any discussion about these hypothetical situations, there's just way too many unknowable variables. we can make up a million different scenarios and a million different ways to prepare- but when the S finallly does HTF, what are the chances it's gonna do it the way we imagined? nill, i'd wager.

but when you get right down to it, ignoring all legal considerations (for the purpose of this exercise), is there actually a negative to having the option? no.

 

[Just Jim]

Couple of negatives about full auto. You have to expend alot of ammo to learn control and accuracy. Ammo may be in short supply suddenly. Learning stoppage drills and how to keep the machine in full auto working order. Costly process and I suspect most full auto will be used in 35 meter or less ranges.

jj

 

[The B]

Couple of negatives about full auto. You have to expend alot of ammo to learn control and accuracy. Ammo may be in short supply suddenly. Learning stoppage drills and how to keep the machine in full auto working order. Costly process and I suspect most full auto will be used in 35 meter or less ranges.

jj

unless using belt-fed suppressive FA, FA should only be used at ranges inside 7m, and closer to 2-3m. 2-4 round bursts into very close targets. trying to burst at anything beyond 7ish meters is where it turns into "wasting ammo." keep it on SEMI for that. anything beyond bad-breath distance is pointless for anyone not well trained in FA muzzle control, if even there.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

unless using belt-fed suppressive FA, FA should only be used at ranges inside 7m, and closer to 2-3m. 2-4 round bursts into very close targets. trying to burst at anything beyond 7ish meters is where it turns into "wasting ammo." keep it on SEMI for that. anything beyond bad-breath distance is pointless for anyone not well trained in FA muzzle control, if even there.

Kind of a segway, but did you ever see the sniper competition show on the military channel?

They invited sniper teams from a few countries and quite a few american military sniper teams. They also allowed a pair that were SWAT members.

One of the challenges was to hit stationary targets from a moving helicopter at ~300-400 meters. First the shooter would use his primary sniper rifle, then the spotter would use his backup rifle, usually an m4.
The highest anyone scored was one hit, besides the SWAT team that is, the spotter used an 11.5" bbl m4 on full auto and managed three consecutive hits on one target.

Not that it was repeatable or recommended, but it was very impressive none the less.

 

[Just Jim]

Problem I see with full auto is the rate of fire is too fast. Most rifles are 650 to 750 rnds per minute on full auto. Would be interesting to have an adjustable AR that you could bring down to 450 rnds per min. Control would be much easier.

jj

 

[22many]

Im actually suprised that more people wouldnt. While its common sense that full auto is only for CQB it would still have its advantages.

I dont think that FA would be benificial of you had a squad. The way I see it, if there is 3 guys comming through my door and I had a squad of 5, then we are all gonna shoot. At that point, why would I need FA?

As opposed to being just me facing 3 guys comming through my door. FA would be alot more benificial. But hey, thats just my thinking.

 

[coctailer]

Im actually suprised that more people wouldnt. While its common sense that full auto is only for CQB it would still have its advantages.

I dont think that FA would be benificial of you had a squad. The way I see it, if there is 3 guys comming through my door and I had a squad of 5, then we are all gonna shoot. At that point, why would I need FA?

As opposed to being just me facing 3 guys comming through my door. FA would be alot more benificial. But hey, thats just my thinking.

FA is beneficial when operating as a squad.
One or 2 guys will lay down suppressing fire in a couple bursts while the rest of the guys move to firing position for actual kill shots.

It is mainly used to get the enemies head behind cover so they aren't firing on the guys moving to shooting position.

In my opinion, it is worthless in a survivalist situation.

 

[Martini_Up]

In a SHTF situation, a good powerful bolt gun with a scope and plenty of practice will be more valuable than a rifle in full auto. Keep your distance, stay unseen, shoot only when absolutely necessary. A semi auto will keep you going if you fail at staying away from danger long enough to get away.

Agreed. The annals of war are filled with examples of a sniper holding company sized (or greater) to a standstill whereas they're also filled with examples a few guys (even one) neutralizing machine gun nest(s). - accurate fire trumps spray-n-pray.

i'd rather have hand grenades over a FA in a SHTF world

 

[Just Jim]

Artillary actually kills the most enemies in war but that stuff is way to heavy

Man on man it seems the snipers have the best record.

jj

 

[The B]

i'd rather have hand grenades over a FA in a SHTF world

indeed.. until they make a bullet that'll fly around corners, the hand grenade will remain an extremely useful close-quarters weapon.

 

[Wenis]

I would consider the 3-round burst, but not full auto.