PDA

View Full Version : Urban Combat: Shotgun or Assault Rifle?


SpK
November 23, 2006, 02:53 PM
I thought this would be an interesting thread to post, to see which members believe what type of weapon is more effective in urban combat.

I have grown to love the assault rifle, ever since I first knew what one was. Throughout the years my knoweledge for them grew, and I only liked them even more. Their effectiveness in modern combat goes undeniable. A rifle that shoots an intermediate cartridge with large magazine capacity capability that allows the soldier to carry ammunition in great quantities. The assault rifle is the hallmark of a modern soldier.

Everyone around knows what a shotgun is and does. They are a get down to business type of long gun, putting hunks of lead in large quantities down range with a single shot. Having been used quite effectively in WWII and other major wars as close range manstoppers, they have proven themselves time and time again.

My question is: having been both well documented, which weapon do you think is more effective in modern urban combat?

smooks75
November 23, 2006, 02:57 PM
I have used both in combat and the shotgun will get my vote for Urban combat only. Out to about 40-50 yards it will stop what it hits with the buck shot that was issued. Slugs are another story.

shamus005
November 23, 2006, 03:05 PM
I'd take an assault rifle of the 7.62 variety, AK or M14 variant.

Blackwater OPS
November 23, 2006, 03:10 PM
It depends, if you are fighting troops in body armor, a shotgun is not vey effective, and it is also not very effective past 50 meters. With those exceptions though, the shotgun is my choice.

Para Bellum
November 23, 2006, 03:51 PM
IMHO the "Assault Rifle" is more versatile. I own a Steyr AUG-Z in .223 for the TEOTWAWKI type of situations. It gives me 42 rounds of .223 out of a 20" barrel in a short gun only 31" long in total. I'd use M193 or Federal LE223T3 ammo. I also prefer the rifle for scenarios when you need a very precise shot to the brainstem or e.g. a dog going mad on a playground etc...:

http://www.steyr-mannlicher.com/typo3temp/pics/5103582833.jpg

The shotgun (12ga in my cases) has it's place though. If the goal is to stop whatever comes charging at you, be it a shizoid-paranoic young man on speed with a knife (I had that in my workplace already) or evil intruders, I'd go for the 12ga. A simple and reliable coach gun puts the whole capacity of a submachinegun into a threat with only two trigger pulls.

So, since the .223 is more versatile, it will be my overall choice. If I know or expect the ranges to be within 20m/yds and no necessity for surgical precision, I'd feel very well equipped with a 12ga. That's why a double barreled coach gun loaded with 00 Buck is handy at my desk at work:

http://www.baikalinc.ru/res_en/0_value_4422_188.jpg

The Real Wyatt
November 23, 2006, 03:51 PM
Urban combat. House to house fighting, clearing a building one room at a time, securing a village one street at a time. Nothing beats the ol' 12 gauge for that ... nothing.

shamus005
November 23, 2006, 03:56 PM
clearing a building one room at a time .....Nothing beats the ol' 12 gauge for that ... nothing.

grenades work pretty well. :D

skeeter1
November 23, 2006, 03:59 PM
Is it OK if I own a couple of each? I'm just not interested in assault rifles, but my leverguns would work out to 100-150yds. The shotguns (#4 buck) maybe out to 30-40yds. The shotgun with #000 Magnum buck will stop any vehicle dead in its tracks with one shot at close range.

You should have included handguns in the poll as well. One of those would probably be the first thing I'd grab for.

shamus005
November 23, 2006, 04:00 PM
Why choose?




You can have an m16 with a m203 40mm launcher slung underneath. Load the m203 with 40mm buckshot rounds and you have the best of both worlds.

revjen45
November 23, 2006, 04:12 PM
In any situation short of Armageddon harm to innocent parties is an important consideration, especially in an urban environment. At the Citizens' Academy the local sheriff informed us that they carry .223 rifles in the car (maybe something more subatantial in the trunk). The reason is that any range at which the pattern is larger than the target some of the pellets will miss and continue downrange, thus possibly injuring uninvolved persons. This is not to say I eschew a shotty as a fighting gun, just that I want the choice of weapons to match the situation.

smooks75
November 23, 2006, 04:23 PM
The shotgun with #000 Magnum buck will stop any vehicle dead in its tracks with one shot at close range.

What!?

Para Bellum
November 23, 2006, 05:54 PM
The shotgun with #000 Magnum buck will stop any vehicle dead in its tracks with one shot at close range.

sure, I've seen Humvees one-shot-stopped in Iraq with 12ga's :D

smooks75
November 23, 2006, 05:55 PM
Thanks for the Thanks Giving laugh Para! :D

Bender711
November 23, 2006, 06:03 PM
Id say the AR, if the first one don't get them the 29 behind it will.

DonR101395
November 23, 2006, 06:11 PM
I'll take a rifle. A rifle will do anything a shotgun will do from 0-50 meters, but a shotgun won't do anything a rifle can do from 50-300 meters. A rifle is lighter when carrying the same ammount of ammo for each. In the correct chambering a rifle will penetrate cover and concealment more readily than a shotgun. I can lay down a base of fire with a rifle while advancing on you as you stuff shells every 6-8 rounds into a shotgun.

Mannlicher
November 23, 2006, 07:40 PM
I have not been in any sort of urban combat, nor do I really think I will be engaged in that sort of stuff in the future.
My choice though, based on my reading, and my preference, would be an AR with 16 inch or less barrel.

UMP
November 23, 2006, 07:47 PM
A pump shot gun with 00 buckshot will get the job done. 12 gauge of course!

hpg
November 23, 2006, 07:47 PM
They both have play a roll in this scenario.....hpg

Ala Dan
November 23, 2006, 07:53 PM
12 gague Remington 870 Marine Magnum with 00 buckshot, will restore
law and order in urban combat~!:cool: :D

tony pasley
November 23, 2006, 09:35 PM
Actually both is the best answer because each others a complianment to eachother. the shotgun covers a larger area with each shot, a rifle can reach out father, so my real answer is both because 1 person cannot sweep and clear by themselves you need a squad or more so both weapons can be used to they're best.

Hardtarget
November 23, 2006, 11:48 PM
I feel the rifle is the best combat weapon. No...I've never been in combat. The rifle is a better weapon to me because it works close and far. Its my responsibility to practice.
For those that voted shotgun...I know it is very lethal up close. So is a rifle.Its just that a rifle can reach out...and that may be very much in your favor!
Mark.

teejhot.40cal
November 24, 2006, 12:09 AM
I would take the assault because I am a really good point shooter so hitting is no problem for me.

shamus005
November 24, 2006, 12:14 AM
A pump shotgun's rate of fire: BOOM, chick-chack, BOOM, chick-chack, BOOM

An assault rifle's rate fo fire: BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG

I kinda like the ability to quickly acquisition and take out multiple targets.

If you want he shotgun, just slap an m203 underneath your assault rifle. A 40mm buckshot round makes a 12 gauge shell look like a snap-cap.

buckster
November 24, 2006, 01:15 AM
Have their advantages. Close in, buck or slugs will work on un-armored stuff. The rifle will penetrate better. Better throw in the pistol too.

BillCA
November 24, 2006, 03:00 AM
Wait a minute!

I have grown to love the assault rifle, ever since I first knew what one was.

Do you really know what an assault rifle is?

Let's be clear. It is NOT an AR-15. Nor is it an M1A, SKS or any other semi-automatic rifle, regardless of its configuration.

Assault rifles (Sturmgewehr) are moderately short, light select-fire weapons capable of fully-automatic fire (including burst-mode) which utilize an intermediate-range rifle cartridge with a magazine capacity suitable for suppressive fire as well as accurate semi-automatic fire.

A combat shotgun will have a barrel 18" or less in length and may include a pistol grip and/or folding stock for CQB. There exists a version of the combat shotgun that could be called an "assault shotgun" in that it is select fire and uses either a box or drum magazine.

Let's also note that a shotgun with 00-Buck (9 pellets/round) and a 6 round magazine puts out 54 projectiles while the M16/M4/M14 puts out only 20-30 projectiles. (Think of shotguns as the "original burst mode" gun.:D)

In urban combat - where house clearing is a standard function - the almost-ideal shotgun would be the late High-Standard Model 10 "bullpup" shotgun or the aforementioned "assault shotgun". In the CQB scenarios of house clearing, the 12 gauge 00 buck round is devastating. Slugs can penetrate solid wood doors and even heavy lathe & plaster walls with surprising ease.

Reality says that your urban combat team should consist of at least one rifleman who has an assault rifle capable of precision shooting. A five man team would consist of two shotguns and two rifles with the 5th man able to go either way since he is the point man in a withdrawl, if necessary.

Thus the shotgun and assault rifle compliment each other in urban combat, instead of fighting for supremacy.

Squad sized teams should include at least one .30 caliber rifle (M14) and/or an M60E4 and one or more members with an M203 grenade launcher on an M16 or M4.

stevelyn
November 24, 2006, 08:39 AM
I'll take the rifle. The shotgun is great for unarmored targets at room and yard distances, but you do know that something down the street is gonna need whacked and the rifle is the only thing that'll give you that reach and precision.

garryc
November 24, 2006, 08:59 AM
I'm going with the rifle. Assuming we are talking military combat. I'd choose it in police situations, but not a semi. It would be a 7600p.

Para Bellum
November 24, 2006, 05:44 PM
Happiness is a full gunsafe, not really, but it helps. :D
That made me LOL. I love that!

smince
November 24, 2006, 06:05 PM
Well, I just tied the poll, but I'll go with the assault rifle, or a semi-auto variant.

Dwight55
November 24, 2006, 08:31 PM
All our point guys in 'Nam who could get one would grab the shotty every time. They looked like the Pillsbury dough boy with every conceivable pocket either filled with shells or water as they went out on patrol, . . .

The question was asked about urban warfare, . . . the implication being house to house, . . . up the alley, . . . down the street. Yessir, . . . shotgun for me.

May God bless,
Dwight

locknid
November 25, 2006, 08:21 AM
I would take a rifle over a shotgun(as i apologize to mine) in an urban combat situation. The rifle has three main aspects as to why I would carry it over a shotgun. First is the rate of fire, much faster then a shotgun(unless full) and with a rifle the recoil is usually not as bad so you can shoot multiple times more accurately. Second is I have more ammo at my disposile before I have to think about changing mags, also it is easier to carry multiple say AR-15 mags over tons of shotgun shells which I have to manually load one at a time in a pump. If I was clearing houses and part of a team I would def be the shotgunner. Also in a civil unrest zombie situation I would probably use a shotgun from the comfort of my bedroom. But if I was in urban combat hand me a nice rifle, doesn't even have to be full auto.

jeager106
November 25, 2006, 11:03 AM
I fellas.
This debate was bound to happen.
It's interseting and brings out a lot of common sense, the experiences of others who have "been there done that", and some silly stuff like, 000 buck will stop a Humvee "dead in its tracks".:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
I'm retired LEO ( disabled in the line really.
I formed our SWAT team, was the firearms instructor, as well as designated sniper, and led drugs raids and other fun, but boring stuff.
The combat s.g. is an extremely effective but very sepcialized weapon.
We abandoned the use of the "riot" gun in it's antiquated form years ago.
We still issue the 12 bore in 870 persuasion but with some minror changes and a whole lot of training so cops, who don't necessarily know much about guns, would understand it's limited usefullness.
At distances under 60 feet the s.g. is quite effective against gobblins wearing normal clothing and using buckshot as the payload.
Our 870 wore i.c. inserted tubes to give a bit better pattern and still be able to fire slugs.
The slug is very, very, effective against tissue targets out to and a little beyond 100 yards if the shooter can manage the weapon.
All issued 'riot' guns have rifled sights, are (were) sighted in dead bull at 50 yards. Issued slug ammo was Winchester 1 oz soft lead fosters.
Why? They work as well as any other foster in a smoothie and are pretty cheap by the case.
The s.g. barrel will need cleaned thoroughly after shooting just 5 rounds of the pure lead fosters.
Even years ago we learned to chuck a 12 bore cleaning rod in a 3/8 drill and apply the drill and solvent liberally to properly "get the lead out".
If I were still able to play policeman again I would consider using Brenneke K.O. slugs.
1) they are cheaper even than Winny
2) they are more accurate
3) that big flat nose dumps more gee whiz and tears up tissue rather well.
4) a dead solid hit in the K-5 even over body armor will dizzy a bad guy real bad!
I use them for bambi and they are 4" at 75 yards accurate on a bad day.
A properly loaded and sighted in shottie can serve as a passable rifle.
Not minute of angle accurate but minute of gobblin accurate.
About ammo.
Buckshot sucks!
Period.
Unless distances are close, under 30 yards, there is the distinct possibility that every one of the 9 00 buck could miss a gobblin! (18" no choke)
I have set up targets to teach the troops how easy it is to completely miss a man sized gobblin with the standard issue of cheap unplated, unbuffered, 9 pellet 00 buck load.
Remember, even a few hits from buck at any distance at all is an anemic projectile.
A .33 lead ball at 900 f.p.s. won't do much damage unless you run said ball up the gobblins nose holes. Compare the buck to a rather old, slow, .32 auto bullet. Would that be your choice in a save yer bacon situation?
At thirty FEET and under, ANY shot load can be devestating, slugs are a no brainer. Slugs is nasty.
When considering the s.g. for serious social interaction one must also consider the fact that there is a veritable plethora of ammo specific to doing certain work.
The s.g. must then be loaded with the ammo specific to the job at hand and it takes time to load the sucker. Assuming you have ammo on your person and the time to switch it out.
I love the s.g. for certain applications.
For a bedroom defense against a burglarizing bad guy it will definately stop any armed confrontation. Distances of course are going to be less than 20 feet.
Up close and personal the s.g. reigns king,
Go beyond 30 yards and you have issues and must switch to slugs and rely on sights to get proper effect from one ounce of soft pure lead.
The "assult" rifle, whatever you choose that term to mean, is superior all around.
Even at very close range the s.g. must still be pointed, call it "aimed", and so does the rifle.
A .223, even the 7.62 X 39 rounds, recoil very little, the s.g. recoils a whole bunch.
The rifle muzzle blast can be minimized with a flash hider, the muzzle blast from a s.g. at night will flat blind you!
Recoil from the mentioned rifle calibers are very mild allowing fast aimed fire.
Recoil from the shottie needs no further comment.
I could go on with this learned diatribe but you get the picture.
For general purpose 'saving my bacon' in an urban combat situation I would not feel naked with the shottie but my tactics would be altered to fit the weapon in my hands.
I would feel much better with at least an AK-47 in a combat situation.

SpK
November 25, 2006, 11:43 AM
Wait a minute!


Quote:
I have grown to love the assault rifle, ever since I first knew what one was.

Do you really know what an assault rifle is?

Let's be clear. It is NOT an AR-15. Nor is it an M1A, SKS or any other semi-automatic rifle, regardless of its configuration.

Assault rifles (Sturmgewehr) are moderately short, light select-fire weapons capable of fully-automatic fire (including burst-mode) which utilize an intermediate-range rifle cartridge with a magazine capacity suitable for suppressive fire as well as accurate semi-automatic fire.

A combat shotgun will have a barrel 18" or less in length and may include a pistol grip and/or folding stock for CQB. There exists a version of the combat shotgun that could be called an "assault shotgun" in that it is select fire and uses either a box or drum magazine.

Let's also note that a shotgun with 00-Buck (9 pellets/round) and a 6 round magazine puts out 54 projectiles while the M16/M4/M14 puts out only 20-30 projectiles. (Think of shotguns as the "original burst mode" gun.)

In urban combat - where house clearing is a standard function - the almost-ideal shotgun would be the late High-Standard Model 10 "bullpup" shotgun or the aforementioned "assault shotgun". In the CQB scenarios of house clearing, the 12 gauge 00 buck round is devastating. Slugs can penetrate solid wood doors and even heavy lathe & plaster walls with surprising ease.

Reality says that your urban combat team should consist of at least one rifleman who has an assault rifle capable of precision shooting. A five man team would consist of two shotguns and two rifles with the 5th man able to go either way since he is the point man in a withdrawl, if necessary.

Thus the shotgun and assault rifle compliment each other in urban combat, instead of fighting for supremacy.

Squad sized teams should include at least one .30 caliber rifle (M14) and/or an M60E4 and one or more members with an M203 grenade launcher on an M16 or M4.

Yes, I REALLY know what the definition of an assault rifle is. I know AR-15s, SKSs, or M1As (especially M1A due to large cartridge) are not 'assault rifles'. However, being semi or fully automatic, I prefer to call them 'assault rifles' due to the ease of saying that over calling them semi-automatic autoloaders. If you want to call them semi-automatic autoloaders, that's fine, too.

Para Bellum
November 25, 2006, 12:05 PM
All our point guys in 'Nam who could get one would grab the shotty every time. They looked like the Pillsbury dough boy with every conceivable pocket either filled with shells or water as they went out on patrol, . . .
That was maybe because the M16 didn't work. I have never heard of guys issued AKs, AUGs or FALs etc wanting to trade their Rifle for a shotgun.

RevolverLover
November 25, 2006, 12:56 PM
That was maybe because the M16 didn't work. I have never heard of guys issued AKs, AUGs or FALs etc wanting to trade their Rifle for a shotgun.


When I was on point, I still wanted a shotgun instead of the M16, AK, M3 grease gun, or anything else we had at the time. You would have to be at point to know why. ;)

snolden
November 28, 2006, 06:11 PM
IF you know you are going to need a long gun, you DON'T go by yourself. You bring as many friends as you can and you mix up your weapons. The shotgun loaded with slugs, with some buckshot deep in the mag. The rifle loaded with teh best ammo you can afford along with a couple mags of ball for penetrating walls, a .30 cal (even a bolt action) for concrete walls, lights, radios, full bore.

If it is urban combat and you are alone, you are DEAD. The only way a lone person will survive a combat scenario is if they are lucky and have a chance to run away.

BobK
November 28, 2006, 06:31 PM
I like the shotgun but would use an AR our equivilent rifle for urban warfare because of the short and long range capability. But if I were in extreme close quarters battle then the shotgun would be first. Actually it would be nice to carry both.

Speer
November 28, 2006, 06:36 PM
Rate of fire, load time, range, low recoil. Rifle for me.

Glenn E. Meyer
November 29, 2006, 02:20 PM
You run out into the street and rack your shotgun. The noise causes all bad guys in a 2 block radius to run away. Vehicles are disintegrated by the sonic waves from a racking pump gun. Didn't ya know that?

Nagano21
November 29, 2006, 03:04 PM
I have to go with the Assault rifle. Further range,more accurate, and can fire off rounds, and reload a lot faster than a shottie. However a shotgun is still going to do its job well, but just not what I would prefer.

Greg_Dunn
November 29, 2006, 03:24 PM
In up close and personal role the shotgun is a versatile weapon, can be used for breaching, less lethal, and lethal applications.

There is a great variety of specialty ammunition available nowadays.
You don't have to be a good marksman to have an effect with it as you do with a rifle and it covers area targets better.

I love my M4 and have used it with the 203 as well, but to me the ultimate urban combat weapon is the shotgun for general use.

I still like my old 870P.

CobrayCommando
November 29, 2006, 03:25 PM
Slugs may not penetrate armor, but at reasonable ranges anyone in soft armor (maybe even with a metal trauma plate) is probably going to be incapacitated with a shot to the chest.

David Armstrong
November 29, 2006, 04:08 PM
Shotgun, hands down. No other weapon gives you the versatility for the urban environment. Proper selection of ammo and weapon allows effective engagement of targets out to 100 meters, and nothing is as good for hit rates within 50 meters. This assumes, of course, a properly trained operator, and those are few and far between. The rifle, in the hands of the moderately trained, is probably better, but for the well-trained the shotgun dominates.
I have never heard of guys issued AKs, AUGs or FALs etc wanting to trade their Rifle for a shotgun.
You just haven't been around enough.

jeager106
November 29, 2006, 06:23 PM
Shotgun, hands down. No other weapon gives you the versatility
Versitility? The question addressed urban combat. The s.g. is a specialized weapon. Even in military applications the s.g. is issued for specific reasons. It is not a general combat weapon, nor is it versitile.
for the urban environment. Proper selection of ammo and weapon allows effective engagement of targets out to 100 meters,
O.K. What ammo is effective to 100 meters? I'm hoping you say a bullet like projectile, i.e. slug, not buck shot.

and nothing is as good for hit rates within 50 meters.

Hit rates at 50 meters with what ammo? From a s.g.? Are you talking about 10 guys shooting buckshot all at once? Then yes, you could fill the air with buck.
But hit rate at 50 meters from a military or police s.g. from one person firing?
Perhaps you missed my post where I reported out on the fact that you could miss a man sized target using a cyl. bore 12, and the standard load of nine 00 soft lead, unbuffered, unplated buckshot.
At 50 meters 00 buck don't penetrate worth a hoot. Remember it's a .33 caliber roundball rocketing along at the screaming velocity of about 700 f.p.s. at that range. Maybe slower. Besides a lead cube, nothing, absolutely nothing, sheds velocity faster than a roundball.
I'm quite sure that a pellet or two would wound an opponent but you ain't gonna set any records for knockdown power.
Oh, by the way. Not long ago I shot some Seller and Bellot JUNK 00 buck over my P-35 and it registered a whopping 835 f.p.s. at 12 feet from the muzzle.Wonder if the pellets hit warp factor 10 at 50 meters?

This assumes, of course, a properly trained operator, and those are few and far between. The rifle, in the hands of the moderately trained, is probably better, but for the well-trained the shotgun dominates.

Listen: What in the world makes you think "proper training" changes the ballsitics of buckshot???????
Your turn.

Dirty_Harry
November 30, 2006, 03:38 PM
AR-15 for me

john in jax
November 30, 2006, 03:42 PM
One of each. Both have their roles.

Up close or even at extended ranges with a .308 or .30-06 there is a good chance, if I can determine your location, that I can shoot you even THROUGH most building materials (a.k.a. walls, doors, etc...).

A shotgun isn't as effective in that very narrow situation BUT is hard to beat for laying down a lot of fire power. And slugs do make breeching doors easier.

dixierifleman
November 30, 2006, 04:28 PM
M4 with Remington 870 Express Super Magnum underneath it. loaded 00 buck, slug, 00, slug, 00, slug, 00

jeager106
November 30, 2006, 08:38 PM
The original question was:
My question is: having been both well documented, which weapon do you think is more effective in modern urban combat?
Since the war we are currently involved in has morphed into a largely urban battle one wonders why the rifle has not been largely replaced by the shotgun?
The shotgun remains a specialized weapon and is not issued en mass to the troops.
Could be the military has a handle on the situation and our military leaders understand the role of the combat shotgun quite well.

Now let me posit a question.
Has anyone here, even one of you, ever patterned 00 buck from a cylinder bore 12 gauge at any distance?
Now, has anyone of you ever, in a controled test, fired the standard nine 00 buck load at a full measured 50 yards from a cylinder bore 12 gauge shotgun?

Does anyone that has posted here know what the weight of a single 00 buckshot pellet is?
Do you know the velocity of the pellet at 50 yards? At the muzzle?
Done any penetration tests at 50 yards with 00 buck?

Mind you I think we need to agree, or disagree and argue, (scientific sense of the word) that the combat shotgun is NOT equipped with a turkey full choke.

Can we agree on that?
Do we agree that a combat shotgun probably doesn't need to be equipped with removable choke tubes?
If it has removable choke tubes can we agree that swapping choke tubes during an armed confrontation is probably a really, really, bad move?

That said, the combat shotgun is likely a cylinder bore.
Which brings me back to the statements I've read here in these posts about the shotgun being effective at 50 yards with 2 3/4" 00 buck.

IT AIN'T effective at 50 yards with 00 buck.

Yes indeedy you might get a lucky strike or even two from the standard 00 buck load on a person at 50 yards, but effective as a stopper it ain't.

Arguments for the other side please?:)

frog21
November 30, 2006, 09:43 PM
That said, the combat shotgun is likely a cylinder bore.
Which brings me back to the statements I've read here in these posts about the shotgun being effective at 50 yards with 2 3/4" 00 buck.

IT AIN'T effective at 50 yards with 00 buck.

Yes indeedy you might get a lucky strike or even two from the standard 00 buck load on a person at 50 yards, but effective as a stopper it ain't.

Arguments for the other side please?

I own 3 tactical shotguns that will put 6 or 7 00 buck pellets on a 12 inch plate at 50 yards. I have done this many times. None of them have chokes. They have been modified by Hans Vang. I am not saying that those pellets will have a lot of stopping power at 50 yards but they may have a pretty good effect depending on where and what they strike.

Shooting slugs from the same shotguns is no problem even out to about 125 yards. I have shot 5 inch, 5 shot groups at 100 yards with all of my shotguns and I have taken effective head shots at 100 yards on a standard pepper popper on several occasions.

In most true urban combat, 50 yards is long shot.

I do not remember the velocity at 50 yards or the weight of a 00 pellet but I have patterned many shotguns with many types of loads and I have tested the effects on body armor, ballistic gelatin and differnt types of clothing.

The combat shotgun can be effective in urban combat but it does take the proper ammuniton and you must be aware of it's limitations.

By the way, in the poll, I voted for the rifle. I have combat experience with both and the carbine is better overall but not by much.

RevolverLover
November 30, 2006, 09:43 PM
Versitility? The question addressed urban combat. The s.g. is a specialized weapon. Even in military applications the s.g. is issued for specific reasons. It is not a general combat weapon, nor is it versitile.


Yes, the shotgun is versatile. I used it very effectively in combat. The shotgun is not a general combat weapon...nobody said it was...but the question was what would someone rather have...so it boils down to personal preference.

O.K. What ammo is effective to 100 meters? I'm hoping you say a bullet like projectile, i.e. slug, not buck shot.


See you can use both buckshot and slugs...isn't that versatile?

What in the world makes you think "proper training" changes the ballsitics of buckshot???????

Proper training doesn't change the ballistics of buckshot but allows you to use it more effectively.

Jeremy Stafford
November 30, 2006, 10:54 PM
My first engagement in the Sandbox I had a well used Mossberg 590. It served me well and handled all of the Hajis I put in front of it (loaded with Winchester slugs). However, when it came time to reload, the Tubes major shortcoming (even in upclose work) was very apparent. When rounds are kicking up dirt at your feet and snapping over your head, it takes an ETERNITY to reload!

smince
December 1, 2006, 04:59 AM
None of them have chokes. They have been modified by Hans Vang
I was under the impression that Vang barrels are internally choked.
See you can use both buckshot and slugs...isn't that versatile?

However, when it came time to reload, the Tubes major shortcoming (even in upclose work) was very apparent. When rounds are kicking up dirt at your feet and snapping over your head, it takes an ETERNITY to reload!
The major strike against the shotgun is the reloading. And changing rounds during an action? Eject the buck, and insert a slug, Or keep the tube one round down so you can insert the round of your choice to be the next one in the mag. I'll take a rifle myself.

jeager106
December 1, 2006, 06:42 AM
frog21:
WELL YOU'VE GOT MY ATTENTION!
Seven out of nine 00 buck in a 12 plate is incredible.
That being the case you have 3 cylinder bore shotties that shoot 100% patterns at 40.
40 yards being the standard most sporting shotguns are patterned to determine the effectiveness of the shot load inside a 30" circle.
Your shotties must absolutely shoot the center out of a paper target at 40 yards!
I have two highly modified barrels for my 870 which serves as a defensive s.g. around the homestead.
One is a 28" v.r. the other 20" with rifle sights.
Both barrels have been extensivley modified, neither will shoot 6 or 7 out of 9 00 buck into a 12" plate at 50 yards with imp. mod., or extra full.
And I've shot a ton of buckshot, premium, hard, copper plated, buffered, 3" ammo.
I am most interested in a shotgun that will perform like yours does.
Would you please advise what modifications Hand Vang performs on a shottie to produce those stellar results at that distance?
Please tell me what ammo you use to get such remarkable results?
I would absolutely pay premium bucks to have a s.g. barrel that would perform like that.
Of coures we know that combat troops don't use specially modified shotguns.
I doubt any military and darned few police s.gs get sent to smiths that specilize in barrel work.
5" groups at 100 with good slugs is no trick from any s.g barrel with good properly reguated sights.
I never shot buck at 50 yards for penetration in any medium. Never could count on a pellet getting close enough to anything, even a gallon jug of water.
Please advise specifics on Hans Vang modifications, and please, how to get contact that person. I sure would absolutely slobber over a s.g. that would perform like that at 50 yards.
I dare say that is a rarity.
I WANT one!!!!!

frog21
December 1, 2006, 08:02 AM
Jeager106,

www.vangcomp.com

The 00 buck I use most often is the copper plated Federal Tactical. I once got all 12 pellets on a 12" plate with a Benneli. I also shot a 6 inch pattern at 25 yards with that same Vang Comp Benneli, and I did that 3 shots in a row. I stopped showing off after the 3. My 870 and 590 barrels will consistenty pattern 7 - 9 inches at 25 yards with the Federal Tactical.

As with any shotgun, occasionally I get a flyer and will get a 25 yard pattern of 10 inches and maybe 11 or 12 inches but these are certainly not the norm and this is very rare.

I was going through a a shoot house once with my favorite 870 loaded with #8 shot and across a large room at about 23 feet, I took a head shot on a paper target. The rangemaster and I did a thorough search and found that only one piece of shot was not in the face. It went through the pictured bad guys ear.

You will see that some of Hans' mods use porting. I have some barrels that are ported and some that are not. The non ported are my favorite but they all pattern the same.

I know lot's of people with Vang mod shotguns and all get like results.

I will say again that even though my tactical shotguns perform like this I would still choose the carbine for urban combat in most cases. I say most cases because "the situation dictates the tactics".

David Armstrong
December 1, 2006, 02:46 PM
Versitility? The question addressed urban combat. The s.g. is a specialized weapon. Even in military applications the s.g. is issued for specific reasons. It is not a general combat weapon, nor is it versitile.
HUH?? The thing that makes it so goood for urban combat is the versatility. Different loads can be selected to address different needs. Most combat loadings have enough versatility to reach across different situations. O.K. What ammo is effective to 100 meters? I'm hoping you say a bullet like projectile, i.e. slug, not buck shot.
While the slug is of course the primary selection for 100 yard use, Buck can be used in some situations. Again, that is the versatility of the weapon.
Hit rates at 50 meters with what ammo?
Buckshot, and flechettes for those who can get them.
But hit rate at 50 meters from a military or police s.g. from one person firing?
Yes. Sorry if that seems to confuse you so much, but those are the findings from tests conducted by various military forces over the years.
Perhaps you missed my post where I reported out on the fact that you could miss a man sized target using a cyl. bore 12, and the standard load of nine 00 soft lead, unbuffered, unplated buckshot.
The fact that you seem to have trouble performing a task does not mean that task is imposssible for others. I used to regularly engage the 24" plates at 50 yards with a shotgun using standard buck. Being able to customize it a bit (such as selecting a buckshot load that patterned well with my particular gun) makes it much easier, so much so that I have little problem engaging the 10" plate at that distance.
At 50 meters 00 buck don't penetrate worth a hoot.
It penetrates well enough to disable and kill. What more do you want? FWIW, I've taken two deer between the 40 and 50 yard mark with buckshot, and they seemed unaware that the rounds weren't supposed to penetrate.
Listen: What in the world makes you think "proper training" changes the ballsitics of buckshot???????
Where have I sad anything about training changing the ballistics? Proper training allows one to more effectively utilize the ballistics that are there, recognize the strengths and weaknesses for various loads, select the proper load for the particular situation, utilize a less than optimum load for best results in a situation, etc.

David Armstrong
December 1, 2006, 02:54 PM
Has anyone here, even one of you, ever patterned 00 buck from a cylinder bore 12 gauge at any distance?
Now, has anyone of you ever, in a controled test, fired the standard nine 00 buck load at a full measured 50 yards from a cylinder bore 12 gauge shotgun?

Yes and yes.
IT AIN'T effective at 50 yards with 00 buck.
Maybe so for you, but for others it has been.
Since the war we are currently involved in has morphed into a largely urban battle one wonders why the rifle has not been largely replaced by the shotgun?
Not at all. They are very different weapons, with different strengths and weaknesses. The shotgun is going to take more training to use to its maximum potential. The ammunition supply is much more difficult. It is harder to control for many people. The rifle is a better general-issue weapon, particularly when capable of automatic fire. It might be equated to the submachine gun never supplanting the rifle for the US soldier in WW2.

jeager106
December 2, 2006, 09:45 AM
David. My point is that the s.g. is a very versitile weapon but specialized in implimentation.
It is not a useful general combat weapon. It is very useful in a urban situation but would never, ever, be the issued weapon for troops in urban combat.
Being a specialized weapon the soldier carrying the s.g. most certainly needs the support of fellows armed with the combat rifle.
The thing is painfully slow to reload, kicks like a mule is of very limited range, can only hold 6, 7 , 8 or 9 rounds of ammo.
Yes I know there are magazines that can hold more but they are beasts to carry, make the gun so very out of balance, and ultra heavy. Ergo you don't hear of the 25 shot drum issued for combat use.
Listen: NO s.g. will pattern available buckshot effectively at 50 yards using a cylinder bore.
Any s.g. that can put 6 or 9 buck into 12" at 50 must have some sort of choke.
50 yards is pretty much a maximum effective range for buckshot with a good shottie designed to pattern buck well.
The only reason the combat shottie is so effective at close quarters is NOT because it scatters lead!
At close range the shotgun simply must be pointed or aimed the same exact way a rifle is used to engage close targets.
The shogtun delivers a massive lead payload. That is way it excells.
If the payload is buckshot it looses effectiveness over distance. It falls far short of the rifles ablilities to deliver a payload.
I never said the s.g. wasn't usefull. It is, however, very limited in it's usefullness.
My tricked up 870 will deliver patterns of #4 and 00 buck that could kill (deer or humans) at 50 yards. It is, however, a tricked up, highly modified s.g. Not the cylinder bore found in most as issued shotties.
Have you ever fired a cylinder bore s.g. at a man sized silhouette at 25, 30, and so on with unplatted, unbuffered, soft lead 2 3/4" 00 buck?
The reuslts may unpleasantly surprise you.
Patterns improve dramatically with todays platted, buffered, high antimony buck and imp. cyl. and modified chokes.
I'd venture to say the deer you took with buck were not taken with a straight cyl. bore and the above mentioned standard buck loads.
Oh, and FWIW. If a shotgun barrel does contain the internal chokes the conventional wisdom is that slugs absolutely should NOT be fired from such a barrel.
That would limit the versitility of the s.g. making it a 50 yard weapon for sure.
Oh. And just for grins saunter out to your local range and sling some 00 buck from your best tricked up shottie at a silhouette at 100 yards.
Then sling some lead at the same target with your assault rifle and see why the combat rifle is the general purpose urban combat weapon and the shotgun is a specialized support weapon.
Given all the information slathered on this thread I would take the rifle over the s.g. and appreciate being supported by the s.g. armed person that knows how to use it.
If I were assigned the combat shottie and had to use it in a urban fight I would apprecaite a squad armed with rifles for support.
If I were alone in an urban fight I would opt for the rifle any day.
The tactically withdraw until I got some support.
No one ever said the s.g was useless, just limited.

jeager106
December 2, 2006, 11:59 AM
Methinks some of you fellas that the unmodified cylinder bore 12 gauge s.g. is a viable, reliable, and effective weapon for general urban combat would do well to study the posted results here :https://www.vangcomp.com/Pattern_dea.html
For those of you not interested enough to see the results on VANGCOMPS site I'll simply say that NO testing was done by anyone past the thrity-five yard range.
No testing was done and posted at even 40 yards.
The DEA tests were done at a maximum distance of 25 yards.
Tests were performed with a VANGCOMP tricked up s.g. using nine 00 buck loads.
At twenty five yards all 9 pellets remained in the torso "kill zone" and was hailed by the testers as "quite an accomplishment".
This lends a taddy bit of credibility to my own observations that the std. nine pellet load of 00 buck at 25 yards left a lot to be desired.
Indeed it is possible to MISS any vital hit on a man sized silhoutte at 25 using a cyl bore s.g. and the much described std load.
I've proved that on more than a few occasions by actually shooting the patterns, doing to work and doucmenting the results, not by reading somes jibberish on the internet.
My trickup up shottie is not ported nor backbored.
Porting makes one extremely loug shotgun blast very, very much more loud.
I consider that a tactical disadvantage that overshadows any advantage in perceived recoil or muzzle rise.
But hey! Listen: I ain't no buddy. I'm just some swiggin' dude that has been to a host of great firearms training programs, fired litterly thousands of rounds of buck 'n ball in all manner of 'live fire house' drills and feild conditions.
Shot up a dozen junk cars with s.g. ammo and I fully realize the devestating power and extreme limitations of the combat s.g.
I've kicked down a door or two in my 22 year career and when I had a choice my entry firearm was a supressed MP-5!
And believe me I was comforted by the fact that my entry team had a trusted, qualified, man with a 14" 870 loaded with #4 buck with modified choke.
I think those of you that believe the s.g. can consistantly put all buckshot into a 12" circle at 50 yards need to go back to the range and fire enough rounds to develope consistant, repeatable, results.
Then post them.

threegun
December 2, 2006, 01:54 PM
The bottom line is if given one choice (either rifle or shotgun) for urban fighting the only logical answer is the rifle. Unless you have a supporting cast armed with rifles the shotgun is simply to short ranged to be a viable choice. Sure you can fire slugs but with 1/5 of the accuracy, 1/4 or the firepower and 1/3 of the range of a rifle. The only major plus for the shotgun is its devastating power at closer ranges. Well I got news for you a hit from a high powered rifle isn't a bee sting. Few humans can withstand let alone function with a hit to the vitals from a high powered rifle. So my rifle can operate close up and at distance with precision and effectiveness. How can anyone chose the shotgun?

gripster
December 2, 2006, 02:43 PM
because assault shotguns with a pistol grip are fun to shoot. i have both assault rifle and shotgun and ill take ether/or. don't matter to me.:p:D

frog21
December 2, 2006, 04:13 PM
jeager106,

I think those of you that believe the s.g. can consistantly put all buckshot into a 12" circle at 50 yards need to go back to the range and fire enough rounds to develope consistant, repeatable, results.
Then post them.
I could not find a post that said, "all buckshot into a 12" circle at 50 yards".

My loads of choice for my 870's are Federal Tactical 00 buck for the up close and personal stuff and a good 1 ounce slug for anything past about 15 yards. These are my real world choices. At the range it is fun and educational to push the limits.

Dwight55
December 2, 2006, 06:06 PM
jeager106, . . . no insult intended, . . . but you have a bit to learn about the tactics used by our military.

Your statement: ". . . but would never, ever, be the issued weapon for troops in urban combat," just simply is not true, . . . it is issued, . . . it is used, . . . and it is even coveted on a regular basis by our front line combat troops, . . . and has been such in every major combat since WW1.

Instead of relying on what you "think" go back and read some of the previous posts in this thread, . . . you will find that the shotgun has a very vital and efficient role in the hands of someone who is proficient in its use.

Contrary to popular belief, . . . military rifle ammo is the big limiting factor in the rifle's effectiveness. As often as not, . . . the rounds buzz right through the person making a beautiful 5.56 or 7.62 mm hole all the way through. This is especially true if no bone is hit. Many VietNam corpmen and medics will be more than willing to validate that statement.

The shotgun on the other hand plows 9 or 12 ea, lead 00 balls through the wound channel, . . . similar to being hit with 9 or 12 ea 5.56 or 7.62's all in the very close proximity of each other.

Yes, . . . cumbersome to reload, . . . limited load capacity, . . . but again, . . . it is simply a function of position in the fire team, . . . and proficiency with the weapon system.

May God bless,
Dwight

jeager106
December 2, 2006, 11:37 PM
Your statement: ". . . but would never, ever, be the issued weapon for troops in urban combat," just simply is not true, . . . it is issued, . . . it is used, . . . and it is even coveted on a regular basis by our front line combat troops, . . . and has been such in every major combat since WW1.

'Scuse me but the s.g. is NOT the weapon issued to the troops.
It's a specialized weapon issued to some troops, and rightfully so.
Methinks I didn't post that clearly enough and you misread it.

The shotgun is an effective weapon at close range only because it can produce multiple hits in milliseconds.
No shoulder fired machine gun can deliver nine, twelve or fifteen .33 caliber 'bullets' in what amounts to instantly.
It is this fact and this fact only that makes the s.g. so devestating at close range. that many instant hits in the torso will produce horrendouse damage to organs, nervous system, and artries.
Bad guys without armor should fall down right quick at 15 yards and less.
But you see at that range you are pretty much shooting the thing in a rifle like manner. It is not the old classic idea of a scattergun.
We see people and law enforcement agencies getting serious about having a s.g. that DON'T scatter so much so that the payload goes in a confined area to wreck havoc.
Remember what I said about sometimes missing a silhouette at 25 yards.
Well son, law enforment agencies know all too well the ineffectiveness of the so called 'police riot' gun and box them up and off the like of Vangcomp for the work that makes them less likely to miss the bad guy at 25 yards and closer.
In a real shooting fight the s.g. is NOT a 50 yard weapon with shot loads.
I would strongly argue that it is not a viable deer weapon with buck at 50 yards.
Maybe a very good, tricked up, s.g. would be marginally effective at 50.
Once I had occasion to converse with some good ol' boys from the swamp land of southern Va.
These boys were serious deer hunters, used beagles to run deer around those very thick swamps and I witnessed some very interesting custom s.g. barrels and loads
These guys claim 100 yard kills on the rather small 80 pound deer that about in that area.
They used reamed out and sleeved barrels as long as 40 inches.
Not made long to make the gun shoot further by vertue of lenght alone but to burn buckets of slow burning powder under up to 20 OO buck shot!
The buckshot was 00, cast by hand from linotype.
These guns sported rifle sights, some had scopes.
That was 25 years ago.
If anyone is interseted in a serious buck load take a look at Dixie Ammo's TriBall load.
Three, hard cast .62 balls that really will put all the payload in a 10" circle at 50 yards.
That is a serious buckshot load that will perfrom on even larger deer.

David Armstrong
December 3, 2006, 02:39 AM
My point is that the s.g. is a very versitile weapon but specialized in implimentation.
And my point is that specialized implementation is what makes it such an outstanding performer in the realm of urban combat.
It is not a useful general combat weapon. It is very useful in a urban situation but would never, ever, be the issued weapon for troops in urban combat.
But the initial post did not ask about a general combat weapon, the question posed was "...which weapon do you think is more effective in modern urban combat?" To me, that is the shotgun for reasons previously enumerated. The fact that it has some inherent weaknesses that disqualify it as a general purpose weapon does not diminish that at all. To use a marginal analogy, if one were to ask "what car do you think is the most effective in modern urban traffic?" I might suggest the Porsche 911. The fact that most people cannot drive one anywhere near to it's potential and are prebably better off with a Honda Civic doesn't change that at all.
The thing is painfully slow to reload, kicks like a mule is of very limited range, can only hold 6, 7 , 8 or 9 rounds of ammo.
Much of that is a training issue, and I believe I've already said that the user must be well trained if he is to get the advantages the shotgun offers. But with proper training reloading is not at all slow, the kick is quite easy to manage, and the limited range is well within the urban combat parameters.
Listen: NO s.g. will pattern available buckshot effectively at 50 yards using a cylinder bore.
Listen: One can quickly and effectively engage human targets at 50 yards with available buckshot using a cylinder bore. Whether one would consider that to be patterning effectively is fairly irrelevant, IMO.
50 yards is pretty much a maximum effective range for buckshot with a good shottie designed to pattern buck well.
Again you use the term effective. Will it hit the BG and cause him to have problems is my concern. To me that is effective. Any other consideration is purely academic to me. If you need to get a more precise shot at any range, switch to a slug.
Have you ever fired a cylinder bore s.g. at a man sized silhouette at 25, 30, and so on with unplatted, unbuffered, soft lead 2 3/4" 00 buck?

Now you are wanting to change the parameters of the discussion to fit your wished-for result. Why focus on the combination of components least likely to achieve good results? But yes, I have, and given the proper match between weapon and ammo had little trouble in doing what I wanted to do.
I'd venture to say the deer you took with buck were not taken with a straight cyl. bore and the above mentioned standard buck loads.
I can't address the bore, as i was much younger and didn't worry about that kind of stuff. But the gun was an old Remington single-shot and the ammo was paper-hulled 00-Buck that Dad bought at the local hardware store, so I doubt any of the equipment was very high tech.
That would limit the versitility of the s.g. making it a 50 yard weapon for sure.
Perhaps in your hands, but having used a cylinder bore 870 to hit what I needed at 50 with buck and 100 with slugs, I don't find it to be much of a limit.
Oh. And just for grins saunter out to your local range and sling some 00 buck from your best tricked up shottie at a silhouette at 100 yards.

Why? At 10 yards the slug is the round of choice for the shotgun. I'm not sure what you are attempting to accomplish by consistently suggesting the shotgun be deployed in methods that go against proper training. When used properly, by someone who is trained in that use, the shotgun works fine. But just like anything else, if you use it incorrectly or outside of its performance envelope it will suffer. As it happens, typical urban combat is well within the performance envelope.
If I were assigned the combat shottie and had to use it in a urban fight I would apprecaite a squad armed with rifles for support.
Again, I'm not sure what the point is here. It doesn't matter if I'm armed with a shotgun, submachine-gun, a flame-thrower, a rifle, or a sword, I would appreciate a squad armed with rifles for support.
If I were alone in an urban fight I would opt for the rifle any day.

Fair enough. I would too these days, given my physical problems. A rifle makes a better choice for me right now. But up until about 5 years ago, would have felt more comfortable with the shotgun, given the skills and abilities I had at that time.
I think those of you that believe the s.g. can consistantly put all buckshot into a 12" circle at 50 yards need to go back to the range and fire enough rounds to develope consistant, repeatable, results.
I don't think anyone here has ever said anything like that. And again it goes back to the issue you keep ignoring--versatility. If your gun, your ammo, or your abilities don't indicate the use of buckshot at a certain range, switch to a slug. It's not hard to do at all.

jeager106
December 3, 2006, 02:46 PM
Hmmmmmmm??????????????
Dave you make sound arguments.
My early experiences with 00 buck/cyl bore were dismal.
Today I keep a s.g. around the property loaded with 3" buck, sometimes 00, sometime #4, but always in premium copper plated buffered stuff.
It patterns very effectively out to 25 and will still keep most of the payload in the discomfort zone to 40.
By the way. My s.g. is an 870 Express with forcing cone work, polished bore, no porting (too loud) rifle sights and mod. tube.
This works for me but I am thinking purely defensive these days.
I appreciate your very well worded arguments and they could go on forever.
Suffice it to say that in urban combat the s.g is a fearsome weapon.
I would still opt for a rifle for general combat, even if in an urban environment.
If I were alone I would still opt for the rifle. Accuracy over all ranges, fast reloads, 30 rounds, etc. etc.
Do appreciate your fine thinking!:)
Refreshing to see some logic and experience at work hey?!;)

John2
December 3, 2006, 04:04 PM
My preference is both. AOW Rem 870 on bungee sling and M16 variation with Tac sling. Transition from M16 to SG when entering close quarters. The SG is like a big pistol that can open doors...In open country, the SG stays home.

jeager106
December 4, 2006, 08:14 AM
John says:
"My preference is both. AOW Rem 870 on bungee sling and M16 variation with Tac sling. Transition from M16 to SG when entering close quarters. The SG is like a big pistol that can open doors...In open country, the SG stays home."

I kinda like that idea! The best of both. I don't know how hard it would be to pack all that equipment and still maintain fexlbility and mobility however.

About pistol grips on shotties.
Never cared for them. You loose a lot of muzzle control w/o the butt stock and we must realize that no matter the weapon, delivering the payload is paramount.
Besides. It's hard to buttstroke someone deserving of a little personal counseling with a pistol grip.:D :D

High Planes Drifter
December 4, 2006, 12:40 PM
I like a rifle. I'm just more "comfortable" with it. Last weekend I was reminded of the devastating power that a .30 bullet moving in the neighborhood of 2700 fps can inflict on a living creature when I took a nice 6 point that wieghed in the ballpark of 180lbs. <>. No large bones were hit; with the exception of breaking a couple of ribs. Clean shot thru and thru the boiler room. However, the exit wound was nearly large enough to put my fist in. He immediately collapsed in a pile. I cannot see a man being able to fight after taking a round like that in the area that my whitetail took it. I'd be comfortable with my Marlin 336, or my M1A. Nothing says "You should have stayed home tonight and smoked crack instead of com'n in my house" quite like a high powered .30 round;)

Amendtwo
December 4, 2006, 01:13 PM
My vote was for the shotgun, but only because of the connotation of "urban combat." As the other replies have indicated, it depends on how one defines "urban." If the need is for a basic weapon to blow away bad guys at relatively short ranges in varying light levels, I will take a shotgun.

David Armstrong
December 4, 2006, 01:50 PM
Dave you make sound arguments.
As do you. In the end it becomes a matter of what one is comfortable with, and that will be impacted strongly by previous background, training, experience, etc.
My early experiences with 00 buck/cyl bore were dismal.
I don't doubt that a bit, and that history is common for many. In fact, until recent developments such as reduced recoil shot and such, it probably was the norm.
I appreciate your very well worded arguments and they could go on forever.
And kudos to you also. It is nice to have a reasoned and logical debate with others knkowlwedgeable in the field.

threegun
December 4, 2006, 03:36 PM
David,
And my point is that specialized implementation is what makes it such an outstanding performer in the realm of urban combat.

Only because rifle armed comrades are with you to back up or cover up its long range deficiencies. Alone you would be at advantage against a mild numbered of assailants from close range however you would be at severe disadvantage at ranges past 35 yards or against larger numbers.

Listen: One can quickly and effectively engage human targets at 50 yards with available buckshot using a cylinder bore. Whether one would consider that to be patterning effectively is fairly irrelevant, IMO.


One can also effectively engage an elephant with a 22lr. If the elephant is charging the lack of effectiveness will be relevant. Change the analogy to a bad guy armed with a rifle at 50 yards and either the inability to hit or the ill effects of those hits (from buckshot) can and should be considered a drawback.

Fair enough. I would too these days, given my physical problems. A rifle makes a better choice for me right now. But up until about 5 years ago, would have felt more comfortable with the shotgun, given the skills and abilities I had at that time.


Although I've never been formally trained, I am quite proficient with the shotgun myself, better than most. Still doesn't make the shotgun's long range performance any better only my ability to extract the most out of what it can do at longer ranges.

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

For those of you who feel the shotgun is effective at ranges of 50 plus yards with buckshot try laying a pumpkin or watermelon (the size of the average Joe's head) on the ground to simulate a prone bad guy (since we can't expect the bad guy to stand nice and tall for us) then try to hit it.

Also try to hit it with a slug at 75 yards. Then take the rifle and blow it up on the first shot.

You would be amazed at how fast good hits can be achieved with the rifle at close range and lets face facts the rifle cartridge is a good close range fight ender as well. This IMO somewhat negates the short range advantage in stopping power for the shotgun.

threegun
December 4, 2006, 04:27 PM
Urban or City combat. Just walk outside (if you live in the city as I do {Tampa}) look around at just how far trouble/enemy might lurk. Stepping out from my job here in Tampa, Florida and I can conceivably need to shoot out to 200 yards or better. In fact most hiding spots are at longer ranges in my particular area. In this area and if shooting a bad guy was justifiable (given the ranges and the option of retreat for us civilians) the rifle would be the only choice I could make that would give me the best chance to survive.

jeager106
December 5, 2006, 08:05 PM
threegun:
This has nothing what so ever to do with this discussion except I noticed that you are in Tampa.
You are fortunate.
I'm in N.E. Ohio where it's 15 degrees and dropping like a stone.:eek:
Lots of good arguments here by the way.:)

gdeal
December 5, 2006, 08:16 PM
Grenade Launcher works best in an urban environment.

threegun
December 6, 2006, 11:43 AM
Jeager, Its freezing over herrrre. A low of 55degrees high of 76degrees LOL.

David Armstrong
December 6, 2006, 02:01 PM
Only because rifle armed comrades are with you to back up or cover up its long range deficiencies.
That's a nice thought, but is fairly irrelevant. It is sort of like saying a rifle platoon is only effective because they can call for air and artillery support. The shotgun does a fine job all by itself as an urban combat weapon. That was the question. All this other nonsense is just that, nonsense. If you can't handle a shotgun to the best of its abilities, go with the rifle. That is the common denominator one-size-fits-all default. A man with a good shotgun and good training rules his environment within 100 meters, which is a fair range for urban combat.
Change the analogy to a bad guy armed with a rifle at 50 yards and either the inability to hit or the ill effects of those hits (from buckshot) can and should be considered a drawback.
You make two rather questionable assumptions. One is that there would be an inability to hit, and the other is that if hit the effect would be poor. Neither of those is a problem in my experience. And as always, if you don't like using buck, select a slug. Very easy to do, very effective, solves both issues.
Still doesn't make the shotgun's long range performance any better
Only needs to be better if that matters. For typical urban combat scenarios, the effective range of the shotgun is quite sufficient, and its performance at shorter, more common ranges, is superior in the hands of properly trained and equipped individuals.

threegun
December 6, 2006, 03:49 PM
A man with a good shotgun and good training rules his environment within 100 meters

We must agree to disagree. One might rule at 35 possibly 50 yards against exposed critters, in moderate numbers, and without body armor. Anytime slugs are used the shotgun becomes a crappy rifle. The rifle, in trained hands is good, both close and afar, against body armor, against small targets, etc. The rifle is faster to reload and allows the user to carry more ammo for the weight.

The shoot out in LA should convince all but the hardest nuts that the shotgun is not the best tool for urban fighting (unless several parameters are assured). No body armor, close ranges, and while using buckshot.

David Armstrong
December 6, 2006, 06:05 PM
We must agree to disagree. One might rule at 35 possibly 50 yards against exposed critters, in moderate numbers, and without body armor. Anytime slugs are used the shotgun becomes a crappy rifle.
As happens so often during discussions like this, one should not attempt to brush everyone else with their own inadequecies and incompetence. The fact that you are unable to maximize the abilities of the shotgun does not in any way diminish the abilities of the shotgun, but instead reflects on your level of competence, or lack thereof. By your own admission you have never had any formal training in this area, so the fact that you can't do it means very little, IMO.
The shoot out in LA should convince all but the hardest nuts that the shotgun is not the best tool for urban fighting
Actually what LA shows us is that any weapon has limitations. Some have pointed out that a Ruger 10/22 in the right hands would have ended the fight early on. That doesn't mean it is a good choice for that.

smince
December 6, 2006, 09:12 PM
Some have pointed out that a Ruger 10/22 in the right hands would have ended the fight early on.
A Ruger 10/22 is a rifle, not a shotgun, right?:D

'75Scout
December 6, 2006, 09:58 PM
I would choose the "Assualt Rifle" although I wouldn't choose a full-auto rifle. I would pick either a high end AK (like and Arsenal or Vepr) or the M1A Socom 16. I am not a big fan of the .223 cartridge. The 7.62 rounds will penetrate barriers better, which I would be likely to encounter. I could carry more ammo than with a shotgun and have a longer time between reloads.

With that in mind I have a Remington 870 18.5" barrel that I use for Home Defense. It's a slick gun that shoots really well. With the Knoxx Compstock and rifle sights I can easily put a 1oz slug COM at 50 yards. I am confident I can defend myself adequately with it and it sure as heck didn't cost me the $1600 the Socom 16 would.

threegun
December 7, 2006, 06:11 AM
As happens so often during discussions like this, one should not attempt to brush everyone else with their own inadequecies and incompetence.

David, Once again you break out the insults. I won't bite this time. I will simply say that you are incorrect in believing that the shotgun is a better choice at ranges over 35 yards. In fact you yourself believe that the slug should be used past 10 yards.....Why? At 10 yards the slug is the round of choice for the shotgun. ......making it a rifle and a poor rifle at that. I would agree with you that the shotgun can, has, and will eliminate threats at 50 -100 yards.........if they remain erect and facing you thereby providing you that perfect silhouette you are so use to practicing on (or maybe even those deer you discuss harvesting). However we cannot expect a foe capable of employing tactics to stand erect. We cannot expect them to even expose more than a muzzle and eyeball. If you can hit an eyeball @ 100 yards with a slug (consistently) you are better than anyone I have ever seen. A rifle can do it all, not quite as good close up but far superior at distance and in firepower.

Again I offer you the opportunity to compete at the next Threegun match in this area. We can see just how inadequate or incompetent I am.

David Armstrong
December 7, 2006, 03:24 PM
A Ruger 10/22 is a rifle, not a shotgun, right?
Yes. Would you suggest it as good selection for urban combat?:D

SpK
December 7, 2006, 03:32 PM
Yes. Would you suggest it as good selection for urban combat?

A Ruger 10/22 does not match the definition for an assault rifle.

Capt Charlie
December 7, 2006, 03:36 PM
I think I'm gonna faint from shock if one of these debates fades out quietly instead of biting the bullet for personal attacks.

It sure ain't gonna happen with this one.

Closed.