Building up my survival arsenal

[mattdylan]

This is my first post here on THR, just looking for some advise and feedback. A while back i had to drastically reduce my collection due to some financial bumps in the road. I'm receiving some inheritance money soon and I'm thinking of putting about $1,500-2,000 to getting my collection going again.
Right now all i have are two 12ga; my Mossberg 550 mariner for home defense, and my grandfather's old Remington wingmaster 870 (30" barrel w/full choke) for hunting. Home defense, hunting and emergency survival readiness are the primary functions of the weapons I'm looking to get.
To round off the collection with about $1,500-2,000, I'm currently thinking about picking up the Marlin Papoose (backpacking, wilderness survival, emergency kit), a WASR-10 (deer and defense), and a Taurus PT-1911AR (wilderness side arm/defense). I've owned both a wasr and a PT-1911 and loved them, and had a marlin 60 that was a piece of junk. What do y'all think? I'm looking for thoughts, recommendations, things to consider. What do y'all have to say?

EDIT: THIS IS NOT A SHTF POST. Though its fun to think about, I'm looking for a well rounded collection so i have the right tools for various wilderness outings, hunting and self defense.
BY "SURVIVAL WEAPONS" I MEAN:
a) whoops, got lost in the wilderness, I sure am glad i have this .22 so I can eat some squirrel and this .45 in case i run into a cougar.
b) here I am at my shack in the woods, I sure am glad i can hunt various things in the area with this well rounded collection that will also keep me safe in any BGs come round.

 

[strambo]

I have no idea what a Marlin "Papoose" is, but the other 2 sound good, esp. since you owned them before and liked 'em. A .22 (rifle or pistol), a centerfire pistol and the AK (plus the shotguns you have now) is a good group of guns for your stated purpose.

 

[FTSESQ]

Welcome, from a new guy

I have no idea what a Marlin "Papoose" is,

Its like an AR7... Although I like the AR7 better, but its personal preference.

IMHO, if you are thinking survival, you are right in looking for a good, light weight, easily carried .22. Most .22's are fairly accurate (At least for hunting or emergency self defense), and almost anyone can carry one plus a year's worth of ammo.

For the "survival situation" thought exercise I also like the .357 combo. That is, a revolver is .357 and a lever action carbine in .357. Think about it. A 4 inch .357 can be loaded with light .38 special loads for rabbit or squirrel (or SD for non shooting folks) up to full house .357 that are boarder line for bear. Or, load with shot shells for close quarters foul or snake. The .357 leaver gun can easily bag deer or boar. You have a light weigh carbine that can handle any medium game animal (Or hostile 2 legged varmints) within 200 yards, maybe further out in good hands. Light weight ammo, and you only have to carry one caliber. If you need more firepower the 44 Mag/44 special combo, or 45 Long Colt variants would also work.

Not to rain on your parade, but I would stay away from the Taurus guns. Lots of mixed feelings on them and spotty quality. Some people get good ones, some get lemons... Wouldn't chance it. if you want a 1911, but don't want to spend a lot, I'd look for a good used Colt or Springfield GI or the like. Besides, if you are thinking wilderness, a .357 will handle a lot more than a .45 (although a high quality .22 conversion would add a new dimension of utility to the 1911) Remember, quality only costs more at the register....

 

[mattdylan]

Its like an AR7... Although I like the AR7 better, but its personal preference.

I was considering an AR7. I really like that it all fits in the stock. I'd much rather have something that breaks down like the ar7, I've just read so many poor reviews about accuracy and reliability. You haven't had issues though?

As for the Taurus pt 1911, my old one worked far better than the para ordinance 1911 slim hawg I used to own for CC. I know a lot of people don't like taurus, but i hear they are getting a lot better, in terms of quality. Have you gotten a chance to fire the PT1911?

 

[FTSESQ]

AR7 & Papoose

Papoose and AR7. Papoose is the pic with the ruler...

 

[FTSESQ]

I was considering an AR7. I really like that it all fits in the stock. I'd much rather have something that breaks down like the ar7,

Not only does it break down nicely, but it will float also.

I've just read so many poor reviews about accuracy and reliability. You haven't had issues though?

No issues... Once you find good mags. Some magazines (maybe a lot of them) are cheap and crappy. Good mags are key. Accuracy is not the best, but is acceptable. maybe 2inch, 5 shot groups on a good day. Sufficient for SHTF hunting, I think.

As for the Taurus pt 1911, my old one worked far better than the para ordinance 1911 slim hawg I used to own for CC. I know a lot of people don't like taurus, but i hear they are getting a lot better, in terms of quality. Have you gotten a chance to fire the PT1911?

OK, fair enough. But please realize that the full size 1911 and a micro 1911 like the Hawg are completely different animals. Any small 1911 (under 4 inch barrel) are almost exponentially more unreliable than the full size 5 inch model. Please note, I'm not a Coolaid drinking Taurus hater. I actually really liked my 4 inch Ti Tracker. It was a light weight, accurate .357 with a fairly good single action trigger pull (although HEAVY double action) that was comfortable to shoot. But my brother bought the same gun from the same dealer two months after I bought mine and his was horrible. Gritty single action pull, no where near as accurate (no matter who did the shooting), and quickly developed timing issues. Although, his double action trigger pull was smother than mine. Go figure. He sold his, and I gave him mine because he liked it so much and I bought a Ruger GP100 for $75 more than the Taurus, and it is an infinitely better gun, although much heavier.

My main qualm with Taurus is their hit or miss (no pun intended) quality. Some folks get good ones, some get lemons... but, in either case, for just a few dollars more, you can get a solidly good gun. For my hard earned money, I'd rather spend a little more and know that I'm getting quality than roll the dice. Even though I personally had a pretty good experience, I'm just not willing to risk it.

P.S. Regardless, in a survival/ SHTF situation I still think that you would be better served by a quality .357 wheel gun. You can get a GP100 in the $400-$500 range

 

[DustyVermonter]

I'd say get a saiga in 7.62x39 or .308. They are economical, customizable, reliable, durable rifles that you can totally hunt with, in fact they are popular hunting guns in Alaska as they can withstand freezing wet conditions on long hunting expeditions. Not to mention they are essentially a russian kalishnakov, which is thought of as the highest quality AK available. I have the Saiga 7.62x39 w/ 16in barrel and I'm totally confident in its hunting/defense capabilities. Its the perfect hunting/ranch rifle in my opinion, as opposed to the mini-14 that is more expensive and less reliable, not to mention less potent. I had a mini-30 and while its a 'sexy' looking piece and everything, I wasn't to crazy about it. It was really finnicky, ammo sensitive and in my experience only shot about 70% of the time so I sold it and got a Saiga.

As for a trail sidearm/knockin around the house gun, reliability is a must for me, so a Glock17 or Glock21 would do nicely to get things going. Than perhaps a nice lightweight 6 shooter in .38spl or .357magnum. It sounds like you have the Shotgun situation covered. So there you go, at $400-$500 for the Saiga, $500 for the glock and $300-$400 for a .38spl you are well in your range and would be off to a pretty good start with some pretty vesatile guns capable of serving just about every purpose.

 

[killchain]

If you're being budget minded, you could consider an SKS instead of an AK model.

And for superior reliability in a bad situation, I'd think about a revolver for a handgun.

 

[BHP FAN]

You might consider the Ruger 10/22.That's where any collection of mine would start.

 

[DustyVermonter]

You did specify "survival" arsenal. When preparing for any type of survival scenario, it would be safe to assume that you may have to be holed up somewhere for an uncertain amount of time and it could be in less than desirable conditions. It is my opinion that nothing even comes close to a Glocks ability to withstand the elements. I love 1911's too I just personally wouldn't want to be trying to clean one in a survival scenario, they are kind of a pain to get clean and assemble/disassemble, one man's opinion. I love the .45 caliber and know a lot of people would argue as to which is more important, proficient stopping power or capacity, but I believe the 9mm has both, personally I would take 17 rounds of 9mm than 7-8 .45acp in a survival scenario. You can also disassemble/assemble and clean a Glock in about 1 minute flat. I love saigas and revolvers for the same reasons I love Glocks, you asked I told, I'm done, carry on...

 

[DustyVermonter]

If your into those nifty little survival rifles like the AR-7 than you definitely need to check out the M-6 scout, I believe its made by springfield. It is the 'niftiest' rifle I have ever seen. Go to www.youtube.com and type in M-6 scout survival rifle

 

[FTSESQ]

Hey- just had a brain fart. An option for the .22 rifle. The Marlin 39A. Larger and heavier and maybe not as easy to transport, but definitely much more accurate and reliable than the papoose, M6, or AR7.

 

[DustyVermonter]

Note: Springfield M6 Scout Survival rifle NOT to be confused with the Springfield M1A Scout Squad. If you like the AR-7 and the Marlin Papoose than the M6 scout survival rifle is an absolute Must See!!!

 

[mattdylan]

I do like that M6 scout, the whole .22/410 seems useful. I do want more than a 1 round capacity on my .22, though semi-auto isn't a must. thanks for the input though.

 

[mattdylan]

now you got me thinking, though. any thoughts on the rossi 22-410

 

[mattdylan]

or for that matter, the rossi match set 22-20? or the trifecta?

 

[pockets]

I'm currently thinking about picking up the Marlin Papoose (SNIP)
I've owned both a wasr and a PT-1911 and loved them, and had a marlin 60 that was a piece of junk.

The Marlin Papoose has the same basic action as the Model 60. It is a breakdown version of the Marlin Model 70, which is just the magazine fed version of the Model 60. If you don't like the Model 60 you have, why buy the same gun in breakdown form?
I used to love the AR7 design, until after owning a few. My current Henry Survival version is not as good as my old Charter Arms Explorer version, which wasn't as good as my old AR7. Neat design, love how it all stows in the stock......but.
Have you considered a folding stock on a Ruger 10/22?
.

 

[mattdylan]

one thing i really didn't like about the marlin 60 was the internal mag. It was mainly a plinker, and i consistently fired pretty cheap ammo through it. I had a lot of FTF and FTE issues as it'd junk up so fast. is the Papoose at all better in that regard? in survival situations i'd be using quality ammo.

I have been thinking more about the ruger 10/22. any thoughts on the 10/22 charger?

 

[TexasBill]

The 10/22 is a good rifle, but I like my Henry better. It will shoot stuff that jams the Ruger and is about the same price. I actually bought the youth model. If you want something that breaks down for whatever reason, why not just get a Ruger or Browning .22 automatic pistol with a 6-inch barrel?

You might also look at a Ruger Mini-14. Cheaper than most of the AR-style rifles.

Taurus QC is still too hit-and-miss for my tastes. Glocks are no better than most of the quality autoloaders on the market. While it's heresy to many, I think there are better SD pistols on the market than the thousand-and-one M1911 clones. There are some very good pistols available from Smith & Wesson, Walther, FN, Beretta and others and the Ruger GP-100 revolver is hard to beat, though I prefer the Smith & Wessons.

The shared-caliber option is worth considering. I have a Beretta CX4 and PX4 in matching calibers with six magazines they can share. I can have more than 100 rounds of ammunition ready to go.

The big question in my mind is was kind of SD scenario are you considering? Basic home defense or Armageddon/zombie attacks?

 

[mattdylan]

The big question in my mind is was kind of SD scenario are you considering? Basic home defense or Armageddon/zombie attacks?

home/self defense scenarios are more likely, but who doesn't like being prepared for zombies?

 

[JoeMal]

one thing i really didn't like about the marlin 60 was the internal mag. It was mainly a plinker, and i consistently fired pretty cheap ammo through it.

A few things.......

I just bought a new Marlin 60 and it works great. The only ammo I've had any problems with is Federal Lightning. Fed bulk stuff runs great though. I have also shot Rem bulk, Rem Thunderbolt, CCI Minimags, and Blazer without ANY problems. For some reason it just doesn't like the Lightning.

in survival situations i'd be using quality ammo.

Survival situation with a .22? Unless you're defending yourself from killer rabbits, I would refer to a larger caliber for 'survival situations'

I have been thinking more about the ruger 10/22. any thoughts on the 10/22 charger?

I went with the Marlin because of the comments regarding the 10/22 and accuracy/ammo problems. Many claim (both Marlin AND 10/22 owners) that the Marlin is a better gun 'out of the box'. Sure, you can dump $1000 into a 10/22 to make it a great shooter, but is that really necessary? I can easily shoot 1-2" 10 shot groups at 30 yards with iron sights out of my Marlin any day of the week (and I'm a beginner when it comes to rifles). That's good enough for me for a stock, $150 rifle. Someday I will put a scope on it and see what it's capable of at longer ranges.

 

[SaxonPig]

#49 on my list of gun discussion 100 FAQs.

----------------------------

SHTF gun? (Urban combat and survivalist scenarios.)

49. A popular topic on some forums is debating what guns to have on hand for Armageddon. There likely isn’t one best answer for this because there are differing possible scenarios. For personal defense of home and family in case of a total break down of law and order, any gun will probably do. Looters and other criminals are cowards and any show of force usually drives them away seeking easier targets. For those anticipating actual combat, against standing armies (foreign or domestic) then I guess some military style rifle would be best. The AR15 makes sense to me as it uses the same magazines and ammo as the U.S. military so scrounging in a prolonged conflict might be possible. Although I have to question how many Americans would actually take up arms and how well scattered and disorganized civilians armed with SKS carbines and AR15s would fare against the U.S. Army if civil war broke out. Yeah, we all saw “Red Dawn” but it was pure fiction and remember how the film ended, with everyone dead.

For taking to the hills and surviving, a 22 rifle and a shotgun for food gathering would be a good choice. Bear in mind that the various take-down 22 rifles are handy but horribly inaccurate and the purpose is to actually GATHER FOOD and not just have a cool gun. Something compact but accurate like a Ruger 10/22 makes much more sense. Since you may have to plan on having no more than what you can carry, a long barrel target grade 22 pistol may be even better. Sure, we’d LIKE to have a fighting rifle; a hunting rife; a shotgun; a couple of handguns; not to mention thousands of rounds of ammunition, but can you carry all this stuff? What makes you think you will be able to transport and store this much equipment?

Again, I have to wonder how many of us could really survive in the wilderness with nothing more than what we could carry with us? Those of us who are old; broken down; and on medications for chronic ailments know that if society collapses, we won’t last long anyway.

 

[mattdylan]

Survival situation with a .22? Unless you're defending yourself from killer rabbits, I would refer to a larger caliber for 'survival situations'

by survival situation with a .22, i mean needing to pick off some small game to eat, NOT self defense. for self defense, there's the 45, 12ga, or 7.62x39. thanks for the input on the marlin though. at this point I'm thinking, for the 22, either a marlin papoose, or a ruger 10-22 w/folding stock or a ruger 10-22 charger

 

[JoeMal]

by survival situation with a .22, i mean needing to pick off some small game to eat, NOT self defense

Ahhh I see. Definitely a difference there :banghead: Sounds like you're on the right track. Good luck.

Also, you mentioned you didn't like the tube-fed characteristic of the 60. Maybe look into the Marlin 795? Pretty much the same gun only mag fed. I think it's even cheaper than the 60 (I KNOW it's cheaper than a 10/22), which will leave you more money for the rest of your arsenal/ammo

 

[TexasBill]

SaxonPig has it pretty much right; it's going to take a well-prepared individual with lots of skills and experience to fend off the Mongol hordes (or zombies). Or even evade them.

As far as armaments go, I would imagine the true survivor-type would start out with some combination of a long gun and handgun, but would quickly "acquire" the weapons and ammunition of the prevailing military or invading force. Why carry a hundred pounds of ammo when your opposition will do it for you?

In my mind, strength does lie in numbers and small groups of people would have a better chance at long-term survival. You have to sleep sometime and it's a lot easier if you've got somebody covering your six.