Ar-15 as handy as a shotgun?

[Eyeplink45]

This a 5.56 video also from brassfetcher. Just some food for thought.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55CkeT7qdtM&feature=youtube_gdata_player

 

[fatcat4620]

Nice over penetration, bet your kids will love that.

 

[mgmorden]

Mgmorden, at 10 feet (self defense ranges), you're likely to get maybe a 2-4" pattern, depending on specific load. It isn't the cone of death you think it to be. You're also hunting with birdshot, which holds lots of pellets and patterns throughout. With 00-buck, probably the most popular self defense shell, you have 9 pellets. If the pattern is such that you'll hit within a cone, you're only going to hit with one or less pellets.

Important note: I've actually hunted pretty extensively with buckshot for deer. In SC we still can drive deer with dogs where the only legal ammo is buckshot. For one, I typically shoot 15-pellet 3" loads, not 9 pellet 2.75", and for two, no, its not a "cone of death", but I'll stand by my statement that I can hit a LOT easier with the shotgun.

BTW, the first deer I ever dropped I hit with 1 - I repeat ONE - #3 buckshot pellet from a 20ga, but it was straight through the heart. That deer made it about 25 feet before he keeled over and bled out. You don't need to put the whole load in the chest to drop an animal (and people are just smarter animals).

 

[Eric M]

Nice over penetration, bet your kids will love that.

Yea well it's got a steel core which is meant to penetrate so your remark is sort of pointless.

M193 on the other hand, doesn't have a steel core.

 

[ByAnyMeans]

I don't think rifle or shotgun matters much. They will both serve you well. Better served through training and then practicing what you learned.

If the price of training and supplies means you get a shotgun in order to afford both then you are ahead of the game if you get an AR and it is barely shot. If you just like the shotgun better than you are still an force to be reckoned with. All this applies if you choose an AR as well.

Train, practice, and pray your aim is true and you and yours come out safe.

 

[Skribs]

Dave, if you'll look here, you'll see that the .223 tends to overpenetrate less after going through walls than a shotgun does, and you have only one projectile instead of 9+. With that said, anything capable of stopping an attacker will go through several walls.

 

[Texan Scott]

I'd consider a good .30-30, .44, or .357 as an alternative to a pump shotgun. 'Handy' it is, but not my first worry... I worry about reliablity and breakability issues. I KNOW 80% of THR will hate me for saying this, but I am NOT comfortable staking my life on an AR-15 if things are going long-term bad or dirty. Admittedly, my only experience with AR-types is with military issue, which may be why I'm biased against them (my dear Uncle Sam loved me enough to arm me with pieces of $#!%) but I'd rather have something I cycle manually. Also, something that keeps working when the batteries fail. I HATE batteries, I distrust accessories that require them.

+1 vote for the shotgun

 

[jmr40]

Shotguns have all but completely disappeared from LE and military use because of many points already discussed in this thread. An AR is lighter, more compact, has far less recoil, far greater ammo capacity, less concern with overpenetration in building materials and better perfromance when the proper bullet strikes human targets at close range. A shotguns only advantage is a cheaper price and with AR prices dropping the gap is getting smaller every year.

 

[Skribs]

Texan, the problem is that a .357/.44 magnum doesn't reach the velocity to cause significant cavitation trauma that a rifle round would. They're useful in revolvers because (excepting the 5.7 and I think maybe the 7.62x25) no handgun round really does. I'll give you the .30-30, but I don't think a quality AR is going to have the jamming issues you think it will.

 

[fatcat4620]

Shotguns have all but completely disappeared from LE and military use because of many points already discussed in this thread. An AR is lighter, more compact, has far less recoil, far greater ammo capacity, less concern with overpenetration in building materials and better perfromance when the proper bullet strikes human targets at close range. A shotguns only advantage is a cheaper price and with AR prices dropping the gap is getting smaller every year.

A shotgun its not an offensive weapon in this case and a shogun does not require proper bullet strikes. A shotgun does not put all its eggs in the hydrostatic shock basket. It is more like a destroy all tissue in its path basket.

 

[-v-]

A shotgun its not an offensive weapon in this case and a shogun does not require proper bullet strikes. A shotgun does not put all its eggs in the hydrostatic shock basket. It is more like a destroy all tissue in its path basket.

Huh? Military ball ammo relies on tumbling and fragmentation for its damage. Civilian ammo is either JHP or SP and relies on the exact same mechanics that any other hunting or varmit ammo relies on - to a quite devastating effect.

Personally, I find my AK or my AR a lot handier in a "CQB" style environment then a shotgun. a 20" mossberg 7+1 is about 4-5" longer with a heavier muzzle swing then either my AK or AR. Its a longer an a much less maneuverable weapon.

Plus the traditional stock forces me to adopt a more spread out stance which makes retention of the weapon difficult and puts me in a much less balanced stance then my AK or AR around which I can hunch down and wrap around and have much greater control of the said long arm.

Not to mention at typical HD distances, the grand total spread of 1-2" from a open choke isnt going to give the shotgun any significant accuracy leg up on the AR. Hell, I can ignore the rear sight on my AR/AK and use the front solely as a shotgun bead, and I give up nothing in practical accuracy in under 10 yards versus aimed fire.

The other thing, weight wise, my bone stock M500 with 7+1 of 000 3" buck basically just as much or more then my 18" AR with a 30 round mag in it, or my bone stock SGL.

Don't get me wrong, I do like my shotgun, but my go-to gun has always been a rifle for the above stated reasons.

 

[fatcat4620]

I give up. I am going to make sure my AK has a mag in it.

 

[walking arsenal]

I was thinking about this last night again and things really do fall into favor for the AR. Not only is a full size rifle as short as a 18" barreled shotgun you can also get them shorter.

It's a mad mad world.

 

[Deanimator]

No non-NFA long gun is practical in my home.

That's why my AR stays in the safe, regardless of whether it's got the 20" or 16" upper. The same goes for my 20" Ithaca Model 37 DSPS.

 

[jrdolall]

No.

 

[Loosedhorse]

Thats because they are fast and pointable

A lot of folks think ARs are, too. They are certainly lighter; in 16" config an AR goes about 6.25 lbs, or you can get one in polymer for 5.5 lbs. Lightest 870 you'll find is about 7 lbs. And the AR will still recoil less.

they have a simple manual of arms

Simple if you already know it. I know lots of folks who short-stroke their pumps in rapid fire. And reloading is part of the manual of arms: much easier for the AR.

Nice over penetration, bet your kids will love that.

Several companies make .223 rounds with disintegration cores, if you are worried about over-penetration (I personally think everyone should be, unless they live alone in a rural setting). For example:

Personally, I don't think there's an advantage to either AR or shotgun for overpenetration concerns; it's completely load dependent, and so can be adjusted for either gun depending on the load.

And with either, the less concern about overpenetration, the more concern about underpenetration--can't avoid that.

A shotgun does not put all its eggs in the hydrostatic shock basket.

Neither does the .223. The temporary cavitation and fragmentation of the .223 bullet leads to actual tissue destruction, a much wider permanent wound channel than the bullet diameter. It is not depending on hydrostatic shock, just on tissue damage.

 

[Chemistry Guy]

I have ARs and AKs that are shorter and lighter than my 870, but I still would choose my 870 for HD. I simply have more confidence in my ability to point a shotgun with a bead sight quickly than to aim a rifle. With my AR I really rely on my eyes, rather than the feel, to predict where the bullet will go. With my shotguns I can close my eyes and point it at an object fairly accurately.

If I trained with a rifle I might feel differently, but 90% of the shots that I fire are at a clay bird with a shotgun. I feel that this familiarity makes the shotgun the superior tool for home defense in my case.

 

[Warp]

And reloading is part of the manual of arms: much easier for the AR.

Not that reloading is much of a concern for home defense.

+ the AR would have to have a spare magazine mounted on it. Unless you keep one next to it and slip it into your pajama pockets, I guess, or buy one of those purse things the gun rags keep trying to sell us on.

 

[Owen Sparks]

I picked up a customized Saiga 12 GA the other day and it just did not point or swing like a conventional shotgun. I felt slow with it.

 

[Certaindeaf]

Nothing points or handles quicker than an old fashioned AR.. not one of those bloated gewgawed out specimens.

 

[Loosedhorse]

Not that reloading is much of a concern for home defense.

Depends on whom you've trained with. I've been trained, once the fight seems over and the area seems secure, you put a fresh mag in. I want one available in case of jams, too. Same as for pistols.

the AR would have to have a spare magazine mounted on it.

It does. If it helps, there are spare shells on the shotgun, too.

 

[Warp]

Depends on whom you've trained with. I've been trained, once the fight seems over and the area seems secure, you put a fresh mag in. I want one available in case of jams, too. Same as for pistols.It does. If it helps, there are spare shells on the shotgun, too.

I would also be worried about jams with an AR.

 

[Certaindeaf]

I would also be worried about jams with an AR.

That's odd. Have you ever shot a "good" one.. ie Colt etc?

 

[leftymachinist]

Carbine v. Shotgun

Back when I was young a shotgun with a short bbl. was a riot gun, and a rifle is one with a bbl. more than 20 inches. Carbines generally had 20" orshorter barrels(Winchester model 94s). The M16/AR15 is a carbine to me. Just my 1.375 cents.

 

[Warp]

That's odd. Have you ever shot a "good" one.. ie Colt etc?

Nope. Too expensive.

Which is why I don't have one of my own at all. Just too $$$