Good firearm idea, as well as some other things.

[A Nomadic Hobo]

So a good and cheap SHTF (in every way) rifle is the mosin nagant; it's powerful enough to take down anything, renowned for accuracy, and very cheap to buy and shoot. It's one of my first choices for a good gun as it's also indestructible. Next is a ak-47 for obvious SHTF reasons.

some other good stuff to know if that property in oregon county is selling from 2,000$ to 15,000$ and a lot of it's 20+ miles from anywhere. Build a cabin, some solar panels, a food stock, munitions cash (including a ammo reloading kit), and you're set.

Read More

 

[Decker]

So a good and cheap SHTF (in every way) rifle is the mosin nagant; it's powerful enough to take down anything, renowned for accuracy, and very cheap to buy and shoot. It's one of my first choices for a good gun as it's also indestructible. Next is a ak-47 for obvious SHTF reasons.

some other good stuff to know if that property in oregon county is selling from 2,000$ to 15,000$ and a lot of it's 20+ miles from anywhere. Build a cabin, some solar panels, a food stock, munitions cash (including a ammo reloading kit), and you're set.

Hey Hobo, what county are you referring to?

 

[A Nomadic Hobo]

Mainly Klamath county

 

[Decker]

Thanks, hobo.

 

[SurvivalistSong]

If you could only have one rifle, and one rifle only for shtf protection, I'd choose an AK-47.

It costs 4x more than a mosin, but it's money well spent.

Bolt action, other than a hunting/sniper rifle, is obsolete and may end up killing you if you were to actually use it during a firefight.

Plus, I don't get why people go gaga over the SKS. It's heavy and often doesn't even accept a 30 round magazine. For that kind of money, I'd rather get a cheap WASR AK.




I've never had an AK-47 fail to fire after 5000+ rounds, and I would trust my life with nothing else but an AK.

 

[Sasquatchvnv]

No argument on the Mosin - probably the best deal going on a bolt action. But if I could have only one - it would have to be the AK-74. The 5.45 is a great round in every respect - light, inexpensive, versatile and highly effective. The Saiga 5.45 is only $399.00 most places - or you could slap together a 5.45 AR upper for about the same money.

 

[SurvivalistSong]

No argument on the Mosin - probably the best deal going on a bolt action. But if I could have only one - it would have to be the AK-74. The 5.45 is a great round in every respect - light, inexpensive, versatile and highly effective. The Saiga 5.45 is only $399.00 most places - or you could slap together a 5.45 AR upper for about the same money.

ah yes, the ak-74 would also be nice for shtf. I have a bulgarian polymer stock 74, and it feels like a more rugged AR-15. I also slapped on a rail attachment and a red-dot scope, so target acquisition is a cinch.


but i'm currently liking the bigger caliber of the 47. I'd probably give my 74 to a family member with a smaller frame than me, such as my sister, during shtf.

 

[jake_16_1999]

If you could only have one rifle, and one rifle only for shtf protection, I'd choose an AK-47.

It costs 4x more than a mosin, but it's money well spent.

Bolt action, other than a hunting/sniper rifle, is obsolete and may end up killing you if you were to actually use it during a firefight.

Plus, I don't get why people go gaga over the SKS. It's heavy and often doesn't even accept a 30 round magazine. For that kind of money, I'd rather get a cheap WASR AK.




I've never had an AK-47 fail to fire after 5000+ rounds, and I would trust my life with nothing else but an AK.

I completely agree with this entire statement. I have still yet to find a 30 mag that functions flawlessly with my SKS, but my AK functions with everything, and will eat any brand of ammo I feed it.

 

[soberups]

I completely agree with this entire statement. I have still yet to find a 30 mag that functions flawlessly with my SKS, but my AK functions with everything, and will eat any brand of ammo I feed it.

I own and like both guns.
One fact that is often overlooked is that the SKS with the fixed 10 rd mag is a lot easier to fire accurately from a prone position. Another advantage from a cost perspective is that stripper clips are a lot cheaper (and lighter) than 30 round magazines. With an AK, once your mags are empty you pretty much have a club until you get them reloaded, whereas its quite easy to "top off" a partially depleted SKS mag or load loose rounds singly.

I do know from experience that the aftermarket "duckbill" 30 round SKS mags are a waste of time and money. You are much better off using the fixed mag and reloading with stripper clips.

 

[Gunner3456]

I'm lost. The 47 round is very comparable ballistically to a 30-30, meaning it isn't "all that." The 74 round is more comparable to a longer distance, flatter shooting 5.56 NATO but still gives the reliability of an AK. The rounds and mags are lighter and you can carry more.

Our military seems to do fine with the AR design, but ammo costs a lot more than surplus for a 74.

If I think I really need more power and distance, it will be an AR-10 in .308.

I agree bolt actions are obsolete for battle rifles.

With all of the above, you couldn't run fast enough to give me an AKM-47. Make mine a 74.

$.02

Peace.

 

[MikeE]

Here is a question I am wondering about. I say this as an AK owner. In any situation where we citizens would actually be using rifles, i doubt the supply line from Tula to the LGS will still be up. I have reloading set up for 5.56, not so for 7.62x39. In a long-term SHTF situation, is the best gun the one you can keep supplied and maintained?

 

[soberups]

Here is a question I am wondering about. I say this as an AK owner. In any situation where we citizens would actually be using rifles, i doubt the supply line from Tula to the LGS will still be up. I have reloading set up for 5.56, not so for 7.62x39. In a long-term SHTF situation, is the best gun the one you can keep supplied and maintained?

x39 is still cheap enough that you could stockpile a lifetime supply of it without worrying about reloading. It is highly unlikely that a long term SHTF scenario will involve continous battlefield type firefights. How many rounds does a person realistically need? I know I feel OK with the 1,000 rd case of Golden Tiger I bought 4 yrs ago for $200. In a long term SHTF scenario the most versatile "survival round" will be the .22LR, it is the best all-around choice for keeping yourself fed with game animals ranging from squirrels to deer. Its quiet, its cheap, and its quite capable of ruining a bad guys day out to 100 yards or more if you know what you are doing.

 

[CaliberGeek]

Here is a question I am wondering about. I say this as an AK owner. In any situation where we citizens would actually be using rifles, i doubt the supply line from Tula to the LGS will still be up. I have reloading set up for 5.56, not so for 7.62x39. In a long-term SHTF situation, is the best gun the one you can keep supplied and maintained?

1000 rounds of 7.62x39 for your AK should last you a lifetime. In a real shtf, if you're surviving continous intense firefights.... you must be rambo.


It's easy enough to buy 10,000 rounds of .22LR for utility and small game hunting use, but how much combat would you ACTUALLY see in a shtf scenario? One? Two? Maybe more if it really hits hard or if Canada invades


Everyone's goal during shtf should be to stay low, avoid all disputes and conflicts, and ride out the storm. I do not understand preppers who store 9999 rounds of this and 9999 rounds of that and 9999 rounds of this and that. Unless they are supplying a company or battalion of prepper friends, I don't see the purpose.

I'd rather use that money to store more food/water and perhaps buy a house security/alarm system.







My opinion is that if people know you're armed, they won't mess with you. The people who would mess with you would be:
1.) Very desperate people who weren't preppers and never was prepared and are willing to sacrifice their life to steal goodies
2.) Marauding gangs trying to control territory and pillage what they can

For #1, a few shots towards there way should scare them off. If they continue, then have your family all grab a rifle and shoot a volley of rounds. If it does't kill him/her, THAT should be enough to scare him/her away.


For #2, this is where your social networking during shtf really comes into play. You and your neighbors, family, and friends better have some kind of organized collaboration going on. If you have a whole culdesac or neighborhood band together with rifles, shotguns, and handguns... organized in strategic locations and formation... with scheduled patrols.... no gang would be in their right mind to stroll through and pillage.





Basically, shtf would be like a time machine. We'd all have to go back to our animal instincts and caveman days.

Eat.

Drink.

Sleep.

Protect territory.

Socialize with the right people.

Hope that civilization and rule of law is reestablished.



Even short-term shtf such as the L.A riots in Koreatown, all the korean shop owners camped out in their stores with their family and friends with AR-15 rifles and handguns and defended their store from looters. We'll all have to do the same once the Zombie Canadians cross the border and invade.

 

[M67]

jmho~

We have choosen the 7.62x39mm and 7.62x51 as our primary calibers for the simple fact, that they pack a punch that the 5.56 and 5.45x39mm do not have.

I have to ask myself, if the 5.56 and 5.45x39mm are such great rounds, why are they not allowed for use on big game, like the 7.62x39mm, 7.62x51 and 7.62x54r.

Yes the 5.56 and 5.45x39mm have a higher velocity, but the 7.62x39mm and 7.62x51 have more energy to deliver at typical engagement ranges and simply provide more penitration and make a larger holes to bleed your target out, animal or human.

The 7.62x39mm, 7.62x51 are both excellent calibers for a SHTF situation, but they are not the only weapons we have stockpiled.

With that said, we have, 10/22's, AR 15's, SKS's, AK's, FN FAL's, AR 10's, O3 Springfield's and Mosin nagant's. Anything beyond the ranges these weapons, will be taken care of by our scoped long guns.

The chances of finding brass from your semi auto rifles in the field is slim (easy if defending a fixed position), so we have stockpiled plenty of ammo for each caliber, replacement parts and magazines (as needed) as well.

We not only have the supplies to reload what we can recover, we can also pull FMJ bullets from the US/Russian military ball ammo and replace them with bullets of our choice, depending on our needs.

I have family or friends that may show up with only a handgun or no firearm and i will be able to provide them with rifles and handguns they can handle, that are time/battle proven.

A wide variety of weapons is a valuble asset that can not be overlooked, not only with rifles, but handguns as well.

M67

 

[Gunner3456]

jmho~

We have choosen the 7.62x39mm and 7.62x51 as our primary calibers for the simple fact, that they pack a punch that the 5.56 and 5.45x39mm do not have.

I have to ask myself, if the 5.56 and 5.45x39mm are such great rounds, why are they not allowed for use on big game, like the 7.62x39mm, 7.62x51 and 7.62x54r.

I believe it's legal to hunt deer in Oregon with a .223 or 5.56.

Why don't you instead ask yourself why our troops use that round?

Yes the 5.56 and 5.45x39mm have a higher velocity, but the 7.62x39mm and 7.62x51 have more energy to deliver at typical engagement ranges and simply provide more penitration and make a larger holes to bleed your target out, animal or human.

I think that depends a lot on where you are. On my acreage, I can see some 300 yard shots from my house. An AK-47 would be hopeless.

A wide variety of weapons is a valuble asset that can not be overlooked, not only with rifles, but handguns as well.

I went the other way to consolidate calibers so that I have more rounds for any gun. For rifles I now have only .22lr, .5.56 NATO and .308, but I have duplicate guns and plenty of ammo and reloading components too.

 

[M67]

I believe it's legal to hunt deer in Oregon with a .223 or 5.56.

Why don't you instead ask yourself why our troops use that round?

I think that depends a lot on where you are. On my acreage, I can see some 300 yard shots from my house. An AK-47 would be hopeless.

I went the other way to consolidate calibers so that I have more rounds for any gun. For rifles I now have only .22lr, .5.56 NATO and .308, but I have duplicate guns and plenty of ammo and reloading components too.

Yes, it is true you should select weapons based on your needs and/or budget

But-

While it is true, you can hunt deer with the 5.56 in Oregon, but not in other states, like Washington. Why? Because they are not really up to the task. I have taken 3 Elk with the 7.62x39 with open sights, from 20 yards out to just over 300 yards with 1 shot, and all were clean kills. The 300+ yard shot was a 4x5 Elk, so it was not a little guy. All bullets exeted the animals, except the 300+ yard shot. That round broke the front shoulder, whent through the vitals, a rib on the off side and stopped under the hide. The 7.62x39mm preforms quite well, without a doubt and they were just as dead as if i hit them with my 338.

NATO uses the 5.56 round, because they simply wanted a lighter round, so they could carry more ammunition and gear, with a lighter rifle. Due to the heavy combat loads soldiers must carry on there backs and bodies.
The military is trained primarily for using the 5.56 for suppressive fire, especially at longer ranges not one shot kills, which it sucks at with the FMJ/Steel Penetrator rounds.

The 7.62x39mm, 7.62x51 and 7.62x54r will penetrate much better and deliver more energy (even with the FMJ) than the 5.56 and the 5.45x39mm. Check out the military test results to confirm this.

The regular Russian army uses the 5.45x39mm, but the Russian special forces still uses the 7.62x39mm and the 7.62x54r.
Why? Because of these rounds offer superior penitration and knock down power over the 5.45x39mm, which has similar ballistics to the 5.56 Nato.

An Ak/SKS in the proper hands can put the hurt on badguys at 300 yards. But that is why we have the FN FAL's and AR 10's, and long guns, for the longer engagements.



M67

 

[A Nomadic Hobo]

I'm buying an ak soon as well as a couple thousand rounds for both guns, I love AKs the only reason why it's second on my idea list is because if someone who reads this doesn't have a lot of money to buy an ak, they can always buy a nagant. It was made to take things out at distance from prone, if someone sees you and shoots you with an m4 iron sights at 400 meters, you did something seriously wrong, like stood while wearing a neon jacket. it's cheap reliable and will put food on the table, it may not be great for defense, but it's better to have that then nothing else, then get an ak after. If SHTF then you at least have something, whereas your still saving for something else in the other case...

 

[stratbastard]

One answer to the question of 1000 rounds vrs. 9999+ is simple; it's a matter of the degree of an individual preppers' wealth. Your plan seems absolutely appropriate for a blue collar/middle class income prepper. Obviously, some of us are in a different financial category. If one has already invested in bunker/food/fuel/meds/guns/ammo to the nth degree, and STILL has piles and piles of excess $$$ accumulated over a lifetime, other considerations come to bear. A person in this position might well believe that that his/her wealth, represented in paper money,might become very expensive toilet paper overnight. This person converts that $$$ into hard assets which retain value when paper $ does not. Silver $ gold, booze, meds, tobacco,... anything which will have a very high trade/barter value after a SHTF scenario which is lasting. I personally believe that ammo will be among the top 3 easily as retaining that value for trade; the net number of guns remaining static over time, with the net amount of ammo reducing at a constant. So yes, I'm a prepper with way, WAY more than 1000 rounds. I purchase commonly needed calibers even if I dont have a weapon in that specific caliber... they will be likely trading fodder.

 

[A Nomadic Hobo]

The couple thousand is just the start, I want to have 10000+ for both guns within a year or so, cause ammo=defense, food, maybe barter. I also want to buy common rounds like you stated, so I can trade it since it has no use to me.