Category: QOTD

From Clay Martin (via Peter’s blog):

The one thing I see over and over again in prepping circles is a belief that a mountain of ammo is all you need. Absolutely not true! In fact, I believe that most people would be better off with 300 rounds and the skills of having shot 20,000 as opposed to 20,000 stockpiled and the skills of having shot 300.

Amen to that.  I cannot tell you the degree of comfort I feel when I unholster my Springfield 1911 and raise it to a shooting position.  I’ve put a lot  more than 20,000 rounds through this old friend, and I’m not sure that I can operate any other  piece of machinery as well as I can my 1911.

As for rounds on hand:  I have an ungodly amount of FMJ practice ammo, and maybe a few hundred rounds of self-defense ammo (which I add to on a monthly basis, a box or two at a time depending on the status of my bank account).  I’d have more of the HP stuff, but at the range I always shoot off a mag of premium hollowpoints first — following the maxim of “practice with what you’ll use” — but I can’t afford to shoot 200-odd rounds of premium self-defense .45 ACP ammo every week, sue me.  So I shoot 8, buy 20, week after week.  In my 1911’s “grab ‘n go” ammo bag, I have 200 rounds of .45 loaded in magazines, after which I’d probably need a rifle anyway.  Which brings me to my next point, and a confession.

I don’t have the same degree of familiarity with my rifle  part of the SHTF equation.  I know I should shoot the AK more, but hell;  in my life I’ve probably fired an AK more often than any rifle other than .22, and what’s to remember about shooting an AK-47?  I’m confident that in any SHTF (urban street fight), I can put 20 rounds into a dinner plate-area at 50 yards, shooting “aimed-rapid” (which is all you need to do in that scenario.  At 100 yards, I can’t even see  the damn target anymore because Old Fart Eyesight, and at that point I’d go to one of my scoped rifles anyway).

So I break out the AK every few months (vs. every week for the 1911) and shoot off three or four mags (20-rounders) before I get bored and put the thing away (after letting the barrel cool and the handguard stop smoking, don’t ask me how I learned to do that  before putting the thing away in a foam-rubber-lined gun case).  And yes, I have an ungodly amount of 7.62x39mm ammo too;  in my AK’s “grab ‘n go” ammo bag, I have 400 rounds of the “39”, which should suffice for any urban unrest I’m likely to encounter;  and let’s not even look into Ye Olde Ammoe Locquer for more.

Practice more, folks, and you’ll end up needing less ammo in storage.  To repeat those wise words:

Most people would be better off with 300 rounds and the skills of having shot 20,000 as opposed to 20,000 stockpiled and the skills of having shot 300.

From the Knuckledragger, commenting on this article:

“I don’t buy into that horseshit about how we should spend the equivalent of our rifle’s value on an optic. I’m sorry, but save your money and invest it in a decent trigger instead. A quality trigger will improve your shooting much more than a fancy big name optic.”

I sorta-agree, with a couple of qualifications.

Don’t buy a $1,900 rifle and put a $49.99 scope on it.

In the same vein, don’t buy an old $200 mil-surp rifle and add $$$$$ Night Force glass.

What you’re getting with a very good scope is not just better optics, but reliability.  Those $49.99 red-dot sights from CheaperThanDirt are not going to work as well, or last as long as a Trijicon.  However (as with all things), once you get past a certain quality standard, incremental quality comes at enormous cost.

And if you’re buying an expensive rifle, you’d better  get a superior trigger for your money.  If you start off with a cheap rifle and add a Timney trigger, pretty soon you’ll discover that your barrel is sub-optimal — and by the time you’ve added that, plus a free-floating stock arrangement, you’ll end up with Washington’s axe.  (Don’t ask me how I know this.)

This, by the way, is why I love CZ rifles so much:  excellent reliability, a decent barrel and (most often) a single-set trigger, all for less than a grand.  Ditto the even-cheaper Savage rifles, ever since they started putting the fine Accu-Trigger into their rifles.

All that said, my policy is always to match three things when putting together a shooting platform:  rifle, scope, and intended use/frequency.  If all you’re going to do is plink away at a range every other month, you’re not going to need a $5,000 rifle/scope combination.  If you’re going to engage in long-distance competition shooting, spend as much or more than you can afford on both the rifle and scope.  My Mauser M12 / Minox scope combination was bought with a Scottish deer stalk in mind (bad visibility, horrible terrain, 200+ yard shots), hence the scope’s illuminated reticle and ruggedness of the Mauser action.  I could have spent a lot more on a hunting setup, but given my skill level (adequate), budget (don’t ask), and likely frequency of Scottish deerstalking (annual, at best), I “settled” for the M12 / Minox.

(More on the Mauser in a later post, by the way.)

Now, if you want to shoot rimfire ammo very  accurately all the time (and you should), the CZ 452 topped with Leupold glass will do you very well — I would humbly suggest that getting an Anschutz with Swarovski glass may be overkill, unless  you want to move on to competition shooting later.   My own rimfire setup, for example, is a Marlin 880SQ (~$280) topped with a Nikon scope (~$300).

Hell, I’ve spent more time working out what ammo works best in the 880 (CCI Mini-Max 40gr FMJ), and those who have seen me shoot with this setup will attest that while I’m no world-beater, I certainly don’t disgrace myself.  Given how often I go plinking (not as often as I’d like aaarrrrgh), it’s all I need.  YMMV.

Sorry, this post has turned into something much longer than a Quote Of The Day, but it’s on a topic about which I have a little experience.  Your comments, as always, are welcome.