Survival 410 foster slug vs 000 buck

Well I cracked out the Ithaca M6 & best I can tell the .410 bore is a full choke. I was just reading online & they stated the .22 Hornet rifle was accurate out to 200 yards! That made me chuckle a little bit. Really can't say I'd be all that confident with one of these stranded in the Arctic. The stock holding 9 Hornet rounds & 4 410 shells has me a little perplexed as well. I'm sure they might of carried extras, but I figure you'd want more shot shells for birds, squirrels & rabbits over Hornet rounds for larger game that you'd probably be lucky to see in that condition. As for protection? IMO: Forget it... I'd still take a 12 ga. with assorted rounds and feel better about the situation. I guess it wasn't up for debate back then? LOL!
 
Last edited:
I think at the time the thought behind the m6 as far as the military was concerned, that it was a gun to be used to provide food for a few days after being shot down while waiting to be rescued ( especially given the amount of ammo that went with it)hopefully the sooner the better.It wasn’t intended for long term survival or as a self defence weapon.What it had going for it was that it was compact,sturdy and simple to use with few moving parts to break.
 
Thank you Danceswithempties.
At least they had the intellect give it some choke.
As far as the 200 yard thing someone got lazy at the armory. Colonel Whelen said at one point one could I theory hit a standing up man at 200 yards with the Hornet round. I think that's where that came from.
 
I can't think of something I would want less than a .410 Foster slug for any sort of hunting whatsoever. Buckshot will at least penetrate reliably and is no less terrible in the accuracy department. Due to the flattening of the pellets and the single stack formation there is relatively little spread compared to larger gauges.
 
In regards to the 22 Hornet out of the Springfield CZ copy, I discovered that from a cold barrel it's pretty spot on with its iron sights 20-50 meters.
One cannot realistically sight it in as if a regular deer rifle at 100 for groups. If you shoot it more than once out of the cold barrel, the warm barrel throws subsequent shots lower each discharge.
So in my instance this is what I discovered at the range.
But as a survival rifle with a small deer less than 100 preferably less than 50, it is adequate from a cold barrel for a spot on hit.
A warm barrel must flex upwards and because it's tied down in the front, warm barrel shots strike lower. Maybe.

Edit: IIRC my drop at 100 meters was about 3 or 4 inches line of sight.
 
Last edited:
Brutus said:
Thank you Danceswithempties.
At least they had the intellect give it some choke.
As far as the 200 yard thing someone got lazy at the armory. Colonel Whelen said at one point one could I theory hit a standing up man at 200 yards with the Hornet round. I think that's where that came from.
Click to expand...

That would make more sense LOL!

I had not taken the gun out of the safe for a while. With it's weight & compactness I can see the allure of it as a survival gun & if I was stuck here or in northern Ontario I'd be fine with it. I would not have wanted to carry it when I lived in Alberta. In the bush where something can eat me without an effort, I want a 12 ga. or something no smaller than a 7mm in a rifle (although I am guilty of bird hunting in the foothills with a 28 ga.). I've head shot bush chickens with a 12 ga. & another time with a 30-06. Still say there's way better options than the .410 for survival in a down & out scenario. Just my 2 cents...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom