Hi Gentleman,
First of all, I’d like to offer an apology, if I misread the purpose of this forum,
“The Survivalist Boards”. I answered Nuada’s question,
“Utility camp rifle bad decision?” based on that assumption and his question, whether the SKS in 7.62x39mm would be a good choice as a camp rifle, ie. defense from animals and predators (2 and 4 legged) and if it would be a better choice than a 7mm Rem Mag.
The majority of you focused on answering Nuada’s question. Some disagreed with what I said and I respect your right to do so. Those that disagreed with me and decided that instead of offering evidence to support their disagreement, instead decided to disparaged my character; accusing me of being 12 years old, gleaning my experiencing from playing a video game, etc. I invite to submit evidence supporting their opinions that contradict my own. Or at least say you disagree with some common courtesy for your fellows.
The SKS is a much better choice than a bolt gun. Predators, both two legged and 4 legged can be dealt with efficiently with the 7.62x39mm round. Anything the 30/30 can do, the 7.62x39 can do better. You were right to sell the 7mm Mag and you should probably sell the .243 and get an AK next or a suppressed 22 LR for small game.
28 Elephants Killed in Cameroon by AK-47-Wielding Poachers
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/wor...n2/world/28-elephants-killed-in-cameroon-by-ak-47-wielding-poachers-361724.html
I disagree on running soft points though, as penetration rules the day and always has. Gun writers and ammunition companies may disagree, but African hunters do not, as they mostly run solids when they hunt big game and you should too. Many elephants have been quickly killed with full auto AK fire by poachers. Grizzly Bears are not Godzilla, 10 rounds of just about anything (except 22lr) are going to do them in. The trick is to use enough gun, so they don't kill you too.
This brings us to another important point; in a survival situation, you need to forget about being "Elmer Fudd"; Hunting Licenses, Tags and "Hunter Ethics" need to go out the window. Killing prey needs to be done quickly and efficiently. In Alaska, the Inuit hunt Caribou with Mini-14's and blast and entire magazine into the herd and skin/eat every animal that falls dead. They don't care about how many they wound or if animals suffer needlessly. It’s about being quick, efficient and survival. .223 is cheap and available.
Of course if you are going on a hunting trip to Alaska, you are better served by a 30-06, 300 Win Mag, 338 Win Mag. No guide is going to let you go hunting with a .223. If you travel to Africa to hunt the “Big-5”, you’re looking at 375H&H as minimum and some countries you will require you to use more gun than that for pachyderms.
Perhaps animals can tell the difference between being shot by a 7.62x39 with a 123 grain ball ammo vs. a 30/30 with 170 grain soft points. I understand there is an argument to be made for heavier expanding rounds for game. Undoubtedly the heavier projectile may drive deeper and penetrate better than a bullet of the same construction and of lighter weight. The question ten becomes; how does the 170 grain soft point (30/30) perform vs the 123 ball (7.62x39) ammo. I haven’t tested it myself, but I suspect the depth of penetration is similar. Which was my point. Disagree if you like, but evidence would be welcome. Here’s as close as I can find to an “Apples to Apples” comparison between JSP in the 30/30 and a JSP 7.62x39:
30/30 160 grain Hornady Soft Point = 17.5 inches penetration, expansion amount .316 inches
http://www.brassfetcher.com/30-30 Winchester/30-30 Winchester 10% gelatin results.pdf
7.62x39 123 grain soft points = 12.3 to 14 inches penetration, expansion amount .291 to .314 inches
http://www.brassfetcher.com/7.62x39mm/7.62x39mm 10% gelatin results.pdf
Polar bear killed near village in Interior Alaska
By Mary Beth Smetzer
http://newsminer.com/news/2008/mar/2...ed-fort-yukon/
A polar bear wandering around the outskirts of the Interior village of Fort Yukon, 250 miles inland from its normal coastal habitat, was spotted eating lynx carcasses Thursday morning and was killed later in the day because of safety concerns.
The bear was first spotted outside a cabin on the edge of town by Peter John, said Tony Carroll, who had recently been skinning lynx at the cabin.
Most people didn’t believe him, Carroll said, but as word spread around town, more than a half dozen hunters began tracking the bear.
Zeb Cadzow, maintenance director at the Council of Athabascan Tribal Government, took off work after lunch to join in the hunt. “There’s usually grizzly around this time of year,” he said. “You want to get rid of it because it’s hungry.”
The men tracked the bear three miles out of town to the Porcupine River, where it moved onto a river island. At that point, most of the hunters returned to Fort Yukon for a sled dog race, leaving Cadzow, 30, and Paul Herbert, 60, to continue the hunt. “We assumed we were chasing a grizzly bear,” Herbert said.
Cadzow concurred, thinking the white description meant it was an albino bear or a grizzly covered in frost. While Herbert waited at one end of the island, Cadzow, on foot, went into the brush tracking the bear.
Suddenly, the bear came out from under a brush pile about 10 yards away. It charged straight at Cadzow,
who was carrying an AR-15, a rifle similar to the U.S. Army’s M-16.
The encounter was so close, Cadzow said, he didn’t have time to lift and sight the rifle.
“I shot from the hip, seven or eight times,” he said. “If I had gotten it to my shoulder, it (bear) would have been on top of me. It happened so quick, by the time it was down, it was about 10 feet from my feet.” According to the hunters, the young female bear appeared to be in good health and wasn’t starving.
The hunters contacted the Department of Fish and Game in Fairbanks on Thursday and are delivering the hide and head today so biologists can have a closer look at the bear. It will be sent to the Marine Mammal division of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for further study.
After perusing some photographs Thursday evening, **** Shideler, a Fish and Game wildlife biologist who studies North Slope grizzly bears, is in cautious agreement.
“I’m not 100 percent sure, but it sure looks like a polar bear. The ear set looks right, so does the head profile, and the feet look pretty big which is pretty typical (of polar bears),” Shideler said.
“It’s definitely not a grizzly. The only other possibility is a hybrid. I’m leaning pretty far towards polar bear,” he said. “It’s a super interesting bear no matter what it turns out to be.”
The Fort Yukon hunters and the village of more than 900 people are still in a state of disbelief that a polar bear wandered so far south.
“I think all 900 people have been by my house today,” said Cadzow, who spent the rest of Thursday skinning the bear hide.
Townspeople in the Yukon River village have been fielding calls from friends and relatives around the state since word about the polar bear has spread.
“It’s quite a shock to our town,” wrote Bonnie Thomas in an e-mail. “Our oldest elder, Rosalie Joseph, 102, passed away. She must have some powerful medicine to bring a polar bear to us.”
Inuit Hunters
I didn't see the show, Yukon Men, but I did spend quite a bit of time in Western Alaska. I was in the Alaska National Guard, and did my time with the Eskimo BNs. as XO of A co 1/297th Inf on St Lawerence, and CO of C co, 1/297 Inf. These people fed their families mostly by hunting, plus there weren’t many jobs. A lot of people's only income was their Guard Checks.
But, we keep ammo in all the village armories, mostly M-193, (55 gr Ball). So they bought what ever guns they could that shot 223 and they hunted whatever animal available with, from polar bear, seals, caribou, moose.........whatever.
Even used them on whales. You'd get 6-8 guys in a boat and they'd shoot the whale until they killed it, and then drag it to the village. I was at Brevic Mission one time when one of my sergeants and senior boat captain brought in a whale. A asked him how many times he shot it. He says "box and half of 458 and two and half boxes of 223.
Speaking of 458 WM, I was at Gamble (St Lawrence Island) when one of my guys showed me a 458 he traded some ivory for, but couldn't find ammo, nor could he afford it. On the south side of St Lawrence Island there was an old telegraph lead cable. I told the guy to get some chunks of that cable and I'd fix him up.
The next trip to the Island I bought a 458 bullet mold, and lee 458 size, and Lee loader for the 458 and plus primers and powder and showed him how to cast bullets, use tallow for lube, and load the shells for the 458. He got a lot of walrus' with that set up.
Anyway the Alaska natives don't use the best gun, they use the gun and ammo that's available. It's the white man that has to have the fancy rifles and super velocity ammo.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
Big heavy guns of limited fire power (yes sniper rifles too) have limited utility in a survival situation. You need to have a gun that can do it all, that can be carried all day. Optics can be good, if they are durable, in that they will extend the normal combat engagement distance of 250 yards, to 400 or so, giving you an advantage in hunting and defensive actions.
I stand by my opinion, the SKS is a better all-around choice for a
“The Camp Rifle” than the 7mm Rem Mag or any bolt gun. In addition, I also stand by my assertion that this rifle and the 7.62x39mm round is superior choice if one needs to harvest meat in a
survival situation; cost, availability of ammunition, quick follow-up shots make the SKS superior in my opinion.
I don’t know Nuada’s financial situation and wouldn’t presume to ask, as it’s none of my business. That being said, many of us (myself included) can only afford one rifle. This is not an intellectual exercise for us; it is a fact of life in the current economy. I know some are more fortunate and can afford several guns, each tailored to a specific task. I congratulate you on your prosperity and wish you well. Not everyone is like you though.
Regarding the corruption and the “Pay –to-Play” world of the “Gun Journalist”, I also stand by these comments. Free guns, free trips and cash, in exchange for good reviews, getting paid to write ad copy for the same manufactures whose products you review and paying (additional advertising fees) to get your gun on the cover of a magazine is pervasive. Does that mean everything they say is wrong, No. Just means I don’t trust them and everything they say, has to be taken with a grain of salt and verified. These are the same hacks that used to recommend carrying snake shot for defense in a revolver (mini shotgun?) and telling us hollow points were the best ammo to run in all pistols for self-defense, hunting, etc. No science here, just their “expert” opinions. I could go on, but it’s too depressing.
In any event, I always welcome constructive arguments that differ from my own, I rest I will now ignore.
