.357 mag levergun as a "bad times" gun

[JohndeFresno]

Welcome to the campfire, ride357!

This is a great site to have stumbled onto - good folks here from all walks of life, but especially levergun aficionados.

[gak]

My choice for "bad times" is my Inland M-1 Carbine with 15 SPs loaded--for it's capacity/"firepower," easy reload-ability and all-around handiness. I would--and do--not feel undergunned with my Rossi .357 lever in a similar role and is indeed my second go-to in the corner...All of this behind an Ithaca 37 that is.

[Haycock]

Part of this has to do with WHICH .357 Magnum levergun we're talking about.

For example... I love my 1894CSS... truly... but it is picky enough about feeding so that I would NEVER select it as my "go to" for any type of situation other than 125-yard deer hunting.

It isn't that the cartridge isn't up to it... it is... its that I'd want something that I KNOW would cycle EVERY TIME and that I could feed any ammo in the caliber I could find.

Now, maybe if I had an NKJ super-slicked up 92 or some such, I'd see it differently... and maybe I need to fix that...

For now, though, I would definitely NOT grab my .357 levergun in any kind of "bad times" use.

Hate to be a lever-heretic, but I would pick up one of my .30-06s (my Garand if events tended towards "social", or one of my scoped 700s or 70s for general purpose use) and my 6" S&W 686 .357 revolver (at least I'm representin' wit' the OP caliber)...


Hay

[ride57]

I wouldn't feel undergunned with a lever gun if thats all I had. But, the caveot is what type of bad times situation we have. If its a 'Red Dawn' with a actual invasion by trained army, or a actual civil war with trained armies on both sides, or a alien invasion, then its the AR or AK platform. Those are pretty unlikely.
( the alien invasion calls for the plasma rifle in the 40 watt range )

If its a natural disaster Katrina type, I would have no problems with a lever gun. From what I read, most looters decided against going into neighborhoods when they saw guys patrolling with rifles/shotguns.

Even a full on riot like Los Angeles, I think I would be ok with a lever gun. The Korean store owners were holding the mob off with pistols. If the mob was coordinated (ie military training for all) and had firearms, I don't think the storeowners would have had a chance. But, what are the chances of a rioting mob, all of a sudden forming into squads/platoons etc. MHO is that would be impossible. There would be power struggles between all the different street gangs, or any group first. Every gang would want to be in charge and would fight amongst themselves first.

of course, the more "firepower" one has, the better.

anyway, here are my lever guns to fight off the zombie hordes:



30/30 and 45/70 guide gun. Both are by Gunsite (trigger/action work, enlarge loop,ghost ring sights) the 30/30 has Black T by Birdsong.

[Poohgyrr]

In our family, the kids and disabled adults have no problems putting rounds on target with the .357 Levers (and .30 Carbines). That means a lot.

AR's, AK's, FAL's, Tommy Guns (the real ones), etc... are still basically illegal to buy. (Folks are taking advantage of a loophole in the AR law.). Many of these guns cost quite a bit too, certainly more than a used Lever. The days of the new $70 SKS are long gone around here.

Our state law banning new 10+ round magazines makes S&W's eight round .357's look as good as the 8 round autoloaders.

Most regular thugs become cowards when you are armed and stand your ground.

The .357 Lever should work about as well today as the 44WCF Lever did back when. Same thing for having other options available, if the budget allows it. And besides, Levers are cool.

[2571]

"Bad Times", 'TEOTWAWKI'.

You guys scare me.

[Otto]

... the most effective weapon you have is NOT in your hands,

it's between your ears.

Alot of people use insufficient firepower.

[pokey]

... the most effective weapon you have is NOT in your hands,

it's between your ears.

Alot of people use insufficient firepower.

run what ya brung.

[AJMD429]

I'm liking my .357 Marlin "Night Scout" more and more lately...



Granted, having a Garand and a few hundred rounds of .30-06 in en-bloc clips would be preferable in some situations, but the "bad times" we usually have around here are a pack of raccoons in the hen house or coyotes in the goat pasture.

Time to start saving up for a Garand. . . maybe call it the "Night Mare" gun, just to keep the theme. . .

[Predecessor]

Personally, I think the .357 Mag lever is an excellent "bad times" gun. Now, if you asked me if the .357 lever was the best gun to use in a modern military mission I would respond in the negative.

But when I think of "bad times" I think of chaos -- not organized warfare. There's a "Jericho" event or the dollar collapses and so does our infrastructure. Pretty soon the supply chain is corrupted, communications are down, and people are left on their own to survive. In an open field where 400 yards away there is a trained military unit coming your way? Better have a different weapon and tactic. But in a chaotic urban environment, I like a Marlin 1894C very much. In fact, I prefer it to several other popular considerations. It's compact and easy to wield and an excellent companion to any revolver of the same caliber. That way I can throw on a belt or backpack full of one type of ammo and feel well prepared for most situations.

It's primary weakness is capacity and the speed to reload. And yet, I think the lever itself is an intimidating deterrent - not unlike the pump action of a shotgun. In the hands of a an experienced rifleman, it's fast and accurate. Instead of spraying and praying, deliberate yet quick cycles of the action might even be more effective in a variety of situations.

[Poohgyrr]

Considering where I live and what I do, this pair could work if it was all I had. The M94 could easily be replaced with a .357 M92.

[Booger Bill]

Most everyone that reads this site are no doubt well armed with multable guns and calibers. Probley a better way of putting it would be, "If you lost every gun you own, and had to start over, what guns would you try to buy first?" Without the idea well, maybe the ones in the closet arent 100% perfect, but they are close to it and will do in a pinch, and we dont have to outlay more money!
Now it would be interesting to ask that same question and keep in mind that hypotheticly, we have no guns, and knowing what we know, what are we going to be looking for first?

[tman]

Most everyone that reads this site are no doubt well armed with multable guns and calibers. Probley a better way of putting it would be, "If you lost every gun you own, and had to start over, what guns would you try to buy first?" Without the idea well, maybe the ones in the closet arent 100% perfect, but they are close to it and will do in a pinch, and we dont have to outlay more money!
Now it would be interesting to ask that same question and keep in mind that hypotheticly, we have no guns, and knowing what we know, what are we going to be looking for first?

M4, Glock 18.

[2X22]

Probley a better way of putting it would be, "If you lost every gun you own, and had to start over, what guns would you try to buy first?"

Ruger .44 Special Flattop

Marlin Cowboy 45-70

Ruger Red Label 20 gauge

In that order.

2x22

[AJMD429]

Now it would be interesting to ask that same question and keep in mind that hypotheticly, we have no guns, and knowing what we know, what are we going to be looking for first?

Perhaps this is a long-winded answer, but here's a 'handout' I printed up for patients and drug reps and other people I encounter who ask about "getting started" with gun ownership and shooting...

Although it was intended to answer the more generic newbie 'first gun' question, as well as give newbies insight as to why some us feel we 'need' several or more guns, you can see also that the .357 mag levergun as a "bad times" gun philosophy fits right in for a family buying their first firearms. (and yes, .44 Mag or .45 Colt optional of course... )

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So you want to buy a gun...? Here’s some suggestions:

BEFORE buying a gun, however, get:

• a couple pairs of hearing protectors,
  shooting glasses, and
  an appropriate-sized gun safe (sized to be useful for other household valuables as well).

BUDGET about the same amount for an initial stock of ammunition as you pay for the gun to shoot it with. A gun without ammunition is a very expensive paperweight.

First Handgun - .357 Magnum Ruger GP100
(alternatives - .357 Ruger Blackhawk, .44 Mag or .45 Colt Ruger Redhawk, Ruger SP 101)
This is the first* gun, because if you could only have ONE gun, it would be one which you could use to protect yourself (by carrying concealed), your home (it is portable and powerful), and even to hunt with if needed. The Rugers are sturdier than any other common brand, and easy to find at gun stores. Get a 4" barrel for one an adult male can conceal with a bit of effort, or a 3" if easier concealment is needed. Get a 6" barrel if concealment is not at all likely, as the longer the barrel, the less noise and recoil. You can shoot .38 special in a .357, and it will recoil less, generally cost less, and work pretty well, if you are still ‘learning to shoot’; use the .357 Mag loads when you are more experienced or need more power. The Blackhawk is a larger, ‘single action’ revolver like the ‘cowboy’ guns, and is more for field or hunting use, but some like the way they handle better. The .44 Magnum or .45 Colt guns are also larger, and not for the inexperienced, nor as easy to conceal. At the other end of the size spectrum, the Ruger SP-101 is a smaller, five shot (vs. six) revolver which is the easiest to conceal, but generally regarded as ‘unpleasant’ to shoot, whether with .38 Special or .357 Magnum loads.

* If you haven’t shot much, or have a family member who needs to learn - STRONGLY consider a Rimfire Handgun that is similar to your Centerfire Handgun above. Since factory ammunition will cost $0.05 or less per shot vs. $0.50 or more per shot, AND since it takes maybe 500 shots fired to be really comfortable handling and shooting a gun, you’ll save enough money to pay for the cost of a basic .22 Handgun very quickly. Learning to shoot a centerfire handgun without lots of experience shooting a rimfire handgun is like learning to ride a motorcycle without first having ridden a bicycle; it can be done, but just isn’t as easy, or as safe.

First Rifle - .357 Magnum Marlin 1894
(alternatives - .357 Magnum Rossi Puma, .44 Mag .45 Colt Marlin 1894 or Rossi Puma)
This is the second gun, because it uses the same ammunition as your first one, simplifying issues of supply, and offers an easier-to-use yet less-concealable firearm to keep at home, or use for hunting or target practice. It is not ‘intimidating’ looking (so less likely to be banned, or raise neighbor’s eyebrows), and yet is fully as able to stop ‘bad guys’ as an AR-15, unless you really anticipate dozens descending on you at once. In addition, in contrast to most AR-15 type guns, the .357 Mag (or .44 Mag or .45 Colt) guns you now have can use a wide variety of ammunition in terms of power and even quality, and still function reliably. The ammunition is among the easiest to reload, as well, with equipment often costing less than a box of ammunition. Buy a Williams FP sight for the gun (easy to mount on the Marlin with only a screwdriver, the Rossi’s require drilling and tapping - gunsmith work); a scope is generally not that necessary, and hard for novices to get used to, and the ‘open’ sights which come with the gun are also difficult for the novice to use or adjust. The Williams FP is easy to adjust and easy to use, and once sighted in, you can remove the ‘aperture’ for a ‘ghost ring’ rear sight effect that will enable both fast and accurate shooting.

If you’ve bought ‘new’ guns, you have probably spent about $1,200 now, but you have GREAT guns.

First Rimfire - .22 LR Ruger 10/22
(alternatives - .22 LR Marlin 39A, Henry, or Ruger 96/22, 77/22; or other semiauto .22 LR’s)
This gun would be your third gun, a ‘rimfire’, which uses non-reloadable ammunition casings, that are far less expensive to shoot. Ammunition is not very powerful (although still lethal), not very noisy, and is so compact that 200 rounds take up about the same space as two decks of cards. It is a gun made for practice, since it is inexpensive and easy to shoot, yet perfectly capable of use to control pests in the garden, for instance, and in a pinch, self or home defense. The Ruger 10/22 semiauto, 96/22 lever action, and 77/22 bolt action guns all can use up to 50-round magazines, vs. the 10-round ones they come with. Semiautos fling empty brass out, which reloaders dislike, but this doesn’t matter with the non-reloadable .22 LR, and sometimes rapid followup shots could be important, with a low power cartridge like the .22 LR. An advantage of the lever action Ruger, Marlin, or Henry is that they will work very similarly to your ‘main’ .357 Mag lever action gun, facilitating safe and accurate shooting, and easy transition from your practice and plinking gun to your hunting and home-defense one. For sights, consider another Williams FP for whatever .22 LR rifle you get, or if you like, a scope of the ‘red-dot’ variety or the ‘magnification’ type. Laser sights aren’t often that practical, but you can even try one of those - they are helpful sometimes for training.

Second Rimfire - .22 LR Ruger Mark II
(alternatives - .22 LR Ruger Single Six, many other .22 LR semiauto or revolvers)
This would be your fourth gun, completing a second ‘pair’ of rifle and pistol in the same chambering. It is likewise a good practice gun, and while not the ‘one-shot-stopper’ that is best for self-defense, it does give a second household member the potential for a concealed carry firearm in a pinch. Again, the semiautomatic has more ‘firepower’, but the revolvers are going to be better for gaining familiarity through practice with a gun similar to your ‘main’ .357 Mag self-defense revolver. See notes above*

At this point, if you’ve been buying new guns, you’ve spent about $1,700 total. You have not only the ‘basics’, but a couple ‘extra’ or ‘training’ guns, which you may in fact find you enjoy shooting more than your ‘main’ guns, due to the quieter cartridge, lesser recoil, and much less expensive ammunition.

*** *** *** At this point you have all the ‘Basics’ covered...! *** *** ***

Find a good place to shoot, whether it be a commercial indoor or outdoor range, conservation club, or friend who lives in a rural area, and go shooting. If you’re a novice, find a serious instructor (not one who likes to show off their macho skills, etc.) who will help you get started safely, sight in your guns, and gain confidence. If possible, shoot your rimfire guns first.

Use a bench if possible, to rest your gun-holding hands on (or a padded gun-rest), just to get started.

Use PAPER targets at first, pretty close up (15' for handgun and 30' for rifle isn’t too close), so you can SEE where you're MISSING, vs. just knowing that you're missing the pop-can, but not knowing in which direction (and therefore just wasting ammunition, and NOT learning). Later, you may want the ‘fun’ of appropriately-sized metal ‘flip-up’ targets, or the occasional pop can full of water, etc. - just clean up your mess when finished.

Learn where your guns hit (it may not be where you aim), and once you find out, either adjust your shooting style, or adjust the gun’s sights, so your sights show you where your shots will be hitting.

It is quite possible to take a man or woman or mature child, who has never shot any type of gun, and within a few hours, teach them to safely handle and shoot even ‘heavy hitters’ like a .44 Magnum or .30-06 well enough to consistently hit a five-gallon bucket at 50 yards.

The secret is starting them from a bench, with a rest, with hearing protectors, and with a rimfire rifle, using a red-dot sight. Then they gradually move to rimfire handguns, then low-powered centerfire rifles and handguns, then medium-powered ones, then finally the high-powered ones.

Beyond the Basics - Here are some other firearms you will want to consider...

Backup Gun - .22 LR/Mag North American Arms Pug
(alternatives - other ultra-compact .22 Mag or LR guns)
This one is mentioned, merely as an example of an ‘inside-the-bra’ or ‘hideout’ type ultra-concealable, if not powerful, handgun. The .22 LR is commoner ammunition, but as a ‘backup’ gun for self-defense, getting the extra cylinder which enables it to shoot .22 Magnum ammunition would be a good idea. The idea of such a gun is that on days you may be naive enough or careless enough to leave your ‘main’ self-defense firearm home instead of on your person, the much lighter ‘Pug’ type gun might be likelier to be taken with you on that errand you thought was safe. For the average person whose primary concern is not getting raped in the parking lot, this may be the most practical, if not impressive, other gun to own.

Shotgun - 12 gauge Mossberg 500
(alternatives - 20 gauge Mossberg 500, 12 or 20 gauge Remington 870)
Shotguns are very versatile, able to fire one projectile, or a few to several dozen small pellets. It is NOT true that you can just ‘aim in the general direction’ and hit your target, as the pellets do not spread out very far apart until rather far away, but certainly if you wanted to hunt birds, you’d need one. The power is awesome, as well, in terms of a home-defense gun, but many people find the recoil intimidating. A 20-gauge may be better for novices for that reason, and ammunition is widely available. Other gauges, like 16, 28, or “.410" have many limitations in ammunition availability; if you absolutely need a very low-recoil shotgun, a “.410" will do, and they definitely are lethal, in terms of home-defense, when used at rooms-length distances. In some states, hunting deer is not legal with a rifle, but you can use a shotgun with an ordinary or a special ‘rifled’ barrel, and single-projectile ‘slugs’ designed for that purpose. The closest other gun on this list would be the “.45-70 Guide Gun”, which isn’t designed for multiple-pellet loads, but has a similar power level able to stop something BIG if need be - even a bear.

Bear Gun - .45-70 Marlin Guide Gun
(alternatives - .444 Marlin XLR, .45-70 Thompson Center Encore Rifle)
This is also an ‘optional’ firearm - covering the end of the spectrum where you want to shoot a really heavy bullet, which can be vital if you need to stop a really big critter, or want to make a really big hole. Reloaded ‘light’ ammunition can be used for much lighter game, if desired. The ‘Guide Gun’ will be far more accurate than most shotguns if you want to hunt or make a precision shot out past 100 yards, and the shotgun will be more useful to most people as a ‘home defense’ firearm, or to hunt birds. Most gun afficionados will have both a pump shotgun, and a lever-action rifle. The Encore rifle is a single-shot firearm worth mentioning, in that you can buy extra barrels to shoot nearly any cartridge in existence, including .22 LR, 12 and 20 gauge shotgun shells, .357 Magnum, .223 Remington, .308 Winchester, .45-70 Government, and so on - even muzzleloading ‘black-powder’ barrels (which need no brass cartridge case). As a single-shot, the Encore is not a great ‘home-defense’ firearm, but is capable of great accuracy, and versatility; one ‘gun’ with multiple barrels enables a wide variety of hunting or target shooting, for instance.

(So-called) ‘Assault’ Rifle - .223 Rem AR-15, various brands
(alternatives - .223 Ruger Mini-14, .308 Win Springfield M1-A or Garand, AR-10)
These are often (inaccurately) termed ‘assault’ rifles, but basically are high-capacity carbines and rifles which are typically very durable, and in the case of the ‘AR’ family of guns, very MODULAR, meaning you can buy just the ‘stripped lower’ (about $130, and legally constituting the ‘gun’ part), and add mix-or-match stocks, barrels, and so forth to create anything from a short-barreled, folding-stock ‘carbine’, to a heavy-barreled, long-stocked ‘rifle’, often with extreme accuracy. The Ruger Mini-14 is more ‘traditional’ (like the levergun, less ‘threatening’ so raising fewer eyebrows), and is not ‘modular’, but is a handy little rifle to shoot .223 ammunition in. A Mini-14 version is also available in 7.62x39 - the ‘eastern bloc’ cartridge used in the SKS and AK-47 firearms. The Springfield and Garand are much larger rifles, shooting heavier and more powerful (and expensive) cartridges, which predominated in the 1920-1960 era. The fully-automatic “M-16" which replaced them uses a .223 cartridge that is basically the same as the AR-15 semiautomatic version civilians typically buy. Of note is the fact that far from being “an assault weapon purely designed for killing”, the .223 guns were specifically brought to the military with the goal of having a rifle which would more likely wound the enemy rather than kill him, since a wounded individual is more distracting to comrades, creates a worse morale problem for the enemy, and creates logistics and supply problems for evacuation and medical care. These guns are awesome for a ‘just one gun’ scenario, but only IF there is adequate ammunition (and they are far pickier than most lever-action guns, for instance). They are also the most likely for a government to ‘ban’, if that government is planning on doing anything to its citizens they might not care for, and their looks intimidate neighbors, which can be good or bad, depending on what the neighbors are up to. They would likely be great ‘barter’ items in times of social breakdown, since parts are fairly generic and the guns are considered desireable by everyone, yet they could become a ‘prohibited’ item as has happened in California.

Long Range Gun - .300 Win Mag Savage Accutrigger
(alternatives - .300 Win Mag Remington Model 700, many other cartridges and brands)
This type gun is mentioned, merely as an example of ‘long range’ rifles, with a bit more power than the M1A or Garand, and much more power than the AR-15 and other ‘assault’ rifles. Mostly useful in terrain where you may need to shoot at something several hundred yards away, and want enough impact to drop game, for instance, vs. just make a hole in a paper target. Not for the novice, because once the bullet is in the air for more than a fraction of a second, wind, barometric pressure, humidity, and target movement and position become challenging even for the expert. Don’t discount the inexpensive ‘Handi-Rifle’ that is a break-open action - you can get one in some very impressive chamberings, and save enough money vs. the ‘brand’ guns to get a really good scope sight on it. The Savage ‘Accutrigger’ is mentioned specifically, because it is probably the best buy if you want a really accurate firearm, and part of the reason is the innovative trigger, plus the fact that as a non-‘status’ brand, there is no huge markup for the logo or needless cosmetic features.

Semiauto Handgun - .45 ACP Para Ordnance or Rock Island double-stack
(alternatives - other brands, single-stacks (if you don't have large hands), and .40 S&W or 9mm semiautos)
This one is mostly an alternative to the ‘main’ revolver, for those who prefer semiautomatics. They are pickier about ammunition, but most function nearly as reliably as revolvers with the proper ammunition, and have a bit more rounds available in their magazine. They are NOT guns for the novice, as they are far too easy to accidentally discharge - they cock and reload themselves, and they will still have a loaded cartridge in the chamber, even after the magazine is removed. Like the .357 Magnum and other cartridges generally used in revolvers, there are .45 ACP and .40 S&W and 9mm semiautomatic carbines one can get to form a ‘pair’ with a semiautomatic pistol. Some even can share the same magazines, and extra loaded magazines can facilitate sustained and rapid shooting.

Muzzleloader - .50 Muzzleloader Savage ML-10
(alternatives - many other brands of muzzleloaders on the market)
This one is one of many muzzleloaders, meaning guns which require only a primer, powder, and projectile - no cartridge case. Most muzzleloaders require ‘black powder’, which as a true explosive, tends to be harder to find, more heavily regulated, a bit more dangerous to handle, and important to thoroughly clean the gun after using. The Savage ML-10 is more costly than other muzzleloaders, but is extremely accurate, more powerful per shot than any other gun listed above, and CAN use several other ‘smokeless’ powders, which lack the disadvantages of black powder. You can shoot ordinary ‘pistol’ bullets like you’d use in a .357 Magnum or .44 Magnum in a muzzleloader, by putting them in a plastic cup called a ‘sabot’, which goes out the barrel with the bullet. Given the variety of powders and projectiles useable, a person with a Savage ML-10, and a bunch of the proper primers, could certainly get by quite well as far as hunting. For home-defense, no muzzleloader is very practical, as after each shot, loading the next one is cumbersome and takes nearly a minute.

Hopefully this will get you started.............

[Streetstar]

Good handout doc ! You have all the bases covered. Being somewhat of a traditionalist, i would probably slip in a Single Six over the Mark 2 , (i'd rather have both though).

And (for a newer shooter) possibly start 'em out with a .308 or '06 for their first "long range rifle" -- as Magnums can sure induce a flinch if the shooter is not seasoned, but thats a neat chart.

[AJMD429]

Good handout doc ! You have all the bases covered. Being somewhat of a traditionalist, i would probably slip in a Single Six over the Mark 2 , (i'd rather have both though).
And (for a newer shooter) possibly start 'em out with a .308 or '06 for their first "long range rifle" -- as Magnums can sure induce a flinch if the shooter is not seasoned, but thats a neat chart.

True enough, although most newbies I help seem to shoot 'right on' faster with the naturally-pointing Mark II. I suppose on the 'long range rifle' one could even make a good argument for a .223 - if it is a novice, and especially in circumstances where they might want to have a 'same ammo' gun as their semiauto EBR.

I've probably given out thirty copies of that 'handout' in the past couple of months, and at least four or five of the people have since that time bought their first firearm! I hope it at least helps them have a 'game plan' for sensibly accumulating a 'battery' of useful firearms for their family, for protection, recreation, etc., with the least amount of unnecessary overlap and compromise.

One woman read it, decided the 'smart thing' was to get a .357 DA revolver and levergun, but couldn't talk her husband out of a much-cooler Glock .40 for their first gun, but after she dry-fired my Crimson Trace stocked Charter Arms Bulldog, the smile on her face told me she'd be getting her own gun(s) soon...

[MrMurphy]

And you're still perpetuating the "5.56mm is for wounding" myth..........

The 5.56mm was noted in the original AR-15/M16/CAR-15 for it's extreme lethality against opponents in the 1959-1967 time frame. Changes in ammunition and barrel twist due to meeting other Army demands reduced that somewhat, but the object was never to simply wound someone. If that was the case, they'd all be carrying BB guns.

Theory is a wounded guy is better than a miss, because he requires care, but a dead guy doesn't come back into a fight.

That, and since for the last 40 yrs we mostly have been taking on enemies who do not care for their wounded anywhere near like any 1st/2nd world army would and that myth has long, long been incorrect. Might want to modify your article.

The 5.56mm, just like the original 7.92X33mm Kurz round the Germans used, was developed because it hit hard, fast, accurately and didn't weigh much, allowing rapid delivery of firepower inside the 300m radius most typical firefights happen at.

The Germans, Russians, Brits, and U.S all knew as far back as 1920 the .30 cal rounds were overpowered for what they were actually being asked to do, thus the .276 Pedersen, British .280, and German 7mm and 7.92X33 (they upped the size due to German army requests to use some of the same machinery) that popped up in the 20s and 30s.

Most fighting happens inside 100m, 300-400m being about the max except in cases such as the Falklands or Afghanistan, even with modern optics spotting any one man that far out is a real problem. Most shooters simply don't have the training under combat conditions (especially pre-optics days, say Dawn of Time-1990 when the first issue combat optics such as the Elcan and SUSAT were common) to make hits that far, so they were being realistic.

The 6.8 and 6.5 rounds now sneaking out into public are newer equivalents of what they thought up 60-80 years ago, but due to politics, budget and military stubbornness were not allowed to adopt. The .280 actually was adopted until the US pressured the UK to switch to the 7.62X51 due to NATO requirements.

[AJMD429]

The 5.56mm was noted in the original AR-15/M16/CAR-15 for it's extreme lethality against opponents in the 1959-1967 time frame. Changes in ammunition and barrel twist due to meeting other Army demands reduced that somewhat, but the object was never to simply wound someone. If that was the case, they'd all be carrying BB guns.

1. There was alot of behind-the-scenes politics in the "M-16" decision which likely far outweighed any sane ballistic factors, for or against the M-16. I've read enough different sources over the past few decades to be convinced that the potential advantages of less lethal (or less quckly lethal, even) small arms was most certainly understood.

2. The .223 can certainly be "lethal", but for a given shot placement it is never going to be MORE lethal than a .30-06 or .308; if the enemy wounded lives long enough to cause a fraction more supply issue, a fraction more distraction, or a fraction more morale problem, there IS a strategic advantage, whether pre-planned or simply observed after the fact. Studies on civilian woundings in ER's in the 1970's, even by anti-gun authors, wound up having to admit that "assault weapons" (including not just the .223, I realize) were less lethal than common hunting firearms (including not just the .30-06, I realize).

3. I do not doubt that less gun-experienced recruits can be trained to hit torsos with an M-16 far more quickly and at less cost, than with an M-14. That factor likely was second only to corporate lobbying and other political issues, in making the switch, and I think is certainly a legitimate argument. I'd rather face newbie recruits with M-14's than M-16's - I'd not want hit with either round, but I'd be more hopeful they'd miss with the heavier guns.

Primarily, though, since the 'handout' is intended for an audience just expressing a tentative interest in firearms, who I realize gets anti-gun relatives and co-workers commenting negatively about how 'bad' guns are, my point was inserted into the handout not to initiate a re-hash over the 1940's and 50's service firearm debates, but to counter the relentless media crapola about how unlike hunting or sporting weapons, "assault weapons" are uniquely powerful and lethal - "...meant only for killing people."

[donw]

i agree that "bad times" may be-a-coming...however...if it comes down to "us vs. them", "us" could be in deep doo.

first it would be local LE, then SWAT. if you manage to defeat those on their level, then it would be the NG...the U.S. military. "they" have resources, like helicopter gunships, heavy weapons, air strike, predators, etc at hand..."us" don't...(not normally, anyway)

in the civil unrest/riot/runaway crime scenario, i have chosen three possibles: 38/357 lever carbine with Taurus 38/357 revolver as companion, Ruger P-9 9mm carbine with Ruger P95DC 9mm companion and last but not least, Rem 870 stoked with whatever i have on hand.

the 38/357 would be an excellent close combat/cqb choice but may be defeated by modern Kevlar body armor.

if you're in a "last stand" scenario...i don't think the firearm you choose will matter in the end.

in the above posting about the 5.56/.223 vs 30-06, .308 etc, etc, having used a .30 cal in the Vietnam conflict i can assure you, it IS effective. the average VN "kill" was from 40 yards. the 5.56 certainly can be lethal within the 100m mentioned...but it must also be pointed out that general Petreaus himself was shot in the chest in a training accident at Ft Bragg at point blank range...he's still around to command our forces in Afghanistan...had that been a 30-06/7.62...well...we all know what would have happened. my personal opinion is the military went to the 5.56 as more an NATO/economical/political demand more than for TRUE effectiveness on the battlefield: the average grunt can carry more 5.56 than 30-06/.308. and the fact they're coming back around to calibers close to the .30 points in that direction. my personal choice for a COMBAT weapon would be a good semi-auto in 7.62x 51 or similar.

that being said...i like the 5.56 in my varmint rifle

[2X22]

the 38/357 would be an excellent close combat/cqb choice but may be defeated by modern Kevlar body armor.

I'm curious. I know absolutely NOTHING about body armor. Can it stop a cast bullet at 357 or 44 caliber velocities?

2x22

[AJMD429]

I'm curious. I know absolutely NOTHING about body armor. Can it stop a cast bullet at 357 or 44 caliber velocities?

I think there are MANY types of body armor, and although most would stop an 'ordinary' handgun bullet at 'ordinary' handgun velocities, even if it didn't penetrate, it would certainly knock the snot out of the recipient. Probably they'd be 'distracted' even if on PCP, and 'out for the count' if they weren't some drugged-out or combat-hardened type. Just supposing, mind you. I'll bet some LEO's here have more specific knowledge of types and of impacts and results they've seen.

[Rifleman336]

the 38/357 would be an excellent close combat/cqb choice but may be defeated by modern Kevlar body armor.

Yes and no,

As a armed guard and being trained by police instructors, they taught us about the different "Threat Level" vests and their ratings and what was to be worried about as far as weapons being presented. I wore a Threat Level IIA vest that could survive my own .357 Magnum being used against me at contact distance. 125 JHP at 1500 FPS from a 4" revolver per NIJ rating system.

But what if I had a punk came up with a 9mm High-Point Carbine with +P Ammo in it. MY vest was just barely addiquite against it. But a .357 Magnum Rifle vs. a Threat Level IIA or even a Threat level IIIA (260 Gr .44 Magnum out of a 4" barrel at 15 feet), you best have a good life insurance policy for the vest might as well be made of tissue paper AT TYPICAL HD distances. But the further out from your house you shoot at someone the more the .357 Magnum losses velocity to be more in line with it's "mild mannered self", distance is their friend at this point.

Only "Interceptor" Class IV vest will work. But the only the Police and Military have the bulk of those and they wouldn't be common at all for a street punk to have. And it would take a .300 Win Mag or more to get through one of the "Interceptor" vests plates. Not what I call a practical defense caliber for CQB!!!

So I wouldn't worry about it, just shoot for the head. And the .357 Magnum has no trouble doing that out of a pistol or rifle!!!

Rifleman 336

[MrMurphy]

The "more is better' school of thought is generally good, this was in play as far back as WW2 when it came to ammo carriage.

My dad went to Vietnam with an M14, used both the 14 and 16, 16A1 while there, he did not have a particular favorite as each had it's role. Judging by the few times he's spoken of it, he put his fair share of VC and NVA down with both. Personally for long range work, i would prefer a 7.62 as well, but in close (200m and in) the 5.56 shines. Never ended up pulling the trigger myself during my time in, but there was half a dozen times where it got real, real interesting....split second one way or the other.

The older M193 55gr with a 12 or 14" twistrate was noted for it's lethality, the later heavier rounds in 1-in-7 (the current SS109/M855) made to better penetrate armor and for longer range accuracy in the M249 tend, like the 7.62X39mm and the US 7.62X51mm loads, to zip right through and not tumble nearly as much.

In my former job I dealt daily with a lot of Special Forces personnel and the newer Mk262 'browntip' 77 gr load is noted for being extremely lethal, comparative to a 7.62 load at the same ranges inside 500m, as is the new USMC "SOST" load.

As to body armor, most current police vests are rated Level III, which will stop any pistol round of buckshot or slug that is not specifically armor piercing. The Interceptor vest and the newer replacements for it currently in use overseas will stop any pistol round in the kevlar, the plates (front/rear/sides) are rated up to rifle rounds, I personally know of several guys who've taken multiple 7.62X39 hits and walked away and kept fighting, and the plates are theoretically at least rated to stop 7.62X51 or 54R at a distance (not point blank, but 50-100M probably) though I wouldn't want to be the guinea pig.

A .357 carbine "might" penetrate a Level IIA vest, the lowest level currently sold, at close range with an FMJ, but I wouldn't bet on it.

[Predecessor]

i agree that "bad times" may be-a-coming...however...if it comes down to "us vs. them", "us" could be in deep doo. first it would be local LE, then SWAT. if you manage to defeat those on their level, then it would be the NG...the U.S. military. "they" have resources, like helicopter gunships, heavy weapons, air strike, predators, etc at hand..."us" don't...(not normally, anyway)

Interesting. Certainly a plausible "bad times" scenario - and yet hopefully one of the least possible ones (fingers crossed). I can think of a dozen scenarios that might effectuate the breakdown of society, in which case, local law enforcement, military reservists, and active duty are all in the same soup.

But "us vs. them" would have to be closer to a quick and dirty political takeover (ala dictatorial coup) wherein Military and LE were on board with the puppeteer so much so that they would be willing to subvert the Constitution and 2nd Amendment in order to control a mass civilian armed disapproval of the takeover. Boy do I hope it doesn't come down to that. If it does, no doubt the "them" might have the initial advantage due to some of the resources listed above, but I'm not sure "us" wouldn't be able to ultimately prevail when we realize it's kind of like A Bug's Life -- there's a heck of a lot more of us ants then there are grasshoppers

[AJMD429]

But "us vs. them" would have to be closer to a quick and dirty political takeover (ala dictatorial coup) wherein Military and LE were on board with the puppeteer so much so that they would be willing to subvert the Constitution and 2nd Amendment in order to control a mass civilian armed disapproval of the takeover. Boy do I hope it doesn't come down to that.

We're already there - look how many LEO's zealously enforce 'environmental' laws that are clearly unconstitutional, or the glorious 'war on drugs', which has become an excuse to pretty much do anything to the citizens (whether they happen to actually abuse 'drugs' or not).

[Haycock]

In an attempt to steer this thread back to the original topic , I will share that I just bought the 1894C that rjohns94 had up for sale at http://www.levergunscommunity.com/viewt ... =2&t=29008.

I did say before that I love my 1894CSS... I meant it. My daughter has now claimed it for her own use, though (I am NOT upset about that ), so I nabbed Mike's as soon as I saw it. I had one other pre-safety model and like an idiot I let it go a couple of years ago.

After getting the new puppy home last night I cycled a bunch of different loads through it, and it appears that the 1980 model feeds everything indiscriminately... .38s, .357 158gr JSPs, .357 180gr LFNs, etc. Haven't tried empties but I will today.

If it turns out that that older unit is a reliable feeder I'll amend my prior comment on not selecting MY (as opposed to ANY) .357 lever for the OPs purpose... if I could be confident that I wouldn't have to double or triple clutch my carbine in order to get it to cycle any type of ammo I might acquire over time, I would definitely at least consider it.

HOWEVER... I want to call out the very important notion of engaging targets (hunting or other) at a distance and with enough lethality to make it real. Appleseed targets engagement out to 500m. I would want any primary armament I would select for general purpose use during uneasy times of any sort to be capable of that.

I love my 1894(s!!!)... but it does not qualify in that respect. Would I grab the one that's more reliable in a pinch? Sure. Would one fill the "general purpose long-arm" niche? Nope.


Haycock

[donw]

lots of good info and input here in this thread. one of the better ones to come along in a while. adds to the "think about possibilities" department doesn't it?

an interesting caveat here in the ongoing 5.56/.223 vs 308/7.62 vs 357 vs xxx vs xx......:

why is it many, if not most, states will not allow "big" game to be taken with the 5.56/.223 (or any centerfire in the .22 caliber, for that matter) ? the .308/7.62, 30-06 and even the .357 is capable of knocking down most "big" game in CONUS.

most of the SpecOps groups nowadays opt for the .308/7.62 or the 6.9/6.5 & the good ole .45 ACP. (yet the military re-upped the Beretta 9mm once again)

under any of the "doomsday" scenarios a person would do well to learn use what he has (by choice) and how to defeat a possible aggressor with it. you may, reasonably, assume that in most civil unrest/riot situations, the aggressors will not be armored up...a well placed .22 lr should suffice....an armored up one...head/neck/hands/arms and leg/knee/feet shot is in order (unless you happen to have a .50 Barrett on hand)

what i believe is that ANY cartridge may be used effectively to defend ones self if used correctly...caliber and "lethality" debate can, and will, continue as long as there is the need for firearms in a defensive/offensive nature; i choose to select one(s) that are highly versatile, reliable and have been PROVEN to be effective. as an example: a 7.62x51 on an AR platform, an AR-10 or the Kel-tec bull pup carbine, etc or the proven M14/mini14 or even the M1 carbine platform. the ones i named above as my personal choices are based on what i have "on hand".

it's also interesting to note that some of the firearms training academies are offering training with leverguns as fighting weapons...they see the value of their effectiveness as such.

[olyinaz]

Some great posts! Hard to argue with your lists Doc!

As much as I love the AR and am most seriously not a 5.56mm basher, I will say that if it were so incredibly lethal on 150-200lb animals we'd all be using .223s for whitetail deer hunting but I think most everyone understands that a bigger hole and a more ragged wound channel = animal bleeds out faster and/or drops dead quicker. The problem is, as it's always been, the weight of the ammo. As a former grunt I can assure you THAT is what the compromise is all about and I'm just as prone to reach for 500 rounds of .223 vs. 200 rounds of something else as anyone else going into battle.

Considering where I live and what I do, this pair could work if it was all I had. The M94 could easily be replaced with a .357 M92.

Love that tanker! Is it chambered in .308 or .30-06? Been considering one myself for some time now.

Cheers,
Oly

[AJMD429]

Under any of the "doomsday" scenarios a person would do well to learn use what he has (by choice) and how to defeat a possible aggressor with it. you may, reasonably, assume that in most civil unrest/riot situations, the aggressors will not be armored up...a well placed .22 lr should suffice....an armored up one...head/neck/hands/arms and leg/knee/feet shot is in order (unless you happen to have a .50 Barrett on hand)

That's IT...!

Just get a .50 BMG, and figure out some way to 'down load' it so you could still hunt rabbits with it (and leave any edible meat behind)...!

[Rifleman336]

As to body armor, most current police vests are rated Level III, which will stop any pistol round of buckshot or slug that is not specifically armor piercing.

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!! Wrong!! Average police vest is Threat level IIA it is very rare to see a .44 Magnum used in criminal activity, your more most likely to get shot by a .38 SPL / 9mm or a .22 those are the big three that are the biggest threat against a LEO. Then comes .45 and .40 and the magnums trailing behind that thus the agencies save money and the officers get lighter vests to match the average threat. For one can always get a bigger gun and you'll have to draw the line some where is admin thinking in the Dayton / Cincinnati, Ohio region. Or every officer would be in "Interceptor" armor because a criminal "might" have a rifle which would make the .44 Mag laughable. You can't protect every officer from every possibility. Class IIIA is used by the SWAT team, counter narc raid units and other high risk raiding teams.

A .357 carbine "might" penetrate a Level IIA vest, the lowest level currently sold, at close range with an FMJ, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Their no "might" about it, even with a cast lead bullet here's the NIJ Threat Level classification and testing procedures WWW.Cheifsupply.com/docs/Body-Armor-NIJ-06-standard.PDF .

Look for yourself a .357 Magnum with a Buffalo Bore 158gr bullet doing 2,100 FPS out of a 18.5" barrel is going to put a hole in you and your Threat Level IIIA vest at across the room distances and further!!!!

Rifleman 336

[Hankster]

No problem with the .50... you shoot UNDER the rabbit, and let the CONCUSSION from the round strike take him out!! LOL!

[MrMurphy]

There's what gets issued, and what gets authorized. I know a ton of cops, as a former military cop and a former news photographer. Most upgrade to III whenever possible. Rifle threats ARE out there. Most SWAT teams I've interacted with (a considerable number in my last job as a sales rep selling various things related to their field) the majority were wearing III with plate carriers for rifle plates (giving similar performance to an Interceptor with more flexibility) whenever possible.

Some cops consider it just another job and turn off their brain off duty. Others don't. I've worn IIa, II and III, and a II or IIa can certainly get the job done, but i'd take a III whenever possible even if i had to buy it myself. Considering most departments in my area have personally owned/authorized rifles and pistols, the majority authorize armor upgrades if it meets spec. And a lot of guys do so.