When it comes to guns I'm as dumb as it comes...aside from the course I took to get my license.

Last week I ordered a US Survival Rifle...my first fire arm ever...but my selection isn't what I'm posting about.

I have a question or two for those of you who are believers in the idea of carrying a rifle for survival.

Question number one! For those of you who carry a firearm or survival, do you also carry a backup to that rifle? Is so, what form does it take? Parts to fix said gun? Another smaller gun? Another identical gun? Sling shot?

Question number two! I got to thinking about this in relation to the AR-7 aka US Survival Rifle and came up with some ideas which I'd like some feedback on. Is it practical to buy or build another barrel and action which could technically be stored in the stock as backup to the action and barrel mounted on the gun normally. This would also give one the opportunity to mount a scope on the external barrel...which prevents it from being stored in the stock anyhow. Does that make sense or am I taking things too far as usual

Hi Hacksaw,

Your "gun within a gun" is an idea I have never heard of. I have heard of spare parts (e.g. firing pin, back-up sights) being stored within the butt of a rifle, and ammo or survival kits.

On the Henry US Survival Rifle it maybe possible to store a second receiver/barrel/magazine in the butt of an assembled rifle. The gun would be almost twice as heavy so the floating aspect would probably be lost.

Interesting concept, you are definitely "thinking outside of the cave".

Mike

Everybody's situation is different.

My normal habit is to carry a pistol in addition to the shotgun or rifle that I am carrying. If I am expecting some kind of problem(s) to/may arise, then I'll have a 2nd smaller pistol as a backup.

I don't worry about spare parts because my weapons are taken care of and maintained while in the field. Cleaning my weapons each morning occurs before breakfast and while I'm having my first cups of coffee.

I do carry a long knife (KaBar) and a short knife (Buck 110). If I am using my harness, then I'm also carrying a bayonet.

Those are my personal preferences.

The late Colonel Jeff Cooper was once asked about backup weapons. He said a handgun backing up a rifle was like a destroyer filling in for a battleship.If you want more than one firearm, consider two different applications with some slop over or common ammunition . People have fiddled with multiple use fireams with both practical and impractical results. The various combinations like Drillings, Cape Guns, the Savage 24 for instance. Then there are multiple systems like the Thompson Contender or various sub caliber barrel inserts, variable shotgun chokes or specialised amunition that often enough doesn't always perform as advertised ( Glaser safety slugs.)In real life, what you effectively get are the equivelent in wieght, headache and bulk of two firearms anyway- hardly the philosophy behind your version of the old AR 7. Firearms are like our knives in argument, availability and use. It still comes down to the user and appreciation for what people in our past used as 'state of the art.'I imagine most people would freak at taking a Hawken .54 alone to Alaska- and remember very few people actually carried this limited production, premier rifle in it's day!

The more I think about it the less practical it seems...however...

When we talk about modularity with our gear as we so often do...and I like things to be modular...this idea might be more practical.

Just a loose example (it's too late to think any more than loosely ):

Carry the standard AR-7/US Survival Rifle as a survival rifle but carry the scoped barrel (plus optionally the action if you wanted) in the car or in the cart or bug out stash or whatever your preferred method is. If you were to stash one of those folding stock/pistol grips somewhere as well, you could assemble two whole rifles which depending on what you're preparing for might be useful. Until it arrives I won't know for sure if I can afford the space and weight but I'm definitely going to explore my options since there is a lot of aftermarket for it. For all I know I'll like it as is and won't want to mess with it.

The above idea is actually sort of what I do with fishing. I carry a tiny tackle box with the essentials and enough hardware to fish off the end of a whittled stick or a pocket rod (though I have never liked those). In my bigger pack (which the small pack slips into...modular!) I keep a travel rod with a bait cast reel. Combined I've got everything I need to fish most species just about anywhere in the usual way.

I think Chris hit it on the head. If you go that redundant, you get all off the disadvantages of the AR-7 rifle with all the weight and size of a more practical gun. Good for some...not so good for others. Yet another aspect of survival that is a personal thing.

Interesting.

Perhaps the survival purposes for carrying firearms are important in examining redundancy and backup. The two survival purposes that seem most discussed are self-defense and hunting.

If self-defense is the goal, then a most-likely-scenario analysis would seem appropriate. Somebody other than me will have to address that.

I can easily think of situations where a pistol, a shotgun, or a rifle might be the most appropriate self-defense primary or backup weapon. The major alternative would seem to be to avoid conflict, which might not always be a choice you can make.

If hunting is the goal, a most-likely-scenario analysis also seems appropriate. Others have addressed this many times, and seem to conclude that nets, traps, and snares are more efficient than firearms for most game with the possible exception of animals larger than deer.

If that conclusion is correct, then a rifle or shotgun of sufficient caliber for such larger game would seem to be the gun of choice.

Firearm candidates that combine both self-defense and hunting would seem to include either rifles or shotguns, with the edge toward shotguns for the variety of shot, slugs, and powder a single shotgun can use. If longer-range use figures as a most-likely-scenario, then combo shotgun-rifle firearms would seem a powerful option.

Redundancy seems a big challenge given the expense, weight, and size of a single rifle or shotgun. Again, with significant weight penalties, a combination rifle-shotgun seems to include some built-in redundancy.

At the moment my brain cannot puzzle through the backup challenge.

I guess my biggest question for Hacksaw is what are you planning to use the gun for?

Heinlein said it best in Tunnel in the Sky. If you have a gun, you tend to get a bit more cocky in a survival situation and may place yourself more into harms way.

Mind you, most people on this forum knows that +/- of owning/using a gun.

Still, what application are you planning on it?

This is the first firearm I've ever owned so for now it's purely recreational. I wanted something small, light, and easy to pack so I'm more likely to take it to places I can use it for plinking and to help control the bunny population. I also wanted something inexpensive as I'm sure I'll want another once I get hooked on it.

Survival is way down the list but obviously, being me, it's crossed my mind more than once and at 2.5lbs it's something that I could carry, when appropriate, for use in an emergency.
Being as I'm very inexperienced, there's no way I'd know enough to repair a gun in the field (though that is likely to change in time) which is why the second action popped into my head as a good idea especially since you can store one in the stock while the other is mounted. I also don't know how much that piece weighs or any other inconveniences. I mail-ordered it so I won't be able to discover these things until at least next week.

The way I look at hunting in a survival situation is this. I'm only going to want small game because I won't be equipped to handle large amounts of game nor would I want to as it would attract scavengers including bears. It's way more efficient and productive to use snares but these aren't a perfect science either and if you haven't eaten in a week and a rabbit bounces within 50 feet of you...it's too late to set up another snare. Setting up enough snares when you're starving would also be exhausting work I'd imagine...far more than shooting anyhow.

I'll make another fishing comparison. If I'm backpacking and plan on doing fishing I'll have my pole, reel, tackle, etc. However if I just have the small tackle box, I have everything I need to construct a wicked 12 hook night line out of Pickerel Rigs...or both if I had both and getting food was critical. They compliment each other just like a rifle and snares.

Lastly self defense. This is a non issue for me. I would have to be in an especially desperate situation to use it for self defense except maybe to ward off smaller predators like Coyotes.

not redundancy but more options.

I sometime carry a shotgun barrel for my Handirifle when
hunting deer so I can legally shoot quail or grouse and
sometimes the rifle barrel is in my pack when hunting turkey
so I can shoot a pig.

In other states where you can take upland game with a rifle,
I used to carry cast bullet loads for birds when deer hunting.

Have fun, Hacksaw!

My survival rifles are either one of my 98 mausers or a late production SMLE. I tend to reach for my 9.3x62 these days. You may think it's for the big old field proven bullet. Nope, I discovered it can stow several slim jim jerky sticks down the barrel.

Hacksaw,

As a side note I purchased an AR-7 about a year ago. Took it out a few times and boy what a disappointment. It jams about every 3rd round. I am still looking for the "right" ammunition. I have read that you can file the inside of the barrel where the shell slips up into it and that may help but I am not a gun smith and don't want to mess around with it.

Would be very curious as to your results with it.

For me this is a last resort to anything. I have it in my BOB because It is the only .22 I own but that is the only reason.

I am currently in the market for something better.

cameron2trade

Take a serious look at a Ruger 10/22 or a Marlin 70PSS, the takedown Papoose in stainless.

For me, a good back up firearm would be a handgun in the same caliber. It won't do quite the same job as a rifle would, but at least you don't have to pack 2 different sizes of ammunition.
Obviously a larger rifle wouldn't have an easy counterpart in handgun, but if we're talking survival firearms anyway I wouldn't take a large caliber (situation depending of course).
$0.05

It would be nice to have that as an option. Canadian law prohibits it unfortunately.

I'm surprised you can buy this one up here but when it comes to .22s and long guns the law seems to flex the most. You can't hunt birds with a shotgun which holds more than 3 shells or own one with a barrel length shorter than 18.5" but you can buy 50 round clips for a .22 with a 16" barrel you can practically fit in your pants...no problem!

A pistol in the same caliber, .22LR pistol, is what I am looking to buy as soon as I can get the permit. Cheap ammunition, and it's easier to find a range. A number of ranges in my area won't allow you to shoot anything bigger.

Good luck in NYC! I've a NYS pistol permit, but it is not legal in NYC. Better get it fast, and it's getting harder and harder.


I've 2 combinations in my emergency gear bag, A .357 revolver paired with a .357 lever carbine, and a 9mm semi-auto pistol paired with a 9mm carbine (33 round mags). The long guns give a far better range than the handguns, and use the same ammo. I also have .44mag and .45colt revolver/rifle pairings in my gun safe.

Well, I'm not sure the spare action and barrel for the AR-7 within the stock is all that useful. Then again, putting glass on an AR-7 seems kinda silly as the design is... I won't say flawed, but I will say eccentric. The way the barrel mounts means that your accuracy can fluctuate pretty impressively due to cleaning, or just normal firing. That eccentricity is what allows it to be stowed in the stock, so the idea of having and action barrel stowed in the stock, plus a scoped action mounts seems kinda self defeating in several directions.

However, if you were to get yourself a spare bolt, that might not be bad- I've had to take my AR-7's bolt apart before due to crud getting in there. And I wouldn't carrying it for the intended purpose without a spare bolt pin/handle tucked away with my ammo, and at least one spare magazine. I've had the bolt handle fall out a few times accidentally while taking it apart, and I've retired a few magazines.

Depending on what I'm doing, I might or might not have a revolver in .22 or .38 on me along with a rifle or shotgun, but that is kinda out for Canadians. Carrying two long arms... I wouldn't, unless one was a very specialized item and conditions required it, most of those being tactical in nature. (Sniper with an SMG or carbine for defense, or carrying a shotgun for breaching along with your regular weapon, that kind of thing.)

Hi Hacksaw.

I believe in having some spares parts for any gun you take to the field in the form of a spare firing pin, spare return springs(if needed) and a spare mag(s). Other items I include are a good field cleaning kit and the hex keys/screwdrivers needed to change out vital parts and to retighten bipod leg mounts or scope mounts.

If you take care of a gun properly in the field you will never really need more than that to have it stay serviceable and last a very long time. If you can get a gun plumber to mount a weaver type rail to your reciever you can quickly attach or dismount a scope if needed. It is best to leave a scope undisturbed but if you mount it in the same place every time and do not disturb the dial settings you will be plenty accurate for hunting or plinking. This may be an alternative to buying a whole new reciever.

Try the "western gun parts" store in Edmonton and you should find these things for any gun you need.

Just my opinion

P.S long time reader, first time poster

Welcome to the forum!

I did the comparison shopping about a year ago and went with the Marlin 70SS Papoose. I found it more "ergonomic" and reliable than AR-7 but still had the factory take-down ability that the Ruger 10-22 lacked. After one hunting season of testing I still like it and often plink with it at the range. There a quite a few threads/posts on the Papoose here at ETS Forum.

Mike

Welcome priest! Thanks for the advice. Carrying some spare parts and some tools makes perfect sense. I'm sure the parts are light weight and small just like the gun they belong in.

One of the top items on my list is to get to know it inside and out before it ever sees ammo.

Also, the Henry version has a scope rail and the reviews I've read speak fairly well of it's capabilities with a scope. You can't pack it in the stock with a scope unfortunately.

Welcome to you, priest.

The AR 7 survival Rifle is a durable production, if not wholly satisfactory design product; Armalite, Charter Arms, Henry. The problem with jamming has always been from poor magazines. It is my understanding Henry paid attention to this flaw with some better QC.You should still find ammo that your INDIVIDUAL piece likes in terms of feeding reliability and useful field accuracy.And then buy as many 'bricks' with the same production serial ( on the box) as possible, the .22 being like a wine vintage with production runs showing their own qualities. And if you buy a more plebian make, don't be afraid to visually inspect each cartridge like a box of Strike Anywhere matches and do some gleaning.I've known some simple RN lead to show glaring imperfections.Understand what a scope will, and will not do. There was a time ( and still is) when .22 scopes were wretched affairs. Get a decent one, and remember you are getting a faster target acquisition system for relatively short ranges. You don't need, or want anything much over 1- 1.5 true maginification. The takedown system will produce a 'different' carbine everytime you reassemble it. Try making everything you do with it; cleaning,torque on the receiver collet ( mark it like a timing belt in a car and observe any change from wear) and especially your shooting stance and hand position as uniform as possible.And remember, If Sean Connery could knock a helicopter down with his, you can nail the rabbit.

He wounded the guy who was going to toss out the grenade. He didn't kill him with the AR-7; the guy killed himself with the frag.

The AR-7 comes up in several James Bond movies but Q gets the credit.

I have no intention of even trying to get the permits in NYC. I'm waiting until my house is finished in Connecticut.

Welcome. Stick around. Post more, please.

Dead is dead, no matter how you get there...

I've got one of the original Armalite AR7 survival rifles. Just got it a few days ago in fact.

I'd be interested in reading any hints or tips that I can do to improve it's workings, one thing I've already learned and this may apply to the later models, the Charter Arms version in particular, and that is they work better with solid tipped ammunition vs the more common hollow point.

I don't quite get the idea of mounting a scope as it basically defeats the break-down advantage, if I were interested in becoming an assassin, I guess it would make more sense...;^)

I'm not interested in that by the way...really I'm not.

Really...

John E

Thanks again for the warm welcome folks. I am new to the whole forum thing and didn't plan on staying too long but there is good reading here. It gives me something to do at work until they block this website.

I don't have a dedicated survival gun, My survival gun is the one I am taking with me at the time I guess but out of my gun collection I usually end up in the field with my ruger 10/22 the most. As far as redundancy goes there is no other gun out there that I am aware of that you can buy so many aftermarket parts for. It won't break down like a Henry but there are some nice survival stocks available for the Rugers whick don't take up much room in a pack. I think it is possible to buy every part separate and assemble it yourself out of knock off parts without using a single one made buy Ruger.

If anyone wanted the kind of redundancy that Hacksaw was talking about then this rifle would get my vote.

The whole reason we put up with the quirks of the design is becuase you can take it apart and put it all in the stock for a nice, neat, compact package. Scope it, and you can't do that so well. Sure you could put the barrel in the stock, but not the action. And with issues involving getting the barrel remounted exactly the same way every time means your point of impact will float relative to your point of aim. Sure, you could drill and tap the action, then make a case for the scope and mount and a couple of screws, but that would be one more thing that changed.

Now, if you want to glass a survival rifle, put a folding stock on an 10/22. Almost as small, more accurate, more reliable, and easier to get parts for. :P

With all due respect I find it unreasonable to have to try tens of different brands of amuniton and "alterations" to get a firearm to perform at a minimal level. I don't recall reading in the manual that performance is at my own risk. (I already own a slingshot) I expect with the unique nature of this rifle that problems are inharent. ENOUGH SAID I have yet to receive on my (registered) rifle any notice of problems. Is it really too much to expect the AR-7 to feed amunition reliably? Really? How does Henry qualify this?

Just about every semi-auto firearm likes one brand/style/bullet type more than the others. That is why those of us who carry a firearm for serious "social" uses try various ammo 'til we find one that works all of the time, every time. Same with precision target shooters; they play with bullets and powder charges 'til they find the one that shoots best in their particular weapon...

Agreed that amo can be tricky. Not arguing that. Accuracy is something we all have to put up with. I would just like if the AR-7 fed amo so I could figure out the best brand/type to use.

Sorry don't mean to be cranky. Shoved that sucker in my BOB 6 months ago and decided better than nothing. Have sense acquired a few other items so I am comfortable. Just gears me up to discuss it again. I feel cheated but life goes on. Thanks OBG.

Well Hacksaw, you bought the rifle for its packability and you intnded useage is plinking and hunting small game...... If you were to permantley mount a scope and store in essence a second rifle inside it you will lose one of the factors you originally bought the rifle for. Its packability. I understand redundancy and approve of it, but in this case I don't see it. Maybe if you could get (not sure it being Canada and all) a .22 revolver or a .22 auto pistol you could gain the redundancy you desire. It would allow you to plink and hunt if the rifle fails, and be a more handy defence against smaller predators in your area that the rifle would be able to handle, by being in a pocket/holster and ready to deploy. Unlike the AR-7 if its all packed down.
I would definately pick up the small parts suggested by others for field expedient repair, there very well may be a local gunsmith who would be willing to teach you the ins and outs of your particular rifle. Good luck and happy hunting!

-Bill Liptak

Thanks Bill.

Hand guns are restricted. Even if I had the licensing, I'd only ever be able to take them to the range...and only if I had a seperate permit to transport it.

I've been looking online at what's available and it seems the best thing to do (which I can't confirm until it actually gets here) is what many of you have recommended...get some spare parts, learn this particular unit inside and out, then make the best of it even if it's finicky.

The ammo debate seems to be a hot one on the internet too. Everybody has their favorite it seems. One tip I found which makes sense is that they seem to feed jacketed/plated rounds better than just straight lead. Also, there seems to be some agreement that it's the magazines which cause loading problems...if they're not in JUST right, they won't feed very reliably. I've also heard that the Henry rifle and magazines are improved over previous designs.

Hi Hacksaw,

I am eager to read your review on the Henry AR-7 rifle, I have "lusted" for one for years but have held off buying because of the reports of functioning troubles. Maybe Henry now has the problems solved.

Mike

"...I feel cheated but life goes on..."

As they say, life's a [censored]. Then you die. Happy plinking..

"...magazines which cause loading problems..."

The magazine is the root of all evil in most semi-auto misfeeds, which is why you should always have at least one spare readily available. And if we are talking a self defense weapon, practice rapid reloads...

It seems to me that firearms using the simple .22 are a finicky lot, at least usually. After a "break in" period of about 200 to 500 rounds they mellow out quite a bit. When I first purchased my ruger MK II with a bull barrel for about 1/2 the retail cost I was overjoyed. Then to my dismay it didn't like anything I put in it. Fired 2 or 3 times and a jam. I finally lucked out and found a round it liked (sorry can't remember what it was) and finally got it to run about 95% of the time. After 250 (5 boxes) rounds of the stuff it runs all the time with no problems aside from ammo related issues. I tend to buy 500 round bulk "milk cartons" now so sometimes the heads get a little bent and cause feed issues or I will have one that the primer has gone to hell and won't go off.
Be patient, if the first batch won't shoot reliable, try a different one. Play around with what the bullets actually are i.e., round nose, flat nose, hard lead, soft lead, jacketed, hollow point. Also try different bullet weights and grain charges. Keep a list of what doesn't work and what does. I suspect in time it will be able to handle most, if not all of what is out there given time to break in. Patience is key.
Welcome to a fun and addicting past time Hacksaw, enjoy

-Bill Liptak

I ordered 2 extras right off the bat for a total of 4. You can get high capacity mags but they, like the scope, won't fit in the stock.

I have a Henry AR-7, while it's a fun little rifle that's been reliable, it wouldn't be my first choice if I really needed to depend on having a rifle. The build quality and design just doesn't feel that great, and I have heard enough about reliability issues to not trust it. Of course, I knew about all the issues before even buying it, but i chose to buy it anyway just becaues I liked it.

If I really needed to depend on having a rifle, rather than having to worry about questionable redundant rifles, I would try and make sure my primary rifle is as reliable as I can make it, and it's just better to start off with a more reliable base than the AR-7 than to try and modify the AR-7 into something it's not. It would be like spending tens of thousands of dollars to make a Yugo into a sports car, when for the same price or less you could have just gone out and buy one.

IMO, the only reason you'd choose the AR-7 over anything else is because of the light weight and compactness. The main selling point for most people is the ability to take down the reciever and barrel to store it in the stock. Take away that feature, and you might as well get a 10/22 with a collasible stock which is just a better rifle all around. And if you're gonna carry another barrel and reciever, you might as well just carry another rifle, it wouldn't be adding much more weight. That kinda goes back to the first argument, if you've got the space and ability to carry two rifles, why not just carry a better one to begin with?



If you having trouble with the AR-7's, a common fix would be to polish the feedramp, or chamfer the end of the barrel on the early versions without the chamfer. Ideally, everything should already work straight out of the box, but then again this is a cheap rifle with an unusual design, some people just live with the short comings just because there is currently no other option. Even thousand dollar semi custom guns sometimes have problems right out of the box that need some minor tweaking to make work, but as you go lower and lower on the price scale the problems are more common. And with the AR-7, you're basically at the very bottom of that scale.

I'm lucky that I haven't had any problems (yet), but if I did it's a pretty simple rifle to work on.

Hacksaw.

Another thing to consider is that every firearm has a "breaking in" period just like new boots or a new engine. After the first few hundred rounds you will notice that the rifle(should) work smoother and with less snags.

Solid lead ammo not only feeds less reliably in most semi-auto .22 rifles, but it fouls the hell out of them. If you use lead ammo I would suggest you get a good wire(not plastic) bore brush and some good solvent cleaner. Things like your action will gum up fairly quickly using solid lead ammo as well so a good field cleaning kit will pay off big time to aid in keeping it firing. This may be just as important as any spare part if you intend it as a survival rifle.

Just my take

Thanks priest...that's good to know.

I was actually wondering about lead fouling (is that the right term for it?) and was planning on picking up some jacketed (or similar) ammo to start out with...as well as some good cleaning supplies.

Some folks never clean their 22's and still get good accuracy.

I think it depends on the rifle.

I am new to the survival arena (outside of my military training) and looking into it on a personal level. One of the things I looked for was a weapon I could take w/ me that was light, portable, and reliable. I have a sidearm, but wanted something I could use for hunting small animals (or the occasional larger one). I looked at the AR-7 and other collapsible rifles and went w/ the Kel-Tec Su-16. It provided me w/ different models to choose from, ammunition that is readily available, and simple in its design. It is collapsible to about 21 in. and can mostly fit in a pack if desired. Being the .223 round, it packs a bit more punch than a .22. It is very accurate at the distance one might need in an emergency/survival scenario.

There is already a review here by Doug Ritter and if anyone wants to get more information, there is a user group located here . I encourage anyone interested to give it a look.

I've been looking at the Hi-Points.
http://www.hi-pointfirearms.com/40_carbine.asp

My brother has a HiPoint in 9mm, loves it. Has decent accuracy. The Tampa (Florida) Police Dept. Actually ok'd them for personal purchase for agency carry 4 or 5 years ago and a LOT of officers picked them up. Personally I dislike the HiPoint brand of firearms as they tend to end up in the wrong hands (85% of gun traces at the shop I used to work at were for the HiPoints. Needless to say florida ammo traders no longer carries this firearm nor will order it. If they have one in stock its because of a trade.) The pistols are sometimes an "iffy" affair, but the carbines are surprisingly reliable.

-Bill Liptak

Is it just me, or is anyone else always reminded of a Komodo Dragon every time they see this carbine?

Thought I should update on my AR-7 issues. I sent the Henry Survival Rifle back to Henry a month ago. The issues were jamming, not firing and obviously not feeding. When I got it back I took it out and had the exact same problems. I am not being a crybaby about this it only fired about 20% of the time.

Called them again and they have agreed to replace it. Still waiting for the new rifle. Will update when I receive and have a chance to try it out.

I should mention customer service is very accommodating and they sent me free UPS shipping labels both times.

Also as a side note. I was watching I think the Discovery channel and saw a Henry Rifle TV advertisement. First time I have ever seen a gun ad on TV.

Cameron

That's good to know. I've always liked the AR7 design, but I've also always heard they're pretty much hit or miss.

I want to pick up one of the Marlin Papooses. It's slightly more expensive than the Henry AR7, but it's supposed to be more reliable and accurate over all, while still being almost as compact.

I've also seen Taurus makes a nifty little stainless pump action carbine in .22LR that is a take down (it separates into two pieces).

Decisions....decisions......

Hi Paul,

I have a Marlin Papoose and have been pleased with it, we had a good discussion on them here

Lately I have been using a Savage .22RF/.20ga Camper Combination gun more with success. My eyes are not as good as they used to be and it is easier to hit a grouse with a load of 6's than with a .22 bullet.

Mike

Can you post up a picture of the .22/20 combo? Can it be broken down? That sounds like a nice piece as well.

I really like the .22LR rifles but not a fan of the take down AR-7. Not really sure why but I think its something like the same reason I am not a fan of fishing poles that do the same versus my regular poles.

I have a .22LR on a Butler Creek folding stock that is excellent. However I have always wanted to put it on a Bullpup Plus stock that makes the entire length only 26 inches. I may do that rather soon or mount it on a AR-15 type frame with collapsible stock and rails for a aimpoint or EOTech sight and a front hand grip.

Never has a Failure to fire with my papoose. a Damn fine firearm in my eyes

Many years ago, Savage (I think it was savage anyway - I can check on brand and model another time) made a break action rifle. Dad had one in 30-30, but what was slick whas that you COULD buy extra barrels, from .410 shotgun, to 12 gauge, to .22 hornet, and I understand even 220 swift - I gather about 10-12 factory calibers

Being a break action, it's LIGHT, small and handy. The dog is that scopes have to be barrel mounted, or use iron sights, and the action was horrible - when I say horrible, as a tean, I could bearly moved the lever to open the action

I have a NEF Handi rifle that does this. Rossi makes em too.

I find that the quality of the ammo is the more important factor. I have an AR-7 that I've had for over a decade, and probably put a few bricks through it. I've never had a feed or ejection problem with mine; the exception being that when I was shooting CB caps there wasn't enough energy to cycyle the action, but usually I held my thumb over the bolt to keep the action closed anyways (making it a very, very quiet little shooter, quieter than a pellet gun, but more powerful).

My only problem is that it shoots low, and the sights are adjusted to the max. I'm not worried, though, as I know where the rounds are going and can call my shots within reason.

Most of my problems with 22 lr firearms stem from using low quality cheap ammo, just like with all my other guns. In this case, I tend to avoid shooting lead bullets with a wax coating, which is about as cheap as it comes. Shooting such ammo will gunk up the chamber of my semi-automatics in short order, usually causing a feed failure or preventing the bolt from closing completely, thus causing a misfire. Roughly 80% of the failures I've experienced with 22 lr are due to this or similar from cheap ammo fouling the gun quickly. Even my Ruger 10/22 won't tolerate it. Anymore, the only gun I shoot dirty 22 lr ammo out of is my Ruger Single Six revolver, because everything about it is so manual that it doesn't care really how dirty it gets.

Other problems come from leaving too much lubricant behind in the action with typically similar results. One old 22 lr semi-auto rifle I owned was a Coohey Arms. It was a sweet shooter, but I bought it used, and the firing pin had been peened down from dry firing before I got it to the point that it wouldn't reliably detonate the primer charge, which explains why I got it for cheap. I ended up trading that gun off for a slick little plastic daisy bolt action 22 lr carbine that I used to help train my daughters with. For being a mostly plastic gun, it wasn't a bad shooter in the least. The oldest daughter could snap twigs with it at 50 feet, usually better than I could (I always claim I had too much coffee to drink on those mornings).

As far as the AR-7 goes, I think it is a fine knock-around gun. It is highly transportable, and mine hasn't failed me yet.

As far as 22 ammo goes, it's like any other cartridge, some guns will just prefer a particular type of ammo over another. Other than the fouling issues, I've never had cause to complain about any 22 ammo I ever bought and used. I've probably shot up a couple hundred thousand rounds of various brands, and anymore I favor using plated or jacketed ammo because I don't want to spend so much time cleaning up. The cheap stuff just isn't worth the effort. My top three are CCI Stingers, Remington Yellow Jackets and Remington Vipers.

I agree with ammo on the .22LR. I was at a store the other day and found a box of 500 hollow point rounds for $19.00. Man I was sorely tempted but instead I purchased 100 rounds of higher quality stuff at $8.00 because I knew I wouldn't have any feed issues.

I think in all things there is a decision that must be made between size/weight/cost and durability.

Junk ammo is even bad for revolvers. My old K-22 has recessed chambers, junk ammo will crud up those recesses to the point I can not force a new round far enough into the chamber to close the cylinder. Easy to remove, but a pain nonetheless...

Yep, the SA Ruger is a bit more tolerant than the DA Smith I reckon. Fewer parts to deal with on the SA cylinder, whereas you have the ejector system on the K-22 plus the cylinder in the Ruger doesn't swing out. The cylinder to frame gap at the back end of the SA away from battery is also a bit wider on the Ruger, allowing for the cylinder rotation to compress the cartridge into the chamber at battery when the hammer gets pulled back. The hammer pull becomes increasingly stiffer, but has to be better than trying to force the cylinder back into the frame with a bunch of slightly protruding cartridges. I suspect eventually the Ruger would jam up with wax and gunk as well if I kept going with that junk ammo. But for a while it would do it's job where the others would have to be tore down and reamed out. I believe the junk ammo was a couple cheap bricks of PMC LRN 40 grain standard vel. The bullets themselves are wax lube coated, and as the chamber heats up, that wax is going to come off and deposit itself inside, and at the worst place too.

Most 22 lr ammo isn't that expensive that you couldn't go with something better than the bottom of the barrel stuff. Use good jacketed ammo from a mainstream mfr, and practice marksmanship rather than spraying and you will enjoy it more in the long run I reckon.

In the spirit of the original post, I have a 410/45lc (H&R Survivor) with removable choke, a 410/22lr (M6 Scout), and a 45lc single action revolver (Beretta Stampede) as my basic bug out armament. My wife has a 22lr single six as hers and likes to carry the M6 because it's "cute". Plus the scoped 22 helps her in hitting the target more consistently.

So redundancy in ammo for all. And picked to be as simple as possible for maintenance and repair.

I replaced the original H&R stock with the ATI stock,foreend and heatshield and it gives it an AR15 look from a distance, with your eyes squinted and slight astigmatism thrown in. Plus the adjustable stock allows my wife to use it comfortably.

All varmint/snake/small critter guns, all single shot (except if you're really fast with the M6, but accuracy would suffer, and it does enough without any extra help).

Ammo runs the gamut, from snake shot to cowboy loads to high velocity, shot big samples of each, and accuracy varies as noted by others, but I weeded out the rounds that were way off and now stick with the tried and true....

Benjammin, I think you hit the mark (pun intended), marksmanship is key, rather than volume.

I've used the bricks of copper-jacketed Remington ammo (from walmart) in my 10/22 with no real problems. Any misfires/FTE's were using the off-brand magazines.

I also have a few brands of the "high velocity" .22 ammo. Does anyone know if there are any problems firing these types through a regular 10/22? I have read that it's not the best idea to shoot hi-vel rounds through firearms not designed for them.

Thanks!

High velocity rounds aren't exactly the issue, it is more a question of blowback energy and dwell that are a concern in semi automatic actions. Locked breech designs, such as the bolt rifle or falling block type, are not really effected by changes in recoil energy and pressure dwell, but semi automatics are more or less tuned to a rather tight range or optimal operating conditions based roughly on the pressure wave exerting force on the action to cycle it. They can operate outside of that range, but if the pressure curve results in a lower exertion force, then the action can short stroke, resulting often in misfeeds as the spent case fails to eject or the bolt fails to retrieve the next round in the magazine. Over-exertion is the real concern, as the bolt usually ends up slamming into the bolt stop hard, usually while the spent case is sent flying a considerable distance. Having the action under such stress generates excessive and premature wear, and leads to mechanical failure quicker.

I doubt that high velocity 22 lr ammo is going to cause problems for the 10/22 action. Ruger builds those things fairly stout, and the ammo needs to be factory safe for less sturdy semi-automatic handguns and older firearms anyways, so in factory ammo I would think the margin of safety is more than enough. Since 22 lr is never reloaded, there's no chance for a shooter to overpressure a load in that caliber.

Now reloading centerfire ammo is a whole different hullabaloo. I've seen guys with handloads in 223 that spit cases 40 feet out of a mini-14. Those bolts are slamming the stops hard, and if they are going to shoot such hot ammo, they should really think about getting a smaller gas port or else beefing up their recoil springs. The irony is that by handloading you can tune the ammo to a particular semi-automatic to where it practically egg-lays the spent cases from the ejection port without ever a mis-feed, yet maintains velocity at nominal levels. I've done that with my semi autos and working up some custom recipes. That same ammo would repeatedly fail to cycle properly in someone else's gun.

I doubt that any 22 lr ammo manufactured today is going to hurt your 10/22.

UPDATE:

My email exchange with Henry Rifles regarding the AR-7 survival rifle I purchased about a year and a half ago.



> To: webletters@henryrepeating.com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:18 PM
> Subject: Thank you and a question.
>
>
> I had had some trouble with a survival rifle I purchased
> about a year and a half ago. You repaired it once and then
> ended up replacing it.
>
> I received the new survival rifle a month ago. I had an
> opportunity to try it out last weekend. The performance
> compared to the old rifle was outstanding. Thank You.
>
> I did notice that the new rifle seemed a little more
> hearty in the trigger and receiver area. I also noticed a
> copper or goldish colored pin protruding into the receiver
> area that I didn't notice before.
>
> Is it that I have a bad memory or have some changes been
> made?
>
> Thank you in advance for your response.
>
> Cameron

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Date: Tuesday, January 6, 2009, 1:01 PM
> Thank you for owning a Henry US Survival. I am sorry you had
> some problems, and yes we made some improvements.
>
> Best wishes for a Happy & Healthy New Year
> Anthony Imperato, President
> Henry Repeating Arms, Co.
> 59 East 1st Street
> Bayonne, NJ 07002
>
>
>
> Telephone 201-858-4400
> Fax 201-858-4435
> Email Anthony@HenryRepeating.com
> Website http://www.henryrepeating.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Subject: Re: Thank you and a question.
To: Anthony Imperato <anthony@henryrepeating.com>


Mr. Imperato,

Thank you for the response. As I no longer have the first survival rifle I purchased and can't make any comparisons would you be kind enough to elaborate on all of the improvements?

I am a member of an out door web forum. The Henry Survival Rifle is often a topic of conversation. It would be greatly appreciated by many members of the forum I am sure to have more information on the improvements.

Thank you,

Cameron

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


in SHORT WE HAVE MADE IMPROVEMENTS/CHANGES TO THE MAGAZINE, THE EJECTOR, THE MAG CATCH AND THE BARREL. Best wishes for a Happy & Healthy New Year
Anthony Imperato, President
Henry Repeating Arms, Co.
59 East 1st Street
Bayonne, NJ 07002 Telephone 201-858-4400
Fax 201-858-4435
Email Anthony@HenryRepeating.com
Website http://www.henryrepeating.com

"MADE IN AMERICA AND PRICED RIGHT" (718) 499-5600






End of email exchange.....


Well I guess he was a little hurried or didn't want to answer the question. Anyhow I ran 100 rounds through the new survival rifle and had about 10 misfires.... and a few feeding problems. Although this is not perfect it is substantially better than the previous rifle. It also seemed to have the problems in the first 50 rounds or so. I hope by breaking it in a little more the performance will improve.

I had to shoot at an indoor range so no long range shooting but it was hitting in about 8 out of 8 in a 3 inch circle at 50 feet out of the box with not even a sight adjustment. Will break it in a little more soon and then take it outside this spring and put some time into seeing what king of groupings I can really get.

Would recommend the new and improved version of the Henrey survival rifle but don't expect it to be perfect.

Cameron

Sounds like a typical New Jersey response. I guess the bottom line is it is definitely new and improved, so with your testing results, that seems appropriate enough.

For what you pay, you are probably getting your money's worth.

I am not big on guns. I don't even bother keeping any guns right now.
I used to have a few, but not now.

I will comment on your thread anyhow.

If I was restricted to one firearm for meat getting it would likely be a .22 single shot. Possibly a repeater, but certainly a bolt action, certainly with iron sights but possibly a scope in addition to the iron.
You chose semi auto. That is OK. They work too. The AR-7 is a nice light and easy to store package. Ideal for bush pilots.
A 12 guage shotgun would be the second choice, and something in the 30 caliber range if there was the likely chance of big game that needed to be shot.

Why .22 bolt action? It is reliable, the ammunition gun and ammo are both inexpensive and light to carry. It can be used on almost anything up to the size of a small deer with a pretty good certainty of success. They have killed larger animals but it starts getting pretty iffy. I would not want to try a bear or moose with it, yet people have killed bear and moose with them.

Shotgun? Because of the great variety of loads one gun is good for everything from rabbits up to bear and moose. It satisfies most SD needs if they ever come up too.
This would likely be a pump gun.
A shotgun has about the same range as a .22, or a pistol.
For me the .22 wins on ammo cost and weight over the 12 guage.
It is not easy to choose between them though because of the ability to use the shotgun with different loads for different game including birds.

About the .30 calibers. You know with 303, 30-06, 30-30, 308,etc a lot of different good calibers exist. They have good availability, they can be purchased for a reasonable price and will handle any animal in North America.
The only drawback is the weight of both the rifle and the ammo. Smaller game is just blown away to smithereens with them too. Again a bolt action for reliability.

I would be very unlikely to ever need a higher caliber like a .375 Winchester or Wetherby magnum and using one on anything I might shoot would just be wasting powder.
I tend to think of .223, 5.65 and all of the hyper velocity .22 type rifles as varmint guns. All very flat shooting, but not really great knock down power.
Good for shooting coyotes at long ranges, but not really good meat getters.
Also since I usually hunted forest areas most of my shooting was under 75 yards and only occasionally as far as 1,000 or 2,000 yards.
So no real need for long range stuff

About using crappy ammo.
Well for sure not. It might be OK for plinking or range practice, but not for where you want each bullet to put food on your table.

One thing about the .22 is that it is a trapper's friend.
A line of traps, deadfalls and snares will supply a lot of meat. Aircraft cable will get you more moose, deer and bear steaks than a rifle ever will.
But you might need to kill them even though they are in the trap.
A .22 lets you stay just far enough away to be a bit safe and a well placed shot will finish them off, even of it is just a .22.

Now for backups.
I would likely just get the parts most likely to break or get lost and store them. Things like springs and firing pins or clip parts.
If you want a scope you can get decent demountable scopes that let you still use the iron. If you put a redspot or quick point scope on you will likely just use that for everything anyhow.
You don't need high power scopes on a .22.
They don't shoot that far anyhow.
I doubt if you will ever shoot the barrel of a .22 out, no matter how many bricks of ammo you feed through it.

Here in the city, my Beeman R1 and/or R7 pellet rifles could potentially keep me in survival meat for quite a while with little or no noise or expense. There are scads of pigeons, seagulls, cats, dogs, squirrels, possums, crows, and giant rats in my neighborhood. Dozens of pigeons and seagulls sit on the power lines next to my house everyday.

You reminded me about something.

Some old gents in a city I know raise show pigeons. The show pigeons thay raise are Giant Runts.
Giant Runts are a lot like the regular rock pigeons that plague every city, they are just bigger and meatier.

Because you can not raise livestock for meat in that city, but you can raise show birds, they have a club called the Ontario Giant Runt Club.
They are real certified pigeon fanciers, it is true.
It is all quite official and they have shows and everything, at which they judge the quality of the birds and present awards for the best birds shown.
After the show they go home and start fattening up more birds for the next show.



This is an American Giant Runt

Pigeons are decent eating.

tastes just like chicken...;^)

JohnE

Squab for us West Texaners. Grandad made me a slingshot out of inner tube rubber, some leather, and a plywood cutout. He posted me in the big feed barn with orders to try and bring down any squab I coudl reach with the thing. Them big sheet metal pole barns were a bit too tall for me to reach the top rafters with the rocks I had, but I sure had a lot of fun trying. Learned an important lesson about trajectory and shooting from a pure vertical hold in that barn. Got a goosegg for my trouble.

I learned about trajectory, Kentucky windage, etc by shooting buttons leaning against the wall in the next room in my mom and dad's basement with a Rough Rider BB gun. You could follow those BB's from the time they left the barrel until they hit the target. It's a dang miracle I didn't put my eye out. I probably shot 20,000 or more BB's out of that gun over the course of several years.

I once saw a .22 pellet out of a Benjamin pump go across a garage, contact a piece of wood that I thought was soft pine but turned out to be hard pressed wood, then come back, right into my left eye. Lucky for me, it didn't penetrate, just hurt like hell, and caused a cataract that I had to have removed 40 years later ...

Sounds like my first experience with Rat Shot and a .45LC S&W M25. Rat shot will indeed bounce back from an old weathered 4x8 sheet of 3/4" plywood. I was popping lead pimples for three days. Thank God for shooting glasses.

We were not allowed BB guns as kids.
When we were old enough to learn to shoot we were handed a .22 Cooey.
Dad said all BB guns were good for was taking out headlamps and eyes.
We were not allowed pellet guns until years later.

Yup, been there, done that. Once I saw a .22 lead bullet ricochet off of a junked '52 Plymouth hood ornament and smack right back into someone's chest.

Good thing I was wearin' a thick coat.

To help get this thread back on track, I really like my snazzy old S&W K22 copy Taurus .22 revolver. Good old fashioned hi-polished blue finish, target adjustable wide trigger and sights, cocobolo target grips, and can be loaded up with any combination of .22 rimfire ammo of opportunity known to human-kind--short, long, CB cap, CB long, long rifle, snake shot, BB cap, sub-sonic, what have you. Two lb. trigger breaks like a glass swizzle stick.

I carry around a tee shirt to wear one day a year, a gift from my daughter. Ever seen the movie A Christmas Story? Well, my shirt has Ralphie, broken glasses and all, and says "You're Gonna Shoot Your Eye Out"...

I carry a .357 Marlin Lever and a S&W 686 plus (7 shot .357) in my Emergency Gear. I feel with correct shot placement, the .357 can handle about anything on the US East Coast. I can go with a .44mag and .45 Colt paring if I need to. The marlin carbine is light and dead on. .38/.357 ammo is light to carry and reletivly easy to find should I run out.

The Marlin .357 Mag and S&W revolver combo is really hard to beat. You can shoot a wide variety of .38 Spl and .357 Mag. ammo, even wadcutters if you load them one at a time in the Marlin as they don't feed from the magazine and you'll have to take the tube off to clear it. Yes, I do know for sure. The .357 with proper bullets can take even deer, elk and black bear at ranges out to 150 yards or so. Using cast bullets and light loads you can shoot rabbits or squirrels without losing much meat.
Ruger, Marlin, and others also make 9mm and .40S&W carbines that would make a good pairing with a suitable pistol, though the range of ammo choices is not as great as for the .357.
Versatility and utility are my big things. That's why I prefer the .357 Mag. and also the 20- or 12-ga. shotgun. As mentioned by others, there are several rifles made with interchangable barrels that shoot rimfire, centerfire and shotgun with the same action. H&R/NEF, Knight, Taurus, Rossi, are a few that come to mind. This flexibility, and reliability, makes for what I consider the ideal "survival" gun, or guns when teamed with a revolver.

The AR-7 survival rifle is not known to be accurate, reliable or have a good trigger.

I think a .22 rifle is a great survival gun. To me a good rife has a good barrel, good trigger and good sights. There are a lot of rifles like that. I prefer to have a scope on my .22 rifles. I have a T/C Contender carbine with a 17" custom barrel and a 2-7x Weaver .22 scope. I had Mike Bellm do the trigger job several years ago. It can be taken apart as small as the AR-7. I also have 21" .223 and 7-30 Waters barrels for it. It is a real joy to shoot!

Everyone should own a Ruger 10/22. My boys love shooting a brick (500 rounds) of ammo through it every time we go out shooting.

I think you also need a powerful handgun for protection. My preference is for a .40 S&W Glock 23 or a 9mm Glock 19 with night sights and a .22 lr slide by Advantage Arms. Mine likes Remington Golden bullets and CCI Mini Mags.

An even better survival rifle is an M4 clone. Get a flat top and put a low power optic on it. Then get a .22 lr adapter and magazine. I have a Bushmaster ORC with a Leupold 1-4x scope and the Ciener's .22 lr adapter with a 27 round Mad Dog magazine. It works amazingly well. The rounds hit where the scope looks, no sight adjustment is needed. With the M4gery you have the firepower to win a fight or hunt deer if you use special bullets. You can also use the .22 lr adapter to hunt small game. If you were in a desperate situation you could use a light mounted on your M4gery with a red filter and hunt at night with the .22 lr adapter. Just aim for the glowing eye. Surefire has wonderful lights and filters.

For a survival rifle I'd want something other than a semi-auto ... a lever action or bolt action. They are far less sensitive to dirtiness and different ammo. Since you, the human, get to work the action you do a much better job than a semi-auto action that relies on the minimal .22 cartridge for its power source.

Were it me, I'd buy a Henry lever action .22 rifle. I love mine. If you need it to be more packable, simply remove the stock. It's only one screw. If you want takedown to be tool-less, replace that screw with a thumbscrew from the hardware store. It's a standard 10-32 thread, 1.65" long. I happen to have one sitting here in my hand, in case you're wondering ... I was just installing a tang sight on my Henry .22 (model H001T) today.

A Survival "Rifle" goes along the same lines as a Survival knife. Neither do any good unless you have them with you. Handguns require practiced skill to be proficient beyond arms length. Handguns are self defence weapons and are not typically hunting weapons. Unless of course you are extremely proficient and practice with them, still, they hard to master.

Therefore, my choice goes to the rifle or shotgun. They need to be light, so you take it with you, It needs to be rugged and dependable to handle hard use, and still remain accurate.

In a true survival situation, the objective for a firearm is "MEAT ON THE TABLE." And this meat will probably be small game, with the ability to take larger game if needed. The game you shoot will typically be under 50 yards.

For me, this type of weapon would be either a small 20 gauge shotgun, or a Ruger 10-22 Compact with open barrel sights, no scope.

Shotguns are Meat Getters that require minimal marksmanship experience to be sucessful at harvesting game. Their drawback is their range (35-40 yards) and the weight of the ammo.

The Ruger 10-22 Compact is a proven reliable rifle that is accurate and can take game of all sizes even at extended ranges out to 100 yards. 50 rounds of ammo weigh as much as three or four 30-06 bullets or 4 shotgun shells.

Range practice is cheap and fun. What is also VERY good is the 22 rifle can be used by any member of the family with little training. My boys 8 and 11 each have a Ruger 10-22 Compact and can shoot with them very well.

Also, the 22 does not make a lot of noise which in some survival situations would be usefull.

My vote goes hands down to the Ruger 10-22 Compact. Put a sling on it, leave the scope off of it. If you insist on having a scope that will some day fail or get damaged, I suggest putting "High" rings on it so you can keep the open barrel sights on it as backup. "Low" or "Medium" Rings set the scope too low to retian the rear sight. Make sure you sight in the open barrel sights before you install your scope. When your scope fails, you can take off the rings scope combo with a simple screwdriver or quarter.

Muleskinner

OK..how about this..i have no idea if they are even made anymore but Iver Johnson and i would assume other gun companys made long barell 22 pistols..sort of goofy looking,somewhat like a blank starters gun but with a 10-12? inch barell. i have seen photos of them being carryed in outdoor books going back to the 1900's by fisherman and canoe trippers who were not hunting but would shoot somwthing for the pot--"pot guns".something like that could be slipped into a --don't open untill you need it" survival kit along with a couple box's of ammo.for someone who did not expect to be lost for anymore that a week or two or just need to pick up a little game on way out--