Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Rimfires Survival Guns...Hype or Legit

Can't say much about the ar-7 type guns. I do have an m-6 which I got before they went out of production. Once I got used to the funny trigger I found it shoots as well as any other 22 I've ever owned with the exception of the Anschutz I used to use for smallbore competition (and my 39a). The rifle barrel and shotgun barrel on mine shot closer to the same point of aim on my m6 than the rifle and shotgun barrels did on the Savage 24F I used to own. It shoots pretty good groups with the little .410 slugs too. When I'm hiking during small game season (as opposed to actively hunting) I sometimes put the m6 in a NEF takedown case that I found on clearance for $5.00 and stuff it in my day pack. For something to stuff in your pack just in case you might want to take small game I don't think they're bad. They sure aren't worth what people are asking for them now.

My first 22 was a Nylon 66 (well, the box magazine version - that one was $5.00 cheaper at the hardware store). I always felt like if you wanted a light 22 to actually take into the field that the Nylon 66 was hard to beat. They were rugged, light to carry and plenty accurate for small game or plinking. They also had a decent sight radius and an actual forend.

I have the trapper version of the 9422. It's a little on the heavy side but it's a handy little rifle too (they do take down and mine will fit in the NEF case I use for the m6). They cost too much now that Winchester doesn't make them anymore. However, Browning is making a youth version of their lever 22 (it has a 16.25" barrel). I've only handled one in the store. Length of pull is short (especially if you're tall) but I think a lot of people could choke up on it or one could put on an adult stock if that didn't work.

16 years ago when my oldest daughter was 6 years old, I bought her a Chipmunk made by Oregon Arms. I taught her to shoot a long gun with that rifle, and her younger sister and brother learned with that rifle too. We still have it. It's rugged and well made, and has a nice peep sight on it. For a .22, I think it'd be a great survival gun. It only weighs 2 and 1/2 pounds. It's accurate. And it's easy to pack.

I had one of the Springfield 22/.410's, nice idea, beatable rifle, but the grip trigger was not really usable.

I like the Henry stowable in the stock, accurate, holds two or three loaded magazines, floats.

The Marlin paposse is a great choice, stows with a scope on, very accurate, and tough beat design.

The .22/.410 option is a great combo. The weight factor of a full size combo long gun is not necessarily a true stowable option in all scenarios. I have seen a few of these in the used sections of shops. Are they accurate?

Probably? Understatement....big time. I would say the AR-7 could not hold the 39's jockstrap. IMHO

I know how accurate my 39a is. I've never fired an AR-7...so, I was giving it the benefit of the doubt.

Ar-7 can have questionable functioning, reliability and accuracy. And that's their good points. Generally they are trash IMO. After carrying one for a year on differnet chores I decided I was better off with my Ruger 22/45. Yes the AR-7 will generally out shoot the Ruger at least in my hands. Other than that the Ruger smokes it in all catagories.

Never seen an M6 and don't care if I do.

CB

Ruger Standard, MK I, MK II, and MK III are a decent kit gun, as well as the Single Six. Mine have all shot well.

If I'm limited to a rimfire, I'd take a .22 RF Magnum any day over a .22 LR. If I can pack a rifle, then I'd do that. If not then a Ruger Stainless Convertible would be my choice. Which I own and have used alot, BTW.
If the sky is the limit, then I'd take one of the Mil Spec AR-15's with a 16 inch barrel or a Ruger SS Mini something. E

Unless you absolutely need the minimum weight of the survival rifles, I think either one of these take-down rifles would be preferable:

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=239279260

or

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=237867641

Quality seems far superior to that of the survival-types, many of whose bulky stocks look like they'd be very uncomfortable to shoot.

No matter how you package it, the 22lr round is hard to argue against. It has and will give anything walking a "bad hair" day.

My favorite article on the 22lr as a survival round.

Before you put too much stock in Annabell's article you may want to read this link, it pretty well sums up what I have heard about him from a couple of folks who knew him fairly well.

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/503013/1

But with that being said I did enjoy reading him but also kept in mind that the facts were less than "factual".

drover

Yeah, I am listening to a History of Rome podcast that is constantly reminding you that the more "vivid" accounts are from one historian in particular.

I don't read too many articles all the way through. Annabell can sure spin a tale with an accent though.