What's /k/'s opinion of pic related? I've been thinking about getting one to keep in my bug out bag, and I've heard mixed reviews.
The new ones are way better than the old ones, .22 is gay, they should do a redesign and make it a 9mm, add a compass, small flashlight, Mora style knife and a ferro rod to the butt storage then it would be a true survival weapon.
As far as takedown guns go, marlin makes a decent semi auto 22 takedown rifle for $150. And promag makes decent 25rd mags for it Model 70pss, its the stock and receiver with an unscrewable barrel. I don't have that one, but I have the non takedown, same action, and its a great rifle.
Really? I don't see much
I would like that but the whole design would have to be altered because of bigger barrel, receiver, magazines, etc, but I like the concept of different caliber options
Buddy has one and his response is negative for keeping it in his BOB.
Heavy, clunky, ungainly, not quick to deploy.
In his opinion its better for maybe, camping, rafting, leaving in the vehicle or something like that.
>.22 is gay
It's a fucking squirrel rifle for if your plane crashes and you need to feed yourself, not a SHTF rifle for killing people.
It's like 3.5 pounds
>not quick to deploy
See above, it's not a defensive weapon
i've got the original armalite version and i enjoy it and it is more of a fun relic from the 60s/70s than a practical gun but as far as an interesting rifle that i have only shot probably around 1000 , rounds through, i definetly would feel safe squirrel hunting with this but nothing bigger than that
I bought one new for $225. I always wanted one, but it wasn't really what I expected.
It is compact, yes. It is pretty fuckin' neato, yes. It is decently light, yes. But aside from that, it's kind of a let down. It fouls easily, magazines are expensive, mine only likes high velocity ammo, and both of the factory magazines fail to feed reliably. Don't get me wrong. They're cool as all fuck. And they're handy for back packing. But I'd honestly take back the purchase if I could.
Get a takedown 10-22, and put in your bag if you're that worried about shit. Or buy a real gun.
You could just get a compact STANAG compatible survival rifle...
I thought he gets it from the submerged plane at the end of hatchet, then it breaks in Brian's winter? Any which way, my uncle has one that he's had for years and shot allot and its pretty accurate and seems to do well.
I also have an original Armalite, I like it. Accurate, cycles fine with anything non hollowpoint.
Somewhat related to OP, looking for a lightweight .308/7.62 rifle. Must have iron sights, can be single shot or bolt action, for $600 or less preferably. I can save a bit more but I need it kinda soon
I'm confused. If this is essentially a varmint rifle designed to be simple, compact, and reliable, why bother making it semi-auto?
Wouldn't an O/U .22/.410 be the superior survival rifle? It's simpler with fewer moving parts, can be broken down just as easily, and allows for .410 which is a godsend if you're trying to hunt squirrels or any other fast moving small game.
In a survival situation you're going to want to be conserving ammo as as much as possible anyway, and it's not like you'd be hunting anything with .22 that is going to be enough of a danger to you to necessitate quick follow up shots.
I don't see it being practical for anything. It was already gimmick tier, but when the 10/22 TD was released, it was fully pushed out into toy-tier.
How so? Stowed the 10/22 TD is 20 inches and needs it's own case while the AR-7 is 16.5 and is self contained which doesn't seem like much but in a pack means a lot.
I agree that almost every other application it goes to the 10/22 but both are 'gimmick tier' outside of a rather esoteric application.
None of that is worth the lack of reliability. It's finicky about ammo type, it's finicky about cleanliness and it's extremely finicky about magazine geometry (if you even get the right type, the new ones substitute spring wire retention for friction retention). Add to that clunky controls, a wandering safety switch, the collapsible charging handle, terrible ergonomics no matter what type of stock or configuration you have, and you have a complete shit rifle. The original ArmaLites were pretty decent (which is why the Air Force used them). The Charters were mostly trash, and the current and past Henrys are very hit and miss.
The 10/22 CAN be a regular rifle if you leave it assembled, the AR7 can't.
I don't regret buying mine, it's neat and esoteric, but I certainly don't pretend I would ever give it legitimate use. Recommending an AR7 as a survival rifle, a trunk rifle, a bug out rifle or anything at all other than a once-in-awhile range toy is downright irresponsible.
>None of that is worth the lack of reliability
Recent runs are solid and rival originals for reliability. As a survival rifle it is acceptable as long as long as you get current production.
Frankly any takedown rifle is inherently less reliable than a standard rifle and I wouldn't recommend either for survival. Hell, for trunk and bugout it would be way better for a pistol and a survival rifle would be a single shot if we are talking about reliability under adverse conditions.
I had a Charter Arms version. Jammed on everything. Wandering zero. Fucked ergonomics. Literally a single shot weapon.
Hated it so much I threw that chunk of junk in the creek.... fucken thing floated.
My chiappa. Easily customizable, perfect for survival, comes in .22 and .22 mag, folds die to 7 inches with minor mods, 16.5 inches long , and and be nodded very easily to be broken down to two pieces.
>Wouldn't an O/U .22/.410 be the superior survival rifle?
Yes, but an M6 survival rifle will cost 400 in meh condition and beyond 800 in good condition. More for an "original" production or actual military issue (which requires an SBS and SBR tax stamp)
A savage M42 weighs more than 6 pounds and at that point you can go for a really light ar or Aero Survival Rifle (which comes in 5 different pistol calibers)
You can also shoot a fucking rabbit with 9mm
Im not the same guy but I agree with him. I dont understand why people think .22 is a survival round? I'd much prefer 9mm, something even bigger if I could.
>but muh small game
I can easily make a trap, or a rock sling to use against small game. In fact I have a rock sling in my BoB. They work and weigh nothing nor take up any space.
If im going to be carrying around a gun I want something more capable.
I like the idea of the X-Caliber and it's 12Ga/.22 barrels, having a light shotgun allows you to take damn near any game with the right shells.
Are there any takedown/survival rifles chambered in based .17hmr? I love my dad's Savage, we use it to shoot clay pigeons across a small lake, shit flies flat as hell.
It's good to have alternatives. People forget in survival situations fatigue and conditions can keep you from performing ideally. A sling is a great idea but you should consider a gun as backup.
As far as I'm concerned, the only advantage of .22 is that you can carry so much more for the same space as a larger caliber. I'd rather have 200 rds of .22 on hand than 50 of 9mm.
You don't put rocks in with your rock sling silly. Rocks are obviously easy to find so "ammo" isnt an issue.
Well of course I have a gun but like I said its going to be something more capable.
I can see the appeal with carrying more ammo and having a lighter gun for sure but I just dont like the idea of being unprepared for anything. If im in a BoB situation some serious shit is going down and I want to be ready for anything.
I dont see whats so bad about hunting smaller game with an AR or even a 5.45 AK?
Poking around it got meh reviews no ergonomics to speak of and the barrel inserts may not work right. I'd rather have a .22/.410 that isn't 6 pounds and costs less than 400.
Keep in mind that he AR-7 has been made by a lot of different companies over the years.
Henry Arms seems to be one who are pretty decent at it.
Charter Arms made some, and apparently those weren't always good.
I have one and like it. It's kinda a cool novelty for me more than anything, but I can reliably hit out to 100 yards with it's rudimentary sights and it fits in a backpack pretty nicely. It's kinda cool that it floats too.
Definitely more 'survival' oriented than something like the 10/22 TD.
It doesn't seem to like Remington Golden bullet hollowpoints though. Maybe one in every ten rounds doesn't feed properly.
The .22lr is a bit underpowered for survival for me. I'd prefer .22 mag to be able to take down something a bit larger than a rabbit if I had to.
That said it is a lot better than nothing.
.22 will take down larger game, a friend who's a game warden told me that .22 is the preferred round for deer poachers as it doesn't make muck noise, it's just about how good a shot you are.
It's a cool design with no real purpose. Why would you want your gun to be in pieces? If things are so bad you need to grab a rifle and go innawoods, then it's past the point of needing to be concealed. That said I keep a rosi matched pair broken down in my trunk, but that stores nicer and I can hunt anything I decided to any given day with those two barrels, and that one cheap receiver.
That's my trunk gun. It packs small and is great for hiking/hunting because it is so light. I have it in youth and it is super compact, a great brush gun. The sights on the .22 are great, and the 20 gauge kicks like a truck. I've killed more Squirrels with that gun than any other.
Is it really possible to do so though? You'd have to go through the bother of convincing lawyers that a heeled cartridge that is significantly higher chamber pressure won't lead to lawsuits from retards and the thickened case will be a bother to design around.
Though all could be fixed but Winchester decided to be cŭcks about it.
>Henry repeating arms makes an AR 7 that is loosely based on the original Armalite design and it's also a much better rifle
>This is something that has been in my family when it was purchased new over 50 years ago
Fucking kill yourself.