Chance to Add to My Battery

[blueyedmule]

Currently this is what I own:

S&W 4506-1 (fullj-framed semi-auto .45 for those unfamiliar)
Keltec PF9 for concealed carry, very thinline single-stack 9mm)
Mossberg 500 12 ga. w/synth stock and 18.5" barrel
Marlin 30-30 lever action iron sights only
Grandad's old single-shot bolt-action .22lr iron sights only

I've got an opportunity to purchase at dealer's cost. I'd like to keep my cost down to $400-500 which would put me @ I think around $750 retail. What in your estimation is lacking from my lineup?

I live in the suburbs of a 65,000 pop. town across the highway from a college town of 135,000. River runs right through it. I've got squirrel, nutria, raccoon and possum right in my neighborhood if I needed it. Also have some MS13-affiliated if things went into breakdown, but crime day-to-day is pretty low otherwise, usually meth-related stupidity--break-ins, etc.. Married, no kids, own my home and have a small back yard. I can't think of any other pertinent info that might affect choices, but I'm sure there are.

Anyway, I appreciate any and all input.

[joeinwv]

...

I've got an opportunity to purchase at dealer's cost. I'd like to keep my cost down to $400-500 which would put me @ I think around $750 retail. What in your estimation is lacking from my lineup?
...

Anyway, I appreciate any and all input.

I would be looking at either a higher end 22 rifle for practice / hunting, such as a ruger 10/22 - your budget would allow for some nice upgrades (trigger, bolt release, mag release, charging handle, etc) as well as a quality optic. I recommend the full sporter stock, not the carbine.

Otherwise, I would buy a decent deer rifle - no less than 243, but better in 308 or 30-06. $500 will get you a real nice Savage, Ruger or Remington gun. You will need another $300-500 at some point for quality scope, mount and rings. Alternatively, you could likely get a gun and scope at a lower level gun - more like a Ruger American Rifle or Ruger 770.

Option 3 would be a M4 of some sort - at cost, you can probably get a Colt or Wyndham in 223/556 in your range. (Or a Ruger mini 14)

[blueyedmule]

I would be looking at either a higher end 22 rifle for practice / hunting, such as a ruger 10/22 - your budget would allow for some nice upgrades (trigger, bolt release, mag release, charging handle, etc) as well as a quality optic. I recommend the full sporter stock, not the carbine.

Otherwise, I would buy a decent deer rifle - no less than 243, but better in 308 or 30-06. $500 will get you a real nice Savage, Ruger or Remington gun. You will need another $300-500 at some point for quality scope, mount and rings. Alternatively, you could likely get a gun and scope at a lower level gun - more like a Ruger American Rifle or Ruger 770.

Option 3 would be a M4 of some sort - at cost, you can probably get a Colt or Wyndham in 223/556 in your range. (Or a Ruger mini 14)

Thanks for your input, joeinwv! I appreciate it. I have definitely considered a semi-auto .22lr, either Ruger 10/22 or Marlin Model 60. I'd hate to waste the "dealer's cost" opportunity on either, as they are both very much in my budget without the lower cost. I guess I should have added, I will have to drive a couple hours either way to pick up the purchase; in the case of these two rifles I'm afraid the combination drive and a dinner for Mrs. Mule and I would probably put me back at full price.

Far as the deer rifle, I know some folks don't consider the 30-30 lever a proper deer rifle. It does fill the niche for me given where I live. If I were hunting east of the mountains I'd be more worried about a longer range rifle such as a .308, but the Hornaday loads for the 30-30 really give the weapon back some range that has always been lost because of the rounded projectiles. I might consider scoping it, but again that would probably be done through another channel. I do confess, I have been drooling over the Savage Night Train series .308 rifles, but I've already got a .30 cal. weapon, albeit with less range. It's still adequate for my needs, and a nasty suburban redneck AK too. Wish I could trade it for a Mossberg 464 SPX though, just for the conversation-starter alone.

M4/AR platform--yeah, I'm leaning that way right now. I fired M16 about a million years ago but am nowhere near knowledgeable on what to buy. I took a look at the DPMS website and quickly got lost on all the models available. Some price themselves out even at my discount, others. . ..not sure if I want a light barrel, for instance. Not sure if I'd rather a 20" or 16" barrel either. Hafta think about those things. Got a buddy that has a Bushmaster, I should see what kind of cost that involves.

One other thing I'm considering is swapping the .45 for a Glock 19 simply to lessen the number of different ammo I have to have. That can be done without the discount just by doing some local horsetrading.

My final and original thought had been to get a .22 Hornet and begin handloading, but I'm thinking the more glaring omission is something that can achieve a high rate of fire.

[blueyedmule]

I'm thinking of a Windham Weaponry MPC (M4A4)



I came to this conclusion after reading the below thread "drinking from a fire hydrant" and then reading up on WW.

Any thoughts on this??

[bdhutier]

I actually think you're OK, especially for a moderately urban environment.  You have a formidable handgun, with a compact back-up.  You have a good deer rifle/intermediate range hood-rat stopper.  You have a shotty for indoors combat or birds/rabbits.  Finally you have a .22 varminter which would be great for giving said hood-rats a hard time, pretty covertly.  From a prepping perspective, at this point I'd be looking at your ammo. 

If ammo levels are good, then go buy something you really like in that price range.  I guess your only gap is the 3-mile super-sniper shooting many people are convinced they're going to be doing... 

[joeinwv]

Looking further at your list, I am going to say what you need is a 22 handgun and 22 semi. The amount of cheap, fun practice these provide is hard to beat. I have a walther P22 and a 10/22 'wal mart special' - this is the 22" barrel and full size sporter stock.

A 25 round "mag dump" in my 10/22 is just as fun as an M4, but only costs $1 in ammo.

I would not get rid of your 45 to get a 9, I would get both. The last ammo crunch taught me that caliber commonality can be a liability if you don't have enough stored.

I was at the range Sunday and reinforced my opinion that there is not better handgun for me than the Glock 19.

[cmxterra]

My vote is for more ammo (not knowing your current stockpile)

Without ammo you just have expensive clubs.

[16onRockandRoll]

I don't disagree with the people saying you're ok and just buy ammo, but the spirit of the question is that you have a 1-time use discount. In that case, I would say go with the AR. Get a semi-auto .22 next, but maximize that discount while youve got it. But I would throw out that you are overestimating the markup on guns. My first choice would be the WW, factoring in price/value. But I think you'll be a little overbudget. On the other end, DPMS has a simple little AR that can be had for $700ish retail that looks like a good value for a few hundred less than the Windham. 5.56 won't pick up a huge advantage with a longer barrel, I would stick with a 16", heavy (not bull) if possible. That would be a great all-arounder. Not a 3-400 yard varmiter, and not a building-clearing SBR, but a good compromise, and a great bang for your buck.

[CR Williams]

AR or AK or some actual fighting rifle. Maybe even something in .308 if the discount allows it. The Marlin was the assault rifle of it's age, but that age is past. You have a fighting handgun, get a fighting rifle of some kind to go with it.

No matter what, go semi-auto and magazine-fed.

[The Professor]

Well, I think you're pretty well-rounded, as it is.  While I military-style semi-autos, there are a lot of ancillary costs involved.  Magazines, ammo, spare parts, etc., that may take you well over the $500 limit.  And to be honest. . . I don't know of any AR's that run sub-$500, right now.

The only real thing I see that _may_ be considered lacking is long-range "stomp."  Something like a Savage 110 or Remington 700 bolt-gun in the .308 range (.30-06 is also acceptable) that you can scope, is what I'd recommend.

I wouldn't worry about the .22, too much, as long as it's accurate.  I'd also suggest getting more mags for the 4506, I don't believe they're making that pistol, anymore, and magazines are becoming scarce (I had a "transition" 4506 (one that had a mix of features from the 645 and the 4506). . .shot that gun 'til it rattled.  Great piece.)

Just some thoughts.  Hope they help.

The Professor

[Shirley Temple]

At first glance, I'm inclined to agree with the Medium size rifle choice.  A good bolt action in .308 or 30-06.  But since I also buy into the political climate fear (real or not), I wouldn't fault you for buying an AR.  Even if you find you can't afford a complete one and purchase just a lower and a bunch of high capacity mags, given the talk from Feinstein and the other gun-haters, that may be a smart move.  Even though in the short term it would be useless, when your funds allow you can always buy the upper and ammo.  Then again, nothing may happen like the last four years.  If you aren't swayed as much by fear as me, I'd say buy a good 30-06 bolt.

[CR Williams]

Whatever you get: Magazine-fed, semi-auto. No bolt-action rifle I'm familiar with offers the option to go to rapid fire if something happens that needs it, and very few (if any) bolt-action rifles allow to load lots of rounds in them. Both of those capabilities could become necessary in a fight or a situation that might shift the conditions of a fight on you with little or no warning. More flexibility, more options, more benefit. For those that push accuracy, are you more accurate than the rifles you have already? If not, I'm not sure a lot more accuracy is useful to you, considering that there are semi-autos that offer MOA and sub-MOA accuracy out of the box.

Sure, you can if necessary throw down the bolt-action and pick up the semi-auto, if you happen to have both of them available. When the bad guy pops up on your flank 20 yards away or kicks in the door two rooms down when you're scoping one 200 yards distant from your prepared shooting position, what would you prefer? Traverse and get one shot (counting on that one snap-shot to be a hit and enough to drop them right there) before they lower the boom, drop the rifle in hand and try and scramble to get the other one up in time, or change the position and start pulling the trigger?

Semi-auto, magazine-fed. You can hunt with it and you can fight with it. You can do either with a bolt gun, too. But the fight for life, which I focus on here, is much better done with the semi-auto and a big magazine full of rounds (and more behind that one).

[The Professor]

Whatever you get: Magazine-fed, semi-auto. No bolt-action rifle I'm familiar with offers the option to go to rapid fire if something happens that needs it, and very few (if any) bolt-action rifles allow to load lots of rounds in them. Both of those capabilities could become necessary in a fight or a situation that might shift the conditions of a fight on you with little or no warning. More flexibility, more options, more benefit. For those that push accuracy, are you more accurate than the rifles you have already? If not, I'm not sure a lot more accuracy is useful to you, considering that there are semi-autos that offer MOA and sub-MOA accuracy out of the box.

Any suggestions on a MOA/sub-MOA, semi-automatic, magazine-fed rifle that wholesales at under $500?

Barring those, any suggestions on a semi-automatic, magazine-fed rifle that wholesales at under $500 with "acceptable" accuracy?

The Professor

[American freak]

Long time reader, first time post. I think you are almost there. The one thing you are lacking is a reliable battle rifle. Personally, the rifle combo I rely on is a ruger scout rifle and an ak-47 clone. The kalashnikov variants are the working mans br. More affordable than the ar's, and with cheaper mags and ammo to be had. 7 thirty round mags of ammo is 210 rounds of rock and roll, ready to defend you and your wife. My wife just got me a mossberg 464 zmb in 30-30. However, I can't look at it till christmas so can't tell you much about it.

[CR Williams]

Any suggestions on a MOA/sub-MOA, semi-automatic, magazine-fed rifle that wholesales at under $500?

Barring those, any suggestions on a semi-automatic, magazine-fed rifle that wholesales at under $500 with "acceptable" accuracy?

The Professor

You'll have to pay more than that for the accurate rifles, Professor. As for the second question, don't have anything for that, either. (I'm defining 'acceptable' accuracy in the second question as 3 MOA, based on some quote I saw a long time ago that the US won a lot of fights with 3 MOA rifles.) AKs in that price range might get 3 MOA or less, but I wouldn't count on it. ARs that might get it would be starting around 600.00.

How much accuracy is needed? A lot seems to be desired by some of you, but consider this: Do you really expect to be able to take a pristine rested position in a firefight? And if you as a shooter are good for (picking a number out of the air) 2 MOA, what good does having a sub-MOA gun do you even if you could benchrest the beastie?

You do not have to have supreme and undeniable mechanical accuracy to win a fight. You just need enough plus a margin of error.

Next question: Unless you absolutely, positively have to, do you want to put Walmart-price thinking into the choice of a gun that may be the ONLY thing you have between you and someone trying to KILL YOU ALL (you and whoever's behind you) some day?

Really?

Is that what you want to do?

Don't answer me. Look at the family you're defending and answer them.

[joeinwv]

...

Next question: Unless you absolutely, positively have to, do you want to put Walmart-price thinking into the choice of a gun...

I feel pretty safe in saying the professor has enough accurate, semi auto rifles to go around.

I think he was combining your advice with the OP's price requirements. In a semi auto, probably looking SKS or Rem 7600 to stay decent

[bdhutier]

Accurate, sturdy, <$500, reliable battle rifle?

SKS.

[CR Williams]

I feel pretty safe in saying the professor has enough accurate, semi auto rifles to go around.

I think he was combining your advice with the OP's price requirements. In a semi auto, probably looking SKS or Rem 7600 to stay decent

I know he does, Joe, but on forums like this I'm never answering just one person. And I still don't know of a (arbitrarily-chosen level of) sub-3 MOA semi-auto-magazine-fed rifle in an accepted fight-ready caliber that's going to be had for under 500.00.

Understand, I'm focused on just a very few rifles that I'm saving for now and not at all as familiar as some of you with what-all may be available. Someone else may know something I don't about that.

SKS may not be a bad idea at all, bdhutier, if something has to be had right now. There is still some time before Congress will get around to a new, improved AWB. If the OP-ster can save a few more bucks in that time, the options could be expanded quite a bit.