Survival Rifle

On Nov 26, 8:13*pm, Dana M. Hague wrote:
On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 15:59:28 -0800 (PST), "

wrote:
The purpose of such a weapon was not defense but a means of feeding
yourself....last night I stumbled upon what
may be a suitable substitute: *A black-powder pistol. *(!??)

There are some pretty significant disadvantages as well. *Reloading
takes time, bad weather can be a problem (the old expression "keep
your powder dry" isn't just an expression), and the knockdown/stopping
power is considerably less than a modern weapon. *Then there's the
risk of chain fires if you don't slob grease over the loads.

If I'm in a survival situation, I want a gun that I can reload in a
driving rain, and KNOW that it will fire.

There are other handguns that can fire shot shells. *Shot shells are
available in various pistol caliber sizes, and there are revolvers and
derringers that chamber both .45 Colt and .410 shotgun shells.

I still hold to a .22 as probably the best survival rifle. *Not much
stopping power for large game (though the world record black bear was
taken with a .22!), but it's great for the small game that's more
likely to keep you fed, and _lots_ of ammo doesn't weigh much.

-Dana

--
Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine.
Pietenpol AirCamper

While I have great admiration for black-powder arms, there's another
factor that has to be considered regarding carrying a weapon in an
aircraft for use in a survival situation: You may have injuries to an
arm or hand.

The black-powder arm will require that the survivor manipulate canned
powder, loose balls/shot, patches, percussion caps, grease, ramrods,
etc. to prepare the weapon for ONE shot. A complex job, much more
difficult if the user is crippled.

I just pulled my Grandma's 1906 Winchester pump-action 22LR rifle down
from the wall. I jammed the stock between my legs, twisted the magazine
tube open, slid the pushrod partially out, simulated loading five rounds
into the slot, slid the tube down, locked it, and pumped the slide to
load it.

All one-handed, in little more time than it takes to describe it. I'm
certainly no expert, either...I haven't fired a weapon in twenty years,
and I've never as much as worked the action on Grandma's rifle in the 15
years I've owned it. I had to look it over...one handed... to figure
out how to load it in the first place!

I seriously respect those who hunt with muzzle-loading weapons, but a
survival situation isn't the same as a sporting one.

Ron Wanttaja

Dana M. Hague wrote:
On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 15:59:28 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

The purpose of such a weapon was not defense but a means of feeding
yourself....last night I stumbled upon what
may be a suitable substitute: A black-powder pistol. (!??)

There are some pretty significant disadvantages as well. Reloading
takes time, bad weather can be a problem (the old expression "keep
your powder dry" isn't just an expression), and the knockdown/stopping
power is considerably less than a modern weapon. Then there's the
risk of chain fires if you don't slob grease over the loads.

That only holds for revolvers, not single shots. One thing many
people miss is that moisture can get into the chamber(s) from
condensation. For best reliability the firearm needs to be reloaded
every day. Gunfighters did this for that reason.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

In article
,
" wrote:

Those of you familiar with my Blog have probably read the several
articles therein about survival. And yes, I've poked a bit of fun at
those who think survival can be measured by the size of your knife.
But an on-going thread, bounced around amongst a few of use keeps
coming back to the little survival rifle/shotgun (called a 'drilling'
in gunsmith-speak) the Air Force included in their comprehensive
survival pack. As best I can recall this was a .22 Hornet rifle / .
410 shotgun that folded up. Ammunition was carried in the stock,
which was all aluminum.

The purpose of such a weapon was not defense but a means of feeding
yourself.

There are civilian versions of such over & under weapons but they are
heavy and tend to be expensive. But last night I stumbled upon what
may be a suitable substitute: A black-powder pistol. (!??)

A cap & ball pistol, typically a replica (the real thing, in good
condition, is worth thousands of dollars) is inexpensive and not very
heavy. It's also not very accurate :-)

Some of them can be pretty accurate, at least in pistol terms, not rifle
or shotgun.

The Ruger Old Army cap and ball revolver, for example, can do pretty
well. (One of our local blackpowder club members more than once shot a
50-5x at 25yds on the pistol course. He may have been a mutant, was the
local consensus.)

Well, in someone else's hands, not mine. I could hit a squirrel (size
target) fairly consistently with an Uberti replica Colt 1861 Army. Why
I'd want to is another question, given the local ground squirrels.

...but hear me out before condemning the idea.

With black-powder you pour a measured amount of powder into one of the
six chambers then insert a wad of some sort, atop which you place a
round ball, a cone shaped bullet OR A MEASURED AMOUNT OF BIRDSHOT.
Another wad is installed atop the bullet and the charge is compressed
using the lever built-in to the underside of the barrel. A percussion
cap is then installed on the nipple and you go on to the next chamber.

There are a couple of features not generally known to those who do NOT
regularly fire black-powder weapons... especially cap & ball ...that
makes this idea worthy of thought. One is that when we do away with
the cartridge case -- the brass part of the 'bullet' -- the weight &
cube of our ammunition. Fifty rounds for a black-powder weapon weighs
but a fraction of 50 rounds for a regular pistol. And since the ammo
is not made-up it does not have a prescribed shape. This allows you
to store the bullets, powder and caps in whatever space is most
convenient. Another factor is that you'll probably find shot to be
more useful than ball... yet you'll still want to keep one or two
chambers charged with ball. This presents no problem. The other four
chambers may be charged with shot, fired, then charged again, leaving
the chambers charged with ball (or with a conical bullet) undisturbed,
giving you one or two 'insurance' shots to protect yourself from the
ravages of an enraged porcupine or ptarmigan.

Firing shotgun pellets through a rifled bore does neither the bore nor
the pellets any good but given the purpose of this weapon the
traditional arguments against this kind of use have no basis.

It might be worth trying a trade pistol with bird shot. Probably good
for grouse, or a rabbit if you're a bit lucky. They were smoothbore
pistols that were sometimes made to match a (smoothbore) tradegun,
usually a basic flintlock musket for hunting.

You can find them (or build your own) in 28, 24, or 20-gauge, and you
can also fire a patched ball (.54, .58, and .62 calibers, respectively).
They do tend to be flintlock, but there are some converted to caplock.

Those old smoothbore tradeguns must have worked pretty well, since they
were sold on the Colonial frontier from the late 1600s on, and the
Hudson's Bay company didn't quit offering them until just before WW1.

Just a thot. Outside the box.

-R.S.Hoover

wrote:
Those of you familiar with my Blog have probably read the several
articles therein about survival. And yes, I've poked a bit of fun at
those who think survival can be measured by the size of your knife.
But an on-going thread, bounced around amongst a few of use keeps
coming back to the little survival rifle/shotgun (called a 'drilling'
in gunsmith-speak) the Air Force included in their comprehensive
survival pack.

My personal favorite for this sort of duty is the Camp Carbine...

On Nov 26, 6:59*pm, " wrote:
Those of you familiar with my Blog have probably read the several
articles therein about survival. *And yes, I've poked a bit of fun at
those who think survival can be measured by the size of your knife.
But an on-going thread, bounced around amongst a few of use keeps
coming back to the little survival rifle/shotgun (called a 'drilling'
in gunsmith-speak) the Air Force included in their comprehensive
survival pack. *As best I can recall this was a .22 *Hornet rifle / .
410 shotgun that folded up. *Ammunition was carried in the stock,
which was all aluminum.

The purpose of such a weapon was not defense but a means of feeding
yourself.

There are civilian versions of such over & under weapons but they are
heavy and tend to be expensive. *But last night I stumbled upon what
may be a suitable substitute: *A black-powder pistol. *(!??)

A cap & ball pistol, typically a replica (the real thing, in good
condition, is worth thousands of dollars) is inexpensive and not very
heavy. *It's also not very accurate :-) *...but hear me out before
condemning the idea.

With black-powder you pour a measured amount of powder into one of the
six chambers then insert a wad of some sort, atop which you place a
round ball, a cone shaped bullet OR A MEASURED AMOUNT OF BIRDSHOT.
Another wad is installed atop the bullet and the charge is compressed
using the lever built-in to the underside of the barrel. *A percussion
cap is then installed on the nipple and you go on to the next chamber.

There are a couple of features not generally known to those who do NOT
regularly fire black-powder weapons... especially cap & ball *...that
makes this idea worthy of thought. *One is that when we do away with
the cartridge case -- the brass part of the 'bullet' -- the weight &
cube of our ammunition. *Fifty rounds for a black-powder weapon weighs
but a fraction of 50 rounds for a regular pistol. *And since the ammo
is not made-up it does not have a prescribed shape. *This allows you
to store the bullets, powder and caps in whatever space is most
convenient. *Another factor is that you'll probably find shot to be
more useful than ball... yet you'll still want to keep one or two
chambers charged with ball. *This presents no problem. *The other four
chambers may be charged with shot, fired, then charged again, leaving
the chambers charged with ball (or with a conical bullet) undisturbed,
giving you one or two 'insurance' shots to protect yourself from the
ravages of an enraged porcupine or ptarmigan.

Firing shotgun pellets through a rifled bore does neither the bore nor
the pellets any good but given the purpose of this weapon the
traditional arguments against this kind of use have no basis.

Just a thot. *Outside the box.

-R.S.Hoover

Great write up again Bob.

Monk

wrote in message
...
Those of you familiar with my Blog have probably read the several
articles therein about survival. And yes, I've poked a bit of fun at
those who think survival can be measured by the size of your knife.
But an on-going thread, bounced around amongst a few of use keeps
coming back to the little survival rifle/shotgun (called a 'drilling'
in gunsmith-speak) the Air Force included in their comprehensive
survival pack. As best I can recall this was a .22 Hornet rifle / .
410 shotgun that folded up. Ammunition was carried in the stock,
which was all aluminum.

The purpose of such a weapon was not defense but a means of feeding
yourself.

There are civilian versions of such over & under weapons but they are
heavy and tend to be expensive. But last night I stumbled upon what
may be a suitable substitute: A black-powder pistol. (!??)

A cap & ball pistol, typically a replica (the real thing, in good
condition, is worth thousands of dollars) is inexpensive and not very
heavy. It's also not very accurate :-) ...but hear me out before
condemning the idea.

With black-powder you pour a measured amount of powder into one of the
six chambers then insert a wad of some sort, atop which you place a
round ball, a cone shaped bullet OR A MEASURED AMOUNT OF BIRDSHOT.
Another wad is installed atop the bullet and the charge is compressed
using the lever built-in to the underside of the barrel. A percussion
cap is then installed on the nipple and you go on to the next chamber.

There are a couple of features not generally known to those who do NOT
regularly fire black-powder weapons... especially cap & ball ...that
makes this idea worthy of thought. One is that when we do away with
the cartridge case -- the brass part of the 'bullet' -- the weight &
cube of our ammunition. Fifty rounds for a black-powder weapon weighs
but a fraction of 50 rounds for a regular pistol. And since the ammo
is not made-up it does not have a prescribed shape. This allows you
to store the bullets, powder and caps in whatever space is most
convenient. Another factor is that you'll probably find shot to be
more useful than ball... yet you'll still want to keep one or two
chambers charged with ball. This presents no problem. The other four
chambers may be charged with shot, fired, then charged again, leaving
the chambers charged with ball (or with a conical bullet) undisturbed,
giving you one or two 'insurance' shots to protect yourself from the
ravages of an enraged porcupine or ptarmigan.

Firing shotgun pellets through a rifled bore does neither the bore nor
the pellets any good but given the purpose of this weapon the
traditional arguments against this kind of use have no basis.

Just a thot. Outside the box.

-R.S.Hoover

And you can put a stock on it to increase practical accuracy without running
afoul of the Feds.

Bob (another one)

wrote:
Those of you familiar with my Blog have probably read the several
articles therein about survival. And yes, I've poked a bit of fun at
those who think survival can be measured by the size of your knife.
But an on-going thread, bounced around amongst a few of use keeps
coming back to the little survival rifle/shotgun (called a 'drilling'
in gunsmith-speak) the Air Force included in their comprehensive
survival pack. As best I can recall this was a .22 Hornet rifle / .
410 shotgun that folded up. Ammunition was carried in the stock,
which was all aluminum.

The purpose of such a weapon was not defense but a means of feeding
yourself.

There are civilian versions of such over & under weapons but they are
heavy and tend to be expensive. But last night I stumbled upon what
may be a suitable substitute: A black-powder pistol. (!??)

A cap & ball pistol, typically a replica (the real thing, in good
condition, is worth thousands of dollars) is inexpensive and not very
heavy. It's also not very accurate :-) ...but hear me out before
condemning the idea.

With black-powder you pour a measured amount of powder into one of the
six chambers then insert a wad of some sort, atop which you place a
round ball, a cone shaped bullet OR A MEASURED AMOUNT OF BIRDSHOT.
Another wad is installed atop the bullet and the charge is compressed
using the lever built-in to the underside of the barrel. A percussion
cap is then installed on the nipple and you go on to the next chamber.

There are a couple of features not generally known to those who do NOT
regularly fire black-powder weapons... especially cap & ball ...that
makes this idea worthy of thought. One is that when we do away with
the cartridge case -- the brass part of the 'bullet' -- the weight &
cube of our ammunition. Fifty rounds for a black-powder weapon weighs
but a fraction of 50 rounds for a regular pistol. And since the ammo
is not made-up it does not have a prescribed shape. This allows you
to store the bullets, powder and caps in whatever space is most
convenient. Another factor is that you'll probably find shot to be
more useful than ball... yet you'll still want to keep one or two
chambers charged with ball. This presents no problem. The other four
chambers may be charged with shot, fired, then charged again, leaving
the chambers charged with ball (or with a conical bullet) undisturbed,
giving you one or two 'insurance' shots to protect yourself from the
ravages of an enraged porcupine or ptarmigan.

Firing shotgun pellets through a rifled bore does neither the bore nor
the pellets any good but given the purpose of this weapon the
traditional arguments against this kind of use have no basis.

Just a thot. Outside the box.

-R.S.Hoover


The old AR-7 in .22 LR, now made by Henry, is a good choice. Mine is
a Carter Arms. It disassembled and stores in its own stock, will float
and is inexpensive by today's standards.

This is one of those "my Ford is better than your Chevy" eternal
arguments as to the best single firearm. I suggest a little research
into what you are likely to use it for in the area in which you will be
flying. You never know, maybe a .410 with an assortment of shot and slug
shells may be the best bet.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Dan wrote:
wrote:
Those of you familiar with my Blog have probably read the several
articles therein about survival. And yes, I've poked a bit of fun at
those who think survival can be measured by the size of your knife.
But an on-going thread, bounced around amongst a few of use keeps
coming back to the little survival rifle/shotgun (called a 'drilling'
in gunsmith-speak) the Air Force included in their comprehensive
survival pack. As best I can recall this was a .22 Hornet rifle / .
410 shotgun that folded up. Ammunition was carried in the stock,
which was all aluminum.

The purpose of such a weapon was not defense but a means of feeding
yourself.

There are civilian versions of such over & under weapons but they are
heavy and tend to be expensive. But last night I stumbled upon what
may be a suitable substitute: A black-powder pistol. (!??)

A cap & ball pistol, typically a replica (the real thing, in good
condition, is worth thousands of dollars) is inexpensive and not very
heavy. It's also not very accurate :-) ...but hear me out before
condemning the idea.

With black-powder you pour a measured amount of powder into one of the
six chambers then insert a wad of some sort, atop which you place a
round ball, a cone shaped bullet OR A MEASURED AMOUNT OF BIRDSHOT.
Another wad is installed atop the bullet and the charge is compressed
using the lever built-in to the underside of the barrel. A percussion
cap is then installed on the nipple and you go on to the next chamber.

There are a couple of features not generally known to those who do NOT
regularly fire black-powder weapons... especially cap & ball ...that
makes this idea worthy of thought. One is that when we do away with
the cartridge case -- the brass part of the 'bullet' -- the weight &
cube of our ammunition. Fifty rounds for a black-powder weapon weighs
but a fraction of 50 rounds for a regular pistol. And since the ammo
is not made-up it does not have a prescribed shape. This allows you
to store the bullets, powder and caps in whatever space is most
convenient. Another factor is that you'll probably find shot to be
more useful than ball... yet you'll still want to keep one or two
chambers charged with ball. This presents no problem. The other four
chambers may be charged with shot, fired, then charged again, leaving
the chambers charged with ball (or with a conical bullet) undisturbed,
giving you one or two 'insurance' shots to protect yourself from the
ravages of an enraged porcupine or ptarmigan.

Firing shotgun pellets through a rifled bore does neither the bore nor
the pellets any good but given the purpose of this weapon the
traditional arguments against this kind of use have no basis.

Just a thot. Outside the box.

-R.S.Hoover


The old AR-7 in .22 LR, now made by Henry, is a good choice. Mine is a
Carter Arms. It disassembled and stores in its own stock, will float and
is inexpensive by today's standards.

This is one of those "my Ford is better than your Chevy" eternal
arguments as to the best single firearm. I suggest a little research
into what you are likely to use it for in the area in which you will be
flying. You never know, maybe a .410 with an assortment of shot and slug
shells may be the best bet.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

was that Carter Jimmy or billy ?? I gots one & mine sez Charter
arms....Jerry

Jerry Wass wrote:
Dan wrote:
wrote:
Those of you familiar with my Blog have probably read the several
articles therein about survival. And yes, I've poked a bit of fun at
those who think survival can be measured by the size of your knife.
But an on-going thread, bounced around amongst a few of use keeps
coming back to the little survival rifle/shotgun (called a 'drilling'
in gunsmith-speak) the Air Force included in their comprehensive
survival pack. As best I can recall this was a .22 Hornet rifle / .
410 shotgun that folded up. Ammunition was carried in the stock,
which was all aluminum.

The purpose of such a weapon was not defense but a means of feeding
yourself.

There are civilian versions of such over & under weapons but they are
heavy and tend to be expensive. But last night I stumbled upon what
may be a suitable substitute: A black-powder pistol. (!??)

A cap & ball pistol, typically a replica (the real thing, in good
condition, is worth thousands of dollars) is inexpensive and not very
heavy. It's also not very accurate :-) ...but hear me out before
condemning the idea.

With black-powder you pour a measured amount of powder into one of the
six chambers then insert a wad of some sort, atop which you place a
round ball, a cone shaped bullet OR A MEASURED AMOUNT OF BIRDSHOT.
Another wad is installed atop the bullet and the charge is compressed
using the lever built-in to the underside of the barrel. A percussion
cap is then installed on the nipple and you go on to the next chamber.

There are a couple of features not generally known to those who do NOT
regularly fire black-powder weapons... especially cap & ball ...that
makes this idea worthy of thought. One is that when we do away with
the cartridge case -- the brass part of the 'bullet' -- the weight &
cube of our ammunition. Fifty rounds for a black-powder weapon weighs
but a fraction of 50 rounds for a regular pistol. And since the ammo
is not made-up it does not have a prescribed shape. This allows you
to store the bullets, powder and caps in whatever space is most
convenient. Another factor is that you'll probably find shot to be
more useful than ball... yet you'll still want to keep one or two
chambers charged with ball. This presents no problem. The other four
chambers may be charged with shot, fired, then charged again, leaving
the chambers charged with ball (or with a conical bullet) undisturbed,
giving you one or two 'insurance' shots to protect yourself from the
ravages of an enraged porcupine or ptarmigan.

Firing shotgun pellets through a rifled bore does neither the bore nor
the pellets any good but given the purpose of this weapon the
traditional arguments against this kind of use have no basis.

Just a thot. Outside the box.

-R.S.Hoover


The old AR-7 in .22 LR, now made by Henry, is a good choice. Mine is
a Carter Arms. It disassembled and stores in its own stock, will float
and is inexpensive by today's standards.

This is one of those "my Ford is better than your Chevy" eternal
arguments as to the best single firearm. I suggest a little research
into what you are likely to use it for in the area in which you will
be flying. You never know, maybe a .410 with an assortment of shot and
slug shells may be the best bet.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

was that Carter Jimmy or billy ?? I gots one & mine sez Charter
arms....Jerry

OK, so I'm lysdexic, mine says Charter Arms also.

The only thing I don't like about it is the bolt handle will drop out
if one rolls the rifle right side down and installs or removes the
barrel. I have been meaning to install a detent. I'm going to
procrastinate a bit more, it's only been 25 years.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired