I will caveat up front that if you have a rifle or similar-type firearm meant for serious social engagements, you should have a set of BUIS.  That said, a quality optic relying on batteries or even tritium will last a couple decades easy.  That's assuming you have extra batteries on hand and if you don't, you're not serious about SHTF or survival and not really part of this discussion.  Seriously, a handful of extra batteries will keep your optic running up to a decade or two depending on the optic (two extra CR2032 batteries in an AR pistol grip for a Aimpoint T2 will give you 15 years of constant-on use).  Etched reticles are a bonus, and don't forget some optics that run on AA or AAA rechargeable batteries that can be charged with a small solar panel and I have Eneloop batteries still working that are 15 years old and hundreds of charges.  I'm to the point now where a quality optic will likely last longer than most post-SHTF lifespans or ammunition supplies.  In fact, there's a higher probability the optic will fail before you run out of batteries.  ACOG and quality LPVOs are the best long-term value; even if tritium or battery sources dry up, the etched reticle will still be daylight usable.  I still have a couple of old Aimpoint COMP MLs that are running just fine (close to 20 years old).  I just ordered a dozen on the DL1/3N batteries to keep them fed another decade plus.

While I do like some of the cheaper (Chinese manufactured) red-dot optics like Holsoun, Sig Romeo, Primary Arms, etc, I'm not sure if their housing and construction will last two decades...at least that remains to be seen; however, I know Aimpoint and Trijicon make optics that have lasted that long.

One thing to consider is magnification as you get older.  I've been delving into some LPVOs recently.  While most require a battery for their 1x "red dot" use, they have etched reticle and variable magnification for those aging eyes...something that concerns me more than battery life over the next decade plus

While I think optics are now considered an essential on a fighting rifle (or braced "pistol"), I still contend BUIS are a must and you need to continue training with them for proficiency.  Every firearm I own that is potentially a fighting firearm has BUIS on them if they have an optic as their primary.  Heck, one of the reasons I like scout-style bolt guns is that they often have integrated iron sights...simply prudent advice and insurance for a serious-use firearm.

Some of my go-to firearms that have an non-magnified optic have iron sights that are already fixed and co-witnessed.  There's no real transition as I can use them without having the optic on or even needing to "pop" the BUIS up.

ROCK6

Fully concur with your remarks.  Beyond age 35 or so, presbyopia is almost 100% inevitable, no matter if your eyes are excellent, or otherwise afflicted by other conditions.  Thus why most older shooters are forced to transition to various types of optics in lieu of accurately shooting with iron sights.

However, there may be a work-around, if shooting in bright light.  The use of a very tiny aperture can help all but the most presbyopia-afflicted eyes.  It only helps for a while, though, until the condition has progressed too far.  Even at that point, small apertures can help the afflicted shooter shoot more accurately than without such apertures.  Such shooting will NOT be as accurate as with appropriate optics, but will serve for close ranges on, say, 10" diameter targets.

To tie this in to my previous comments, one must be able to use threaded rear apertures, and so vary the internal diameter.  Certainly not a set-up for combat, except if one is a long-distance sniper.

At any rate, consider the trick I mentioned for the Front Sight of your BUIS system.

I wonder about the "offset" BUIS one sees.  Might be worth thinking about, if the firearm/platform allows such, and such BUIS serves one's purpose.  If anything, transition should be instant.  Most likelyclose-range distances.

I do like peep sights and while my eyes are still decent for irons, I can see the ghost ring getting larger down the road It may not be MOA accurate for me, but certainly combat-accurate.

I put Magpul's offset BUIS on my POF Revolution in 308.  I have a Leupold 1.25-4x Patrol as the primary.  It's not too bad, but takes some practice using the offset sights. I will say it's not uncomfortable to rotate the rife and run drills with the irons while the rifle is canted about 45 degrees.  They would be faster if they weren't folding sights, but it's what I'm working with.  An offset MRDS is another option I'll look at in the future, but I'm trying to keep overall weight less than a similar sized AR15...

ROCK6

ROCK6, do you have a micrometer, or other, accurate, way to measure the internal diameter of your rear sight aperture?  If so, please do, and report your findings.

Reliable.  Accurate enough to do what you need to do.  Something you can clean.  Something you can replace parts on if necessary.  Something you have those parts to replace.  Something you have reliable and accurate ammo for.

Around here, where I live, 100 yds. is all I can see (farthest) unless I walk out on a highway.  On a highway, if I can get 20 ft. off it I'm in the brush/vines with the ticks/chiggers/snakes and can't see 20 yds.  I shoot/stock 55 grain FMJ.  Been thinking about some 55 grain soft points, just haven't bothered to buy/reload any yet.

55 grain will take care of anything on two legs or four legs around here.  At least until it's wild enough the black bears come back around after a few years.  If anyone is left by then.

Are you familiar with Merit?  They make a variable aperture sight disk that works very well.  I haven't used the AR version but I've used one on a 24" barrel Marlin since the middle 1990's.

http://meritcorporation.com/via.html

Yes, I am familiar with Merit apertures, and others like them.  I have a similar, antique, Brit-made, variable aperture mounted on my M1917 rifle. They are very nice, fragile, and expensive devices suitable for benign conditions.  I have some others, for use on different rifles, for such situations, and they are very handy--as long as they serve under such conditions where they seldom see rain and never get dirty.  I reckon that such sights, encountering an injection of mud, might never work properly again.

In short, these variable apertures are not combat-ready sights, and fine for the range, or hunting, and if rules allow such.

For the purposes of "Survival" discussions, I deliberately did not make mention of such, because they are sufficiently fragile as to make their longevity suspect in any environment more hostile than a range setting, or hunting.  I opted, instead, for the far less vulnerable, replaceable, screw-in apertures.  Such apertures will perform the same function as adjustable Merit apertures, but are far more robust.  Granted, they are a bit of a fuss to remove and install, but that is a trade-off that, in a survival situation, makes replaceable apertures a better long-term investment.  YMMV.

In my experience, few people will be willing to experiment with adapting their rifle(s) so as to accomodate replaceable rear apertures, let alone the more expensive Merit-type aperture, which, BTW, is also a screw-in device.  Congrats to you for being open-minded.  Most are not.

Your suggestion is a good one, but IMHO useful under certain, limited, circumstances.  While hunting with the Merit is one thing, using such a fragile sight under combat/survival conditions is asking for trouble, IMHO.  YMMV.  Under survival/combat conditions, I would certainly use such a rear sight, but I would not expect it to last long.

Right tool for right job. I don't have "One" SHTF weapon. I have a safe with many weapons, with exception to my Glock not being in the picture, these are my "GOTO" weapons.... The MP5 Clone is still in need of a better sight....

Attached File


The one I have the most time with and most comfortable with would be my 20+ year old Bushmaster. Some may bash it for not being an expensive AR, but it goes bang, has been reliable and is accurate enough for my old eyes...
(With Mrs. NCUrk demonstrating...)
Attached File

I think that most of us have safes with many different firearms.  However, the OP's intent was to cause the readers to pick a single rifle for all purposes.  Not an easy requirement.  I don't question your particular choice, FWIW.

I have some older Bushmaster item in my collection, and they have served me well; no Bushmaster bashing intended.

Well, glad to see you again!  You are one of those people, whom I have come to know and understand, that I would not argue against.

We may occasionally differ, but hopefully such will be learning opportunities for both of us.

The two aperture settings are 0.07 and 0.19.

ROCK6

OK.

Let's put it this way:  On my Ruger Scout rifle, I have an un-advertised, internally-threaded aperture which is about 1/8"/3/16" Internal Diameter.  It's a direct replacement for the OEM Ruger GSR rear sight and adjusts in similar manner.   This Ghost ring rear sight, all by itself, is a GREAT close-range/dangerous game rear sight.

This threaded base/standalone ghost ring rear sight will accept common threaded sight inserts which will allow various apertures.  In other words, one has choices.

The apertures you specify above are FAR too "tight" for a good "ghost ring" rear sight, and are much more suited to the target range than the field.

Call the mfr (XSsights), and ask about the upgrade.  As I mentioned, it's not on-line.  The item is a simple drop-in, but one will need to re-sight.

The XSsights "long rail" that installs over the rear of the action, and so goes forward, allowing a conventional scope to be mounted, has an integral Ruger GSR rear sight.  Once the conventional optic is removed, the iron sights can be used, once sighted-in.  The "long Rail' does NOT come with a threaded rear aperture, unfortunately.  Such accessory will fit the "long rail", but the threaded rear aperture sight assy is a stand-alone option, and bought separately.

Having become familiar with various types of rear sights, on many different rifles, this one is about the best rear iron sight available for the Ruger GSR--or most any rifle, if such an option s available to other rifles.

OTOH, if your eyes are too far gone to take advantage of it, then disregard.  The smaller peep apertures which this aftermarket rear sight accepts will extend the usefulness of iron sights, but beyond a certain point, in the deterioration of your eyes, you will need to transition to optics, as even the best iron sights will be of reduced accuracy.

The largest aperture is pretty big, I don't think it would work well with anything larger.  It's extremely fast within 10 meters but still quite accurate out to 100 meters.  I get the same sight picture as I do with my XSights on my lever carbine.

ROCK6

Actually, it was a single ROUND, not a rifle.  Then, whether two rifles would make more sense (right tool for the job, right...?)

Not even about what other things to do first (water, food, etc).

This thread has strayed.

Well, some straying has occurred, but OP was not exactly specific on what rifle he specified, although his personal choices were all 5.56 rifles.

Thread "straying" or "wandering' is something only an attentive Mod can control--if they wish to do so.  In most cases, some wandering can be  pertinent, and tolerable.

I don't think the amount of 'wandering' in this thread is unacceptable, but that is just my opinion.

Then maybe you shouldn't have titled this thread, 'The SHTF rifle concept,' and maybe used the word 'SHTF cartridge' instead.

Your original post said:

No doubt, ... but it wasn't horrible.

I am late to the game messing with appleseed stuff, but a weekend of shooting in 3 positions, standing, sitting or kneeling, and prone, taught me how nice an adjustable stock can be.

Did the appleseed in the spring.

I borrowed a 10-22 with tech sites for the saturday shortrange portion and tech sites worked well for my middle aged eyes.

I do like optics as I get older though and for what appleseed is after an acog or other marked reticle was impressive in the hands of some others.  Known distance shooting was the 2nd day so on something like an acog made for m193 ammo you need to just know what the marks on the reticle need, check for wind, and away they went.  Several qualified rifleman.

I used another borrowed rifle and was not up to the task, this one had a scope and I short changed myself somewhat not learning the scope the first day and making more of my knowledge sunday.

But there are appleseeds all over the place, so no biggy.

Anyway, get out and use your stuff.  We had a mish mash of stuff there, some fixed stocks and some not and it was interesting and educational on many levels.

Added on edit cause I thought I already put something in here on ammo.

There is a lot of the 77gr stuff that can be found at 50cpr when on sale/clearance/ or rebate.  I have some of the imi and some of the hornaday, which after reading on some of the 55gr hornaday I don't know if I would buy it again or not.

The appleseed stuff works just fine with common m193 ammo as long as your rifle groups ok with it.  Many people have said the m855 ammo is less consistent but this is across multiple cases I guess.  I would stick to 1 brand and case lot if trying to stock up on ammo.

I admit I have some gold dot soft point from psa clearance deals years ago and consider it home defense ammo I guess.  Site it in and leave it be.  Depending on distance shot other ammo used in that firearm is not terrible different for point of aim.

I mostly stock m193.  Yeah I bought a couple cases of m855 cause atf considered going after it.  Yes I have some odds and ends 77gr and other stuff as well.

For me, I would stock more of what you can practice with.  I was impressed with some of the austrian outback 69 gr that was selling right under 50cpr after shipping.  Don't know that it will be found at that price much.  Same goes for the other ammo.

Federal just started rebates on m193 and m855 ammo so to me I would stock what you can afford to shoot.

I generally take shtf and extend it to teotwawki and these days it could just be dems killing shipping ammo across state lines and cranking up taxes on ammo.

Yes I have some spiffy ammo.  Yes I would use it first.  No I don't feel that bad about not having a ton of spiffy ammo on hand.  At some point quantity vs quality needs examined.

I have some ar pistols and some different barrel lengths on ar rifles as well.  Each one gets different ammo just cause that is how it has worked out for now.

If you have a quality optic it is not hard to sit at a table and adjust from x ammo to y ammo.  Need to know and write down the adjustments.  And I would still make sure each time that everything worked as it should.

Congrats in doing Appleseed.  Overall, a good program.  I got my Patch.

I never had formal shooting classes or training other than some handgun stuff I paid for once I had my ccw.

Relatively cheap, awesome instructors, low pressure but they want you to excell sort of class.

I meant to find a local one by now to work on skills some more but work overtime saps all energy out of me.

I will have my own setup for the next one, I got lots of excuses for why I did not have mine at previous one but who needs excuses.

Also got me into buying slings here and slings there, and just the basic canvas one at that.

Absolutely correct, and my bad.

Thanks for admitting a mistake!  Very few hereabouts are able to do so.  

When younger and skinnier and surplus 7.62x51 from south africa was cheap I decided 308/7.62x51 was a do everything round.

Surplus for the fal, cause back then fals were cheap and ar10s were complicated and picky and what not.  From the 16 inch or so barreled para with a folding stock to the regular sized non folding stock version I felt it was plenty to do anything I was gonna want to do.

Bolt action 308 could use the surplus or spiffy hunting rounds or whatever.

These days I give a not to the 5.56/223 ar15 for accomplishing anything I want to do and being a lot lighter.  These days the carry handle is not a permanent attachment and building an ar is simple and cheap.  I like the m193 ammo for everyday whatever.  I readily admit to messing with 69gr and 77gr stuff for longer range shooting just cause.  Got some gold dot soft points and some other odds and ends around as well.

The ar15 can generally be set up to do anything I wish to do so I do not have a bolt action version but if I found one cheap I would not mind one.  The ruger bolt action that takes ar15 mags would be ok.

I like both the above rounds cause surplus as well as hunting.  Both have a ton of info out there for doing whatever you want to do.

I give a huge nod of the head to something like a 45-70 or marlin 444 round as being a do everything round for reloaders.  Can find old articles on loading em with 3 lead balls for a sort of shotgun effect.  Or load em on up for bear protection or hunting.

By no means do I have anything against an ar10 these days, kinda wanting to get one but finishing up what all I got first.  And for me a bolt action 308 is not going to really do anything a good ar10 can't do.

I also have to admit a fal will do anything I have ever wanted to do.  But a remington 700 adl with a $300 scope back then was a lot easier to scope than a fal.  Got the adl cause its stock got scratched in the gun shop by a new hire kid and owner of store wanted to move it.  ADL cost about $300 and back then I decided similar money for glass was good.

I let the rifle wander off just cause, these days I would probably look at savage or someone else and I would spend more than $300 on glass.

I am currently building my "EOTW" rifle.  
It will be a 14.5in pinned and welded (Faxon with slim break)
Going for a somewhat light weight build.  
Will probably buy a TA44 for it.

I have a similar light 5.56 set-up that I run suppressed.

But the confusion in this thread is that a 'SHTF rifle' isn't necessarily the same as an 'urban fighting rifle,' a context in which the 5.56 cartridge probably rules the day.

But in a 'SHTF' event, especially a long term one, there will be more things you might need to do with a rifle than fighting off the hungry, howling mob that spilled into your AO.

A SHTF weapon needs to have versatility of use.

I have a 6.5 Grendel upper that would be more versatile in terms of hunting etc.
That said, it's fairly heavy and wouldn't be that fun to carry around all day.  
I might look into a light weight 6.5 upper at some point.
In terms of versatility, I think 6.5 grendel is pretty awesome.

As is so often the case, FPNI.  It is my belief that a SHTF rifle should be a general purpose rifle.  If people get all wrapped around the axle over a specific purpose, they will be shortchanging themselves for many other purposes.   The closer you can come to a general purpose rifle, the better off you are.

I think Jeff Cooper's idea was essentially sound, but his ideas preceded many of the really good, lightweight semi-auto type rifles now available.  A lightweight AR10 style (bickering over the AR10 only applying to Knights armament rifles aside) 308, or 6.5mm rifle with an 16-20" barrel and a 1-6 or 1-8 power optic would be a wonderful all around rifle.

I would get the rifle in the cartridge I find the most practical.  Battlefield scavenging for ammo is not an important consideration.  A battlefield that would provide ammo in any meaningful quantity is just as likely to provide a weapon in the same caliber.  This means that it isn't necessary to put battlefield ammo scavenging as a significant consideration for MY rifle purchase.

A valid consideration is whether I could afford to stockpile enough ammunition for my rifle.  If ammo for my rifle costs $2.50 per round, I couldn't stockpile nearly as much as if the ammo cost .32 cents per round.

Don't recall if we got into 22lr conversions or just a lightweight 22lr rifle to carry with your rifle.
cmmg drop in 22lr conversions for ar15s are common but are often said to not be super accurate.  Folks using the cmmg bolt and an actual 22lr barrel and adapter are able to feel they have an accurate rifle but now we have a complete ar15 upper to swap around.

Lightweight 22lr single shot or whatever probably is similar if not less weight than complete cmmg upper, but I am lazy and did not look it up.

For ak 7.62x39 stuff there is now a 22lr kit running around and due to the larger bore I would hope it would be more accurate but I have not read up on them.  Tech sites for an ak replace the rear dust cover I believe, I used to keep up with this stuff decade or two ago.

These days, I fully comprehend the concept of bugging out longterm is gonna be dang hard to do and you can't take everything with you.

A really accurate 22lr handgun might perhaps replace the 22lr rifle, depends what you expect to use it for.

Cooper never envisoned the use of carbon fiber and the like in his SR, the ability ot have a SA, mag fed, ar10 pattern, that comes in under 6 lbs is here. toss on optic(3.5x35 Acog, easy and about 1 lb after you factor in mount)

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/building-the-lightest-ar10-ever.822282/

There are guys running around with fully reliable, ar15's (full optics) that are sub 6, heck even sub5 can happen.

The WWI brits did some amazing things with their enfields but imagine if that marksmanship and drill ability were applied to SA firearms with optics??

Definitely this ...

Cooper's General Purpose Rifle/Scout Rifle theory was decades ahead of the firearms technology we have now, most essentially in terms of his weight restriction on a GP rifle in .308 for field use.

As the Colonel said more than once, he had no objection to a semi-auto GP/Scout rifle as long as it could meet the same weight restriction applicable to bolt-actions. But back then, none of the available platforms or configurations could. So in the .308 chambering, the obvious default was to the compact, thin-barreled bolt-platform.

The M1 Garand action was available back in Cooper's day, but it won't make weight, trust me. I've tried 'experimental' Scout builds on the M1-platform twice just to satisfy my own warped curiosity.

The first was applying the elements of Cooper's 'Scout' configurations to my old 7.62/.308 18.25" 'Tanker' M1  - running an Ultimak forward rail mount and Burris Scout optic -  and later on, the same set-up on a 16.1" Mini-G (w/ .308 Criterion barrel) from Shuff's Parkerizing.

Both were also set up with an Olongapo stock pack and a Magpul 2-pt padded MS1 sling for 'patrol-style' carry, so as to facilitate easier manipulation of the weapon over the traditional GI sling.

All these ideas actually worked: the M1 action is easily clip-fed; the optics have repeatable 200-yd zeroes; sturdy iron-sights, also zeroed for back-up; flawless reliability; and both rifles are accurate. The MS1 sling is quick to cinch up tight as a shooting aid ...  But while the Mini-G, a true 'carbine-length' Garand, is lighter than the Tanker, both still fail make weight under Cooper's strict SR criteria.

Regardless, for my use both currently serve as general, 'all-around' weapons  - from home or self-defense, to handy 'truck guns' or short-range deer & hog-hunters. The Mini in particular shines as a bush or 'brush gun' with a .308 hunting load, where you'd want something compact and maneuverable as well as hard-hitting   -  with or without the Burris 2.75x.

True also. But my problem is, I've accumulated so much surplus 7.62 ammo and its commercial equivalents in .308 over the years that I don't see how I'll ever shoot it all in my lifetime unless I spent a couple of weeks at Knob Creek with the full-auto crowd.

It is fair to say that Cooper might well have selected a semi-auto chassis for modern Scout development, but I rather doubt it.  The reason for saying so is contained within the Scout Rifle requirements, an analysis is quoted within this link: http://www.scoutrifle.org/index.php?topic=971.0

The main point to Cooper's selecting a 7.62 bolt action was that was the only action available at the time which could "make weight", AND use a cartridge/bullet combination of sufficient power to meet other (range and target weight) requirements.

Granted that while some 5.56 AR-based rifles can "make weight", they fall down on the basis of their cartridge, at least when one adheres to the essential "Scout Rifle" dogma as being a general-purpose rifle.  Cooper would term them as "Pseudo-Scout" rifles.

Now, if a modern 7.62 NATO semi-auto rifle can be built, and which meets the stated requirements, all well and good.  In practice, the magazine capacity used to "make weight" will probably be much less than the usual 20-rd magazine.

I don't mind admitting a mistake or taking the blame, but I won't apologize to save my life!

I just attended an Appleseed. I put a scope on my 10/22 rifle, piled up a couple sandbags for a rest, and sighted it in two days before the event at 25m (27yrd). I ground out the X ring on the target and felt pretty confident I would rock the Appleseed. It turned out to be a LOT harder than I thought. The two girls on either side of me were pounding the shit out of the targets, while I looked like I was using a shotgun. I didn't get my patch. The chick to my left was pissed and bitching because she shot 227 points, which was the lowest score she "has shot in years." If we visit the big igloo, I better make sure I have some sort of rest. I am going after that patch with a vengeance, now.

Ok, back to the thread. I believe a KISS rifle is best rifle. That's why I have an A2 with a 1:8, 20" barrel. I am looking for a reasonably priced LED ACOG to go on top, then call it a day. I know the LED isn't exactly KISS, but the reticle is etched on there and the battery life from a common AA battery is a couple years. By the time the batteries have run out, I would probably have been eaten by somebody, but oh well. Circle of life and all that.

I think what you experienced was an example of not firing the course-of-fire as intended, IOW, without sandbags as a support/aid during the Appleseed.  I'm sure many other people made the same assumption.  No problem.  Just PRACTICE the Appleseed as you now know how it is conducted.  PRACTICE enough, the right way, and you will get your patch.  FWIW, I am certainly no dead shot, but I did make an effort to practice a lot, even in the snow and rain.  It paid off during the early April Appleseed in CT.  I saw lots of folks who were ostensibly good shots come up short, even with some good coaching, which the Appleseed folks are pretty good at.  I might make a suggestion that you clean your rifle just prior to making a few last-minute sighting-in confirmation shots.  IOW, start the match with a verified GTG rifle that is clean, and ready to go.  I made the mistake of not cleaning my 10-22 prior to the Appleseed (after firing a LOT of practice shots), and had some problems.  Fortunately, I was able to overcome them, and still got my Patch.

Always have some verified GTG, loaded, easily accessible mags ready to use, in case some mags get troublesome.  I had that problem with some non-Ruger mags that I was (foolishly) using.  They had been reliable up to that point, but the non-Ruger mags I had been using became a problem what with all the dirt and so forth accumulated during practice.  Perhaps the non-Ruger mags were fundamentally a bad idea in the first place.

You can certainly do it, if you want to, so go PRACTICE.  Go get your Patch!

Depends a lot on your where and what. SHTF for me I don't picture running into the desert and hunting whatever might be there. Being in a metro within AZ most likely I am not bugging out. Even if I filled my largest vehicle with water in the summer I'd maybe last a month.

I have some good like minded friends where I am and although we have a few BOL among us it's not the most likely course. Thus my SHTF is a 11.5 AR pistol with 1-6 razor and light. Most likely use is repel invaders not hunting. Hope to get NV soon. Yeah that's all batteries but a SHTF in the US is unlikely to be no power forever.  Even most 3rd world countries have occasional power. 10 yr shelf, extra batteries and solar charging.

The 5.56 isnt the most powerful but it's good enough for a metro to me. Some of you likely in wide open territory a bolt gun in 308 or more might be better for you.

Practicing with the sling was what helped me most with Appleseed.  If you want to get your patch you should be consistently shooting rifleman scores before you go.  Using the garand sling as it was intended makes a huge difference.

Overthinking gear is part of the hobby.

It seems that the topic has drifted a bit away from the "Ideal" SHTF rifle.  I've been a part of that drift.  I suggest that we get back on-topic.

I think that the "best" SHTF rifle is one that you are used to shooting, are accurate in shooting, and for which you have sufficient ammo and spare parts.

Your rifle, with reasonable care, will shoot well for a long time, as long as you have sufficient ammo.  Until it breaks some part.  Have LOTS of ammo, and a reasonable supply of spare parts.  Please.

I went with M193.
Anything that's going to print about 2 to 4" at 100 is going to be plenty to take a man or deer.
Bad guys in S Africa frequently use R5's (short barrel Galil) that they stole or "rented" from cops. Always running 55gr ball. Not many people walk away from a 55gr 5.56 to the torso or gut - make that 100% without immediate trauma care.
ETA: Read the rest of the thread and have some opinions to add.
RE: Scout Rifle idea - It was a great idea in days when semi auto's were heavy or not terribly reliable. It is also a great idea in places where you may not own a semi auto. It is also fantastic as a hunting rifle. Bolt actions CAN and have been used both offensively and defensively. That said - they are definitely not great for it when facing enemies that are armed with semi-auto's. Think of what happened to the Germans and Japanese armed with bolt actions when they ran up against Americans sporting M1 Garands and carbines. In today's age with the metallurgy and reliability of semi-auto's, I think the scout idea takes a back seat.

RE: 5.56/ 223 vs .308, etc - it has been my experience that a lot of folks underestimate the 5.56/223 cartridge. It is capable of taking down some pretty serious things if you do your part. I have taken a lot of animals with .222 and .223. From pigs, impala and deer to kudu. The cartridge also lends itself well to self defense of course. I would say these same musings will go for the 7.62x39 cartridge as well. It's just easier to hump the intermediate carbines than the traditional battle rifles. Having had to carry an R1 (FAL) some distance, I can tell you I prefer my puny AR's!

U nailed it. 22lr is lethal for shtf ranges, light, can carry more while still saving weight/space for more critical things like water and food.  S&w midel 617.  Shtf u wamt to evade and survive and 22lr will put more food on plate quietly than anything else

No offense, but are you kidding?  This sounds like a flashback to a '70s survival magazine article.  Again, no offense.

I think you have well-stated the proposition for the 5.56 ctg, and suitable rifles.  However, there are other alternatives.  I respectfully agree with your comments, up to a point, and submit that there are circumstances where one just might choose a 7.62 round.

not at all and no offense taken as these are good discussions and there really is no 1 right answer

a 22lr will give you far greater range of options and the amount of ammo you can carry is unquestionably superior.  The 22lr will be better for hunting small game, lower noise signature (and making a make shift silencer is pretty easy with a 1 liter bottle), absolutely lethal at ranges most engagements would occur provided you are dumb enough to engage and not avoid fire fights at all cost and pretty sure that 22lr is responsible for more deaths in America than all others and is absolutely lethal to 100yds.  Now if I had to be in a firefight, it's not my go to obviously but for all variables considered, bigger is less and less is more

Oh absolutely. If I lived in a region where long open distances or animals larger than deer and black bears were the norm, 7.62*51 all day long. I would more than likely take a good FAL. If I had to go through this in S. Africa again, I would ditch all other rifles and settle for a FAL due to the distances and threats.
That said I believe in making what you have, work. If all you have is a bolt action then work with it. I've seen people do some crazy things with them. A 11 year old kid went on a rampage a few years back with his dad's Lee Enfield. I think he killed 11 people before they could stop him.

agree

location location location has a lot to do with choice.

Depending on the EXACT physical configuration of one's rear sight aperture, a possible solution might be available.  In short, an inserted, corrective lens.

It is possible that a skilled gunsmith can create a sleeve or other device to adapt these devices to one's existing rear sights, but that is a last resort.  for the most part, such inserts are available for many common rear peep apertures.

See here: http://www.bjonessights.com/index.html

We are all getting older, whether we want to or not.  We WILL all encounter visual problems with iron sights: These problems are Inevitable, and increase with  age.  These aids might make >>modified<< iron sight use a practical proposition for a long time

I confess that I have not used these sight inserts, as switching to illuminated optics with range hold-overs seemed to be the best use of my money.  However, many older shooters that I know have used these devices, with good effect.  It's pretty easy to detect.  If you see a 50+ year old guy shooting accurately with Iron sights, the chances are that he is using such aids.  Just be non-confrontational, and ask.  If one approaches the situation looking for help, it's likely that he will be delighted to tell you how he does it.

I will say this, and it is based on considerable research, and personal experience.  One's eyes have a progressive, and inevitable inability to focus on things.
The medical term is presbyopia.  See here: https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/presbyopia/symptoms-causes/syc-20363328

This has a direct effect on one's ability to use rifle iron sights, and may affect even pistol sights.

The long-and-short of all this is that as you get older, at some point you WILL need some appropriate optical aids to shoot accurately.  Good news is that many such alternatives are available.  Bad news is that such alternatives will have a cost.

It's for sure many middle-age and older shooters can make use of these aids.  I just wish they were available for the "old-timers" when I first started shooting.  I know such aids would have prolonged their useful shooting careers.

It's quite likely the linked vendor has competitors, so do some investigation.

Why is what he stated incorrect?

Which poster do you mean?

Myhatinthering.

I thought so.

The .22RF concept has been bandied-about over the ages in umpteen survivalist forums/magazines.  There is a great deal of value to having a .22RF rifle handy while one is out shooting for small game, but what if larger game appears?  What if two-legged predators appear?

Exactly what is one's environment?  Modern-day pest hunting, or post-apocalypse?  Much depends on one's current circumstances.

In any event, shooting .22 RF requires exact shot placement for maximum effectiveness.   I have personally witnessed a rabid fox being shot about 6 times with a .22RF before it sank to the ground, and bled out.  One might shoot at a squirrel with a scoped .22 RF rifle with a fair chance of success, but hitting a two-legged opponent with a kill-shot is another thing--and a far more serious situation.

I prefer the lethality of my ctg to be less than a few yards, especially as the potential lethality of the target decreases with range.

If one were to take this case to the extreme, than an air-rifle, with pellets, ought to serve.  As indeed it will for small game, possibly better than a .22RF.  After all, the ammo is even lighter, and there is almost no sonic signature.

The point is, that the .22RF, and even a well-made air rifle are niche arms, and should be considered as such.
In such cases, the value of .22RF rounds changes into small-game-hunting ctgs, and away from two-legged critter rounds.
I suggest that every person own such (if of high-quality), and train with such, for their intended purposes.

To say, as some posters have implied--and no offense to them-- that one might tote a .22RF and live long in a very hostile environment, is certainly a fundamental mistake.

I don't say previous posters are entirely wrong, just that they might not have thought things through.

YMMV, and submitted for consideration.

I've shot impala, fox and a bushbuck with .22lr.
Shot placement, as you mentioned, is key. You CAN survive with only .22lr - but you are taking a huge risk. If you have enough open space and low population density, sure. But if you are in a place with large predators and a lot of humans - you are basically keeping that .22 rifle for someone that is more sneaky than you and has a bigger gun.
Even going completely "grey man" you are still going to be challenged for your belongings.

A well sorted 10-22 with good 25 round mags still beat a pointy stick, but it is just not reliable enough (mechanically and in stopping power) to be a serious consideration when dealing with predators of any kind.