apocalypse armory

APOCALYPSE ARMORY


I wanted to save this one for Friday Fundamentals but I was coming up with a blank on what to write today so I had to go with this. The discussion started in the comments section and I got to chewing on the issue and it was the only thing on my mind. Basically, what is a brother to do for a frugal arsenal now that the World War Two bolt guns ( The Master Gunmaker's Guide To Building Bolt-action Rifles ) are no longer affordable? Essentially nothing has changed on my recommendations, other than if you followed them you would need an extra hundred bucks. The Lee-Enfield is still the best surplus bolt gun out there, and the Russian Commie bolt is still the cheapest one available. You can still get a rimfire or shotgun for a hundred bucks brand new, but those are usually supplemental guns rather than ones primary weapon. So, if you can only afford one gun as the primary defensive weapon, and it can’t be the equivalent of a New Guinean’s five year income, what do you choose? We here at the Bisonian Institute For Advanced Tightass Preparedness do not believe that you should just throw money at a problem. If we did that we would be like all the rest of the Pollyanna’s, gratefully taking your money for the next twenty years by telling you everything will be alright because nothing bad ever happens to people that take ten years to put aside a food storage system ( How to Develop a Low-Cost Family Food-Storage System ).

*

You all know why I love war surplus rifles ( Bolt Action Military Rifles of the World; The Full-Color Guide to All Your Favorite Vintage and Surplus Rifles ). They are solid and well built, capable of downing charging cavalry as you butt stroke your enemy after you bayonet them. Carbines are very useful for sending huge streams of lead downwind. In the near future, as commodities depletion jacks up ammo prices again, the cost of ammunition will be dear. Soon after that, no ammo will be available at all. First, it is priced above your pay grade, then it isn’t made anymore. Carbines are only a valid gun choice while the factories are humming along on cheap ore and oil ( hint- we’ve already started down the road where they don’t hum at all anymore ). Bolts, or semi’s which have been switched to manual reloading, are the only way to force yourself to conserve ammo. But now that surplus bolts are so much more expensive, does it make sense to buy them? I love bayonets ( GI Type M-9 Bayonet with Sheath ), but are they 100% necessary? Of course not. I wouldn’t feel too comfortable without one unless I had a revolver as back up, however. You can still buy those for a hundred bucks, with another hundred or so for the ammo. You should have a pistol anyway, regardless of main rifle choice.

*

If you are very poor, you only have one choice which is the Russian bolt for a hundred bucks. Another hundred gets you 400 rounds of ammo. That combined retail price is less than the jobber price of an Enfield rifle alone. Even if it isn’t your first choice, get it if that is all you will have when rioting starts tomorrow after a super volcano ( Super Volcano: The Ticking Time Bomb Beneath Yellowstone National Park ) or mass solar flare ( A Paranoid's Ultimate Survival Guide: Dust Mites to Meteorites, Tsunamis to Ticks, Killer Clouds to Jellyfish, Solar Flares to Salmonella ) erupts and suddenly changes everything ( the volcano might be a long shot but flares can happen anytime ). I don’t like the Russian bolt because of the crappy sights ( you must drill and tap for glass which makes it a not so affordable rifle anymore ) and because of the lack of a gas vent safety ( or whatever you call the feature that directs the gases from an exploding primer or case away from your face ). But it is less dangerous than having no rifle or ammunition. No, modern ammo is almost never a problem, but once you start improvising with paper cases and improvised mercury primers the lack of the safety might be bothersome. But, again, better than nothing.

*

Once you decide against a Russian bolt, everything pretty much cost the same. An Enfield, or Mauser, or modern single shot. Even perhaps a lever action. They all cost $225-$300. And once a rifle costs that much, isn’t the negatives of a surplus rifle more pronounced? Everything that you didn’t care about when the rifle was half the cost now is much more important. The ugly beat up exterior. The fact it was used and abused. The oddball ammo, the extreme weight ( which sucks marching with but is nice in hand to hand melees ). Beating up the cases by their sloppy action. Less tolerant machining ( the older guns used the expanding case to seal the breech while the new guns are so well made they are machined so fine the case doesn’t need to do that job- important when using homemade/improvised cases ). If you are going to spend $300, might other guns be a better choice? The single shot break open ( Crosman Quest 1000X Breakbarrel Air Rifle air rifle ) in .223 gives you the option of mid range sniping using enemy rounds. Some folks love the lever action for common pistol/carbine ammo. Others sport wood over pump action shotguns. Or whatever. The good thing about surplus guns drying up is that now you can buy modern rifles without feeling guilty about it ( “Damn the Gods! I know an Enfield is better than this toy but I felt I was special enough to raid the kids college fund- the little bastards would just drink all their brain cells to death anyway!” ). The bad thing is that the surplus bolts were so good at what they did that it is a shame you can’t afford them. Well, you can’t afford to overpay for their faults, anyway.

*

Financially, it now seems silly to overpay once for a rifle and then twice as you are buying oddball ammo ( does not apply to the Russian gun ). The modern guns at least are excused with the lure of far more affordable ammunition. So, if you won’t go with the Russian, my second choice would be the SKS ( AK/SKS Stripper Clips/20 Pack ) now. The Mausers seem to have become even scarcer than the Enfield ( I spent a whole $6 on an issue of Shotgun News and only found three Mausers- the Swiss bolt [ I’m sure not technically a Mauser ]( Shotgun News Shotgun News, 1 Yr/6 Issues ), the Mitchell’s Mausers and a no paperwork pre-1899 beat to crap unit ) and I imagine no cheaper. If you spend the $225-250 on an SKS and change it to a bolt by disabling the gas reload you have a nice military bolt gun. Simple, robust, nice sights, almost affordable. And the ammo is as cheap as its going to get. Creekmore went with the AK-74 ( The AK-47 and AK74 Kalashnikov Rifles and Their Variations )( AK74 Side Mount with Double Rails ) and I believe the ammo is both cheaper and the gun more accurate but there is the question of future ammo availability which is not as much of a problem with the 7.62x39. If you go with that one, will you just be repeating the “one time cheap, future unavailable” issue the Enfields and Mausers gave us? Obviously, keep in mind the change from battle rifle round to carbine round and make sure it is feasible for your terrain.

END

The Official Bison Web Site http://www.bisonpress.com/
*
My e-mail is jimd303@netzero.com
*
Anyone can submit a guest article. No minimum word length, no writing skill necessary ( just get the idea across ). You retain copyright ( this must be your original writing ) and I’ll just use the once. I’ve yet to turn down an article, just don’t use the N Bomb or libel another that can sue me. Send by e-mail ( please, label as “guest article” so I can find it easily later ). Payment will be your removal from my enemies list.
*
Please support Bison by buying through the Amazon links in each article. You can purchase anything, not just the linked item. Enter Amazon through my item link and then go to whatever other item you desire. As long as you don’t leave Amazon until after the order is placed, I get credit for your purchase. Thank you.