To buy or not- this rifle

Before I start...

On another thread, the consensus seemed to be that having a .22 and a shotgun would be the "ideal" survival combo to have. i have both of these firearms, as well as 2 WW2 surplus rifles.

I just saw, at my local sporting good store, this rifle at $129. In short, it's single shot, break open rifle, available in 7.62x39, or .308, or .223. http://www.rossiusa.com/products/product-details.cfm?model=R223B&category=RIFLE
For this price, I'd feel like an idiot to pass it up, even though I can't think of any practical purpose for it.

Pro's: cheap, the ammo can be cheap (depending what I get), light (at 6.2 lbs), break-open means easy to clean, few moving parts to clog.

Con's: don't need it (either hunting or survival situation), do I? A .223 is OK for a varmit round, or maybe hunting up to deer size. that being said, my Mauser or shotgun would do the same thing. The .22 I have could do all the small hunting work in a pinch (say, possum or smaller). And, being a single shot, it's slow to reload, making shot placement that much more important.

Feedback welcome... the sale is for a few more days still. And, if I decide to buy, which round? .223 is cheap, used by the US military, available in surplus, and "big enough for deer, small enough for rabbit." .308, I feel, would be redundancy with a Mauser, plus ammo is lots more expensive.

Thanks for the feedback.

I think you talked yourself right out of buying it, you seem to have things covered with the other weapons you mentioned you already have. If the money is burning a hole in your pocket buy ammo for the ones you already have.

The "consensus" is wrong. Which is not unusual.
A survival gun has to combine hitting power, accuracy and maximum practical ammunition capacity. Combining a .22 with a .410, 20 ga or 12 ga is a complete waste of time.
You are hunting for the pot. You make a kill or go hungry . That means that being "sporting" is a no-no. If something flies overhead you follow it, let it settle on a perch and then shoot it off it.

Dinner.

Same principal applies to rabbits, deer, snakes etc. Shotguns have a very limited effective range. Rule is: If you can spit at it use a shotgun. If you can't use a rifle.

Proper combi-rifle sets are:
.22 & .223,
.22 & .308,
.22 & 30.08.
Minimum of 100 round's of .22 and 20 - 30 round's of .223 etc.
I personally would go for .22.

To many 'survival' includes being able to fend off predators...which is one of the reasons a 12ga is so popular. If all you're doing is putting food on the table, then the .22LR can't be beat. My opinion of course. I've been researching this plenty though I haven't followed through yet.

If you're worried about bears, buy bear spray. It's proven more effective than any gun has ever been.

WOW are we really gonna get this debate started???

For you MDinana, a single shot break open in all seriousness would be a poor choice for a survival weapon(given the choice)IMHO So it's gonna be a toy to go plink with in real life more than likely.. have fun!!! single shots make you take your time and improve your shot placement abilities.

If you dont think you will need something 100% then chances are you may not ever use it. It looks to be a reliable little gun for what you described. You do have your basics covered though. From my experiences the .223 is a good little round.

If you think .308 ammo is too expensive consider reloading. I have a friend who reloads and he says he can save up to 80 % of the cost depending on what cal you reload. I will be starting soon.

Ha! Yeah, .308 is pricey. But the 8mm Mauser, and more-so the 7.62x54R is even worse. Many stores don't even carry the latter, even though they're selling the rifles for it (there's some great managerial foresight).

OK, it seems so far that most of the comments are in the "pass it up" category. Fun, but mainly a waste of money. If anyone has more "pro's" to change my mind, by all means speak up.

Thanks to everyone so far.

I bought a .460 revolver a while back. I dont need it. but it sure is fun to fire at the range. Sometimes you need to buy stuff because you want it and for no other reason. everything doesent have to be about survival. buy it for fun.

better yet. buy a SKS. they sell for about the same price but will have 10 round stripper clips giving you more options for a fun gun and a survival gun. canadaammo.com sells 7.62 x 39mm by the 1200 round crate for next to nothing.

I dont want to veer from your origional question though. it looks great for the price but it wont do anything your 12 ga and .22 cant.

If he's talking about the other thread, it wasn't about survival firearms, it was about what firearms to own as your first and the ones that would be the most "multi-purpose." A firearm for outdoor survival use, is a completely different matter.

For that, like Leigh_Ratcliffe said, .223 or .308 makes for a good choice. While I like .223, I think .308 would be more useful in a variety of circumstances. With a .308 and accurate .22LR pistol or pack-able rifle I would be good for a long time.

With that said, to answer your original question, for that single shot break-action rifle. Since you already have a .308, I would get the .223, just for fun. It would make for a light weight and easy to shoot rifle compared to a .308. It's a nice "in-between" for your .22LR and .308 and gives you something different to mess around with.

I have never used the rifle your asking about.

I would pass it up.

I do not like a break action for those calibers, though it is fair to say I have never tried a rifle with that action in those calibers.

I also do not like the look of the rifle from the 1 image I have ever seen of the rifle in question.

The only thing I am certain of is do not get the rifle chambered in .223 It's not worth it.

The .308 I *might* consider to use for a scout project.


-JRJ

The only break-open firearms here are non-serious guns for clay games -- Skeet, Trap, et al. For serious guns I would prefer to have a magazine to reload the gun quickly. Some folks like the simplicity of the singles though, your call.

IMHO, were my current arsenal not so well stocked, I would gladly spend the small amount of cash for the Rossi. I would most likely get either the 223 or the 7.62 x 39 because those rounds are in mass circulation in civilian and military use. Here's my philosophy:

From a survival perspective, it would pay to have at least one firearm that can handle high power rifle ammunition you would be likely to find if the bubble ever went up and we were reduced to an anarchist or fend for yourself type society. Even a single shot version isn't a bad choice, as with one well placed round, you can re-equip yourself with better, yet still be able to issue that same firearm to someone else you are willing to help out (this was a big deal in WW2 for the french resistance when we dropped heaps of little 45 acp sheet metal pistols for them to do exactly that with). Even if you otherwise would use the firearm seldomly, for the price it seems well worth the investment. Also, such a firearm can be a very useful tool in properly educating new shooters with. Either of the recommended rounds are much more managable than standard high powered rifle rounds, yet still well capable for the sort of training a new shooter needs. The gun will likely be lighter and smaller than it's repeating counterparts, and therefore easier to handle for younger marksman, while still being practical enough for them to take to the field (7.62 x 39 being roughly equivalent to a 30-30 with the right bullet).

With a suitable telescopic sight mounted atop the firearm (your basic Tasco 4 x retailing for around $50 or so), it if quite functional as both hunting firearm based on the cartridge selection and for more serious survival issues.

I've used an NEF in 223 for varmint hunting, with a similarly equipped scope, and had a good measure of success when I did my part. You are not likely to get a following shot very often, but I never needed one. The NEF is a similar break action single shot, and I would compare the quality of the Rossi to be only marginally less than the NEF is, at worst. More likely they are on a par. There are an awful lot of single shot Thompsons and Rugers out there in use today, and whether it is a falling block, rolling block, break action, or muzzleloader, they do seem to get the job done about as often as any repeater does. If you think a break action takes too long to reload, try stuffing the muzzle sometime. I can spend most of a good day at the range shooting 30 rounds out of my 50 cal at 100 and 200 yards. It is a most satisfying exercise in marsksmanship and control.

308 does make a more suitable hunting round, but unless you intend to make this your primary hunting firearm, I would stick with a caliber that is more likely to be enocuntered while in scrounge mode. While not legal in most places, a 223 is quite a capable firearm for harvesting deer sized game, as a number of my "tribal" friends have attested to.

Your statement that "the consensus is wrong" is a bit presumptuous. I would say it is a question of context as to what recommendation is more appropriate for a given situation. I've experienced situations where having a shotgun to bear is far more desirable than any rifle. Likewise, some shotguns are capable of shooting ballistic projectiles far more accurately than many would-be shooters are capable of, certainly accurate to havest big game at nominal range. I would compare the effective result that shooting at a bevy of quail (or similar flock of birds most of us would be likely to encounter) perched in a tree with a 22 might accomplish compared to what can be done with a shotgun using an improved cylinder or cylinder bore choke at sufficient range would do. Likewise, hunting deer or even elk in what we call "Dog Hair" fir groves would be much more productive were we allowed to use shotguns with buckshot instead of centerfire rifles.

Having used the shotgun to harvest everything from rabbits and squirrels to bullfrogs to turkeys and geese and even deer, I have come to the firm conclusion that a shotgun is a far more effecitve tool in most cases for putting meat in the pot than any other firearm I have. Combine that with its inimitable self defense capabilities, and I can think of nothing that is more suitable as a multi purpose firearm. The only reasons I would consider having a 22 lr as well are simple economics and practicing marksmanship, and maybe detection avoidance with the right ammo. Your statement that shotguns have a very limited effective range is, in my experience, narrow-minded, ethics and sportsmanship notwithstanding. It is a versatile firearm with a far greater effective range than any 22 lr and certainly capable of far more than any centerfire rifle cartridge out there. That it is not specialized for any one sort of hunting/shooting situation should not be viewed so much as a compromise or debtriment, but that it is more suited as a multi-purpose firearm, capable of doing pretty much all but the most extreme tasks with the right ammunition comobination. It is the jack of all trades that is more likely to put meat on the table or repel an attack in more situations than any other commercially available configuration currently available to the majority of us.

If marksmanship and opportunity were the only criteria by which to measure the success rate of the use of a given firarm configuration, then perhaps, in that limited context, your suggestion may bear some validity. In most practical scenarios, I would say such is not the case.

ben... To add to your point about the 12 gauge. In the "Cartridges of the World, 6th ed" I believe Frank Barnes ( I could be wrong on the name) stated that if he could have only one gun to take with him anywhere in the world it would be the 12 gauge. That is good enough for me.

Several companies make this style weapon ...some with the ability to own multiple barrels for ONE action. Which in my book ...makes this kind of thing a "nice to have" in the arsenal. Don't know if Rossi offers interchangeable barrels. If so, I'd start with one and add others...given the attractive pricing.
I also think "spitting distance" is under-estimating the usefulness of the shotgun. I think out to a 100yds though is about as far as I'd want to go. A shotguns' shortcoming is really in that the ammo is bulkier and heavier than most rifles. Certainly you can carry more 7.62x39 or .223 ammo than 12 ga or 20 ga ammo for same weight and size. Of course ...if carrying a lot of ammo isn't a concern ...
But $129 for something that goes "bang" is tough to pass up.
I wouldn't ...personally...chose to have multiple single shot weapons ... but one with several barrels in different calibers I could see as useful.
There's no perfect weapon ...just degrees of compromise.

I love how the posts in these threads try to blur the lines between practical hunting tool, survival firearm, and weapon.

We've gone from casual to assault rifles in less than 20 posts hehehe.

BTW: Rossi does make interchangable barrel guns and they're supposedly quite good. So far it's the only gun maker I can find with a rifle that will to .22LR, rimfire, and shells in one package. They call it the Trifecta but I can only find it in youth sizes (ie: small calibers/gauges).

They've been making stubby loads for 12 gauge for a few years that I know of. These are 12 gauge shells that are about an inch long. They are great for closer in work and still pack enough wallup to be handy for homestyle self defense. I'd reckon a handful of those aren't too much more inconvenient than an equivalent in 7.62 x 39, except for maybe packaging. There too, it wouldn't be too awful to have a speedloader tube with 15 of those stubbys in it to jack into the magazine of my pump gun, assuming they don't jam up the shell feeder when cycling.

Also referred to as 12 gauge kurtz ammo.

With decent sights on a good shotgun with the proper ammo, 150 yards is fairly doable, 200 yards would be pushing it, but then I seldom take shots beyond that range for anything other than target practice. 90% of all the critters I ever killed were taken inside of 50 yards anyways, even with my big 338 win mag and my 7mm mag. 100 yards is a pretty realistic limit for ballistic projectiles out of a shotgun in any case.

If it works, it works. If it don't, more probably wasn't going to do much better.

Rossi is now owned by Tarus and I have heard that QC is improving rapidly. Their older break action shotguns were very workable, if not pretty. Like others have said, it could be fun and it might add a caliber you don't have. Do you need it? Probably not. I would probably go for a Thompson Center which will do rimfire as well as centerfire, but that is just me.

Respectfully,

Jerry

I wonder if Thompson/Center rifles are restricted or prohibited in Canada...does anybody know? You can turn a long gun into a pistol in about 3 minutes flat. If not, I think I'd like one.

I would watch out for combination, often 'drilling', interchangeable barrel and other specialty guns.

IMHO unless weigh and bulk are huge and critical issues your almost always better off with two or more separate guns.

Reliability can be an issue. To the extent a combo gun uses common parts

Just my random 2 cents worth, have or have had .22 to .375H&H, .410 to 10 gauge.

.22: many rounds of ammo in small volume, inexpensive guns available, wide range of guns available. BUT limited “knock-down” power (yes I know about the polar bears, not me, not on purpose)

SKS: inexpensive, readily available, nearly indestructible, reasonably accurate, BUT heavy. Ammo cheap, fair selection of bullets, generally non-reloadable steel cases (policing brass is probably not a priority with the primary end-users). I keep one on the tractor for coyotes, etc., hasn’t failed yet.

We have a similar Rossi (interchangeable .22 and .410 barrels) to start the kids on. Light, reasonably accurate, hasn’t blown up yet after hundreds (? thousands) of rounds. I wouldn’t want this as my only gun, though.

Sounds like good logic from a guy who has been around, I agree with you Ben.

I have hunted a lot over the past 30 years and agree than the vast majority of game that my partners or I have harvested has been under 100 yards.

A high-powered rifle cartridge with decent bullet weight/velocity would be my first choice for big game hunting but in North American shotgun-only areas 100,000's of deer/bears are cleanly taken each year.

I often use a combination gun to near silently take small game with the .22 rimfire but have the shotgun option to collect flying game birds or big game with a slug. The shotgun is also effective when I have this gun in camp for bear protection. With a shotgun you vary the ammunition to match the situation.

I am currently shopping for a Baikal O/U Combination Gun in 30-06/12ga. to use when I go grouse hunting in the fall, for at the same time the local moose season is on. Seen here http://www.baikalcanada.com/rifles_combo_94.htm
Not the most graceful double ever made, but it is a good deal for a utility firearm.

Mike

OMG. I knew you could buy Baikal's at many of the shops in !dmonton but I didn't know there were so many...thanks for the link Mike!

Both the .22LR/20ga and 30-06/12ga are rifles I wanted to get a look at.

Hi Hacksaw,

I have used Baikal shotguns many times but never their rifles or combo guns. The combo in .22/20ga is a little heavy/overbuilt at 8.4 lbs but this weight is not overly heavy for the larger rifle caliber combo's. The old wood-stocked Savage Model 24 Combo Guns were about 2 lbs lighter, check out the gun shows and online for them.

I met a fellow in the bush 2 falls ago who was hunting grouse and calf moose with a Baikal Combo rifle/shotgun. The odds of getting a calf moose here are very low but this guy was happy to get his limit of birds every day while walking through the old clearcuts, and you never know when your moose luck will change.

When I am hunting big game specifically (eg have an adult Val. Tag) I use one of my tuned high-powered rifles but for general woods-bumming around here, one of these combo's would be fun.

Mike