• The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
    Price is $300 $250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
    Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.

  • Today marks the 24th anniversary of 9/11. I pray that this nation does not forget the loss of lives from this horrible event. Yesterday conservative commentator Charlie Kirk was murdered, and I worry about what is to come. Please love one another and your family in these trying times - Spark

2 months in deep wilderness which rifle

Sorry guys, I wasn't attempting to pick any fights. It's definitely true that the range of the .30-30 will still show over the .357. I just wanted to show some data that the .357 mag turns into a whole new beast out of a longer barrel. Definitely capable of short range medium sized game and muzzle energies near the .30-30. Then you also have the ability to use .38's on small game.

Both the .30-30 and .357 are great rounds, and each have their own pro's and con's.
 
I would not hesitiate to take a deer with a 20 gauge slug, a quick search showed many favourable reviews of it.
In deep woods you are going to be shooting at relativly close distances anyway, and these things are pretty accurate out to 100 yards. With all the variety available for ammo these days a 20 guage would be an excellent survival gun, but I would still love to have a good old .22lr, mainly for how small and light the ammo is.
 
runningboar said:
I don't think Chris McCandless did a very good job of anything, except to prove he was egotistical, arrogant and ignorant. You might be surprised just how little food it takes to "survive" for 4 months. Many woodsman have proved the worth of the 22 lr in the early years of the 20th century to present. BTW Welcome aboard. :D Chris
Click to expand...

I figured bringing up McCandles would stir the pot.;)
Yes he was ignorant, and fatally so. But his ego was no more inflated than many of us who entertain survivalist notions. As for arrogance, he was fully aware of the possibilty of his death when he set out. My own opinion is that he had a bit of a death-wish. In the end he overcame his personal demons and misanthropy, albiet a little late to do him any good. Before bringing judgment against McCandles, stop and think about how the average person would view your own personal plans and ambitions to do anything similar. If he had simply spent an afternoon fording the river (BTW, this is a most valuable and often overlooked skill) he probably would have survived and been considered a (foolhardy) hero.

Anyway, in order to keep from hijacking this thread I am going to say that I really like my 10/22. It is reliable, cheap, light, accurate, easy to work on and I could carry several hundred rounds without even noticing. As to the question of larger game, I have personally seen a good sized whitetail doe that was taken by a single shot from a 22lr (but don't tell anybody). Good stalking skills are almost always more valuable than killing power.

Thanks for the welcome, these forums are great!
 
Had McCandless possessed just the sliver of common sense required to buy and be able to read a USGS topo map of the area he died in, we'd never have heard of him.

IIRC, there was and is a clearly map marked cable hand car suspended across the river he found himself "trapped" behind. It was about three miles upstream from where he died and again, if I have it right, he came within a quarter mile of stumbling across it when he'd tried to depart and couldn't/wouldn't ford the melt off swollen river.

That so many admire a Darwin Award winner who so heavily depended on luck rather than skill and sense, is remarkable.
 
Yep, I admire him, or at least his ambitions.
That so many pass judgement on him is what I find rather remarkable.
 
My objection is to the elevation of McCandless to sainthood, not about his ambitions or pretensions, which were quaint in an immature way.

Taking off his halo what do we have?

I see a kid who abandoned a loving family to wondering about his well being, who set out to emulate the better equipped Thoreau, and greenhorned his way to his own death by poisoning and starvation in the Alaskan bush.

The only true larger lesson offered by his self-martyrdom is "don't be as stupid and selfish as I was."

I see the same elegiac praise for dead mountain climbers from their friends and colleagues--as if dying in a snow cave after badly misjudging the weather for a lightly equipped summit try was some sort of rush or quasi-spiritual pursuit.

Others, myself included, call that type of risk taking foolhardy. There is nothing wrong with mountain climbing or tackling the Alaskan bush for the spring, but doing it underequipped and/or lacking the knowledge to do it without grave risk to one's self or potential rescuers isn't admirable.

Maybe doing volunteer SAR off and on for a decade when I was footloose gives me a short fuse for guys like McCandless.
 
I am sure she felt differently then I do, but I admire anyone who lives their lives the way they want to, though I certainly do not extend this to murderers and such, as was mentioned in the other thread. (which is where this derail belongs, sorry OP)
 
20 sxs or a single shot if weight is an issue. It lets me shooting games on the wing, while a couple of 20g slugs for protection.
 
If I had to choose from what I had, I would probably go for my CZ452. It's incredibly accurate. I'm talking .25" groups at 50 yards. Assuming the animal stayed still, I could shoot it through the eye, no problem, every single time. I'd be deadly against those still animals once I found them.

If I were in some area with bigger game, I'd go for my Keltec SU-16. .223 semi-auto with a red-dot sight. Not nearly as accurate as the CZ but it's portable, easy to shoot very quickly, and has a built in bipod (which sucks).

If I could choose anything out there, I'd go for that M6. That looks sweet.
 
Wildewinds said:
. . .If I were in some area with bigger game, I'd go for my Keltec SU-16. .223 semi-auto with a red-dot sight. Not nearly as accurate as the CZ but it's portable, easy to shoot very quickly, and has a built in bipod (which sucks). . . .
Click to expand...
How has your SU-16 been for reliability? Would it be more accurate with a regular scope or is the optic not the limiting factor in its accuracy? TIA
 
Hmmm... 2 months, deep wilderness, one rifle. I'd have to say any of the various .22 LR rifles. Anywhere from here to the Mississippi, I'd be comfortable with that, and considering the game I'd be eating would be small, that would be the best choice.
 
I have a CZ452 in .22 and .177, extremely accurate rifles, the .22 seemed to like pretty much anything, I haven't found enough ammo for the .177 yet but it seems like it can be capable out to about 150-200 yards pretty easily, with a good scope, it's a hot little round. I was one holing at a little under 50 yards.
 
I got to thinking more about this after my initial reply, and even though I'd probably be fine with the .22LR, I'd probably go with a Marlin in .357 or .44 Magnum, now that I think about it. With either of those, I feel I'd have the maximum versatility and capability from small game to large (reasonably), with a reasonable weight of ammo, particularly if it was the .357. While, as someone said, the .357 HEAVY is NOT going to equal the performance of the .30-30, particularly over longer ranges, for close in, I believe out of a 20 inch barrel it would work just fine. And you'd still have .38 Spc. for small game without destroying ALL the meat in the process.
 
ruger 10/22 stainless with ghost ring sights ,and stinger ammo,all my game would be close shots and for big animals,close up shots placed properly will kill some BIG GAME.We butcher beef cattle all the time and a 2500 pound animal is no match for a .22 stinger right in the head.key for making killing shots is to draw an imaginary X from right ear to left eye ,and left ear to right eye,but the bullet in the center of that X and you will have an instant clean kill.
 
I think I'd go for a marlin in 44 magnum. Good knockdown power but still able to get small game. And of course, a good peep site.

Sam
 
Liam Ryan said:
I have a CZ452 in .22 and .177, extremely accurate rifles, the .22 seemed to like pretty much anything, I haven't found enough ammo for the .177 yet but it seems like it can be capable out to about 150-200 yards pretty easily, with a good scope, it's a hot little round. I was one holing at a little under 50 yards.
Click to expand...

Liam Ryan, 22ammo.com has .17 from CCI, Eley, Federal and Remington. They sell individual boxes, bricks and bulk.
 
ras said:
How has your SU-16 been for reliability? Would it be more accurate with a regular scope or is the optic not the limiting factor in its accuracy? TIA
Click to expand...

It's quite reliable. I can't remember it misfiring on me yet.

I am a stickler for accuracy. I put the SU-16 on my benchrest setup and used a 24x scope on it to see what it would do at 100 yards. It's like 3 to 4 MOA. Decent enough for some stuff, but not an "accurate" gun by any means, however it's better than what you'll get from a typical Ruger Mini-14 (what I consider its main competition).

Thus, I put the red dot sight on it and it's a great match. Fun and fast to shoot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top