Originally Posted by ltppowell
Originally Posted by The_Real_Hawkeye
Originally Posted by 260Remguy
Why would you purposely take a bolt gun to a fight?

The U.S. Army recognized the value of the auto-loader in combat during WW1 via the Pedersen Device and that was over 100 years ago.

If I'm going to a gun fight that I can plan for, I hope to have an AR and a lot of loaded 30-round magazines in my kit.

The thought experiment assumes you have no other choice. So, the apocalypse happened. You're unarmed. You find an abandoned farm house, and inside there's an extensive collection of bolt guns, along with appropriate ammo. Which one?


In that scenario, you pick the most accurate rifle, which means a Remington or a Savage. Hopefully, they have a Remington. It's not like you're gonna impress the enemy with novel bullshit.


My opinion the Remington and Savage unless significantly modified are much less capable than a Mauser, Springfield or Mosin. I mean if all you are going to get caught up in is sniping and running then maybe but otherwise the stock SA Remington is a pain to quickly load the stock magazine, the older staggered magazine Savages much better than the centerfeeds. There is usually more to it than sniping and running. Beyond that saying the average Remington is significantly more accurate than anything else and enough to make a difference is ludicrous.

Dog I rescued in January

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]