wayupnorth
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Northern Alberta
The Great Survival Rifle / Pack Rifle Experiment of 2016/17
- Thread starter wayupnorth
- Start date
Those are some very unimpressive groups at 25m, especially from the AR-7! It is hard to see how the AR-7 could be useful in a survival situation with that accuracy. I have been tempted, in the past, to buy a used AR-7, but this info has definitely changed that. Thanks again for this very useful test/comparison.
wayupnorth
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Northern Alberta
take into account that i am by no means a master marksman.
im strictly a plinker.
but when you see the 4 different guns all turning in the same sized groups over and over it becomes pretty clear that they do all shoot a little different and some do in fact shoot tighter groups, even at a short distance of 25m.
personally i was going off the assumption that all 4 would shoot about the same at that distance with the odd flyer.
but its pretty obvious to me now that some of the guns shooter better then others.
be it barrel construction, rifling, trigger, blah blah blah who knows.
what is obvious is that some of them just do.
it was neat to see that the Chiappa with the smaller scope outshot all 3 of the semi autos all of which had a lot bigger optics on them.
that right there sceams volumes to me.
i thinking that since i still have a couple days of holidays left i would LIKE to get out once or twice more and maybe try a different brand of ammo for the test and run it once more.
CCI Blazer while my budget ammo of choice may very well be the achilles heel of one of the rifles that did poorly in the test.
ill take a swing down to the LGS on Monday and see if they have another brand that catches my eye.
i know they had a bunch of Federal Target ammo in stock.
i picked up a couple boxed and was highly underwhelmed with my big 22's but that stuff may be good to try for another test.
a thought..... if your going to have a pack rifle your probably gonna have a zippy ammo for it, hollow point too?
maybe i should pick up some CCI HP or Velocitors to try???
im strictly a plinker.
but when you see the 4 different guns all turning in the same sized groups over and over it becomes pretty clear that they do all shoot a little different and some do in fact shoot tighter groups, even at a short distance of 25m.
personally i was going off the assumption that all 4 would shoot about the same at that distance with the odd flyer.
but its pretty obvious to me now that some of the guns shooter better then others.
be it barrel construction, rifling, trigger, blah blah blah who knows.
what is obvious is that some of them just do.
it was neat to see that the Chiappa with the smaller scope outshot all 3 of the semi autos all of which had a lot bigger optics on them.
that right there sceams volumes to me.
i thinking that since i still have a couple days of holidays left i would LIKE to get out once or twice more and maybe try a different brand of ammo for the test and run it once more.
CCI Blazer while my budget ammo of choice may very well be the achilles heel of one of the rifles that did poorly in the test.
ill take a swing down to the LGS on Monday and see if they have another brand that catches my eye.
i know they had a bunch of Federal Target ammo in stock.
i picked up a couple boxed and was highly underwhelmed with my big 22's but that stuff may be good to try for another test.
a thought..... if your going to have a pack rifle your probably gonna have a zippy ammo for it, hollow point too?
maybe i should pick up some CCI HP or Velocitors to try???
I hope you did not take my comment about "unimpressive groups at 25m" as a criticism of your shooting abilities, it was not intended as such.
I think the CCI Blazer was a good choice for the test, it is an average, inexpensive, widely available ammo that would be a reasonable choice for a take down / survival rifle. Of course you could find other more accurate ammo, that provides better accuracy with more testing of each rifle, but it is a good basis for comparison.
Here is a comparison of my Ruger Takedown with bulk ammo (Federal AE: $3+/- per box) and with some better quality ammo (SK Rifle Match: $8+/- per box):
Given the types of rifles you are testing, I thought you might be interested in this for comparison - a Gevarm E1 takedown rifle at 25 yds using CCI MiniMags:
The blue dots are 1/2" diameter. A used Gevarm is about the same price as a new Ruger TD
I think the CCI Blazer was a good choice for the test, it is an average, inexpensive, widely available ammo that would be a reasonable choice for a take down / survival rifle. Of course you could find other more accurate ammo, that provides better accuracy with more testing of each rifle, but it is a good basis for comparison.
Here is a comparison of my Ruger Takedown with bulk ammo (Federal AE: $3+/- per box) and with some better quality ammo (SK Rifle Match: $8+/- per box):
Given the types of rifles you are testing, I thought you might be interested in this for comparison - a Gevarm E1 takedown rifle at 25 yds using CCI MiniMags:
The blue dots are 1/2" diameter. A used Gevarm is about the same price as a new Ruger TD
Last edited:
wayupnorth
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Northern Alberta
have never heard of that gun before, ill have to look it up.
wayupnorth
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Northern Alberta
i still smile and laugh when i think about doing that test!
Great survival rifle should meet ALL of the following:
1. Compact
2. Easy to carry/ ergonomic
3. Low weight
4. Reliable
5. Field strip w/o any tools, easy, fast, clearing action+bolt removal without a single screw to be removed with any tool (10/22 already fails this one)
6. Cheap/ Afordable
7. No plastic to trigger group (10/22 already fails this one), action, bolt
8. Reasonably accurate: sub-MOA at 100m is STUPID as hitting a rabbit into the eye or lower jaw is still providing you food
9. BACK-up sights is a must, moreover, open sights should be your primary way of training and shooting for SHTF; optics only or special tools needed to remove failing optic = failure in your set-up; sights must be instantly available within seconds if optics fails. Many people when they make "survival rifle" never saw a major problem in their lives... so they rely on optics only or screw it to picatinny so it is not removable w/o a tool.. isn't STUPID? It is not only STUPID it may cost you life
10. Simple mechanics with minimal moving parts is a MUST = more parts in the system= more chance for failures
1. Compact
2. Easy to carry/ ergonomic
3. Low weight
4. Reliable
5. Field strip w/o any tools, easy, fast, clearing action+bolt removal without a single screw to be removed with any tool (10/22 already fails this one)
6. Cheap/ Afordable
7. No plastic to trigger group (10/22 already fails this one), action, bolt
8. Reasonably accurate: sub-MOA at 100m is STUPID as hitting a rabbit into the eye or lower jaw is still providing you food
9. BACK-up sights is a must, moreover, open sights should be your primary way of training and shooting for SHTF; optics only or special tools needed to remove failing optic = failure in your set-up; sights must be instantly available within seconds if optics fails. Many people when they make "survival rifle" never saw a major problem in their lives... so they rely on optics only or screw it to picatinny so it is not removable w/o a tool.. isn't STUPID? It is not only STUPID it may cost you life
10. Simple mechanics with minimal moving parts is a MUST = more parts in the system= more chance for failures
wayupnorth
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Northern Alberta
This is not bad system:
inserts, unfortunately, not readily available in Canada and/ or very expensive, which is ridiculous
Having a shotgun with inserts into the buttstock would be awesome!
ive got that shotgun and its only effective at about 10 feet.
as to inserts, while im very hungry to get a set i fear that a 6" center fire barrel (because thats all it really is) i fear would not have very good accuracy.
i may be wrong, because it definitely not gonna have the velocity intended with a 6" barrel to get full burn.
inserts will probably be the next thing i look into, like i said im very curious about them.
but, back to the topic on hand, we are not discussing shotguns, we are discussing 22's.
wayupnorth
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Northern Alberta
yup, i like your list.
but i will disagree with you on point 7.
you say having a plastic trigger group fails a gun.
but the 10/22 dost not have a plastic trigger group.
the 10/22 has a plastic trigger body, the components of the trigger (stuff on the inside) are all metal.
and while i agree with you that i am not a fan of Ruger decision to switch out their metal trigger body to a plastic at the end of the day i have yet to have one fail.
until such a time that i see one fail or even hear of one failing then im not going to complain (too much).
the simple fact of the matter is that its just a trigger body.
it really no different than the gun having a plastic stock.
i do believe its even been said that the plastic trigger body is stronger than the metal ones where in drop tests.
i find it hard to believe but i have seen gunsmiths i trust (like the guys from Brimstone Gunsmiths) state that its been tested and is true.
if you dont like plastic inside guns that you'd better not look inside the Henry AR7!
Last edited:
I have owned several 12ga adapters in the past, with one notable exception they are, in my opinion, a complete waste of time and money.
A shotgun with a bead front sight, using a .22 adapter is absolutely useless as a rifle in my experience. Literally you will be able to hit a 1 gal paint can at 20 feet reliably and that's about it.
The exception is the shotgun to shotgun adapters. My 12Ga to .410 adapter is actually useful enough to bag a grouse or 2. Of course you could also shoot the grouse with the 12 ga and save money (for some reason .410 shells cost way more than 12 ga). YMMV
A shotgun with a bead front sight, using a .22 adapter is absolutely useless as a rifle in my experience. Literally you will be able to hit a 1 gal paint can at 20 feet reliably and that's about it.
The exception is the shotgun to shotgun adapters. My 12Ga to .410 adapter is actually useful enough to bag a grouse or 2. Of course you could also shoot the grouse with the 12 ga and save money (for some reason .410 shells cost way more than 12 ga). YMMV
wayupnorth
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Northern Alberta
have been adding stuff onto the guns over the last year and shooting them now and then.
thought id update 1 for you guys.
finally sourced out some 25rd mags for the Papoose and got them in the mail this week.
slipped out to the sandpit today and rattled off 100 rounds with them.
while tight to get in and out of the gun they run flawlessly the entire afternoon.
cost me almost as much for shipping on these 2 mags as i spent buying them, that always sucks!
and fear not, i am i shall do a major update to the test now that im into the 2nd summer with them.
the Papoose and its new mags!
the old carry bag is getting pretty full!
thought id update 1 for you guys.
finally sourced out some 25rd mags for the Papoose and got them in the mail this week.
slipped out to the sandpit today and rattled off 100 rounds with them.
while tight to get in and out of the gun they run flawlessly the entire afternoon.
cost me almost as much for shipping on these 2 mags as i spent buying them, that always sucks!
and fear not, i am i shall do a major update to the test now that im into the 2nd summer with them.
the Papoose and its new mags!
the old carry bag is getting pretty full!
- Location
- Saskatoon Saskatchewan
I can't believe I missed this thread before. Excellent work.this thread is right up my alley. I love 22's, especially short ones or "survival" type guns. I have a few that get some field time, a 10/22 with 11.5" barrel, a 10/22 with bc folder and tech sights, a Stevens 305 trapper model in 22wmr with 13" barrel and I recently picked up both a tc hotshot as well as a chiappa little badger. I have been very impressed by both of the little single shots. They both have very good triggers and are showing promising signs of accuracy. I bought the hotshot for my 7 year old and the little badger will likely end up as a pack rifle for shooting grouse while moose hunting. I thought I had it all figured out when I developed a subsonic load for one of my hunting rifles until I read in the sk regs that its illegal to kill upland with a centerfire.
Bumping the thread, as it's such an amazing batch of information provided so thoroughly and entertainingly that it really ought to be a sticky, maybe adding other 'survival' guns should the author feel like it.
My Little Badger is definitely my go-to lightweight pack rifle. I carved into the pot metal in the bottom of the receiver after removing the plastic rails (and attaching a nice aluminum rail up top for a tiny 3.5x scope), such that it folds even more compactly. The triangular shape of the thing when folded bothered me almost as much as the cheapness of the plastic sights (removed within half an hour of it arriving) and plastic rails, or the toothed washer under the head of the Chicago screw, which was eating up pot metal every time I folded and unfolded it. Swapped that for a smoothly polished steel washer, added a dab of grease under it and a drop of Loc-tite inside the threads to keep it from loosening, and it hasn't shaved a bit of pot metal since, nor come loose through many dozens of open/close cycles. I'd recommend that fix for everyone with a Badger. The careful Dremel carving under the receiver lets me close it up to a triangle about 1/2 the original width at the muzzle/buttplate folded end. Similar now to the width of the scoped receiver.
I wonder, has anyone ever managed to find a Pack Rifle in Canada? Or are they for some reason not legal here? Seems that one should be considered along with the rest of the takedown models if it can be had legally, or is distributed here at all. This review shows the thing off fairly well:
https://www.alloutdoor.com/2013/10/14/pack-rifle-review-22lr-review-17oz-felt-light/
Iron Sighted
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Peace Region
I'll definitely have to look at replacing that toothed locking washer in my Little Badger, thanks for the heads up on that. May have to look at using my dremel as you did as well, I was already thinking to do it to the replacement forestock I have on order from Longshot, but if I can make it even more compact my carving away a bit of metal I may look at that as well.
Have only had this gun a couple weeks, and only got about 100 rounds through it but it's already one of my favorites in my safe.
Have only had this gun a couple weeks, and only got about 100 rounds through it but it's already one of my favorites in my safe.
It was a bit fussy, marking out where the receiver needed carving, then modifying that hollow location a little as the stock closed further and the trigger guard and action lock lever moved up a bit. There was a bolt or pin (can't remember now) to watch out for, but I just missed touching that. Think it was a split pin retaining the barrel. The ebony forend I made is stuck on now with JB Weld so there's no getting it apart to look. I stopped carving when it was closed enough and I was starting to worry about making the metal too thin. Of course with .22lr, and especially since I only shoot subsonic CCI SV or Quiets through mine, it's not like weakening it was much of a worry, but there was no real need to get it folded tighter than this:
The scope has QD knobs if I want to take it off for transport but it doesn't hang off the back too far when folded, so I just leave it in place. This is what the forend looks like, openings in the ebony for the guard and release lever to get to the metal, then shallow carved pockets for both of those. Oh, and I cut off the lever a bit, keeping it long enough to use easily but allowing the thing to close more. The outline measures about 17" x 6" without the scope, 19" x 6" with it mounted.
The scope has QD knobs if I want to take it off for transport but it doesn't hang off the back too far when folded, so I just leave it in place. This is what the forend looks like, openings in the ebony for the guard and release lever to get to the metal, then shallow carved pockets for both of those. Oh, and I cut off the lever a bit, keeping it long enough to use easily but allowing the thing to close more. The outline measures about 17" x 6" without the scope, 19" x 6" with it mounted.
Iron Sighted
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Peace Region
It was a bit fussy, marking out where the receiver needed carving, then modifying that hollow location a little as the stock closed further and the trigger guard and action lock lever moved up a bit. There was a bolt or pin (can't remember now) to watch out for, but I just missed touching that. Think it was a split pin retaining the barrel. The ebony forend I made is stuck on now with JB Weld so there's no getting it apart to look. I stopped carving when it was closed enough and I was starting to worry about making the metal too thin. Of course with .22lr, and especially since I only shoot subsonic CCI SV or Quiets through mine, it's not like weakening it was much of a worry, but there was no real need to get it folded tighter than this:
The scope has QD knobs if I want to take it off for transport but it doesn't hang off the back too far when folded, so I just leave it in place. This is what the forend looks like, openings in the ebony for the guard and release lever to get to the metal, then shallow carved pockets for both of those. Oh, and I cut off the lever a bit, keeping it long enough to use easily but allowing the thing to close more. The outline measures about 17" x 6" without the scope, 19" x 6" with it mounted.
That forend looks great, nicely done. Sure does fold up nice now too. I removed the bottom factory rail on mine as soon as I got it, that alone made quite a difference but looking at your pics I can see I can get a bit more out of it if I want to.
First let me say great thread I really enjoyed reading it. I have the same ruger takedown that I picked up about a year and a half ago when I got board with other hobbies and decided to get back into shooting. I researched the web quite a bit as I wanted to scope the takedown but still have it be useful as a survival rifle and this is what I came up with.
UTG bugbuster 3-9x32 with AO. At only 8 1/2" it's small enough that the rifle still fits nicely into the bag for protection and for $125 it includes quick disconnect rings which DO hold zero when re-installed but it can be removed in a couple seconds if desired. You need a new rail as the supplied ruger one does not have enough slots to fit the short scope. I went with the utg tactical shoot through rail and when the scopes removed I can JUST see the iron sights. My humble opinion its a perfect match for the takedown. I was a bit wary of a brand I hadn't heard much about but after reading the reviews gave it a chance and glad I did. Very accurate and seems to be build tough as can be. Guys are using them on .308 AR's and like them. Hard to find up here in shops which sucked but you can get it online from a company that starts with an A that has free shipping and they also carry the rail for $15.
If you want head shots on small game to fill the tummy this will do it at a lot farther the 25m.
Which UTG rail did you go with? The low pro, or just regular?
