Carbines and other SHTF Gun Opinions

[twistedfocus1647545489]

I'm a long-time gun enthusiast and have owned many of each type of firearm but never any assault rifles. I always convince myself they're impractical and can be too expensive to feed (especially as ammo prices continue to climb). Lately I have been thinking it might be time to get something that fills the gap between my 30-06 bolt rifle and assorted pistols. I have a decent shotgun, but if I ever needed good firepower at medium ranges I just don't have the tools. I'm no survivalist nut job, but I'm starting to think that it's never a bad idea to be prepared for the worst. I don't really expect a full governmental collapse or anything, but localized catastrophes have a knack for bringing out the worst in people (situations like Katrina, etc.) and they can happen anywhere. Even the Boy Scouts say "Always be prepared".

 

So, I have finally decided I am in the market for a medium range, high-firepower weapon. My added stipulations are that I prefer a moderately inexpensive, simple yet dependable design with plentiful ammunition availability. I know everyone immediately thinks AR-15, and I do too, but I really want to keep it simple/cheap-ish and a "Nice" AR seems to be ~$800 at minimum. If I can get something that fits the bill for a few hundred dollars less I can afford to keep a shit ton of ammo on hand with that money. I figure its intended useful range would need to be anywhere between up-close and 300ish yards max (I have a rifle more suited for longer range shots).

 

Honestly I have always liked the M1 Carbine, but I realize that .30 carbine a little on the weak side and while ammo is similar in price to 7.62x39/.223 it's not nearly as common. This led me to the Ruger mini-14/mini-30 side of things as they are similar in design and I always loved my 10/22s. I like that carbines of this type are not as "Scary-looking" and are perhaps more likely to scoot under the radar on bannings, but it also seems that they aren't a very accurate choice either for work past 100 yards or so.

 

AKs seem like a decent option. Still not superb as accuracy is concerned, but many military forces use them with success. Granted that's mostly because they are cheap to make but with some practice it will probably work passably against 2-legged targets to ~300 yards. Unfortunately that doesn't seem much better than the M1/mini-14 type guns. Other than accuracy I'd say it fits the bill pretty well though. It really sucks that they are about double what they used to cost 10 years ago. Hell, it seems the SKSs are now 3-4 times the cost.

 

A nice M14 variant would sure be sweet, but way expensive and gets a little pricier to feed. I could do an FAL for considerably less, but then I still have to feed it .308 and it's a much less common design if I should need parts, etc.

 

So, does anyone have any insight or opinions to share that might make my choice a little easier. I know that some of you have combat experience that might be valuable, not that I'm looking to go to war.

 

Cliffs: Want a nice medium range high capacity weapon for a reasonable price. Thoughts/opinions?

[Mark1647545493]

I think the .30 Carbine would supprise you, but they are getting expensive to buy. I like the AK47 and SKS. If you're going to upgrade the gun I wouldn't recommend the SKS unless you read all the 922r regulations before you change anything on the gun including removing the bayonet.

The AK47 is a proven battle rifle. It's cheap to shoot and reliable as gravity.

 

I bought my first SKS back in the 90's for $89 at Vance's and now it's hard to find one for under $300. An AK can be had for just under $400.

 

Ruger Mini's are good guns, but I've always thought they was a little over priced.

 

My vote would be for the AK47

[Dave1647545494]

if you can find a an m1 carbine that isn't worn out that somebody doesn't want a ton of money for its worth picking up

 

something else to look into might be an old thompson if you can find one 100rd drum ftw

 

some variant of an ak or an sks is probably going to get you the best bang for the buck though

 

if you want to carry less ammo you could get a garand then you get semi auto .30-06

[twistedfocus1647545489]

I think the .30 Carbine would supprise you, but they are getting expensive to buy.

 

My vote would be for the AK47

Yeah, I'd take the AK over the SKS for sure. I do think that the .30 isn't a bad choice, it's just that they are a bit pricey nowadays for a nice one and they have always been plagued with inconsistently loaded ammo. The Ruger Minis and the 30 Carbine actually share alot of the same design and subsequently alot of the same quirks that conspire to make them less accurate than they could be. You can make really accurate guns out of them, but it seems like it will end up costing as much or more than just buying an AR.

[Drewhop]

I have always thought this http://www.cx4storm.com/ was a cool gun but for the price you could buy a much better weapon imo.

[RyM3rC]

Depending on what caliber your bolt gun is you may want an assault rifle in that caliber, because that's one less caliber you have to buy/have on hand. You can get a solid AK for about $400 now, and a good solid AR for $600. The ammo for both will run you $220/1000 roughly right now, and either will suit your needs. They are completely different animals, so shoot before you buy. Be nice to Chris and maybe he'll bring you over to shoot sometime.

 

You seem like a decent guy, so I'll be happy to help you buy/build a rifle that will fit your needs and get you pointed in the right direction for some training. I have owned thompson, m1 carbine, garands, and mini-30 but none of those are going to be competitive with an AR/AK for the price.

[twistedfocus1647545489]

if you can find a an m1 carbine that isn't worn out that somebody doesn't want a ton of money for its worth picking up

 

something else to look into might be an old thompson if you can find one 100rd drum ftw

 

some variant of an ak or an sks is probably going to get you the best bang for the buck though

 

if you want to carry less ammo you could get a garand then you get semi auto .30-06

 

I hadn't considered a Garand because of the price for a good one and the cost of ammo, but there is certainly merit to minimizing your caliber spread. The other issue is that while they are very powerful, they lack capacity. This hurts their overall firepower for this purpose in my mind, though I love the guns. I think it would make a nice primary battle weapon, and it surely did for years.

 

Thompsons are really neat but definitely fall short in the range and accuracy department. I hear they can be a bit unreliable too. Actually I think the Thompson is what the 30 Carbine replaced.

[RyM3rC]

you don't want a .30 carbine for anything medium range, and a thompson is even worse. Not to mention they'll be inadequate against even a lightly armored enemy.

 

Oh, you should be able to get garands in the $450-$600 range unless CMP went crazy. I have two- one service and one rack grade. I would trust my life with either within 300 yards.

[Dave1647545494]

I hadn't considered a Garand because of the price for a good one and the cost of ammo, but there is certainly merit to minimizing your caliber spread. The other issue is that while they are very powerful, they lack capacity. This hurts their overall firepower for this purpose in my mind, though I love the guns. I think it would make a nice primary battle weapon, and it surely did for years.

 

Thompsons are really neat but definitely fall short in the range and accuracy department. I hear they can be a bit unreliable too. Actually I think the Thompson is what the 30 Carbine replaced.

 

 

 

the thompson garand and m1 carbine all saw action at the same time in WWII depending on what you need it to do the thompson and the m1 will go about 100 yards, the garand will go closer to 300yards (on stock iron sights) if you can find the parts the .30 or the .45 can also go full auto these weapons were both designed for close in work in house to house or city fighting

 

steel jacketed .30 carbine or .45 auto (lake city surplus) will punch a hole in a variety of different metal objects

 

if you join the civilian marksmanship program you can get the .30 carbine in bulk at a highly discounted rate

[RyM3rC]

if you join the civilian marksmanship program you can get the .30 carbine in bulk at a highly discounted rate

 

But it's still has crappy stopping power. A thompson would be better in every way other than they're heavy as hell, tricky to clean, and expensive. A joy to shoot, very quiet, no recoil... just like a heavy .22.

[Mark1647545493]

A Tommy gun???? Those things are show pieces these days..... Last one I looked into buying was $1500 and weighed more than my Mustang.

[RyM3rC]

we bought ours for $800 and sold for $1200. Good investment.

[Avenger1647545502]

The Thompson is an SMG, not a carbine. It's a close-in weapon, not a distance shooter. And original Tommies are $$$$, while the repros are usually pretty crappy.

 

My vote would be for an SKS, preferably a Yugo. Accuracy is better than an AK, parts and pieces are EASY to find, and they are lighter and handier than an AK. Reliability is arguably a toss-up.

 

If you aren't married to the idea of a semi-auto, you might want to think about a lever-action in .357 or .44. With the proper loading, they've got the range and the hitting power.

[Mark1647545493]

My vote would be for an SKS, preferably a Yugo. Accuracy is better than an AK, parts and pieces are EASY to find, and they are lighter and handier than an AK. Reliability is arguably a toss-up.

 

If you aren't married to the idea of a semi-auto, you might want to think about a lever-action in .357 or .44. With the proper loading, they've got the range and the hitting power.

 

He wants Hi capacity mags. Can't do that with the SKS unless you make the gun 922r compliant. By the time he buys a decent SKS and makes it 922r compliant he could buy a nice AK.

Don't get me wrong I love all of my SKSs, but as collectors pieces and fun shooters. If zombies come to my door I'm grabbing my AK47 and my Glock 22.

[Scotty2Hotty]

Don't be cheap on a SHTF rifle. Afterall, Shit Hit The Fan, so you don't want something jamming on you. An FAL style rifle will be not much cheaper than the M1A/M14 style rifle, but the PTR91/H&K91 is a tried and tested platform aswell.

 

I enjoy all my S&W M&P15's and spent $1K a piece on them. Personally a good investment into something I will most likely utilize if necessary. The peasant rifle (AK47) you speak of is a great investment. I will agree that it is a successful, reliable, and simple weapon that is utilized by many countries. It's tried and tested, not to mention a prefered weapon of 90% of our enemies. If you want a GOOD AK47 variant style rifle, look into Arsenal's AK47's. They're made in the Las Vegas area, and as far as accuracy is considered, it should top most of the Soviet era firearms.

 

I guess it's all in what you want, but personally, you go cheap and you WILL get cheap. It's as simple as that. You've got to pay, to play in the gun world. And personally, I'll depend my life on something I may have to spend a little money on. I don't put a price on my life or safety, just to save a few hundred.

[twistedfocus1647545489]

Ideally I'd like something that can hold ~6" at 300 yards, which I think is the maximum range I'd expect to use it. It seems it will take a top-shelf AK to get that kind of accuracy, which puts it in the AR-15 price range... So I'm still a little torn, but I think I'm down to one of those 2.

 

As for the 30 carbine, I think it would be passable if I lowered my range expectations to 150 yards or less. Ballisticaly its not bad, but similar to .357 mag, which I don't expect to be very effective at that range even if the accuracy was there. It certainly seems to offer the reliability, portability and firepower. Mini 14/30 is similar and stretches the range a bit, but nowadays they're pretty close to the same price of a nice AR/AK.

 

Am I overthinking this? Probably.

 

Incidentally I also handled the Kel-Tec SU16. Its really neat and I like that it's super-light and folds up so small you could stick it in a pack. Unfortunately they're too new to really find much about their accuracy and reliability, and they're certainly not "battle proven".

[Scotty2Hotty]

Just know the .30 Carbine is a pistol round. The lack of kenetic energy basically turns it into a nice closer range rifle, but in that aspect, you can pick up the old Ruger PC4 chambered in .40S&W.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d7/Ruger_PC4.jpg/800px-Ruger_PC4.jpg

 

If you want an AR15, don't skimp on one. If you go AK, go with an Arsenal. You'll spend the money, but be happier in the long run.

[Richard Cranium]

Just know the .30 Carbine is a pistol round. The lack of kenetic energy basically turns it into a nice closer range rifle, but in that aspect, you can pick up the old Ruger PC4 chambered in .40S&W.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d7/Ruger_PC4.jpg/800px-Ruger_PC4.jpg

 

If you want an AR15, don't skimp on one. If you go AK, go with an Arsenal. You'll spend the money, but be happier in the long run.

 

I picked up an Arsenal AK years ago on a whim. Was a complete impulse purchase, and it's my favorite. Cheap, simple, fun, and reasonably accurate.

[RyM3rC]

Years ago AK ammo was cheaper than about anything else, so buying a $350 rifle and a couple thousand rounds kept you under $500 easily. Now, it's about the same as 5.56, so you're really just saving money on the initial rifle purchase if at all any more. Considering you can build/buy an AR for $600 easily, and AKs are still around $400ish, you're only saving $200 going with one platform over another at that level.

[twistedfocus1647545489]

Well, I went over to Blackwing again yesterday and handled a few more guns. After researching the Kel Tec SU16 series a little more I was really intrigued. They have alot of the same attributes as an AR but a gas system more like that of an AK. Seems like a good compromise between the two. I didn't realize they have been making them since 2003 and all but the erliest examples seem to get stellar reviews.

 

So after handling the "B" model they had in stock some more I decided to have them order in a "CA" model. Most people confuse this with California legality (and it is legal there) but it's actually because it's their newest "C" model with the standard "A" buttstock. I find it to be a really interesting firearm and hope that it turns out to be as reliable and accurate as I have read. Obviously I'm a little concerned about the robustness of a plastic receiver over metal, but it's super-light because of it and seems to hold up well if you don't plan on bashing fools in the skull with it.

 

http://www.kel-tec-cnc.com/su16ca.htm

http://www.kel-tec-cnc.com/images/su16ca/pic2.jpg

http://www.kel-tec-cnc.com/images/su16ca/pic1.jpg

[RyM3rC]

It's nice it accepts AR magazines, but the $700+msrp seems pretty high to me. I mean shit, you could buy an AR for that much, or a nice AK. What's that about?

[twistedfocus1647545489]

It's nice it accepts AR magazines, but the $700+msrp seems pretty high to me. I mean shit, you could buy an AR for that much, or a nice AK. What's that about?

It's just under $600 street price. I have seen them for as low as $550. Still AK territory for sure and nearly entry-level AR prices. Overall I think I like the design. It incorporates alot of "nifty" features (bipod forend, mag storage, folds for storage, weighs 5lbs.) It's certainly more of a compromise b/w an AK an AR and a survival gun than exactly filling the role of either.

 

That being said, I have shot AKs and ARs alot and they are a known quantity to me, but this is not. I may find that its not as good an idea in reality as it was "on paper". If so, I'll sell it and "upgrade" to something else. I have a feeling that it might actually work out well for its intended purpose though. If I knew anyone that had one I would have tried it out first, but I guess I'll find out soon enough.

[RyM3rC]

Interesting. It needs a flash hider too, but that's cheap and the site said it has standard AR threads. Still, it's not clear as to whether it's a 5.56 NATO or .223 chamber, and I'd like to see a little faster twist. I'll look forward to hearing your range report.

[twistedfocus1647545489]

Yeah, I think it will likely end up with at least a basic birdcage ($10) if not a nice comp/FH (~$25). It's a 5.56 chamber. I don't intend to go really heavy on he bullets, so I think it will probably work well enough for most loads. They probably chose that twist for its wide range of workable bullet weights.

[twistedfocus1647545489]

Related question:

 

So, I see there's alot of debate over the elventy-billion magazine offerings. Most seem to like the P-Mags, where others seem to prefer traditional steel with upgraded followers (often Magpul followers). P-Mags are pretty cheap and it seems like a no brainer, but is there any good reason to keep away? Any quirks, like issues with feed lips vs. the steel?