Survival Pistol?

[22-rimfire]

It is not class 3. It is classified as a handgun.

[jplacquay]

I'll look into more then... I just assmued and I shouldn't do that.

[22-rimfire]

But it is still 25" long end to end, so it would be a bit large for a day pack, but would fit inside a larger pack. I have one. Best to see one in-person rather than looking at a picture. They are really interesting as a potential survival gun.

[Hammerhead]

SAAMI's definition of a pistol;

A generic term for a hand-held firearm.

For a handgun I would pick a .357 DA pistol.
Any gun? My CZ Scout. Tiny, light, nice open sights, magazine fed, steel and wood, more accurate than most full size .22's.

Thinking about the 16" 10/22 compact.

[orthosophy]

to me it's a question of offense vs defense.

If you mean survival as in killing things that may try to eat you, you want a big enough gun to at least give yourself a chance.

If you mean survival as in killing food until you are dragged from the woods by the forest rangers, then a .22 will give you a usable carcass and you can carry more ammo in the same space.

[bamaranger]

I like handguns, but if I am going to try and feed myself w/ small game and a .22, I want a rifle! Despite the comments, the Henry Survival rifle we have would work just fine, if there was enough game.

Another option is to take one of the youth single shots, like a Cricket, and break it down into action and stock. It would stow and pack easy, and reassemble with just a coin or screwdriver.

I'm not a slouch with a handgun,. but I can shoot either of the two above better than any handgun.

Hook and line too!

[rc]

An accurate 22 LR would give you the ability to carry 50 or even 100 cartridges which is a lot of meals or at least chances for a meal in a survival situation. Something like a browning buckmark camper is a light survival arm with a good degree of accuracy. The ruger is a heavier gun by design. A 22 magnum revolver would be maybe even better cause it's a bit more powerful but not much heavier and does not take up much more space. 327 magnum might also be a good choice for a survival kit gun cause you can shoot 32 longs, 32 mags or much more powerful 327s. The GP100 is pretty compact. Accuracy is really important for a survival gun as you may have to shoot small game to survive at distance. As others have said feeding yourself with a handgun is much harder than with a rifle. Having a gun sighted in for all the ammo you have will increase your chances of scoring hits. Unless you want to live on snakes and they are plentiful, a 410 handgun just isn't a good choice. 45 colt ammo is also neither the most powerful or lightweight. A 357 mag is also a viable choice if weight of ammo, gun and space for your kit is not a big concern. Ultimately, I think you'll like the buckmark for your intended purpose.

[jagwire]

I think 22-rimfire was on to something with the Ruger single six convertible. Say a 5.5" or 6.5" stainless. Very easy to hit with, ultra reliable, slip in the mag cylinder for more punch. Thats the backpack/survival gun I would choose.

If it means anything the US military issued small survival rifles to air crews in WWII chambered in 22 hornet.

[ms6852]

For survival I would feel very very comfortable with a 22 magnum pistol. I would get the pmr 30 from keltec. Magazine holds 30 rds and the hold set up with loaded magazine is still under 20 ounces. The 22 magnum is a very lethal round for its size.

[shafter]

I would suggest a Ruger Single Six. I prefer blued but if this is for a survival gun then stainless may not be a bad choice. To me the 5.5 barrel feels just right and points very nice. The new ones come with a 22 magnum cylinder but personally I think the 22lr will be just fine.

[dalegribble]

there are alot of good suggestions and some questionable in my mind. the pmr 30 from keltec is a very interesting suggestion. it would seem a handgun with 30 rounds of 22 mag and a couple extra mags could cover an awful lot of bases from small game and deer to personal protection against anything but the largest bears. problem is i have not seen one yet and i'm not sure if it works smoothly or is a jam o matic. if it works well it might be my top choice.

there are some nice, proven 22/22mag revolvers out there although in a survival situation i would probably keep the 22 mag cylinder in 100% of the time anyway.
there are alot of 22 semi auto choices as well and when all is said and done a 22 is probably all you would need.

i'm not sure i would like any of the 22 survival type rifles. thier size is nice but i'm not sure i want to have to assemble the gun when i need it and accuracy might be a big trade off.

the "new" 45/410 revolvers are very interesting. regardless of what i have read here they seem to be popular, accurate with the 45 and reliable. i guess you would have to pattern the 410 with different shot sizes to see how it shoots.

personaly, if i were to go into the woods and needed to take a backpack (which means more than a short walk) i would probably have a larger caliber handgun on my belt. a smaller trail sized 357 or 44 mag, maybe the 45/410 or 9mm or 45 pistol and 2 extra reloads. in my pack would be a smaller, lighter, reliable 22 pistol or revolver and a box of ammo. they would cover more bases than a single rifle and take up less space and weight. i guess when you are talking about survival or protection everyone has their own ideas and comfort level and whatever they choose is their personal choice.

[Motownstan]

I like the S&W M-63. It's compact, durable, 8 shot and accurate enough out to 25 yards. As has been stated already you can carry lots of .22's and it doesn't matter what kind they are, they will go bang. This thread needs pictures.

[30-30remchester]

When survival is the question there are 2 differing situations that must be addressed. Food aquisition and self protection. Food is by far the most important if past real life experences teach us anything. The next statement with surely fire up the forum responces but here goes. How many of you are truley willing to live or die on your ability to shoot a handgun accurately? I am very good with a handgun and regularly compete in handgun bullseye matchs and win the majority. That being said I doubt I could survive long with a handgun in real world situations. The one handgun I would choose is a 22 target handgun if I had to. I admire the OP's concept of rescuing himself. You can carry 400 rounds of 22 lr's for the same weight as 25 rounds of 12 guage's. If I had to choose I would choose a quality compact takedown 22 rifle. Since my work takes me into the mountains of Colorado, I count the number of game shooting possibilities per day while afoot. Most small game spooks at @50 yards average. My shooting ability with a 22 handgun at 50 yards is @15% on first shot on squirrel sized animals. So I would have to encounter 30 to 40 game animals per day to get one average sized meal. This is an interesting test. Walk in the woods, count and record the distance and size of the game you encounter. Now at the range set like size targets at the same angles encountered. Now you get one shot only at the animal in question . How many do you take on the first shot?

[22-rimfire]

Surviving in the woods is a very difficult thing to accomplish even with a rifle. 30-30, I agree with what you say and I also know that actually taking small game with regularity (when your life depends on it) is not easy even with a rifle let alone a handgun. All you have to do is watch some of the survival shows and you can see a good meal is hard to come by.

I approach survival from a food gathering perspective rather than self defense in the East. A 22 LR or 22 mag would be my choice of RIFLE caliber. Woods survival is something that is done to buy time unitl you can walk out or get rescued.

The Henry AR-7 is designed for this, but are not terribly accurate. But I suspect they are minute of squirrel accurate. There have been fuctionality questions with the AR-7 since its inception although I read that the Henry version is pretty reliable overall.

I lean toward a non-take down rifle. The CZ Scout would be close to ideal. The Henry Mare's Leg (offered in 22LR and 45LC, 44 Mag, and 357 mag) http://www.henryrepeating.com/rifle-mares-leg.cfm is an interesting design from a compact "rifle" perspective and Henry has developed a history for reliability although there are forum complaints that certain parts are plastic and so forth. The sights are now metal. (There are lawsuits going on regarding use of the term "mare's leg".) I have only seen 45 and 22LR versions. But the 357 mag has a lot of interest to me. There is a Taurus version also.

I think with practice, a shooter could do very well with the Mare's Leg from a rest and that lends itself to a survival firearm in a fairly compact package. It also could be used for self defense in a pinch even in 22LR.

[TheGoldenState]

S&W .500 4inch.


The blast will kill any small game within 360 degrees of shot out to 10 yards or so, and the following fireball will cook them. 2 for 1 special. Also good for large game out to 856yards.


-For your requirements, the judge looks good on paper, i've never shot one, but in practice they seem to get a bad wrap.

[arch308]

I must agree with RsqVet, a medium sized .357 would fill the bill. Very potent ammo that doesn't weigh alot and will do the job up to black bears at reasonable distances.

[Vermonter]

Rosi Trifecta,



This is a 243, 20ga modified choke, and a 22lr single shot. It weighs nothing with all three barrels and stock. This easily fits into my day pack disassembled and ammo is a plenty.

243 will do a way better job on medium and large game than will any 22. With the 243 barrel and open sights this thing is MOD accurate (minute of deer) out to about 75 yards or so in my hands. It is no tack driver but would put food on the table in a pinch.

20Ga in this weapon is no different than any other 20 ga single shot. 20 ga buck shot will do a wonderful job defending the camp sight at night if need be and 20 ga hunting loads will help you take flying critters as well something that a 22 will not.

22lr with thing thing is small game accurate and again is no different than other 22 single shots.

http://www.rossiusa.com/whatsnew-trifecta.cfm

You can also get almost an endless supply of barrels with thing making it a winner in my book. Want a .44m go right ahead.

This gun is a modest example of everything that it is. It isnt the best 20ga single shot, 22lr, or 20ga however it is a great package that boasts all three.

It comes on every canoe camping trip from now on and also serves as the lady friend's primary hunting tool. Beat that for $300.

Regards, Vermonter

[seeker_two]

I'll second Vermonter's idea with one caveat....get a .22mag barrel instead of the. 22lr.....better bullet construction on the Mag's. Supplement it with a good DA revolver in .22mag (Charter Arms or Taurus).

[22-rimfire]

Cool concept and another option.

This easily fits into my day pack disassembled and ammo is a plenty.

It wouldn't fit in my day pack, but it would fit in a kayak or canoe. You must use a big pack for day hikes. Seems like that might be all you carry in your pack with some ammunition. Price is right for not caring a whole lot if it gets wet.

[TenRing]

Lots of responses but some are impractical. The OP wants a lightweight handgun that can always be in his backpack just in case he finds himself stranded in the woods. Long guns are out because they are too heavy and the ammo is too heavy. Larger calibers are out for the same reason.

When going into the woods, I'm going to hope that the OP is carrying an appropriate self defense sidearm for his region. What is needed now is something to use to shoot food. If you're hungry in the woods, you are likely to get more chances to shoot small game than big game. In most areas, this comes down to shooting squirrels or raccoons out of trees at close range, something that can be easily done with any .22 handgun. You might luck up on a rabbit or pheasant but these are much more difficult to hunt.

The last thing you would want to do is kill a large animal such as a deer or elk just to get one meal and leave 100+ pounds of bloody meat to draw in bears, wolves and coyotes that would only cause you more worry once they close in on your area.

My impression is that you want to stash the gun in the pack and not worry about it until you need it. I would pack a Ruger Single-Six and 100 rounds of ammo. Your choice of 22LR or 22WMR since you will have both cylinders. Get the shorter 4-5/8 barrel for compactness and your biggest problem will be that you could forget that the gun is with you.

[22-rimfire]

The last thing you would want to do is kill a large animal such as a deer or elk just to get one meal and leave 100+ pounds of bloody meat to draw in bears, wolves and coyotes that would only cause you more worry once they close in on your area.

You would probably get a couple meals, and more if it was winter or during colder weather. But I agree that a larger animal is not a good choice unless that is all there is or you are feeding more than a couple people.

The Single Six is certainly a good choice. The problem is that you have to be able to hit what you are aiming at consistantly because you probably don't get that many opportunities. Hence, a short rifle concept....

The perfect choice is difficult and subject to many what if's. If I were heading for the woods today, I would have the Henry Mare's Leg in 22LR if I could rig up a scabbard or my 5" S&W M63 (22LR) if I wanted something more compact. I am not really concerned about bears, but I would make do with the 22LR.

But I think a 22 mag is a better choice if you have one and can shoot well with it.

[jplacquay]

Wow, I am VERY new to TFL and never expected this many responses. This is wonderful! I like all the replays and suggestions. As stated earlier though, I am looking for a handgun so I can keep the pack small and lite. If I were just "surviving" or living off the land and I had my truck or cabin or even a base camp I would have my .243 rem 700 mountain rifle with the 4-12 Nikon monark on it as well as my Benelli m1 super 90 field and lots of ammo for both. But a long gun is out of the question for my purposes. Yes a long gun would be ideal and in 99% of my outings into tge woods I have some type of long gun, whether it's my 30-30 win 94 trapper or my side by side short barreled 12ga. I'm looking for the pistol (as stated earlier) to throw in my pack and forget about. I'm in no way worried about predators as in MOST situations, the old saying of "they're more scared of you than you are of them" will hold true. Along with the fact that a good campfire will keep MOST away.

I also agree that gathering is almost always more productive than hunting but I want to have the option to take game if the situation presents itself.

Keep the comments and suggestions coming PLEASE!!! This really is a great discussion and if y'all would like I can even post what I'm putting in my survival kit for your comments as well.

As of now I have time for all the comments and suggestions before making a purchase because I am serving in Afghanistan with the USAF Security Forces and I won't be getting home for another few months.

[DPris]

I won't suggest any of a multitude of far better choices in individual guns, but I WILL say that the Judge/Smith .410/.45 Colt revolver in any form by either maker is one of the WORST possible choices for any type of survival handgun.

You won't get close enough to most birds (or squirrels) to hit with the limited-range birdshot, it will not take down a rabbit even if you could get close enough to shoot at one.

I seriously doubt you could get close enough to a deer to hit one with the mediocre .45 Colt accuracy.

Velocities are so reduced with .410 Buck that it's neither an adequate defensive or hunting proposition, .410 slugs are typically very light in weight, quite inaccurate at any distance (you are, after all, shooting a .41-caliber projectile through a .452-.452-inch bore), and also lose effectiveness along with reduced velocities.

If you want something you can actually HIT with at typical animal encounter distances, a good .22 that you can shoot well will be FAR more effective on birds, squirrels, rabbits, turkeys, and other small edible game at greater distances.

If you want something that can defend against cougar, smaller bears, wolves & so on, a good .357 that you can shoot well can take smaller game up to deer easily, while offering sufficient power for the larger clawed threats you may have in your hometown area.

And, I will continue to say the Mare's Leg is a poor all-round choice for serious purposes.

Denis

[K_Mac]

I also think the Ruger Single Six .22/.22mag convertible would be a good choice.

S & W makes a model 317 Kit Gun that looks like it might meet your needs. It is a 3" 8 round aluminum alloy J-Frame in .22LR. It is SA/DA, comes with an adjustable rear sight, a fiber optic front sight, and weighs 12.5 oz. It would probably do in a pinch.

[jagwire]

I'd say for survival I would still take the stainless single six convertible over a semi auto 22. The biggest reason is reliability. They are extremely reliable, well built, and easy to hit with.

Second, I have a ruger mark II target model and while I love it, if the mag/mags were to get lost or damaged, you have a single shot pistol, its also more susceptible to dirt and grime causing malfunctions. Which would not be uncommon in a survival situation. Just more things to worry about.

Worst case scenario with the single six, unless by some chance you lose both cylinders, youll always have a repeater, and its much less susceptible to malfunctioning. And a wider choice of loads to shoot too.