Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Posted: 6/20/2002 1:01:02 AM EDT
If you were in a survival situation (read: head'n to the hills, etc.), how much could you handle with just a nice, custom Ruger 10/22 with quality optics?
No handgun, no other rifle. Your 10/22 would have to used for food, defense, tactical, and overall survival. And what if you could have a huge stockpile of rounds, but only of one type- what type would that be?
Very interested in people's opinions, pictures, and scenarios about the 10/22. Be honest.
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 4:44:11 AM EDT
IMO, a 22 rifle is a pretty good choice for 99% of situations. A custom 10/22 is accurate, reliable and fairly quiet.

In terms of bullet types. I would find the most accurate common 22LR I could find that fed reliably and then buy a bunch of it.
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 4:49:59 AM EDT
a .22lr sucks if you have to kill something large that is trying to kill you like a bear, human, feral dog. for those situations i want a real gun like a M1 or an AR-10. the 10/22 and 22/45 pistol are good guns for small amimals but in a pinch i don't want to bet my life on them.
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 5:01:09 AM EDT
What about the 10/22 WMR? MUCH better round for what your talking about.
In 22LR I'd bring CCI stingers, FMJ if I could find them.
In 22 WMR, I'd bring 50 gr PMC FMJ.

Link Posted: 6/20/2002 5:08:49 AM EDT
22lr is fine for small game but if i had to defend myself from something bigger than a bunny, or persuade it to jump in my stew pot, i'd want soemthing bigger. i think .223 is a good compromise round, not too big for most things, not too small, and available anywhere the dod sees fit to venture. if i cant have both 22lr and 30-06, i'd reluctantly settle for .223
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 5:10:00 AM EDT
It's far from ideal, but if you know how to use one, you can do alright in most cases. I guarantee that a nice tight group of four or five .22's hitting rapidly in someplace vital will make an impact. It ain't .308, but it'll do for a person.
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 10:25:07 AM EDT
I know I don't want to get shot with a .22lr! Personally, I think a 12Ga. shotgun is the most versatile weapon on the planet, with the choice of slugs or lead shot in so many different sizes.
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 10:48:56 AM EDT
Really kind of depends on your personal requirement, if you mean live of the land and let the rest of the world slide into oblivion, than yes a good 10/22 would serve very well. If however you had more of a Red Dawn sinario in mind then I think perhaps something with a bit more punch is in order an AR or AK comes to mind. As for a stockpile of .22 ammo The best all around choice is probaly Stingers But as cheap and plentiful as .22 is I think a variety would be much better, some Stingers, Some subsonic and maber some standard velocity.

P.S. In the Red Dawn senario, if your carfull and perhaps a little lucky a 10/22 would allow you to aquire a more sutable weapon.
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 12:02:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/20/2002 12:14:28 PM EDT by marvl]
I wouldn't "head for the hills" with anything less than a .308 or .30-06. A 10/22 is fine for hunting small game, but you'll never take a deer with one, and you won't stop a man if that becomes a necessity. Even the .223 is problematic in many situations.

Of course, accuracy can make up for caliber, and if you have the time for a well placed shot then it probably doesn't matter what gun you use-- up to a point. Imagine facing a bear with a 10/22. Actually, you probably wouldn't be facing him if that was your rifle.
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 12:11:54 PM EDT
I'd pick my shotgun first. It is the most versatile and as reliable as my 10/22. Birdshot for small game and upland game. Slugs for deer, bear, and selfdefense. The bad part is slugs have limited range.

The 10/22 could handle alot and I'd take as much CCI Velocitor ammo as I could get.

Shok
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 12:59:58 PM EDT
I don't know 10/22's are really reliable and fast and also very light, If you have a 50rd mag a quick burst could ruin someones day.
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 1:14:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/20/2002 1:17:34 PM EDT by AR15fan]

Originally Posted By Part-time Pork:
If you were in a survival situation (read: head'n to the hills, etc.), how much could you handle with just a nice, custom Ruger 10/22 with quality optics?
No handgun, no other rifle. Your 10/22 would have to used for food, defense, tactical, and overall survival. And what if you could have a huge stockpile of rounds, but only of one type- what type would that be?



Sure. But I would want the gun to have a built in supressor, match trigger, & Leupold optics.

The discontinued CCI SGB would be my ammo of choice, if limited to one type. The heavy 40Gn flat nosed solid bullet penetrates deeper than the 32 -38Gn hollowpoints.

Plenty of deer are killed by poachers using the .22Lr.
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 5:58:02 PM EDT
Well speaking as someone who has been shot by a .22, it isn't that impressive if you don't get hit someplace vital. Now a few shots and that opinion would probably change. I'm sure more shots would really suck. I guess being able to aim at the head would certainly help.
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 6:11:21 PM EDT
Face it, after 75 yards a .22LR loses just about all its power. Basically worthless past that. .223 is powerful and light, it's the way to go.

Sgtar15
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 7:00:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Part-time Pork:
If you were in a survival situation (read: head'n to the hills, etc.), how much could you handle with just a nice, custom Ruger 10/22 with quality optics?
You could handle surviving by getting meat from small animals. Some bigger animals, such as cougar/bear/deer might be difficult to get unless you were lucky or close. Humans would be problematic; either killing and/or eating them.
No handgun, no other rifle. Your 10/22 would have to used for food, defense, tactical, and overall survival. And what if you could have a huge stockpile of rounds, but only of one type- what type would that be?
I would use regular old lead round nose .22LR ammo. Someone mentioned how they penetrate better than hollowpoints, and I agree.
A huge stockpile of cheap ammo would allow for practice and becoming a superdeadly shooter. After becoming extremely proficient at using the .22LR within its required close range limits, the ammo would last longer...

Very interested in people's opinions, pictures, and scenarios about the 10/22. Be honest.



OK.
I'll answer only what you asked...
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 8:33:56 PM EDT
Id do just fine with my 10/22.As for ammo make mine Stingers.There not as accurate as some but mine shoots them pretty well.I really beleave after seeing what a .22mag will do to a Deer at 100 yards that Stingers out of a 22lr would do OK at closer ranges.
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 8:54:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 45B10:
Id do just fine with my 10/22.As for ammo make mine Stingers.There not as accurate as some but mine shoots them pretty well.I really beleave after seeing what a .22mag will do to a Deer at 100 yards that Stingers out of a 22lr would do OK at closer ranges.



Sorry, but the deer would just run away. Shooting a deer with a .22 just aint right..or practical.

Sgtar15
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 9:06:25 PM EDT
Remington 700 chambered in .243, any arguments, if so, bring on your .223, don't get me wrong, I love it, but the .243 is a 1 one pick of medium to large game in the US.
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 9:10:47 PM EDT
More deer are prolly shot wit .22 LR's then with any other caliber. Usually at night, prolly with alight and head shots are much more effective.
(I should mention i'm referring to 'herd management' and not road-side poaching)
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 9:10:57 PM EDT

Originally Posted By marvl:
but you'll never take a deer with one, and you won't stop a man if that becomes a necessity.



I personally have killed a deer with a 10/22 (yes legal in the sate i did it) it was from 50 yds in the head.
Link Posted: 6/20/2002 9:28:37 PM EDT
In my opinion, the 10/22 is the ultimate survival weapon. Here are the reasons:

1. You take any size game from squirrel to cattle/deer.
2. It can be used effectively in a majority of self-defense situations. Unless your opponent is wearing body armor or at a great distance, a clip worth of 22LR will definitely slow them down or disable them.
3. The 10/22 is light-weight, and very compact, especially with a folding stock or take-down stock.
4. Ammo is light-weight. 2 bricks of 22LR is much easier to carry than 1000 rounds of .223 or any other centerfire ammo.
5. Wide range of ammo is available. From ultra-quiet, ultra-low velocity ammo for taking small game at short ranges when you don't want to attract attention, to hyper-velocity hollow-points when you need a little more energy transferred to the target.
6. Even standard high-velocity ammo is quiet when compared to almost any centerfire caliber. Report from firing the 10/22 will not travel miles like other rifles.
7. Ammo and rifle is cheap. $90 for 5,000 rounds from Sportsmans Guide. 10/22 rifle can be had for $160.


The 2nd weapon I would select in a survival situation would be a 9mm pistol (my SIG P228). Again, light-weight, close-quarters.
3rd would be my AR 16-inch carbine.


Link Posted: 6/21/2002 12:39:59 AM EDT
Ok, let's think about it this way....you ask would we feel safe with just a decked out 10/22. Ok, how many times in the past have you had to use it to defend yourself? How many times have you had to head to the hills? How many bears have you had to shoot with it? And when did you depend on it to feed you?

Asking myself those same questions I would say, yes. I would be comfortable with just a 10/22. The chances of an all out struggle for survival is probably less than your chances of being struck by lightning. But if the world's climate has you in doubt as to what the future holds, slowly and gradually acquire additional stuff that you think you may need. There is far more to survival than just guns. I would be more worried about water, food, and shelter. A little creative thinking can go a long way toward reducing the need for a firearm in such a situation.

And of course, you can always add a handgun, shotgun and some type of larger caliber rifle to your collection without great expense if that is something you wish to do. Examples would be.....Hungarian FEG Hi-Power 9mm, Ruger P series auto pistols, Taurus or Smith and Wesson .38 caliber revolvers, a Winchester 1300 12 gauge and an SKS. All relatively cheap, reliable and ammo is very available for all.

So thinking of defending yourself isn't a bad thing or being paranoid. It could be necessary. I think a home invasion scenario by some crack head would be more likely, so a good handgun or shotgun would be my next choice. But just don't let yourself be driven crazy by this SHTF talk you hear everywhere. The SHTF on Sept 11, 2001. And it happened on December 7, 1941. Yet we made it through alright didn't we? It was tragic and sad days that forever changed the lives of all Americans, but the massive chaos and disorder many would have predicted never happened. Instead of people trying to destroy everyone, people instead did the opposite by doing everything possible to help each other. The only panick I saw was higher gas prices for about 5 hours after the attacks on 9/11. Keep everything in perspective and you'll be ok.

I too had many worries and fears of the what might happen after 9/11 and asked many similar questions. But I gathered all my thoughts and took a sensible approach to my safety and that of my family. But if being prepared for the unknown (and that's where this SHTF stuff originates), then take the sensible precautions and steps necessary to alleviate those fears. It might be the healthy thing to do. Afterall, if you feel prepared, you will feel more confident and less uncertain. Many people in or near NYC and Washington, DC have been plagued by fears of the unknown after the terrorist attacks. By doing a few simple things and taking a few momnets to just prepare some basic things, they could probably eliminate that fear. Good luck and let us know what you do. I hope I was helpful and if I sounded critical, I didn't mean to be. I understand what you are feeling and why. This insane world will cause us all to think "what if" from time to time. I know I have.
Link Posted: 6/21/2002 4:43:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SKSBoy:

Originally Posted By marvl:
but you'll never take a deer with one, and you won't stop a man if that becomes a necessity.



I personally have killed a deer with a 10/22 (yes legal in the sate i did it) it was from 50 yds in the head.



That must have been one deaf and dumb deer to let you get that close. Hell, I can take a bear with a 10/22. Run up to it, put the muzzle against the eye socket, and fire away. Not sure I would want to try that, however.

There are many things that are possible, but it is better to eliminate luck and the need for extreme measures. That's why, for example, paratroopers wear parachutes. They could jump without them, but more of them will remain functional if they jump with them.

So, when it comes to taking out large animals, including homo sapiens, I want a large cartridge.

I'm currently reading a book by Rad Miller, who was a SEAL in Vietnam. He recounts hitting a VC with a burst from his Stoner. They had to go looking for the little 125 lb twerp because, even though he had 5 .223 rounds in him, he didn't die right away. He managed to hide his equipment, crawl away, and then he died.

I guess they should have been carrying 10/22s.
Link Posted: 6/21/2002 6:06:56 AM EDT
Granted the 22lr is not the ideal round but there have been a hell of a lot of deer poached with them.

The 22 LR is known to kill humans as well. Robert Kennedy was offed with a 22. I know first hand of a hit man who killed 3 people with 22s. He would buy a cheap Marlin 60 at a discount store and then sit in a car down the street from the victims house. When the victim came out, he would whack them with 1 shot to the head, usually from 60-70 yards away and then dump the gun.

One of the post office shooters from awhile ago used a 10/22. He killed 4, and wounded a bunch more. Of course, President Reagan, Jim Brady and a secret service agent were all hit with 22s. It didn't kill any of them but it sure ruined their day.


Link Posted: 6/21/2002 6:24:22 AM EDT
The .22 is not optimum for deer or anything larger than a squirrel. That being said, anyone who thinks that it will not reliably kill a deer has been spending too much time in the city. As a rural county deputy I've come across many. Either laying where they were shot or in the back of a pick up discovered during traffic stops. One fact remains, the .22 kills deer!
Link Posted: 6/21/2002 10:13:03 AM EDT
I would feel better with a .22 than I would with just my arm and a bucket of rocks that for sure. After I shot myself in the foot with a .22 I can tell you it's not a real effective person stopper unless it's a well placed shot of course.
Top Top