Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 4/20/2011 2:57:16 PM EDT
I ask this tounge n cheek. I know suppressors and SBR's would be much more practical but would having a full auto gun be an asset?

If the SHTF and there is an altercation, then would you rather have a full auto to show the bad guys there and whoever may be listening that you are NOT to be played with?

Or would it just draw more unwanted attention to your locale. Curiosity did kill the cat.
Link Posted: 4/20/2011 3:16:11 PM EDT
how much ammo do you have? also who will give you more when you run low/out?

suppressive fire can be a few rounds at a time if the other side is few and/untrained; fire a few and get lost, if that is an option ( and it should always be an option)
Link Posted: 4/20/2011 3:44:40 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/20/2011 3:53:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Quarterbore:
I own MGs and honestly I don't really see them as being a lot of value for real world SHTF events I would expect to ever happen. Sure, if we sit and think through scenarios I guess if there was some mad rush of Rabid Liberals to invade my little home and if I had time to grab the full auto AR-15 and a couple 100-rd BETA mags sure I could pile up a lot of bodies but survival is really evaluating the situation and if the Democrats are really going to start getting Rabies I would be wise to find a BOL somewhere safe (like Texas).

I think a submachinegun may well have more practical use then an assault rifle in my honest opinion as I could see that more helpful in a close in defensive position.

Anyways, like I said I don't really see a lot of value in running these full auto as you burn up precious ammo that you may not be able to replace in a SHTF event. Besides, we can shoot a semiauto pretty darned fast too if we needed to take on multiple tangos or the tangos seem to be armor plated.


I pretty much agree with QB - semi will probably suit you better in SHTF when you can't run to Wally World for more ammo. That said, full auto does have its place; I've got beltfed .30s, plenty of spare barrels, and thousands of rounds on belts. If it gets real bad, I could lay down some very heavy sustained fire.




Link Posted: 4/20/2011 4:35:43 PM EDT
The cost of a MG is much better spent on other items needed for long term survival. If you already are well prepared and stocked with supplies, than yes, a MG will be an asset in a number of situations.

There is physiologic value to the fear factor generated when MG fire is directed your way, even in short bursts. You want the BG to realize he should pass your house and find a softer target. Accurate night vision fire and precision fire at distance (sniper fire) also has significant value.

Although I can "hammer" targets with the best of them, it is easier to hit a moving target with aimed auto-fire than aimed semi-auto fire.

If you can afford a MG, you should be able to afford large quantities of ammo. Carrying a lot of ammo is a different story.
Link Posted: 4/20/2011 5:17:14 PM EDT
Full auto for getting out of ambush zone with a team, otherwise mostly ammo sales support activity.
Link Posted: 4/20/2011 5:38:43 PM EDT
If I had Powerball money sure I'd have beltfeds and full auto's out the wazoo, I'd also set myself up as a SOT/manufacturer to make it easier to get the goodies.

Here in the real world where one M16 will cost you the same as ten or more tier one AR15's and a beltfed full auto is a serious down payment on a nice BOL it doesn't make much sense.

Link Posted: 4/20/2011 5:53:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By bwp777:

If the SHTF and there is an altercation, then would you rather have a full auto to show the bad guys there and whoever may be listening that you are NOT to be played with?

Or would it just draw more unwanted attention to your locale. Curiosity did kill the cat.

Nothing forces you to use it, but it is better to have it and not need it, then to need it and not have it.

Link Posted: 4/20/2011 9:06:13 PM EDT
"Full auto for survival"?


Depends on what you're trying to survive.
Link Posted: 4/21/2011 1:37:48 AM EDT
NV setup would come way before an auto, least for me.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 4/21/2011 3:53:38 AM EDT
enough money and ammo,,,,,why not have a few. all depends on how squared away you are already.
Link Posted: 4/21/2011 5:11:17 AM EDT
Originally Posted By roguetrader:
how much ammo do you have? also who will give you more when you run low/out?

suppressive fire can be a few rounds at a time if the other side is few and/untrained; fire a few and get lost, if that is an option ( and it should always be an option)


this.....
Link Posted: 4/21/2011 6:38:57 AM EDT
interesting topic OP. i've been teaching FA in the LE instructor world for about 10 years now, and FA has "its place" in certain CQB areas, however its a very limited place. I purchased a couple of FA's back in 1986 about the time of the cutoff, and paid less than one would now pay for a very nice high-end AR15. i had a discussion with Lewis Awerbuck a few years back on the topic of the need for FA in LE work and we both kind of came to the conclusion that its a small nitch in the world of self-defense and gun-handling skills + the fighting mindset are far more important as equired to survive a gunfight (aka Jeff Cooper's teachings)

now with a SHTF situation, i dont define that as LE "work" so yes, my go-to gun would be a FA in a SHTF. probably not needed, but its there if you think it might be. when i get one of "those" call-outs and its looking like things might go bad real quick, i'm always carrying an 870 or my FA, or a suppressed subgun. if you have lots of $$$ and can afford what a FA costs these days plus the ammo and take the time to learn how to use it go for it.

like many of the posters above that have commented for a SHTF situation, i'd probably opt for some good NV and stock up on ammo and food and survival supplies + a suppressor or two as those would probably come into play much more than the need for FA.

no expert here, just my 2-cents...
Link Posted: 4/21/2011 7:49:15 AM EDT
IMO, a belt fed auto, Maybe. An AR not so much. You can score more hits with 30 rnds squeezing each time than you can spraying and praying. It's good for suppressive fire, thats about it.
Link Posted: 4/21/2011 8:30:52 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/21/2011 2:40:05 PM EDT
At what point do you think people would convert their firearms to SBR or fulll auto if things were to go bad?
Link Posted: 4/21/2011 7:33:51 PM EDT
When things get really bad. I would think that would be something like marshal law or worse as nobody would really care anymore about the stupid firearms laws.
Link Posted: 4/21/2011 11:56:05 PM EDT
Originally Posted By okent:
When things get really bad. I would think that would be something like marshal law or worse as nobody would really care anymore about the stupid firearms laws.


Not really a matter of caring. Full auto has a purpose, suppressive fire. 1 well placed shot is better than 100 poorly placed shots.
The psychological value is HUGE however. Full auto implies training, implies being well stocked, and gives pause to someone who is not well trained.



Link Posted: 4/22/2011 12:35:19 AM EDT
With some of the nicer AR triggers, compensators, and techniques out now, you can get semi-auto AR's to sound like they are going cyclic while still maintaining control and accuracy.
Link Posted: 4/22/2011 3:48:01 AM EDT
I could see the benefit of a subgun in a SHTF situation. At any distance I'm going to want accuracy. Up close a HK UMP45 would be my choice, unless I could get a Kriss Super V in select fire. Could then run my G21 and the Kriss off of glock mags or the extended 21 round Kriss made mags.
Link Posted: 4/22/2011 4:02:14 AM EDT
My AR has a 2# Jard trigger and you can finger it just right.
I have a Gen 3 NV monocular so that base is covered as well as Aimpoint M4's to aim with.
I was just thinking about the pyschology behind the sound.
Even if I had a full auto gun I wouldn't dare use it unless there were way more than I could get to w/ semi. I would expect ammo to be of GREAT concern.
Thanks for all the replies.

Happy Easter. Remember. The tomb is empty
Link Posted: 4/22/2011 4:48:39 AM EDT
I'd prefer any number of non-essential firearm related things than a F/A in a real survival situation. Specifically NV and a suppressor not necessarily in that order. In my opinion no one will be extra intimidated by F/A but you will run extra low in ammo extra quick. My nations soldiers rarely run F/A on their carbines, or shoot overly fast for that matter. Rapid fire at the section level is considered 1 shot per soldier per 5 seconds and thats how we took Khandahar. I can't see SHTF being much worse than the taliban.
Link Posted: 4/22/2011 5:27:21 AM EDT
A dozen MG42's, a weapons platoon of Wehrmacht soldiers and a truck full of ammo. Accept no less.
Link Posted: 4/22/2011 7:48:04 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Quarterbore:

Originally Posted By Gyrene84:
IMO, a belt fed auto, Maybe. An AR not so much. You can score more hits with 30 rnds squeezing each time than you can spraying and praying. It's good for suppressive fire, thats about it.

An M16 in a trained hand is more of a 2-3 rd burst use then spraying and praying With a solid hold and normal distances you hold mid torso and the 3rd round is upper torso/head withround 1 and 2 on center mass. Trainining is key, but let's not under estimate what a MG can do even if they are not that practical of a tool for survival situations.


I would not consider 3 round burst Full auto. I have done many live fire drills, yes, three round burst is controllable and you can put three rounds on target depending on the distance. I just do not see why it would be useful in a survival situation, unless your position was being overrun by more than a few hostiles.
Link Posted: 4/22/2011 9:52:43 AM EDT
as others have said, FA really only becomes a big advantage in a LMG role supported by others, and in an SMG role. In either case specific training is key to reap the benefits and is impractical for most everyone. Sure is fun though.
Link Posted: 4/22/2011 10:47:29 AM EDT
if TSHTF, I'm not sure that I'd want to be running around with $10k firearms. There may be a point where you have to ditch one... and I'd be better with dropping an AR somewhere in the woods instead of leaving a RRM16 or 08/15.
Link Posted: 4/22/2011 1:56:13 PM EDT
Originally Posted By RenegadeX:

Originally Posted By bwp777:

If the SHTF and there is an altercation, then would you rather have a full auto to show the bad guys there and whoever may be listening that you are NOT to be played with?

Or would it just draw more unwanted attention to your locale. Curiosity did kill the cat.

Nothing forces you to use it, but it is better to have it and not need it, then to need it and not have it.


+1. Close quater battle also.

if TSHTF, I'm not sure that I'd want to be running around with $10k firearms. There may be a point where you have to ditch one... and I'd be better with dropping an AR somewhere in the woods instead of leaving a RRM16 or 08/15.


When SHTF I wil not be worrying about how much I spent on something.

Link Posted: 4/22/2011 9:40:44 PM EDT
Originally Posted By suprmatch:
Originally Posted By RenegadeX:

Originally Posted By bwp777:

If the SHTF and there is an altercation, then would you rather have a full auto to show the bad guys there and whoever may be listening that you are NOT to be played with?

Or would it just draw more unwanted attention to your locale. Curiosity did kill the cat.

Nothing forces you to use it, but it is better to have it and not need it, then to need it and not have it.


+1. Close quater battle also.

if TSHTF, I'm not sure that I'd want to be running around with $10k firearms. There may be a point where you have to ditch one... and I'd be better with dropping an AR somewhere in the woods instead of leaving a RRM16 or 08/15.


When SHTF I wil not be worrying about how much I spent on something.




Unless you bought chicom and it fails when needed


Link Posted: 4/23/2011 5:08:58 AM EDT
Originally Posted By TornMonkey:



Unless you bought chicom and it fails when needed


[/quote]

I wish the NVA had experienced the failure rate of the rifles Uncle Sugar handed out to us.
Link Posted: 4/23/2011 6:08:10 AM EDT
To be honest chi com firearms are above average on the reliability scale. Out of a M305 (M14/M1A), a M93 and a SBS 870, all chicom, over 100 000 rounds I've had maybe 50 stoppages and 15 of them were experimenting with low recoil rounds on the M305 (mix of reloads and factory, FTE), the rest were .22LR of various brands being run in the abused and never cleaned M93 pistol (mix of FTE, FTF, double feed etc). Since changing the magazine the M93 experiences maybe a stoppage every 1500-2000 rounds with it's preferred cheap ammo. I've had more stoppages with my S&W m&p 15/22 in a tenth of the rounds. The funniest part is I spent less than $1000CAD on the whole damn bunch of chinese guns. Ugly they may be but accurate, reliable and effective are also a good description.
Link Posted: 4/24/2011 7:10:28 AM EDT

I was being tongue in cheek, reliable is reliable no matter where you find it. I'd rather have a beat up Tokarev that I can count on than all the whiz-bang-tactical gear in the world that I can't.


Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 4/24/2011 9:47:30 AM EDT
If things do get bad and I hear full auto fire, I'm heading in the opposite direction if possible. It really says 2 things to me. 1) the person is very willing to dump ammo and 2) they may or may not have plenty more. It is about survival and snooping around that kind of fire power can only get you killed. I'll pass.

I'm sticking to semi now and after the SHTF
Link Posted: 4/25/2011 6:24:01 PM EDT
In which case i'll STFU
Link Posted: 4/25/2011 9:09:20 PM EDT
In a SHTF situation, I'm not likely to need long range, because if I can see them, I can avoid them (most likely). I'm not taking shots 300+ yards out when I can go around.

I will need to carry it with me EVERYWHERE, meaning it has to be lightweight.

It has to be able to put down someone in CQ out to about 100 yards....


For that reason, I'd go with an SBR'd AR in 7.62x39 semi-auto, or maybe 3 rd burst. but not FA.

My state does not allow SBRs, so I had to go with the next best thing, an AR pistol in 7.62x39...

With a red dot, and a 5x magnifier, I can hit point of man @ 300 yards EASY.....

A .30 cal round out of something the size of an MP5=win.

:D

Link Posted: 4/26/2011 3:19:39 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Gyrene84:
Originally Posted By Quarterbore:

Originally Posted By Gyrene84:
IMO, a belt fed auto, Maybe. An AR not so much. You can score more hits with 30 rnds squeezing each time than you can spraying and praying. It's good for suppressive fire, thats about it.

An M16 in a trained hand is more of a 2-3 rd burst use then spraying and praying With a solid hold and normal distances you hold mid torso and the 3rd round is upper torso/head withround 1 and 2 on center mass. Trainining is key, but let's not under estimate what a MG can do even if they are not that practical of a tool for survival situations.


I would not consider 3 round burst Full auto. I have done many live fire drills, yes, three round burst is controllable and you can put three rounds on target depending on the distance. I just do not see why it would be useful in a survival situation, unless your position was being overrun by more than a few hostiles.

If your position was being overrun, that ammo in the well is even more important. Unless you've got backup behind you, your time would be better spent picking targets, even snap-firing, than in changing mags.

Also, I can see (if I squint) situations where Marshal law is in place and not in a good way. Or where the minions of power aren't friendlies. In which case, they'll not ignore full auto fire. Do our troops ignore it in the sandbox?

Link Posted: 4/26/2011 11:42:39 AM EDT
Originally Posted By TheOTHERmaninblack:

Originally Posted By Gyrene84:
Originally Posted By Quarterbore:

Originally Posted By Gyrene84:
IMO, a belt fed auto, Maybe. An AR not so much. You can score more hits with 30 rnds squeezing each time than you can spraying and praying. It's good for suppressive fire, thats about it.

An M16 in a trained hand is more of a 2-3 rd burst use then spraying and praying With a solid hold and normal distances you hold mid torso and the 3rd round is upper torso/head withround 1 and 2 on center mass. Trainining is key, but let's not under estimate what a MG can do even if they are not that practical of a tool for survival situations.


I would not consider 3 round burst Full auto. I have done many live fire drills, yes, three round burst is controllable and you can put three rounds on target depending on the distance. I just do not see why it would be useful in a survival situation, unless your position was being overrun by more than a few hostiles.

If your position was being overrun, that ammo in the well is even more important. Unless you've got backup behind you, your time would be better spent picking targets, even snap-firing, than in changing mags.

Also, I can see (if I squint) situations where Marshal law is in place and not in a good way. Or where the minions of power aren't friendlies. In which case, they'll not ignore full auto fire. Do our troops ignore it in the sandbox?




My guess is that they'd not ignore semi-auto fire either.

In SHTF, suppressors would be a very useful item to have. In most cases, far more useful than FA.


Link Posted: 4/26/2011 1:49:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/26/2011 1:53:13 PM EDT by pigmypuncher]

Originally Posted By rockthecasbah:


My guess is that they'd not ignore semi-auto fire either.

In SHTF, suppressors would be a very useful item to have. In most cases, far more useful than FA.



I agree, but you should have subsonic ammo if that is really your goal. Otherwise the $$ spent on either solution would be better spent on other supplies or a 2nd (duplicate) rifle.

2 is 1, 1 is none...

ETA - OP already addressed the suppressor. So to answer your question OP, IMHO it would draw a lot of unwanted attention. I think your money would be better spent on other items since FA has a limited scope of usefulness. However, if money is no object - go for it!
Link Posted: 4/26/2011 4:56:01 PM EDT
and if money were no object I would buy a government abandoned missle silo and stock that mug full of all kinds of crap.
Link Posted: 4/26/2011 7:04:02 PM EDT
I definately think full auto would be a benifit. If you were defending you location, the ability to go full auto could be a nice thing to have at your disposal. If you have the money to buy one through the legal channels, you should have no trouble buying enough ammo to learn to use the weapon effectively and stock SHTF ammo supplies as well. I dont really think you would need more ammo to feed a select fire weapon than you would for a semi. You dont have to hose everything you shoot at in FA mode you know, nor do you have to blow an entire mag on one pull of the trigger. 99% of the time I think you would be running in semi mode, but I would like to have the option of full auto, I just don't have the type of money that would make me comfortable buying one. I would rather spend it on other supplies, and trust that my lowly semi autos are good enough.
but if I every pick the right six numbers............I'll be doing some paperwork, fo-sho
Link Posted: 4/26/2011 8:47:23 PM EDT
IMHO, full auto is the realm of belt fed weapons, and belt feds are best used as part of a team.
For the "lone operator", or whatever, a belt fed is heavy and awkward to move around.
Belt feds use a lot of ammo, and usually, that ammo is pretty heavy. 7.62N, 8mm, 7.62R, ain't at all light.
There are, of course, belt feds available in 7.62S, 5.56N.

More knowledgeable people here may post about the weight and bulk of spare barrels, bipods, tripods, etc.

Now, select fire weapons (assault rifles), are a different animal.
The assault rifle is of intermediate caliber, and can be fired in a semi automatic, or full automatic mode.
If I understand it correctly, the idea is that aimed, semi auto fire is used at a distance.
Full auto fire may be employed in an "up close and personal" situation.
If the bad guys are "up close and personal", is this when you want to use an ammo depleting, full auto rate?
I hope you have the whole "tactical reload" thing down good.

The S.M.G. is usually a short, light, handy, full auto - select fire weapon that fires a PISTOL cartridge.
If I were to choose a long arm to pack around, it would not fire a pistol cartridge.
Pistol cartridges are known poor stoppers, relative to rifle rounds.
Pistol cartridges are known poor penetrators, relative to rifle rounds.

For me, no. Full auto does not belong anywhere in my armory.
There are very likely quite a few on this board that could exploit a full autos advantages, but I'm not one of them.

Good luck to you!



Link Posted: 4/28/2011 12:27:32 PM EDT
I could pile up a lot of bodies


Yep that's the name of the game.

GIVE WAR A CHANCE


Link Posted: 4/28/2011 6:12:30 PM EDT
Just buy a Slidefire stock for your AR15, considerably cheaper than a MG and it shoots very very fast
Link Posted: 4/28/2011 10:38:35 PM EDT
Originally Posted By JSmith88:
I could see the benefit of a subgun in a SHTF situation. At any distance I'm going to want accuracy. Up close a HK UMP45 would be my choice, unless I could get a Kriss Super V in select fire. Could then run my G21 and the Kriss off of glock mags or the extended 21 round Kriss made mags.


I can honestly say that my subgun would be one of the last guns I have that I would take with me if the zomebies were shuffling down the streets. MG's are good for clearing rooms and laying suppressive fire if you have a belt fed weapon, but to be dead honest a regular AR is just as effective with a little fire discipline and accuracy-and you stay in the fight longer.
Link Posted: 4/30/2011 6:41:37 PM EDT
I think full auto would be a waist of ammo
Top Top