Defensive Carry banner

Making a major,drastic change in rifles for SD, and shtf.

8K views 77 replies 46 participants last post by  bmcgilvray 
#1 ·
For a long time I have been thinking about this. I carried the M16A2 for years, and saw the effects of the 20 inch barrel on "soft targets" here and there. To tell you the truth, I was never too impressed with the 5.56 and its effectiveness on anything.

But, I suppose since they are popular, and I was trained and familiar with every aspect of the weapons system. I lived with it, and kind of blindly followed the market like cattle do a tractor loaded with hay.

But the last straw was a couple of weeks ago. I attended by invitation a culling hunt at a local game farm. There were a few guys there using the AR rifles, and watching the results of the shooting made me sick to my stomach, but it was for me a valuable lesson.

I am happy to say, that I have no more puny 5.56/223 rifles. What is replacing them?

2 Springfield M1A National Match models with black and OD synthetic stocks, with a supply of 20 round mags, and 500 rounds apiece of ammo.

The rifles are currently on order, and should be in next week.

Yes, I am paying big time, and I have also had to trade a few guns I really wanted to keep, but it saved me alot of cash.

But Ill tell you what; I feel like this is the most sensible upgrade I have made in a long time.

I figure if I need a rifle, I REALLY NEED a rifle, not some puny high speed 22 round. And if its a close threat, I want a big bullet. So, I am super sizing everything, 30 cal rifles, and 45 pistols. When you have to hit someone, hit them hard the first time.
I do believe in bringing enough gun.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
Your experiance is far greater than mine and thanks for sharing it. With my little knowledge I chose the AK over AR15 as well. I have 10,000 rounds of 7.62x39 154 grain soft points. I'm in a suburban setting so like you say, if you need a riffle for SD you REALLY need it. I just couldn't see paying for the weaker AR set-up. Riffle is twice the price and ammo is over 30% more costly for less knock down power.

AR's are great and have there place for longer distance application but too many people jump on the band wagon with giving the AK consideration IMO.
 
#3 ·
Sounds like a good move, if a larger, harder-hitting round is the goal. Particularly if that platform is what you're experienced with. Particularly if you can consolidate and save cash at the same time.

Enjoy the new Springers. :eek:k:
 
#4 ·
No, I'm not saving cash. Actually, I am losing my arse in the deal. Ammo is more expensive, and each rifle was about 1700 bucks.

But I like the platform and caliber much, much better.
 
#7 ·
I hunt deer with a .30-30 and I hunt coyote with my AR. I'm beginning to realize that a deer is pretty much a human sized target and the coyote is a small dog, and that doesn't really add up if you're trying to get a one shot "knock-down" on a bad guy. Not saying I wouldn't shoot a bad guy with my AR but what you're saying makes a lot of sense. My next firearms purchases will probably reflect your new philosophy.
 
#9 ·
Let me pose a question:

With the results on your hunt last week, was the issue the shooter, or the round?

Did they take good shots through the boiler room? Or something else?

Just curious.
 
#10 ·
Some misconceptions about hunting.

Lots of people will say its all about shot placement and it is. What they don't realize is that when you have been out all day and you are tired, cold,hot, hungry...whatever it may be, when that animal finally shows up, you are going to take the shot and expect the gun to do its job.

It may be less than an ideal shot, but ifs that all that presents itself, that is what you are going to take.

Its all about discipline and being above to know when to shoot or not shoot. Most people do not have what it takes to hold off.
Even a seemingly prefect shot can be deflected by a twig, a leaf, a branch...even thick grass, so even what looks like an OK shot may turn out not to be so good.

I have said it before and I will say it again, in spite of all those that worship the AR platform. It's a varmint round, always has been and always will be. It works well on people, because people are varmints,they are soft targets and they can be very easy to kill.

Understand, that I am in now way against the AR, in fact I have half a dozen of them and they are great guns...given their limitations.

I don't use them for hunting anything other than varmints. Sure, they will kill anything out there, but so can a .22 short. That doesn't make it the best tool for the job. Its also a reason that deer hunting in some states is illegal with a .22. While some will argue that the local game and fish doesn't know what they are talking about, I will argue that those that matter have seen enough deer maimed and wounded with one to prohibit its use. Killing Pigs? Not so great. Yeah, it'll do it but you'll see as many run off as you will drop right there. Fact of the matter is, pigs are becoming such a problem that many people don't care if they are killed cleanly or not.

I'm in the bigger is better school, always have been. I'll take a .30 caliber any day of the week. Having killed lots of deer with one, I know that it works. I have one in the freezer now that was killed with a .300 Blackout,with a shot that I would not even attempted with a .223.

I look at it like this...
you can frame a house with an 4 oz hammer or you can frame it with a 20 oz hammer. Which one would you rather build the house with? Why?

Of course there will be those that argue for the .223 no matter, but most of them have never dropped a hammer on a living creature, or if they have, maybe it worked on the scant few that they have shot.

Its a simple thing really. Its all about using the right tool for the job. An amateur will grab the wrong tool until he learns a bit and gets experience. A professional knows the capability of his tools and uses them accordingly.
 
#12 ·
Buckeye, I saw an adult exotic ram shot, in my estimation, under 60-70 yards. It was a good shot, but it ran off. Additional shots were made at it on the run, but it still got out of view.
It was found, but the blood trail was sparse and it was still alive when we found it.

Every animal seemed to absorb alot of 223/5.56 and still get away.

Now, to be fair, I have seen this happen with the 270 and other calibers.

But I have never, ever witnessed such consistent poor performance from anything else.
Deer I kill with a handgun act harder hit and go down constantly better than I have observed with the 223.

I would rather have a 30 cal anything, then the 5.56
And, I really, really like the M1a platform over the AR.
 
#14 ·
I was just curious.

I think I could probably be described as an "AR fanboy." I would not choose one to go hunting deer with, were it legal to rifle hunt in Ohio.

For defense, yes. Part of that is familiarity on my part, part of that is with first hand knowledge and experience. The 5.56 rifle was a compromise from the get go, lower recoil, lighter weight, and higher capacity, but you give up some power.

Lots of people will say its all about shot placement and it is. What they don't realize is that when you have been out all day and you are tired, cold,hot, hungry...whatever it may be, when that animal finally shows up, you are going to take the shot and expect the gun to do its job.

Of course there will be those that argue for the .223 no matter, but most of them have never dropped a hammer on a living creature, or if they have, maybe it worked on the scant few that they have shot.
Those people you are talking about wouldn't be me, would it HG?

G-man, in no way am I knocking your M1A choice, one of those rifles has been on my wish list forever, but, between the cost of the rifle, mags and ammo, I have never acquired one. I am mostly just trying to have an intelligent conversation about the topic.
 
#15 ·
Those people you are talking about wouldn't be me, would it HG?
Nah.
I am reffering to people that call me up to help them track deer.
I an tell you this for a fact...I track more deer that have been shot with the .223 than another other caliber.
Second place is the .243.

Thats just the way it is.
 
#16 ·
I love the M1A, carry it for a few hours and hold someone at gunpoint with one over five minutes and then tell what you think. I found the same conclusion as Glockman with 5.56. We hunt nothing bigger then coyotes as the round is a bit endemic. I guess I am somewhere in the middle as I choose the AK over my AR's as my go to for many reasons.
 
#17 ·
Almost bought a Springfield SOCOM years ago and really, really like the 7.62 round, but the weight of that rifle, versus the M4 carbine made me stay in the M4 world. I'd just hate to tote that heavy rifle a lot, when hunting, or patrolling. I also don't hunt with the .223 other than varmints. I'd rather use the 30.06 or ..270, 45.70 Marlin Guide Gun (lever action), or if my game is as big as a dinosaur, I'd use my .300 Ultra Mag. I'm a big fan of limited tracking when it comes to deer. As as sidebar, a buddy of mine just bought the Scout which is magazine fed, bolt action rifle in 7.62. Might consider that, if I was in a one gun only contest. Congrats on the man-size rifles my friend.
 
#18 ·
Interesting thread. I've never hunted with a AR (.225/5.56) since in my area only archery, black powder, and shotgun is allowed. I'm in the process of buying an AR for HD/SHTF but was told it is a perfectly fine rifle/carbine for hunting. I'm starting to re-think this based on what I've read. However, I have a slightly different question. A friend of mine is considering a Hi-Point carbine in .45 ACP. Obviously it would have excellent stopping power. However, besides comments on Hi-Point quality, how useful do you feel such a carbine in .45 would be for HD and SHTF? I'd be concerned about the range mostly (certainly not a hunting firearm). Just curious about others' opinions.
 
#19 ·
I am a fan of the AR - just because they are fun to shoot and cheaper to shoot. I am not defending the AR because I agree the bigger/heavier is better. However, I would rather have something I am familiar with and can use automatically. I can't afford to shoot the larger/heavier rounds to have the familiarity/muscle memory as my smaller caliber guns. I do have my 30.06, but I can't shoot it enough of it to claim it is a SHTF gun.

To those that argue that they want something with readily available ammo they can pick up from those that no longer need it, my response is - then pick up the gun that uses that ammo at the same time, after all, if they don't need the ammo, they won't need the gun.
 
#20 ·
I'm with you, glockman. I have a Mini-14 in .223 and a SOCOM-16 in 7.62 X 51mm. If trouble ever comes my way, I'll take the battle rifle caliber over the poodle shooting caliber any day. I can hit bowling pins with my Mini, but if I want to MOVE them, the M1A does that. Sure, you can sometimes see them twitch a bit when the 5.56 round hits them, but when the 7.62 round hits them they MOVE, generally several inches away. The 7.62 just hits harder.
 
#21 ·
Yes, they are a more all round heavy rifle. Guess I'll just have to do more push ups and " rifle drills ", lol.

I just do not think the military made the right choice anymore in a battle rifle. It was probably a good choice in jungle where shots were close, and the yawing effect of the high speed pill was at it's maximum, but I think for anything beyond a hundred or so yards, it is very, very lacking.

And the M4 variant that is so popular for all the wrong reasons with that 16 inch barrel does nothing to help it.

It's really not been easy for me to go against the grain on this. After all, I have to face the reality, and it goes against popular opinion. But I'll tell ya what, I feel damn good about that M1A rotating bolt and operating rod system, easy access to the chamber, long sight radius, and 20 round mag loaded with 150 grn 30 caliber bullets.

I should have done this a long time ago.
 
#25 ·
The one thing I really don't like about the M1A platform is that finding solid mounts for optics seems to be difficult and expensive.

I'm not anti-iron sights, I like iron sights, I think everyone should know how to use them at respectable rifle ranges (like 5-600 yards).

But, for defensive use, optics make a lot of sense, as they do for precision work.

That would of course, negate the easy access to the chamber.
 
#22 ·
I have killed a lot of deer and it never ceases to amaze me what kind of damage a real, "high powered" rifle can do. My .308 punches all the way through deer and I have NEVER recovered a bullet, not even when taking a Texas heart shot. I find it sad and somewhat sickening to hear that people think deer hunting is OK with a .223.

I killed a doe this morning with a 240 grain SST from a 20 gauge. It passed through and sunk about 3 inches into a tree. Lets see your little .223 do that. :)

ETA: I have seen many errant shots on deer still get the job done because the shooter brought enough gun. I recall once when my dad hit a deer too low and it took both it's front legs off just below the torso. The deer dropped to the ground and the now exposed front leg bones stuck in the mud holding the deer in place like a lawn ornament. My dad was able to effectively place a follow up shot immediately and put meat on our table.

Many, many times I have seen a deer with it's front shoulder blown to bits from a bullet. All those bone fragments add to the lethality of the hit. A .223 just can't dish it out like the .30s can.
 
#26 ·
I also think( I've been doing this lately), that too much inet crapola is going around about bugging out, carrying x amount of rounds, and all that stuff.

Plus, the " because I am familiar with" statement that is taken as sound reasoning doesn't fly with me.
Because what we are really saying is" I'm too dumb to learn anything else, so I'll stick with whatever just because".

Ok, rambling over:)
 
  • Like
Reactions: atctimmy
#27 ·
I don't know, that statement makes sense to me.

I have neither the time, nor the money, at this point in my life to get the same level of familiarization with another platform that I gained from having an M-16A4 as my almost constant companion in the Corps.

I have plenty of other weapons systems, and have fired plenty of rounds through them. But, I have had an M-16 in my hands during moments of sheer terror, and it worked for me then. I know the location of all the controls by heart, the rifle is just second nature to me. Didn't one of the old school gun gurus have a saying "Beware the man who owns only one gun, he probably knows how to use it?"
 
#31 ·
7.62 is a great round and I love many of the rifles that fire it. The AR10 and M1A are two of my all time favorites. They are great choices for defending stronghold (if SHTF) as well as all-around hunting round. They are hard to beat.

But if you're not defending stronghold, AR15 likely better choice. The lighter weight ammo, higher capacity magazine, and lighter weight of a carbine make it much easier to run and gun.

We all know this, but I just thought I would be Capt. Obvious.
 
#32 ·
I wish you well. The M-14 is a great rifle, ergonomic, powerful and as long as you use the right ammo the OP rod will be fine. I tried the Battle rifle concept and kept coming back to the AR. I have been using them for over 30 years in the Army and LE, I know the system front to back and I am an armorer.

For me the AR is more nimble for CQB, where it is needed and when using the right ammo for the task at hand is devastating on bipeds. If I have a need for hunting or a 300+ yard shot I will use my scoped 30-06. On my short list is to build a 300 Blackout upper.
 
#33 ·
I respect your choice and decision that you made about choosing a rifle that you want to live with. As for me personally, I have some limitations that makes the M1A a poor choice for me. At the same time, however, I'm not sure you're being completely fair to the AR platform. If the 5.56 is anemic and you want a larger and harder hitting round, you can attain this with the AR platform - you don't have to abandon it completely for the sake of going to a larger caliber. LMT makes a .308 & Daniel Defense makes a 6.8 both in the AR platform. I haven't studied the topic in depth by any means so it may be the AR isn't much lighter when using .308 or 6.8 but I would think it would be somewhat lighter. There are also other features to consider when choosing a battle gun. The modular construction of the AR makes for reasonable maintenance and sufficient parts availability (when there aren't buying frenzies in place). In a SHTF situation are the parts for the Springy going to be available? This may be a toss up. There are so many with an AR, you probably won't be able to get parts for them either - who knows?
 
#34 ·
I used to hunt up to coyote size game with a 22-250 which is a more power version of the 5.56. It was explosive in the amount of damage it did. The smallest gun I could legally use on big game was a .243. Most of the time I used a .270

In the military I never shot anything with a m-16. Guys said it was pretty effective however, and this was the days of the 55 grain load

The guns you chose are fine and have been around a very long time and I am sure will serve you well


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
#35 ·
I am not sure where every thought based ideation of CQB, or defending a strong hold comes from when we talk shtf , or battle rifles. In a CQB, I dont see whats wrong with shouldering the rifle and using the pistol.

The AR is a compromise. Its a lightweight platform, that is short enough to be pressed into service if set up with short barrel, and collapsible stock for close quarters, and it is almost enough to be effective at punching small holes out to 500 yards, if you can shoot that far. Most cant.

I would rather have a rifle that IS a rifle, set up for rifle duty. My pistol can do its part for the light work.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top