Survival Rifle or Air Rifle

Iboschi

Iboschi

Joined
Sep 17, 2009
Messages
2,692
I was just organizing some "gear" and came across a Diana RWS .177 Air Rifle I received in trade years ago. This thing packs a decent wollop for an air rifle. It's muzzle velocity is somewhere around 1200 + FPS; not bad for a pellet gun, and it's accurate as hell.

It occurred to me that this might even outdo a .22 Caliber Rifle for a TEOTWAWKI situation in terms of long term usefulness. I can carry more rounds, and don't need to rely on gun powder or need to be concerned about getting rounds wet. The .177 pellets would be easier to make if I needed to make my own at some point.

Anyway, just thought it was an interesting concept for a survival rifle. I am interested in what the rest of you think. In the meantime, I might stock up on some pellets.
 
Sounds like a fun shooter. I bet it costs as much as a .22 and I don't think it would have more power. The velocity might be up their but it is a much lighter projectile. so less knock down power.
 
Last edited:
Funny I was looking at getting one of those air rifles for the same reason to replace my .22 I think your way of thinking is smart but not only because I think the same way. :)
 
I think you'd be better off with a .22. It will have more impact than a pellet gun; especially at range. Also will have better range.
 
The main problem with most high quality, powerful air rifles is that they weigh more than just about any .22LR, most of the air guns run 9lbs-11lbs or more.

For a survival gun, something I'm packing around, I want it as light as possible.

High power air guns also need more maintenance than a beater .22lr would need.
 
Just to clarify, I do have a 10/22 and love it. I'm just thinking, perhaps the .177 Air Rifle has more LONG TERM viability if the grid came down. They do cost about as much as a .22, but like I said, I received it in trade. The knockdown power is significant for what it is. The muzzle velocity is nearly the same as a .22, and 500 rounds come in a small tin, the size of a can of Copenhagen chewing tobacco (dip). I could carry easily 5 times the .22 rounds in the same size compartment if I was bugging out. I am starting to think it is a viable option. I almost never have to clean or maintain the thing and it still keeps plugging away.
 
Can't survive on the squirrels and rabbits that an air rifle will kill, not enough fat/energy in the meat.

Good luck tryin to make a .177 pellet that will fly straight.

Best bet is still a .22/.223/.308, ammo wise.
 
You literally don't know the answer to this, till you have hunted extensively with both weapons.

The .22 Short is A Lot more gun than any common .177 or .22 caliber air rifle. Renew your hunting licence, do some "research".

My personal experience:
They's two different tools(air rifle=smallish hammer, .22 = medium sized hammer), and one does not replace the other.

Do not take my word for this, go forth, kill it and grill it.
 
Great thinking and the addition of silencer would really add survival value. The pellets are also MUCH lighter and the Diana is accurate, and very accurate once you find the right pellet. If you Google the UK air gun sites, you will usually find a number of tests showing results of gun/pellets, which is good start. Air guns in .177s are the most accurate with the flattest trajectory which in turns leads to better shot placement; essential when you are using a low energy projectile (compared to a .22LR for example), which is why they are the choice of all top competitors.
 
I like the idea of a pellet rifle for that role but prefer .22 caliber. I'm stocked up on Beeman Crow-magnum hollow point pellets as they seem to be the most accurate in my Benjamin, have a decent weight and hit hard. I have no problem taking squirrels at 35 yards.
 
I think you have to ask yourself "why am I carrying a gun?".
If it is to kill things to eat, is an air rifle going to take down pigs, deer, sheep, goats, etc?
If it is to kill things before they hurt you, is it gong to take down dogs, bears, wolves, zombies, etc?

I feel the best WTSHTF weapon is a bow. Arrows take some skill to make, sure, but they require much less resource than a bullet or pellet. Twenty years after TSHTF, will there be bullets, casings, primer, powder, bullet presses, etc? Possibly, but I think it is more likely that there won't. There will be trees (unless the S REALLY HTF in which case we aren't going to be here, so why worry. :-)

Additionally, bows are almost silent. I imagine that the sound of a firearm is going to bring the zombies running.

Psychologically, carrying a ranged weapon puts you in the mental attitude of "predator", which isn't the best for survival. "Prey" is a better mental state. It is safer (and uses less energy) to avoid bad things rather than attack them. It is safer (and uses less energy) to trap food animals rather than hunt them.

Just my $0.10.
B
 
I think it would be useful to a limit. If you can see small game and shoot it, it would be nearly indispensable. I've shot some pretty high powered air rifles, but never anything in the 1000+ FPS range. I had a Daisy that did about 750 FPS, and it had significant take down power with a good pellet. With a properly zeroed scope it was pretty easy to shoot birds and field mice and such at about 50 to 100 yards without scaring many of them off like the report of a firearm would.

If you're talking about a survival situation at all (the end or the world, you're poor, etc) then I think an air rifle would be practically irreplaceable for getting food. As long as you can spot small bird like game and shoot them you can sustain yourself; given the fact that a 2400 pack of steel BBs is about $5, I would say that there's no way that a .22 LR could really compare to that unless you were sure you were in an area where you could get larger sized game than just birds. I mean, I would suspect that a 1000 FPS air rifle could take down rabbit, and I've took down coyote with a .22.

If in reality you were truly fucked and had to hunt pidgeons and sparrows, an air rifle would defintely be more valuable than a .22 simply for the comparison in powder usage to air, and how much force you really need., Then when you consider the caliber and velocity difference to a .22 and a .17 caliber round at 1200 FPS ( which is the cap of most .22 I believe ) and a 1000 FPS .17 caliber you realize there's that there's really not much game that a .22 could take advantage of that a high powered air rifle couldn't.

If you want to bring pure physics into this I'm sure people here could help to compare the average mass and velocity of a .22 round versus a .177 round at the peak of their respective velocities. I would suspect that a .22 would only have moderately higher energy, but range would still wind up being a bit higher.

At the end I think you have a pretty valid point. I think taking advantage of air and the stifling amount of ammunition you can store on yourself with an air rifle would out-weight the power and range of a .22. A 2400 pack of Daisy steel BBs is $5, and weighs about 1 lbs; storing that on your persons with a good air rifle would give you far more ammunition and opportunity to kill small game than a .22 in my eyes.

I think it really comes down to just how big of game you can hunt and how effective .22 is against that. If you can get large game with something like a 10/22 in a "the end of the world scenario" then I think that 20 or 30 rounds of .22 is a far more effective use than an air rifle wound be against rabbit, bird, etc. Where I live (and I suspect everywhere else) small game is much more common than large though; add to that the relatively low noise of an air rifle, and you have a very good hunting implement.

Then again... 10/22 Will take down those human critters in that kind of scenario, with proper round placement. This might be a bit of a thread hijack, but imagine in the end of the world scenario all you had is a 10/22 or an air rifle and you see a white tail deer in the meadow before you. I would think that you'd be happier with the chances of hitting it in the head enough times with a 10/22 than with an air rifle. I've had a 10/22 with a 30 rd magazine and a zeroed 8x scope, and those things are mean. I've never been deer hunting, but I don't know how it could do much better than the cinder block I disintegrated.
 
the RWS Dianna is a good gun from everything i've ever heard about it.
pellets are cheap. it might be handy for controlling pests like rats, but traps take less work to do that job. harvesting squab AKA: eliminating pigeons it could do.

not sure i'd want to take it "into the field"

a .22 will put Bambi in the freezer. an air rifle won't... at least not a .177. if you had "the mother of all air rifles: in .22 it might. dunno, but .22 will and has.

it just ain't legal.

neither is snaring deer. :eek:

but if it's *survival* are you worried about eating, or not pissing off the game warden?

DISCLAIMER: we're discussing a hypothetical survival situation, i hope some mod doesn't freak out because i mentioned unapproved methods for harvesting game in passing. just to be clear, i'm NOT recommending that anyone do any poaching now. :rolleyes:
 
In a true ETOWAWKI situation, I think that a quality, high powered, spring action air rifle would make a find supplement to conventional firearms for use in pest control, small game harvesting and even target practice. I would not want one instead of a convential firearm in any sort of survival situation, however.
 
Great opinions and a great discussion! Let's keep the ideas flowing. It's interesting to note, we're not all in agreement, but some concepts seem to solidify. I like the Bow idea also, but for the sake of simplicity, lets keep it between rifles and air rifles.

As to the take down power, for giggles, I just went outside and shot (the report is super quiet! It's like a puff/clang sound) at a galvanized steel garbage can from 30 ft away and the pellet passed clean through one side. I'm sure a well placed shot could down anything dog sized and smaller.

If anyone has a reasonable test to test penetration power I am game. I don't know if the pellet could penetrate a human (sized) skull, but would be interested to know WITHOUT trying. The garbage can experiment would lead me to think it is POSSIBLE but, not definitively. I'm sure it would penetrate far enough for a heart shot up to 4 or 7 inches into pig or human type tissue, but I'm more curious about actual penetration power. Any inexpensive test suggestions (I live inside an URBAN jungle and probably won't be getting any dirt time this month fyi)?
 
I've got a savage .22 that has a pretty good sized cavity inside the buttstock. 2 phillips screws hold the butt plate on. I put a firesteel, 50 rounds, oil, and a spare magazine in there. It's my "survival" rifle. Can't think of a situation I'd be in where I'd have it and need it, but I like little projects like that.

Come to think of it, I should probably add some more goodies sometime.
 
I've taken down dozens of squirrels and small game with a good air rifle. On my farm I favor a typical powder rifle. But in town, the pellet can take care of whatever I need to take care of at relatively short range, without the risk of injury to others from far flying projectiles.
 
Iboschi said:
I was just organizing some "gear" and came across a Diana RWS .177 Air Rifle I received in trade years ago. This thing packs a decent wollop for an air rifle. It's muzzle velocity is somewhere around 1200 + FPS; not bad for a pellet gun, and it's accurate as hell.

It occurred to me that this might even outdo a .22 Caliber Rifle for a TEOTWAWKI situation in terms of long term usefulness. I can carry more rounds, and don't need to rely on gun powder or need to be concerned about getting rounds wet. The .177 pellets would be easier to make if I needed to make my own at some point.

Anyway, just thought it was an interesting concept for a survival rifle. I am interested in what the rest of you think. In the meantime, I might stock up on some pellets.
Click to expand...

1. Keeping it around on a fixed retreat, no problem, glad you own an air rifle. I own some too. Setting out on foot, no way would I take it. A 22 rimfire is much more versatile. In the ballistic spectrum, and also in the noise spectrum. With an air rifle, to move an projectile requires lots of moving air-noise.
2. Carry 22 shorts for game gettin. You can fit 200 in a 100 cci box.
rounds getting wet? http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=770524&highlight=immersion Put em in a water proof container.
3. Keep spare parts for the airgun?
4. Always remember that a gun isn't always the solution to the problem. That type of airgun is a single shot game gettin gun. Traps work all the time. What's going to kill you and end your survival?

You may want to read these two threads, they're pretty good IMHO about the subject

http://www.hoodswoods.net/IVB/index.php?showtopic=36060&hl=Quality&st=0

http://www.hoodswoods.net/IVB/index.php?showtopic=40679

-scott
 
Iboschi said:
Great opinions and a great discussion! Let's keep the ideas flowing. It's interesting to note, we're not all in agreement, but some concepts seem to solidify. I like the Bow idea also, but for the sake of simplicity, lets keep it between rifles and air rifles.

As to the take down power, for giggles, I just went outside and shot (the report is super quiet! It's like a puff/clang sound) at a galvanized steel garbage can from 30 ft away and the pellet passed clean through one side. I'm sure a well placed shot could down anything dog sized and smaller.

If anyone has a reasonable test to test penetration power I am game. I don't know if the pellet could penetrate a human (sized) skull, but would be interested to know WITHOUT trying. The garbage can experiment would lead me to think it is POSSIBLE but, not definitively. I'm sure it would penetrate far enough for a heart shot up to 4 or 7 inches into pig or human type tissue, but I'm more curious about actual penetration power. Any inexpensive test suggestions (I live inside an URBAN jungle and probably won't be getting any dirt time this month fyi)?
Click to expand...

Coconut.

"The short qualifies as the most quiet of useful hunting rounds, making a pop a little louder than a pellet rifle. It's small size and mild report belie its deadliness. In solid plywood tests, the high velocity solid will go through 1.5 inches at 25 yards, as compared to the high velocity long rifle at 2 inches at that distance. A penetration of .5 inch of plywood is enough to cause death in a vital area hit on a person. Documented fatalities with the 22 Short have occured at 600 yards."

-1993 gun digest
 
the "devils elbow" thread caused me to think about the Savage 24C .22lr/20ga over under I used to have....in a scenario that involves on foot, non vehicle supported trekking, where weight of firearm/ammunition must be evaluated as to their possible gain... heavy shot shells don't make sense for the practical value of harvesting winged foul on a weight/nutrition value scale, but as a defensive caliber,...large game/large toothy critter equalizer, the 20ga with a couple packs of slugs or buck shot coupled with a 500pack of .22lr might be the best solution... that said, I foolishly sold it, so my SW41, G23, and .223 carbine have the mags and ammo prepositioned in my 72 hr kit...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top